Pakistan News
Yet Again, Pakistan Averted a Global Meltdown
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 temporary suspension of “Project Freedom” by President Donald Trump on May 5–6, 2026, may ultimately be remembered not merely as a tactical military pause, but as an admission that diplomacy had succeeded where overwhelming force had failed. After months of escalating confrontation in and around the Strait of Hormuz, the sudden halt of the U.S.-led naval escort operation reflected a changing geopolitical reality: the battlefield had reached its limits, the global economy was bleeding, and quiet diplomacy—much of it facilitated through Pakistan—had become the only viable path forward.
Within hours of the announcement, Brent crude fell sharply to nearly $108 a barrel while U.S. crude dropped toward $100. Global stock markets surged in relief. The S&P 500 and Nasdaq reached new highs, Asian markets rallied, and the immediate fear of catastrophic maritime losses eased. The world economy, which had been standing at the edge of another massive inflationary shock, suddenly regained a measure of stability.
According to the emerging narrative from regional diplomacy, Pakistan worked continuously behind the scenes to maintain communication channels between Washington and Tehran after the fragile ceasefire that began on April 7, 2026. Islamabad reportedly urged restraint on all sides and advocated a formula that combined de-escalation in Hormuz with renewed negotiations on sanctions, maritime access, and regional security guarantees.
Whether acknowledged publicly or not, Pakistan’s role appears to have been crucial in preventing the conflict from crossing the point of no return. The irony of the entire episode is impossible to ignore. The war itself began with immense confidence from the United States and Israel. “Epic Fury,” the military campaign launched with promises of crushing Iran’s strategic capabilities, was presented as a short and decisive operation that would allegedly force Tehran into submission within weeks. Regime change, rollback of nuclear ambitions, destruction of military infrastructure, and strategic surrender were all openly discussed as attainable goals.
None of those objectives materialized. Instead, Iran absorbed the pressure, maintained internal cohesion, preserved much of its command structure, and demonstrated a capacity for resilience that surprised even many seasoned observers. What was expected to become a demonstration of overwhelming Western military supremacy gradually evolved into a prolonged strategic stalemate.
The same pattern repeated itself with “Project Freedom.” The initiative was introduced with great fanfare as a bold U.S.-led naval effort to escort commercial vessels safely through Hormuz and break Iran’s effective control over maritime movement. Yet the operation quickly encountered practical realities. Shipping companies hesitated. Insurance providers warned of extreme wartime risk exposure. Several commercial vessels reportedly complied with Iranian maritime instructions rather than rely entirely on foreign military escorts. What was intended to project dominance instead exposed the limitations of power in a multipolar world. Ultimately, Project Freedom itself was paused without fully achieving its declared objectives.
That decision alone speaks volumes. For decades, Washington operated under the assumption that military superiority automatically translated into geopolitical compliance. The Iran conflict has challenged that assumption. A country under sanctions, facing combined pressure from the United States and Israel, managed not only to survive but to negotiate from a position far stronger than many anticipated.
Now the balance of leverage has visibly shifted. Even President Trump’s own remarks about energy exports inadvertently revealed another dimension of the conflict. During recent comments about upcoming discussions with Xi Jinping, Trump openly spoke about encouraging China and Asian economies to purchase greater quantities of American oil and gas from Alaska, Texas, and Louisiana. He described satellite images showing lines of ships moving toward American energy terminals like “highways at sea.”
Reading between the lines, many analysts see a broader economic motive behind the prolonged instability in Hormuz. As Middle Eastern exports became constrained by war, insecurity, and naval restrictions, U.S. energy producers gained unprecedented opportunities to capture global market share. Asian consumers who traditionally relied heavily on Gulf oil increasingly turned toward American supplies.
In effect, the disruption of Gulf energy routes redirected enormous revenue streams toward the United States. Meanwhile, Gulf economies paid a heavy price. Infrastructure damage, declining investor confidence, soaring insurance premiums, interrupted exports, and prolonged regional insecurity weakened economies that had once depended on stable maritime commerce. Even when some production capacity remained intact, the uncertainty surrounding Hormuz severely constrained the movement of energy resources.
