Connect with us

Pakistan News

Pakistan Saves Middle East and Iran and Shatters Israel Invincibility

Published

on

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 : At a moment when the world stood dangerously close to a catastrophic regional war capable of dragging humanity toward economic collapse and even nuclear confrontation, Pakistan accomplished something that few nations in modern history have ever achieved. Through persistence, strategic wisdom, diplomatic resilience, and calculated engagement with opposing powers simultaneously, Pakistan helped prevent the Middle East from falling into total destruction and the world economy from sliding into chaos.
What military alliances, aircraft carriers, sanctions, missile strikes, assassinations, cyber warfare, and diplomatic threats failed to accomplish was ultimately challenged through dialogue, persuasion, trust-building, and geopolitical balance.
Pakistan emerged not as a military conqueror, but as a stabilizing force capable of influencing some of the world’s most dangerous rivalries at a critical historical moment.
The war began with overwhelming momentum in favor of the United States and Israel. Under what Washington called “Operation Epic Fury,” Iran faced unprecedented military, financial, and geopolitical pressure. Israel’s strategic planners believed they were approaching the realization of a long-term objective: permanently weakening Iran, dismantling its missile and drone capability, reducing its regional influence, and reshaping the Middle East in Israel’s favor.
At the beginning of the conflict, nearly every major analyst believed Israel would emerge as the biggest strategic winner.
Iran was isolated, Gulf states were anxious, energy markets were panicking, and the Strait of Hormuz — through which nearly one-fifth of the world’s energy supplies transit — became the focal point of global fear.
Oil prices surged, shipping insurance costs exploded, inflation intensified worldwide, and stock markets across continents became unstable. Governments feared a global recession deeper than the financial crisis of 2008.
My own analysis during the early phase of the conflict was that everybody was losing, but only Israel was winning.
Yet history often changes because of one unexpected factor — strategic wisdom exercised at the right moment. Pakistan emerged as that factor.
Pakistan understood something many world powers failed to fully appreciate. This conflict was not merely about Iran’s nuclear ambitions or Israel’s security concerns. It was about the future geopolitical architecture of the Middle East, control of global energy routes, strategic domination, and the possibility of dragging the world toward a wider confrontation involving nuclear-capable states.
The danger was real. The United States possesses enormous nuclear arsenals. Israel is widely believed to possess nuclear capability. Iran was being accused of moving closer to nuclear threshold status. If the war had continued to escalate uncontrollably, the possibility of mutually assured destruction could no longer have been dismissed as theoretical.
Pakistan recognized that danger earlier than many others. In that atmosphere, Pakistan chose diplomacy over silence.
Field Marshal Asim Munir’s statement became symbolic of Pakistan’s commitment when he reportedly declared with conviction that Pakistan would not allow Iran to fall. At the time, many dismissed the statement as political rhetoric.
Yet Pakistan gradually transformed those words into strategic action. Quietly, carefully, and persistently, Islamabad built trust simultaneously with Tehran, Washington, Beijing, Moscow, Ankara, Riyadh, Doha, and other key capitals, effectively bypassing Israel, reducing it to inconsequential in the mediation process and frustrating all its objectives of starting the war.
Despite repeated attempts by influential Israeli circles and hardline lobbies in Washington to sideline Pakistan from the mediation process, Islamabad remained central because all parties eventually recognized one reality: Pakistan possessed credibility with opposing camps simultaneously.
Iran trusted Pakistan’s intentions. Gulf countries trusted Pakistan’s balance. China and Russia trusted Pakistan’s strategic judgment. Even Washington eventually realized Pakistan had become indispensable in preventing total escalation.
The emerging 60-day framework agreement reflects that diplomatic achievement. Instead of discussions centered exclusively on dismantling Iran, the negotiations shifted toward reopening the Strait of Hormuz, reducing naval confrontation, ending hostilities across multiple fronts including Lebanon, and establishing timelines for broader future understandings.
This represented a dramatic reversal of battlefield realities.
At the beginning of the war, Iran reportedly faced enormous pressure to surrender key elements of its uranium enrichment capability, missile program, drone infrastructure, and regional strategic influence. Israeli strategic thinking envisioned a transformed Middle East where Iran’s long-term deterrence capability would be permanently dismantled.
Discussions even emerged regarding alternative regional energy corridors bypassing the Strait of Hormuz through routes linked to Israeli-controlled infrastructure and the Red Sea. The dream of “Greater Israel” appeared increasingly visible through expanding buffer zones in Gaza, southern Lebanon, Syria, and potentially beyond.
