RECENT claims by international media regarding the construction of a US-built port in Pasni, Pakistan, have sparked controversy and confusion.
According to Pakistan’s security officials, no such offer has been made, nor has any official discussion taken place regarding the development of a port at Pasni by the United States. The controversy emerged after an article published by the Financial Times on October 4, 2025, titled “Pakistan courts US with pitch for new Arabian Sea port”. It alleged that advisers to Pakistan’s Army Chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir, approached US officials with a proposal to build and operate a port in Pasni, potentially providing Washington with a strategic foothold near China. However, Pakistan’s security officials have firmly denied the report’s contents, clarifying that Field Marshal Asim Munir has no formal advisers authorized to propose such initiatives. They argue that the article lacks authenticity and substance, as no official statement has been issued by the Government of Pakistan, the Foreign Office or the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) on the matter.
While it is possible that private discussions may have taken place between US entities and Pakistani business interests; particularly in the context of mineral exploration in Balochistan. Such conversations are exploratory in nature and do not reflect official policy. Balochistan, a mineral-rich but volatile province, has long attracted foreign interest. However, speculative proposals from private sectors should not be conflated with state-level commitments. The Financial Times itself concedes the speculative nature of the idea, describing it as “not official policy.” Yet, the article paradoxically seeks a rebuttal from a senior White House official, thereby creating a false impression of state involvement. This contradiction blurs the lines between private dialogue and government policy, misleading readers and potentially undermining diplomatic and regional stability.
Pasni, a small fishing town, lies just 70 miles from Gwadar, Pakistan’s deep-sea port developed with Chinese assistance. Gwadar is a cornerstone of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a strategic initiative central to both countries’ economic and geopolitical objectives. China remains the main investor in Gwadar, which became operational in 2007 under Chinese management. Pakistan-China relations are rooted in mutual trust and sovereignty. China has consistently respected Pakistan’s territorial integrity and has never acted against its interests. In contrast, introducing another superpower, especially one seen as a strategic competitor to China into the same geographical zone could have far-reaching consequences. A US-built port at Pasni, so close to Gwadar, would not only undermine China’s confidence but may also trigger unnecessary regional tensions.
Besides, Pasni’s proximity to Iran—just about 100 miles away—adds another layer of geopolitical complexity. Pakistan and Iran share over 900 kilometers of border and have recently made significant efforts to rebuild trust after years of mutual suspicion. The regional environment remains highly volatile; for instance, in June 2025, US airstrikes targeted Iranian nuclear facilities following Tehran’s retaliation against Israeli military actions. Against this tense backdrop, any move to establish an American-built port so close to Iran could be perceived as a deliberate provocation, potentially endangering Pakistan’s fragile diplomatic equilibrium and its broader regional relationships.
Domestically, Balochistan has remained a hotspot of terrorism since 2004, particularly after the assassination of Nawab Akbar Bugti. Militant outfits such as the BLA, BLF and BRA continue to target Pakistan’s security forces and infrastructure, allegedly with support from India’s intelligence agency, RAW and covert backing from other external actors. Introducing another foreign power with strategic ambitions could further destabilize the province, embolden insurgent elements and intensify Pakistan’s internal security challenges. In this context, Pakistan must exercise utmost caution. Any engagement involving foreign powers—especially those maintaining complex relations with Pakistan’s neighbours—should be grounded in national consensus, institutional oversight and strategic foresight. Private business initiatives must not dictate or influence national security policy.
The security officials have reiterated that no offer regarding a port at Pasni has been made by Pakistan to the US. No such proposal has been discussed at any official or strategic level. Conversations involving private firms do not represent the policy or intention of the Pakistani State. Media outlets must exercise caution when attributing speculative proposals to national leadership. Anyone claimed to be “an adviser to the Army Chief” must be verified through ISPR to avoid misrepresentation. Furthermore, speculative reporting that links a commercial idea to broader geopolitical tensions such as implying a challenge to China or Iran risks inflaming regional anxieties unnecessarily. Pakistan, like all sovereign nations, engages in multi-directional diplomacy. India maintains trade with China, engages Russia, courts the US and keeps ties with Iran and Israel; all under the umbrella of “strategic autonomy.” Pakistan deserves the same diplomatic latitude.
Learning from the past: Pakistan’s geopolitical position at the crossroads of Asia has often made it a stage for global rivalries. From the Cold War to the post-9/11 era, its involvement in conflicts between major powers has come at a high cost—territorial, societal and economic. During the Cold War, alignment with the United States led to internal instability and ultimately the secession of East Pakistan. In the 1980s, Pakistan’s participation in the US-Soviet proxy war in Afghanistan left it vulnerable once Washington disengaged. Likewise, Pakistan bore the brunt of the Global War on Terror, which severely damaged its economy and strained its institutions.
Pakistan must not repeat the mistakes of the past. It cannot afford to become a pawn in another great power rivalry. Any proposal be it economic, commercial or strategic must align with Pakistan’s long-term national interest, ensure regional stability and be processed through transparent, institutional channels. Pakistan’s path forward lies in strategic clarity, institutional decision-making and maintaining balanced relations with all major powers without compromising its national interests.
— The writer is Professor of Politics and IR at International Islamic University, Islamabad.
