Ladies and Gentlemen, Assalam-o-Alaikum,

I welcome you all to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Let me begin with developments in the Gulf Region and state of affairs between Iran and the United States.

We note with concern that the security situation remains precarious, despite the relative calm of past few days, which had rekindled hopes that this positive development would consolidate into a durable and fully respected ceasefire and pave the way for dialogue.

Amid the prevailing tensions and hostilities, Pakistan reiterates that dialogue and diplomacy remain the only viable path forward. We welcome all efforts aimed at sustaining the cessation of hostilities and resumption of dialogue between Iran and the United States. Pakistan is engaged and will continue to play its role in this regard. The negotiations are ongoing to normalise the situation in the strait of Hormuz and de-escalate. We are doing utmost to bring both parties back to Islamabad MoU, so that all the irritants can be removed in the light of its spirit. We are hopeful for de-escalation and peaceful settlement of the issue. We encourage the parties to exercise maximum restraint and fully adhere to their commitments to resume technical-level talks for the implementation of the Islamabad MoU, in line with the Pakistan-Qatar Joint Statement of 21 June 2026.

Last week on 23 July, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif held a telephone conversation with Saudi Crown Prince and Prime Minister HRH Mohammed bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud. During the call, both the distinguished leaders agreed to continue working very closely to maintain regional peace, security, stability, and the uninterrupted flow of lawful maritime commerce through the Red Sea as well as the Strait of Hormuz and the wider region.

Following up on this important conversation between our Prime Minister and the Saudi Crown Prince, two days later on 25 July 2026, the DPM/FM Senator Mohammad Ishaq Dar held a telephone conversation with the Foreign Minister of Saudi Arabia, Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud. They discussed the latest regional developments, reaffirmed the close and brotherly ties between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, and underscored the importance of continued diplomacy and constructive engagement for regional peace and stability.

On 28 July 2026, the Deputy Prime Minister/Foreign Minister Senator Mohammad Ishaq Dar held a telephone conversation with Jordanian Deputy Prime Minister/Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi. The two leaders discussed the worsening situation in Palestine, condemned Israeli actions, emphasized coordinated diplomatic efforts, and reaffirmed their commitment to regional peace and stability.

Yesterday, you all covered the visit of the Foreign Minister of the State of Kuwait, H.E. Sheikh Jarrah Jaber Al-Ahmad Al-Sabah, who was in Islamabad for an official visit at the invitation of our DPM/FM. This was an important visit both in regional context as well as in bilateral terms. Pakistan and Kuwait reaffirmed their strong and longstanding bilateral partnership, agreeing to deepen cooperation in trade, investment, energy, IT, agriculture, education, health, and other priority sectors through sustained high-level engagements and the establishment of Joint Working Groups. The Deputy Prime Minister/Foreign Minister welcomed Kuwait's ratification of the Pakistan–Kuwait Defence Cooperation Agreement, describing it as a significant step towards strengthening institutional defence ties and collaboration between the two countries. The two sides also exchanged views on regional and international developments, pledged continued coordination at multilateral forums, and reaffirmed their shared commitment to further advance this important fraternal Pakistan–Kuwait partnership.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Last Friday, Deputy Prime Minister/Foreign Minister Senator Mohammad Ishaq Dar participated in the SCO Council of Foreign Ministers Meeting in Kyrgyz Republic. He reaffirmed Pakistan’s commitment to the SCO Charter, regional connectivity, peace, and CPEC, while inviting SCO Member States to the 2027 CHS Summit in Pakistan. On the sidelines, he held bilateral meetings with the Foreign Ministers of Kyrgyz Republic, China, Iran, Kazakhstan, Belarus, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan, and called on the President of the Kyrgyz Republic. He also conveyed Pakistan’s readiness to assume the SCO Chairmanship for 2026–27.

Deputy Prime Minister/Foreign Minister Senator Mohammad Ishaq Dar addressed an interactive session at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs with U.S. Congressional Delegation (CODEL) and a 33-member U.S Business Delegation two days ago on 28 July 2026. DPM/FM highlighted the positive momentum in Pakistan–U.S. relations and reaffirmed Pakistan’s commitment to strengthening bilateral ties through enhanced parliamentary engagement, economic cooperation, and people-to-people exchanges. 

