Shortly before his death, Iran's late President Raisi spent several days visiting Pakistan. Like many state visits between Pakistani and Iranian officials over the years, his trip was filled with grand proclamations about the affinity between both nations and the need to improve ties. Both sides agreed to boost trade to $10 billion within five years. They also agreed to work together to bring peace and prosperity to Afghanistan and jointly condemned Israel's massacres in Gaza.
These were all worthwhile developments, which I have advocated for many times in a variety of contexts. The need to build an alliance between Iran and Pakistan has been obvious for a long time. They are natural allies with overlapping interests and ideological perspectives. An alliance would drastically improve each nation's geopolitical and economic positions, giving them the tools to deal with a chaotic world.
Despite their lofty rhetoric and the potential benefits, Pakistani and Iranian leaders have yet to deliver on their promises. As Jahangir Jameel recently explained, cross-border trade still suffers from a "staggering number of restrictions, hurdles, and hindrances." As usual, little meaningful progress has been made.
It is, therefore, time to consider ways to turn these aspirations into reality by discussing steps each nation can take to finally make good on the promise of building a closer relationship. Creating a strong alliance will require a multi-pronged approach that binds them in as many ways as possible. A true alliance, one strong enough to compel Pakistan to stand up to America on behalf of Iran or for Iran to stand up to India on behalf of Pakistan, requires developing multiple overlapping interests to form a deep bond. Cooperation must extend to the social, cultural, political, commercial, scientific, academic, and military spheres.
The most logical way to start is by building people-to-people ties with a view towards increasing tourism and travel between both nations. Most of the efforts thus far have emphasised government-to-government cooperation, which is important but also puts the proverbial cart in front of the horse. Bringing people together is the first and most important step to bringing nations together.
As a starting point, their governments must harmonise their import and export policies to create a common market between them while removing barriers to trade like tariffs and inconsistent regulations. They must also improve the rail, air, and road connections that link them, build financial networks that are insulated from American sanctions
To that end, creating trade, civil, cultural, and professional organisations comprised of Iranian and Pakistani engineers, artists, miners, teachers, law enforcement officers, lawyers, poets, scholars, scientists, military officers, politicians, journalists, businessmen, etc., will be extremely important. The think tanks, universities, and research institutes of both nations must also be connected via exchange programmes and frequent symposiums and conferences. Essentially, Pakistani and Iranian people from all walks of life must find ways to converse, get to know each other, and make as many excuses to travel to each other's countries as possible. Poetry recitals, festivals, trade shows, academic competitions between students, and scholarly conferences on any and every topic under the sun. Any excuse will do.
Yet another way to accomplish this goal is by building sports leagues featuring teams from both countries and regularly holding tournaments and competitions in as many different sports as possible. A semi-annual soccer (football) match between their national teams would be a great place to start, but any sport will work. Rugby, martial arts, Olympic sports, etc. The more events and reasons to travel, the better.
Ideally, this exchange of people and ideas and the connections they create will lead to increased trade, which is also of vital importance. To facilitate trade, both nations will need to take several steps. As a starting point, their governments must harmonise their import and export policies to create a common market between them while removing barriers to trade like tariffs and inconsistent regulations. They must also improve the rail, air, and road connections that link them, build financial networks that are insulated from American sanctions, and make it easy for their businesses to invest in and access each other's markets while providing neutral and efficient dispute resolution mechanisms to protect their investments.
It would also be wise to create joint ventures to stimulate and improve their manufacturing and technological abilities. Both nations would benefit greatly from building semiconductor foundries, investing in renewable energy, factories that make heavy goods like mining and construction equipment, and modernising and protecting their agricultural sectors from climate change. Sharing the costs associated with these capital-intensive investments and pooling their expertise would help reduce the burden on each nation, while creating a common market between them would allow for economies of scale that would increase the profitability of these ventures.
Commercial, cultural, ideological, intellectual, and personal connections are the bedrock upon which strong alliances are built. Once they have been established, government-to-government connections and political cooperation will naturally follow since the perspectives and interests of their people and elites will be more aligned.
