Transcript of the Press Briefing by the Spokesperson on Wednesday 02nd September 2026

Ladies and Gentlemen, Assalam-o-Alaikum.

I welcome you all to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Over the past week, Pakistan remained actively engaged on the diplomatic front, with a series of high-level bilateral, regional, and multilateral engagements aimed at advancing Pakistan's foreign policy priorities and further strengthening relations with key partners.

As we speak, Prime Minister Muhammad Shehbaz Sharif is in Bishkek. Today, the Prime Minister is holding bilateral discussions with President Sadyr Zhaparov on the entire spectrum of Pakistan-Kyrgyzstan bilateral relations. Several important agreements and MoUs have been signed, particularly in the areas of trade, economy, industry, and investment. Just a while ago, our Prime Minister and the Kyrgyz President addressed a Joint Press Stakeout. We will keep you updated on the Prime Minister's engagements today.

Yesterday, the Prime Minister participated in the SCO Council of Heads of State meeting and the SCO Plus Summit. He delivered important statements at both forums, which you have already covered extensively. Several meetings on the sidelines of the Summit were held by the Prime Minister as well as the Deputy Prime Minister/Foreign Minister with their respective counterparts. We have been releasing media readouts of these meetings.

Pakistan has also assumed the Chairmanship of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, during which it will host the next meeting of the SCO Council of Heads of State next year. Pakistan will conduct its Chairmanship under the theme: "Turning Vision into Action: Connectivity, Innovation and Shared Prosperity."

Pakistan looks forward to working closely with SCO member states to advance the Organization's objectives of promoting regional peace and stability, strengthening economic cooperation and connectivity, and fostering shared development and prosperity.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

On 31 August 2026, the inaugural meeting of the Strategic Political and Defence Committee, established under the Makkah Joint Defence Agreement between Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Türkiye, was held in Istanbul.

In the Joint Statement issued at the conclusion of the meeting, the three sides reaffirmed their resolve to work together for regional peace, stability, and de-escalation, including through restraint and the peaceful resolution of crises.

We agreed to further institutionalize cooperation under the Makkah Agreement, strengthening solidarity, collective deterrence and defence, and cooperative security for a just, inclusive, and lasting peace.

A Secretariat, headed by a Secretary-General, will be established in Saudi Arabia, initially led by a Secretary-General from Pakistan for three years.

The three sides will also deepen defence industry cooperation, joint technology development, and production to enhance the capabilities and cohesion of their armed forces, contributing to regional peace and stability.

On the sidelines of the Strategic Political and Defence Committee meeting, the DPM/FM met with the Foreign Minister of Türkiye, Mr. Hakan Fidan. Both sides welcomed the continued strengthening of Pakistan-Türkiye ties across political, economic, security, and cultural spheres. They agreed to convene the next HLSCC (High-Level Strategic Cooperation Council) session soon and reaffirmed close cooperation on regional and international issues to promote peace and stability.

Before reaching Istanbul, the DPM/FM was in London, where he held a series of high-level meetings, including with Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband, Minister of State for Pakistan Stephen Doughty, National Security Adviser Jonathan Powell, Secretary-General of the International Maritime Organization Arsenio Dominguez, and Commonwealth Secretary-General Shirley Botchwey. We have been issuing press releases on these important engagements, which you have all been covering.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Pakistan remains engaged alongside other brotherly states in sincere efforts to resolve the crisis arising from the standoff between Iran and the United States.

In this context, on the sidelines of the SCO Summit, Prime Minister Muhammad Shehbaz Sharif met with the President of Iran, H.E. Masoud Pezeshkian. The two leaders discussed the evolving regional situation. The Prime Minister reiterated Pakistan's sincere commitment to peace through restraint, dialogue, and sustained diplomacy. The understanding reached under the Islamabad MoU offers the most viable pathway towards lasting peace and stability in the region.

The DPM/FM also interacted with the Foreign Minister of Iran, Mr. Abbas Araghchi, on the sidelines of the SCO Summit in Bishkek. The situation in the Gulf and the Middle East was also discussed during our leadership's interactions in Istanbul in the context of the Makkah Agreement meetings.

