ISLAMABAD: Pakistan has rejected a Financial Times report suggesting it offered to the United States a base at the Arabian Sea port of Pasni, calling the claim “entirely baseless” and the result of “private speculation confused with state policy.”
“There is no truth to the claim that Pakistan has offered any port to the United States. No such proposal was ever made by the Government of Pakistan or discussed by the Army Chief in any official forum,” a senior Pakistani military official told We News English.
The official said the FT report appeared to conflate private commercial ideas with actual government policy. “What the article refers to are speculative ideas floated by private entrepreneurial individuals who are neither official advisers nor representatives of the state,” the official added.
He further underlined that Pakistan’s policies remain sovereign and independent: “Financial Times story clearly confuses private entrepreneurial enthusiasm with state policy, a mistake that is unfortunate but not unusual when geopolitics meets imagination,”.
Islamabad stressed that while private investors may float business schemes, Pakistan’s military and government had not made, nor authorized, any offer to Washington.
The Financial Times report, published on October 4, claimed advisers to Army Chief Gen Asim Munir had approached US officials with a plan to develop Pasni into a port giving Washington a foothold in the Arabian Sea. Pakistan has categorically denied the news story.
![For over seven decades, Gaza has remained at the heart of one of the world’s longest and most violent conflicts. The besieged enclave, home to more than two million Palestinians, has faced relentless bombardment, blockades, and fascism at the hands of an illegal state, Israel. The humanitarian toll is staggering—mass civilian casualties, destruction of infrastructure, denial of medical supplies, and an ongoing blockade that has transformed Gaza into what human rights groups have called the world’s “largest open-air prison.” According to the United Nations, Gaza’s conditions amount to a human rights catastrophe, with Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch repeatedly accusing Israel of committing war crimes, genocide and enforcing an apartheid system against Palestinians. The most recent round of bombardments in 2025 left thousands dead, with children and women disproportionately among the victims. The death toll in Gaza after 2023 has almost reached 70,000. Al Jazeera reported that hospitals and UN facilities were deliberately targeted, highlighting Israel’s disregard for international law. Despite growing international outrage, Tel Aviv continues to act with impunity. In this dire context, new efforts have emerged—most notably the Trump sponsored “Gaza Peace Plan.” Gaza Peace Plan & Hamas’ Calculated Response The Gaza Peace Plan, proposed by US President Donald Trump after the United Nations 80th session, claims to offer a roadmap for stability in Gaza. Initially, it was 21-point plan later modified and outlines 20 points ranging from ceasefire agreements to reconstruction efforts, prisoner exchanges, and the formation of a neutral Palestinian committee to oversee governance. At first glance, the plan appears comprehensive, but on closer inspection, it is riddled with many inconsistencies and biases that overwhelmingly favor Israel’s interests. Central demands include the disarmament of Palestinian resistance groups, sidelining of Hamas in governance, and acceptance of Israel’s military presence—conditions that essentially strip Palestinians of sovereignty and security. Hamas, however, responded with a display of political maturity and strategic calculation. Rather than outright rejecting the plan, which would have allowed Israel and Washington to brand them as “obstructionists,” Hamas partially accepted the deal. Hamas agreed to major points such as a ceasefire, prisoner releases, and even transferring Gaza’s administration to a neutral Palestinian committee. At the same time, Hamas firmly rejected clauses demanding full disarmament and surrender of security control. As a Hamas official Osama Hamdan explained, “We are ready to announce a ceasefire tonight. Many details still need negotiation. We reject any non-Palestinian role in governing. We are ready to negotiate release of all prisoners. Some prisoner bodies are buried; others remain where Israeli forces are present. Hamas is a national liberation movement. The plan’s definition of terrorism does not apply to it. Weapons were to resist occupation. If it ends and Palestinians govern themselves, there’s no need for arms. We will hand over weapons to the future Palestinian state." This calculated approach disarmed the propaganda machine. Middle East Eye reported that Hamas’ move undermined Israel’s narrative of Palestinians as “enemies of peace,” instead casting the resistance as rational actors seeking justice under impossible conditions. Al Jazeera noted, “Hamas showed a lot of positivity here by accepting the spirit of the paper and praising President Trump’s initiative. In this way, they are showing that they are ready to extend their hand.” Lessons from Islam Although all this development is seen with positive eye but the skepticism toward such peace plans is not without precedent. The nature of Zionists in the history cannot be ignored. Islam repeatedly warns about the dangers of hypocrisy, broken covenants, and dishonesty from Yahood in agreements. These lessons, while not condemning any people wholesale, highlight the conduct of Jews in history that repeatedly violated their promises. 