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 : The Middle East has long been the epicenter of conflict, betrayal, shifting alliances, and global maneuvering. Yet the most recent chapter has revealed not just another tragic confrontation, but a sophisticated, high-intensity, high-stake game where every move was calculated to achieve both destruction and survival. The sequence began with Hamas’s surprise attack on Israel—an operation described by some analysts as clumsy and poorly coordinated, yet one that, paradoxically, many claim was abetted by Israel itself to trigger a wider conflict. What followed was a brutal escalation that saw Gaza reduced to rubble, its people starved, slaughtered, and collectively punished under what international observers called nothing less than genocide.
The early days of the war set the stage for Israel’s long-held expansionist ambition: to annex Gaza, the West Bank, and potentially extend its dominance into the broader Middle East. With the United States’ unconditional backing, Israel unleashed a campaign that turned Gaza into what one doctor called a “slaughterhouse,” where children, women, doctors, and civilians were killed daily in horrifying numbers. This genocidal spectacle shocked the world and forced international powers to take sides.
China and Russia limited their involvement largely to issuing statements, avoiding direct entanglement. The real surprise came from Europe. Under immense public pressure, European governments pivoted dramatically. Citizens poured into the streets demanding sanctions against Israel, recognition of Palestine as a state, and an end to the occupation. Governments responded by canceling military, civilian, and economic agreements with Israel, withdrawing investments, and promising support for a two-state solution. This groundswell of European public opinion became a turning point. For decades, Israel had enjoyed near-total impunity in Western capitals, but this time the moral force of public condemnation began to erode even the most entrenched political loyalties. One decisive moment came when a prominent European leader flew to Israel, not to offer support, but to confront its leadership, creating diplomatic shockwaves and forcing new pressure on Tel Aviv.
Equally astonishing was the role of the Muslim world. Long criticized for division and inaction, the Muslim ummah displayed unprecedented cohesion. Iran, while vilified as a sponsor of Hamas, proved its influence by supporting Palestinian resistance and deterring Israel and the United States from full-scale regional escalation. The collective strength of Muslim nations, particularly through economic and diplomatic channels, became a bargaining chip powerful enough to push the United States toward reconsidering its position.
Amid this turmoil, President Donald Trump played what many now describe as one of the most intelligent and strategic diplomatic games of his career. Historically, U.S. presidents have been tethered to Israel’s narrative, often adopting regime-change agendas across the Middle East at Israel’s urging. Netanyahu, for example, loudly advocated regime change in Iran, Syria, Iraq, and Libya. But Trump deviated sharply from this script. He refused to endorse Netanyahu’s ambition to annex Gaza and the West Bank, despite widespread support for the idea within Israel’s parliament and public opinion. He rejected calls for regime change in Iran, signaling that Washington would no longer be manipulated into destabilizing yet another regional power. For Israel, this was an unprecedented betrayal. For the world, it was a signal that America might finally be pulling back from decades of Middle Eastern entanglements.
Trump’s stance marked a turning point. It reflected not only his desire to assert American independence from Israeli influence but also his recognition that the United States could not afford endless wars while its economy and political institutions were under strain. His 21-point peace plan became the centerpiece of this recalibration—a plan that sought not only to stop the carnage in Gaza but also to end centuries of conflict by pushing for a viable two-state solution. When Trump unveiled the plan, many dismissed it as fragile, unrealistic, and destined to fail. Yet, against all odds, it gained momentum. The plan’s strength lay not in forcing capitulation but in balancing interests. It acknowledged Hamas as a legitimate political actor—something Israel had long resisted—and compelled Israel to sit at the same negotiation table as its sworn enemy.
In an unprecedented development, Hamas and Israel accepted the first phase of the plan. This meant an agreement to a ceasefire, humanitarian access to Gaza, and recognition of Palestine’s right to statehood in principle. The agreement is expected to be formally signed in Egypt, with Trump himself likely attending the ceremony. This moment is remarkable not only for its symbolic power but also for its practical implications. For the first time in decades, Israel was forced to concede to negotiations that recognized Palestinians as equal stakeholders. Trump’s ability to leverage European sanctions, Muslim unity, and American political will into one cohesive push was a rare alignment of global forces.
The immediate outcome of the plan is the cessation of the most brutal phase of the Gaza war. Yet its long-term implications are far more significant. If implemented fully, it could establish a two-state solution with Palestine gaining international recognition and sovereignty, force Israel to halt annexation and ethnic cleansing policies, rebalance U.S. foreign policy away from blind loyalty to Israel, strengthen European political autonomy, and reinforce Muslim nations’ influence as collective economic and diplomatic actors in global politics.
Nevertheless, challenges remain. Israel’s political establishment continues to resist, with Netanyahu lobbying fiercely to derail the plan and push the United States back into alignment with Israel’s hardline agenda. Doubts persist about Hamas’s ability to transform from an armed resistance group into a reliable political entity. Skeptics also question Trump’s capacity to maintain momentum given domestic pressures and the fragility of international alliances. Yet despite these uncertainties, the peace plan represents a monumental shift. It demonstrates that even in a region as complex and conflict-ridden as the Middle East, diplomacy, economic leverage, and public opinion can achieve what decades of war could not.
Credit for this breakthrough belongs to multiple actors. Trump’s strategic deviations from Israel’s traditional influence were decisive. Europe’s citizens, by refusing to remain silent in the face of genocide, forced their governments into action. Muslim nations, particularly Iran, used their strength to tilt the balance. International institutions such as the UN and the International Court of Justice provided moral legitimacy by condemning Israel’s actions and upholding Palestinian rights. Even Pakistan’s diplomats, often overlooked, played a vital role in mobilizing the Muslim world and countering Israeli-American propaganda at the United Nations. Conversely, China and Russia, despite their global stature, remained largely on the sidelines—issuing statements but contributing little. Their absence highlights a critical lesson: in this conflict, words without action mean little.
The Middle East has endured millennia of bloodshed, with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict at its modern heart. Yet the alignment of international outrage, Muslim unity, European pressure, and Trump’s uncharacteristically disciplined diplomacy has produced a fragile but real chance for peace. The 21-point plan is not merely a blueprint for ending one war; it is a test of whether humanity can finally prioritize justice and coexistence over expansion and annihilation. If the plan succeeds, it will not only be remembered as Trump’s greatest diplomatic achievement but also as the moment when the world finally forced Israel and Palestine to imagine peace. If it fails, it will join the long list of shattered hopes in the Middle East. For now, however, the world stands at a rare crossroads—one where the slaughter has paused, the diplomacy has begun, and the possibility of justice has flickered into view.