Earlier, the visit of the Chief of Army Staff and Chief of Defence Forces, Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir, to Iran last week formed part of Pakistan's diplomatic efforts to facilitate an end to the US-Iran conflict and renewed efforts to reopen the strategic Strait of Hormuz. Regional de-escalation, breaking the military stalemate, and exploring a negotiated settlement to restore regional peace and stability were discussed. The visit underscored Islamabad's sincere and constructive role in bridging differences between Washington and Tehran. The CDF's visit to Tehran on 25 August generated momentum, as it was followed by high-level visits from Oman and Qatar. Despite the recent escalation, we remain hopeful and will continue to strive for dialogue and diplomacy.

Finally, Ladies and Gentlemen,

On 1 September 2026, the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) at The Hague reaffirmed that the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) remains fully in force and binding, rejecting India's unilateral attempt to place the Treaty in "abeyance."

The unanimous Award of the Court of Arbitration constitutes an important reaffirmation of the sanctity of the Indus Waters Treaty and the rule of international law. The Court confirmed that India's purported decision to place the Treaty in "abeyance" does not relieve it of its obligations under the Treaty, and that the Treaty's dispute-settlement mechanisms remain operative. The interim measures concerning the Ratle Hydroelectric Plant further affirm that rights and obligations under the Treaty cannot be altered or displaced through unilateral action.

Pakistan welcomes these clear and authoritative pronouncements, which vindicate its consistent position that differences concerning the Indus waters must be addressed strictly within the framework of the Treaty and in accordance with international law.

With that, I conclude my opening statement.

Before I take your questions, let me introduce Ambassador Sajjad Haider Khan, who will be assuming the responsibilities of Spokesperson after this briefing. I take this opportunity to thank you for all your understanding and support extended to me during my tenure as Spokesperson.

Thank You.

***

(Mateen Haider, WE News): So, good wishes. This is your last briefing, and we wish you good luck in your new diplomatic assignment in Geneva as Pakistan's Ambassador. And we also warmly welcome Ambassador Sajjad Haider Sahib. So, the question is: As the last news item that you gave a reaction to was that Pakistan welcomes the decision of the Permanent Court of Arbitration on the Indus Water Treaty, and that decision by the Permanent Court of Arbitration-basically, I've gone through the decision-it has demolished the Indian position, whatever position the Indian government adopted and announced on 22 April. Now, we have also seen the reaction of the Indian Ministry of External Affairs. The Indian Ministry of External Affairs spokesman completely rejected this decision, and as per experts, the rejection is tantamount to an act of war, right? Because there is no other such thing that India can completely reject and term malafide, and so many things they have given. So, your reaction to the Indian MEA reaction by rejecting the Permanent Court of Arbitration decision, which Pakistan has welcomed.

Spokesperson: Thank you for the kind words about me.

India's rejection of the award by the Permanent Court of Arbitration raises concerns that extend well beyond the present dispute. India cannot treat International Law as a matter of convenience, invoking it when useful and discarding it when inconvenient. Nor can it disregard binding treaty obligations and the legal processes to which it freely subscribed, simply because their outcomes are not to its liking. Such an approach by India undermines the sanctity of treaties, erodes confidence in established international dispute settlement mechanisms, and creates adverse precedents for other regions where shared resources are governed through agreed legal frameworks.

Let me add that, in a region as sensitive as South Asia, unilateralism in the management of transboundary water is particularly concerning and inimical to sustainable peace and stability. India should therefore return to full compliance with the treaty, respect the institutional and dispute settlement mechanisms of the treaty, and engage Pakistan constructively within the framework that both countries solemnly accepted.

India's rejection of the award cannot extinguish or otherwise alter India's obligations under the Indus Water Treaty, or its obligations to fulfil the award of the Court of Arbitration.

(Muhammad Saleh Zafir, The News): Let me endorse the sentiments and the views expressed by Mr. Mateen Haider, and I will, kindly let me also permit myself to pay gratitude for your cooperation, patronage, and ably representing the point of view of Pakistan on foreign affairs. And I hope your successor will follow in your footsteps. And my question is about this Permanent Court of Arbitration's judgment. About it, India has discarded it, but according to the information, a team of experts is due in the region to look into the projects on the Indian-occupied Kashmir side as well as in Pakistan. I also wish to know that since it has been indicated, hinted by India that this treaty could be negotiated, do you think that there is any accommodation, any room for negotiability of this treaty?