Turning to developments in Palestine: on 24 July 2026, the Foreign Ministers of eight Arab-Islamic countries issued a joint statement strongly condemning Israeli actions and restrictions in Jerusalem, particularly concerning Al-Aqsa Mosque. They called on the international community to uphold international law, protect the rights of Palestinians, and preserve the religious and historical status of the Holy City.

Deputy Prime Minister/Foreign Minister Senator Mohammad Ishaq Dar received a telephone call from the Foreign Minister of Egypt, Dr. Badr Abdelatty. Palestine issue was discussed in detail; the two Ministers expressed grave concern over the situation in Palestine, calling for an immediate end to hostilities, unhindered humanitarian assistance, and respect for international law, while also discussing coordinated diplomatic efforts in support of the Palestinian people and emphasizing dialogue to preserve regional peace and stability.

Pakistan and Egypt held the 10th Round of Annual Bilateral Consultations virtually on 21 July 2026, we issued PR on this. The Pakistan side was led by Additional Secretary (Middle East) Mr Zahid Hussain, while the Egyptian delegation was headed by Assistant Foreign Minister for Asian Affairs Ambassador Amr Hamza. The two sides reviewed bilateral cooperation and agreed to further enhance engagement in trade, investment, education, culture, science, and people-to-people exchanges, and also reaffirmed coordination on regional and multilateral issues.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Moving to science diplomacy, on 24 July, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in collaboration with COMSTECH, launched the first issue of the Journal of Science Communication and Diplomacy for 2026, marking the second year of its publication.

The Journal provides a platform for diplomats, scientists, academics, and policy practitioners to engage in policy-relevant discourse at the intersection of science, technology, and international relations. The inaugural 2026 issue features eleven articles, including seven authored by Ministry officials, among them an article by Foreign Secretary Ambassador Amna Baloch. Let me also acknowledge the editorial and compilation work of Dr. Mohammad Adeel, Deputy Director, ACDIS, who was instrumental in bringing this publication to fruition. Copies of the Journal are available here, and you are welcome to pick up one if you are interested. 

With that, I conclude my opening statement and will now be happy to take your questions.

*

(Muhammad Anas Ahsan Mallick, Asia One News):    Sticking to the issue that’s close to your heart on ACDIS, there’s a documentary on ACDIS in particular. There’s a Deutsche Welle documentary, or a DW documentary, that has been critiquing Pakistan’s nuclear program at large, and we’ve seen the so-called invited experts as well. They’ve critiqued it as well. Your comments on the documentary, which has been criticizing Pakistan’s nuclear security program and nuclear program approach.

Spokesperson:    Pakistan rejects the misleading documentary recently aired by Deutsche Welle (DW) which is nothing but regurgitation of hackneyed and speculative commentary and biased sourcing. 

The documentary reflects either a profound misunderstanding or a deliberate disregard of the history, evolution, and rationale of Pakistan's nuclear programme. 

By lending its platform to such poorly sourced and one-sided content, DW risks undermining its own credibility and reputation for professional, fact-based journalism. Responsible journalism demands rigorous verification, balance, and context, not the amplification of recycled conjecture and unfounded insinuations. DW must uphold these tenets and exercise greater editorial responsibility when reporting on issues with far-reaching implications for international peace and security.

Pakistan has full confidence in the robustness of its command-and-control architecture, as well as its comprehensive technical, legal, and institutional mechanisms governing nuclear safety and security. These arrangements meet the highest international standards and have been consistently acknowledged by independent international experts. 

(Shiza Hashmi, PTV Digital):    Two days ago, the Government of India banned our X and YouTube accounts in India. What does the Ministry have to say about that?

Spokesperson:    The decision by the Indian government to block access to the social media accounts of Pakistan TV Digital, as well as other social media accounts, is entirely in keeping with its established pattern of suppressing information and peddling an officially sanctioned and carefully sanitized version of reality through a pliant media.

Factual reporting has no place in this captive ecosystem. This frequent lapse into escapism exposes India’s deep intolerance for independent voices and its increasing reliance on repressive and restrictive measures as instruments of state policy.

The international community, including representative media organizations, should take full cognizance of the Indian government’s curbs on the media and the shrinking space for free speech in India.

