Geopolitics: Changing Dynamics of Pakistan's Ties to China and the US

Pakistan has long sought to balance its foreign policy between China and the United States through a pragmatic hedging strategy, gaining economic, military, and diplomatic benefits from both superpowers while maintaining strategic autonomy. But the relationship between Pakistan and China is not the same as the one between Pakistan and the United States. Pakistan's ties with China are strategic while those with the United States remain tactical and transactional. What has changed recently is that Pakistan is no longer waging war to help the United States as it did during the "Cold War" and the "War on Terror". Instead, Pakistan has emerged as a peacemaker between the US and Iran. 

Both China and US Are Courting Pakistan


In a piece titled "Pakistan's Great Game", French political scientist Christophe Jaffrelot has explained what he sees as Pakistan's "tactics and strategy" in dealing with the two superpowers. Here's a quote from Jaffrelot's recent article on the subject:  

"While Pakistan’s relationship with China is rooted in strategic logic, its relationship with the United States is more tactical in nature-and has been since the 1950s, when General Ayub Khan boasted of his ability to play "one lion against another" (referring to the United States and the USSR at the start of the Cold War). In its dealings with the United States, Pakistan has played the role of intermediary, or even "client," within a typical clientelist framework: in exchange for the services Islamabad provided to Washington, the United States provided Pakistan with substantial aid and agreed to sell it sophisticated weapons, and even to train its officers-a privilege greatly appreciated.....  The first major service rendered by the Pakistanis to the Americans was none other than the intermediary role played by General Yahya Khan vis-à-vis Chairman Mao in the early 1970s, which led to the United States’ recognition of the People’s Republic of China. Over the following decade, Pakistan served as an intermediary between Washington and the mujahideen tasked with driving the Soviets out of Afghanistan. And in the 2000s, Pakistan was tasked by Washington with hunting down al-Qaeda-with much more mixed success this time, as evidenced by the discovery of bin Laden’s hideout in Abbottabad in 2011". 

Pakistan PM Sharif (L) with Chinese President Xi


Jaffrelot goes on to say that the United States has repeatedly proved to be an unreliable partner of the South Asia nation.  "Whenever the United States no longer needed Pakistan-or even felt betrayed by it-it abandoned the country or even imposed sanctions on it", he writes. 

More recently, Pakistan's usefulness to the US has once again become obvious,  no longer to wage war against the USSR or terrorism, but to make peace with Iran, Jaffrelot says. 

"In 2026, Pakistan appears useful once again, no longer to wage war against the USSR or terrorism, but to make peace. Each time, these glorious episodes were very short-lived and came to an end due to criticism of the Pakistani regime’s authoritarianism - with the military always remaining in power, even when civilians are in the forefront; its ties to Islamists accused of terrorist activities - particularly in India; or accusations of nuclear proliferation. Will the same be true tomorrow, once the war in Iran is over and the United States no longer needs Pakistan?  Everything will, of course, depend on the outcome of the conflict and the role Pakistan plays in resolving it-for it will be harder to send Islamabad back home if the world owes it something resembling peace". 

Oval Office Photo: L to R: VP JD Vance, President Trump, PM Sharif, FM Munir & Sec of State Rubio

Jaffrelot argues that "Pakistan has reached a turning point through the recognition of its military capabilities, as reflected in the mutual defense agreement it signed with Saudi Arabia...... Last June, Kaja Kallas, the EU Vice President in charge of the Union’s international relations, on the occasion of the 8th Strategic Dialogue between Pakistan and the European Union in Islamabad, thanked Pakistan-"a major regional power"-for its efforts in helping to avert an "all-out war" in the Middle East.  Jaffrelot now sees Pakistan's new role as a "net security provider" in West Asia and the Middle East.

