The legislation, entitled the Pakistan Democracy Act, was introduced by Rep. Joe Wilson (RS.C.) and Jimmy Panetta (D-Calif.), and called for targeted sanctions under the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Responsibility Act.
The bill stipulates that within 180 days, the U.S. government identified people involved in political persecution in Pakistan and imposed penalties, including visa bans and restrictions on entry to the United States. It explicitly accuses Munir of “intentionally suffering unlawful persecution and imprisonment against his political opponents” and urges similar actions against others to complicity in the crackdown.
Wilson has always spoken about his stance on Khan’s imprisonment, which he describes as political motives. “Mr. Khan is obviously a political prisoner,” Wilson told Hill, reiterating that he urged the U.S. government to put pressure on Pakistan’s military leadership through visa bans and other means to restore democracy and ensure Khan’s release. The bill allows the lifting of sanctions if Pakistan terminates its military rule, restores democracy and releases all detained politicians.
Khan, who was removed from office through a vote of unconfidence in 2022, was arrested on corruption charges in August 2023. His supporters claimed the allegations were politically motivated and carefully planned by the military to prevent him from returning to power. Members from two major U.S. parties have repeatedly called for his release, including Greg Casar (D-Texas), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Brad Sherman (D-Calif.), Ro Khanna (D-Calif.
Richard Grenell, a former Trump administration official, also expressed support for Khan. Last December, he posted on social media platforms X: “Watch Pakistan. Their Trump-like leaders are jailed for forgery allegations, and people are inspired by American Red Waves. Stop political prosecutions around the world!” His post has received more than 12 million views and has been widely shared by Khan’s supporters. Earlier this month, President Trump thanked the Pakistani government for assisting the arrest of Islamic State (ISIS) members associated with the 2021 Kabul airport attack. Last week, U.S. State Department spokesman Tammy Bruce declined to comment on Khan’s situation, noting that the government has not intervened in internal affairs in other countries. “It is unlikely that it is just to ensure the release of populist but anti-American politicians, so it is unlikely that sanctions will be imposed,” Hakani said.
After the strike, Khan repeatedly accused Washington of collaborating with Pakistan’s then-opposition to strike. He claimed that the United States wanted him to leave because of his independent foreign policy and stance on U.S. influence. His rally, marked by anti-American slogans, constituted an attack on Pakistan’s sovereignty. The Biden administration denies any involvement.
Wilson acknowledged his differences with Khan’s views but believed that political differences should be resolved democratically. “But political differences should be resolved in the ballot box,” he said.
Michael Kugelman, South Asia director of Wilson Center, also downplayed the possibility of sanctions, pointing to the contradictions that Khan’s camp demanded US intervention. “For many observers in DC, it is somewhat ironic to blame the United States for Khan’s strike on Khan and then call for rescue,” he said. He noted that although Khan’s supporters believed it was about reversing the interference, the assumption itself was politically accused, according to Shan’s report.
Haqqani suggested that the driving force of lawmakers is more about domestic politics than actual concerns about Pakistan’s internal affairs. “The congressman was not aware of Khan’s history because some people mistakenly described him as a friend of the United States, who never claimed to be a friend of the United States,” he said.
