Well, granted Iran has been trying to be buddies with India, but did we leave Iran a choice in the past ? Yes maybe it was the wrong choice but Pakistan made sure more than Iran did, that Iran goes into India's camp.
We have been sabotaging Iran since the revolution, by being total vassal state of the Arabs. What was Iran supposed to do ? They are our neighbours but we were bypassing them to please everyone else, at their expense. In the meantime, their people have totally treated Pakistanis like their brothers.
Maybe after this episode is over, if we can also bring some balance to our relations between Arabs and Iran, then I am sure Iran will prefer us any day, over India. And as a disclaimer in every such post, so I do not
et bashed, I'm a Sunni, so yeah, my reply is not 'biased' in any way, its just simple fact.
Reducing a complex geopolitical rift to one sided blame does little justice to the truth. It takes two to tango, and Iran’s own miscalculations played no small role in deepening the trust deficit and dismantling a relationship that once held promise. Both sides have paid the price. Now, more than ever, introspection is warranted..
The notion that Pakistan has been undermining Iran since the 1979 revolution is a widespread misconception. To suggest that bilateral relations deteriorated solely as a result of the Iranian Revolution overlooks important historical context. During this period, Pakistan was governed by General Zia-ul-Haq, a staunch Wahhabi/Deobandi whose ideological closeness to Arab states did contribute to some tensions with Iran. However, contrary to popular belief, Zia initially supported the Iranian revolution and endeavored to restore the diplomatic ties that had frayed during the tenure of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto.
The true source of the rift dates back to Bhutto’s era, particularly after 1971, when Pakistan decisively distanced itself from the United States and pivoted toward Arab nations in pursuit of financial aid and backing for its nuclear program. This realignment was strongly opposed by the Shah of Iran, a close ally of the US, who openly challenged Pakistan’s position. The Shah even refused to participate in Islamic summits convened by Bhutto, which aimed to forge an Islamic coalition primarily oriented against Western influence. The Shah’s opposition stemmed from his self-appointed role as the regional custodian of Western interests, viewing such a coalition as a direct threat.
During General Zia’s era, the geopolitical alignments were essentially reversed. Pakistan firmly re-entered the US camp, standing resolutely against the Soviet Union, while Iran emerged as one of the United States’ principal adversaries.
Until the mid-1970s, Pakistan and Iran had been close allies, united by their shared allegiance to the US. However, following Pakistan’s traumatic loss of East Pakistan in 1971 and perceived abandonment by Washington, Pakistan briefly distanced itself from its American patron. Iran, meanwhile, maintained its steadfast position within the US sphere.
With Zia’s ascent to power, Pakistan returned decisively to the US fold. Meanwhile, the Iranian Revolution decisively severed Tehran’s ties with Washington, pushing Iran firmly out of the US orbit. These shifts were dictated by the rigid bipolar world order of the Cold War era. India was always irrelevant
Today, as the global order transitions towards multipolarity, the old paradigms no longer hold. Both Pakistan and Iran would do well to embrace this changing landscape and seek new avenues for cooperation and mutual benefit. Both Iran and Pakistan face mounting existential threats, not only from Israel’s aggressive regional posture but also from the enduring pressures of Western imperialism.