(Shaukat Piracha, AAJ News):    I have two questions. Number one is that, yes, you are concerned about the precarious situation, but my question is: How does Pakistan view the expanding theatre of war in the Middle East? Saudi Arabia is bombing Iraq, and then, you know, Iran is sending missiles and drones to other Middle Eastern countries. Pakistan wanted from the beginning that the war should not expand to the broader region, but that nightmare is becoming a reality. How does Pakistan view it? My second question is: Thank you very much; we received a press release very late at night, two nights ago, on the Indian Defence Minister’s, you know, utterances in Drass, Kargil. That was the condemnation. What is Pakistan’s own perspective on what happened in 1999?

Spokesperson:    First, on the situation in the Gulf, the Strait of Hormuz and Red Sea: these developments are worrying and we would not shy away from saying that. The attacks, particularly by non-state actors against Saudi Arabia, are utterly condemnable. Pakistan has issued strong statements on such attacks. Our Prime Minister has also spoken eloquently about these attacks. So, these are worrying developments. 

However, as I said, the negotiations are ongoing to normalize the situation. Pakistan is playing a role towards this end. We are doing our utmost to bring both parties back to the Islamabad MoU so that the irritants can be removed and the implications of hostilities between the two countries (Iran and the US), do not spill over into other theatres. This effort is ongoing, and we remain hopeful for de-escalation and the peaceful settlement of issues. We also remain hopeful that the parties will return to the technical-level talks – the roadmap or framework for which is amply identified in the Pakistan-Qatar Joint Statement of 22 June.

Regarding your second question on Kargil: Pakistan has expressed its position a number of times. This issue is now part of history. There have been very good books written about it, so I will refer you to those accounts on which we have expressed our position. 

As regards the statement of the Indian Defence Minister: we issued a strong rebuttal to it, particularly rejecting the efforts to normalize India’s occupation of the erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir, including the occupied Valley, the Occupied Jammu, and the Occupied Ladakh. All efforts by the Indian side to normalize this occupation and give it a legal cover are totally rejected. The Jammu and Kashmir issue is to be settled in accordance with the UN Security Council Resolutions, including Resolution 98 and Resolution 122, which clearly state that any decision by the local assembly or the local government in Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir cannot erode or sidetrack the importance the need and the imperative for, a UN-administered plebiscite to determine the future of Jammu and Kashmir – this remains the only workable solution to address this long-standing issue.

(Muhammad Saleh Zafir, The News):    Sir, you just reported that our Foreign Minister had several meetings in Manila while he was there to attend the ASEAN Foreign Ministers’ Conference. I wish to know whether Dr. Jaishankar, the Indian External Affairs Minister, requested a meeting with the Foreign Minister of Pakistan. And, as you told us just now, next year Pakistan is going to host the SCO Summit in Islamabad. Can we expect that Indian Prime Minister Modi will also be invited to it?

Spokesperson: I am not aware of any meeting request from India on the sidelines of the ARF in Manila. I cannot comment. As regards the SCO Summit, yes, all member states of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization will be invited at the level of the Heads of State or Government, should they wish to attend at the level of the Head of Government. So yes, invitations will obviously be extended, and this is an obligation on the part of Pakistan as the host. We will invite all Heads of State and Government to the Summit meeting. The SCO Summit takes place at the level of the President. The CHG, which took place in Pakistan in 2024, was at the level of the Prime Minister. The Presidents and Prime Ministers do participate interchangeably in these Summits and Heads of Government meetings. So, our invitation will be extended as per SCO procedures.

(Zeeshan Yousafzai, Dunya News): I have two questions. First, let me add to Shaukat Piracha Sahib’s question. Saudi forces, along with U.S. strikes in Iraq, have targeted pilgrims. Now, effectively, Saudi Arabia is part of this war, being a strategic ally. What’s Pakistan’s position on it? That’s my first question. My second question is: Pakistan is expected to seek a rollover of around $4 billion from China, while recently Pakistan paid $1.3 billion to its commercial banks. So, are you hopeful that your all-weather strategic partner and ally will roll over this money for Pakistan?

(Anwer Abbas, 24 News): Sir, I want to know that we have always been condemning the attacks on Iraq, whether they were by Daesh or others. What is the reason that this time we have not issued any statement on the attack by Saudi Arabia on Iraq?

