Pakistan on Wednesday accepted an invitation from United States President Donald Trump to join the proposed “Board of Peace”, an initiative aimed, according to Islamabad, at achieving lasting peace in Gaza.
In a statement, the Foreign Office said Pakistan hoped the framework would lead to concrete steps towards a permanent ceasefire, increased humanitarian assistance for Palestinians, and the reconstruction of Gaza.
The decision, however, has sparked sharp criticism from politicians, analysts and activists, many of whom questioned both the timing and the implications of joining the initiative.
‘Pakistan jumped the gun’
Author and journalist Zahid Hussain said Pakistan had acted hastily by agreeing to join the board.
“Pakistan has done it in a hurry. They should have waited to see how other countries respond,” he told Dawn. Hussain warned that Islamabad risked becoming part of what he described as President Trump’s “adventurism”, arguing that the board appeared to function as a parallel structure to the United Nations.
He said Pakistan’s participation raised concerns about the direction of its foreign policy. “Do we simply want to follow Trump’s diktat? This seems driven by a desire to stay in Trump’s good books,” he said, adding that the initiative altered established global power structures.
Hussain also pointed out that the board would include Israel and countries that signed the Abraham Accords, while Palestinians themselves were not represented. He cautioned that the move could potentially open the door to troop deployments, adding that any such force would likely be led by a US general.
“Is Pakistan willing to disarm Hamas?” he asked, warning of the risk of Pakistani or allied troops confronting Palestinian resistance groups.
‘Morally incorrect and indefensible’
Opposition leader in the Senate Allama Raja Nasir Abbas condemned the decision in a post on X, calling it “morally incorrect and indefensible, both on principle and policy”.
He argued that the initiative undermined Palestinian self-governance by placing post-war reconstruction, security and political oversight in the hands of external actors. Abbas described the framework as bearing “the unmistakable imprint of a neo-colonial enterprise” and warned it could erode Palestinian self-determination.
Abbas further criticised the absence of clear UN oversight, saying the board appeared designed to marginalise multilateral institutions. He said Pakistan’s participation was inconsistent with its longstanding reliance on UN resolutions, particularly on issues such as Kashmir.
“Foreign policy decisions driven by short-term calculation often carry long-term consequences,” he said, warning that the move risked damaging Pakistan’s moral standing and strategic coherence.
‘Wrong for several reasons’
Tehreek-i-Tahafuz-i-Ayeen-i-Pakistan leader Mustafa Nawaz Khokhar criticised the lack of public debate and parliamentary consultation before joining the initiative.
In a post on X, Khokhar described the board as a “colonial enterprise” intended to govern Gaza while sidelining the United Nations. He said the draft charter granted extensive powers to President Trump, including authority to appoint or remove members, control the board’s agenda, and exercise an effective veto.
Khokhar also questioned the board’s broad mandate, warning that its stated objective of promoting peace and good governance globally could be used to justify actions beyond Gaza, including potential conflicts elsewhere.
‘Unwise decision’
Former ambassador to the US, UK and UN Maleeha Lodhi called Pakistan’s decision “unwise for many reasons”. Writing on X, she said the board appeared designed to secure international legitimacy for unilateral US actions and noted that its scope extended well beyond Gaza.
Former human rights minister Shireen Mazari echoed Lodhi’s concerns, describing the decision as “a very unwise” move.
Support and backlash
Former information minister Fawad Chaudhry, however, defended the decision, calling it “absolutely correct”. He said Pakistan should play a role in shaping the future of the Palestinian people.
Activist Ammar Ali Jan strongly disagreed, calling the move a “shameful betrayal” and accusing the government of joining a neocolonial arrangement without public or parliamentary scrutiny.
Author and activist Fatima Bhutto also criticised the decision, questioning Pakistan’s participation in a forum that included Israel. “What a disgrace,” she said.