6 hours ago
12
Islamabad, Pakistan – A new survey indicates nearly three-quarters of Pakistanis support deploying troops to the Gaza Strip as part of an International Stabilisation Force (ISF).
The findings of the poll by Gallup Pakistan come as media reports suggested Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif will attend the first formal meeting of United States President Donald Trump’s Board of Peace (BoP) on February 19, a body Pakistan joined alongside several other Muslim-majority countries last month.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 items- list 1 of 4Israel’s Gaza genocide risks global order, leaders warn at Al Jazeera Forum
- list 2 of 4Trump’s ‘Board of Peace’ to convene in Washington, discuss Gaza: Report
- list 3 of 4Can Pakistan join the Gaza stabilisation force without facing backlash?
- list 4 of 4Trump’s ‘Board of Peace’: Who has joined, who hasn’t – and why
The Gallup poll, conducted from January 15 to February 3, surveyed 1,600 respondents through random telephone interviews. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 2 to 3 percentage points at a 95 percent confidence level.
According to Bilal Gilani, executive director of Gallup Pakistan, the results paint a picture of a nation deeply engaged with the Palestinian cause yet divided on how best to pursue it and uncertain about the political structures being built around Gaza’s future.
The ISF was proposed along with Trump’s BoP in September on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York. They were part of a 20-point plan Trump proposed to try to end the war in Gaza. The plan began with a “ceasefire” that started in October. In later stages, the international peacekeeping force is to be created and deployed to provide security and oversight of the “truce” between Hamas and Israel in Gaza.
The Board of Peace was initially framed as a mechanism to support the administration, reconstruction and economic recovery of Gaza.
The White House formally announced its creation in January. However, the organisation’s 11-page charter does not mention Gaza once.
Permanent membership on the board requires a $1bn contribution for a three-year term although the UN Security Council resolution establishing it limits its mandate in Gaza until the end of 2027.
The board includes countries with sharply different relationships with Israel, from Muslim-majority states that have normalised ties to others, such as Pakistan, that do not recognise Israel but have participated in diplomatic efforts to end its genocidal war on Gaza.
Divided views
The Gallup Pakistan survey’s central finding is unambiguous: 73 percent of Pakistanis support sending a contingent of the country’s military to Gaza with 55 percent expressing “strong” support and 18 percent “slight” support.
Opposition was limited. Only 6 percent opposed the deployment while 16 percent were undecided.
Gilani said the most striking takeaway is the divergence between Pakistan’s elites and the broader public.
“The public opinion, at least in my reading, with respect to sending troops to Gaza is more unanimous whereas joining BoP is a little divided but still more in support of joining, so I think this is an interesting juncture where elite and public opinion varies,” he told Al Jazeera.
Salman Shahid, a 29-year-old lawyer in Lahore, said Pakistan’s diplomatic standing improves when it acts as a “voice of reason, law and unity, not when it rushes into confrontational positions”.
“A mature, lawful and humanitarian approach strengthens our credibility far more than military posturing. However, any military involvement outside Pakistan’s borders must strictly follow Pakistan’s Constitution and must align with UN mandates,” Shahid told Al Jazeera.
Masroor Hussain, 33, a software developer from Karachi, said Pakistan should avoid joining the stabilisation force but believes participation in Trump’s board could be beneficial.
Despite criticism, the body is currently the only platform offering countries a role in shaping a resolution to the Gaza war while potentially providing a long-term solution, he said.
“Pakistan being in BoP will mean it is more involved in the Middle East as far as talks go, but how it turns into something concrete for Pakistan is hard to say as the region has multiple sides with their own agendas,” Hussain told Al Jazeera.
Pakistani peacekeepers are deployed with the UN’s stabilisation force in the Democratic Republic of the Congo [File: Glody Murhabazi/AFP]‘Vague objectives’
Support cuts across demographic lines although with variations. About 78 percent of men backed a troop deployment to Gaza compared with 68 percent of women. Urban residents showed stronger support at 84 percent compared with 67 percent in rural areas.
Education appeared less decisive. About 67 percent of respondents with less than a high school diploma supported a deployment compared with 84 percent of those with post-secondary educations.
Anam Nadeem, 38, a communications professional from Sialkot, is firmly opposed.
“The ISF’s role, leadership and objectives are vague, and it appears to be aligned with a US-led framework that lacks broad regional legitimacy. Joining such a force risks placing Pakistan in direct conflict with Palestinian factions, including Hamas, potentially against the will of the Palestinian people,” she said.
