A senior security official has said that Chief of the Army Staff Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir does not have any advisers in an official capacity.
The statement came a day after the British daily newspaper Financial Times (FT) referred to so-called “advisers to army chief Field Marshal Asim Munir” in a report on a proposed port along the Arabian Sea.
The official stated that “conversations or proposals by private individuals or commercial entities are exploratory and should not be construed as state initiatives.”
According to the FT report, the plan envisions American investors building and operating a terminal in Pasni, Balochistan, designed to facilitate access to Pakistan’s critical mineral resources.
The security official explained that a concept of port on the southern coast also surfaced in private discussions with Mota Engil Group. “It has not been submitted through official channels, has not been reviewed at any strategic or governmental level, and remains a commercial idea pending appropriate consideration.”
The FT report follows a high-level meeting in September, during which Field Marshal Munir accompanied Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif to the White House for talks with US President Donald Trump. During the meeting, the prime minister invited American companies to invest in Pakistan’s agriculture, technology, mining, and energy sectors.
According to the FT report, the port proposal was floated with some US officials and was shared with Field Marshal Munir ahead of the White House meeting.
The blueprint excludes the use of the port for US military purposes and instead aims to attract development finance for a rail network linking the proposed terminal to mineral-rich western provinces, the report added.
The security official said, “The [FT] piece acknowledges it is not official policy, yet implies a link to the army chief — which is not accurate.”
Security sources have said Pakistan’s foreign relations, counter terrorism strategy, and mineral development policies are all anchored in protecting the state’s national interest, dismissing speculation about shifts in longstanding positions.
“International relations and bilateral ties between states depend on mutual national interest,” the sources said, adding that “Pakistan conducts its relations with other countries and world powers while safeguarding the interests of the state and its people. Every decision is made in Pakistan’s interest and will continue to be so.”
Addressing Pakistan’s coastal development potential, the security sources noted that “there is considerable potential for small and large commercial ports along Pakistan’s coastline.” They added that countries routinely assess such partnership opportunities and that “in this context Pakistan’s interests will be given priority.”
On plans to develop the country’s minerals and mining sector, the security sources said the effort will require “strategic patience and substantial investment.”
“Pakistan will explore its deposits with the participation of various countries, companies and investors,” they said. “China, the United States, Saudi Arabia, or any country that is willing to participate — Pakistan will enter partnerships according to its national interests and ground realities.”
The sources described the Financial Times article on a proposed port as essentially outlining a public-private partnership. “The article published in the Financial Times is actually based on a proposal for a public-private partnership,” they said.
