Politicians and journalists on Tuesday raised questions regarding the government’s reported plan of deploying troops in Gaza as part of the International Stabilisation Force (ISF) currently being assembled.

A cornerstone of the US-brokered Gaza Peace Agreement is the establishment of the ISF, composed mainly of troops from Muslim-majority countries. According to officials close to the discussions, an announcement is expected soon from the government regarding the decision.

Since the news spread, politicians and journalists alike have expressed concern and criticism over the idea, sharing their thoughts on social media.

‘Troubling’, ‘rebranded extension of occupation’

Former senator Mustafa Nawaz Khokhar called the news “troubling”, saying, “Our ill-thought-out policies of the past are haunting us in the present.”

He added, “Have we discussed and debated its pros and cons? Why is the government hesitant to take the public into confidence?”

Meanwhile, Senator Allama Raja Nasir posted a lengthy statement on X in which he expressed “categorical opposition” to the plan, saying that it would enable, rather than end, Israel’s military control of Gaza as a “rebranded extension of occupation, sanitising Israeli aggression through Muslim participation”.

He also pointed out the absence of Palestinian consent to the deployment of foreign troops, saying, “Any such move would violate international law and the core principles of peacekeeping … The people of Gaza would rightly view the ISF not as a stabilising force, but as an imposed foreign presence.”

Nasir added that without a clear mandate from the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), the ISF would likely operate under a US-led arrangement that would “strip it of neutrality”. Additionally, he voiced his concern that the plan would divide Arab and Muslim nations into “those willing to cooperate with this flawed framework [and] those who continue to stand firm against Israeli occupation”.

“True and lasting stability in Gaza cannot come from foreign boots on Palestinian soil. It can only emerge from Palestinian-led governance, reconstruction, and reconciliation,” he said, urging the government to refrain from joining the force.

‘Who made the decision?’

Opinion Editor of The News International, Zebunnisa Burki, responded to a post by Ryan Rozbiani that pointed out ceasefire violations by Israel in Gaza — killing 150 Palestinians in 16 days — and asked, “How is this a ceasefire?”

“It’s not,” Burki responded, adding, “And any ‘peacekeeping’ force will also not be keeping any peace, other than helping out Israel.”

Journalist Hamid Mir also called attention to a report by Israeli newspaper The Times of Israel about the likely inclusion of Pakistani troops in the ISF, demanding more details and discussion on the matter.

“Why there is a silence on this report?” he asked. “If true, who made this decision? Why [is] this issue not discussed in [the] Pakistani parliament yet?”

Former human rights minister and ex-PTI leader Shireen Mazari, in a series of posts, said that the plan would only aid the Israeli occupation by cooperating with the Israeli Defence Force (IDF) under the command of the US and UK.

Mazari posted a photo of the news story published this morning in Dawn with the phrase “cite country’s strong track record in peacekeeping missions” underlined, pointing out, “Pakistan has a strong record of peacekeeping BUT under UN — we opposed the Coalition of the Willing in Iraq.”

“This is negating [the] idea of [a] Palestinian state,” she added in a later repost. “Nor is it simple peacekeeping. It is peace enforcement under a questionable Trump-Netanyahu Plan!”

Mazari expressed agreement with Senator Nasir’s statement, adding that the “scheme” was intended to prevent the creation of a Palestinian state, which was a “core commitment” of the Quaid-i-Azam.

She compared the new peace force to another “Coalition of the Willing”, saying that they “have never provided security or justice”.

‘Wonderful decision’ but needs ‘national consensus’

Former information minister Fawad Chaudhry cited the Dawn article, calling the reported plan a “wonderful decision” but urging a national consensus before such decisions were made.

“I call upon those in power: take [the] nation in confidence, bring political temper down in [the] house; such decisions need national consensus,” he said.

The ISF’s mandate would include maintaining internal security, disarming Hamas, securing border crossings, and assisting with humanitarian relief and reconstruction under the supervision of a transitional Palestinian authority.

Officials in Islamabad argue that Pakistan’s potential participation stems from both moral responsibility and diplomatic necessity. They noted that Pakistan was part of the original eight-country peace proposal conceived in late 2024, and backed by several Muslim-majority states, that formed the basis of the US-brokered Gaza peace plan finalised earlier this month.

Since the ISF was a key pillar of that plan, officials said, Pakistan’s participation would signal consistency and credibility.