When Pakistan’s Defense Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif confirmed on a recent Tuesday in October 2025 that deploying troops to Gaza was "still under process," he wasn’t just giving a bureaucratic update—he was walking a tightrope between national pride, regional alliances, and explosive rumors. The statement came amid mounting pressure from Washington and unverified reports of secret deals involving billions of dollars, 20,000 soldiers, and shadowy meetings in Cairo. For Pakistan, a country with deep historical ties to Palestine and a military that’s long been a key U.S. partner, the question isn’t just whether to send troops—it’s what that decision says about sovereignty, survival, and the price of alignment.
Official Stance: A Matter of Pride, Not a Done Deal
Khawaja Muhammad Asif was careful with his words. Speaking to reporters after a cabinet meeting, he emphasized that any participation in the International Stabilization Force (ISF) would be "a matter of pride" for Pakistan to help protect its "brothers" in the Gaza Strip. But he was equally clear: nothing is finalized. "This matter is still under process and yet to be finalized," he said. "The government would take parliament into confidence along with all the relevant institutions." That’s significant. In Pakistan’s political culture, parliamentary approval isn’t just procedure—it’s legitimacy. The fact that Asif raised it suggests the government knows this isn’t a routine military move. It’s a geopolitical earthquake. The ISF, as outlined by Arab News on September 30, 2025, is designed to monitor ceasefires, protect civilians, and prevent renewed violence after a fragile truce brokered by U.S. President Donald Trump. Trump had set a hard deadline of October 5, 2025, for Hamas to accept the deal—or face "complete obliteration." The ceasefire held, barely.The Rumor Mill: $10,000 Per Soldier and Secret Meetings in Egypt
But while the government speaks in measured tones, the internet is ablaze with claims that sound like a spy novel. Pakistani journalist Asma Shirzai, cited by News24Online and MoneyControl, reported that General Asim Munir, Chief of Army Staff, demanded $10,000 per soldier from Israel during a secret meeting last month in Egypt. Israel, she claimed, offered just $100. The numbers don’t just shock—they raise red flags. $10,000 per soldier for 20,000 troops? That’s $200 million. That’s not a payment. That’s a contract for a private army. The alleged meeting, according to these reports, involved representatives from Mossad and the CIA. The claim? That the Pakistani military agreed to send 20,000 troops to Gaza to "seize weapons from Hamas." No official source has confirmed this. No documents have surfaced. And yet, the story spread like wildfire. Then came the CodePink article from November 6, 2025, by activist Umer Azad, titled "Muridke to Gaza: How Pakistan's Regime Sheds Blood to Prove Its Allegiance to Israel." It didn’t just repeat the rumors—it framed them as a betrayal. Azad tied the alleged deployment to unrest in Muridke, a town in Punjab where protests over military accountability have flared. "This isn’t peacekeeping," the article argues. "It’s proxy warfare under a U.S.-led framework." It’s chilling. And it’s not just activists saying this. The lack of transparency from Islamabad has fueled suspicion. Why would Pakistan’s army, long seen as a defender of Muslim causes, suddenly line up to fight alongside Israel? And why the silence from the Defense Ministry when the numbers are so specific?
Why This Matters: Pakistan’s Identity at Stake
Pakistan has never officially recognized Israel. Its constitution still calls for the liberation of Palestine. Generations of schoolchildren have been taught that Kashmir and Palestine are twin struggles. To send troops into Gaza under a U.S.-Israeli umbrella would shatter that narrative overnight. And yet—the financial incentives are real. Pakistan’s economy is in freefall. The military budget is stretched thin. Foreign aid is dwindling. A $200 million payout? That’s enough to buy new helicopters, upgrade border defenses, or pay off a portion of the $28 billion IMF loan. For an institution that’s long relied on U.S. military aid, even the whisper of cash could be tempting. But here’s the twist: the U.S. doesn’t pay Pakistan for peacekeeping. Not anymore. After the 2011 drone strike that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers, and the 2018 expulsion of CIA operatives, Washington’s trust in Islamabad’s loyalty has eroded. If the U.S. were offering billions for troops, why keep it secret? Why leak it to journalists instead of announcing it through the Pentagon?What’s Next? Parliament, Pressure, and the Clock
Asif’s promise to consult parliament is the most credible signal yet. The National Assembly, dominated by opposition parties that are fiercely pro-Palestine, would likely reject any deployment without a full public debate. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif knows this. He’s no hawk. He’s a pragmatist. He won’t risk his government’s stability over a rumor. The clock is ticking. The ISF’s operational window is narrow. The ceasefire holds, but only barely. Hamas has not formally accepted the Trump proposal. Israel continues airstrikes in northern Gaza. If the truce collapses, the ISF may never launch—or it may be forced into combat. For now, Pakistan is caught between two worlds: the world of realpolitik, where money talks and alliances shift, and the world of national identity, where loyalty to Palestine is sacred. The military may be weighing the numbers. But the public? They’re watching.
