Pakistan PM Shehbaz Sharif and army chief Asim Munir (R) (PTI file photo)
The province recently announced plans to observe its own Independence Day, underlining the persistence of separatist sentiment.
“After the Pahalgam terror attack, by suspending the Indus Waters Treaty, we said that those whose tears have dried up should not expect water from us. We will not let the waters of the Sindhu reach the patrons of terrorists and enemies of humanity,” Rajnath said. “A house divided against itself cannot stand. Abraham Lincoln’s observation aptly captures Pakistan ‘s situation. its own foundations appear increasingly fragile While Islamabad chases the image of an indispensable diplomatic player. From brokering peace in Middle East to courting Washington and Beijing, Pakistan has sought a larger role in global diplomacy. Yet back home, it remains weighed down by economic distress, political unrest, separatist movements, water shortages, terrorism, and accusations of human rights abuses, an uneasy contradiction that defines the country’s present-day reality. The message was reiterated recently by defence minister Rajnath Singh recently on Kargil Vijay Diwas. For Pakistan, the water crisis has added yet another layer to an already fragile economic and political situation, with experts warning that prolonged shortages could further aggravate regional discontent. Balochistan continues to represent Pakistan’s longest-running internal security challenge While PoK has dominated headlines in recent weeks.
The MEA also condemned the Islamabad-backed ill-treatment and crackdown that killed 90 people in the region since June this year. Operation Sindoor fallout India swiftly showcased the scale of its response, striking nine terror bases and 11 military installations across Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). With all major rivers in Pakistan flowing into its territory from India, New Delhi had placed the decades-old Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance immediately after the Pahalgam massacre of April 22, 2025.
New Delhi’s “zero-tolerance” policy under Prime Minister Narendra Modi translated into a series of retaliatory actions that once again placed Pakistan under international scrutiny over terrorism. Iran formally informed mediators that it would not attend the proposed talks with American officials in Pakistan, according to The Wall Street Journal. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and military head Asim Munir stepped up engagement with Washington, with Munir’s growing proximity to the Trump administration earning him the title of Trump’s “favourite field marshal”. “I put the protesters of PoJK in the same category as India and consider them as enemies,” Asif said. The ministry of external affairs strongly denounced Pakistan’s mischievous handling of the situation, describing the elections in PoK as a “complete farce”. Amnesty International USA called reports emerging from PoK’s Rawalakot as “disturbing” and urged Pakistani authorities to restore communication services and permit independent media and observers into the region. “Terror and talks cannot go together; water and blood cannot flow together,” he had said.
Much of Pakistan’s strategic direction continues to be shaped by its military establishment, with army chief Asim Munir, the country’s de facto centre of power. His influence extends well beyond defence matters, as Pakistan’s military continues to function as a parallel authority that heavily influences domestic governance as well as foreign policy. That contrast between projecting stability abroad and confronting instability at home, has become one of Pakistan’s defining geopolitical challenges. Just over a year ago, Pakistan suffered one of its most difficult periods on the diplomatic and military fronts following India’s response to the Pakistan-backed terror attack in South Kashmir’s Pahalgam. Yet, even as tensions with India remained elevated, Islamabad quickly sought to recast its international image. Already maintaining close ties with China, Pakistan simultaneously attempted to deepen engagement with Donald Trump’s United States. For a country grappling with a fragile economy, maintaining goodwill with both Washington and Beijing has become increasingly important. It was in this backdrop that Pakistan pitched itself as a potential mediator between Iran and the United States. Pakistan’s bid to position itself as a regional peace broker did not begin smoothly. Its initial attempt to host talks between Iran and the United States faltered after Tehran rejected Islamabad as the venue. Islamabad, however, persisted. Around the same time, Sharif attended President Xi Jinping ‘s grand military parade in Beijing alongside leaders including Russian President Vladimir Putin and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. The event reinforced Pakistan’s continued strategic closeness with China even as it simultaneously sought stronger engagement with Washington. The most visible flashpoint in recent months has been Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), where the so-called Assembly elections have been conducted in three phases amid allegations of police excesses and restrictions on dissent. Videos and reports emerging from the region have shown violent confrontations between security forces and protesters, prompting criticism from rights groups and attracting international attention. Pakistan’s