Waterloo is actually the name of a small village in Belgium, but in English it is used as a metaphor for defeat. The Iron Man of Europe, Napoleon Bonaparte, was decisively defeated here in 1815 by the Duke of Wellington. Without Napoleon and Waterloo, the history of Europe remains incomplete. It was this very event after which the British Empire emerged as a global superpower. The lessons associated with victory and defeat at Waterloo also apply to present-day circumstances. The desire of France and Britain to become great powers and to dominate the seas was a driving force in that war, and it is also a prominent element in today’s America-Iran conflict.

Napoleon Bonaparte’s journey from a soldier to a general and then to a dictatorial ruler is of great interest to politicians and generals around the world. The extent of Napoleon’s impact on history can be gauged from the fact that the legendary British Prime Minister Winston Churchill himself was among his great admirers. Napoleon holds an important place in history also because he was widely read. Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, and Germany’s Frederick the Great were his favorite heroes, and like Alexander, he would experiment with a new war strategy in every battle. Napoleon fought 60 battles, losing only 6 and winning the rest. Acknowledging Napoleon’s greatness, even his conqueror, the Duke of Wellington, said: “The greatest commander of our times, past times, and future times was Napoleon.”

In simple terms, Waterloo is understood as the end of one era and the beginning of another. In Pakistan’s specific political circumstances, regardless of the future of the America-Iran war—whether someone wins or loses, whether there is peace or conflict—the Waterloo of Pakistan’s politics has already occurred. The politics before this event was entirely different, and the politics after it will be entirely different.

Napoleon used to say, “I am the French Revolution.” When Napoleon was gone, everything changed. In Pakistan too, slogans of change and revolution have been raised, but the recent Waterloo has tarnished both change and revolution, and “Mr. Change” has, for now, been completely pushed into the background by national and international circumstances.

In the changing international situation, PML-N, PPP, and Maulana Fazlur Rehman have all said “yes” to the state’s stance; Tehreek-e-Tahafuz-e-Ayeen has also supported it; Jamaat-e-Islami is not opposing it either. The only ones opposing the state’s current policies are the spokespersons of Khan sitting in jail. The collapse of their narrative is their Waterloo, and this narrative was Khan’s only weapon. Therefore, the defeat of this narrative is the political Waterloo of Tehreek-e-Insaf.

If analyzed impartially and objectively, there was considerable strength in PTI’s narrative after the success of the no-confidence motion against Khan and their failure in the 2024 elections, and it had many buyers—true or false. This narrative sold rapidly among overseas Pakistanis. However, from the time President Trump was elected for a second term until today, the narrative built by PTI YouTubers and their supporters has repeatedly failed. Not only has it collapsed, but it has also exposed their falsehoods and ill intentions.

Who can forget that before Trump’s election, bold claims were made that once Trump came, Khan would be released the very next day? Then some members of the US Congress were engaged in propaganda against Pakistan. At times, hope for change was tied to statements from members of the Trump administration, and at other times, the government was threatened with economic and defense sanctions. All these rumors and assumptions proved 100% wrong. The causes of political Waterloo began from there.

During the Pakistan-India war, these same YouTubers pinned their hopes on India. The results of the war favored Pakistan; Pakistan not only defeated India, but for the first time in 70 years, the world truly acknowledged Pakistan’s victory. This was the second defeat of the PTI narrative in its political Waterloo.

After the war, when President Trump began praising the Field Marshal and Pakistan’s decisive victory, it was thought that he was doing so to pressure or undermine India and Modi. However, Trump’s continued praise of Pakistan’s Field Marshal and Prime Minister became PTI’s third political Waterloo. And it didn’t stop there—when, breaking all protocols and traditions, the Field Marshal met President Trump directly at the White House, PTI’s international narrative burst like a bubble.

After this collapse, those same YouTubers changed their stance. Previously they used to scare Pakistan with America; now they claim that Pakistan has actually become an agent of America. Earlier, they used to present themselves as America’s most loyal agents and used that to intimidate others. Whether you call it Waterloo or, in regional terms, the fourth Battle of Plassey, their false narrative suffered defeat here as well.

When the Iran-America war began, these YouTubers adopted an unjust stance, claiming that Pakistan was America’s ally and, in reality, opposed to Iran. They began exploiting the pro-Iran sentiments of Pakistanis, creating the impression that America and Pakistan were secretly aligned and that Pakistan was helping America instead of Iran.

The Field Marshal achieved a decisive Waterloo victory during his visit to Tehran by proving that not only does President Trump appreciate Pakistan’s role, but Iran also regards it with respect. For the first time in Pakistan’s history, we have achieved such diplomatic and international standing.

Even now, PTI’s artificial loudspeakers could have changed their narrative in favor of the state, but despite suffering a decisive defeat equivalent to five Battles of Panipat, they continue repeating the same old narrative. Now politics is no longer the priority—international affairs are. Not politics, but the state has become the top priority. Not a change of government, but strengthening the state has become the foremost goal.

Even PTI ticket-holder Ayaz Amir has now admitted that he was wrong before; the reality is that a state that does not prioritize defense cannot survive. Thus, standing with the state or not has become the real issue. Politics is not even the topic right now; its decision will be made later—and obviously, it will have to be.

The real issue is that the formula of achieving economic stability through defense now appears to be succeeding. After Waterloo, Britain established dominance worldwide and achieved economic and political prosperity. Pakistan, however, seeks only to act as a mediator—not to rule, but to live with dignity, without fighting anyone and without becoming anyone’s agent.

Pakistan was not a party to the war, but this war has given it a Waterloo victory in its internal political narrative. Now create a new story—the old ones have already failed.