Pakistan must carefully navigate a complicated diplomatic chessboard

On my television screen, I watched a plume of smoke rise over Tehran as thousands of mourners beat their chests following the assassination of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in US–Israel strikes. The air was thick with vows of revenge.

Thousands of miles away in Karachi, a different but equally volatile scene unfolded. Emotional protesters — mostly young men — scaled the walls of the US Consulate, raising Hezbollah and Iranian flags while chanting against the United States and Israel. Clashes with police left several dead after an attempt to storm the compound.

The war in Iran is not a distant spectacle for Pakistan. It carries immediate and profound implications. The two countries share a long, porous border, and between 15 and 20 percent of Pakistan’s population is Shi’ite.

Historically, many within this community felt ideological affinity with Iran’s clerical leadership. After Khomeini’s revolution, religious political movements gained influence in Pakistan amid sectarian violence during the 1980s. That era belongs to history. Yet in today’s climate — especially after Gaza — anti-American and anti-Israel sentiment runs deep across both Shia and Sunni communities. If the war intensifies, anger and resentment could coalesce into a more organized movement. Pakistan cannot afford this. 

Balancing competing pressures will require deft diplomacy from Pakistan and careful calibration of national interests. 

- Owais Tohid

The country is already grappling with internal security challenges in insurgency-hit Balochistan, which borders Iran. Baloch militant groups carry out attacks inside Pakistan, while across the border in Iran’s Sistan region, Sunni insurgent groups such as Jaish Al-Adl operate. Instability on either side quickly reverberates across the frontier.

To the northwest lies Afghanistan, where relations with the Afghan Taliban have deteriorated sharply. Recent fighting has been among the fiercest in years, with Pakistan declaring an “open war” posture toward Kabul. Islamabad claims to have killed hundreds of militants while accusing the Taliban regime of harboring the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).

Pakistan now finds itself facing a volatile Afghanistan and a destabilized Iran — a precarious triangle in which any escalation could affect both its western borders simultaneously.

There are legitimate concerns that Pakistan’s military operations against militant groups operating out of Afghanistan and Baloch insurgents could be complicated if the conflict in Iran prolongs. An influx of refugees and potential spillover of unrest are additional risks. Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran all contain ethnic and sectarian fault lines that external shocks can aggravate.

For Iran, this moment is existential. Beyond Khamenei’s assassination, strikes reportedly killed senior officials including Revolutionary Guards commander General Mohammad Pakpour, security adviser Ali Shamkhani and Defense Minister Aziz Nasirzadeh. Iran’s regional posture had already weakened after the collapse of the Assad regime in Syria and setbacks faced by Hezbollah in Lebanon. Now, amid leadership uncertainty, Tehran must demonstrate resilience both domestically and abroad.

As Iran processes these losses and contemplates retaliation, the situation grows increasingly dangerous.

Back in Pakistan, protests against the US and Israel are likely to intensify. Public pressure could constrain the government’s diplomatic flexibility. If sentiment turns sharply hostile, Islamabad may face demands to distance itself from US-led initiatives such as the Trump-backed Board of Peace, potentially straining improving ties with Washington.

In recent years, Pakistan’s military diplomacy has enhanced its global profile. It aligned with Turkiye during a critical moment last June when Israel launched strikes on Iran, killing several high-profile figures. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian subsequently visited Islamabad to express gratitude for Pakistan’s stance. These gestures strengthened bilateral ties.

Today’s geopolitical landscape, however, is far more complex. US President Donald Trump has warned that strikes will continue until Iran’s nuclear and missile programs are dismantled and its regional proxy networks neutralized. He has urged Iranians to challenge their leadership — a move widely seen as a high-stakes gamble. Tehran, for its part, has vowed decisive retaliation.

For Pakistan, the dilemma is stark. On one side stands a superpower and longstanding partner in the United States, alongside Gulf Arab states with which Pakistan shares deep economic and strategic ties. President Trump is personally well-disposed toward Islamabad, and recent diplomatic engagement has warmed relations.

On the other side lies neighboring Iran — a country linked to Pakistan by geography, history and culture. If the conflict escalates, prevailing anti-US and anti-Israel sentiment within Pakistan could align more openly with Tehran. Balancing these competing pressures will require deft diplomacy and careful calibration of national interests.

So far, Pakistan’s leadership has adopted a cautious tone. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif expressed condolences, stating that “the government and people of Pakistan join the people of Iran in this hour of grief and sorrow.” Both Sharif and President Asif Ali Zardari described Khamenei’s killing as “martyrdom,” language reflecting domestic sensitivities while stopping short of inflammatory rhetoric.

The challenge ahead is formidable. Islamabad must prevent domestic unrest from spiralling while safeguarding fragile western borders. It must maintain working relations with Washington without alienating Tehran. It must guard against militant exploitation of regional turmoil while managing economic vulnerabilities that external shocks could worsen.

In short, Pakistan is navigating a complex diplomatic chessboard with little margin for miscalculation.

As the conflict deepens and its regional and global consequences unfold, Pakistan’s leadership will be tested not by ideology but by its ability to balance principle with pragmatism. Stability at home, equilibrium abroad and restraint in rhetoric will be essential.

The choices made in the coming weeks may shape not only Pakistan’s foreign policy trajectory but also its internal cohesion in an increasingly volatile neighborhood. 

- Owais Tohid has reported extensively on war and conflict in Asia for 30 years and witnessed the rise and fall of the Taliban in Afghanistan. He has also covered the Palestinian conflict in the Occupied Territories and worked for the BBC World Service, AFP and CS Monitor. X: @OwaisTohid