Can Pakistan afford regime change in Iran?

ISLAMABAD:

When Field Marshal General Syed Asim Munir was meeting US President Donald Trump in the White House in June last year, the Iran situation was still tantalisingly precarious.

There were still murmurs that Israel backed by the US would push for a regime change in Iran. But then within days of the field marshal’s meeting with Trump, the situation de-escalated after Iran carried out largely symbolic air strikes on the US military base in Qatar.

The Iranian government survived. If sources and circumstantial evidence are to be believed, it was Pakistan’s army chief’s advice to Trump that led the US not to pull the trigger.

Today, as protests once again roil Iran and Trump issues fresh warnings of military action, Islamabad’s position remains unchanged. Pakistan does not want regime change in Iran because the costs would be catastrophic, according to some experts and officials

Iran is not a distant concern for Pakistan, it is a 900-kilometre neighbour, sharing a sensitive border with Balochistan, the country’s most fragile province. Any upheaval in Iran immediately threatens cross-border militancy, arms trafficking, refugee flows and economic disruption.

“Any change in Iran whether it comes as a result of internal developments or external intervention will have a direct impact on Pakistan,” said Asif Durrani, who served as Pakistan’s ambassador to Iran.

“Pakistan has played a role in the past in helping reduce tensions between Iran and the West and it must be remembered that Pakistan’s diplomatic mission in Washington also watches Iran’s interests,” he added while referring to Islamabad’s possible role in defusing the crisis.

This underscores Islamabad’s dual role, managing its own security while also subtly advising global powers on the consequences of aggressive action against Tehran.

One of Pakistan’s immediate concerns is the impact on Balochistan. Iran’s Sistan-Baluchestan province shares ethnic, tribal, and linguistic ties with Pakistan’s Baloch areas.

State instability across the border would energise militant networks, enabling them to exploit safe havens and expand cross-border operations. Security analysts note that Pakistan’s previous counterterrorism gains in Balochistan can quickly unravel if Iran descends into chaos.

Johar Saleem, a former foreign secretary, said when there was a conflict going on between Iran and Israel last time, and at that time Pakistan had supported the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Iran very categorically.

“But I was one of the very few commentators in Pakistan who felt that military conflict had actually weakened Iran. So, the situation we now see is partly because Iran is facing a huge crisis of political instability.”

Johar emphasised that external intervention now, be it economic, cyber, or military, would exacerbate the situation, further destabilising a country already weakened by internal and external pressures.

Pakistan already hosts millions of Afghan refugees. A collapse or military intervention in Iran could trigger another massive influx of people, overwhelming border management, urban centres, and social services.

The economic toll alone would be significant, coming at a time when Pakistan is under IMF programs and facing domestic fiscal constraints.

A forced regime change in Tehran would reverberate far beyond Pakistan. It could harden fault lines across the Middle East, provoke proxy conflicts, and draw in regional powers such as China, Russia, and Turkey.

For Pakistan, which relies heavily on Gulf stability for energy, trade, and remittances, the consequences could be severe.

“In situations like these, it is always dialogue and amicable solutions that not just people in the country would want but people outside the country as well, especially those who are well-wishers of Iran. And Pakistanis are great well-wishers of Iran,” Johar said.

This underscores that Pakistan’s approach is rooted in realism: it seeks to manage regional dynamics without being drawn into risky external adventures.

“Besides economic sanctions, there are other options too, which the Americans have been talking about military strikes for instance or cyber attacks.

“Technologically speaking, there is a vast array of possibilities, so that any type of intervention by the US or West would exacerbate the situation in Iran,” warned Johar. Pakistan’s position is clear that Iran must remain stable, sovereign, and intact.

While Islamabad may not always agree with Tehran’s internal policies, it recognises that a collapse of the Iranian state would be a strategic disaster for Pakistan, spanning border security, refugee flows, regional power dynamics, and long-term diplomatic credibility.

As protests continue in Tehran and Trump hints at intervention, Pakistan is likely to continue quietly advising restraint, emphasising dialogue and pushing for solutions that preserve both Iran’s territorial integrity and regional stability.