1. Surah Al-Baqarah (2:83–86) reminds the Bani Israel of their covenant with ALLAH Almighty—worshipping HIM alone and acting justly—yet they transgressed by killing Prophets and breaking oaths. 2. Surah Al-Maidah (5:13) states: “So for their breaking of the covenant, ALLAH cursed them and made their hearts hard. They distort words from their [proper] usages and have forgotten a portion of that of which they were reminded.” ALLAH then reminded HOLY PROPHET PBUH that “And you will still observe deceit among them” 3. Surah Al-Maidah (5:41) highlights how some sought to mislead others and distort truth for political gain. 4. Surah Al-Maidah (5:64) states that Jews are enemies of Muslims till the Qayamat. “ALLAH have stirred among them hostility and hatred until the day of Judgement... And they strive to spread corruption in the land and ALLAH does not like corrupters.” These Quranic passages correspond with historical episodes during the HOLY PROPHET MUHAMMAD’S PBUH physical presence in Madina Munawwara, where certain Jewish tribes violated treaties, sparking conflict and eventual expulsion. In today’s context, these lessons resonate with Israel’s repeated violations of treaties and international agreements. They reinforce the principle that peace can only endure where justice and sincerity prevail. While keeping in view these principles alongwith Israel’s history of breaking oaths and treaties, one must remain cautious at all costs. Israel’s Record of Breaking Agreements & International Law Any honest assessment of the Gaza Peace Plan must account for Israel’s long-standing pattern of dishonoring treaties and violating international law. Here I am mentioning some of them to make the readers aware of the vulnerability regarding this peace plan. 1. Violation of UN Resolutions and Ceasefires Israel has ignored numerous UN Security Council resolutions, including Resolution 242 (calling for withdrawal from territories occupied in 1967) and Resolution 194 (affirming the Palestinian right of return). In 2025, the UN documented Israel’s attacks on UN facilities in Gaza despite ceasefire agreements, further illustrating its contempt for international mediation. 2. Illegal Settlements and Annexations As Human Rights Watch noted, settlement expansion in the West Bank flagrantly violates the Fourth Geneva Convention. The transfer of Israeli civilians into occupied land remains a cornerstone of Tel Aviv’s strategy to permanently alter demographics. 3. Human Rights Violations and War Crimes From the 2002 Jenin massacre to repeated bombardments of Gaza, Israel has engaged in practices deemed war crimes under international law. Amnesty International’s 2024 report accused Israel of apartheid, collective punishment and genocide. 4. Breach of International Humanitarian Law Practices such as administrative detention without trial, home demolitions, and the Gaza blockade are in direct violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The International Court of Justice ruled Israel’s separation wall illegal, yet construction continues. 5. Obstructing Accountability Israel has consistently blocked UN fact-finding missions and denied access to international investigators and news agencies, shielding itself from accountability. 6. Violation of UNCLOS Israel has violated the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) by intercepting the Global Sumud flotilla while it was 44 nautical miles off the coast of Gaza. Under UNCLOS, a state’s sovereignty extends only 12 nautical miles from its coastline, with a contiguous zone limited to 24 nautical miles. By seizing humanitarian aid ships in international waters well beyond its legal jurisdiction, Israel committed a clear breach of international maritime law. This record provides little confidence that Tel Aviv will honor any new peace framework. Positives of the Gaza Peace Plan The Gaza Peace Plan presents several provisions that, on the surface, appear constructive and are framed to appeal to the international community’s call for stability. These include promises of humanitarian aid and large-scale reconstruction to rebuild Gaza’s devastated infrastructure, as well as the exchange and release of Palestinian prisoners languishing in Israeli jails. The plan also emphasizes ceasefire commitments to halt immediate violence, alongside the establishment of a neutral Palestinian governance committee aimed at reducing factional divisions. Moreover, it promotes the involvement of regional mediators such as Egypt and Qatar, whose roles in past negotiations have been significant. As reported by Reuters, these elements are designed to present the plan as pragmatic and peace-oriented, aligning with the international community’s aspirations for calm and reconstruction in Gaza. Although it offers some positives but the question marks associated with Israel’s intentions, inconsistencies in the plan and the association of controversial figures can not be ignored at all.](https://wenewsenglish.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/gaza-peace-300x180.jpg)