Spokesperson: I am not particularly aware of any team of experts or any exchange of visit that is to take place under the treaty. Maybe I can check with the relevant quarters and let you know. The Indus Water Treaty is quite clear in its text and spirit. Pakistan is committed to implementing the treaty in earnest, in letter, and in spirit, in accordance with the language and provisions of the treaty. We urge India to reciprocate with the same approach whereby the treaty is upheld in letter, in spirit, and in its full legal documented provisions.

(Kiran Butt, The Khorasan Diary): So, question one is: China's special representative for Afghanistan recently held meetings in Islamabad to explore ways to revive the Urumqi process. Can you share whether a second round of talks is expected to take place anytime soon? And what is our current diplomatic status with Afghanistan, as their ambassador yesterday spoke at the National Defence University? So, any comments from you on that?

Spokesperson: Chinese Special Envoy for Afghanistan Ambassador Yue Xiaoyong was in Pakistan, from 31 August to 1 September. He held detailed discussions with his counterpart, SAPM Ambassador Muhammad Sadiq. Pakistan appreciates China's constructive and sustained engagement on the issues of Afghanistan. We have always remained positively engaged for constructive dialogue on the subject of Afghanistan. However, progress on the matter would depend on the Afghan Taliban regime taking concrete and verifiable action against TTP, BLA, and other terrorist organizations operating from their soil into Pakistan.

Your second question about the envoy's visit to the NDU: envoys visit academic institutions. This is not unusual. Such interaction is no yardstick for measuring bilateral relations between the two sides. As such, we should not read too much into this interaction. This was just in an academic context. I am not aware of any such decision on engagement with Afghanistan. This depends on the assurances provided by the Taliban regime in Afghanistan that their soil will not be used for terrorism against Afghanistan. This we have been reiterating. As such, there is no change in that position.

(Zeeshan Yousafzai, Dunya News): Sir, I have two questions. Number one is regarding the U.S. and Iran. You have said that Pakistan is diplomatically engaged, but last night, we have seen that both countries are in active war. We have witnessed the Field Marshal's visit. After that, multiple contacts. FM Dar met Abbas Araghchi. So, what do you think? Where are we lacking in this diplomatic process? Number one. Number two, let me add to Kiran's questions that when Ambassador Shakib visited NDU, after that, he made his remarks public on Twitter, and after that, the Afghan Embassy's official Twitter handle was deactivated, and now it has been activated when the content has been removed from that X account. So, did you raise this concern with the Afghan Embassy or what?

Spokesperson: On the first part of your question, you used the third word, quote-unquote "active war." There have been armed attacks, and counterattacks and retaliation from both sides. We are closely monitoring the situation. As I have said before, international armed conflicts have their cycles, whereby a period of escalation is followed by relative calm, cessation of hostilities, and eventual return to the negotiating tables. This is the pattern of international armed conflicts. Whilst we remain concerned, and obviously these escalations are not desirable, however, we are not discouraged, and we remain engaged. This escalation should not be termed as a failure of the mediatory process.

Pakistan has remained engaged in complete earnest with the peace process. Our Prime Minister, has been interacting with the leadership. He just met President Pezeshkian in Bishkek two days ago. Our Deputy Prime Minister interacted with the Iranian Foreign Minister in Bishkek. Prior to that, he has held a series of important telephone conversations with his counterparts across the region. The CDF visited Tehran and generated considerable momentum, particularly towards the resolution of the standoff in the Strait of Hormuz.

So, our efforts will continue. We hope that, when the logic of escalation will exhaust-and it should eventually exhaust-the parties would return to the negotiating table. As our Prime Minister stated after his meeting with the Iranian President, let me reiterated that Islamabad MOU and the Pakistan-Qatar Joint Statement provide a framework for the parties to return to the negotiating table and hold dialogue, including technical-level dialogue, for a long-lasting and sustainable settlement of this standoff. We remain engaged with the positivity that it merits.

As regards your second question, this NDU event is a non-issue. We should not read too much into it. This was an academic engagement. I am not aware of what was posted on Twitter and what was deleted of it.

