In the complex and ever-shifting landscape of global geopolitics, Pakistan has long been a focal point for international intrigue and intervention. The recent revelations surrounding “Operation Goldsmith” have once again thrust the nation into the spotlight, exposing a sophisticated and covert campaign designed to destabilize Pakistan’s political landscape, undermine its military, and manipulate public opinion. This operation, allegedly orchestrated by a coalition of foreign powers, has drawn comparisons to some of the most infamous examples of international meddling in the country’s history. Operation Goldsmith is not a traditional military campaign, but rather a multifaceted strategy that employs a combination of psychological warfare, economic pressure, and media manipulation to achieve its goals. At the heart of this operation is the political resurgence of Imran Khan, the former Prime Minister of Pakistan, who has found himself at the center of a geopolitical tug-of-war involving powerful international actors. According to reports, certain Western diplomats and media outlets, along with influential figures with personal ties to Khan, have been involved in a coordinated effort to restore his political influence in Pakistan. The operation is believed to include a strategic smear campaign against Pakistan’s military, using international media and lobbying efforts to portray Khan as a victim of political repression, while simultaneously criticizing the country’s democratic institutions and human rights record. This operation is not merely a product of domestic political maneuvering but appears to be part of a broader agenda to weaken Pakistan’s sovereignty. The involvement of foreign powers in such a campaign is particularly concerning, as it raises questions about the extent of external influence over Pakistan’s internal affairs. The tactics employed in Operation Goldsmith are reminiscent of past instances where foreign powers have sought to exert influence over Pakistan’s political and military affairs. One of the most notable examples is Operation Cyclone, the CIA’s covert program to arm and support Afghan Mujahideen fighters during the Soviet-Afghan War. Launched in 1979, Operation Cyclone was one of the longest and most expensive covert operations in U.S. history, with far-reaching consequences for Pakistan. The tactics employed in Operation Goldsmith are reminiscent of past instances where foreign powers have sought to exert influence over Pakistan’s political and military affairs. The influx of weapons, fighters, and ideologies into Pakistan’s tribal areas during Operation Cyclone created a volatile mix that would later contribute to the rise of militant groups and the spread of extremism. The legacy of this period is still felt today, as the networks and alliances forged during the Jihad continue to influence the region’s security dynamics. Similarly, the events of the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War serve as another stark reminder of the dangers of foreign intervention. During this conflict, Indian intelligence agency RAW supported the Mukti Bahini, a guerrilla resistance movement in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh), while international diplomatic pressure mounted against Islamabad. The eventual outcome was a catastrophic loss for Pakistan, both in terms of territory and national morale. These historical examples underscore the risks associated with foreign meddling in Pakistan’s affairs, and the long-term consequences that such interventions can have on the nation’s stability and security. One of the most striking aspects of Operation Goldsmith is the role that international media has played in shaping public perceptions. Over the past year, there has been a marked shift in the narrative surrounding Imran Khan, with a wave of sympathetic reports portraying him as a victim of an authoritarian regime. This media blitz is not an organic response to a political crisis but rather a calculated campaign driven by powerful interests. Western media outlets have published numerous articles criticizing Pakistan’s state institutions, particularly the military, while casting Khan as a beleaguered hero. This narrative has been carefully crafted to undermine the credibility of the Pakistani government and military, and to rally international support for Khan’s political revival. The selective outrage displayed by Western powers and their media outlets is not a new phenomenon, but it is becoming increasingly blatant. The disparity in coverage between Khan’s legal troubles and far greater global tragedies, such as the ongoing violence in Gaza, reveals the true priorities of these powers. It is not about upholding democratic values but about preserving influence in strategically important regions like South Asia. Operation Goldsmith also includes an economic dimension, with foreign powers exerting pressure on Pakistan’s economy to create instability. This is not a new tactic; economic warfare has long been a tool of statecraft, used to weaken adversaries without resorting to direct military conflict. In Pakistan’s case, economic pressure has been applied through various means, including sanctions, manipulation of financial markets, and attempts to disrupt trade. These efforts are designed to exacerbate existing economic challenges and create an environment of uncertainty and fear, which can then be exploited for political gain. Psychological warfare is another key component of Operation Goldsmith. By using media narratives, social media campaigns, and targeted disinformation, the operation seeks to manipulate public opinion and create a sense of crisis. This is a classic tactic of hybrid warfare, where the lines between military and non-military actions are blurred, and the battlefield extends into the cognitive realm. The Pakistan Army has been acutely aware of the threats posed by Operation Goldsmith and has taken steps to counteract