For many decades, people in Pakistan have felt an increasing gap between those in power and ordinary citizens.

This gap has widened over time and has become more visible in everyday life, where decisions made by the leaders often seem disconnected from the realities faced by ordinary citizens.

As a result, many people feel unheard and underrepresented, creating the sense that governance is something done to them rather than for them.

It has also produced a repeated cycle of hope and disappointment, where new figures emerge promising change, only to face the same structural limits that have restricted reform for years.

In such an environment, public attention is easily captured, but political trust is far harder to earn.

Visibility, especially in a media-driven age, can create a strong sense of credibility.

Yet in politics, credibility is not built through recognition alone. It is built through consistent performance, strong organisation, and the ability to deliver results within complex systems.

Iqrar-ul-Hassan enters this political space with significant public recognition, largely due to his journalistic career.

His work in exposing corruption and highlighting governance failures has earned him a reputation as a bold and visible media figure.

However, this reputation also raises an important question of whether influence gained through journalism can truly be converted into political authority.

Journalism and politics operate on different principles.

A journalist’s role is to investigate, question, and expose.

A politician’s responsibility is to govern, negotiate, and compromise.

One works from the outside looking in; the other must operate from within the system, often making difficult decisions that involve tradeoffs rather than clear moral positions.

This difference is key when judging whether media credibility can become political capability.

Critics argue that public figures who move from journalism into politics often carry an image of authority that has not yet been tested in governance.

While they may be effective in identifying problems, they are rarely tested in resolving them.

This creates a gap between perception and performance, where public confidence is shaped more by past visibility than by present competence.

Iqrar-ul-Hassan’s political initiative through Awam Raj Tehreek presents itself as a response to longstanding frustrations with traditional politics.

It claims to create space for ordinary citizens and challenge established structures.

This message clearly connects with a public that has repeatedly expressed dissatisfaction with the mainstream parties.

However, the main concern remains whether such a vision can move beyond words into practical political action.

This pattern is not unique to Pakistan.

In India, the Aam Aadmi Party emerged with a similar promise to represent ordinary citizens and challenge traditional political elites.

It gained strong public support and achieved electoral success, especially in New Delhi.

Yet over time, it has also faced criticism, internal tensions, and questions about governance.

Its journey shows that early popularity does not remove the deeper challenges of sustaining credibility and delivering results.

A similar story can be seen in Italy with the Five Star Movement.

It began as a powerful anti-establishment force, attracting voters frustrated with mainstream politics.

However, once in power, it struggled with internal divisions and the realities of governance, which tested its original promises.

These examples show that movements built on public frustration often face their toughest test after gaining attention or power.

Pakistan’s political system is shaped not only by personalities but by deeply rooted structures of power.

Electoral success depends on local influence, financial resources, and established voter networks.

In this environment, movements built mainly on media visibility face clear limits.

Recognition may create momentum, but it does not automatically build electoral machinery or grassroots strength.

This is where questions about leadership credibility become more serious.

A political movement needs more than a well-known figure as its leader.

It requires discipline, clear decision-making systems, and the ability to manage internal disagreements.

Without these, even popular movements risk breaking apart when they face real political pressure.

There is also the issue of consistency. Public trust depends on whether a leader’s actions match their words over time.

For media personalities entering politics, this scrutiny is often stronger.

Any gap between past criticism of the system and present political compromises can quickly raise doubts about sincerity.

Supporters argue that Pakistan needs new voices outside traditional political families, and this reflects real public frustration.

However, critics point out that being outside the system does not automatically make a leader more capable.

In fact, the lack of experience within political institutions can become a disadvantage when dealing with lawmaking, party organisation, and policy delivery.

Iqrar-ul-Hassan’s strength lies in communication and his ability to highlight important issues.

Yet communication is not the same as governance. Politics requires long-term engagement with institutions that are often slow, complex, and resistant to change.

It demands patience and practical decision-making, not just public messaging.

Another concern is the nature of public expectations.

Movements led by well-known figures often generate strong emotional support at the start.

However, this support can be fragile if it is not supported by clear policies and strong organisation.

When expectations are based more on personality than structure, disappointment can follow quickly.

It is also important to consider the wider political environment.

Established parties in Pakistan, despite criticism, have organisational depth and electoral experience that new movements lack.

This creates an uneven field where new entrants must do far more than simply present themselves as alternatives.

The challenge for Iqrar-ul-Hassan, therefore, is not just gaining attention but proving political capability.

The shift from commentator to decision-maker is difficult.

It requires moving from criticism to responsibility, from observation to action, and from clear statements to complex compromises.

Many figures around the world who have made this shift have found it far more demanding than expected.

Internal stability is also important. Political movements often begin with energy, but disagreements over leadership and strategy can quickly appear.

Without strong internal systems, such disagreements can weaken the movement before it fully develops.

Sustainability is another key issue. Media-driven movements can rise quickly, but maintaining momentum requires deep grassroots support, policy planning, and long-term commitment.

Without these, movements risk becoming highly visible but politically weak.

There is also the question of accountability.

In journalism, influence comes from questioning others.

In politics, that same scrutiny is directed back at the individual. Every decision, alliance, and outcome becomes open to public judgment, often at a much higher level.

This does not mean such movements have no value.

They can challenge established narratives and push mainstream parties to respond more seriously to public concerns.

They can also bring new energy into political debate.

However, influence should not be confused with the readiness to govern.

Ultimately, the main question around Iqrar-ul-Hassan’s entry into politics is not whether he is popular, but whether his credibility as a journalist can withstand the demands of political leadership.

This is a test of ability, not intention.

While Pakistan clearly needs reform and fresh ideas, credibility in politics is earned through consistent action, not reputation alone.

The move from media influence to political authority remains uncertain, and at present, it raises more questions than answers.

The most sensible approach is careful observation, where leadership is judged not by promises or popularity, but by performance over time.

The real test now is whether Iqrar-ul-Hassan can prove himself in politics, rather than becoming just another short-lived entrant in the existing political system.

His success will depend on whether he can turn promises into real change and maintain credibility in a field where many new political efforts fail to succeed.

The writer is a seasoned journalist and a communications professional.

He can be reached at [email protected]