Today, much of that strategic vision lies shattered.
Instead of negotiating surrender, Iran is negotiating from resilience. The focus has shifted away from total dismantlement toward maritime management, phased arrangements, timelines, and future diplomatic understandings.
Iran emerged bloodied but strategically unbroken. Lebanon was spared the scale of destruction inflicted upon Gaza. A wider regional war was paused. Most importantly, the world economy was protected from what could have become the largest energy and financial collapse in modern history.
The economic implications of this diplomatic intervention are staggering.
Had the Strait of Hormuz remained blocked for a prolonged period, global oil prices could have reached catastrophic levels. Energy-importing countries across Asia, Africa, Europe, and Latin America would have suffered devastating inflationary shocks.
Food prices, electricity costs, transportation expenses, fertilizer production, and industrial manufacturing costs would all have surged simultaneously. Hundreds of millions of vulnerable people — potentially more than a billion globally — could have been pushed below the poverty line.
At the same time, Gulf desalination plants, ports, oil facilities, refineries, shipping infrastructure, and industrial zones worth trillions of dollars stood exposed to destruction. The war was already costing the United States tens of billions of dollars while shaking global financial confidence.
Pakistan’s diplomacy helped prevent that nightmare.
This explains the visible anger and panic among hardline supporters of the war in Washington and Israel. Republican figures such as Lindsey Graham, Ted Cruz, Roger Wicker, Tom Cotton, Mike Pompeo, and John Bolton openly criticized the emerging framework because they believed the war should continue until Iran was strategically crushed.
Lindsey Graham described the arrangement as a “nightmare for Israel.” Ted Cruz warned that Iran could emerge stronger. Roger Wicker argued that everything achieved through “Operation Epic Fury” could become meaningless. Mike Pompeo compared the emerging framework to what he considered the failures of the Obama-era nuclear agreement.
Their outrage itself reflects the scale of Pakistan’s diplomatic success.
For decades, Pakistan was often portrayed internationally through the narrow lenses of instability, extremism, economic weakness, or political crisis. Yet this conflict revealed another Pakistan — a nuclear-armed middle power capable of balancing global contradictions and preventing a catastrophic war involving some of the world’s most dangerous rivalries.
Pakistan demonstrated that strategic intelligence, diplomatic patience, resilience, and credibility can sometimes achieve what overwhelming military power cannot.
At the same time, Israel’s global image has suffered unprecedented damage. The destruction in Gaza, the deaths of thousands of civilians and children, devastation in Lebanon, accusations of ethnic cleansing, and growing criticism from Europe and international institutions weakened Israel’s moral standing globally. Countries that once remained silent increasingly questioned Israeli actions. Public sympathy that once overwhelmingly favored Israel significantly eroded.
The United States also realized that unlimited military escalation carried unbearable economic and political costs. The conflict exposed vulnerabilities in global supply chains, energy security, military overstretch, and domestic political stability.
But Pakistan’s accomplishment goes far beyond being merely its greatest diplomatic success. In terms of geopolitical significance and prevention of global destruction, this achievement stands comparable to — and in some respects exceeds — many celebrated diplomatic breakthroughs in modern history. The Camp David Accords prevented another Arab-Israeli war. The Cuban Missile Crisis diplomacy pulled the United States and Soviet Union back from the brink of nuclear annihilation. The Dayton Accords ended the Bosnian conflict. The historic rapprochement between China and the United States in the 1970s transformed two hostile powers into diplomatic partners and reshaped the global balance of power.
Yet even that historic opening was significantly facilitated through Pakistan’s quiet diplomacy, when Islamabad served as the trusted bridge between Beijing and Washington at a time when both countries lacked formal diplomatic relations and viewed one another as ideological enemies. Pakistan quietly helped create one of the most important geopolitical transformations of the twentieth century.
Today, decades later, Pakistan has once again demonstrated a diplomatic capability of historic magnitude.
Unlike superpowers that imposed outcomes through military occupation, coercion, or economic domination, Pakistan achieved influence through trust, strategic balance, credibility, and dialogue. This time, Pakistan helped prevent a conflict involving multiple war fronts, nuclear-capable states, collapsing energy routes, and a possible global economic meltdown.
History often celebrates nations for conquering territories and winning wars. Pakistan may ultimately be remembered for something far greater: helping prevent a regional conflict from evolving into a catastrophe capable of destabilizing the entire international system.