While their designs pose a more immediate threat to Pakistan, they also present a great danger to Iran over the long run since the chaos in Pakistan will naturally spill into Iran
France and Germany were once implacable foes who fought several wars against each other. World War II was particularly brutal. Today, they do $120 billion in trade, coordinate policies in various areas, and are the closest of allies. Their alliance began as a customs union to sell coal and grew into the European Union (EU). Pakistan and Iran have the same, if not more, potential. But they must invest in each other and work together to achieve it.
They must also develop strong military ties. That will require expanding the scale and frequency with which they conduct joint training exercises and increasing staff-level exchanges and interactions. These exercises should include as many different assets as possible and involve large formations to enhance their ability to work together in a variety of scenarios. Eventually, a formal military alliance that leads to joint weapons production, linking their air defence networks, ensuring interoperability between equipment and ammunition, and deep intelligence cooperation will also be necessary. Just as Western nations work to protect each other via organisations like NATO and the Five Eyes Intelligence Alliance, Pakistan and Iran must do the same following their blueprint.
They must also coordinate their policies on areas of overlapping interests, such as dealing with Afghanistan and its duplicitous rulers, who appear to have learned nothing from their long exile. At considerable risk to itself, Pakistan helped the Taliban win their freedom from America, just as it helped their fathers defeat the Soviets. Instead of responding with gratitude, the Taliban have quietly reverted to form by allowing their nation to be used as a base to attack their former allies.
Their treachery is rooted in their desire to create a "greater Pashtunistan" by combining Afghanistan with parts of Pakistan's Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province. While their designs pose a more immediate threat to Pakistan, they also present a great danger to Iran over the long run since the chaos in Pakistan will naturally spill into Iran. The Taliban's existing border disputes with Iran notwithstanding. More importantly, the Taliban will quickly remember their hatred for Shias in Iran once they are done dismembering Pakistan. As such, it is in Iran's strategic interests to work with Pakistan to counter the Taliban.
The withdrawal of American forces was an important step towards stabilising Afghanistan, but the next step is helping it build a government that contributes to regional peace instead of destroying it. Pakistan and Iran have the most to gain from ensuring the Taliban take this step, and they have the most to lose if it does not. Pakistan has historically been the primary conduit for goods shipped to and from Afghanistan; however, its attempts to use this as leverage to convince the Taliban to behave have been undermined by its ability to import goods via Iran's Chabahar Port. It is only by working together and coordinating their policies that either nation has any chance at moderating the Taliban's destructive behaviour.
Pakistan's fear of America is an even bigger factor keeping these neighbours apart. The reluctance to defy America is understandable. It has the power of an 800-pound gorilla, the morals of a flea, and a history of attacking or sabotaging those who refuse to obey it
Despite the urgent need, these nations have not come together due to the many obstacles between them. Pakistan's dependence on the Arabs to absorb its excess labour and provide financial subsidies is one factor holding its leaders back. As a preliminary matter, it should be noted that close relationships with Iran and the Arab world need not be mutually exclusive. If Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) can invest billions in India, Pakistan can build ties with Iran.
However, if Pakistan is forced to pick, the choice is obvious. For all their wealth, the Arabs are not the allies that Pakistan needs. Aside from money, they offer nothing of value. They have no technical skills, universities, research institutes, or military attributes that can help Pakistan. They can only provide a crutch that keeps it perpetually hobbled and weak. While their generosity is greatly appreciated, it will never satisfy Pakistan's massive development and socio-economic needs. The only way to do that is to build an economy that thrives on trade, not handouts. Iran is a far better candidate to help in this regard than the Arabs.
Pakistan's fear of America is an even bigger factor keeping these neighbours apart. The reluctance to defy America is understandable. It has the power of an 800-pound gorilla, the morals of a flea, and a history of attacking or sabotaging those who refuse to obey it. But the truth is, America is already Pakistan's enemy. It has been since 2008 when it formally committed itself to strengthening India's nuclear capabilities. Over the years, it has also sold India weapons worth $20 billion and US Senator Marco Rubio recently introduced legislation that would elevate India to the same status as a NATO ally to facilitate the sale of even more advanced weapons — something Pakistan was never granted even though it facilitated America's War on Terror for 20 years.
