ISLAMABAD: Pakistan’s decision to accept the invitation to join the Boardof Peace (BoP) for a lasting peace in Gaza represents one of its mostconsequential diplomatic moves in recent Middle East politics. Whileofficially framed as a humanitarian and peace-oriented initiative alignedwith Pakistan’s long-standing support for Palestinian rights, the decisioncarries complex strategic, reputational, and geopolitical implications thatwill shape Pakistan’s foreign policy trajectory for years to come.
Positive Implications for Pakistan Enhanced Diplomatic Standing and GlobalVisibility
By joining the Board of Peace, Pakistan gains a seat in a high-levelinternational mechanism shaping post-war Gaza’s political and humanitarianfuture. This elevates Pakistan’s diplomatic relevance beyond South Asia andreinforces its image as a responsible stakeholder in global peace efforts.Participation allows Pakistan to directly articulate its positions onceasefire durability, humanitarian access, reconstruction priorities, andthe necessity of a two-state solution grounded in international law.
This move also signals that Pakistan seeks engagement rather than isolationin major global crises, strengthening its credentials in multilateraldiplomacy.——————————Reinforcement of Humanitarian Narrative
Pakistan has consistently framed its Gaza policy around humanitarianrelief, civilian protection, and Palestinian self-determination.Participation in the BoP enables Islamabad to operationalize this narrativerather than merely issuing statements. If Pakistan uses the platform topush for unrestricted humanitarian access, reconstruction of civilianinfrastructure, and political inclusion of Palestinians, it can reinforceits moral standing both domestically and internationally.
This is particularly important for Pakistan’s self-image as a country thathistorically aligns its foreign policy with justice-based causes in theMuslim world.——————————Strategic Re-engagement with the United States
The BoP provides an avenue for structured diplomatic re-engagement withWashington at a time when US-Pakistan relations have been pragmatic butlimited. Participation may open space for broader dialogue on regionalstability, counterterrorism, Afghanistan, and economic cooperation.
While this does not signal a full strategic realignment, it does indicatePakistan’s willingness to cooperate on selective global issues, potentiallyreducing friction and restoring a degree of strategic trust.——————————Alignment with Gulf States’ Regional Priorities
Key Gulf states are deeply invested in Gaza’s stabilization andreconstruction. Pakistan’s participation aligns it with Gulf diplomaticinitiatives, potentially strengthening political, economic, and securityties. Given Pakistan’s reliance on Gulf financial support, remittances, andenergy cooperation, this alignment carries tangible strategic value.
Participation may also increase Pakistan’s role in post-conflictreconstruction discussions, where Gulf financing will be central.——————————Negative and Risky Implications Domestic Political and Public OpinionBacklash
Pakistan’s public opinion is overwhelmingly pro-Palestinian and deeplyskeptical of US-led peace frameworks involving Israel. Any perception thatthe Board of Peace serves Israeli security interests at the expense ofPalestinian political rights could provoke significant domestic backlash.
Religious parties, civil society groups, student movements, and oppositionpoliticians may frame Pakistan’s participation as complicity in an imposedsettlement. If BoP decisions appear to marginalize Palestinian resistanceor dilute demands for accountability, the government could face sustainedinternal pressure.——————————Reputational Risks in the Muslim World
Pakistan has historically positioned itself as a principled supporter ofPalestine. Joining a US-backed mechanism risks reputational damage if theBoP is viewed as legitimizing post-war arrangements that fall short ofPalestinian aspirations.
Some Muslim countries and non-state actors may interpret Pakistan’sparticipation as political pragmatism overriding moral clarity. This couldweaken Pakistan’s standing among grassroots pro-Palestinian movements andsections of the Muslim world that reject Western-led peace frameworks.——————————Israel Factor and Perception of Indirect Normalization
Although Pakistan does not recognize Israel, participation in a forum thatincludes Israeli representation risks creating perceptions of indirectnormalization. Even without formal diplomatic engagement, symbolicproximity can be politically sensitive.
This perception could be exploited by domestic critics and regional actorsto argue that Pakistan is gradually shifting away from its traditionalstance, even if official policy remains unchanged.——————————Hamas and Palestinian Political Dynamics
One of the most sensitive issues is Hamas’s role in Gaza’s futuregovernance. Pakistan has historically avoided labeling Hamas purely as aterrorist organization and has emphasized political solutions inclusive ofPalestinian realities.
If the Board of Peace adopts a framework that seeks to marginalize ordismantle Hamas without a credible political alternative, Pakistan willface a dilemma: either oppose the consensus and risk isolation within theforum, or comply and face domestic and reputational consequences.
Read Top Stories
Balancing engagement with the BoP while maintaining credibility amongPalestinians will be one of Pakistan’s most delicate diplomatic challenges.——————————Risk of Strategic Over-Commitment
Participation may begin as diplomatic, but over time could involveexpectations of tangible contributions—financial, logistical, or evenmilitary. Given Pakistan’s fragile economic position, any pressure tocontribute large reconstruction funds or sustained financial commitmentswould be controversial.
Moreover, alignment with a US-led initiative may limit Pakistan’s strategicautonomy, constraining its ability to take independent positions if BoPpolicies diverge from its core principles.——————————Long-Term Strategic and Foreign Policy Implications Foreign PolicyTrajectory
Pakistan’s involvement in the BoP may signal a gradual shift towardselective global engagement beyond its traditional regional focus. Ifmanaged carefully, this could enhance Pakistan’s diplomatic reach. Ifmismanaged, it risks diluting Pakistan’s long-standing identity as anindependent, principle-driven actor in Muslim world politics.——————————Alliances and Regional Balancing
– Gulf States: Likely strengthened ties, particularly in reconstruction diplomacy and security cooperation. – Iran: Potential friction if Tehran views the BoP as undermining resistance-based approaches in Gaza. – Turkey and Egypt: Cooperation may continue, but divergences could emerge depending on BoP outcomes.
Pakistan will need careful balancing to avoid being drawn into regionalrivalries.——————————Future Trajectory: Peacekeeping or Stabilization Forces
One of the most consequential long-term questions is whether Pakistan couldbe asked to contribute troops to a Gaza stabilization or peacekeepingforce. While Pakistan has extensive peacekeeping experience, Gaza presentsunique risks:
– High probability of asymmetric violence – Political backlash at home if troops are seen as enforcing an unpopular settlement – Risk of Pakistani forces becoming targets for militant groups
Even limited deployment would represent a major strategic decision withfar-reaching implications for civil-military relations and domesticpolitics.——————————Strategic Bottom Line
Pakistan’s acceptance of the Board of Peace invitation is neither a purelysymbolic gesture nor an unequivocal strategic gain. It is a high-stakesdiplomatic gamble.
Potential Gains
– Enhanced global relevance – Stronger ties with the US and Gulf states – Ability to influence humanitarian outcomes
Potential Costs
– Domestic backlash – Reputational risks in the Muslim world – Strategic entanglement in contested peace frameworks – Long-term military and financial exposure
Ultimately, Pakistan’s success within the Board of Peace will depend onwhether it can actively shape outcomes rather than merely endorse them —and whether it can maintain credibility with Palestinians while engagingwith powerful global actors.
ogimageimage-name