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 the geopolitical arena of South and West Asia, trust is often a currency traded for strategic advantage. Iran, long defiant against Western pressure, has discovered this truth at great cost. India, once considered a friend and trade partner, has not only betrayed Iran but colluded with Israel and the United States in a web of espionage that has left Iran militarily weakened, diplomatically humiliated, and internally compromised.
The alliance began with economic diplomacy. India proposed and helped construct the Chabahar Port in Iran, offering Tehran access to Central Asian markets. Iran, hopeful of bypassing U.S. sanctions and creating new trade routes, welcomed India’s investment. In doing so, Iran opened its gates to a partner that would eventually betray it.
India used this opportunity not merely to trade but to infiltrate. Under the guise of development, Indian operatives created extensive intelligence networks throughout Iran. Their activities went far beyond passive surveillance. According to Iranian security officials, Indian agents helped Israel and the United States establish a covert drone manufacturing and launch hub near Tehran. This facility, disguised as a civilian enterprise, played a direct role in the June 13, 2025 Israeli airstrikes that decimated Iranian leadership.
The drones launched from this platform struck with terrifying precision. Dozens of senior scientists, engineers, and IRGC officers were killed. Strategic infrastructure was demolished—oil refineries, depots, weapons caches, and even sensitive nuclear facilities. Iran, shocked and furious, realized the extent of India’s betrayal.
This is not India’s first foray from Iran. It soon after consolided its hold Chahbahar and dupted Iran in beleiving that India is a true friend it used Irainian soil as a launching pad to infiltrate its spies into Balochintan, pakistan. One of them was Kulbushan Jadhav who was caught in 2016 red handed and confessed his deep and poisonous instigation of Baloch to start separatist movement in Balochistan by pumping in money, weapons and trainings to Balochs and convinces them to attack Chiness interst especially China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). His testimony revealed a broader Indian plan: use Iranian soil to wage proxy wars against Pakistan. Jadhav was just the face of a vast network.
Iran’s own territory, it seems, became both a corridor for Indian agents and a staging ground for Western aggression. While pretending to build trade ties, India was hollowing out Iranian sovereignty—leaking intelligence to Mossad and the CIA, facilitating targeting operations, and constructing the drone infrastructure that would later be used to destroy Iran’s backbone.
Even diplomatically, India’s betrayal has grown more pronounced. During a recent session of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), a resolution was tabled to condemn Israel’s unlawful, unilateral, and unprovoked military strikes against Iran. The resolution passed with overwhelming support from member states—but India refused to endorse it. By distancing itself from the condemnation, India once again signaled where its loyalties truly lie. This calculated abstention laid bare India’s duplicity: publicly posing as a regional partner, while actively siding with those attacking Iran’s sovereignty.
Meanwhile, India’s global credibility eroded. Despite branding itself as a democratic force against extremism, its involvement in espionage, targeted assassinations, and regional destabilization revealed a darker truth. Iranian state media now approach India with suspicion, while Indian diaspora channels face backlash for echoing Israeli narratives.
This dual betrayal—of Iran and Pakistan—was part of a trilateral design: India acted as executor, Israel as planner, and the U.S. as financier. Their shared objective: weaken all resistance to Western hegemony in Asia, cripple CPEC, and ultimately justify the neutralization of Pakistan and Iran’s nuclear arsenal under the guise of regional stability.
