The Iran–US–Israel Conflict and Pakistan!
Ishtiaq Ahmed
Bradford: For Pakistanis living both inside and outside Pakistan, Pakistan’s position on this issue appears somewhat ambiguous. Many important questions are circulating in people’s minds, and there is strong curiosity to know their answers.
For example: Is Pakistan standing with Iran and opposing the illegal war on Iran by the United States and Israel ? If that is the case, then why is Pakistan’s leadership not openly condemning the United States and Israel?
On the other hand, if Pakistan supports the American or Israeli position, then why does it avoid adopting a clear and explicit policy?
Many other questions of this nature are also creating unease in the minds of Pakistanis, home and abroad.
There may be several possible reasons behind Pakistan’s ambiguous policy:
First: Pakistan’s economy is currently weak, and the country is burdened by loans from the IMF. In this situation, it is in great need of the support and cooperation of the United States.
This reality places Pakistan in a position of dependence on the United States, from which it is not easy to distance itself.
Read More: https://thepenpk.com/usa-lead-attack-on-iran-behind-the-rhetoric/
Moreover, because of the unpredictable and unpredictable mindset of Donald Trump, there is always the concern that he could adopt an adverse stance toward Pakistan at any time. Therefore, Pakistan tries not to antagonise him .
Pakistan’s proposal to nominate Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize and other diplomatic gestures can be viewed in this context. Similarly, discussions in certain circles about recognising Israel or participation in international Trump’s ‘ Peace Board ‘ can also be interpreted as diplomatic efforts to keep him satisfied.
Pakistan is also aware that India is always looking for opportunities, and if distance were to emerge between Pakistan and the United States, India would be ready to fill that gap, which could create further difficulties for Pakistan.
Second: Pakistan’s close allies, such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar, are generally considered allies of the United States. For several reasons, Pakistan does not wish to go against their positions, especially that of Saudi Arabia, which has often provided financial assistance to Pakistan during difficult times.
In addition, millions of Pakistanis are employed in these countries, and the remittances they send back are extremely important for Pakistan’s economy. If, for any reason, these workers were to return home, Pakistan could face an even deeper economic crisis.
Read More: https://thepenpk.com/the-strike-that-changed-the-middle-east/
Third: On the other hand, Iran is an important neighboring country and one of the major states in the Muslim world. Pakistan and Iran share long-standing economic, religious, and cultural ties; therefore, Pakistan cannot openly oppose Iran either.
Furthermore, Pakistan has a significant population belonging to the Shia sect, whose religious and intellectual connections with Iran are often acknowledged.
If Pakistan were to take an openly hostile stance against Iran, it could increase religious tensions and sectarian divisions within the country, which would be harmful to an already fragile national cohesion.
Fourth: Pakistan also wishes to maintain its long-standing friendship with China. China is an important partner in Pakistan’s economic development and infrastructure projects, so Pakistan cannot afford to alienate it. Moreover, as a neighboring superpower, China has a highly significant strategic role in the region, one that cannot be ignored.
These and many other factors have contributed to making Pakistan’s policy on this issue somewhat cautious and ambiguous.
The author is a British citizen of Pakistani origin with a keen interest in Pakistani and international affairs.
The article is the writer’s opinion, it may or may not adhere to the organization’s editorial policy.
As the author of the article rightly points out that since Pakistan’s economice survival depends on America and Saudi Arabia, its policy on ongoing war between America, Israel and Iran will remain ambiguous. But the war which started just over a week ago has already escalated to engulf the whole region .Available evidence suggests that it will prolong and may stretch out to cover the whole world. Therefore, Pakistan will have to, sooner than later, provide clarity on its foreign policy about the war despite the fact it is surrounded in precarious position. The dilemma is real but is of its own making. Pakistan’s foreign policy for many decades has been openly slanted in favour of America and successive governments, willingly and unwillingly, compromised Pakistan’s national integrity and sovereignty. This kind of servile and subservient policy of successive governments of Pakistan deprived the country of its political and economic independence.
Hence, the ambiguity and uncertainty in deciding now whether to support the offenders or the defender. However, time is running out for the government, despite economic and political considerations to tell the people of the country when and how the government will overcome this predicament of uncertainty because there is no choice for the economically weak nations to remain neutral.
Mr Ishtiaq Ahmed’s article raises a very real and widely discussed dilemma in Pakistani foreign policy. His central argument is that Pakistan appears ambiguous regarding tensions involving Iran, the United States, and Israel, and he tries to explain why that ambiguity exists. Here is a balanced commentary on this article:
1. Strength of the Article: Explaining Pakistan’s Strategic Constraints
The article correctly highlights that Pakistan’s policy is shaped by multiple competing relationships, not a single ideological position.
He identifies four key pressures:
Economic Dependence
Pakistan’s reliance on financial support from institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and diplomatic ties with Washington makes it difficult to openly oppose the United States.
This is a realistic observation. Countries with fragile economies often adopt carefully balanced diplomatic language rather than strong public condemnation.
Gulf Alliances
Pakistan’s relationship with Gulf states like Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Qatar is also critical.
Millions of Pakistanis work there, and their remittances form a major part of Pakistan’s foreign income. The article rightly notes that any geopolitical tension affecting these countries could indirectly affect Pakistan’s economy.
Relations with Iran
Pakistan cannot alienate Iran because:
It is a neighbouring country
There are religious and cultural ties
Sectarian balance inside Pakistan is sensitive
The article is correct that taking a strongly anti-Iran position could increase internal sectarian tensions.
China Factor
Pakistan’s strategic partnership with China is another critical dimension.
Projects under China–Pakistan Economic Corridor make China one of Pakistan’s most important economic partners.
2. Political Insight in the Article
The writer also touches on Pakistan’s concern about India gaining influence in Washington if Pakistan distances itself from the U.S.
This reflects a long-standing strategic calculation in Islamabad.
3. Areas Where the Article Could Be Stronger
While the article raises important points, a few aspects could be developed further:
Lack of Historical Context
Pakistan’s foreign policy has often followed a “strategic balancing” approach for decades. The article could have mentioned historical precedents where Pakistan maintained relationships with competing global powers simultaneously.
Domestic Political Dimension
The article focuses mainly on foreign relations but less on internal politics in Pakistan, where governments often avoid strong positions to manage domestic political divisions.
Evidence vs Opinion
Many arguments in the article are analytical opinions rather than supported by official statements or policy documents. Adding sources or examples from government statements could strengthen credibility.
4. Overall Assessment
The article presents a reasonable explanation of why Pakistan’s foreign policy may appear ambiguous.
Its main message is essentially this:
Pakistan is trying to balance relationships with multiple powerful partners simultaneously, including:
the United States
Gulf states
Iran
China
Because these relationships sometimes conflict with each other, Pakistan often chooses careful diplomacy rather than clear public alignment.
* Conclusion:
The article provides a thoughtful interpretation of Pakistan’s geopolitical constraints. While it could include more evidence and historical context, it successfully highlights the complex strategic environment in which Pakistan operates.