Owen Bennett-Jones. Telling an inconvenient reality: the idea that a better image building exercise can change the narrative in the west on Pak's support for militants w/o actually changing the policy is pointless https://www.dawn.com/news/1593373/truth-of-the-matter

Now, of course, there's plenty of room in Pakistan to complain about how the west gives India a free pass for its actions against Pak and on Kashmir. But that still won't change the narrative on Pak sponsored militants

So ultimately it comes down to this: Pak has to do a cost-benefit analysis of its choices. If it feels that these policies have and are serving Pak well, then persist with these policies and accept the narrative as an acceptable cost. Alternatively, change the policy.

But the key is to have an honest conversation about the costs and benefits and also about who's been making these policies. FATF stick etc are part of this as well as the radicalization on Pak soil and its blowback.

Now if these are acceptable costs and if these are wise policies, then give GHQ credit. If these costs are too high and you feel these are bad or unsustainable policies, then criticise GHQ. Own your trade offs and properly give all the credit and blame where it belongs.