(Naveed Siddiqui, Business Recorder): U.S. President Trump has publicly dismissed the value of an agreement with Iran. Does Pakistan consider it a rejection of the Islamabad MoU? What do you think, sir?

Spokesperson: During periods of escalation, parties to the conflict usually issue statements which seem hard and strong. This is not entirely unexpected. We remain confident. We remain hopeful that whenever the parties return to, or feel that there is a rationality for dialogue prevailing, then the Islamabad MoU provides a framework for such discussions. There's no question of it being alive or dead or half-dead. This for peace is there. Whether the parties agree to resume dialogue, this template of peace, or any similar framework copying this template, will be adopted. We remain positive that the parties will eventually return to the dialogue table.

(Khalid Mahmood, Express News): Sir, the name of the Makkah Agreement has been slightly changed during the Istanbul talks. Please shed light on the reason, and are other Muslim countries joining this agreement as well? Secondly, as the Secretary-General is from Pakistan, are the next round of talks expected to be held in Pakistan?

(Waseem Abbasi, Arab News): We will miss you and your wit and witty comments. It is with reference to Khalid Sahib's question about the Makkah Joint Defence Alliance. The name has not been changed, but the alliance is formed. So, has Pakistan asked for the inclusion of Kuwait and Bahrain in the alliance? And what was the response of the other parties? And also, who will be the new Secretary-General from the Pakistani side?

Spokesperson: First of all, let me refer you to communiqué (Joint Statement) issued after this meeting. It mentions the name - so this is what the name is. So, I am not particularly aware of any formal change of name or what has been added or what has been mixed. The fact is that the Joint Statement is substantive. I think the focus ought to be on the substance of the Joint Statement rather than on any name.

I think this name will eventually, you know, be agreed upon one way or another. For example, the first paragraph says it is the Makkah Agreement for Joint Defence. We have been stating Makkah Joint Defence Agreement (MJDA). We are operating in three different sets of languages: Arabic, Turkish, and English/Urdu. So, these kinds of name changes can occur when the host language is used. It is more or less an issue of language. Eventually, if there is a formal change of name, it will be announced, you will be informed. As regards opening of the agreement to other countries, certain names were mentioned. I am not aware of any particular country. As I said last week, whenever a country wishes to join this agreement with a commitment to collective obligations and common security interests, the case will be examined in close consultation with our partners in Riyadh and Ankara. As such, I am not aware of any applications or any new names thus far.

(Tooba Khan, Bloomberg): I just wanted to take off from Waseem's question. Over the weekend, Dar Sahib mentioned that six to seven Muslim countries are interested in joining the Makkah Pact. Can you share any details with us? I know you've mentioned it. I don't know, but is there anything? And is there any detail that you can share about the framework?

Spokesperson: I am not aware of the list of countries. This may be made public in due course. The communiqué, the joint statement was quite detailed and self-explanatory. So, I would refer you to the joint statement to find out any details with respect to your question.

(Zahid Farooq Malik, Daily Metro Watch): Best wishes to you for your new responsibilities; we have spent a great time together. We will definitely miss you. Regarding the false murder case against Yasin Malik and the affidavit he released yesterday-which includes emotional details about his wife and daughter, and a promise that we will provide diplomatic and moral support-will we remain limited only to diplomatic and moral support? Those people who are making sacrifices for Pakistan could also have held press conferences to save their own lives. What will Pakistan do to save his life?

Second question: Regarding the decision on the IWT (Indus Waters Treaty), will Pakistan write to India about this so that there is some accountability moving forward? Is there any concept of contempt of court there as well if they do not comply?

Spokesperson: First of all, on Yasin Malik Sahib: we have stated very categorically that this was a sham trial conducted by India. Actually, the tenets of justice have been shattered in this trial. We completely reject the trial, the persecution, and the sentencing of Yasin Malik Sahib. We will continue to raise this issue on relevant platforms and international platforms. Certainly, I think the media should also be very cognizant of this. We pray for the long life and good health of Yasin Malik Sahib.

About the Indus Waters Treaty, the award is self-explanatory. The defiance of such an award-you mentioned the words "contempt of court". In a way, this is the sort of abuse and contempt of international law. It can be categorised as such. If there is a provision for an indictment on account of abusing court order international Permanent Court of Arbitration, certainly, there is a strong case to indict India in this regard.