Yet another remarkable transformation emerged during this crisis: Washington’s rediscovery of international institutions. Only months earlier, senior American officials had openly dismissed the relevance of the United Nations, criticizing multilateral systems as ineffective and outdated. The United States had reduced participation in several international bodies and increasingly emphasized unilateral power.
But as the Hormuz crisis intensified, the rhetoric changed dramatically. Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently emphasized the importance of the United Nations and suggested that maritime disputes surrounding Hormuz should be addressed through international mechanisms and peaceful diplomacy. The same system previously dismissed as ineffective suddenly became essential once military escalation failed to deliver decisive outcomes.
This reversal illustrates a deeper truth about the emerging global order: even superpowers ultimately require rules, institutions, and diplomacy when raw force reaches its limits.
The conflict also exposed extraordinary contradictions in international conduct. Iran was repeatedly described as an aggressor for restricting maritime access in Hormuz, while many across the world pointed to previous unilateral military actions carried out elsewhere without international authorization. Competing narratives dominated global media every day. One day the war was about nuclear weapons, the next day about regional security, then about maritime freedom, and later about protecting commerce. The justifications evolved constantly because the realities on the ground kept changing.
Amid this confusion, Pakistan quietly positioned itself not as a military actor but as a stabilizing diplomatic bridge. A country often underestimated in global power calculations emerged as one of the few states capable of communicating credibly with all major stakeholders—Washington, Tehran, Beijing, and the Gulf capitals simultaneously.
That achievement carries enormous significance. Had the conflict continued escalating unchecked, the consequences could have become catastrophic. A fully closed Hormuz Strait might have triggered oil prices well beyond previous crisis peaks, devastated global transportation systems, collapsed fragile supply chains, and pushed multiple economies into recession simultaneously. The trillions potentially saved through de-escalation cannot be measured only in stock market rebounds or lower fuel costs; they include avoided unemployment, avoided inflationary spirals, avoided industrial shutdowns, and perhaps even avoidance of a broader regional war.
Today, the world stands at a fragile crossroads. The ceasefire remains conditional, mistrust remains deep, and no permanent agreement has yet been finalized. Risks continue to hover over the Gulf, and shipping companies still view the region as dangerous. But for now, diplomacy has temporarily succeeded where confrontation failed.
And in that diplomatic success, Pakistan’s role has emerged as one of the most consequential and least acknowledged developments of the entire crisis.
The world may eventually recognize that while great powers fought for dominance, it was careful diplomacy from an unexpected mediator that helped prevent economic disaster and pulled humanity one step back from the edge of a far wider war.
Pakistan News
Israel’s Bases in Iran and Iraq and Threat to Pakistan
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 June war between Israel and Iran revealed a frightening new reality of modern warfare: nations are no longer defeated only by armies crossing borders or fighter jets bombing cities. Increasingly, wars are prepared from within. The real battlefield now lies inside societies, intelligence networks, covert safe houses, cyber systems, recruited insiders, and hidden operational bases quietly established years before conflict begins.
What shocked military analysts during the June conflict was not merely the intensity of Israeli airpower, but the astonishing precision with which Iran’s top military commanders, nuclear scientists, IRGC leadership, missile batteries, and strategic facilities were targeted. According to multiple international investigations published by The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and The Times of Israel, many of these attacks were enabled through covert Israeli operational networks functioning deep inside Iran itself.
Reports suggest that Mossad had spent years cultivating Iranian dissidents, smugglers, contractors, and covert assets near strategic locations such as Tehran, Natanz, Isfahan, and other sensitive military and nuclear sites. Through these embedded networks, Israeli intelligence reportedly obtained precise coordinates, movement patterns, communication details, and even internal meeting schedules of senior Iranian officials.
The result was devastating. Nuclear scientists were assassinated with pinpoint precision. Missile launchers were neutralized before activation. Air-defense systems were disabled from within. Underground command centers were reportedly identified and struck with astonishing accuracy. Even senior Iranian military gatherings were allegedly tracked through cyber deception operations and internal informants.
Iran later admitted the scale of internal infiltration by launching mass arrests across the country. Thousands were detained on accusations of espionage, treason, and collaboration with foreign intelligence services. Iranian authorities claimed that many individuals had shared coordinates of military sites and strategic locations with Israeli operatives. Tehran’s response reflected a painful realization: much of the war had already been prepared inside Iran long before the first missile was fired. But the most alarming development emerged later.