Pakistan News

Rare Earths: Pakistan’s Economic Part 2

Published

on

By

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 : A mine has a finite life; the capabilities built around it can serve generations. Part One examined Pakistan’s mineral opportunity and the international partnerships that could help develop it. The next task is to connect extraction with a national industrial programme: Pakistani engineers operating sophisticated facilities, Pakistani enterprises supplying them, and Pakistani factories exporting increasingly valuable components and finished products.
This connection should become a central condition of mineral cooperation with China, Canada, the United States, Australia, European countries or any international consortium. Each major agreement should contribute to an industrial development plan, with responsibilities assigned to mining companies, manufacturers, infrastructure providers and public institutions. Measurable commitments can align commercial returns with Pakistan’s ambition to build a diversified economy.
The programme begins with infrastructure. Mines and processing plants require dependable electricity, water management, roads, rail connections and efficient ports. Industrial development also needs broadband, laboratories, workshops, warehouses and customs facilities. Planning these investments together would allow surrounding communities and businesses to share the benefits. A railway should connect productive regions; a power network should support factories and homes alongside mineral operations.
Industrial zones linked to mineral corridors could bring processors, component manufacturers and service businesses into connected locations. Their success would depend on reliable utilities, clear land rights, predictable regulation and access to customers. Common testing facilities, wastewater treatment and logistics services could reduce costs for smaller enterprises. Development should be measured through operating businesses, exports and employment.
Processing provides the first industrial bridge. Copper can support conductors, cables, transformers and electrical equipment. Suitable rare-earth feedstock can support separation, purified oxides, metals, alloys and magnet production. Commercial studies should identify which stages Pakistan can establish competitively and what partners, technology and scale they require. Investment agreements can then specify facilities, commissioning milestones and Pakistani participation.
Magnet manufacturing can connect these activities with motors, pumps, industrial automation, wind-energy equipment and automobile components. Engineering capability in these fields can gradually support more advanced production. Firms supplying one component reliably can qualify for larger contracts and more demanding markets. This progression gives mineral development a route into manufacturing through products that businesses can sell.
The wider ambition should include laptops, smartwatches, smartphones and other electronic devices. Partnerships with established manufacturers could develop components, precision parts, assembly and product testing, progressing toward design and engineering. Production for international brands, including devices such as iPhones, would require authorised commercial arrangements and qualification within their supply networks. Pakistan should negotiate pathways through which firms and workers can meet those standards.
Minerals supply one part of these products. Competitive electronics production also requires semiconductors, batteries, displays, software, precision equipment and dependable suppliers. Pakistan’s industrial programme should connect these requirements through joint ventures, licensing and research partnerships. A strategy would identify selected products, secure customers and build the complementary capabilities needed to manufacture them.
Automobiles offer another route through motors, wiring, sensors, power electronics and specialised components. Shipbuilding and frigate programmes could draw upon stronger capabilities in electrical systems, propulsion components and precision fabrication. Aerospace, satellite and space-launch ambitions would benefit from advances in materials, electronics, control systems and engineering. Participation should progress through civilian and other permitted partnerships, with the necessary certifications and technology approvals.
Pakistani people must occupy the centre of this transformation. Universities should expand relevant programmes in geology, mining, metallurgy, chemical engineering, materials science, electronics and industrial automation. Colleges and vocational institutions should prepare electricians, mechanics, welders, machinists and laboratory technicians. New institutions should be established where regional demand requires them, while existing institutions receive equipment, qualified teachers and industry partnerships.
Scholarships should give students from producing districts a direct route into these professions. Paid apprenticeships and supervised practical training should connect education with employment. Joint ventures should establish time-bound plans for Pakistani engineers and managers to assume greater operational responsibility. Success would be demonstrated by competence in running, maintaining, troubleshooting and improving complex facilities.
Research partnerships should leave permanent capacity within Pakistan. Shared laboratories, pilot plants, geological databases and negotiated access to technical knowledge can help institutions solve industrial problems. Agreements should define intellectual-property rights, licensing and opportunities for Pakistani innovation. Research funding should support processing efficiency, recycling, water conservation and new materials, allowing knowledge generated by collaboration to create further enterprises.
Business and financial infrastructure must develop alongside technical capacity. Local suppliers need working capital, equipment finance, insurance and timely payment. Exporters need trade finance, certification and efficient customs. Transparent procurement can help Pakistani companies enter supply networks, while long-term customer agreements improve investment confidence. Public financial support should carry clear limits, disclosed obligations and performance conditions.
Mineral revenues can finance this wider productive base. A transparent framework should provide predictable allocations for producing communities, investment in education and infrastructure, and savings against commodity downturns. Expenditure should follow verified receipts and public audits. Supporting manufacturing and local enterprise would broaden the sources of income available when particular mines approach the end of their lives.
Environmental management protects that future. Water use, tailings, emissions and eventual rehabilitation need funded obligations and independent monitoring. Communities should participate in decisions affecting their land and livelihoods, with lawful compensation and accessible remedies. Recycling metals and magnets can create additional businesses while retaining valuable material within the economy.
The foundation is accountable government. Credible elections, independent courts, empowered provinces and effective local authorities can give citizens a voice in the use of their wealth. Parliament should scrutinise major agreements, while independent regulators oversee environmental and commercial obligations. The armed forces should fulfil their constitutional security responsibilities, with economic policy directed by elected civilian institutions.
Pakistan’s economic promise will be fulfilled through the factories, skills, research and enterprises its mineral partnerships help create. Negotiating this connection is a national responsibility. With capable governance and sustained cooperation, Pakistan can export finished products, develop its own technology and build prosperity that outlives the deposits from which the transformation began.

