Paris (Imran Y. CHOUDHRY) :- Former Press Secretary to the President, Former Press Minister to the Embassy of Pakistan to France, Former MD, SRBC Mr. Qamar Bashir analysis : President Donald Trump, while addressing American troops in Qatar, noted that Pakistan’s use of “a different kind of missile” had forced India to request a ceasefire. He added that the United States would deepen trade ties with Pakistan and urged American institutions to accelerate commercial engagement. In a rare moment of unqualified praise, Trump described Pakistanis as “brilliant people” who invent and produce cutting-edge technology—a clear nod to Pakistan’s domestic defense industry and scientific acumen.
After years of strategic neglect, Pakistan has reemerged in U.S. foreign policy considerations. The war with India in May 2025 served as a turning point, forcing a global reassessment of South Asia’s power dynamics. Trump’s repeated positive mentions of Pakistan reflect a recalibrated U.S. outlook, acknowledging Pakistan’s growing relevance in regional and international affairs.
The four-day war not only redrew the strategic map of South Asia but also laid bare two starkly contrasting global narratives. India—long portraying itself as a rising superpower—found its arrogance, militarism, and misinformation unraveling before the world. Pakistan, in contrast, emerged as a composed, competent actor, commanding military respect and diplomatic credibility.
India entered the conflict with misplaced confidence, believing its large defense budget, international lobbying, and media dominance would shield it from scrutiny. But its assumptions quickly crumbled. Since the revocation of Articles 370 and 35A of the Indian Constitution—unilaterally and in defiance of UN resolutions—India had adopted a tone of supreme arrogance. That arrogance culminated in the May 2025 aggression, when India, without presenting irrefutable evidence, blamed Pakistan for the Pahalgam attack and launched missile strikes on Pakistani territory.
India’s gambit backfired. For the first time in decades, the world refused to parrot India’s “terrorist state” label for Pakistan. Instead, New Delhi’s actions were seen as a unilateral, unprovoked act of war. The Kashmir issue, long buried under media blackouts and military occupation, reemerged on the global agenda. Trump himself declared that resolving the Kashmir dispute was essential for sustainable peace in the region.
India’s efforts to diplomatically isolate Pakistan not only failed but boomeranged. Major global powers—excluding perhaps Israel—remained neutral or subtly critical of India’s conduct. Russia, the United States, and European nations refrained from backing New Delhi. Even traditional allies in the Gulf and the broader Muslim world declined to endorse India’s narrative. International media questioned India’s disinformation, timing, and lack of credible evidence. Even strategic allies like the U.S. and Russia withheld support during India’s military debacle.
Politically, the impact was severe. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s once mythic stature among Hindu nationalists eroded rapidly. Calls for his resignation grew louder, and the opposition, civil society, and independent media demanded accountability. Globally, Modi’s image suffered irreparable damage, with analysts condemning his militarized policies, suppression of minorities, and use of conflict for electoral gains.
In contrast, Pakistan earned global admiration for its restraint, precision, and strategic maturity. Its missiles hit key Indian military targets while sparing civilian areas—a combination of tactical brilliance and moral responsibility. Pakistan’s electronic warfare systems also rendered India’s expensive defense hardware ineffective, showcasing its technological edge.
Diplomatically, Pakistan performed with poise. China and Turkey openly supported it, while countries from Africa to Southeast Asia celebrated its victory. The United States and Western allies, though silent, acknowledged Pakistan’s competence by their inaction in support of India. Pakistani officials, from the Prime Minister to military spokespeople, engaged transparently with the media, offering facts and fielding difficult questions—in sharp contrast to India’s evasive and scripted responses.
International media recognized this openness and began to shift their tone. Pakistan, once portrayed as unstable and aggressive, was now seen as principled, disciplined, and transparent. Its moral standing improved as it framed its response within the bounds of international law and emphasized civilian protection.