Spokesperson: Firstly, on Zeeshan’s question regarding Saudi Arabia: we have seen the statement issued by the Saudi Ministry of Defense. The statement reads and I quote: “Corresponding to the interception and destruction of a number of drones that attempted to target oil facilities in the Eastern Province and Riyadh, these terrorist attacks originated from Iraqi territory.” So, this is what the situation is. We would obviously refer to the Saudi account of the matter. I have not seen any statement from Government of Iraq on this matter. I am not aware of that but this is what the situation is. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has the right to self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter, and we respect that right. You also referred to this as an extension of the war. That is your interpretation of the event. I will not comment on it. On your question Anwar: the fact is that we are not obliged to issue statements on every development. We issue statements on developments as deemed appropriate or relevant to our own priorities.

As regards the rollover of loans and the financial transactions between Pakistan and China, I will refer you to the Ministry of Finance on this issue.

(Naveed Siddiqui, Business Recorder):    Regarding defense agreement with Kuwait, you welcome yesterday. Is this pact similar to that on Pakistan signed with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and would an attack on Kuwait be considered an attack on Pakistan? Secondly, reportedly, Jordan and Bahrain are also interested in entering into defense cooperation with Pakistan, and the third one, sir, this was reported some two weeks back that Pakistan may agree on holding SAARC Summit at any neutral venue.

Spokesperson:    The Kuwait Pakistan Defense Cooperation Agreement was signed in June 2023. Recently Kuwait completed its ratification process and ratified it. The 2023 agreement, which is now fully operational, built on nearly the four decades of very good Pakistan Kuwait cooperation in defense sector that started in the 80s, survived through the two Gulf Wars, particularly the first Gulf War in which Kuwait was attacked in 1990. It has survived till now. It is now being formalized, whereby there would be exchange of military exercises, trainings, and so on and so forth. The detail you can check from the Ministry of Defence. 

You asked is it similar to the Strategic Mutual Defense Agreement with Saudi Arabia. Obviously, it is not similar in a sense that one is called the strategic mutual defense, and the other defense cooperation agreement. So, the name is self-explanatory.

As regard Jordan and Bahrain, we have robust defense cooperation with these countries. If tomorrow there is a need to formalize it in a new agreement of defense cooperation, you will be informed about it in due course.

About SAARC, I am not aware of what news are you quoting from.

(Sonia Malik, Koh-i-Noor News):    Sir, as we can see the situation in Kashmir where on one side there is an ongoing protest and on the other side the elections are also being conducted which is being widely covered by the international media. Has any country approached Pakistan or made any contact through United Nations on this basis? Need your comments. 

Spokesperson:    I am not aware of any contacts made internationally on this election.

(Zahid Farooq Malik, Daily Metro Watch):    Sir, as we can see the cockroach parties protest and the retreating of the government was widely covered by the media which demonstrates India’s dissembling. However, the atrocities in Kashmir are being extensively ignored, the government use pallet guns in response to the protests there. No one pays attention to the oppressions in Kashmir. 

Spokesperson:     The use of pallet guns in Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir in a certain time frame, particularly 2016-18, and probably in some way continues till today, was amply highlighted and duly condemned. You may recall a very good report by the Amnesty International on the massive blindness that pallet guns caused. This is part of the history now. It was documented in the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) reports – the two reports that came out in 2018 and 2019. Civil society had also actively monitored. To some extent, I think the victims, their rehabilitation and their treatment was also documented.

The use of pallet gun is abhorring wherever it takes place – whether it takes place in the Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir or in India. We totally condemn that. I recall the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights, which is a UN Human Rights Convention, had also taken note of it that how far the use of this weapon (pallet gun) as a lethal weapon for crowd control basically can be justified. India justified the use of pellet gun as a crowd control. So, these developments are well documented. As I said, Pakistan condemns the use of pallet guns in the Indian illegally occupied Jammu and Kashmir, as well as in India itself.

(Azaz Syed, Geo News):    Sir, recently Pakistan and India have exchanged the staff-level visas for the both High Commissions. Would you mind sharing the details? What is the exact number of the visas which we have issued and they have issued? And another question related to the same issue: We saw that soon after the standoff last year, both the countries have announced a ban on visas for the citizen of each of the countries. So, are visas being issued to Indians for Pakistan? And what are your reports? Whether the Indian High Commission is also issuing visas for Pakistani citizen?