Continue Reading

Pakistan News

Rare Earths: Pakistan’s Economic Part 1

Published

on

By

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 : Rare earths offer Pakistan an opportunity to change its economic destiny. Their greatest promise lies in connecting the country’s geological wealth with the industries shaping modern life: electric vehicles, electronics, clean energy, advanced machinery and aerospace. Growing international interest can bring the capital, technology and markets needed for this transformation. Pakistan’s task is to build partnerships that turn mineral deposits into lasting productive capacity, skilled employment and public prosperity.
America’s chargé d’affaires in Pakistan, Natalie A. Baker, has described cooperation extending from geological assessment and extraction to workforce training, schools and transport infrastructure. Her reference to mineral potential reaching seven trillion dollars sits within published estimates of $6 trillion to $8 trillion. The opportunity she outlined provides a basis for agreements that connect mining investment with local development and a wider industrial economy.
Energy Update, citing the Institute of Cost and Management Accountants of Pakistan, reports mineral-bearing areas extending across approximately 600,000 square kilometres, with 92 known minerals, including 52 commercially exploited. SFA (Oxford) estimates recoverable rare-earth oxide potential at 100,000 to 500,000 tonnes. These estimates offer a starting point for systematic exploration, deposit assessment and investment planning.
My own association with this opportunity reaches back four decades. In 1986, while working as a news producer, I accompanied a visiting Chinese state minister during a tour connected with mineral deposits in Balochistan. The delegation’s interest reflected an early appreciation of the region’s potential. Subsequent Chinese involvement at Saindak established an important chapter in Pakistan’s mineral development, providing experience upon which broader partnerships can build.
Reko Diq demonstrates the scale of Pakistan’s documented copper-gold opportunity. Barrick’s year-end 2025 disclosures identify 7.3 million tonnes of contained copper and 13 million ounces of gold attributable to its 50 percent interest. Project-wide quantities implied by these rounded figures are approximately 14.6 million tonnes of copper and 26 million ounces of gold. Federal Pakistani enterprises and Balochistan each hold 25 percent of the venture.
Using illustrative prices of $10,000 per tonne of copper and $3,000 per ounce of gold, those quantities represent approximately $224 billion in gross contained-metal value. Commercial returns will emerge over decades through production, sales and expenditure. Pakistan’s benefits will include agreed royalties, taxes, dividends, employment and domestic procurement. The volume of activity retained within the country will determine how widely these benefits spread.
Rare earths create a related avenue for industrial development. Geological research identifies promising formations at Sillai Patti, Koga, Loe Shilman, Warsak and Jambil in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Studies document light rare-earth enrichment involving cerium, lanthanum, neodymium, praseodymium and samarium. SFA also identifies prospects around Skardu and Chilas, Chagai and the Makran coast, together with potential secondary recovery from Thar coal fly ash.