own defence minister, Khawaja Asif, further fuelled controversy with remarks defending the government’s actions. The statement reflected Islamabad’s increasingly uncompromising approach towards dissent in the region. Human rights organisations have echoed similar concerns. “The disturbing reports emerging from Rawalakot are consistent with the Pakistani authorities’ long history of unlawful violence against protesters in PoJK. We urge the Pakistani authorities to restore all communications access and allow media and independent observers into the area,” Amnesty International USA posted on X. The developments have reinforced criticism that, while Islamabad attempts to mediate conflicts abroad, it continues to face accusations of suppressing dissent within territories under its own control. Behind the fancy overcoat of its foreign policy ambitions, Pakistan ultimately bore the brunt of its fertile terror fields it had long nurtured. The fallout from Operation Sindoor did not just damage Pakistan-backed terror camps and military infrastructure. The consequences of Operation Sindoor extended beyond military targets to the country’s most basic necessities, including water. Sites targeted during Op Sindoor The country is facing an increasingly severe water crisis, particularly across Sindh and Balochistan , where shrinking river flows and uneven distribution have triggered alarm among farmers, political leaders and water experts. Months after New Delhi’s decision, Pakistan is confronting growing concerns over agricultural losses, declining livelihoods and mounting economic pressure across several provinces. Sindh, home to Karachi, Pakistan’s financial capital, has emerged as one of the worst-hit regions, with water shortages threatening agriculture and affecting millions of people. Prime Minister Narendra Modi had encapsulated India’s position soon after the Pahalgam attack.
The conflict, rooted in grievances dating back to Balochistan’s accession to Pakistan in 1948, revolves around demands for greater political autonomy, control over natural resources and opposition to mega infrastructure projects such as the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Islamabad’s hopes of gaining strategic leverage quickly unraveled While the Afghan Taliban returned to power in 2021. Cross-border clashes have become more frequent, while the TTP, an umbrella militant group formed in 2007, continues to challenge the Pakistani state’s authority, specifying the irony of a country seeking to broker peace abroad while battling an escalating insurgency at home. Pakistan ranked as the country most affected by terrorism, recording more than 1,000 terror-related deaths in 2025, its worst figures since 2013, according to the Global Terrorism Index 2026.
For neighbouring Iran, Pakistan has recently struck the chord of “peace”, offering itself as a mediator, though the negotiations have yielded almost no progress. Over the decades, the conflict has been marked by armed insurgency, heavy militarisation and repeated allegations of human rights violations. Yet Balochistan is only one strand of Pakistan’s broader internal unrest. BLA The country’s dissent is neither unified nor driven by a single cause. Separatist groups in Balochistan, the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, political activists and unemployed youth often pursue vastly different objectives. That fragmentation, however, has also worked to the advantage of Pakistan’s establishment. Without a unified opposition, the state has been able to confront each movement differently, labelling one as terrorism, another as separatism, others as political disorder or foreign conspiracy. Rather than confronting a single nationwide challenge, Islamabad faces multiple disconnected crises, each requiring a different response. Its ties with Tehran, however, have rarely been straightforward. Relations with India remain frozen, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi making New Delhi’s position unequivocal: “If there will be talks between India and Pakistan, it will only be on terrorism and PoK. To the west, Pakistan’s troubles are no less daunting. Crossborder tensions with Taliban-ruled Afghanistan have intensified, even as Islamabad grapples with a surge in terror attacks at home. Presence of TTP remains a major challenge for Pakistan Beyond the long-running insurgency in Balochistan, Pakistan faces an increasingly potent threat from the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). Kabul has refused to dismantle TTP sanctuaries, allowing the outfit to regroup and intensify attacks across Pakistan. The fallout has been severe. On one hand, it is attempting to establish itself as a regional diplomatic player, offering to mediate conflicts, expanding defence partnerships and seeking greater geopolitical relevance. On the other, it continues to wrestle with economic fragility, dependence on IMF assistance, unrest in PoK and Balochistan, a worsening water crisis and an increasingly complex internal security landscape. Adding to these challenges is the country’s continued struggle with terrorism. For Islamabad, diplomatic visibility on the global stage may offer strategic dividends and international goodwill. But as long as domestic crises continue to deepen, Pakistan’s ambitions abroad will remain overshadowed by the challenges it faces at home. Catch the latest World News and Live updates. Download the TOI app.
