Pakistan has categorically rejected a Financial Times (FT) report published on October 3 that claimed “advisers to Field Marshal Asim Munir” had approached United States officials with a proposal to build a new Arabian Sea port at Pasni, Balochistan.

The FT Report on Pasni Port Proposal for US faced swift backlash for relying on anonymous sources and contradictory claims about Pakistan’s alleged outreach to Washington. The British daily later quietly corrected the piece on October 4. FT’s own correction acknowledged that the story “required clarification,” following extensive feedback from Pakistani officials who provided factual detail after the original publication.

What Pakistan Says

Senior security officials told state-run Pakistan Television that “there has been no official communication with Washington and no plan to hand over any port to a foreign power.”

“Conversations with private companies were exploratory, not official initiatives,” one senior security official said on condition of anonymity.
“The Chief of Army Staff does not have advisers in any official capacity. Linking these ideas directly to him is misleading and inaccurate.”

The official added that “Pasni’s location may make it geopolitically significant, but it is only an idea, not a policy or initiative.”

Pasni, a coastal town of roughly 70,000 people in Gwadar district, has long been discussed for potential maritime development due to its naturally deep waters. However, authorities stressed that no formal feasibility, agreement, or government directive has been issued for any such project.

What FT Originally Claimed

The FT Report on Pasni Port Proposal for US alleged that advisers to Pakistan’s army chief had “pitched” a plan to US officials to build and operate a new port in Pasni to facilitate access to Pakistan’s critical-mineral reserves.
It implied the initiative was linked to high-level meetings in Washington last month, where Field Marshal Munir accompanied Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif to the White House for discussions with President Donald Trump.

The FT story further said the proposal was “shared with Munir” ahead of that meeting and envisioned US investors developing the port and a railway network connecting Pasni to Pakistan’s mineral-rich western provinces.
It clarified that the blueprint excluded any US military role, but the framing still sparked intense speculation online, particularly from Indian and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf-aligned social-media accounts portraying it as a “strategic sell-out.”

Response from Islamabad

Officials dismissed the FT Report on Pasni Port Proposal for US as “irresponsible reporting that fuels false narratives.”
One senior official told the Express Tribune, Pakistan’s daily English newspaper, that “conversations or proposals by private individuals or commercial entities are exploratory and should not be construed as state initiatives.”

The same official explained that the Portuguese Mota Engil Group, which operates in 21 countries, had informally discussed a concept of a southern-coast port but “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 Express Tribune also quoted security sources affirming that Pakistan conducts its foreign relations, including those with global powers, strictly in line with national and public interests, and that every major policy decision is shaped by those priorities.
Officials added that Pakistan’s mineral-exploration framework requires “strategic patience and large-scale investment” and will involve partnerships with multiple countries including China, the US, and Saudi Arabia, but only under sovereign regulation.

Arab News Confirmation

According to Arab News, Pakistan’s security officials reiterated to state media that the FT Report on Pasni Port Proposal for US “does not represent government or military policy.”
The paper quoted an official saying:

“There is no plan to hand over Pasni’s security to any foreign power. Linking these ideas directly to the Chief of Army Staff is misleading and inaccurate.”

Arab News added that while conversations with private investors might have occurred, “they were never routed through official channels or reviewed at a strategic level.”
It also noted that the US State Department, White House, and Pakistan’s Foreign Office had not commented on the report.

FT Correction and Aftermath

The Financial Times quietly corrected its October 3 story the following day, admitting that the claims needed clarification and that the story was based on anonymous chatter.
By then, the report had already been weaponized online by Indian and PTI-linked accounts to allege that Pakistan was offering a “US foothold” in Balochistan.

A senior Pakistani security source said the episode underscores “how misinformation spreads, an unverified claim, an anonymous source, and an echo chamber that damages investor confidence.”

“The Army Chief has no advisers; everyone knows this,” another official said. “How FT managed to conjure this up is anyone’s guess.”

Disinformation and Political Spin

Analysts in Islamabad observed that the FT Report on Pasni Port Proposal for US played directly into India’s and PTI’s ongoing information campaigns targeting Pakistan’s leadership.

“Indians and PTI cannot live a day without dragging Field Marshal Munir’s name,” one analyst said. “Their obsession only proves his influence and their own insecurity.”

Officials also criticised PTI’s “sudden love affair with China” despite having “annoyed Beijing so much during its own tenure that CPEC stalled.”
They pointed out that it was “the hard work of Pakistan’s civil and military leadership that revived China’s trust and put Gwadar projects back on track.”

The same officials dismissed attempts to frame Pakistan’s outreach to Washington as anti-China, calling it “intellectual dishonesty.”

“Despite disputes, China trades $100 billion with India and $600 billion with the US,” one source noted. “Economic relations are not zero-sum equations; diversification is diplomacy, not duplicity.”

Wider Geopolitical Context

Observers and analysts note that the FT Report on Pasni Port Proposal for US, if true, would have implications for US-China competition in the Indian Ocean, as China already maintains a major presence in Gwadar.

But Islamabad insists that there is no new alignment at play.

“Pakistan will continue to pursue balanced and sovereign partnerships,” a senior security source said. “Whether it’s Beijing, Washington, or Riyadh, our decisions will always reflect national interests, not external pressure.”

Officials further reiterated that Pakistan’s position on Israel remains unchanged:

“There has been no change in Pakistan’s longstanding policy. Pakistan is not recognising Israel,” they said, stressing that the country’s immediate priority is “to stop the ongoing genocide in Gaza and ensure unhindered humanitarian aid.”

Correction Acknowledged, Damage Done

Despite the FT’s post-publication correction, analysts say the episode illustrates how premature reporting can inflame geopolitical speculation.

“The FT itself corrected its story, vindicating Pakistan,” a senior security official said. “But once disinformation circulates, its damage lingers.”

Experts noted that the incident coincided with a rise in online propaganda by Indian and PTI-linked networks, echoing similar tactics used in past narratives against Pakistan’s defence leadership.

In Islamabad’s view, such disinformation “isn’t journalism, it’s narrative warfare.”

Pakistan’s Sovereign Course Ahead

Pakistan maintains that no offer or proposal has been made to the United States regarding any Arabian Sea port, nor is there any plan to grant foreign security control over national assets. Officials emphasise that all investment and infrastructure proposals pass through institutional, transparent channels under state regulation.

They insist the FT report was based on speculation, not evidence, and that all investment proposals are evaluated transparently through institutional channels.

“Our diplomacy is about diversification, not dependence,” one senior official said. “We pursue cooperation with every state that respects Pakistan’s sovereignty and shares our vision for stability and prosperity.”

“Balancing global partnerships is diplomacy, not duplicity,” a senior official concluded. “Those misreading it are either geopolitically naïve, or deliberately dishonest”, the security source added.

Also See: Pakistan’s Gemstones, Rare Earths, and the Politics of Disinformation