International media reports revealed that Israel had allegedly established covert operational bases inside Iraq as well. According to these reports, hidden facilities in Iraq’s western desert were used for reconnaissance, logistics, emergency pilot support, intelligence gathering, and preparation for attacks deep inside Iran. Some reports suggested these installations dated back to 2024 and were operational during both the 2025 and 2026 conflicts.
The implications are enormous. If covert Israeli infrastructure could function inside countries openly hostile to Israel, then no regional state can assume immunity from similar penetration.
This is where the danger becomes particularly serious for Pakistan.
Pakistan today faces a highly sensitive strategic environment. The growing convergence between India, Israeli strategic interests, and evolving Taliban-controlled dynamics inside Afghanistan creates a deeply concerning security equation for Islamabad. Afghanistan’s geography alone makes it an ideal staging ground for intelligence operations targeting both Pakistan and Iran. Its porous borders, fragmented governance structures, smuggling networks, militant corridors, refugee movements, and weak centralized intelligence oversight create an operational environment where covert infrastructure can potentially be established with relative ease.
Israel’s operational doctrine, as demonstrated in Iran and Iraq, appears increasingly dependent on first creating hidden operational ecosystems inside or near adversarial states before open conflict begins. Such ecosystems may start as small reconnaissance cells, logistics hubs, communications nodes, safe houses, drone launch sites, cyber relay stations, or intelligence listening posts. Over time, they mature into fully operational covert bases capable of supporting sabotage, surveillance, targeted assassinations, and precision military operations.
This is precisely why Pakistan must now view Afghanistan not merely through the lens of terrorism or border security, but through the broader framework of strategic intelligence warfare.
The danger is compounded by the existing instability in regions like Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Long-running insurgencies, political polarization, smuggling routes, militant financing channels, ethnic grievances, and cross-border trafficking networks create fertile ground for foreign intelligence agencies seeking recruitment opportunities or covert operational access. Such environments are vulnerable to exploitation by any sophisticated intelligence service capable of leveraging local actors, financial desperation, ideological divisions, or anti-state sentiments.
If covert Israeli networks could allegedly penetrate the heavily monitored security structure of Iran, then Pakistan cannot afford complacency.
The warning is clear and urgent: Pakistan and Iran must immediately strengthen their counterintelligence cooperation regarding Afghanistan. Both countries need to activate deep intelligence monitoring systems capable of detecting even rudimentary efforts to establish covert operational infrastructure near their borders. Intelligence operations can no longer remain reactive. They must become aggressively preemptive.This requires several immediate strategic measures.
First, Pakistan and Iran must significantly expand intelligence penetration inside Afghanistan itself. Monitoring militant networks alone is no longer sufficient. Greater focus must now be placed on suspicious logistics activities, foreign funding channels, unexplained infrastructure projects, covert aviation activity, encrypted communications networks, and unusual movements near sensitive border regions.
Second, Pakistan’s intelligence agencies must intensify scrutiny over recruitment pipelines operating through financial networks, NGOs, smuggling channels, technology firms, cross-border trade routes, and ideological organizations. Modern intelligence warfare rarely begins with soldiers; it begins with local facilitators.
Third, sensitive military, nuclear, communication, and leadership infrastructure inside Pakistan must undergo a complete security reassessment. The Iranian experience demonstrated that covert targeting becomes possible only after years of surveillance, infiltration, and mapping. Preventing such penetration requires constant internal vetting, cyber monitoring, communication discipline, and aggressive counterespionage measures.
Fourth, strategic coordination between Pakistan, Iran, Turkey, and other regional states must expand beyond diplomacy into active intelligence-sharing frameworks focused specifically on covert foreign operational networks.
The reality of modern warfare is brutal. By the time airstrikes begin, the enemy may already have spent years building the battlefield from inside your territory.
This is why the June war should not merely be studied as a military confrontation between Israel and Iran. It should be understood as a case study in how intelligence penetration, covert bases, recruited insiders, cyber deception, and hidden logistics networks can cripple even powerful states from within.
For Pakistan, the lesson is existential. The greatest threat may not come from visible armies massing at the border, but from invisible networks silently embedding themselves within vulnerable spaces long before conflict erupts. Afghanistan’s instability, combined with emerging India-Israel strategic alignment, creates precisely the type of environment where such covert infrastructure could potentially take root.