(Raziq Mehmood Bhatti, Kashmir Express): Sir, has there been any shift in Pakistan's stance on the Kashmir issue? It was not mentioned in your opening statement, and yesterday, on the occasion of Syed Ali Gilani's death anniversary, while Pakistan held events under the auspices of the Hurriyat Conference and other organisations, there was a complete blackout in India. Has there been complete peace there, or is India's attitude such that no such events could be held and no tribute could be paid to him?

Spokesperson: There is no question of any change in Pakistan's position with respect to Jammu and Kashmir. Obviously, the opening statement caters for developments in a week, and I did refer to the Indus Waters Treaty, which was an important development of this week. Pakistan's position on Jammu and Kashmir is anchored in the UN Security Council resolutions, international law, and the wishes of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. So, obviously, one week's time span is not a measuring timeline for this issue. We remain engaged with this issue of Jammu and Kashmir, and, obviously, for that matter, this issue is being raised on relevant international platforms. Our position has been expressed in our leadership's interactions with counterparts in Bishkek, for example, this issue was constantly raised. The Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister had an interaction with the UN Secretary-General including on the issue of Jammu and Kashmir which is a priority for us with respect to the United Nations. The Secretary-General of the United Nations has been invited to visit Pakistan, the dates of which will be finalised through mutual consultation. I am sure that while interacting with the UN Secretary-General, the issue of Kashmir will be raised. So, I assure you that there is absolutely no change in our position.

With respect to the anniversary of Syed Ali Gilani, I think there were a series of events held in Islamabad and elsewhere in Pakistan by civil society, academia, and think tanks. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs also participated in some of these events. So, Ali Gilani Sahib lives in our memory. His contribution to the Kashmir cause will never be forgotten. We will keep his memory alive for his stature with respect to the cause of the right to self-determination of the people of Jammu and Kashmir.

(Baqir Sajjad Syed, Dawn News): I would like to ask you a question about your engagement with the European Union. As I understand, Pakistan and the European Union are currently engaged in consultations regarding the GSP report that came out last month, which found Pakistan non-compliant with a number of its commitments, especially with regard to enforced disappearances, curbs on freedom of expression, and blasphemy laws, as well as the reapplication process that would soon be set in motion for Pakistan's entry into the second phase. So, I would like to know how the dialogue is progressing, as well as what is your understanding, or what's your take, on the European Union's assessment of the situation in Pakistan?

Spokesperson: The European Commission has published its biannual GSP monitoring report for 2023-2025. The assessment is the final monitoring report under the current GSP Plus framework on Pakistan's compliance with 27 international conventions. We appreciate the report and the Commission's recognition of Pakistan's continued compliance under these 27 international conventions. Nevertheless, we believe that the report's overall narrative does not present a sufficiently balanced picture of Pakistan's performance.

Let me point that out. GSP Plus remains central to Pakistan's economic relationship with the European Union, and we will remain constructively engaged with the EU and remain committed to the effective implementation of the international conventions underpinning the GSP framework.

(Anwer Abbas, 24 News): Sir, a quick question. I want to know that the Makkah Joint Defence Agreement is not specific to Muslim countries. So, can any non-Muslim country participate in this, like America, which is a historical ally of the three countries, and can it provide us with defensive cover?

Spokesperson: We have stated our position about the Makkah Joint Defence Agreement. I do not think we need to add any language to what has been agreed. I think the Joint Statement is quite succinct, precise, and detailed. I have nothing further to add to what has already been stated in the joint statement.

(Baqir Sajjad Syed, Dawn News): It was decided that there would be a Secretary-General from Pakistan. So, when are we expecting that appointment to take place? And are there any criteria for the Secretary-General's appointment, like whether he would be a diplomat or a military officer?

Spokesperson: We will inform you in due course. You see, if you look at the seriousness with which the three sides are approaching this agreement - we signed it, and then we held the first meeting of this committee, within few weeks. Obviously, there is a considerable sense of priority for all the partner countries. I am sure the decision will be taken in due course, and an individual befitting this important responsibility will be selected by Pakistan. We will inform you about it in due course.