Spokesperson:    Yes, I understand the both sides issued visas for the officials of respective High Commissions as routine. I understand these were the near identical numbers, and this was for the officers and working level. As you know, we are not operating at the level of ambassadors. I am not aware of exactly how many visas issued, but obviously this was an administrative arrangement to facilitate the routine posting and transfer of officers from capitals to the High Commissions. I think it is related to the completion of the tenures. So, if officer or staff member has completed his three or four years tenure, whatever is the mandatory tenure, then he/she has got to go back and then a replacement has to arrive. Therefore, it was in that spirit, and this was a normal administrative practice, which has been accomplished. As regards the number of visas issued to the citizens, I have seen some reports from our High Commissioner that reflect a certain amount of visas to Indian nationals. Sikh Yatrees and other pilgrims from Indian side were issued visas in quite a significant number, but regular citizens are quite few. I am not aware of exact number, but I think in single digit. But I can check the exact figure and get back.

(Syeda Qurat ul Ain, Independent Urdu):    Several human rights organizations, including Amnesty International, have raised serious concerns about the security and human rights situation in AJK. Some members of the UK Parliament have also called for an investigation into the security situation, particularly in Mirpur and Muzaffarabad. How concerned are you about these allegations, and how do you respond to the criticism being raised internationally? Second, where does the Islamabad MOU stand today? Can it still be regarded as an effective framework, or has it effectively ceased to function? Some critics argue that it was drafted and concluded too hastily without addressing key issues. How do you respond to those concerns?

Spokesperson:    Firstly, on AJK elections: AJK elections are part of the routine democratic exercise as per the rules and constitutions of the territory. The elections were held. I am not aware of anything communicated through diplomatic channels. Perhaps you are referring to the media commentary on that, including by civil society. So, we will respond accordingly with anything that comes up in future. The election-related matter is being taken care of by the AJK Home Department, Election Commissioner, the Ministry of Interior and Ministry of Kashmir Affairs. So, at this stage I can refer you to them for a comment. 

As regards the Islamabad MOU, we have already stated that Islamabad MOU remains the only template for the parties to come back to the negotiations table. So, it is a foundational document. It is a foundation for peace process that may be restarted in the future. There is no question of it being dead or alive. The fact is that it is very relevant. Its template is there for the parties to revert back. Not just the Islamabad MOU, but also the Pakistan Qatar Joint Statement, to which both parties had also agreed that this would be the framework for the technical level talks. So, both these documents, Islamabad MOU and Pakistan Qatar Joint Statement continue to remain relevant.

(Waseem Abbasi, Arab News):    There are reports in media that Saudi Arabia has rolled over $5 billion debt for three years. Do you confirm these reports?

Spokesperson:    I will refer you to Ministry of Finance.

(Kiran Butt, The Khorasan Diary):    Sir, on July 28, United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan released their quarterly human rights report in which they mentioned that 500 civilians were killed in Afghanistan due to Pakistan-Afghanistan cross-border fighting between October and June. I am quoting UNAMA, United Nations. So, my question to you is that every time Pakistan strikes Afghanistan, mostly the statement is now coming from MOIB, where they say that they have credible intelligence and most of the time, visuals also come that they have targeted the terrorist hideouts. On the other hand, UNAMA is saying that 500 civilians were killed, not the terrorists. So, your take on this report? Are you going to reject it or say that this is right?

Spokesperson:    We obviously do not corroborate these figures. And I have stated numerous times in several responses, particularly one I think last week and a week before that on this issue – what we have done is to ensure due diligence and utmost care in striking the military targets. The problem in Afghanistan, particularly with the Taliban forces is that they tend to exaggerate. Moreover, security forces on terrorist outfits do not have a particular uniform – so they are guised as a civilian. The number of militants killed, and particularly TTP and their supporters in their headquarters in Afghanistan – they don't wear a particular uniform. They do not wear any badge on their sleeves to tell that they are combatants. I think this is one of the practical problems, which the UN and others should look into. We are engaged in dialogue with the United Nations on this issue. We totally reject the insinuation of killing of civilians because of our attack. Our attacks are precisely targeted at combatants, terrorists, and their masterminds and their bosses who are based in Afghanistan and who are recruiting Afghan nationals for committing acts of terrorism in Pakistan. I think this is an issue that needs to be internalized, thought through, chewed, and digested by our media – there are terrorist elements operating from Afghanistan including Afghan nationals who are committing terrorist acts in Pakistan. So, we have to take measures for the security of our citizens and the security of our law enforcement agencies. We will continue to do so in future.