Domestically, Pakistan witnessed a rare moment of unity. Citizens of all ethnic, religious, and political backgrounds rallied behind their armed forces. The war became a catalyst for national pride, reinforcing belief in self-reliance, technological capability, and institutional strength. Even opposition parties praised the government and military for their coordinated and effective response.
Crucially, Pakistan used this momentum to reignite global focus on Kashmir. With Trump endorsing mediation, Pakistan gained diplomatic traction. Its dignified wartime conduct and consistent call for peace lent it moral and political capital it had long sought.
This war did not last long, but its consequences will resonate for decades. India’s image as a stable democracy and rising power has been seriously undermined. The myth of Pakistan as a rogue state has been debunked. What remains is a clearer understanding: arrogance is not strategy, propaganda is not policy, and suppression is not victory.
As one oversees patriotic Pakistani Mr. Mubeen Ahmed Qureshi put it, this strategic space, created by the collective national resolve that defeated a far larger and better-equipped adversary, gives every reason for Pakistan to celebrate. But more importantly, Pakistan must seize this moment—not just to revel in triumph but to take a step back, identify its political, economic, financial, trade, and investment roadblocks, and with the same spirit it fought the war, begin to put its house in order. Only then can Pakistan reemerge as a significant regional and global player—not only militarily, but across all elements of national power.
The war has redrawn South Asia’s narrative landscape. The world must now reckon with a new geopolitical truth: Pakistan is no longer the problem—it is part of the solution. Meanwhile, unless India reforms its policies, rhetoric, and regional behavior, it risks becoming its own worst enemy.

Paris (Imran Y. CHOUDHRY) :- Former Press Secretary to the President, Former Press Minister to the Embassy of Pakistan to France, Former MD, SRBC Mr. Qamar Bashir analysis : In a world no longer solely defined by military alliances or ideological blocs, power is increasingly shaped by capital, technology, and human development. President Donald Trump’s decision to begin his second term with a summit in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) nations is a telling recognition of this shift. It affirms the Gulf’s rise not only as a regional powerhouse but as a global actor actively reshaping diplomacy, development, and security.
At the epicenter of this transformation stands Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS), whose strategic clarity and economic foresight have positioned Saudi Arabia and its allies at the vanguard of a multipolar world. The summit, hosted in Riyadh, was more than ceremonial—it was a moment of recalibration for the global order.
What distinguishes the modern GCC is not just its wealth, but the vision to wield it with purpose. With sovereign funds reaching into the trillions, Gulf nations are redirecting capital from passive holdings to strategic investments—funding artificial intelligence, quantum computing, energy transitions, and educational partnerships with elite American institutions.
This is a new form of diplomacy: one where influence is purchased not through arms but by acquiring intellectual property, embedding talent in global research, and co-creating innovation ecosystems. Gulf money is no longer idle—it is building future influence.
President Trump, recognizing this shift, lauded the Gulf’s transformation as “the envy of the world,” citing over $1 trillion in projected investments and over $110 billion in bilateral trade in 2024 alone. But beyond the numbers was a message: Gulf leadership is not following the West—it is co-authoring the future with it.
The summit focused heavily on regional stabilization. In one of the most consequential announcements, Trump declared the complete lifting of U.S. sanctions on Syria, signaling a dramatic shift in American policy. He credited Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Turkish President Erdogan for facilitating the move—an act designed to provide Syria with a “fresh start” and reintegrate it into the Arab fold after years of civil war and isolation.
This development was not a concession—it was a calculated diplomatic trade-off. In return for massive Gulf investment into American infrastructure, defense contracts, and educational programs, the U.S. acknowledged the Gulf’s new authority to shape the political future of the region.
Addressing the Gaza tragedy, MBS underscored that a sustainable peace lies in a just resolution of the Palestinian issue through the establishment of an independent Palestinian state, in line with United Nations resolutions and the Arab Peace Initiative. He categorically rejected any plan to displace or resettle Palestinians in foreign territories, reaffirming their right to homeland and sovereignty.
In this broader context, the Gulf nations’ alignment with the United States reflects not just shared economic interests, but a mutual strategic goal of containing Iranian influence, stabilizing regional politics, and eliminating armed proxies that thrive on chaos.
