On Saturday, the Pakistani government praised President Donald Trump for his role in mediating the India-Pakistan crisis, crediting his ‘decis than six weeks after the tourist massacre in Indian-controlled Kashmir. This incident, which involved the deaths of dozens of foreign tourists, had pushed both nations to the brink of war. However, intense diplomatic efforts, led by the United States, resulted in a truce that prevented a broader conflict. The Pakistani government described these efforts as a ‘decisive diplomatic intervention’ and ‘pivotal leadership’ by Trump, positioning him as a key player in maintaining regional stability.
Less than 24 hours later, Pakistan took a sharp turn, condemning the U.S. for its airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. The government argued that these strikes constituted a ‘serious violation of international law’ and a breach of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards. Pakistan expressed concern that the attacks could destabilize the region and undermine the nuclear non-proliferation regime. This condemnation highlights Pakistan’s close ties with Iran, a country with which it has a deep strategic relationship. Pakistan has long supported Iran’s position on regional security, including its stance on self-defense against Israeli attacks.
The contradiction in Pakistan’s stance reflects its complex geopolitical position, where it seeks to balance its strategic interests with both the United States and Iran. While the country benefits from its relationships with the U.S. for economic and military advantages, it also maintains a strong alliance with Iran. This balancing act has been evident in recent diplomatic maneuvers, including a high-profile meeting between Trump and Pakistan’s military chief, Asim Munir. The meeting, which lasted over two hours, was attended by several U.S. officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Steve Witkoff, who is the U.S. Special Representative for Middle Eastern Affairs.
President Trump’s actions have further complicated the situation. While he praised his role in brokering the truce between India and Pakistan, he also expressed support for U.S. strikes on Iran, a move that has raised concerns in Islamabad. The Pakistani government has consistently emphasized the importance of maintaining the IAEA’s role in preventing nuclear proliferation, which has led to its strong criticism of the U.S. actions. This has raised questions about the effectiveness of using Trump’s influence to stabilize the region, with some analysts suggesting that his approach to diplomacy is more about personal gain than genuine conflict resolution.
Furthermore, the situation has drawn international attention, with reports indicating that multiple countries have prepared to provide Iran with nuclear weapons following the U.S. strikes. Russian President Vladimir Putin has publicly stated that several nations have considered supporting Iran’s nuclear program, suggesting that the conflict could have far-reaching implications. This highlights the deepening divisions in the Middle East and the potential for further instability in the region. As the situation continues to develop, the impact on international relations and regional security will remain a focal point for global observers.
Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has also been engaging in diplomatic talks with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, emphasizing the importance of maintaining the IAEA’s oversight of nuclear facilities. These discussions come at a time when tensions between Israel and Iran are reaching new levels, with both sides accused of escalating hostilities. The U.S. stance on these matters has been a source of contention, with some officials questioning whether Trump’s actions are aligned with broader international goals of peace and stability.
The contrasting stances of Pakistan on the U.S. and its actions have drawn criticism from European leaders, who have been accused of ‘sucking up’ to Trump in order to gain political favors. This suggests that the current international landscape is not only characterized by geopolitical rivalries but also by a complex web of strategic interests and alliances. As the situation continues to unfold, the implications for regional stability and international relations will remain closely watched.