(Tahir Khan, NNI):    My question is regarding Afghanistan, there were some incidents in Badakhshan province in recent days. In which there was a fall of one of their districts, also there were some skirmishes on borders. Afghan Taliban Army Chief Fasihuddin Fitrat, when there was a clash near the border of Chitral, said that the people came from Chitral, Zebak district and then after their operation, they went back and he also claims that those people were found in Pakistan. So, what are your comments on it? An in the last briefing you talked about 16,000 Afghans that they were identified and were given visas or allowed. Kindly shed some light on this.

(Azaz Syed, Geo News):    Sir, there are some reports generating regarding a force i.e., Sipahiyan e Mahin. And this force also occupied Badakhsan in the past which was led by Qayum Malang. What is Pakistan’s position regarding this force or what information do we have regarding this force? 

Spokesperson:    On anti-Taliban forces in Badakshan and in border near Chitral: Tahir Sahab you Azaz Sahab asked, I have no information. I am not aware of who these people are and what are their motives. We have no comment to make on this issue. 

On 16,000 Afghan nationals – the question last week was that Pakistan is forcefully expelling Afghan nationals. To which I had responded that no, this is not the case. We have not expelled anybody with legal and valid visas or travel authorization to stay in Pakistan. 89,000 was the figure that was being processed under this IFRC, and the question was that once they go back to Afghanistan, they could be facing persecution and maltreatment and human rights abuses and so on. So, we had said that we have identified 16,000 women, children, the elderly, who are vulnerable, and for them the facility to extend their stay in Pakistan was being provided. So, this is the figure that I got from the relevant authorities. And this, I believe, is an approximate figure. So, it could be plus minus a few 100, and this is what the information I have right now. 

This figure, how much of them have been sent back, and how much have been given extension of stay – this is an ongoing information which I can check and revert. 

As regards the Anti-Taliban forces or captures of certain areas by them in Badakshan and reported by BBC, the information coming out of Afghanistan needs to be verified from the ground. This is the problem with this country, and this is problem back to the Kiran's question also about civilian casualties. So, I think the question should be from the BBC and not from me, because they are coming up with this from a place where we do not have a presence, particularly in Badakhshan and where this incident take place in that area. So, in Afghanistan, if some armed group had taken a certain territory, captured it, it would not be surprising. But for me to comment on it without a full 180-degree visibility would be premature. I am declining myself from a comment and I hope you would understand my constraints on this.

(Abdullah Mohmand):    Sir, as you spotlighted two questions in response of two questions regarding the security situation and specifically Afghanistan. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan are witnessing board security situation this time. Our borders are fenced, as per the in more than 800,000 sub-1 refugees sent back to Afghanistan. Our old strategic assets are ruling Afghanistan this time. Once our favorite, but still our security situation is very worst in Pakistan. So, do you believe that our internal security policy is outdated? Our counterterrorism strategy is not working? We should change it because the border is fenced? 100 1000s of Afghan refugees has been sent back to Afghanistan. Our old strategic assets are ruling Afghanistan, but still, the terrorism is on peak.

Spokesperson:    The internal security is the mandate of the Ministry of Interior and our law enforcement agencies. To the extent of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, our mandate is to brief you about its external dimension. I can tell you that we are cognizant of the mandate of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. In this regard, we basically explain to international audience and to relevant platforms, particularly in the UN, about this counterterrorism and these security challenges and their links externally. So, this is one part. The hardcore issue if you are seeking a comment or a critique of Pakistan's internal security or returning refugees, I would refer you to the Ministry of Interior or to the concerned quarters. 

(Asghar Ali Mubarak, The Daily Mail International/AAM News): Sir, as we are talking about different agreements and different templates. As Pakistan is a stakeholder in Gaza Peace Board and is playing indispensable role for Palestine. What is Pakistan’s role in recent developments? 