them. While the operation itself is shrouded in secrecy, the military’s response has involved a combination of strategic communication, intelligence operations, and diplomatic efforts. One of the primary objectives of the military’s response has been to expose the true nature of Operation Goldsmith to the public and to rally national support against foreign interference. By highlighting the involvement of foreign powers in the campaign against Pakistan, the military has sought to turn the tide of public opinion and strengthen the resolve of the Pakistani people. In addition to strategic communication, the military has also intensified its intelligence-gathering efforts to identify and neutralize the networks involved in Operation Goldsmith. This has included monitoring the activities of foreign diplomats, NGOs, and media outlets, as well as conducting counterintelligence operations to thwart attempts at destabilization. Diplomatically, Pakistan has sought to engage with its allies and partners to counter the influence of the powers behind Operation Goldsmith. This has involved efforts to build regional coalitions, strengthen ties with friendly nations, and push back against the narratives being promoted by Western media. Operation Goldsmith is a stark reminder of the ongoing geopolitical struggles that Pakistan faces. The operation’s sophisticated blend of psychological warfare, economic pressure, and media manipulation represents a new kind of threat-one that is not easily countered by traditional means. For Pakistan, the stakes are incredibly high. The country’s sovereignty, stability, and future are all at risk as foreign powers seek to manipulate its internal affairs for their own gain. The Pakistan Army’s efforts to counter Operation Goldsmith are crucial, but the battle is far from over. As Pakistan continues to navigate these challenges, it must remain vigilant and resilient. The lessons of history are clear: foreign meddling has never served Pakistan’s interests, and the nation must stand united in its defense of sovereignty. The struggle against Operation Goldsmith is not just a political battle; it is a fight for the very soul of Pakistan. The ongoing situation draws significant parallels with other nations that have faced similar external pressures. For instance, the color revolutions in Eastern Europe and Central Asia during the early 2000s were marked by significant foreign influence aimed at fostering regime change. These movements were often supported by Western governments and NGOs, which provided financial, logistical, and media support to opposition groups. The aim was to promote democratic values, but critics argue that these efforts were more about advancing geopolitical interests rather than genuinely supporting democratic processes. Ukraine’s Orange Revolution and Georgia’s Rose Revolution are prime examples of how foreign influence can play a decisive role in domestic political upheavals. In both cases, the role of Western media and diplomatic channels in shaping narratives and outcomes was substantial, highlighting the complex interplay between domestic politics and international agendas. Pakistan’s history is replete with examples of how external powers have sought to influence its domestic affairs. During the Cold War, Pakistan was a key ally of the United States, primarily due to its strategic location next to the Soviet Union. However, this alliance came at a cost. The influx of foreign aid and military assistance often came with strings attached, influencing Pakistan’s foreign and domestic policies in ways that were not always in its best interest. The legacy of this period continues to affect Pakistan’s political landscape today, as the country navigates its relationships with major powers like the United States and China. In recent years, Pakistan has sought to diversify its international partnerships, moving closer to China through initiatives like the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). However, this shift has not been without its challenges. Western powers, particularly the United States, have expressed concerns about Pakistan’s growing ties with China, leading to a complex diplomatic balancing act. Operation Goldsmith can be seen as part of this broader geopolitical struggle, where external powers are attempting to influence Pakistan’s political direction to align with their strategic interests. The economic aspect of Operation Goldsmith is also significant. By exerting pressure on Pakistan’s economy, foreign powers aim to create a sense of crisis that can be exploited for political gain. Economic warfare is a well-established tool of statecraft, used to weaken adversaries and force them into making concessions. In the case of Pakistan, economic pressure has been applied in various forms, including sanctions, manipulation of financial markets, and attempts to disrupt trade. These efforts are designed to exacerbate existing economic challenges and create an environment of uncertainty and fear, which can then be exploited to influence political outcomes. The role of psychological warfare in Operation Goldsmith cannot be understated. By manipulating media narratives, spreading disinformation, and creating a sense of crisis, the operation seeks to undermine public confidence in Pakistan’s institutions and leaders. This is a classic tactic of hybrid warfare, where the lines between military and non-military actions are blurred, and the battlefield extends into the cognitive realm. By sowing doubt and confusion, the operation aims to weaken Pakistan’s resolve and make it more susceptible to external influence. As Pakistan continues to navigate these challenges, it must remain vigilant and resilient. The lessons of history are clear: foreign meddling has never served Pakistan’s interests, and the nation must stand united in its. The writer is a journalist, TV presenter & column writer. She can be reached via her insta account @farihaspeaks