Pakistan is neither politically nor strategically prepared for a military entanglement in Gaza under unclear terms, Nadeem said.
“Without a transparent mandate, UN authorisation and explicit Palestinian consent, supporting this decision would be irresponsible,” she added.
These concerns echo conditions highlighted in the survey. A joint alliance of Muslim countries emerged as the most crucial prerequisite for deployment with 64 percent rating it “important” and 35 percent calling it “very important”.
A formal request from the Palestinian leadership was deemed necessary by 86 percent of respondents while 81 percent said UN approval was essential.
Approval from major powers, including the US and China, ranked lowest. Only 47 percent considered it important while 30 percent viewed it as unimportant.
Pro-Palestinian protesters in Dublin, Ireland, in January 2026 [File: Clodagh Kilcoyne/Reuters]Uncertain framework
Although Pakistan accepted an invitation to join the Board of Peace during a signing ceremony at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, last month, the Gallup poll suggested significant uncertainty. About 39 percent of respondents said they’re unsure about the move.
About 34 percent expressed happiness at Pakistan becoming part of the board while 23 percent were unhappy.
Gilani said this ambivalence likely reflects limited public information about the body’s mandate and the contours of any potential troop deployment.
“I think there is obviously this aspect that if the military force has to be directly in confrontation with Hamas and is used for disarming them, then I think that the public opinion might not remain in favour of it,” he said.
“Public opinion right now operates from a limited information standpoint. But even from that standpoint, it seems to be overall in support.”
Nadeem said he remained sceptical, warning that the timing and political context could make participation appear as an endorsement of actions shaped by “bad-faith actors” rather than an inclusive peace process.
“If the BoP delivers real, tangible benefits for Palestinians, engagement makes sense. Otherwise, it risks becoming symbolic optics rather than a meaningful step toward peace,” she said.
Pakistan’s credibility, Nadeem added, “ultimately depends on principled alignment with peace, justice and Palestinian rights – not just strategic proximity to powerful actors”.
Calculated gamble?
Throughout 2025, Field Marshal Asim Munir, Pakistan’s military chief, emerged as a central figure in the country’s diplomatic manoeuvring.
In June, Munir had a solo White House lunch with Trump, the first time a US president hosted a Pakistani army chief without civilian officials present.
Pakistan also attended a conference organised by the US military’s Central Command in Qatar in December in which representatives from nearly 45 countries discussed the operational framework of a peacekeeping force for Gaza.
Officials have repeatedly stressed no final decision has been made. They say any deployment would require a “transparent, politically neutral mandate focused on humanitarian stabilisation rather than disarmament of Palestinian groups”.
Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar also stated in December that while Pakistan could consider contributing peacekeepers, “disarming Hamas is not our job.”
The prospect of a military deployment has historical parallels, particularly the disputed role of Pakistani soldiers in Jordan during the 1970 Black September crisis. While Pakistan maintains its troops were only training Jordanian forces and did not engage in combat, the episode remains politically sensitive.
Abdul Basit, a former Pakistani diplomat and envoy to India, told Al Jazeera that although the UN established Trump’s BoP specifically for Gaza, Washington appears to view it much more broadly.
“The irony is President Trump is not talking about the state of Palestine. How can a one-sided ceasefire be termed as peace … as Palestinians continue living under Israeli occupation?” he asked.
Basit was unequivocal that Pakistan “should not be part of any exercise that seeks to disarm Palestinians”.
“Armed struggle against foreign occupation is legitimate in international law and in conformity with the UN Charter. If push comes to shove, Pakistan may send its medical and engineering corps. That would go down well with Palestinians,” he said.
Uzair Younus, a partner at The Asia Group, a Washington, DC-based geopolitical consulting firm, said the survey suggested Pakistanis have a pragmatic view.
“The results are not surprising but do show that compared to elites, ordinary citizens do have a more measured perspective on Pakistan’s policy choices,” Younus told Al Jazeera.
The findings offer guidance to the government as it communicates Pakistan’s potential role to stabilise Gaza, likely tied to broader efforts by Middle East powers, he added.
“The regional push is being led by Saudi Arabia and Turkiye, in particular, and so long as Pakistan remains in close coordination with these countries, engagement in the ISF and BoP is unlikely to create major risks for Islamabad,” Younus said.
