Israel has opposed Pakistan’s role in the Gaza ISF, citing alleged links to Hamas through groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba.
Strategic expert Brahma Chellaney argues that Israel’s decision worked in Pakistan’s favour, sparing its military from joining a US-backed mission
Participation would have damaged Pakistan domestically and placed its troops in an impossible position of either confronting Hamas or angering the US and Israel
Israel has rejected the proposal for the Pakistani military to participate in the International Stabilization Force (ISF) for Gaza under US President Donald Trump’s plan. The ISF is a proposed UN-mandated multinational security force aimed at maintaining stability, overseeing the security transition in post-war Gaza, and disarming non-state armed groups such as Hamas. The force was authorised under United Nations Security Council Resolution 2803 (2025) on November 17, 2025, as part of a broader US-led peace initiative.
Israeli officials have said they are not comfortable with the Pakistan Army being part of any Gaza force, citing the absence of diplomatic ties with Israel and serious concerns over Pakistan’s alleged long-standing links to Hamas through Pakistan-based terror groups such as Lashkar-e-Taiba.
Indian columnist and strategic affairs expert Brahma Chellaney argues that Israel’s rejection has, in fact, worked in Pakistan’s favour. According to him, Pakistan’s military was reluctant to join the US-backed ISF but would have struggled to openly refuse the proposal. “For Islamabad, the ISF was a poisoned chalice,” Chellaney notes. Israel’s rejection provided Pakistan with a diplomatic “get-out-of-jail-free” card—appearing diplomatically useful on the surface while carrying heavy political and strategic risks.
At home, Chellaney explains, participation in a Gaza force could have triggered a major public-relations crisis for Pakistan’s military. It risked being portrayed domestically as acting as “security guards for Israel” or “US mercenaries,” damaging the army’s standing in a strongly pro-Palestinian society.
The operational challenges for the Pakistan Army were even more severe. Chellaney points out that the ISF’s mandate includes disarming Hamas, placing Pakistani troops in an impossible position. Acting against Hamas could have alienated the wider Muslim world, while avoiding confrontation would have angered Washington and Tel Aviv. Either option would have undermined Pakistan’s international position.
By blocking Pakistan’s participation, Israel also helped avert a potential diplomatic collision between the United States and Pakistan. Had the plan moved forward, Pakistan’s powerful army chief might have been forced to directly refuse the White House, straining bilateral ties. As Chellaney observes, Israel’s decision spared Islamabad a situation that would have required Pakistan’s “all-powerful army chief, lauded by Trump as his ‘favorite field marshal,’ to say no to the White House.” In his assessment, Israel quietly removed a significant strategic and diplomatic burden from Pakistan.
Brahma Chellaney (born January 18, 1962) is an Indian expert on global strategy and security. He is Professor Emeritus of Strategic Studies at the Centre for Policy Research in New Delhi and a Fellow at the Robert Bosch Academy in Berlin. He has authored nine books, including Water: Asia’s New Battleground, which won the 2012 Asia Society Bernard Schwartz Book Award. Chellaney has also served on India’s National Security Advisory Board and helped draft India’s nuclear doctrine. He regularly writes for Project Syndicate and other international publications.
Suggested Reading:
