By stepping forward as a mediator of the US/Israel-Iran ceasefire, Pakistan has achieved something it has long pursued, relevance on the global stage. But before recognition turns into legitimacy, key questions remain: How did a country once on the sidelines become central to such an agreement? And what does it mean for Israel?
Why Pakistan?
At the outset, it must be pointed out that Pakistan does not recognize Israel. It has no diplomatic relations with the Jewish state, and recently, Defense Minister Khawaja Asif urged the Muslim world to identify Israel and India as “true and eternal enemies.”
So, how is it that Pakistan has now been elevated into a critical mediating role for a ceasefire that directly affects Israeli civilians? Several factors explain this.
First, Pakistan has actively courted Washington, particularly under the current Trump administration. Unlike during US President Donald Trump’s first term, when Pakistan was publicly criticized, Islamabad has repositioned itself as useful; building direct channels not only with US policymakers but also with Trump’s inner circle, an approach that now appears to be paying off. Trump seems to be warm with Pakistani Chief Field Marshal Asim Munir, especially following the former’s role in de-escalating the India-Pakistan conflict last year.
However, the US appears to be using Pakistan less as a trusted partner and more as a strategic tool. Pakistan’s deep ties with China and defense imports from Russia make it a valuable channel for intelligence. The US may be shrewdly using its role as mediator to draw Pakistan into the spotlight while leveraging its access to Beijing and Moscow.
For the US, the priority is clear: Protect maritime trade routes, protect its military bases and assets in the Middle East, and contain Iran. By elevating Pakistan, Trump ensures it serves American interests in the Gulf region more effectively than the hardline mullahs of Tehran. Moreover, since the US withdrawal from Afghanistan, concerns about a China-Russia vacuum have intensified. Re-engaging Pakistan allows it to retain influence in the region. This is a calculated strategy.
Second, Pakistan offers something few others can: proximity and access. It shares a border with Iran, possesses deep cultural and sectarian linkages, and is home to roughly 40 million Shia Muslims. This gives Islamabad influence in Tehran that neither the Gulf states nor Western countries can replicate.
Third, Pakistan has positioned itself as an “indispensable broker” by maintaining working relationships across various parties: Washington, Beijing, Tehran, Riyadh, and Ankara. That balancing act, however, may ultimately undermine its reliability.
Pakistan’s foreign policy has long been driven by transactional gains rather than consistent principles, simultaneously cooperating with the US while enabling parties that undermine its interests; maintaining close ties with China while seeking Western support; and acting as both a security partner and a sponsor of proxy groups.
This pattern is not lost on regional players.
In the Gulf, patience with Pakistan is wearing thin. Saudi Arabia continues to maintain ties, but the UAE has shown increasing frustration, particularly over issues of security cooperation, labor flows, and financial dependency.
Pakistan is increasingly seen as a risk rather than a stable partner. China, too, may be reassessing. Islamabad’s attempt to balance between Washington and Beijing risks making it less of a strategic asset and more of a liability.
Pakistan’s defense dimension
Pakistan is now a mid-tier defense producer. Its Fiscal Year 2026 defense budget has risen to approximately $9 billion, a 20 percent increase, despite persistent fiscal instability, highlighting the country’s strong emphasis on defense. Its arms industry, supported heavily by China, is transitioning from assembly to indigenous design, with combat aircrafts, such as the JF-17 fighter gaining traction in export markets across Africa and the Middle East.
This growing defense capacity must also be viewed alongside Pakistan’s nuclear capabilities.
With an estimated arsenal of around 170 warheads, Pakistan has a principle of “full-spectrum deterrence,” including tactical nuclear weapons (TNWs) and its first-use ambiguity. Unlike strategic nuclear weapons, TNWs lower the threshold for use, creating a more volatile environment.
The country’s nuclear history is also not without complications. The legacy of the Abdul Qadeer Khan network, which transferred nuclear technology to Iran, Libya, and North Korea, remains one of the most severe breaches of global non-proliferation norms. While officially attributed to rogue individuals, the scale of the operation suggests systemic complicity on Pakistan’s part.
Analysis of Pakistan’s defense strategy must include India
Pakistan’s foreign and security policy has been defined by its confrontation with India. This rivalry has driven its reliance on nuclear deterrence, proxy warfare, and external alliances. Allegations of state-sponsored terrorism targeting India are foundational to understanding Pakistan’s behavior.
India, for its part, represents a strategic counterweight. With a defense budget approaching $94 billion (roughly nine times Pakistan’s), India combines scale with growing technological sophistication. Its partnerships with Israel in defense and intelligence are already robust and expanding under a framework of co-development and strategic alignment. This relationship is essential and rooted in mutual understanding. Both nations face similar threats: nuclear-armed adversaries, cross-border terrorism, and ideological extremism. They also share an operational focus on precision strikes on terror hubs and minimizing civilian harm.
Growing security concerns for Israel
Beyond its emergence as a growing defense power, new regional alignments also warrant close attention. A developing strategic convergence between Pakistan and Turkey poses a significant challenge to regional stability and has potential implications for Israel’s national security.
Turkey’s expanding regional ambitions, combined with Pakistan’s experience in proxy warfare and China-supported military modernization, create a potentially potent combination. Both countries also see themselves as champions of the Palestinian cause, reinforcing their ideological opposition to Israel.
Rhetoric from both Turkey and Pakistan has become more alarming.
Discussions in Turkish political circles about sending “martyrs” against the Jewish state to “wipe Israel off the map,” alongside Pakistan’s long-standing hostility, point to a dangerous direction. With both states driven by ideological motivations and strategic ambition, the possibility of a coordinated front against Israel is no longer unthinkable; making strong regional as well as broader alliances more urgent than ever.
With the Islamic regime at its weakest point, Pakistan is leveraging its position to rally the Muslim world against Israel and India. With historical ties to Iran’s nuclear program, and with a diverse Sunni-Shia population, Pakistan has the potential to act as a broader unifying force among Muslims; even more so than Iran, which under the Islamic regime remains primarily Shia.
Pakistan’s “skin in the game” lies less in stabilizing the region than in shaping a new ideological order in the Middle East and beyond, while projecting importance to the West through its alignment with the US.
Pakistan’s moment in the spotlight should raise concerns.
The choice of Pakistan as a mediator of the ceasefire deal reflects a broader shift in global geopolitics, where usefulness is key.
For the United States, Pakistan is a means to an end—maintaining influence in the most volatile and oil-rich region in the world. For Israel, however, the risks are clear.
A nuclear-armed state with a history of proliferation, proxy warfare, and ideological hostility with no recognition of Israel is now shaping outcomes in a conflict that directly affects Israeli security.
That alone raises a fundamental question: Why has Pakistan been given the status of a ceasefire mediator?
In the coming months of uncertainty, cooperation between Israel and its key allies in the East such as India, and increasingly even the United Arab Emirates, in defense and intelligence will be increasingly vital to counter emerging threats, particularly from a growing Turkey-Pakistan alliance.
What guarantees exist that Pakistan’s nuclear sharing, once extended to Iran and North Korea, will not reach Turkey as well?
Yet there is reason for cautious optimism as hope lies with the people of Iran.
Should the Iranians reclaim their country, it could open the door to a new dawn where ancient civilizations move beyond conflict toward coexistence and progress.