Yasir Arif
Despite countless shortcomings, many missteps, the indifference of its own people, and the persistent intrigues of adversaries, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan continues to stand with dignity and resilience. In truth, Pakistan is a living miracle of history. From the very day of its creation, the state has been encircled by conspiracies, wars, and crises, yet after every trial it has emerged stronger than before. Its birth on the 27th night of Ramazan, its foundation on the Kalima, its emergence as the second state after the State of Madina to be associated with the creed of La ilaha illallah, and its historic connection with the honour of protecting the Two Holy Mosques, all these realities testify that Pakistan is not merely a geographical entity but an extraordinary phenomenon etched into the pages of history.
Consider the fact that barely a year after its creation, the newborn state was already facing war in 1948. From those early conflicts to the decisive confrontation of May 2025, standing firm against a power five times its size and emerging resolute is no ordinary feat.
Above all, despite persistent economic challenges, Pakistan’s emergence as the only nuclear power in the Muslim world remains a distinction that none of the 56 Islamic countries possess.
Even today, there is a firm belief that by confronting new challenges that arise almost daily, this great state will continue to endure.
The reality is that Pakistan, a state that has long been an eyesore for its adversaries, has rarely enjoyed ideal conditions for long. Challenges have knocked at its doors in every era, and they continue to do so today.
This time, however, tensions appear more intense on all fronts.
Following the historic success of May 2025, the eastern border with the perennial adversary remains tense, while new challenges are emerging through Afghanistan. At the same time, the Iranian frontier and wider geopolitical manoeuvring suggest the activation of yet another corridor of strategic intrigue.
A few years ago, during a discussion with certain officials, it was revealed that as many as 25 foreign intelligence agencies were actively operating against Pakistan in Balochistan alone. For a moment, the revelation was staggering. I asked in disbelief: “Twenty-five, really?”
The reply came calmly: “Yes, all twenty-five.”
To illustrate the point, they narrated an incident in which a female intelligence operative from a remote European country entered Balochistan via Iran and was eventually apprehended. When the name of the country surfaced during the investigation, even the investigators were taken aback.
The video evidence was later shown to officials at that country’s embassy and a simple question was posed: “What wrong have we done to you that your agent has travelled from the farthest corner of the world to carry out sabotage in Balochistan?”
The answer was silence.
Subsequent joint investigations by Pakistani institutions confirmed that as many as 25 foreign intelligence agencies were simultaneously active on Balochistan’s soil.
This is Pakistan. This is the state. And these are the institutions, including the Inter-Services Intelligence and others, that confront numerous adversaries across multiple fronts at any given moment.
It is easy to casually ask why so much is spent on defence or why a nuclear deterrent was ever necessary. Why not focus entirely on economic prosperity instead?
While the argument has its place, the harsh realities unfolding in parts of the Middle East offer a sobering lesson. Some states that focused primarily on grand construction and economic expansion while neglecting strategic defence are today witnessing missiles raining down on their towering skylines, leaving them dependent on others for their very security.
Pakistan’s policy of strategic depth in Afghanistan has also often been criticised, with some claiming that supporting resistance against Soviet aggression was a mistake.
In reality, it was a strategic necessity. The Soviet Union had resolved to trample a neighbouring Muslim country, and defeating that ambition in Jalalabad, Kandahar and Khost was first in Afghanistan’s interest and ultimately in Pakistan’s own national interest.
Since its creation, Pakistan has repeatedly extended assistance to neighbouring and brotherly countries whenever possible.
During the Arab-Israeli wars, the role of Pakistan’s Air Force became part of the golden chapters of history. Likewise, Pakistan has consistently stood ready to defend the sanctity of the Two Holy Mosques against any hostile designs.
Similarly, Pakistan’s diplomatic and strategic cooperation with Iran has been significant, and it has often come at a cost.
A BBC report, based on documents leaked from CIA archives, revealed that Russian President Vladimir Putin raised concerns during two long meetings with US President Bill Clinton regarding alleged Pakistani assistance to Iran in acquiring nuclear capabilities. These allegations carried serious consequences, and Pakistan ultimately bore the cost.
Pakistan’s role in providing training, support and leadership to Afghanistan during the Soviet invasion is hardly a hidden chapter of history.
Former Afghan prime minister Gulbuddin Hekmatyar once acknowledged in a recorded interview that without Pakistan’s support, Afghanistan could never have won the war against the Soviet Union.
After 9/11, Afghanistan alone could not have withstood the immense pressure of the United States and NATO. Pakistan too paid a heavy price in that war, in terms of its economy, its military, and the peace of its society.
The scale of the Afghan crisis after 9/11 was illustrated by a statement from Colonel Imam, who was known as a mentor to Mullah Muhammad Omar. Speaking at a forum in Lahore, he recalled that when some Afghan fighters sought permission from Mullah Omar to take up arms against Pakistan after the American invasion, Omar firmly refused.
“Never,” he reportedly said. “This is not Pakistan, this is Majbooristan.”
In other words, Pakistan’s policies were driven by circumstances beyond its control.
The remark carried truth: the individuals whose actions became the pretext for the American invasion of Afghanistan were guests of that country, not of Pakistan. Yet Pakistan consistently tried to avoid humiliating its war-ravaged neighbour, even while paying a heavy price.
Who carried the burden of nearly five million Afghan refugees?
Where did the culture of weapons, narcotics and violent crime spread?
Three generations of a peaceful society were scarred by these developments.
Despite this, accusations are still levelled that Pakistan wronged Afghanistan.
In the aftermath of the US withdrawal, the emergence of Indian proxies, suicide attacks, targeted killings and assaults on Pakistani soldiers raise a simple question: what else are these if not acts of hostility?
When those who once invoked the idea of Ghazwa-e-Hind end up acting as proxies for India, it is not merely a contradiction; it is a complete deviation.
For years, the lock remained sealed. Eventually it broke.
Credit goes to the field marshal who, soon after assuming command as army chief, declared in a gathering of religious scholars that if one of our neighbours believes that it represents a civilisation six thousand years old and can violate Pakistan’s borders at will, that era is over.
In that very context, on Jan 18, 2024, Pakistan carried out airstrikes in Iran’s Sistan-Baluchestan province against the hideouts of militant groups. The operation, named Marg Bar Sarmachar, targeted Baloch separatist elements and came in response to Iranian missile strikes inside Pakistan’s Balochistan province on Jan 16, 2024.
Similarly, on March 18, 2024, Pakistan conducted a significant aerial operation inside Afghanistan, targeting suspected hideouts of Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) in the provinces of Khost and Paktika. The action sent a clear message to Afghanistan, a country that prides itself on five thousand years of history, that any violation of Pakistan’s sovereignty would be met with a firm and decisive response.
Events have since moved forward rapidly, and for nearly a month now, an open confrontation with a neighbouring Muslim country has continued.
That country must now decide whether it wishes to remain a proxy for India or to behave as a responsible neighbour and brotherly state. The war will end only when a clear choice is made: terrorism or Pakistan.
This is a necessary and principled stance, one essential for the dignity of the state. Only such clarity can safeguard the independence and sovereignty of the country.
At this decisive moment, the nation must stand up for the honour of the state. Only a dignified and sovereign country can guarantee the respect and pride of its people.
Pakistan Zindabad.