Spokesperson:    The situation in Palestine is quite grave, particularly in the West Bank, where the settlement activities and settlers’ violence are going on. We have expressed our position quite clear in our national capacity, as well as Group of Eight Arab Islamic countries. I understand that during the telephone conversation of our Deputy Prime Minister/ Foreign Minister, Senator Mohammad Ishaq Dar, with his counterpart from Jordan, this issue was raised, and I believe that some event is being planned to be hosted by Jordan on this issue. Jordan, as you know, has a direct stake in it, being in proximity to the West Bank and having certain legal status with respect to the Al-Aqsa Mosque. So, this event will take place. We would continue to highlight Palestine at all multilateral forums in our national capacity, and as well as in the Board of Peace as and when it is convened.

(Faisal Pasha, We News):    How Pakistan views a very generous defence deal being given to Israel by the U.S. and would this impact rather aggravate the security situation in Gulf region?

Spokesperson:    Israel-U.S. defense cooperation is not new. So we have no comment to offer.

(Shaukat Piracha, AAJ News):    At least a ray of hope from your excellency that the two sides they are talking to each other. My question is that given non-state actors or the proxies or certain fractured elements of some states, they are throwing projectiles inside Saudi Arabia on the oil installations or elsewhere, then Kuwait Defence Pact that you welcomed yesterday, and with Bahrain or Jordan, we have a robust defence cooperation. So, how Pakistan obligation is enhanced given the security threats to particularly Saudi Arabia under the Strategic Defence cooperation agreements?

Spokesperson:    As I said, we will implement all our defense cooperation agreements, not just with Saudi Arabia, but with all our Gulf partners. You saw the Pakistan-Kuwait defence agreement. There are similar agreements with some other Gulf partners as well. So, we will fulfill all our obligations. Pakistan defense sector already provides considerable training, joint exercises, dialogues with relevant armed forces of these countries. So, we will fulfill our obligations. These defense agreement does not mean that there has to be a war and then these with be activated. The substance of this agreement is geared towards the peacetime cooperation. When war takes place, obviously the two sides see how far these agreements are to be implemented. 

We should avoid any speculative mindset about the future or paint a doomsday scenario and then ask questions on what will happen on a given doomsday. We in diplomacy precisely avoid doomsday scenarios. As such, the focus of these defense cooperation agreements is robust defence military to military cooperation during peacetimes in order to build strength of our partners to avoid war and to avoid the particular doomsday – the day that seems to have captured the imagination of our journalist friends when asking such questions.

(Azaz Syed, Geo News):    You've rightly pointed out about the doomsday scenario, which journalists we often paint. But the objective of this is for having a better strategy. In this context, what Paracha Sahab has said, we are mediators. We have a neutral role, and being mediators, we also have defence agreements with some of the key players who are taking part in this conflict. So many people are raising questions and concerns at a time when we are, you know, mediator. We are having defence agreements with the countries which are, in one way or the other, they are part of this conflict. So, are we confident that our role as a mediator will not be compromised? Whatever defense agreements we make or we plan to make.

Spokesperson:    First, very simple answer: mediation and defense cooperation are not mutually exclusive or contradictory. When we say that we are the mediators, and we have a defence cooperation agreement, the two roles do not cut across each other. No Sir, our role as mediator is not compromised by the fact that we have defence agreement. The defence agreement in no way cuts down our role as mediator – the two operate in their own streams. I think you should have enough confidence on Pakistan's diplomacy, this ministry, the military diplomacy, and all government institutions led by the Prime Minister, to take into account all these nuances. You are basically Azaz Sahab talking of nuances. So we take account all these nuances as we go forward. Under the leadership of the Prime Minister, the Chief of Defence Forces, our own Deputy Prime Minister Foreign Minister, this ministry, and all other relevant institutions are fully geared to take into account all these nuances that you have mentioned. We can play our role smoothly with all wherewithal that the State of Pakistan possesses.

(Syeda Qurat ul Ain, Independent Urdu):    How does Pakistan see the current escalation in the region where Iran's proxies are now directly involved in the conflict, including the Iraqi militias and the Houthis. At the same time, Iran has continued its attacks on its neighbors, with the escalation now reaching Egypt. How does Pakistan assess these developments?

Spokesperson:    I have already explained, and when you will see the transcript, you will find the answer of this question.

