SERIOUS global challenges and their likely impact on Pakistan’s fragile economy make it incumbent on this country to initiate a process of national reconciliation. But any such move will not have a prayer unless both the hybrid set-up and the opposition step back from their confrontation.
After US Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s statement at a briefing in Washington, expressing gratitude to Pakistan for “their offer to be part of it, or at least their offer to consider being part of it [the International Stabilisation Force (ISF) for Gaza]”, what was clear was that issues remain to be addressed before any move forward on the matter.
Contacts have been going on since the ceasefire in Gaza in October this year. More recently, whether it has been US-led activity in Doha or Florida or visits to Pakistan by the Jordanian monarch, the Indonesian president or the Egyptian defence minister, they all appear to be links in the same chain.
Around the time the October ceasefire was announced by US President Donald Trump, the perceptive king of Jordan made the observation, which is at the heart of the matter — that his country and other Muslim nations would have a ‘peacekeeping’ but not a ‘peace enforcement’ role.
This observation is what has triggered the contacts and conversations around the region and the world because regardless of what the US and Israel want, at least the prospective Muslim part of the ISF is reluctant, in fact adamant, not to play any role in ‘disarming’ Hamas.
For its part, Hamas has linked the laying down of its weapons to a complete Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, which is nowhere on the cards, and said it would surrender weapons to a Palestinian state authority only after a complete cessation of the Israeli military operation and the establishment of an independent and sovereign Palestinian state, with East Jerusalem as its capital. None of these conditions are likely to be met in the foreseeable future.
The state of the economy, the rise in foreign-inspired terrorism and domestic political instability are all areas of concern.
There are indications that the Hamas stance is to take a tough negotiating position but it is also clear that if Israel, the apartheid state, also adopts a similar posture the whole process will begin to unravel or worse, stay locked in a state of suspended animation, with no end in sight for the sufferings of the Palestinians in Gaza in particular.
The last thing any Muslim contingent of the ISF would want is to be seen to be doing the genocidal Zionist state’s bidding. This will neither be acceptable to the leaders of any participating countries nor to their people who are sympathetic to the Palestinian cause.
Honestly speaking, even if the entire ISF were made up of contingents from non-OIC member states, even then any sane leaders/ commanders would be reluctant to take on Hamas in Gaza as it would be a pointless, long and bloody fight and one they would not win where the Israeli Occupation Forces failed.
There can be no doubt that Donald Trump has staked his personal credibility on the Gaza ceasefire and his own 20-point peace plan. Therefore, the efforts of the US administration members and officials seem aimed at delivering the plan.
Given what is in the public domain so far, it isn’t easy to assess how far the US can bend Israel to force the latter to enable conditions for a long-term peace to become a reality. Even then, it’s easy to say at this point that the doubters seem more credible than those who are optimistic.
With Trump now unleashing his fury on Europe, because he feels that it is less Russian President Vladimir Putin and more the leaders of the European Union and the UK who have not done enough to end the Ukraine war, God knows who will have to bear his wrath if his Gaza plan is slow to gain traction or if it fails.
For countries like Pakistan, there are two avenues of safety. One is safety in numbers. Its leadership should ensure, whatever the negotiations and the final position taken, that all OIC member states who have been asked to consider joining the ISF say exactly the same thing. They should evolve a consensus view and collectively own it.
For the resource-rich Gulf states and Indonesia, the fallout from a possible (and for the sake of the Gaza Palestinians one hopes that it never happens) collapse of the Trump plan will be minimal. I wish I could say the same for our IMF-dependent economy. We need to have all our ducks in a row. It is critical to make an effort at national reconciliation too.
There are many advocates of the so-called hard state in the media these days, with the voices calling for the opposite being far and few. But that does not mean the point they make is without merit. From the various courts sentencing the opposition leaders — from the top and middle tiers — to long jail terms, it is clear that protagonists of the hard state have the upper hand.
The state of the economy, which is the result of forever delaying structural reform, the rise in foreign-inspired terrorism and domestic political instability are all areas of concern. For any attempt at starting a national dialogue, temperatures will have to be lowered. As a first step, the rhetoric should be toned down. Personal attacks should be put on hold.
The hybrid set-up has seen through some serious challenges to its existence and now seems comfortably ensconced in power. It should use its position of strength to lay out reasonable terms for a dialogue. No matter how principled their position may be, it is time equally for the opposition leaders to practise politics as the art of the possible.
Confrontation has delivered nothing to them and kept the country on tenterhooks. People’s issues are multiplying. The country won the war against the arch-enemy earlier this year. It is to time to bring the war within to a successful conclusion.
The writer is a former editor of Dawn.
Published in Dawn, December 21st, 2025