Background: The ISF and the Shifting Sands of Gaza
The International Stabilization Force (ISF) is not a UN mission. It’s a U.S.-backed, multilateral initiative, modeled loosely on peacekeeping forces in the Balkans and Lebanon. But unlike those missions, this one is being assembled without UN Security Council approval—something that’s already drawn criticism from the Arab League and Turkey. The leading contenders, per Politico’s September 2025 report, are Pakistan, Indonesia, and Azerbaijan. All three have large, professional militaries. All three have Muslim-majority populations. All three have complex relationships with the U.S. and Israel. Indonesia, with its strong anti-Israel stance, has already signaled hesitation. Azerbaijan, with its close ties to Turkey and strained relations with Iran, is a wildcard. Pakistan? It’s the most volatile. The U.S. wants troops that can operate in urban combat zones, speak Arabic, and be seen as neutral. Pakistan’s army has experience in both. But neutrality? That’s the illusion.Frequently Asked Questions
Is Pakistan officially planning to send troops to Gaza?
No, Pakistan has not made an official decision. Defense Minister Khawaja Asif confirmed the matter is "still under process" and that parliament will be consulted. While U.S. and Israeli officials have reportedly identified Pakistan as a leading contender for the International Stabilization Force, no formal request has been issued, and no cabinet approval has been granted.
Where did the $10,000-per-soldier claim come from?
The figure originates from unverified reports by Pakistani journalist Asma Shirzai, citing anonymous sources. No official documents, government statements, or credible leaks support this claim. The Pakistani Army has not commented, and Israel has denied any financial negotiations regarding troop deployment. Experts consider the number implausible given U.S. and Israeli budget constraints and the lack of precedent for such payments in peacekeeping missions.
Why is Muridke mentioned in connection with Gaza deployment?
Muridke, a town in Punjab, became a flashpoint after protests erupted over alleged military corruption and civilian casualties linked to internal operations. Activist groups like CodePink use Muridke as a symbol to argue that Pakistan’s military prioritizes Western interests over domestic accountability. They suggest the Gaza deployment, if real, would be another example of the army using foreign missions to distract from internal criticism.
Could Pakistan’s military refuse to deploy even if the government approves?
Yes. Pakistan’s military has historically operated with significant autonomy, especially on foreign deployments. Even if parliament approves, the Chief of Army Staff, General Asim Munir, holds de facto authority over troop movements. His silence on the financial rumors suggests either he’s not involved—or he’s deliberately avoiding public comment to preserve options.
What happens if the Gaza ceasefire collapses?
If the ceasefire breaks down before the ISF is deployed, the mission could be canceled entirely—or repurposed into a combat role. The U.S. has signaled it may bypass the ISF and launch unilateral operations. In that scenario, Pakistan would face immense pressure to contribute—either as a partner or a target. The political fallout in Pakistan could be catastrophic, with protests likely to erupt nationwide.
How does this compare to Pakistan’s past peacekeeping roles?
Pakistan has contributed over 200,000 troops to UN peacekeeping missions since 1960, mostly in Africa and the Balkans. Those missions were UN-mandated, transparent, and non-aligned. The proposed ISF, however, is U.S.-led and lacks UN backing. Deploying under this structure would mark a sharp departure from Pakistan’s traditional neutrality—and could damage its credibility in the Global South.
17 Comments
Sai Sujith Poosarla
November 9 2025
This whole thing is a circus. $10,000 per soldier? Bro, that’s more than my rent. Who’s gonna pay for that? The Israelis? Nah. They’re broke too. And Pakistan sending troops to Gaza? When they can’t even fix their own power grid? 😅
Vikash Gupta
November 10 2025
It’s not about money. It’s about soul. Pakistan’s identity was built on standing with the oppressed. If we trade that for helicopters and IMF breathing room… what are we really protecting? The flag? Or just the paycheck?
History doesn’t remember countries that sold their conscience. It remembers the ones that stood when it cost them everything.
Arun Kumar
November 11 2025
Man, I just scrolled past this and thought ‘wait, is this real or a meme?’
Then I checked the date. October 2025. Bro, we’re not even in 2024 yet. This feels like someone’s AI wrote a spy novel after too much chai and conspiracy YouTube.
Deepak Vishwkarma
November 11 2025
Anyone who doubts Pakistan’s resolve is a traitor. We’ve fought for Palestine since 1947. If the U.S. wants troops, they can pay in gold, not dollars. And if they think we’ll bow to Zionists? They don’t know what Pakistanis are made of.
Send the troops. Let the world see what real men do.