(Muhammad Anas Ahsan Mallick, Asia One News): Couple of questions. You have been a bit self-contradictory today. In your opening statement, you said that negotiations are continuing in the between the parties on the Strait of Hormuz. Then, in response to Annie and Paracha Sahab, you said that we hope that the parties get back to the negotiating table. So, what is the status of the negotiations? Number one, number two, in the opening statement, you said that Pakistan is hosting the Commonwealth Heads of States meeting next year. Was that a slip of tongue, or is that… That what you said in the opening statement. And number three, with regards to the situation, we have seen a lot of critique coming in from the Indian Ministry of External Affairs, and you know the usual what about free and rights that they do. Any comments that you might have to offer on that?

Spokesperson:    First of all, there is no contradiction. When I said that hope the parties are back on the negotiation table, I meant in the follow up of the Pakistan Qatar Joint Statements and in the context of the technical level talks. This is what I meant that back to the negotiation table for the technical level talks which provided framework for the sustainable settlement of this issue. The negotiations are ongoing to de-escalate this acute crisis resulting from over maybe 10, 15 days of heightened strikes and escalations, and is now the relative calm. So, negotiations are taking place with respect to the current situation. Our urge for them to return to the table was with reference to the technical level talks. So, this is one question. 

SCO Summit Pakistan will hold in 2027 and what I meant.  In 2024 was that there was a SCO Council of Heads of Government (CHG). So, sequence is Council of Heads of Government (CHG) in 2024, Summit in 2027. Please do not take me to more tongue twisters.

Secondly on AJK: India is not in a position to conflate the situations (in IIOJ&K and AJK) we totally reject Indian remarks. These remarks have been coming with so many Indian leaders speaking on this issue that it is not possible for me to respond to each one of them. We have issued a blanket response, condemning any Indian efforts to conflate the grave, precarious human rights situation in the Indian Illegally Occupied Kashmir with that of AJK, where the situation remains in the context of the constitutional changes that a certain section of the society intends to make in the constitution of AJK. The inherent Right to Self-determination of the people of Jammu and Kashmir is supported by Pakistan, and that the expression of that Right to Self-determination is to be through a UN-administered plebiscite, to which Pakistan is ready and India is not. So that fundamental question, that fundamental difference remains between our two positions.

(Muhammad Saleh Zafir, The News):    Sir, you have partly responded my question, which I am going to make. May I draw your attention toward a statement by your counterpart from New Delhi. He was pained about the outcome of the polls in Azad Kashmir's first phase. I need your comment on this. And second, he also adversely commented about the law-and-order situation, which is sponsored by India in Azad Kashmir.

Spokesperson:    We totally reject such comments. As I said in my previous answer, we totally reject the comments made by India with respect to Azad Jammu and Kashmir. The fundamental difference has to be understood. The people of AJK express their democratic right through elections this week. Prior to that, the political agitation was on account of a change of constitution in Azad Jammu and Kashmir. That change is to be accomplished through a democratic exercise, so that the constitution of AJK can be amended, and this is the situation. The fundamental question on the disputed nature of the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir stands. The imperative of the Right to Self-determination of the Kashmiris and its fulfillment stand. The need for that right to be exercised through a UN administered plebiscite stands, and Pakistan support all these rights. Can India claim to support all these rights? India is an illegal occupation of the territory of the Jammu and Kashmir that it has held since 1947, 48. So, this is what the situation is. I think there needs to be an appreciation of this fundamental difference.

(Anwer Abbas, 24 News):    I just want to know that with how many Gulf countries we have defense deals and the defense cooperation agreements at the moment, total number. And secondly, with how many organizations we have defense deals like we are providing weapons to Khalifa Haftar, which is not recognized by UN unity government or United Nations and even our Saudi allies and other allies of Pakistan.

Spokesperson:    I will have to check how many defence deals. I would not want to be seen to be ducking under this question. But essentially, the defense agreements are in purview of the Ministry of Defence. So you should ask these questions from the Ministry of Defence. But I can check how many. We have robust defence cooperation with GCC. So, I would not be surprised if we have defense agreements with quite a few countries. I will have to check on that. 

On Libya, our position is well noted. We have often stated it from here as well when relevant debates takes place at the UN, particularly the UN Security Council, which remains seized of the situation of Libya.