Dawn – Newspaper | 2025-10-08 03:50
According to a report by Dawn… WHILE rejecting an international media report about Pakistan offering America access to a proposed port at Pasni, senior security sources were cited as saying that any related discussions vis-à-vis private or commercial entities would have been “exploratory” and not “state initiatives”. Nevertheless, the subject has raised many questions.
According to the Financial Times, the proposal was discussed with some US officials and shared with the army chief before he met President Donald Trump at the White House last month. The report claimed that ‘advisers’ to the army chief (Pakistani security sources said that the army chief does not have any official advisers) had approached the Americans with a proposal to build and operate a port on the Arabian Sea.
The FT said that the plan envisions American investors developing and managing a port in Pasni to facilitate access to Pakistan’s critical minerals sector. It is a highly sensitive issue, which concerns our foreign and national security policy, and if unfounded, the FT report needs to be strongly and publicly rebutted by the political and military leadership, especially as the report involves the latter in the purported negotiations.
So far, no official denial of the reported discussions on the proposed port with American officials or private companies has been issued by the government, including the Foreign Office. The only clarification on this extremely sensitive matter has come from unnamed security sources who reportedly told selected media persons that the (FT) report did not represent the official government or military policy.
A number of questions have been raised about the purported Pasni discussions.
According to media reports, the state-run digital outlet PTV also cited the sources as saying, “Conversations with private companies were exploratory, not official initiatives.” It was further said: “There is no plan to hand over Pasni’s security to any foreign power.” This clarification reportedly by anonymous security sources and echoed by official digital media has raised more questions.
When some “exploratory” conversation with private American entities on the port project appears to have taken place, and when security sources say it is not an official initiative, the question arises: whose initiative is it? It is an extremely vague statement that fails to contradict the FT report. Can even an “exploratory” consultation on such a sensitive matter be described as a private initiative without the government’s approval?
The FT report claims that the paper has seen what it describes as an “audacious plan” for the proposed Pasni port project. According to the report: “A blueprint anticipated the port would cost up to $1.2 billion with a proposed financing model that would be a mix of Pakistani federal and US-backed development finance.”
“The scheme,” the FT report said, “is one of several ideas floated publicly and privately by Pakistani officials to maintain momentum with the Trump administration.” The sources do not appear to respond clearly to these assertions by a reputable global publication.
A strategically located small coastal town, Pasni serves as a naval air station and military airport. The proposed port holds strategic importance. Pasni is located about 110 kilometres from the China-backed Gwadar port and 160km from Pakistan’s border with Iran. Were the proposed port to be handed over to the US to build and operate, there could be serious geopolitical ramifications, not only for the country but for the region as well.
The whole port idea is linked to the American interest in Pakistan’s minerals sector, particularly the rare earth minerals that are a vital component of technologies used for manufacturing electric vehicles, generating renewable energy and producing electronics and defence systems. The demand for rare earth minerals appears to be an important pillar of the renewed US-Pakistan relationship. In fact, visuals were also released of President Trump being presented with a box of rare earth minerals by the civil and military leadership at the White House.
Meanwhile, a Missouri-based company US Strategic Metals signed an MoU recently with Pakistan’s military engineering arm to boost collaboration. The company is also planning to set up a refinery. Pakistan lately shipped a modest first consignment of critical and rare earth minerals to USSM, which included copper, antimony and neodymium. The sample shipment was reportedly prepared locally in collaboration with the Frontier Works Organisation.
This first delivery of rare earth minerals is being described as “a milestone in the Pakistan-US strategic partnership” that promises to establish a roadmap for cooperation across the entire mineral value chain. It may be a very positive sign for Pakistan to attract much-needed foreign investment, particularly in the minerals sector with its vast deposits, but there is also a need for caution when dealing with foreign companies interested in these critical resources in a strategically important region.
Most of these minerals are believed to be located in restive Balochistan and the north-western tribal regions. Many projects in this region have involved Chinese investment for the past many years. There is also the question of whether the presence of American companies will trigger new tensions between the world’s two most powerful powers. Pakistan has a long-standing strategic partnership with China, which has now developed a much deeper economic dimension as well.
At the other end, Pakistan’s ties with the US have historically been on a roller-coaster trajectory. Even in the best of times, the relationship has been a transactional one, occasionally with some strategic convergence. For the past several years, it had remained dormant. It is important to avail the changing mood in Washington, but we must also understand the unpredictable nature of the Trump administration.
In the backdrop of these facts, the FT report is quite disturbing. Equally alarming is the government’s intriguing silence over it. It is extremely important for all foreign deals to be presented before parliament to lend them transparency. It is essential that the country protect its national and security interests.
The writer is an author and journalist.
zhussain100@yahoo.com
X: @hidhussain
Published in Dawn, October 8th, 2025 complete report is on below link.
Like this:
Like Loading...