Research on Sillai Patti cites earlier sampled-material averages of approximately 314 parts per million of neodymium, 915 of cerium and 519 of lanthanum. A hyperspectral investigation identified portions of samples reaching approximately 1,000 parts per million of neodymium. Representative drilling, mineralogical analysis and processing trials can translate this scientific knowledge into project-specific quantities, recovery rates and commercial values.
Neodymium and praseodymium are important inputs for powerful neodymium-iron-boron magnets. Samarium supports samarium-cobalt magnets used where temperature stability matters. Certain high-performance magnets also incorporate dysprosium or terbium. Developing these products involves concentration, separation, purification, metal production, alloying and precision manufacturing. Each stage offers a possible link between Pakistan’s resource base and a more technically capable economy.
American engagement already has a practical foundation. In September 2025, Pakistan announced a US Strategic Metals partnership with the Frontier Works Organization, envisaging approximately $500 million in initial investment and eventual development of a polymetallic refinery. USSM subsequently reported receiving antimony, copper concentrate and rare-earth material containing neodymium and praseodymium. The U.S. Export-Import Bank also lists $1.25 billion in authorised financing for Reko Diq.
Potential technical partners extend across the industrial chain. MP Materials operates in rare-earth processing and magnet manufacturing, Energy Fuels has demonstrated separated neodymium-praseodymium oxide production, and Arnold Magnetic Technologies manufactures advanced magnets. Their capabilities suggest possible commercial matches as Pakistani projects become investment-ready. Chinese, Canadian, Australian and European expertise can likewise contribute through competitive, transparent arrangements.
The economic scale is substantial. Barrick’s 2025 feasibility plan envisaged Phase 1 ramping up to 240,000 tonnes of copper and 297,000 ounces of gold annually. At the illustrative prices above, this represents about $3.29 billion in annual gross metal value. Its planned expanded operation’s specified ten-year average would represent approximately $6.16 billion annually on the same basis. Net national gains will depend on costs, financing and domestic value addition.
Barrick’s April 2026 update provided for slower development and a review through mid-2027. This makes phased planning valuable: exploration, infrastructure, skills and industrial investment should advance through clearly financed stages. SFA’s proposed rare-earth roadmap similarly progresses from initial exports toward processing and larger-scale mining. Timelines should guide coordination, with implementation measured through completed facilities and commercially qualified output.
Pakistan’s strengths are its mineral base and growing international attention. Its development needs include geological data, processing capacity, dependable utilities and specialised skills. Opportunities encompass exports, technology transfer and manufacturing; threats include security disruption, price fluctuations and environmental pressures. This SWOT assessment points toward coordinated investment, strong institutions and community participation.
The next step is to place industrial development at the centre of mineral policy. Agreements should connect extraction with infrastructure, Pakistani expertise and downstream production. That is the bridge from geological promise to economic transformation—and the question taken forward in Part Two: how Pakistan can use today’s mineral opportunity to build industries that continue creating wealth long after individual deposits are exhausted.

