Follow Us;Resize=(820,462) "Asim Munir")
Pakistan Army Chief Field Marshal Asim Munir faced protests and international embarrassment during his US visit, amid rising backlash over terrorism links and India’s decisive military response.
Pakistan Army Chief Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir, who is on an official visit to the United States, was greeted with loud protests and slogans branding him a "mass murderer" and "dictator" as he arrived at a hotel in Washington.
Videos widely circulated on social media show protesters confronting US authorities and asserting their right to freedom of speech. One video showed a large poster with the words “Mass Murderer Asim Munir” emblazoned on it, underscoring the sharp public backlash facing Pakistan’s military leadership abroad.
Related Articles
US Clarifies: Munir Not Invited to Military Parade
In an additional embarrassment for the Pakistan Army Chief, the White House firmly denied reports that Munir was invited to the Washington Military Parade held on Saturday.
“This is false. No foreign military leaders were invited,” a White House official told reporters, dismissing Pakistani claims of a diplomatic honour. According to Dawn, Munir had arrived in Washington on Sunday for a five-day visit, aimed at strengthening military and strategic ties with the United States. But so far, the visit has been overshadowed by controversy and public protests.
Pakistan’s Hollow Propaganda: Field Marshal Title Under Scrutiny
The Shehbaz Sharif-led government in Pakistan recently elevated General Asim Munir to the rank of Field Marshal – the country’s highest military title – claiming it was in recognition of his “exemplary leadership” during the recent military standoff with India.
This controversial decision came in the wake of Operation Sindoor, a decisive Indian military response following a horrific terror attack in Pahalgam, Jammu & Kashmir, on April 22. In that attack, 26 people, most of them tourists, were killed by terrorists affiliated with Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba.
India’s retaliation, dubbed Operation Sindoor, targeted terrorist infrastructure across Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK) on the night of May 6-7.
Deniability: Pakistan’s Old Tactic, Exposed Again
Commenting on the situation, former diplomat Dinkar Srivastava, who served in Pakistan, the US, and the EU during his diplomatic career, recently slammed Pakistan’s repeated use of deniability as a strategic tool.
“Deniability is part of Pakistan’s strategy of asymmetric warfare,” Srivastava was quoted as saying in a PTI report. “They will continue to sponsor terrorism if they feel that this idea is working. Operation Sindoor – firm response by India – has conveyed the message to terrorists, and their masters in the Army and the ISI that such adventures will result in costs to them.”
He pointed out that this playbook is not new. “Pakistan initially denied in the UN Security Council that its forces were involved (in tribal raids of 1947). In May 1948, Pakistan’s foreign minister Sir Zafarullah Khan admitted to the UN Commission on India and Pakistan that two brigades of Pakistani army were fighting in Kashmir, which had acceded to India,” he said.
Internal Turmoil in Pakistan Driving External Aggression
Srivastava argued that Pakistan’s intensifying internal crisis – from economic collapse to growing unrest in Punjab and Balochistan – is pushing its army to stoke tensions with India in a bid to deflect public attention.
“With mounting internal troubles, the Pakistani Army needs to divert focus to India. The country witnessed food riots in 2022, its economy has been on the verge of default, the Army’s legacy is being challenged in Punjab, which has been the main source of recruitment since the British days. There is an insurgency in Balochistan. A terror attack in J&K helps divert attention,” he noted.
Operation Sindoor: The End of Pakistan’s Nuclear Bluff?
One of the most significant outcomes of India’s bold retaliation was the dismantling of Pakistan’s long-relied-upon nuclear threat strategy.
“Pakistan threatened in the past escalation to the nuclear level in case of Indian response to acts of terrorism. This was aptly described by Prof. C. Christine Meyer as ‘Jehad under nuclear umbrella’,” Srivastava explained.
He added: “The Indian military strike against terrorist training camps in PoK and Jaish and Lashkar headquarters in Bahawalpur and Muridke showed that India will retaliate in all such cases. This is the new normal.”
Srivastava, whose latest book “Pakistan: Ideologies, Strategies and Interests” delves into Islamabad’s militaristic strategies, drew a straight line connecting past Pakistani aggression with the present.
“Each act of aggression—whether it be the tribal raid of 1947, Operation Gibraltar in 1965, Kargil in 1999, or the Mumbai terror attacks in 2009—has followed the same formula: initiate hostilities, deny involvement, and play the victim card in international forums,” he said.
