What the Israel-Iran-US conflict taught Pakistan

Middle East Eye

7 hours ago

The freshly thawed conflict between Israel and Iran, including recent US strikes targeting Iran's nuclear facilities, placed Pakistan in a fragile position, caught between regional loyalties and strategic considerations.
Islamabad shares a 905‑km border with Iran across the province of Balochistan, a porous and volatile region where cross-border militant networks are already active. Historically, Iran was the first country to recognise Pakistan in 1947, and supported it in the 1965 and 1971 wars with India, building enduring political and cultural ties.
Pakistan has responded to the Iran-Israel standoff by extending what it describes as 'unequivocal and unambiguous' diplomatic and moral support to Tehran, strongly condemning Israeli air strikes, along with the US attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities, as blatant violations of Iran's sovereignty and international law.
While Iran acknowledged and welcomed Islamabad's solidarity, Pakistan deliberately avoided making military commitments, underscoring its caution.
On Monday, Iran launched a choreographed attack on a US base in Qatar as retaliation for US strikes.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
While the strikes were followed by US President Donald Trump declaring a ceasefire between Israel and Iran, the conflict cemented the notion that growing volatility in the Middle East can easily land on Pakistan's doorstep in South Asia.
Engagement with Washington
A meeting on 19 June at the White House between Field Marshal Asim Munir, Pakistan's army chief, and US President Donald Trump underscored Pakistan's heightened diplomatic mobilisation.
The meeting was framed primarily around Pakistan's role in diffusing a recent India-Pakistan conflict, but the ongoing Iran-Israel confrontation at the time, and the potential for direct US military involvement, were central to the discussions, experts believe.
After the meeting, Trump said that 'Pakistan knows Iran very well, better than most', and added that Islamabad was 'not happy' with the current escalation.
'In every respect, this conflict is likely to have serious repercussions for Pakistan, and we must begin preparing for its impact'
- Pakistani security official
While US officials extended public thanks for Pakistan's help in de-escalating regional flare-ups, Islamabad emphasised that it had offered no military advice and advocated for diplomacy, citing potential harm to US interests as unwise.
Following his four-day visit to the United States, General Asim Munir travelled directly to Turkey to attend an emergency summit of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, which was convened to address the Iran-Israel crisis.
Pakistan also abstained from a recent International Atomic Energy Agency vote condemning Iran, reinforcing its diplomatic caution.
However, Pakistani security officials have expressed concern that the country may not be able to shield itself from the spillover effects of the Iran conflict.
'In every respect, this conflict is likely to have serious repercussions for Pakistan, and we must begin preparing for its impact,' a security official based in Islamabad told Middle East Eye.
Sectarian tensions
Pakistan's security outlook with regard to Iran is shaped by a complex matrix of historical ties, geographical proximity and sectarian sensitivities, placing Islamabad in a strategically precarious position.
While Pakistan is a majority Sunni country, it is home to a sizeable Shia minority, estimated on the low end to constitute between 15–20 percent of its nearly 250 million citizens. This community holds deep religious, cultural and emotional ties with Iran, widely viewed by Shia Muslims as a spiritual and ideological centre.
These connections make Pakistan's position particularly delicate, as the appetite for national militarism rises in the Middle East.
Analysts and Shia leaders warn that any overt support by Islamabad for military action against Iran, or even a stance of perceived neutrality, could exacerbate sectarian tensions and trigger political unrest. Pakistan has a long and often violent history of sectarian conflict, usually inflamed by geopolitical shifts in the Muslim world.
'Targeting him (Ayatollah Khamenei) would provoke serious emotional and political consequences, including within Pakistan'
- Syed Ali Rizvi, Shia cleric
In Karachi, Pakistan's largest city, thousands marched on Sunday in protest against US and Israeli strikes on Iran.
'Any alignment with a western or Israeli-led offensive against Tehran would not only alienate a significant portion of our population but could also destabilise the internal security fabric of the country,' Syed Ali Raza Rizvi, a Shia cleric in Karachi, told MEE.
Rizvi warned that attempts to forcibly dislodge Iran's clerical leadership would carry profound repercussions.
'Ayatollah Khamenei is not like Mullah Omar, Saddam Hussein, or Bashar al-Assad. He is a marja [religious authority], a source of emulation for millions of Shias worldwide. Targeting him would provoke serious emotional and political consequences, including within Pakistan.'
Some experts noted that Shia groups in Pakistan, including influential figures in mainstream political parties, could pressure the government to adopt a more assertive pro-Iran stance.
Last year, Pakistan banned the Zainabiyoun Brigade, a militia reportedly backed by Iran and known for recruiting Pakistani Shia youth to fight alongside the now ousted Assad government in Syria, Tehran's key ally before its collapse in December.
'We saw how emotionally charged the atmosphere became in Pakistan after the US drone strike that killed General Qassem Soleimani in 2020,' said Ali Hilal, a Karachi-based analyst on Middle Eastern affairs.
Pakistan-Iran border fallout
The 905-km border along Pakistan's southwestern province of Balochistan is known for its porous frontiers and overlapping ethnic communities. On the Iranian side lies Sistan-Baluchestan, home to similar Baloch populations.
Much in a similar vein to its border with Afghanistan, cross-border ethnic ties further south complicate Pakistan's ability to remain insulated from regional instability.
Analysts stress the risk that instability in Iran could create 'ungoverned spaces' along the Pakistan border, fueling militant movements and reigniting separatist ambitions.
