Paris (Imran Y. CHOUDHRY) :- Former Press Secretary to the President, Former Press Minister to the Embassy of Pakistan to France, Former MD, SRBC Mr. Qamar Bashir analysis : The war between the United States, Israel, and Iran did not erupt suddenly. Beneath the surface of the conflict lay years of planning, strategic positioning, and diplomatic maneuvering aimed at weakening Iran’s nuclear, missile, and regional influence. When the first strikes were launched, they appeared dramatic and unexpected to the outside world, but the broader geopolitical architecture had already been carefully prepared. Alliances were strengthened, intelligence networks expanded, and regional actors were positioned in ways that limited Iran’s ability to respond effectively. In this unfolding strategic landscape, Pakistan found itself walking a diplomatic tightrope, attempting to maintain balanced relations with Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United States while safeguarding its own national interests.
One of the earliest signals that the geopolitical chessboard was being rearranged appeared soon after the new American administration assumed office. In an unprecedented gesture, the U.S. president hosted Pakistan’s Field Marshal for a high-profile meeting in Washington. The event was widely interpreted as a recognition of Pakistan’s strategic importance in the region and the central role played by its military leadership in shaping the country’s security policies. The meeting suggested that Washington was carefully engaging key regional players as it prepared for a more assertive approach toward Iran.
Following this engagement, Pakistan’s strategic posture began to shift in noticeable ways. Islamabad strengthened its defense cooperation with Saudi Arabia and Qatar, entering into a broader security framework with Gulf states that host significant American military installations. These arrangements reinforced Pakistan’s role in the Gulf’s defense architecture while simultaneously limiting its freedom to openly align with Iran in the event of a regional confrontation. The diplomatic message was clear: Pakistan remained a close partner of the Gulf states and the United States.
At the same time, another important strategic issue emerged. The United States expressed renewed interest in regaining operational flexibility at key regional facilities, including the strategically located Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan. Although the situation surrounding the base remained complex, the discussion itself highlighted Washington’s desire to strengthen its presence in the region and maintain strategic reach across South and Central Asia.
Parallel to these developments, Pakistan’s relations with Afghanistan began to deteriorate rapidly. For decades, despite periods of tension, the two countries had maintained a relationship rooted in shared culture, history, and geography. Even during difficult times, the narrative of fraternity and mutual interest had prevailed. However, increasing cross-border security incidents and accusations of militant infiltration gradually eroded trust. Preventive military strikes by Pakistan against militant targets inside Afghan territory further strained relations, transforming a historically complex but manageable relationship into one marked by deep suspicion.
The deterioration of Pakistan-Afghanistan relations created new geopolitical openings. Afghanistan’s leadership began exploring stronger ties with other regional actors, particularly India. This shift coincided with an already expanding partnership between India and Israel in areas such as defense technology, intelligence cooperation, and cybersecurity. Gradually, these relationships began to intersect in ways that reshaped the regional security environment.
The growing alignment between India and Israel is a part of Israel’s broader long-term strategic thinking. Israeli leaders have historically viewed nuclear and missile programs of Pakistan as potential threats to their national security. In the past, Israel has been associated with efforts to neutralize such capabilities in countries like Iraq, Syria, and others that were perceived as developing strategic weapons. From this perspective, the dismantling of Iran’s strategic infrastructure during the recent conflict is seen by some analysts as part of a wider effort to remove potential threats to Israel’s security.
Within this evolving landscape, Israel is strengthening its security cooperation with India and Afghanistan to position itself to establish spy and intelligence networks in Pakistan by using Afghanistan as a spring board. Similar methods by Israel have been extremely successful in taking out high profile leadership and kinetic and economic assets of Iraq, Syria, Libya, Lebanon, Qatar Yemen and Iran and the world over.
For Pakistan, these developments highlight the importance of vigilance and preparedness. The experience of Iran demonstrates how advanced intelligence capabilities, combined with technological surveillance, can identify and target critical infrastructure with extraordinary accuracy. Pakistan must therefore strengthen its counterintelligence systems, enhance cybersecurity defenses, and protect sensitive strategic facilities to ensure that its leadership and defense capabilities remain secure.
Meanwhile, the war itself delivered a severe blow to Iran’s strategic capabilities. Several key installations associated with its missile, drone, and nuclear programs reportedly suffered extensive damage. Economic infrastructure was also affected as sanctions tightened and regional instability disrupted trade and energy markets. The cumulative effect significantly weakened Iran’s ability to project power across the region.
The consequences of the conflict were felt far beyond Iran’s borders. Global oil markets experienced dramatic volatility, with prices briefly soaring before gradually stabilizing. For Pakistan, an energy-importing nation already struggling with economic pressures, these fluctuations created additional financial strain. Rising fuel prices translated into inflation, higher transportation costs, and growing hardship for ordinary citizens.
Amid these challenges, Pakistan continued to maintain a carefully balanced diplomatic approach. At international forums such as the United Nations, Pakistani representatives emphasized the principles of sovereignty, dialogue, and peaceful conflict resolution. Islamabad expressed concern about escalating hostilities while avoiding steps that might jeopardize its relationships with key partners in the Gulf or with Washington.