One of the most overlooked, yet powerful, elements of the U.S.-GCC partnership is the massive investment in human capital. Tens of thousands of students from the Gulf are studying in top American universities, training in advanced fields like robotics, aerospace engineering, nanotechnology, and cybersecurity. These students are not merely recipients of Western knowledge—they are future architects of a Middle East prepared to lead.
MBS has paired this educational strategy with significant incentives for American universities to expand in Saudi Arabia and across the GCC. These joint campuses are fast becoming incubators for innovation, preparing the region to compete not only economically but intellectually in the coming decades.
The Gulf states are no longer content to influence global policy from the sidelines. By investing in American industries, real estate, and financial markets, they are embedding themselves deeply into the U.S. economic architecture. But what’s more strategic is their targeted investment in intellectual property and cutting-edge technology.
This ensures that as America innovates, the Gulf is not just a client but a partner—and in many cases, a co-owner. This strategic stakeholding, wisely replacing dormant assets and offshore accounts, reflects a new doctrine: soft power through smart capital.
Trump also unveiled a fresh diplomatic offensive aimed at liberating Lebanon from Hezbollah’s shadow. A new U.S. ambassador—a Lebanese-American with deep regional roots—has been appointed to lead this mission, backed by economic assistance and civil society outreach. It’s a move meant to offer the Lebanese people an alternative path forward—free from sectarian domination and foreign interference.
This summit may well be remembered as the moment when the Gulf ceased to be a regional player and assumed its role as a global co-author of peace, stability, and progress. With sanctions lifted on Syria, and the Palestinians firmly defended through diplomatic backing, the message is clear: the future will be written by those who blend capital, conviction, and clarity of purpose.
The partnership between President Trump and the Gulf leaders—particularly Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman—is not about fleeting gestures or transactional politics. It is about long-term architecture—of peace, of prosperity, and of power sharing.
As the tectonic plates of global influence continue to shift, one thing is certain: the Gulf has arrived—not merely through the power of petro dollars, but by the sheer force of merit, strategic foresight, and visionary leadership. The prosperity of the GCC is no longer defined by passive wealth accumulation, but by the intelligent reassignment of resources—where idle capital is transformed into active investment across continents.
They are acquiring foreign assets, attracting global minds, and integrating world-class expertise to exponentially grow their economic footprint. Recognizing that true and lasting prosperity lies in empowering their own people, GCC nations are investing billions to build human capital—sending their youth to top global institutions, creating ecosystems of entrepreneurship, and opening channels of trade and innovation.
By aligning emerging technologies with national ambitions and training their citizens to lead in these domains, the Gulf states are not only securing their place at the forefront of global progress but are reshaping the narrative of power, productivity, and purposeful development for the 21st century.

Paris (Imran Y. CHOUDHRY) :- Former Press Secretary to the President, Former Press Minister to the Embassy of Pakistan to France, Former MD, SRBC Mr. Qamar Bashir analysis : In what may go down in history as a precedent-setting case of state-level bribery and constitutional evasion, President Donald Trump has accepted what is being described as a “gift” from the Amir of Qatar—a lavishly outfitted Boeing 747-8 jumbo jet reportedly valued at $400 million. Far from a mere logistical update to the aging Air Force One, this so-called donation is raising alarms about ethics, sovereignty, and national dignity both at home and abroad.
Trump’s social media declaration—filled with his characteristic bluster, capital letters, and partisan jabs—painted the aircraft as a patriotic solution: saving taxpayer money while upgrading America’s presidential fleet. But behind the branding lies an ethical dilemma that cuts to the core of public office: is the President of the United States compromising the integrity of the office by accepting such an extravagant gift from a foreign government?