After being stabbed, hurt and betrayed Iran launched “Operation Viper,” arresting over 17 Indian nationals directly implicated in espionage and sabotage. Their involvement in facilitating Israeli precision strikes, identifying nuclear targets, and supplying coordinates for drone and missile attacks sent tremors across Tehran.
The fallout extended far beyond intelligence circles. Social media across the Muslim world erupted. From Iran to Iraq, Turkey to Uzbekistan, Malaysia to Azerbaijan, voices rose in unison—not just to condemn Israel’s brutality, but to denounce India’s complicity. What followed was unprecedented: Iranian parliamentarians raised slogans in support of Pakistan, the only nation that stood unequivocally with Iran during the crisis.
Pakistan’s support was not limited to words. As Iran reeled from the attacks, Pakistan offered to host and repatriate 20,000 Iranian pilgrims stranded in Saudi Arabia due to closed airspace. The gesture, magnified across platforms like X (formerly Twitter), TikTok, and Facebook, triggered a wave of gratitude across Iranian media. One viral clip even quoted a senior Iranian figure claiming Pakistan had warned Israel of nuclear retaliation if Iran was hit by a nuclear bomb—a statement never confirmed officially, but powerful enough to shift regional sentiment.
This solidarity was echoed far beyond Iran. Chinese commentators praised Pakistan’s principled diplomacy. Uzbek and Azerbaijani citizens posted messages thanking Pakistan for its courage. Middle Eastern media contrasted Pakistan’s loyalty with India’s duplicity. In short, Pakistan’s image surged—India’s plummeted.
Meanwhile, India’s global credibility eroded. Despite presenting itself as a democratic bulwark against extremism, its actions in Iran exposed it as a willing conspirator in illegal assassinations and foreign-sponsored destabilization. Iranian media now treat India with suspicion, and Indian diaspora channels are widely criticized for parroting Israeli propaganda.
Now, the world is beginning to recognize the duplicity and double-dealing that define India’s foreign policy. Russia once considered India a long-standing ally, only to be blindsided when India signed strategic agreements with the United States—effectively turning its back on Moscow. This shift strained decades of trust and placed Russia in a geopolitical quagmire.
Yet, in a baffling turn, India later undermined the United States as well—by buying massive quantities of Russian oil, ammunition, and military hardware during a time when the West was trying to economically isolate Moscow. In doing so, India propped up the Russian economy, directly undercutting U.S. objectives. Thus, both superpowers—Russia and the United States—have been betrayed in turn.
India’s record of betrayal doesn’t end there. It mirrors Israel in both ideology and practice—particularly in its treatment of the Kashmiri people. Like Israel’s brutal campaign in Gaza, India has transformed Kashmir into a massive open-air prison, stripping its residents of autonomy, rights, and dignity. Through a combination of military occupation, demographic engineering, and systematic repression, it has reduced the Kashmiri population to a state of permanent subjugation.
This shared mindset—of colonialism, population control, and impunity—has become the moral link between India and Israel. Both stand accused of genocide, of targeting civilians without distinction, and of crushing resistance through starvation, displacement, and fear. It is within this framework of normalized brutality that India’s betrayal of Iran, Pakistan, Russia, and even the United States must be understood.
The lesson resonates far and wide: trust built on deceit crumbles; support rooted in principle prevails. Peace demands parity. Justice requires truth. And history will never forget those who betrayed under the guise of friendship.