This delicate balancing act illustrates the complexity of Pakistan’s geopolitical environment. Few countries must simultaneously manage such diverse relationships with competing global and regional powers. Maintaining constructive ties with Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United States, and other regional actors requires a level of diplomatic precision rarely seen in international politics.
The broader lesson from the crisis is that modern conflicts are often shaped long before the first shots are fired. Strategic alliances, diplomatic engagements, intelligence networks, and regional realignments gradually build the framework within which military operations eventually unfold. By the time war begins, many of the key variables have already been determined.
Pakistan’s experience during the U.S.–Iran conflict underscores the importance of strategic foresight. While the war reshaped the Middle East’s balance of power, Islamabad managed to avoid direct involvement while preserving its relationships with multiple partners. Through cautious diplomacy and calculated restraint, Pakistan maintained stability at home while navigating one of the most volatile geopolitical crises of the decade.
As the region moves forward, Pakistan’s challenge will be to convert this diplomatic survival into long-term strategic advantage. Strengthening economic resilience, enhancing security infrastructure, and continuing a balanced foreign policy will be essential for navigating an increasingly uncertain global order.
In an era defined by shifting alliances and emerging power struggles, Pakistan’s ability to walk the diplomatic tightrope may prove to be its greatest strategic strength. By combining prudence, vigilance, and diplomatic agility, the country can continue to protect its sovereignty, safeguard its strategic assets, and remain a stabilizing force in a turbulent region.

Paris (Imran Y. CHOUDHRY) :- Former Press Secretary to the President, Former Press Minister to the Embassy of Pakistan to France, Former MD, SRBC Mr. Qamar Bashir analysis : Geopolitics has never been governed by sentiment. Not religion, not shared history, not cultural brotherhood—only interests. The unfolding realignments across South Asia and the Middle East illustrate this truth with striking clarity. Alliances are shifting, rivalries are recalibrating, and Pakistan finds itself increasingly positioned at the intersection of competing strategic designs.
The roots of today’s complexity stretch back to 1979, when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. Pakistan became the frontline state in a U.S.-backed campaign to counter Moscow. Billions of dollars in American and Saudi assistance flowed through intelligence networks to arm and train Afghan fighters. The mobilization of religious ideology was not incidental—it was strategic. Fighters from across the Muslim world converged in Afghanistan. By 1989, the Soviet withdrawal marked a Cold War victory for Washington and its partners.
But militant infrastructures rarely dissolve once their immediate utility ends. The Taliban emerged in the 1990s from the ashes of war, establishing control over Kabul in 1996. Pakistan was among the few nations to recognize their regime. Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, however, the same Taliban became the primary target of American military intervention. The subsequent 20-year war cost over $2 trillion and claimed more than 170,000 lives before the U.S. withdrawal in August 2021.
The Taliban’s return to power reshaped the region yet again. Instead of ushering in stability for Pakistan, however, cross-border militancy intensified. The Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), operating from Afghan soil, escalated attacks in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan. Islamabad responded with cross-border airstrikes against militant sanctuaries. While tactically decisive, these actions strained relations with Kabul and risked civilian backlash.
Instead, Pakistan with its deep intelligence roots in Afghanistan, had the option to adopt the same tactics which Afghanistan is using by infiltrating Pakistani Taliban in Pakistan and killing innocent people mostly by detonating human bombs in Mosque. This could have been a more discrete way to weed out the menace of TTP. History suggests that purely kinetic responses can produce unintended strategic consequences. Airstrikes may eliminate immediate threats, but they can also deepen mistrust and create diplomatic openings for rival powers.
In geopolitics, tactical victories can sometimes yield strategic setbacks. By intensifying overt military pressure, Islamabad may have inadvertently accelerated Kabul’s search for diversified partnerships.
That diversification is perhaps the most striking development. The Taliban government, ideologically committed to Islamic governance, has increasingly explored diplomatic and economic engagement beyond traditional Islamic partners. India reopened diplomatic channels in Kabul and expanded humanitarian assistance. Israel has pledged billions of dollars of aid to Kabul in alignment with India. This is a profound geopolitical entanglement: an Islamic Emirate seeking expanded engagement with a Hindu-majority India and a Jewish-majority Israel, even as tensions simmer with neighboring Muslim Pakistan.
This underscores a fundamental principle of realpolitik: states pursue survival and leverage, not theological alignment. Religious brotherhood and shared culture matter, but only when they coincide with national interest calculations. Facing economic collapse, frozen reserves, and diplomatic isolation, Kabul seeks diversification. India offers infrastructure and access. Israel offers technological cooperation and strategic outreach. Ideology yields to necessity.
For Pakistan, however, the optics intensify concerns of encirclement. On its eastern border, India remains a strategic competitor, particularly over Kashmir. On its western frontier now stands an Afghanistan willing to engage Islamabad’s rivals. To the southwest lies Iran, itself navigating tense relations with the United States. This evolving geometry fuels perceptions of a tightening strategic ring.