Time, therefore, is not on the side of complacency. Pakistan, Iran, and other regional powers must act now — before covert operational ecosystems mature into irreversible strategic threats. Once such networks become deeply entrenched, the cost of dismantling them becomes extraordinarily high, and the damage they can inflict may already be beyond repair.
Pakistan News
Berlin event highlights Pakistan’s strategic restraint and national unity
BERLIN, Germany — The Embassy of Pakistan in Berlin marked the first anniversary of Maarka‑e‑Haq (The Battle of Truth) with a solemn ceremony that highlighted Pakistan’s national unity, strategic restraint, and commitment to regional peace.
Addressing the gathering, Pakistan’s Ambassador to Germany, H.E. Saqlain Syeda , described Pakistan’s conduct during Operation Bunyan‑un‑Marsoos as an example of responsible and principled statecraft. She noted that Pakistan’s response to Indian aggression was “measured, lawful, and firmly rooted in international norms,” adding that the country’s political and military leadership demonstrated exceptional coordination at a critical moment.
Ambassador Ms.Syeda praised the “unshakeable resolve” of Pakistan’s Armed Forces, commending their readiness to safeguard the nation’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. She also underscored the importance of public support, which she said played a vital role in strengthening the country’s unified stance during the crisis.
Prominent German‑Pakistani businessman Manzoor Awan emphasized the urgent need for unity and national cohesion in Pakistan, stating that collective strength remains the country’s greatest asset in times of challenge.
Speaking at the event, Awan noted that Pakistanis have historically stood together as a united nation. He stressed that strong coordination between the public and the government is essential for confronting external threats, adding that “with unity, not only India but any major adversary can be faced with confidence.”
Awan reaffirmed the unwavering support of the Pakistani people for the Pakistan Army, saying that whenever the nation encounters danger, the public and the armed forces respond together with courage and determination.

Members of the Pakistani diaspora in Germany also spoke at the event, expressing solidarity and national pride. They voiced appreciation for Pakistan’s civil and military leadership and emphasized that diplomacy, unity, and strategic patience remain essential for maintaining regional stability.

Participants reaffirmed their confidence in Pakistan’s leadership and reiterated their commitment to contributing to the country’s progress, prosperity, and global standing.
The ceremony concluded with the screening of a documentary on Operation Bunyan‑un‑Marsoos, offering attendees a detailed account of the events and the national response it inspired.
Pakistan News
Delegation of students from the Comité Interuniversitaire des Nations Unies de Paris (CINUP) visited the Embassy of Pakistan in Paris
Paris (Imran Y. CHOUDHRY):- A delegation of students from the Comité Interuniversitaire des Nations Unies de Paris (CINUP) visited the Embassy for interactive session with Ambassador Mumtaz Zahra Baloch.

During the session, the students were given a detailed presentation on Pakistan’s role in multilateral diplomacy, with a particular focus on its engagement with international organizations based in Paris. The presentation was followed by an insightful question-and-answer session.

Ambassador Mumtaz Zahra Baloch underscored Pakistan’s commitment to multilateralism, international law, and peaceful settlement of disputes. She also briefed them on the constructive role played by Pakistan in advancing the mandate of and championing the priorities of developing countries.





CINUP is a Paris-based student organization that promotes awareness and engagement with the work of the United Nations and multilateral diplomacy.
-
Europe News1 year agoChaos and unproven theories surround Tates’ release from Romania
-
American News1 year agoTrump expands exemptions from Canada and Mexico tariffs
-
American News1 year agoTrump Expels Zelensky from the White House
-
Pakistan News11 months agoComprehensive Analysis Report-The Faranian National Conference on Maritime Affairs-By Kashif Firaz Ahmed
-
American News1 year agoZelensky bruised but upbeat after diplomatic whirlwind
-
Entertainment1 year agoChampions Trophy: Pakistan aim to defend coveted title as historic tournament kicks off today
-
Art & Culture1 year agoWill Snow White be a ‘victim of its moment’? How the Disney remake became 2025’s most divisive film
-
Pakistan News1 year agoCan Pakistan be a Hard State?

