If a country is domestically stable, with economic vibrancy, good governance, and the rule of law, then it makes sense for it to engage in mediation to manage a crisis or conflict. Pakistan’s role in promoting peace in the Persian Gulf by serving as a mediator between the United States and Iran is commendable. However, in a situation where the country lacks political stability, its economy is in dire straits, and violence and terrorism are escalating in the restive provinces of Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, it does not make sense for Islamabad to involve itself in issues that are external in nature.
Domestic Flashpoints Demand Immediate Attention
The growing schism in Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK), with the banned Joint Awami Action Committee (JAAC) leading protests and demonstrations, particularly in Rawalakot, demanding the abolition of the 12 seats in the AJK Assembly reserved for refugees and relief for people in the form of cheaper energy, food, and other essential items, is another flashpoint. Why did Pakistan involve itself in the Iran–United States conflict, and how did it achieve success in facilitating the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between Tehran and Washington on a 60-day ceasefire and the launch of negotiations to resolve issues ranging from the nuclear programme to the Strait of Hormuz, the release of frozen assets, and the lifting of sanctions against Iran?
Certainly, the role played by Pakistan and Qatar in promoting peace in the Persian Gulf deserves appreciation, as it reflects how diplomacy can play a cogent role in averting the resumption of another phase of the Iran–United States war. One wonders who can mediate between Pakistan and Afghanistan, and between Pakistan and India, given that Islamabad remains in conflict with both countries. Why did Pakistan, despite the complicated nature of Iran–United States relations and the high degree of mistrust between Tehran and Washington, choose to become involved in mediation and peace-making? Why does the Pakistani state disregard alarming domestic issues that threaten to destabilise the country's political and economic landscape?
Saudi Arabia Is A Key Player In Resolving The Israel-U.S. War Against Iran
In retrospect, Pakistan played a pivotal role in mending fences between Communist China and the United States when it facilitated the secret visit of the then American National Security Adviser, Dr Henry Kissinger, from Islamabad to Peking in July 1971. However, Pakistan’s critical role in China–United States normalisation of relations backfired because the Soviet Union and India, both of which had antagonistic relations with China at the time, were offended and signed the Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation in August 1971. The Soviet tilt in favour of India during the December 1971 war was the result of Pakistan’s role in facilitating Sino-American rapprochement. Furthermore, the United States seldom acknowledged Pakistan’s role in mending fences with Communist China.
At a time when Pakistan was facing an insurgency in what was then East Pakistan, was it advisable and prudent for Islamabad to facilitate the Sino-American normalisation process, particularly when such a role carried risks and antagonised the Soviet Union? At a time when the focus of the Pakistani state should have been on strengthening the economy by enhancing foreign exchange reserves, increasing the country’s meagre exports, and attracting greater foreign direct investment, Islamabad’s priority should have been to put its economic house in order rather than focusing on mediating the Iran–United States conflict. Likewise, one can argue that, instead of involving itself in mediation on external issues, Pakistan should focus on dealing with alarming domestic challenges.
Will Washington Acknowledge Pakistan’s Role?
Taking the example of the American lack of appreciation for Pakistan’s role in facilitating rapprochement with Communist China, what is the guarantee that Washington will acknowledge Pakistan’s mediatory role in promoting peace between Iran and the United States in the future? It is true that, given Pakistan’s unique geo-strategic and geopolitical position in the region, along with its cordial relations with both Iran and the United States, Islamabad utilised its advantageous position to play a mediatory role between Tehran and Washington. But will Islamabad be able to deal with the emerging challenges arising from the Iran–United States MoU, particularly those relating to the Strait of Hormuz, uranium enrichment, the unfreezing of Iranian assets, and the lifting of sanctions? And how would Pakistan deal with Israel’s belligerent attitude in attempting to subvert the Iran–United States MoU?
Pakistan has no diplomatic relations with Israel. From every standpoint, the Jewish state has enormous influence in the United States and is in a position to destabilise the emerging Iran–United States peace process.
Pakistan’s Middle Power Aspirations Are A Balancing Act Between Diplomacy And Domestic Crisis
The argument that the focus should be on managing and resolving domestic issues instead of becoming involved in external matters should be examined from three standpoints. First, political schism and polarisation in Pakistan are stark realities. The coalition government faces legitimacy issues because of allegations that the February 2024 elections were neither free nor fair. Even after more than two years in power, the Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) and the Pakistan Peoples Party have been unable to justify their hold on power, while the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, despite all the restrictions imposed by the then Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Qazi Faez Isa, and other measures designed to deny the party its seats in the National Assembly and the Punjab Provincial Assembly, is still regarded as a cogent threat by the coalition parties and their principal backers.
It is not only the question of the coalition government’s legitimacy; the situation in Balochistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and Azad Jammu and Kashmir is also alarming. In particular, the JAAC movement in AJK tends to question the writ of the state and highlights its failure to address issues that have fuelled popular discontent. Reports that the JAAC has refused to accept the authority of the state are deeply alarming. When Pakistan is facing enormous domestic political challenges, why has Islamabad involved itself in external matters such as the Iran–United States conflict? Unless Pakistan puts its political house in order, how can it expect its foreign policy initiatives to yield plausible results?
Economic Crisis: Debt Servicing Consumes Over 70% of Budget
Second, Pakistan’s economy is in dire straits. The budget for 2026–27 reflects that more than 70 per cent of total expenditure will be devoted to servicing debt and covering defence spending. The remaining 30 per cent is allocated to running the federal and provincial governments and financing development expenditure. Furthermore, during the 2026–27 fiscal year, Pakistan will have to repay 12 billion dollars in debt to its lenders. Law Students Debate Evolving Legal Dimensions Of Domestic Violence Borrowing from the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, other multilateral financial institutions, and friendly countries will further increase Pakistan’s external debt, with potentially disastrous implications. When there is insufficient money to finance development expenditure, and 57 per cent of federal revenues are transferred to the provinces under the National Finance Commission Award, Pakistan’s economic predicament is indeed alarming. At a time when the focus of the Pakistani state should have been on strengthening the economy by enhancing foreign exchange reserves, increasing the country’s meagre exports, and attracting greater foreign direct investment, Islamabad’s priority should have been to put its economic house in order rather than focusing on mediating the Iran–United States conflict.
Other Existential Threats: Terrorism, Water Crisis, Brain Drain
Finally, other issues threaten the very existence of Pakistan, such as violence and terrorism. With around 65 per cent of Pakistan’s population comprising young people, their growing anger and frustration are likely to intensify public discontent. The brain drain of talented individuals to foreign countries is another unfortunate reality. The rising cost of living, the inadequate supply of gas to consumers, and electricity load-shedding are further challenges confronting Pakistan. On top of this is the water crisis, following India’s suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty in 2025 and Afghanistan’s construction of dams on the Kabul River. The water crisis, together with climate change and the environmental catastrophe caused by the melting of glaciers, also requires effective attention from both the state and society.
The aforementioned facts and analysis regarding Pakistan’s domestic predicament require the state to focus on addressing issues that threaten the very survival of the country instead of becoming involved in external matters such as the Iran–United States conflict. It is high time that the stakeholders in Pakistan reset their priorities and address issues that are primarily domestic in nature.
Pakistan’s Moment: Why Trump Should Seal the Historic Iran Deal In Islamabad
There is also an urgent need to tackle other pressing problems, such as the poor quality of education, particularly when 26 million children remain out of school. The menace of corruption, nepotism, and the lack of merit also pose serious challenges. Therefore, it is high time that the Pakistani state effectively addressed its domestic issues before the country reaches the point of fragility or failure.