(Imran Waseem, Aik News): Sir, regarding the decision of the Permanent Court of Arbitration, in which Pakistan's stance was accepted, and India, which does not even recognise its jurisdiction and is not ready to implement its decision. According to this situation, what benefit can Pakistan take from this decision? If Pakistan takes this Indian defiance to the United Nations Security Council or the United Nations General Assembly, what action can be taken against the Indian government?

Spokesperson: It is important to the decision by the Permanent Court of Arbitration is under the dispute settlement mechanism of the treaty. As such, the Court has followed what is provided in the treaty. So, the question of India accepting or not accepting does not arise. India cannot abuse the decisions of the Court, Pakistan will take all possible measures to ensure that the decision of the Court is implemented fully.

(Azaz Syed, Geo News): My question is related to the peace process and Pakistan's role in that. We saw that the Syrian Foreign Minister visited Pakistan on 20 August, and soon after his visit, he also met with the Mossad chief in Jordan. We also know that in the MOU, which you say is a template for peace, Lebanon was an issue, and later, America separately held talks on the Lebanon issue, and America also referred that issue to Syria. So, the visit of the Syrian Foreign Minister to Pakistan was linked to the peace process, and was it related to the issue of Lebanon, which is also a part of the conflict that we are witnessing now?

Spokesperson: The visit of the Syrian Foreign Minister was primarily in the bilateral context. The main content and context of this visit were purely bilateral. Syria, being in the Middle East, obviously is affected by the situation and the standoff in the Gulf and the Middle East. But I do not see any correlation between the visit of the Syrian Foreign Minister, and Pakistan's engagement on wider regional issues. Syria being a neighbor, is an important stakeholder with respect to Lebanon. Similarly, Pakistan-Lebanon interaction in that context, particularly in the UN and other relevant forums, has its own trajectory. We have taken a principled position with respect to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Lebanon - we totally reject the incursions and violation of that sovereignty by Israel. So, in that sense, it is logical if Lebanon was discussed during the visit of the Syrian Foreign Minister. But, as I said, the content of the visit of the Syrian Foreign Minister was essentially bilateral.

With respect to Islamabad MOU and in the Pakistan-Qatar Joint Statement, and the areas identified for the technical-level talks, I would refer you to those documents to see the relevance and the engagement with respect to Lebanon in these documents - as those documents are something that all relevant parties have agreed. In that sense, Lebanon is indeed an important facet of discussion. We will continue to support the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Lebanon. We have had good interaction at the leadership level through telephone calls. Our Embassy is working in Beirut. We remain engaged with it bilaterally also, and on multilateral platforms as well.

(Aijaz Ahmed, GNN News): For the past few days, this issue has been ongoing and is being discussed extensively. It is in the context of Pakistan and Britain; there are two aspects to it: one involves diplomatic relations, and the other involves the code of conduct for sports. The way the interview with Imran Khan's sons was broadcast on Sky Television constitutes a violation of this code of conduct. So, have we raised this issue with Britain diplomatically?

Spokesperson: Sir, I am not aware of any bilateral exchange between Pakistan and the UK. This issue is beyond the mandate of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

(Abdullah Momand, Friday Times): We are resuming the role of the global guardians, as you mentioned, through the Makkah Strategic and Defence Agreement. But on the other side, we have totally failed to protect Balochistan, Waziristan, Tank, and [other areas] from militant aggression. So, we are assuming the role of global guardians, but our own house is on fire. More than 20 districts in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan are lawless, and there is no government writ. So, what is the view on this? Our own house is on fire. We have totally failed to protect our own people from militant aggression, and we are going to assume the role of global guardians.

Spokesperson: First of all, let me disassociate myself from the terminology that you used, "the role of global guardians." We have never hinted at that. Certainly, there is no entitlement on our part to this phraseology, which is entirely yours.

The problem that you raised with respect to Balochistan and KP has two dimensions. One is the internal dimension. This is beyond the mandate of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. So you can check with the Ministry of Interior with respect to it. There are very important counterterrorism operations, one of which was conducted just two days ago. The ISPR issued a detailed press release - so I will refer you to that.

