rki.news

Altaf Hamid Rao.

MIRPUR ( AJK): January 21 : Ambassador Masood Khan, ex President of Azad Jammu and Kashmir and former Pakistan Ambassador to the United States and the United Nations, said that the proposed multi-tiered governance and stabilization framework for Gaza—anchored in President Donald Trump’s 20-point formula—will remain operational only so long as President Trump personally drives and sustains it.

Talking to our Special Jammu Kashmir state Correspondent Altaf Hamid Rao on Wednesday, he emphasized that the plan does not represent a sudden innovation but rather a formalization of ideas and structures that had been circulating earlier, now consolidated into a comprehensive roadmap.

Ambassador Khan explained that the framework envisages a three-tier structure, headed by a “Board of Peace” chaired by President Trump himself, followed by an Executive Board, and a localized administrative tier for Gaza. He noted that the administrative layer would include Palestinian participation, including individuals with prior ministerial experience in the occupied Palestinian territories, thereby giving the arrangement a limited municipal character while reserving strategic authority at the top.

He said the plan’s viability hinges largely on political realities rather than institutional design. As long as President Trump’s political authority remains intact, the structure is likely to function, he observed, pointing out that the Board and Executive tiers are populated by individuals closely aligned with the U.S. President, including senior cabinet members, national security officials, and long-standing associates from political and business circles.

Ambassador Khan noted that the inclusion of figures linked to real estate and reconstruction underscores the economic and redevelopment focus of the initiative. He said initial signals suggest that war-weary residents of Gaza, devastated by prolonged destruction and loss of life, may be willing to cooperate if the arrangement delivers basic security and a semblance of normal life, even though full freedom and sovereignty remain elusive and large areas are still under Israeli control.

Referring to security arrangements, he said that overall responsibility rests with an International Stabilization Force led by a U.S. general, effectively placing security decision-making in American hands, with Israel acting in coordination. In contrast, Palestinians would exercise limited authority akin to municipal administration, while major political and strategic decisions would be taken by the Board of Peace.

Addressing perceptions that the initiative represents an alternative to the United Nations system, Ambassador Khan rejected the notion that the UN’s failure in Gaza reflected institutional collapse. He asserted that paralysis at the Security Council resulted solely from repeated U.S. vetoes, not from opposition by other permanent members. “The UN was prevented from acting; it did not choose inaction,” he said, cautioning against shifting blame to multilateral institutions.

He observed that while President Trump appears inclined toward unilateral or alternative mechanisms, key U.S. allies in Europe, Canada, Australia, and beyond remain unconvinced of any single-country-led substitute for the UN framework. He added that voices of dissent are already emerging within Europe, while the Global South remains fragmented and has yet to articulate a collective position.

On Pakistan’s role, Ambassador Khan described Pakistan’s reported invitation to participate as a diplomatic development of significance, reflecting growing international recognition of Pakistan’s constructive engagement. He recalled Pakistan’s earlier role—along with other Muslim countries—in urging President Trump to support a ceasefire in Gaza, noting that such engagement contributed to temporary de-escalation.

However, he urged extreme caution in determining Pakistan’s level of participation. He said the matter requires thorough consultation within Pakistan’s National Security Committee and dialogue with political forces and stakeholders, emphasizing that any decision must align with national principles and public sentiment. He noted that participation modalities vary widely among invited states, ranging from heads of government to ministers and security officials.

Ambassador Khan also drew attention to reported financial conditions attached to participation, including substantial funding expectations, which have already prompted some countries and prominent individuals to step back. He said these developments reinforce the need for Pakistan to proceed carefully and deliberately.

Concluding his remarks, Ambassador Masood Khan described the issue as highly sensitive and of strategic consequence, stressing that Pakistan must balance diplomatic opportunity with principled restraint. “Any step forward,” he said, “must reflect the will of the people, national consensus, and Pakistan’s long-standing position on Palestine.”