Thanks to the conflict involving Iran, Pakistan has emerged as a significant force in international diplomacy. Amidst the ongoing tensions between the United States and Iran in the Middle East, everyone-from Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif to Army Chief Field Marshal Asim Munir-is keen to project the message that Pakistan is a responsible and influential state within the Muslim world. Public praise from U.S. President Donald Trump has further bolstered this self-promotion on Pakistan's part. The Pakistani media is portraying the situation in such a manner as to suggest that the country is poised to assume the leadership of the Muslim world.
However, lurking behind this facade lies a starkly different reality. Today, Pakistan is gripped by a severe economic crisis. The country's foreign exchange reserves are depleted, inflation has rendered the lives of ordinary citizens unbearable, and the nation is compelled to rely repeatedly on loans from the IMF. Political instability, military overreach, unemployment, and a human rights crisis have further compounded the country's internal situation. In a desperate bid to overcome this crisis, Pakistan is effectively leveraging its nuclear capabilities. It has entered into defense agreements with Saudi Arabia, while Turkey and the UAE also continue to provide assistance.
Meanwhile, long-standing tensions with Afghanistan and India persist unabated. Pakistan is, in fact, struggling even to ensure the basic security and economic stability of its own citizens. Yet, instead of resolving these domestic crises, Islamabad remains preoccupied with projecting itself as a "messenger of peace" on the international stage. The question remains: how can a state that is incapable of putting its own house in order aspire to shoulder the responsibility of resolving the crises of others?
Pakistan confronts economic crisis and reality
The most pressing reality facing Pakistan today is its fragile economy. For many years, the country has subsisted on an economy heavily reliant on debt. Keeping the economy operational without loans from the IMF has become nearly impossible. Foreign exchange reserves have repeatedly plummeted to levels where even meeting import costs has become a matter of grave concern. Fuel shortages, rising electricity tariffs, and soaring prices of daily necessities have rendered the lives of ordinary citizens unbearable. Middle-class families are now compelled to cut back on daily expenses, small businesses are struggling to survive, and a significant segment of the youth is increasingly eager to migrate abroad.
In this context, the primary objective of a responsible state should be the reconstruction of its economy, the creation of employment opportunities, and the improvement of its citizens' standard of living. However, Pakistan's political leadership appears far more preoccupied with projecting itself as a major force in international diplomacy. Islamabad repeatedly harbors aspirations of assuming the "leadership of the Muslim Ummah." On issues such as Kashmir, Palestine, or Afghanistan, Pakistan has consistently sought to position itself as the guardian of the Muslim world. Yet, in the modern world, leadership cannot be attained through religious sentiment alone; rather, economic strength, technological advancement, and stable governance constitute its true foundations.
Today, nations such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and Turkey are exerting global influence through their economic development, technology, infrastructure, and investments. They have established a formidable presence on the international stage by prioritizing their own internal development. Pakistan, conversely, remains plagued by political instability, a fragile democracy, and chronic financial crises. Consequently, the vision of leading the Muslim world—a dream Pakistan frequently espouses—bears little resemblance to the reality on the ground.
Failure to establish peace with its own neighbors
One of Pakistan's most significant weaknesses lies in its relationships with its neighboring states. When a country that is unable to maintain stability within its own borders claims to act as a mediator for peace among others, it naturally raises questions.
Pakistan's relationship with Afghanistan has long been fraught with tension. Border skirmishes, terrorism, and conflicts surrounding the Taliban have kept relations between the two nations in a state of perpetual instability. Pakistan frequently accuses the Afghan Taliban of harboring terrorist groups within its borders; conversely, Afghanistan criticizes Pakistan's military operations. Consequently, a deep-seated mistrust has taken root between the two countries—a situation that has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of people along the border over the past few years.
Pakistan's relationship with India has also been conflict-ridden for many decades. The Kashmir issue, border clashes, and political tensions have consistently kept relations between the two nations on edge. On several occasions, situations have arisen where the specter of a nuclear conflict loomed large. Yet, Pakistan is currently projecting a message of peace to the world. In reality, for a nation that has failed to establish lasting peace with its own immediate neighbors, claiming the mantle of an international peace envoy appears largely self-contradictory.
Furthermore, Pakistan's internal situation remains a cause for concern. Weak democratic institutions, restrictions on media freedom, and allegations of repression against political dissidents have tarnished the country's international image. Allegations of enforced disappearances and human rights violations in Balochistan have frequently been raised and discussed within the international community. Moreover, the excessive influence wielded by the military has further undermined Pakistan's political framework.
A political strategy to shape international image
In reality, there is a distinct political objective underpinning Pakistan's current international activism. Historically, whenever domestic inflation has surged, unemployment has intensified, and public discontent has mounted, the government and the military leadership have invariably utilized foreign policy and nationalist sentiments as political tools. By projecting themselves as key players on the international stage, they are able to temporarily divert public attention away from pressing domestic crises. This strategy is nothing new in Pakistani politics; for many years, foreign policy—specifically the narrative of "leading the Muslim world"—has been employed as a means to garner domestic political support.
Pakistan also has its own vested interests in mediating between Iran and the United States. Should the conflict in the Middle East become protracted, oil prices would inevitably rise—a scenario that would plunge Pakistan's already fragile economy into an even deeper crisis. Furthermore, given Pakistan's large Shia population, instability surrounding Iran could trigger sectarian tensions within the country. Consequently, Pakistan's diplomatic endeavors are primarily aimed at safeguarding its own security and economic interests, rather than serving as an effort to establish ideological peace.
Ultimately, true leadership does not stem from grand speeches, television diplomacy, or symbolic posturing. Rather, leadership emerges from a nation's internal stability, economic strength, good governance, and the trust of its people. If Pakistan genuinely aspires to secure a respected position on the international stage, its primary responsibility must be to revitalize its economy, strengthen its democracy, and improve the living standards of its citizens. For when a state fails to properly manage its own domestic affairs yet attempts to resolve the problems of others, such actions are perceived not as genuine leadership, but merely as political theater.