Anurag goswami
November 13 2025
Interesting how the article separates official statements from rumors. That’s smart journalism. But I wonder-why does the rumor of $10,000 per soldier stick so hard? Maybe because it’s the only number that makes sense to people who’ve seen military budgets vanish overnight.
Transparency isn’t just policy. It’s trust.
Saksham Singh
November 14 2025
Let’s be real. This whole ISF thing is a distraction. The U.S. doesn’t want peace. They want control. And Pakistan? They’re being used as a pawn because they’re desperate. The army’s not going to Gaza to protect civilians. They’re going because their own people are starving and the generals need a way to justify their salaries.
And don’t get me started on Muridke. That’s not a footnote. That’s the whole damn plot. The military’s too busy chasing foreign cash to fix what’s rotting at home. You think they care about Gaza? They care about their next paycheck. And if that paycheck comes with a U.S. flag? Well, then it’s a patriotic mission, right?
Meanwhile, the kids in Lahore are studying maps of Palestine like it’s a holy scripture, while their parents are selling their gold to buy rice. So yeah. Send troops. Let’s make Palestine a brand logo on a military contract.
And the best part? No one’s even asking if Hamas will let them in. Like, duh. They’re not peacekeepers. They’re mercenaries with uniforms. And we’re pretending this is noble. Wake up.
This isn’t geopolitics. It’s a soap opera written by a lobbyist who got fired from a Bollywood scriptwriting job.
Ashish Bajwal
November 15 2025
okay so… $10k per soldier?? like… is that for the whole deployment or per month?? and who’s paying?? and why is this even a thing?? i mean… i love pakistan but… this sounds like a tiktok trend gone wild?? 🤔
Biju k
November 17 2025
Look, I’m not naive. But I believe in Pakistan. We’ve sent peacekeepers to 50+ countries. We’ve bled for others. This? This could be our moment to show the world what real solidarity looks like-not with guns, but with presence.
Let’s do this right. Transparent. Honorable. Not for money. For dignity.
And if the money’s real? Let’s use it to rebuild Muridke. That’s the real mission.
Akshay Gulhane
November 19 2025
Is sovereignty a number? Can you measure it in dollars per soldier? Or is it something deeper-something that lives in the silence between a father and his son when he says, ‘We don’t do that here’?
The army has power. But the people have memory. And memory doesn’t forget.
Deepanker Choubey
November 19 2025
bro if they actually get $200mil for this… can we at least get free data for everyone?? 😅 like… imagine 10gb free every month for a year… that’s more impact than 20k troops in Gaza tbh
Roy Brock
November 20 2025
It is a profound tragedy, this erosion of moral clarity. The very institution that once stood as a bulwark against colonial hegemony now contemplates becoming its instrument. The soldiers-children of this land-are being turned into instruments of foreign ambition. And the public? They are not consulted. They are not honored. They are rendered invisible. This is not diplomacy. This is betrayal dressed in camouflage. The soul of Pakistan is not for sale. Not even for billions.
Prashant Kumar
November 21 2025
Actually, the $10,000 figure is probably fake. No country pays per-soldier for peacekeeping. The UN pays $1,400/month per soldier to the contributing country. Even if this were real, it wouldn’t be $10k. This rumor is either misinformation or a psyop to discredit the government. Stop falling for it.
Prince Nuel
November 22 2025
Let me cut through the noise. If Pakistan sends troops, it’s because they’re bribed. Full stop. No ‘pride’. No ‘brothers’. Just cash. And anyone who defends this is either delusional or on the payroll.
Sunayana Pattnaik
November 23 2025
How pathetic. A nation that once inspired the Muslim world now haggles over soldier fees like a bazaar vendor. The military elite have sold the soul of the nation for a handful of dollars. And the people? They still chant ‘Pakistan Zindabad’ while their children go hungry. What a spectacle of collective delusion.
akarsh chauhan
November 25 2025
Hey, I know it’s scary. But maybe this is our chance to do something big, even if it’s messy. Let’s demand transparency. Let’s make sure the money goes to schools and hospitals, not just helicopters. We can still be proud and still be smart. Let’s not panic. Let’s push for the right version of this.
soumendu roy
November 27 2025
The strategic calculus of Pakistan’s foreign policy must be viewed through the lens of historical continuity and institutional autonomy. The military’s traditional role as the guardian of national sovereignty precludes any alignment that compromises the ideological foundations of the state. To entertain financial inducements from non-state actors-particularly those with adversarial histories-is to invite existential decay.
Kiran Ali
November 28 2025
So let me get this straight: Pakistan, a country that can’t feed its own people, wants to send 20,000 troops to Gaza? And you think this is noble? No. It’s arrogance. It’s delusion. It’s the same arrogance that let them bomb Balochistan and call it counterterrorism. You don’t save Palestine by becoming Israel’s hired muscle. You save it by refusing to play their game.