The bill also calls for monitoring "Pakistan's use of offensive force, including through terrorism and proxy groups, against India" and barring it "from receiving security assistance if it is found to have sponsored terrorism against India." Whether Pakistan's rulers want to admit it or not, America is a serious threat to their long-term safety and prosperity. It is intent on arming India's fanatical government to the teeth and has no regard for the danger this poses to Pakistan.
As its decades-long military presence in the Middle East shows, America is not just a threat to Pakistan but the entire Muslim world. The nearly 18,000 Palestinian children it helped apartheid Israel murder after October 7, are but the latest in a long line of victims forced to suffer for its imperial ambitions. Its unequivocal support and facilitation for the massacres in Gaza and refusal to withdraw its military from the region show it learned nothing from the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan or the excesses of its supposed "War on Terror." This suggests it is perfectly capable of making similar mistakes vis-à-vis Iran.
Instead of trying to placate America's hegemonic demands, Pakistan's leaders must build the strength to protect themselves from its destructive and unhinged behaviour. As I have already warned, if they do not, it is very possible Lahore's children suffer the same fate as Gaza's one day
Just as the Taliban's designs on Pakistan represent a long-term threat to Iran, America's military posture in the Middle East, particularly its aggression towards Iran, represents a long-term threat to Pakistan. The invasion of Iraq killed or displaced millions, plunging much of the Middle East into chaos. If America initiates large-scale violence that destabilises Iran, which has a significantly larger population than Iraq, the impact on Pakistan will be devastating. As increased insurgent activity in Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa shows, Pakistan is still dealing with the consequences of America's actions in Afghanistan. The fallout from similar violence against Iran will be far more consequential. As such, it is in Pakistan's long-term strategic interests to protect Iran from America's aggression.
Due to the many ways America's malignant activities threaten Pakistan's long-term security, it should not be viewed as a barrier to closer ties with Iran, but as a motivation to develop them. Instead of trying to placate America's hegemonic demands, Pakistan's leaders must build the strength to protect themselves from its destructive and unhinged behaviour. As I have already warned, if they do not, it is very possible Lahore's children suffer the same fate as Gaza's one day.
Though it would be convenient to place all the blame on them, neither the Arabs nor America are the greatest obstacles to unity between Pakistan and Iran. That distinction belongs to the Iranian and Pakistani governments themselves. Each nation is governed by repressive, authoritarian political systems that are simply incapable of creating an environment conducive to promoting technological or economic development of the sort needed to spur large-scale, export-based trade. Due to its oil wealth and greater investments in education and infrastructure, Iran is more advanced than Pakistan, which is exceptionally backwards and inefficient. However, both suffer from similar structural deficiencies and weaknesses. For example, each has military elites that dominate their economies and wield a disproportionate amount of political power behind the scenes.
As Europe's example shows, liberal democratic rule supported by a politically powerful merchant class are vital pre-conditions to EU-type integration. Without these attributes, creating the mechanisms and institutions that can bring these neighbours together will be impossible. Consequently, developing a strong, trade-based relationship requires each nation to empower their merchants and embrace democracy, freedom of expression, and the rule of law.
The steps discussed above would also work to integrate additional Muslim states. Turkey, for example, would be a valuable addition to the alliance contemplated herein. Turkish President Erdogan's recent statements regarding the need for an alliance between Muslims suggest Turkey would be receptive to such a venture. However, political and economic realities require Pakistan and Iran to lay a foundation that can lead to Turkey being included since the benefits required to induce it to abandon the Western alliance must outweigh the risks. Providing the necessary inducements will only be possible once Iran and Pakistan pave the way. It is oddly fitting then that Shia Iran and Sunni Pakistan are the key to uniting and revitalising the Muslim world. If they can overcome their doctrinal, ethnic, and linguistic differences by focusing on their shared Islamic identities, they have a chance at finally ending the cycle of violence and instability that has gripped Muslim societies for centuries.