A recent opinion piece has sharply criticized Pakistan’s military leadership, claiming that a proposal to deploy Pakistani troops to Gaza ended in serious embarrassment for Islamabad. The editorial alleges that when the plan was discussed, Israel responded with what it described as a counter-offer, valuing the deployment at approximately US $100 per soldier, a figure the article suggests has raised outrage and humiliation among observers. The situation has been portrayed as damaging to Pakistan’s image, with critics arguing that the military appeared eager to engage in an overseas mission without assessing the wider implications.

The commentary also questions the balance of authority between Pakistan’s civilian government and its military establishment. It suggests that decisions surrounding the Gaza proposal may have been taken without full consultation with elected officials, renewing concerns about the military’s influence in matters of foreign policy and national strategy. The phrase “army for sale” has been used by critics to illustrate the perceived erosion of institutional dignity and public confidence.

For General Asim Munir, who took charge as Chief of Army Staff in November 2022, the episode is described as a significant setback. What was initially projected as a move to reinforce Pakistan’s solidarity with the broader Muslim world is now being portrayed as a miscalculation that has drawn ridicule. According to the editorial, the alleged valuation of soldiers has also affected morale within parts of the military community, who view the issue as diminishing the honor traditionally associated with service.

Analysts note that beyond reputational damage, the incident could have wider strategic consequences. Pakistan occupies a key geopolitical position between the Middle East and South Asia, and critics argue that such controversies may weaken its diplomatic standing. Domestic response has also been intense, with many social media discussions reflecting anger, disbelief, and deep concern about how military personnel are being represented in international negotiations.

Looking ahead, several questions remain unanswered: whether Pakistan’s civilian leadership will seek clarity on how the proposal was formulated, whether the military will offer an official explanation of the negotiations, and how Pakistan will navigate the perception that its troops were treated as expendable assets.

Although official statements from Islamabad have so far been limited, the “$100 per soldier” narrative continues to circulate widely and may have already created long-term challenges for both Pakistan’s military leadership and its broader diplomatic image.