Washington has strengthened ties with Islamabad recently through high-level diplomatic meetings, comparatively lower tariffs for Pakistan and commitments to invest in the South Asian country’s mineral sector.

The sector has drawn interest from foreign investors, with a US metals company signing a US$500 million investment deal last month, including the development of a polymetallic refinery in Pakistan.

The likelihood of an American-built port in Gwadar coming into fruition would depend on whether US investors believe that extraction of critical minerals from Pakistan’s “fractious and remote” Balochistan province is viable in the short to medium term, according to Markey.

“Without the success of major mining operations, the port will make no sense,” Markey said, adding that if it were easy for American firms to extract minerals from Pakistan, it would have happened at scale decades ago.

“If a port along Pakistan’s Arabian coast were a sure bet, Gwadar would be thriving. That does not appear to be the case. I don’t expect President Trump and his associates will be patient enough to build a port in Pakistan,” Markey said.

A port is already in place in Gwadar, which was developed by China. Despite significant Chinese investments, the port is yet to become a thriving trade hub as initially envisioned and has encountered multiple problems, including security threats, underutilisation, and poor supporting infrastructure.

“Pakistan’s goal for the port is to find ways to lock the Trump administration, and the US more generally, into a tighter relationship of mutual interest,” Markey said.

“Pakistan fears diplomatic and economic isolation, and wants to capitalise on Trump’s good feelings before the famously fickle president turns his attention elsewhere.”

Amit Ranjan, research fellow at the Institute of South Asian Studies in the National University of Singapore, said the US might take up Pakistan’s offer, given the potential port’s strategic location about 160km (99 miles) from Iran.

Is Pakistan’s solar-powered farming fuelling a water crisis?

“By having a port there, the US can keep an eye on the ongoing developments in the region,” Ranjan said.

Adding that the port was a “big test” for Pakistan’s diplomatic skills on how to engage with both the US and China, Ranjan said the new port would be of concern to Beijing because of its presence across Balochistan.

Apart from operating the Gwadar port, Chinese entities are involved in mining natural resources in Balochistan, such as copper and gold, primarily through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, which is considered the flagship project of Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative.

Tensions in Balochistan have spiked in recent years, with attacks by separatist militants, extrajudicial killings, and clashes between locals and Pakistani security forces fuelling concerns of companies with operations in the restive province.

Sriparna Pathak, a professor of international relations at O.P. Jindal Global University in India, also said the US would likely take up Pakistan’s offer to build and operate the port to access critical minerals, given Washington’s strategic and economic imperatives.

“America wants to diversify supply chains away from China amid escalating great-power competition,” she said, noting the project would signal a determination by Trump to strengthen America’s economic depth and minimise supply chain disruptions.

While a US-backed port in Gwadar that is run on a commercial basis would not threaten India, it might be a viable alternative to the existing port in Karachi, and this could make it harder for India to impose any blockade on Pakistan in the event of a conflict, according to Markey.

Pathak said: “[The port could] enhance Pakistan’s maritime export capabilities and provide the US with a subtle foothold in the Arabian Sea, potentially complicating India’s surveillance and trade routes.”

Seoul hoped the agreement would lead to the swift release of all hostages, help improve humanitarian conditions in Gaza and serve as a critical turning point towards restoring peace and stability in the Middle East, the statement added.

“We have called for some time for a ceasefire, for the release of the hostages, for aid to be granted,” he said, pointing out that Canberra had been pushing for a two-state solution.

“We welcome the agreement on the release of hostages and enhanced humanitarian assistance to the people of Gaza,” Modi wrote, adding the deal reaffirmed that “terrorism in any form or manifestation is unacceptable anywhere in the world”.

He added that Malaysia would not stop its efforts to support the Palestinian cause, noting that “every step is to bring an end to the cruelty and oppression that have become increasingly insane”.

According to authorities in Gaza, at least 67,194 Palestinians have been killed in Israel’s war since October 2023.

Mohd Nor Hamzah, information chief of the clerics council of the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party, said the ceasefire agreement was a moral victory for Hamas and Muslims in Gaza.

“It is an early indication of the major loss for the Zionist regime that has carried out a genocide on the people of Gaza,” he said in a statement on Friday, referring to Israel.

“Major challenges remain, including the issues of trust, oversight and guarantees of long-term effectiveness [of the ceasefire],” he added.

The council called on the Muslim world to unite and support Hamas’ struggles by demanding full independence for Palestine, instead of bowing to pressures for a peace plan that would only benefit Israel and the US.

“This struggle will not end so long as the Muslim world does not unite to ensure Palestine is freed from the clutches of the Zionist regime,” the council added.

Shanmugam said seasoned observers were “urging caution” because, as far as the Middle East situation was concerned, “it’s never done until it’s done”.

“But we hope that this will be done,” he said, adding that Trump had to be “commended tremendously” for pushing the two sides to reach a deal.

“Ultimately, only the USA can influence Israel’s course of action. And he has done that.”

Repairing Washington’s image

Chong Ja Ian, an associate professor of political science at the National University of Singapore, said that if the deal were to succeed with adequate guarantees for the security, safety and future of both Palestinians and Israelis, it could improve perceptions of the US in Southeast Asia and around the world.

“Those are big ifs, however,” Chong said, adding that while any failure in the ceasefire deal might be seen as an “affront” to Trump, it would not change how people viewed the conflict.

Even if there was no sympathy in the region for Hamas over its violent terrorist attack on October 7, 2023, Chong said that “a lot of people, especially in Southeast Asia, already attribute near unequivocal US support for Israel with complicity if not responsibility for the latter’s excesses in Gaza and the large civilian cost on Palestinians”.

Vannarith Chheang, a lecturer in public policy and global affairs at Nanyang Technological University, said if the peace plan were to succeed in Gaza, it would “give a leg up” for US diplomacy.

“But it will not likely change regional power dynamics and perception much. Tariffs remain the key factor here,” Chheang said.

If Washington, however, could push Cambodia and Thailand towards a durable peace deal, its image in Southeast Asia would improve, he added.

Tensions between Thailand and Cambodia have simmered for years over their long-standing border dispute, which has led to armed clashes and hostile political rhetoric. Both countries agreed to a ceasefire in July after a brief conflict.

Robert Patman, professor of international relations at New Zealand’s Otago University, said on social media that while the Gaza deal was a welcome step, more should be done to stabilise the Middle East.

“Measures must be taken internationally to ensure there is no repetition of the sort of carnage that we have witnessed in the Gaza Strip during the past two years,” Patman said.

Southeast Asia would be waiting to see whether the current ceasefire would hold, Harrison Cheng, Southeast Asia Lead at Control Risks told This Week in Asia.

“Malaysia and Indonesia in particular would want to see a robust framework for peace that addresses the fundamental drivers of conflict and which also ensures the welfare of the Palestinians, as their respective populations feel strongly about the current conflict in the Middle East,” Cheng said.

Additional reporting by Joseph Sipalan