The Boeing 747-8i being offered by Qatar is no ordinary aircraft. Originally manufactured in Washington state and flown under Qatar Amiri Flight—the division of Qatar Airways that serves royalty and high-level officials—the plane features amenities more fitting for royalty than for the head of a constitutional republic. According to an aircraft specification summary posted online by Swiss firm AMAC Aerospace, the jet includes three full-size lounges, two bedrooms including a master suite with a couch and media center, nine bathrooms, five fully equipped galleys, and a private office furnished with a conference table, bookshelves, a monitor, and an en suite bathroom.
The jet’s art-deco-inspired interior features L-shaped sofas, recliners, club seating, wood paneling, built-in shelving, and large-screen televisions—some as large as 55 inches. It can carry up to 89 passengers and 14 crew members, and reportedly took AMAC Aerospace two years to complete the custom fittings, creating what has been described as a “palace in the sky.” Ironically, what appears to be missing is Trump’s signature decorative flourish—gold embellishments—though few doubt such features could be added swiftly.
Beyond the opulence lies a deeper constitutional issue. The U.S. Constitution’s Emoluments Clause strictly prohibits any sitting president from accepting “any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever” from a foreign state without the express consent of Congress.
Trump’s team is reportedly sidestepping this clause by having the aircraft first transferred to the U.S. Air Force for official use and later to the Trump Presidential Library Foundation, potentially before his term ends. While this maneuver might pass narrow legal scrutiny, it clearly violates the spirit of constitutional safeguards and fuels long-standing accusations that Trump blurs the line between personal enrichment and public service.
Central to this controversy is the question of conflict of interest—a situation in which a public official’s private interests might interfere with their obligations to serve the public good. As an ethical and legal principle, it is a standard used across democratic systems to safeguard transparency and impartiality. By accepting a $400 million aircraft from Qatar, a nation with clear strategic interests in U.S. military and foreign policy, Trump risks compromising his ability to act in America’s interest.
Would he be able to negotiate with Qatar as an impartial leader? Would he challenge their positions on defense, energy, or regional security if doing so might sour the goodwill symbolized by this flying monument to privilege? These are not hypothetical concerns—they are urgent ethical questions with serious implications.
Even if the aircraft is used only temporarily, the symbolism is damaging. No sovereign nation that values its independence would accept such an extravagant offering from a foreign power without fear of becoming beholden. Trump’s acceptance without hesitation—and worse, with pride—signals not strength, but weakness. It suggests that national integrity is up for negotiation, and that symbols of prestige take precedence over principles of independence and self-respect.
Adding insult to injury, the affair exposes another uncomfortable truth: the apparent decline of U.S. infrastructure and procurement readiness. For a country that spends nearly $900 billion a year on defense, leads NATO, and commands military presence across the globe, the notion that it must rely on a foreign monarchy for its presidential aircraft is a stunning indictment of mismanaged priorities. The delay of Trump’s own $3.9 billion deal with Boeing for two new Air Force One jets—initially expected by 2024 and now pushed several years into the future—reflects systemic inefficiencies, but it does not justify compromising institutional integrity for convenience.
Trump has long portrayed himself as a disruptor, someone unafraid to break with tradition and defy political correctness. But leadership requires more than provocation; it demands judgment, discipline, and loyalty to public service above personal image. Accepting a gift of this magnitude from a foreign monarchy is not bold leadership—it is a surrender of ethical clarity. Even if the aircraft is ultimately transferred to his presidential library, the gesture does not erase the perception that the office of the presidency has been leveraged for personal benefit.
Symbols matter. In diplomacy and governance, optics often shape narratives. Accepting a “palace in the sky” from a foreign ruler sends a dangerous message to the world—that America’s highest office can be influenced through prestige and indulgence, rather than earned trust and principled negotiation. It undermines the moral authority of the presidency and sets a precedent that could normalize similar breaches in the future.
Ultimately, history will judge whether this episode is remembered as a symbol of Trump’s disregard for convention or as a warning sign of a broader erosion of ethical standards in American governance. What is undeniable is that the aircraft, no matter how luxurious, casts a long shadow over the principles of impartiality and transparency. The plane may elevate Trump’s image to cruising altitude, but it drags down the dignity and constitutional integrity of the republic he claims to serve.