Shehbaz Offers PTI Talks Again, But Only After the Long March Stops

Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif used a public appearance on October 7 to repeat an offer he has made before: talks with PTI are available, but only once the party calls off its long march and winds down its sit-ins. Until then, he said, the government will not negotiate under what he described as pressure tactics.

The offer, and the condition attached to it

Shehbaz's position, as relayed by multiple outlets covering his remarks, was unambiguous about sequencing: end the march and sit-ins first, and dialogue follows. He framed the preceding negotiation attempt as proof that PTI was not negotiating in good faith. By his account, a joint committee of PML-N and PPP representatives had already sat down with PTI's negotiators and worked toward a finalised draft agreement, only for the process to stall when PTI's side demanded last-minute changes to terms the two sides had already settled. That account lines up with the breakdown we covered when the second round of talks collapsed hours before PTI's march actually departed, though Shehbaz went further this time, saying PTI's "sole objective was to sabotage the dialogue" rather than reach an agreement.

The remarks came as Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Sohail Afridi continued leading the march convoy through its slower, extended route toward Islamabad — the same convoy Afridi has openly described as a deliberate long campaign rather than a rush to the capital. Shehbaz's offer, in other words, landed in the middle of a march PTI has already signalled it intends to sustain for some time, not call off on short notice.

An economic argument, not just a political one

What distinguished October 7's remarks from earlier rounds of the same back-and-forth was Shehbaz's choice to frame the march primarily as an economic threat. He warned that continued protests, sit-ins and long marches could carry serious consequences for the economy, specifically citing the risk to exports, manufacturing and imports, and argued the disruption comes at a moment when economic activity is only beginning to recover. That framing ties the political standoff directly to the government's broader economic narrative this year, built around Pakistan's staff-level agreement with the IMF and a string of improving indicators the government has been eager to protect from disruption.

It's a different argument than the security-and-order case the government has leaned on in prior rounds, when officials like Adviser Rana Sanaullah warned mainly that the march would not be permitted to enter Islamabad's limits and that the law would be enforced against any disorder. Shehbaz's October 7 remarks kept that line intact — the government has not softened its position that the march stops short of the capital — but added a cost-of-doing-business argument aimed as much at Pakistan's business community and export sector as at PTI itself.

Where that leaves both sides

Nothing in Shehbaz's statement suggests either side has moved. PTI has shown no indication it will end the march in exchange for a promise of future talks, having already walked away from a draft agreement once over unresolved demands, including Khyber Pakhtunkhwa's refusal to commit to counterterrorism cooperation and PTI's demand for Imran Khan's access to personal physicians. The government, for its part, is repeating an offer it has made in some form at nearly every stage of this standoff, without changing the precondition that has twice failed to produce a deal.

What has changed is the venue for the argument: rather than another closed-door session in the National Assembly Speaker's chamber, Shehbaz took the offer — and the warning attached to it — public, aiming it at an audience well beyond PTI's negotiating team.

Build Better Pakistan's Politics Desk is tracking the long march and the government's response as events develop.