There is an external dimension, which we have forthrightly addressed from here. This is the support by elements in Afghanistan, including the Taliban regime, for terrorists operating inside Pakistan - the support and abetment not just by the government or by the Taliban regime, but also by extra-regional actors, namely India, for which we have concrete evidence that we have provided. This external dimension of this problem is within the mandate of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which I and my predecessors have been addressing. Most importantly, the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister also addressed the external dimensions of this issue. The Prime Minister raised the issue of terrorism in his very important speeches yesterday at the SCO platforms. So, this is where it stands. We will continue to raise and elaborate our position on the external dimension of this problem. I do not think that you should underestimate or sort of downplay the importance of the external dimension of the challenges that we face in Balochistan, KP, and elsewhere with respect to the issue of terrorism.

(Asghar Ali Mubarak, The Daily Mail International): Sir, during your tenure, we have witnessed Pakistan's diplomacy achieve a prominent position, particularly with Pakistan assuming the SCO presidency following the Makkah Agreement. In this context, has India extended any message of congratulations to you at the diplomatic level regarding Pakistan taking over the SCO presidency? Is there any back-channel diplomacy ongoing in this regard, so that, since Pakistan will be hosting the event, relations with India might be normalised?

Spokesperson: Thank you for stating Pakistan's success in diplomacy during the last one year. Let me tell you that my tenure is purely coincidental in that sense, because the credit for the success of Pakistan's diplomacy goes squarely to our leadership, who have ably led us - under the leadership of our Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister/Foreign Minister, and with the support of all state institutions, particularly the armed forces, the Chief of Defence Forces, and the Chief of Army Staff. It is also teamwork. I have been fortunate, and humbled by the fact that I have been the spokesperson during this time. So, thank you in that sense for your comment.

As regards the SCO chairmanship, Pakistan will follow and implement the roles and responsibilities of the SCO chair, as laid out in the SCO Charter and the relevant rules of procedure of the organisation. We will follow this, as we did when we were the chair of the Council of Heads of Government, when we held - the SCO Council of Heads of Government meeting in 2024. So, we will continue to implement our responsibility as the chair of the SCO summit.

(Shizza Hashmi, Pakistan TV Digital): Best of luck for all your future endeavours. I want to take you back to the Makkah Alliance. Now that Pakistan is leading the first initial phase, how does Pakistan plan on using this role in furthering, of course, regional security and defence cooperation, while protecting its own personal interests and sovereignty?

Spokesperson: This Agreement is essentially a framework for defence. So, whilst it serves the interests of the three countries, it also serves the interests of the region and beyond, since the agreement is tailored towards maintaining and improving the prospects for peace, prosperity, regional stability, and basically ending the prospects of war in the region. So, in that sense, it serves the collective interests of not just the three countries, including Pakistan, but also the wider interests of the region. We will continue to follow our obligations and responsibilities with respect to the agreement in this spirit. The agreement is in our interest, and in the collective interest of the region and beyond.

(Asif Shahzad, Reuters): Thank you very much, Ambassador, and best of luck for your next assignment. So, a couple of questions. Firstly, there was some confusion last week about the trade issue with Iran. Can you please give a more clarified answer? Like, I mean, is trade with Iran on despite U.S. economic sanctions, and, I mean, what's the status, current status? Secondly, I mean, there have been a lot of questions about the Makkah Agreement. As you said, this is the defence framework, but there are several questions on people's minds. Like, I mean, how is this pact going to work? Like, we have seen Houthi attacks against Saudi Arabia, then we saw Israel attacking Turks and Turkish interests in Syria. So, how does this work? Like, I mean, is Pakistan going to, like, fight for Saudis physically there and fight for Turks physically in areas like, I mean, in Syria? Or, I mean, is it going to send military hardware or jets? Or, I mean, how does it work, like, in terms of physical conflict in that region?

Spokesperson: First, on your question on the announcement of the U.S. measures the sanctions that you mentioned: we have taken note of these latest economic measures, some announced during the course of this week and earlier this week. We believe that the prevailing situation calls for restrained dialogue and sustained diplomatic engagement. We will continue to urge all sides to make progress in that direction. And, as regards the potential impact of these U.S. measures on Pakistan-Iran trade, the matter is being carefully evaluated and monitored in coordination with the Ministry of Commerce.