Pakistan today finds itself pursuing two parallel realities.
A war next door, and Pakistan’s opportunity
Global Shia icon and longest-ruling Supreme Leader of Iran Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed on the opening day of the offensive on February 28, 2026 in Pakistan’s neighbourhood. On April 8, Sharif posted on X announcing a ceasefire that actually wasn’t close to peace. Source: IMF According to Reuters, the IMF in May completed reviews of its lending programmes with Pakistan, clearing the way for approximately $1.32 billion in fresh funding. The package included nearly $1.1 billion under the Extended Fund Facility and around $220 million under the Resilience and Sustainability Facility, taking total disbursements under the two ongoing programmes to roughly $4.8 billion. Pakistan remains under a $7-billion IMF programme after reaching a staff-level agreement in March.
For Islamabad, therefore, diplomacy is not merely about regional influence. Six months later, the geopolitical landscape shifted dramatically as President Donald Trump launched military strikes against Iran, joined by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu under Operation Epic Fury.
In May, army chief Asim Munir hailed the development as “slight progress”. “Amid a more challenging and highly uncertain external environment since the onset of the war in the Middle East, Pakistan needs to maintain strong macroeconomic policies while accelerating reform efforts,” the IMF said in a statement. The defence pact, signed by Pakistan and Saudi Arabia in September, states that “any aggression” against one member would be treated as an attack on all , a provision that closely mirrors Nato’s Article 5.
The raging Tehran regime’s response left the Middle East region totally disturbed. Bombs, missiles and drones fell, almost hitting every country in the region. Retaliatory strikes and military activity engulfed large parts of the region, with airspace disrupted across Iraq, Kuwait, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, Oman, Jordan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. However, Pakistan, despite its border with Iran, remained untouched and safe. That made Islamabad a potential venue for talks with Iran’s new leadership under Mojtaba Khamenei . Sensing an opportunity, Pakistan declared itself a peace broker. He wrote: “With the greatest humility, I am pleased to announce that the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States of America, along with their allies, have agreed to an immediate ceasefire everywhere including Lebanon and elsewhere, EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY. US Vice President JD Vance visited Pakistan twice for peace talks, but despite the diplomatic efforts, the fighting continued and a lasting peace remained elusive. Still, the symbolism was already disheartening. The same country where the US carried out Operation Neptune Spear to eliminate Osama bin Laden had now become Washington’s chosen venue for talks with Iran. Islamabad may be eager to wear the badge of a global player, but its economic reality tells a far less flattering story. Beneath the grand diplomatic posturing lies a cash-strapped nation surviving on lifelines from China, the United States, the IMF and other international lenders, hardly the profile of a country calling the shots on the world stage. It is also about preserving the confidence of the international community at a time when its economy remains deeply dependent on external financing. Alongside its mediation efforts, Pakistan has also sought to deepen strategic partnerships within the Islamic world. Islamabad has moved closer to Turkey and Saudi Arabia, readying a Nato-style Islamic security arrangement with mutual defence provisions reminiscent to Nato. Turkey, already a Nato member, fields the alliance’s second-largest military after the United States. it reflects Islamabad’s broader effort to strengthen its regional security architecture to counter New Delhi While the arrangement remains far from becoming a formal military alliance. However, the economic and military size of the two-nuclear armed nations still remain widely different. Pakistan lagging far behind. Even with Islamabad’s projected flamboyancy in foreign dealings, unrest continues across Pakistan and regions illegally occupied by Pakistan.
