On January 22, both nations announced the imminent return of their ambassadors after a telephonic discussion between their foreign ministries. The Pakistani foreign minister extended an invitation to his Iranian counterpart, Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, to visit Pakistan later this month. Both parties committed to addressing minor issues through mutual trust and dialogue, utilizing existing communication channels to defuse tensions. This return to normalcy reflects a mutual wariness to avoid further crisis escalation and prevent it from evolving into a new conflict front.
Denouncing the strikes as an 'illegal' and 'unprovoked' assault on its sovereignty and territorial integrity, Pakistan reiterated its determination to respond. As concerns mounted about a potential escalation between the neighboring countries, Islamabad initially recalled its ambassador and expelled the Iranian envoy, suspending all upcoming high-level meetings. Subsequently, Pakistan conducted retaliatory strikes, framed as an 'intelligence operation,' targeting the Baluchistan Liberation Front and the Baluchistan Liberation Army hideouts in Iran’s Sistan-Baluchistan province. While these reciprocal actions raised worries about the nations reaching a point of no return, calls for 'de-escalation' emerged, emphasizing the fraternal relations between the two countries.
Historically, Pakistan and Iran have grappled with differences over the sheltering of groups hostile to each other within their borders. The border region has witnessed numerous skirmishes and cross-border strikes over the years. However, for Pakistan, the timing of the recent strikes proved highly unfavorable. The preceding years witnessed a worsening domestic situation in Islamabad with no apparent relief. Challenges such as the removal of Imran Khan, attacks on symbols linked to the military, the country's rapidly declining economic condition, the threat posed by the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), and the military's struggle to control it, coupled with delays in national elections, collectively pushed the country to a critical juncture. Even before the strikes, concerns loomed over the successful conclusion of the February elections. Pakistan's domestic circumstances influenced its decision to cautiously assert itself and ultimately advocate for restraint.
The strikes were intended to convey a message: Despite facing internal challenges, Pakistan would not hesitate to take action if its sovereignty is threatened.
Facing challenges posed by the TTP and internal unrest, the military establishment's failure to mount a robust counter-attack would have further damaged its prestige and emboldened anti-Pakistan groups. The strikes aimed to convey a message: Despite internal crises, Pakistan would not hesitate to defend its sovereignty. The caretaker Prime Minister commended the armed forces' response, but beyond this display, Islamabad had little choice but to temper its reaction.
Since the return of the Taliban in Afghanistan, Pakistan's aspirations for strategic depth have faltered. The TTP, linked to the Afghan Taliban, has unleashed chaos with daily attacks in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Baluchistan. Efforts to persuade the Afghan Taliban to curb the TTP and broker a ceasefire have been futile.
The Taliban claims the TTP is Pakistan's internal problem, denying leverage, but its reluctance to act underscores Pakistan's policy repercussions. Supporting terrorist groups for regional influence has backfired, altering relations with the Islamic Emirate from Islamabad's expectations. Strained ties with India since 2019 and Iran's strikes on Jaish al Adl (a response to their attack in December 2023) deepen Pakistan's isolation. India's acknowledgment of Iran's concerns underscores the global call for dismantling terror networks, which Pakistan has failed to heed, leaving it more isolated in the region, posing a long-term challenge.
0 Comments