akistan Army Chief General Asim Munir is reportedly in direct talks with the Trump administration, urging the U.S. to explore untapped reserves of rare minerals and oil in Pakistan, particularly in Balochistan, Waziristan, and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Analysts caution that such a move could inflame local resentment and potentially pull Washington back into the same unstable regions it exited under the Doha Agreement.
Trump Sees Opportunity, But Risks Are High
A report by the Times of Israel suggests that former President Trump has been assured of Pakistan’s potential as a source of critical minerals. However, intelligence briefings downplay the practicality, citing harsh terrain, armed militancy, and deep-rooted hostility towards the Pakistani military in these provinces. China has already entrenched itself through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), further complicating U.S. ambitions.
Warnings From Experts
Geophysical expert Sergio Restley cautioned that Washington risks repeating past mistakes:
“If Trump continues down this path, the U.S. will return to the same conflict zones Biden left behind.”
Other analysts stress that Balochistan has a long history of political unrest, where the perception of exploitation by outsiders — whether Beijing or Washington — only worsens tensions.
The Local Dimension: 18th Amendment Betrayal
Despite the 18th Amendment meant to devolve powers to provinces, natural resource profits still flow to Islamabad.
-
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa: rich in marble, granite, chromite, and copper, but remains underdeveloped.
-
Balochistan: home to gold, copper, coal, and rare earths, yet remains Pakistan’s poorest province.
Local resentment is fueled by past mega-projects like REKO Diq and Saindak, which promised billions but delivered displacement, pollution, and unrest instead.
American Stakes vs. Local Costs
The Trump administration has prioritized rare minerals as a national security issue to reduce dependence on China. Islamabad, facing a foreign exchange crunch, is eager to strike deals. But as always, contracts are fixed in Islamabad, implemented by the army, and imposed on local populations — who bear the brunt of displacement and militarization.
Experts’ Final Word: Not Development, But Repression
Analysts warn that new U.S.-Pakistan mining ventures would:
-
Militarize villages under the guise of “strategic security.”
-
Criminalize dissent against projects.
-
Stop royalty payments to locals.
-
Spark stronger anti-American sentiment at the grassroots.
If pursued, this model risks entrenching exploitation rather than development, leaving Washington trapped in a new cycle of instability — this time in the name of minerals.