A high-level Pakistani parliamentary delegation, led by Chairman of the Pakistan Peoples Party and former Foreign Minister, Mr. Bilawal Bhutto Zardari , held a focused interaction at International Institute of Strategic Studies, one of the world’s premier think tanks on defence and security.

The session, moderated by Desmond Bowen, Associate Fellow for South and Central Asian Defence, Strategy and Diplomacy at International Institute of Strategic Studies, brought together a distinguished audience of policymakers, academics, strategic analysts, and media professionals.

During the engagement, the delegation apprised the participants of the recent escalation in South Asia, voicing serious concern over India’s unprovoked military strikes that resulted in civilian casualties and posed a significant threat to regional peace and stability. They underscored that these strikes constituted a blatant violation of Pakistan’s sovereignty, international law, and the principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter. It was emphasized that Pakistan, in line with Article 51 of the UN Charter, exercised its inherent right to self-defence through a measured and proportionate response, intended to demonstrate its legitimate right, firm resolve, and capability to safeguard its territory and protect its people.

In his remarks, Mr. Bilawal strongly denounced India’s unilateral and illegal suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty, terming it a flagrant breach of international obligations and a direct threat to the water security of over 240 million Pakistanis. He noted that the weaponisation of water undermines international norms and sets a perilous precedent. He urged the international community to take notice of this alarming development and make India accountable for its actions.

Jammu and Kashmir dispute remains the core issue in India-Pakistan relations. The delegation urged the international community to support meaningful dialogue and ensure respect for international commitments and human rights. Pakistan always advocated for constructive engagement and result-oriented dialogue for resolutions all outstanding issues, including the core issue of Jammu and Kashmir.

The delegation also engaged in a candid Q&A session, responding to a range of queries from participants, addressing concerns related to regional tensions, Pakistan’s diplomatic approach, and its broader vision for peace, stability, and cooperation in South Asia.

The other members of the delegation included: Minister for Climate Change and Environmental Coordination, Dr. Musadik Masood Malik ; Chairperson, Senate Standing Committee on Climate Change and Environmental Coordination and former Minister for Information and Climate Change, Senator Sherry Rehman ; Chairperson, National Assembly Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and former Foreign Minister, Hina Rabbani Khar ; former Minister for Commerce, Defence and Foreign Affairs, Engineer Khurram Dastgir Khan ; MQM’s Parliamentary Leader in the Senate and former Minister for Maritime Affairs, Senator Syed Faisal Ali Subzwari ; and Senator Bushra Anjum Butt , Former Foreign Secretaries, Ambassador Jalil Abbas Jilani , who also served as Caretaker Foreign Minister, and Ambassador Tehmina Janjua .

London
09 June 2025