An additional dimension complicates matters further: Bagram Airbase. During the U.S. presence in Afghanistan, Bagram served as the largest American military installation in the country, with dual runways capable of handling heavy aircraft and advanced surveillance platforms. Its geographic location—approximately 500 kilometers from China’s Xinjiang region—made it strategically significant.
U.S. President Donald Trump publicly criticized the abandonment of Bagram in 2021, arguing that retaining the base would have preserved American leverage, particularly in the context of intensifying U.S.-China rivalry. Bagram’s proximity to Central Asia, Iran, and western China positions it as more than a counterterrorism platform—it is a potential springboard in great-power competition.
While direct American military reentry into Afghanistan appears unlikely in the near term, evolving regional alignments could create indirect pathways of influence. The strengthening of India’s presence in Kabul, combined with Israel’s strategic engagement in broader Asian geopolitics, introduces analytical possibilities. Washington maintains deep defense partnerships with both New Delhi and Tel Aviv. If Afghanistan continues diversifying toward these actors, space may gradually reopen for U.S. strategic leverage—without formal troop deployments.
Interestingly, geopolitics often unfolds through indirect channels. For Washington, containing China remains a central strategic priority. For India, Afghanistan offers westward strategic depth. For Israel, expanded regional engagement broadens diplomatic influence. For Kabul, diversified partnerships reduce isolation. For Pakistan, however, these convergences heighten strategic anxiety.
For Israel, extending its engagement with Kabul through India would provide a strategic foothold in South Asia and enhance its capacity to deter Pakistan from aligning with Turkey and Saudi Arabia in any configuration perceived as intimidating to Israel. Such cooperation could be viewed as a counterweight to a potential alignment involving Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and nuclear-armed Pakistan, which some analysts argue might aim to exert strategic pressure or encirclement against Israel.
Simultaneously, the Persian Gulf remains heavily militarized. The U.S. Fifth Fleet in Bahrain deploys advanced naval assets, while Iran has invested in ballistic missiles, drones, and anti-ship systems designed to offset conventional asymmetry. China, importing substantial Gulf energy supplies, and Russia, expanding ties with Tehran, both observe carefully.
Any escalation between Washington and Tehran would reverberate in Pakistan. The country already hosts approximately 1.3 million registered Afghan refugees. A major Iran conflict could trigger further displacement, compounding economic strain amid IMF-backed reforms and domestic political polarization.
Internally, Pakistan faces political turbulence, including debates surrounding the incarceration of former Prime Minister Imran Khan and federal-provincial tensions. External pressure combined with internal division magnifies vulnerability.
Yet one broader truth emerges from this complex web: strategic encirclement is not solely a product of adversarial design. It can also arise from miscalculation, overreliance on hard power, and insufficient diplomatic agility. States that rely exclusively on military tools risk narrowing their strategic options.
This is a defining moment. Great-power rivalry, regional insecurity, and ideological contradictions intersect at fragile fault lines. Afghanistan’s outreach beyond traditional religious alignments demonstrates the primacy of interest over identity. Bagram symbolizes the enduring shadow of great-power competition. India and Israel’s evolving engagement in Kabul reflects the fluidity of modern alliances.
But history offers a sobering lesson. From the Soviet-Afghan war to the U.S. intervention, military campaigns have reshaped borders without resolving deeper grievances. Stability requires not merely deterrence but diplomacy.
Encirclement strategies may promise leverage. Hybrid doctrines may promise precision. Yet sustainable security demands cooperation grounded in mutual recognition of vulnerabilities.
Geopolitics may be ruthless in its calculations, but peace remains the only enduring strategic victory.

Monitoring Desk: The Moscow–Islamabad Media Forum will be held on February 27, 2026, to coincide with the official visit of the Prime Minister of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Muhammad Shehbaz Sharif, to Moscow, scheduled for the first week of March 2026.
The forum will serve as a platform for journalists, political experts, and diplomats from Pakistan and Russia to discuss the current state of bilateral relations, explore future opportunities, and analyze how the Russia–Pakistan partnership impacts global politics, the economy, and the contemporary media landscape.

Cooperation between Russia and Pakistan is of particular importance in the context of the transformation of international relations and the formation of a new system of global interaction. In recent years, contacts between the two countries have intensified at inter-parliamentary, expert, and media levels, while practical cooperation in the humanitarian and socio-political spheres continues to expand.
Within the framework of the forum, Russian and Pakistani journalists, political scientists, and representatives of diplomatic circles will discuss the current state and future prospects of bilateral relations, as well as the role of the Russia–Pakistan partnership in political, economic, and information processes shaping the modern world.
The event is timed to coincide with the official visit of the Prime Minister of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Shehbaz Sharif, to Moscow from March 3 to 5, 2026.
Admission for media representatives will be granted only through prior accreditation upon presentation of a passport and a valid editorial certificate confirming the journalist’s affiliation with the accredited media organization.
MSPC “Russia Today” reserves the right to refuse accreditation without providing an explanation.
This News is taken from
https://dnd.com.pk/pakistan-and-russia-deepen-media-and-diplomatic-dialogue-ahead-of-pm-sharifs-visit-to-moscow/328726/