Continue Reading

Pakistan News

Political Hoopla in Pakistan

Published

on

By

The Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) government’s non-cooperation with the federal government’s policies and its opposition to military operations against terrorists led to the imposition of Governor’s Rule on 12 October 2026. Political hoopla has been a defining feature of Pakistan’s political history. The PTI’s dissenting and, moreover, defiant politics led its leadership and activists towards violence. However, the subsequent situation, in which security agencies reportedly identified deep links between KP-PTI leaders and the Taliban and Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), convinced the federal government to impose Governor’s Rule. There are allegations that the KP government had a covert understanding with Afghanistan regarding cooperation. Although no one has presented evidence of such an understanding, the PTI’s non-cooperation with Pakistan Army operations, its silence on the deaths of law enforcement personnel, and its apathetic attitude towards equipping the KP police with the required modern weapons and other equipment reflect the provincial government’s detachment from federal policies. These factors have also reinforced the claims made by state institutions. Pakistan is a democratic country, but undemocratic policies and attitudes have devastated the dream of establishing a welfare state. The federal government has spent huge amounts of public money on maintaining a luxurious lifestyle for those in power, while the public has continued to endure severe hardships. Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir has expressed his desire to make Pakistan a hard state in which the rule of law empowers the state. However, this aspiration has yet to be realized because politicians remain reluctant to enforce the rule of law. The rule of law begins with genuine democracy, which is possible only through an empowered local government system. Yet, such a system is largely absent across Pakistan. It does not suit politicians and the civil bureaucracy because it transfers resources and decision-making powers to local governments for development work. Neither politicians nor the civil bureaucracy appears willing to share these resources and powers. Federal and provincial governments may formulate democratic policies, but their undemocratic attitudes towards implementation prevent those policies from producing the desired results. Governments are dominated by elite families that enjoy protection from accountability for illegal and corrupt activities. Such practices include shielding individuals from criminal proceedings, protecting the occupation of government land and plots, and benefiting from corruption, commissions from contractors, NGOs, fraudulent TA/DA claims, and bogus medical bills. This pathetic situation neither restores peace in society nor produces honest and competent leadership. Such a pathetic situation neither restores peace in society nor produces honest and competent leadership. After imposing Governor’s rule in KPK, what is to be done with the PTI followers and leaders? I opine that discarding the traditional policy of dividing the political party into factions is more harmful than declaring one party as a traitor and anti-Pakistan. It would have been better to create a parallel PTI faction instead of the Istehkam-i-Pakistan Party, etc. because the PTI workers must have been provided political shelter somewhere, but right now the establishment has left them in the doldrums, which can be more dangerous. This is what we warned about: it would be very easy for terrorist or violent groups to form governments in the proposed new provinces with small areas. Nobody can prevent violent groups such as TLP, TTP, BLA, etc. from clinching governments in the new provinces with small areas. Now, the federal government owes the entire responsibility to root out terrorism from KPK and to ensure the prosperity of the people. People expect positive results from this political strategy. To sum, if we genuinely want to transform Pakistan into a welfare state in which the rule of law is firmly enforced and crime and punishment are proportionate and consistently applied, ‘we’ must redefine the role of institutions. Who are ‘We’ is yet to be disclosed, although the Constitution ought to be the ‘we.’ Everyone, from politicians to those who exercise a strong grip on the system, must demonstrate the will to put Pakistan on the path to becoming a democratic country. The existing political system cannot transform Pakistan into a welfare state as long as elite capture (Gutterafia) continues to prevail and the powerful remain above the law.

Continue Reading

Trending