Posts from multiple users, politicians and media outlets on social media platform X since August 4, 2025, claimed that an article published by British magazine *The Economist* paid tribute to Chief of Army Staff Field Marshal Asim Munir. However, the article offers an analysis of the army chief and his policies, particularly pertaining to the United States.
Article by *The Economist* pays tribute to Field Marshal Asim Munir
The iVerify Pakistan team investigated this content and determined that it is misleading.
To reach this conclusion, iVerify Pakistan thoroughly reviewed the original article for language and tone.
Posts from multiple users, politicians and media outlets on social media platform X since August 4, 2025, claimed that an article published by British magazine The Economist paid tribute to Chief of Army Staff (COAS) Field Marshal Asim Munir. However, the article offers an analysis of the army chief and his policies, particularly pertaining to the United States.
In June, the COAS became the first serving chief of the army staff to have an in-person meeting with a sitting United States president, without holding political office or governing under martial law. Field Marshal Munir met Donald Trump at the White House on June 19, where the two leaders discussed joint counterterrorism efforts and expanding bilateral trade during their “cordial” meeting.
On August 4, PML-N MPA and Punjab Women Protection Authority chairperson Hina Parvez Butt shared a post on X with the following caption: “Another honour for Field Marshal Asim Munir sahib, a tribute to the field marshal in an article published in the British magazine The Economist. The field marshal is giving a new dimension to American relations, The Economist reports.”
The post gained 50,600 views and had posted screenshots of news bulletin tickers from media outlet GNN.
Several other mainstream Pakistani news outlets, such as Geo News, ARY News, GNN News and 92 News had also ran news bulletins that The Economist article paid “tribute” to the army chief and praised his role in the relations between the US and Pakistan.
Some of the bulletins had highlighted and outlined parts of the article, such as the following: “The field marshal’s aim is to build a more sustainable, multi-faceted relationship with America. There is potential for progress.” However, the follow-up sentence was hidden that said: “It is, however, a high-wire act.”
A report by state broadcaster Radio Pakistan on the article was titled: “The Economist lauds Field Marshal Asim Munir’s effort in improving Pak-US ties”. However, a report by fellow state-owned news outlet PTV News said: “‘The Economist’ highlights Pakistan’s evolving diplomatic role under Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir,” using the term of “highlights” instead of the overly positive phrase of “lauds”.
A fact-check was initiated to determine the veracity of the claim due to its high virality and keen public interest in the role of Field Marshal Munir in current Pakistan-US relations.
The said article, titled, “Pakistan’s army chief is cosying up to Donald Trump”, was published on August 3.
The article provides an analysis of the army chief’s engagements and results from interactions with the US since the Trump administration came to power, particularly after the India-Pakistan conflict in May 2025 that resulted in a US-brokered ceasefire.
The article also explores the domestic environment and the impact of the army chief’s promotion to field marshal, along with his objectives and goals.
Contrasting the situation of the army chief and the country pre and post-2025, it said: “Pakistan’s army chief, could hardly have wished for more. For almost two years, he had been under fire at home over his
meddling in politics. Wracked by debt and insurgent violence, his country had been sidelined in geopolitics as America and other rich countries courted India, Pakistan’s arch-rival. And yet there he was, enjoying a private lunch with Donald Trump in the White House on June 18th, just over a month after Pakistan’s brief conflict with India. Then, at the end of July, came further snubs for India.”
It added that “the field marshal’s fortunes reflect a shift in American policy that affects India, China and the Middle East” and recounted the deterioration in Pak-US relations since the killing of Osama bin Laden and the Afghan withdrawal.
However, it pointed out that “to India’s dismay, America and Pakistan are now rebuilding ties with a focus
on trade, counter-terrorism and consultation on Middle Eastern policy. America may even sell arms again to Pakistan.”
The article described the army chief as being “pious and pragmatic, with a keen interest in the economy”, according to those who met him frequently.
“He admires the modernisation drive of Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS). Like MBS, he can be vindictive and has a temper, especially when talking about Mr Khan, who (as prime minister) sacked him as intelligence chief. And his appetite for risk is greater than that of his predecessor, who favoured quiet (and ultimately fruitless) diplomacy with India. Even some critics credit the field marshal with resisting foreign pressure not to respond to India’s initial air strikes,” the article said in among the points noted in the army chief’s favour by even those opposed to him.
On engagements with the US and the results of those efforts, the article said that he was recently praised by the US for killing and capturing leaders of a local offshoot of the proscribed Islamic State group. It noted that he had also “sparked interest” from the US president’s associates in Pakistan’s crypto and mining sectors and had positioned Pakistan as a “potential means to advance America’s interests with Iran”.
“In return, America has toned down criticism of Pakistan’s programme to build longer-range ballistic missiles, which officials from Joe Biden’s administration considered a threat to America. It has resumed some aid programmes. It is also considering selling weaponry, including armoured vehicles and night-vision goggles, to help Pakistan combat local insurgents. And American officials are examining Pakistan’s evidence to support its claims that India backs those insurgencies, although they are unconvinced so far,” the article said of the outcomes with the current engagement with the US.
The article analysed that the army chief’s aim was to “build a more sustainable, multi-faceted relationship with America, adding that “there is potential for progress” in the endeavour, but it is “a high-wire act”.
“The prospects for economic co-operation are uncertain given Pakistan’s poor investment climate. Mutual distrust hampers efforts to combat terrorism. And while Pakistani officials suggest that closer ties with America will not come at China’s cost, the Chinese leadership may disagree.”
On the domestic front, the article said politics looked to be at a “turning point” as well, noting that despite PTI founder Imran Khan’s popularity, “Field Marshal Munir’s popularity has surged since the conflict with India. And the military-backed civilian government now has the two-thirds parliamentary majority needed to alter the Constitution (after a controversial re-allocation of seats). That has ignited rumours that the army chief could become president too, opening a fourth period of military rule since independence in 1947.”
The article said that while Field Marshal Munir’s “ultimate political ambitions are uncertain”, some individuals “predict he could grab the presidency soon to capitalise on his domestic popularity and Mr Trump’s fondness for strongmen”.
The article added that such an action “would institutionalise his authority (foreign and business leaders already try to deal with him directly on many matters)” and also “offset the risk that a less pliant civilian leadership might replace him as army chief when his current term expires in 2027”.
It noted that the army chief’s critics cited his promotion to field marshal in May as comparable to Field Marshal Ayub Khan, who the article pointed out was “Pakistan’s first dictator and only other officer of that rank”.
On that note, the article said of his relations with the opposition: “He and civilian leaders also share an interest in suppressing Mr Khan’s supporters (dozens of whom have recently been jailed, including 108 on July 31st alone) before parliamentary polls due by 2029. A more overt power grab might fuel support for Mr Khan, including in the armed forces.”
It can be noted that the points regarding the military’s role in politics and suppression of opposition have also come under criticism by local media and rights organisations.
Therefore, the article provides an analysis of the army chief and his recent engagements on the international and domestic fronts without being overtly positive or negative.
The claim that the article by The Economist on Field Marshal Asim Munir pays tribute to him or lauds him is misleading.
While the article does make note of and highlights the possible positive outcomes of the army chief’s engagement with the US, it is an overall analysis that does not pay tribute to him and covers multiple aspects of his tenure so far, including on the domestic front.