He writes: "A more significant factor entering the equation relates to regional balances of power: Pakistan will continue to serve as a "net security provider" for Middle Eastern countries such as Saudi Arabia if those countries continue to fear the rise of Israel - a potential regional hegemon - and if they doubt Washington’s intentions, or even its mere reliability. There is no doubt that Pakistan itself will do everything in its power to prevent Israel from asserting itself on the regional stage and to gain influence over Iran-which is what the Israeli-American plan for regime change in Iran might have entailed. At the very least, faced with the risk of Israeli hegemony based on force and repeated military interventions, Pakistan could emerge as the architect of a resistance front bringing together not only Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Egypt, but also Iran".  



Jaffrelot expects India to continue its decade-long campaign to isolate Pakistan internationally. "India’s ability to isolate Pakistan-the strategy Narendra Modi has pursued for more than a decade-is another important variable, though its significance may be undermined by New Delhi’s drift toward authoritarianism and ethnocracy, as well as by the economic and social crisis threatening the country", according to Jaffrelot. 

Related Links:

Haq's Musings

South Asia Investor Review

Pakistan Downs India's French Rafale Jets in a Major Aerial Battle

Has Modi Succeeded Diplomatically or Militarily Against Pakistan After Pahalgam?

Pakistan-Saudi Defense Pact

Pakistan's Key Role in US-Iran Ceasefire

Has Modi Succeeded Militarily or Diplomatically in Isolating Pakistan After "Operation Sindoor"?

China, Pakistan to "Further Deepen and Expand" Ties

Modi's India: A Paper Elephant?

Pahalgam Attack: Why is the Indian Media Not Asking Hard Questions?

Ukraine's Lesson For Pakistan: Never Give Up Nukes!

Pakistan Economy Nears Trillion Dollars

Pakistan's Sea-Based Second Strike Capability

Riaz Haq Youtube Channel

VPOS Youtube Channel

Load Previous Comments
  • Riaz Haq


    Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan to sign joint defence agreement in Saudi Arabia on Friday, sources say

    https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/turkey-saudi-arabia-pakis...

    Aug 7 (Reuters) - Turkey, ​Saudi Arabia ‌and Pakistan ​will ​sign a ⁠joint ​defence agreement ​in Saudi Arabia ​on ​Friday, two ‌regional ⁠sources with direct ​knowledge ​of ⁠the matter ​told ​Reuters.

    —————-

    @MarioNawfal

    🇹🇷🇸🇦🇵🇰 Three of the Muslim world's biggest players are quietly putting together their own bloc.

    Erdogan reportedly flies into Saudi Arabia tomorrow to sit down with MBS and Pakistan's PM Sharif, who's already there on a three-day trip.

    Here's why it matters. These three have spent nearly a year inching toward a joint defence pact, with Turkey trying to muscle into the mutual defence deal Saudi and Pakistan signed last September.

    Everyone brings something: Saudi cash, Turkish drones and defence tech, and Pakistan's nukes, the only ones in the Muslim world.

    Put it together and it starts to look like a bloc that doesn't answer to Washington or Beijing.

    A quiet three-way meeting like this is exactly where that kind of thing moves forward.

    Source: @burhanduran / Writer: Daniyal


    https://x.com/marionawfal/status/2085468454195499380?s=61&t=mgT...

  • Riaz Haq

    Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan Sign Joint Defense Pact
    The agreement treats an attack on any of the countries as an attack on all, but in a region of volatile rivalries, it was unclear what that would mean in practice.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/07/world/middleeast/saudi-turkey-pa...

    Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan signed a new pact on Friday committing to collective defense against attacks on any of the three nations, Saudi Arabia said, entering an agreement that could reshape the strategic layout of the Middle East.

    “The agreement is intended to strengthen collective deterrence against any act of aggression,” the Pakistani Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

    The pact, it said, “stipulates that any armed attack against any one of the three states shall be regarded as an attack against them all.” Yet the text of the agreement was not immediately made public, making it unclear what the parties’ obligations are.

    A Turkish official, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed that the agreement had been signed, adding that it pledged mutual support only for defense and was not directed against any other country.

    The idea for a pact bringing together Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan evolved this year as wars and instability across the Middle East many led countries to explore new ways to enhance their security without relying on the United States and other Western powers.

