In a bold statement at the UN General Assembly’s 96th Plenary Meeting of the 80th Session during the 9th Review of the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy (GCTS), Pakistan laid out an 11-point action plan to reshape global counter-terrorism efforts. The proposal calls for a comprehensive assessment of new and emerging threats in both physical and digital domains, realistic pathways to resolve prolonged conflicts, an end to foreign occupation, and strict adherence to human rights and the rule of law. It also demands that the legitimate struggle for self-determination be clearly distinguished from terrorism, condemns state terrorism against occupied peoples, and urges measures to counter xenophobia, racism, far-right extremism, and the desecration of religious symbols. Notably, Pakistan explicitly calls for eliminating biased terms such as 'Islamic terrorism' and 'radical Islam,' and for reforming the UN’s counter-terrorism architecture and sanctions regimes. The statement also advocates for regulating social media and digital financial systems to curb hate speech, radicalization, and terrorist financing. In my opinion, while Pakistan’s points address deeply relevant and often overlooked drivers of terrorism—such as unresolved conflicts, foreign occupation, and state-sponsored violence—the proposal risks being politically instrumentalized. For instance, the emphasis on self-determination could be used by states to justify violent non-state actors as freedom fighters, blurring the line between legitimate resistance and terrorism. Additionally, the heavy focus on Islamophobia and bias is valid, but the strategy must equally address other forms of religious and ethnic extremism. The call for digital regulation is crucial, but it must not slide into censorship or state surveillance that undermines civil liberties. Overall, Pakistan’s intervention is a necessary, if contentious, push to rebalance a strategy that has historically been criticized for being one-sided and overly reliant on military measures.