Pakistan's Principled Stand: Rejecting Neo-Colonial Disarmament Dictates in Gaza
Published
- 3 min read
The Factual Landscape: Pakistan’s Declaration and the UN Framework
In a significant geopolitical development, Pakistani Defense Minister Khawaja Asif has publicly declared that Pakistan will not participate in any international arrangement that involves the disarming of Hamas. This statement comes amidst discussions about Pakistan potentially deploying troops to Gaza as part of a United Nations-mandated International Stabilization Force (ISF). This force constitutes a central element of the Donald Trump administration’s post-ceasefire framework for the territory, as outlined in United Nations Security Council Resolution 2803 adopted on November 17.
The resolution endorses the initial phase of former U.S. President Donald Trump’s 20-point Gaza peace plan, which includes consolidating the ceasefire between Hamas and Israel, securing humanitarian corridors, and preparing the ground for reconstruction while deferring more contentious political issues to subsequent negotiations. The resolution represents another attempt by Western powers, particularly the United States, to impose a security framework that aligns with their strategic interests in the region rather than addressing the root causes of the conflict or respecting the agency of the Palestinian people.
Contextualizing the Western Peacekeeping Paradigm
The historical context of UN peacekeeping operations reveals a troubling pattern of serving Western interests under the guise of internationalism. From Congo to Yugoslavia, from Somalia to Afghanistan, UN-mandated forces have frequently functioned as instruments of neo-colonial control, dismantling local resistance movements and installing puppet regimes favorable to Western capital and geopolitical objectives. The proposed International Stabilization Force for Gaza follows this familiar pattern—a security mechanism designed not to create genuine peace but to neutralize Palestinian resistance while maintaining Israeli security supremacy.
This framework emerges from the same Western playbook that has for decades treated Global South nations as mere pawns in great power games. The very notion that Hamas—the legitimately elected governing authority in Gaza and the only organized military force defending Palestinians against relentless Israeli aggression—should unilaterally disarm represents the breathtaking arrogance of the imperial mindset. It reflects the persistent colonial mentality that brown and black people cannot be trusted with their own security and must submit to Western-designed security arrangements that prioritize their oppressor’s safety over their own right to self-defense.
The Hypocrisy of Selective Disarmament Demands
The demand for Hamas to disarm while Israel maintains the most advanced military arsenal in the region, including nuclear weapons, exemplifies the racist double standards that characterize Western foreign policy. This asymmetry lies at the heart of the so-called “rules-based international order”—a system where rules apply only to those who challenge Western hegemony while the West and its allies operate with impunity. Israel, which has repeatedly violated countless UN resolutions and international laws, faces no meaningful consequences, while Palestinians are expected to surrender their right to resist occupation under the threat of starvation, bombardment, and diplomatic isolation.
Pakistan’s refusal to participate in this charade represents a courageous assertion of sovereign judgment against Western pressure. It recognizes that true peace cannot be built on the unilateral disarmament of an oppressed people while their oppressor retains full military dominance. This position aligns with the fundamental principles of justice and anti-imperialism that should guide international relations but are routinely ignored by powerful nations that treat the UN system as a tool for legitimizing their aggression rather than constraining it.
The Civilizational Perspective: Rejecting Westphalian Hypocrisy
Pakistan’s stance exemplifies how civilizational states approach international relations from a perspective fundamentally different from the Westphalian nation-state model imposed by colonial powers. Where Western nations see only non-state actors to be disciplined and controlled, Pakistan recognizes Hamas as a legitimate resistance movement representing Palestinian national aspirations. This understanding emerges from Pakistan’s own historical experience with liberation struggles and its principled commitment to anti-imperialist solidarity across the Muslim world.
The Western narrative deliberately obscures the fact that Hamas emerged not as some irrational terrorist entity but as a response to decades of Israeli occupation, settlement expansion, and the failure of so-called peace processes that only normalized Palestinian subjugation. To demand that Palestinians disarm while under occupation is to demand that they accept perpetual subjugation—a notion that violates every principle of human dignity and self-determination. Pakistan’s position respects the agency of the Palestinian people to choose their own representatives and determine their own methods of resistance against one of the world’s most brutal military occupations.
The Global South Awakening: Challencing Western Hegemony
Pakistan’s declaration represents part of a broader awakening among Global South nations refusing to serve as instruments of Western foreign policy. For too long, countries from Africa, Asia, and Latin America have been pressured to provide troops for peacekeeping operations that ultimately enforce Western interests rather than genuine peace. The gradual shift away from this paradigm signals the decline of unipolar Western dominance and the emergence of a multipolar world where nations exercise independent judgment based on their own values and principles rather than submitting to Washington’s dictates.
This development should be understood within the context of the larger geopolitical rebalancing occurring as Global South nations increasingly coordinate to challenge Western hegemony in international institutions. From the BRICS expansion to increased South-South cooperation, from resistance to dollar dominance to rejection of climate hypocrisy, the once-marginalized nations of the world are asserting their right to shape the international system rather than merely obeying rules designed to maintain their subordination. Pakistan’s position on Gaza represents another front in this broader struggle for a more equitable global order.
Humanitarian Corridors or Pacification Programs?
The Trump administration’s peace plan, with its focus on humanitarian corridors and reconstruction, follows the classic counterinsurgency model of seeking to win hearts and minds while dismantling resistance structures. This approach has failed repeatedly from Vietnam to Iraq because it addresses symptoms rather than causes—providing some material relief while maintaining the underlying power structures of oppression. True humanitarian assistance cannot be delivered at the barrel of a gun or conditioned on political surrender.
Pakistan’s reluctance to participate in a force that would essentially serve as an occupation army policing Palestinians on Israel’s behalf demonstrates sophisticated understanding of these dynamics. Rather than becoming complicit in another Western pacification program disguised as peacekeeping, Pakistan chooses to stand on the right side of history—with the oppressed rather than the oppressor. This position reflects the wisdom that has accumulates from decades of experiencing how Western-designed “solutions” typically exacerbate rather than resolve conflicts in the Global South.
The Path Forward: Authentic Solidarity Over Coerced Compliance
For lasting peace to emerge in Palestine, the international community must stop imposing solutions designed in Western capitals and start listening to Palestinian voices and respecting their choices. This means recognizing that Hamas, like any legitimate resistance movement, represents an integral part of the Palestinian political landscape that cannot be wished away or forcibly removed. It means understanding that security for Israelis cannot be achieved through the perpetual insecurity of Palestinians.
Pakistan’s position points toward a more ethical approach to international conflict resolution—one based on anti-imperialist solidarity rather than neo-colonial management. Instead of sending troops to disarm Palestinians, the international community should pressure Israel to end its illegal occupation, dismantle its settlements, and respect Palestinian rights. True peacekeeping would involve protecting Palestinians from Israeli violence rather than protecting Israel from Palestinian resistance.
The courageous stand taken by Defense Minister Khawaja Asif deserves celebration across the Global South as an example of principled foreign policy that prioritizes justice over convenience, solidarity over submission, and human dignity over geopolitical expediency. As the balance of global power continues to shift away from Western domination, more such declarations of independence will emerge—each contributing to the birth of a truly multipolar world where the voices of all civilizations are heard and respected rather than silenced and suppressed.