On your second question about the Makkah Agreement: I would urge you not to speculate on a negative scenario and then evaluate our positions. I would request you to follow what has been stated in the communiqué that was released on the eve of its signing and the joint statement released from Istanbul. As I said (in last briefing), the operationalisation of this agreement remains at an early stage. The Istanbul meeting has generated progress in that direction, and we would continue to make progress, in consultations with the two partners on this issue.

I think the focus ought to be on what this platform releases to the media and how our leadership speaks. We should refrain from speculative negative scenarios and then evaluate what would be the likely reaction of this "alliance" or this agreement, or of the countries. That is a road that I would certainly advise not to take.

(Tahir Khan, NNI): Thank you very much, Mr. Tahir. Prayers for you as well, and for the new spokesperson. Last week, you had, in a way, welcomed the statement by the Afghan Interior Minister that they are ready for dialogue with Pakistan. He had also mentioned that they would address the concerns, and your statement was also received quite positively by the media. This implies that people want peace between Pakistan and the Taliban government of Afghanistan. So, has there been any progress following those statements? Because there was repeated mention yesterday of the Afghan Ambassador's direct talks with Pakistan. Is there any progress, or, given that your statement a few weeks prior had mentioned that we pursued diplomacy until October 2025 but perhaps it wasn't as effective, has there been any progress toward talks or not?

Spokesperson: Progress in Pakistan-Afghan relations hinges on actions and assurances to be given by Kabul, the Taliban regime. I am not aware of any development or any assurances coming out from Kabul since I spoke last week and answered your question in follow-up to your interview with the Interior Minister of Afghanistan. So, as such, I have nothing to add to what I already said with respect to your question last week.

The Chinese Special Envoy, Ambassador Xiaoyong, visited Islamabad, and I responded to that new development. Fact remains that progress (Pak-Afghan relations) hinges on verifiable, written, assurances from the Afghan side that their territory will not be used for terrorism against Afghanistan.

(Kiran Butt, The Khorasan Diary): My question is, I want to take this opportunity as I don't know when the next briefing will be. In a few days, the BRICS Summit will take place in New Delhi, and Chinese President Xi Jinping is expected to attend. His visit would be his first to India in seven years. So, how is Pakistan viewing the growing closeness between China and India?

Spokesperson: I am not aware of any confirmation regarding that visit. Let me elaborate on a broad principle - Pakistan views relations between other countries within their own bilateral context. However, we welcome any engagement that contributes to regional peace and stability. Let me also add that Pakistan's long-standing, close, and all-weather strategic partnership with China is not affected by the relationship of either country with a third party.

(Mateen Haider, WE News): Back to the Indus Waters Treaty. A decision has been issued by the Permanent Court of Arbitration, and India has rejected it. Could you diplomatically clarify which forum Pakistan can now approach to assert that this verdict has validated Pakistan's position and should be implemented? Would it be the UN Security Council or the World Bank?

(Zahid Farooq Malik, Daily Metro Watch): Sir, Pakistan also approached the Court of Arbitration. When Pakistan did so, was India's point of view taken into account, and did India participate in the proceedings? Was this a one-sided decision, or did India also provide input on the matter?

Spokesperson: Pakistan retains all options regarding the follow-up to this decision, as well as the broader issue of India's weaponization of water. We retain all options. All diplomatic and non-diplomatic options remain on the table. The dispute-resolution mechanism under the Indus Waters Treaty was followed in the proceedings leading up to the Permanent Court of Arbitration. India is a signatory to this treaty. As such, its participation was necessarily part of the entire process, conducted under the treaty's dispute-resolution mechanism. Therefore, India cannot absolve itself of its responsibilities with respect to the decision given by a Court established as per Treaty provisions.

(Muhammad Saleh Zafir, The News): Sir, my question is about President Asif Zardari, who is visiting some European capitals, and currently he is in London. And last evening he had meeting with the Pakistan's Interior Minister, Mr. Mohsin Naqvi, in London. And incidentally, Pakistan's Law Minister, who was author of 26th and 27th constitutional amendment he is also in London, and Speaker National Assembly is also supposed to be sometime this week in London while he is going to South Africa. Do you have any inkling about the official engagement of all these gentlemen?

Spokesperson: I will refer you very respectfully to the Office of the President for this answer.

***