    Fueling this thinking were the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran; new attacks on Saudi Arabia that it has blamed on Iran’s allies in Yemen and Iraq; concerns about Israel’s expanding military actions; and doubts about the reliability of the United States as a defense guarantor for its Middle Eastern partners.

    The pact, dubbed the Mecca Joint Defense Agreement, was signed on Friday in the holy city of Mecca in Saudi Arabia by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan’s prime minister, Shehbaz Sharif.

    While Egypt participated in early discussions about such a pact, it was not mentioned as a participant on Friday.

    The Pakistani Foreign Ministry’s statement said that in addition to a commitment to mutual defense, the agreement “further provides for the enhancement of all aspects of defense cooperation among the three States.”
    -----------

    Çetiner Çetin
    @cetiner_cetin
    Translated from Turkish
    Summary of the Mecca Agreement:

    170 nuclear warheads 🇵🇰
    G20 membership 🇸🇦🇹🇷
    OPEC leadership 🇸🇦
    NATO membership and one of NATO's largest armies 🇹🇷
    Total economic size of 3 trillion dollars 🇵🇰🇸🇦🇹🇷
    1,000 fighter jets 🇵🇰🇸🇦🇹🇷
    Total 2 million personnel in the armies 🇸🇦🇹🇷🇵🇰
    7,000 tanks 🇸🇦🇹🇷🇵🇰
    90,000 armored vehicles 🇸🇦🇹🇷🇵🇰
    34 submarines 🇹🇷🇵🇰
    500 combat and naval platforms 🇸🇦🇹🇷🇵🇰
    Total surface area of 4 million square kilometers 🇸🇦🇹🇷🇵🇰
    Soon F-35 for Saudi Arabia and Turkey 🇸🇦🇹🇷



    https://x.com/cetiner_cetin/status/2085694305830576425?s=20

  • Riaz Haq

     Indians, Pakistanis See Each Other as Top Threats and Differ on Global Order | Pew Research Center

    What do people in India and Pakistan think about major powers?

    Indians and Pakistanis generally agree on one thing: Their greatest geopolitical threat is the other. Over half of Indians (54%) name Pakistan as their country’s greatest threat, and 43% of Pakistanis name India. Around one-third of Indian Muslims (34%) name Pakistan as their top threat, compared with 57% of Hindus.

    Indians also see China as a top threat (named by 21%). Pakistanis, for their part, see Israel (24%) and the U.S. (24%) as their next-greatest threats.

    When asked about their most important ally, Pakistanis clearly point to China (75%) and, to a lesser degree, to Saudi Arabia (12%). About a third of Indians say Russia is their top ally (36%), while 16% name the U.S. Roughly a third of Indians did not answer the question.

    Because the U.S., China and Russia play an outsized role in global affairs, the diverging views of these major powers and their leaders is noteworthy.

    Indians, for example, show much more positive views of Russia (58% favorable) and President Vladimir Putin (51% confidence) than Pakistanis do (39% and 32%). In fact, Indians are among the most positive toward Russia and Putin across 37 countries surveyed this spring.

    When it comes to views of the U.S., Indians feel three times more favorably than Pakistanis. Indians also express more confidence in President Donald Trump.

    Pakistanis have overwhelmingly positive opinions of China (90% favorable) and President Xi Jinping (83% confidence). But only around a quarter of Indians express a positive view of China or its president. Indian Muslims are more likely than Indian Hindus to have a positive view of China and confidence in Xi, but on balance, their opinions of both are negative.

    Indeed, across 36 countries, the favorability gap between the U.S. and China is largest in Pakistan. India is one of the most comparatively pro-U.S. countries surveyed, and one of only six where people express more positive views of the U.S. than China.

    On a variety of questions about the role the U.S. and China play in the world – like reliability as a partner, taking other countries’ interests into account, interfering in other countries’ affairs, and maintaining global peace and stability – a similar pattern holds, with Indians more positive toward the U.S. and Pakistanis far more positive toward China.