'Iran's internal conflict dynamics are never fully contained within its borders - they inevitably spill over into Pakistan, particularly in Balochistan, where a separatist insurgency is already simmering,' said Imtiaz Baloch, an Islamabad-based researcher specialising in cross-border ethnic movements and regional militancy.
Why did Pakistan and Iran bomb each other and then become friends again? Read More »
Islamabad and Tehran have traded accusations for years: Pakistan claims Iran offers refuge to Pakistani separatists such as the Baloch Liberation Army and Baloch Liberation Front, while Iran accuses Pakistan of harbouring Iranian Sunni militants, including Jaish al‑Adl.
Tensions flared in January 2024 when both struck each other's territory with missiles, a rare but serious escalation.
The idea of a pan-Baloch homeland, often referred to as 'Greater Balochistan', has gained renewed traction among militant and nationalist circles.
Groups such as the Free Balochistan Movement, led by Hyrbyair Marri, a self-exiled Baloch separatist based in the UK, have openly advocated for an independent Baloch state carved out of both Pakistan and Iran. The resurgence of such rhetoric, analysts warn, could further destabilise the volatile border region.
Islamabad has already sealed five border crossings and launched countermeasures in Balochistan since mid‑June to curb militant infiltration and deter refugee influx, recalling the Afghan refugee crises after the Soviet invasion in 1979 and the Taliban's takeovers in 1996 and 2021.
Nukes and Israeli air supremacy
Another critical concern for Pakistan stems from the precedent set by US and Israeli air strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities - and the potential extension of Israeli aerial dominance near Pakistan's western frontier.
The strikes are particularly alarming for Islamabad, a nuclear-armed state bordering its long-time rival, India, another nuclear power.
The notion that one country can target another's nuclear infrastructure with apparent impunity raises profound questions about the erosion of global non-proliferation norms, experts said.
'Israel achieving total air dominance over Iran would dramatically shift the regional security calculus and threaten the strategic balance'
- Pakistani foreign ministry official
'Pakistan has condemned the US attack on nuclear sites, possibly with the thought of the dangerous precedent that it sets in its hostility with India,' said Farhan Hanif Siddiqi, a professor at the school of politics and international relations at Quaid-i-Azam University in Islamabad.
Siddiqui added that Pakistan had to assert that its nuclear capabilities and deterrence aren't aimed westward.
"It (Pakistan) has made it clear that its strategic and nuclear forces remain directed at India and not any other country,' Siddiqi told MEE.
A less direct but equally profound concern for Pakistan, which does not recognise Israel and views it as an enemy, is the reported expansion of Israeli air superiority deep into Iranian airspace.
Both Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Trump publicly claimed that Israeli forces were able to take total control of Tehran's skies, a declaration that didn't go unnoticed in Islamabad.
'Israel achieving total air dominance over Iran would dramatically shift the regional security calculus and threaten the strategic balance on Pakistan's western flank,' said a Pakistani foreign ministry official.
'It is not just an Iranian concern. It sets a dangerous precedent that could reverberate across the region, including here in South Asia.'
Reset in US-Pakistan relations
Islamabad saw the Munir-Trump meeting as a vital diplomatic reset after strained ties under the Biden administration, where issues like Pakistan's missile programme had soured US perceptions.
After a shaky ceasefire, US and Israel can hardly claim to have deterred Iran Read More »
The Pakistan military's media wing, Inter-Services Public Relations, boasted that the meeting achieved more in three days than India had in three decades - underscoring Islamabad's pride in repositioning itself at the centre of US strategic attention.
'Pakistan values its renewed relations with Iran but not at the cost of relations with the US, which it has tried hard to reset, given the recent Trump-Munir meeting,' said Siddiqi.
But some analysts caution against interpreting the meeting as a fundamental shift in US policy. They note that Washington's relationship with Pakistan has historically been driven by short-term strategic needs rather than long-term alignment.
'US policy toward Pakistan is unchanging from administration to administration and transactional, as always,' Shuja Nawaz, a Washington-based political analyst and author of The Battle for Pakistan: The Bitter US Friendship and a Tough Neighbourhood, said on X. 'Pakistan needs to strengthen itself within its neighborhood to remain relevant and useful to its friends in both America and China.
Nawaz emphasised that Pakistan's leadership, civilian and military, must draw lessons from history. 'A stronger polity and a strong economy. Otherwise, it will be at the mercy of its misalliances.'
High‑wire act
Pakistan's most pressing challenge continues to be its long-held policy of strategic non-alignment, often referred to as 'no-camp politics', as tensions in the Middle East refuse to die down.
The recent flare-up between Israel, Iran and the US pushed Islamabad's ability to tread its careful middle path to the brink. Pakistan will count itself as lucky if the Israel-Iran ceasefire holds and the US chooses the negotiating table.
Pakistan's position is made more precarious by internal vulnerabilities, including the rise of terrorism after the Taliban's recapture of Afghanistan in 2021, sectarian sensitivities, economic strain and political instability. Coupled with external pressures from competing global powers seeking regional footholds, Pakistan once again could find itself in the unenviable position it found itself during the US's global "war on terror".
'The concern is that there are no free lunches in Washington,' said the Pakistani security official, alluding to historical precedents.
'We've seen this before, becoming a frontline state against the Soviets in 1979, and again post-9/11 against al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Each time, the cost to internal security and national cohesion was enormous.'
Whether Pakistan can avoid being drawn into a new US-led security group or choose its own path focused on regional peace will be a key challenge for its diplomacy in the coming months.
For now, Islamabad will continue to attempt its balancing act without a clear path forward.