Although tensions between Tehran and Islamabad have reduced, the incident has highlighted Pakistan’s frayed relations with all its major neighbours--India, Afghanistan, and Iran as all of them have accused it of backing terrorist groups
On January 16, Iran launched missile and drone attacks on Pakistan, hitting camps of the Jaish al-Adl, a US and Iran designated terrorist group in Panjgur in Balochistan province. The next day, Pakistan took retaliatory action against Iran and targeted camps of the Balochistan Liberation Army and the Balochistan Liberation Front in Sistan--Baluchistan province of Iran.
 
Pakistan’s Foreign ministry statement mentioned, “It is concerning that this illegal act (Iranian attack) has taken place despite the existence of several channels of communication between Pakistan and Iran.” The Iranian statement post the Pakistan attack, after condemning Islamabad, maintained, “Islamic Republic of Iran adheres to the policy of good neighbourliness and brotherhood between the two nations and the two governments of the Islamic Republic of Iran and Pakistan.” Foreign ministers of the two countries commenced discussion to diffuse the situation.

While tensions between the two may have reduced, forces would remain on alert. Both have been accusing the other of backing terrorist groups. Pakistan claims that two Baloch children were killed and three injured in the Iranian strike. The Iranians announced nine Baloch civilians killed in Pakistan’s strikes and a few more injured.
 
The Jaish al-Adl operates from Pakistan’s Sistan-Baluchistan region and comprises about 500 fighters. It operates on both sides of the Iran-Pakistan border. It has support from local Baloch tribes and is backed by the ISI, possibly at the behest of the US and Saudi Arabia. The BLA and BLF have their bases in Iran and Afghanistan and target the Pakistan army. All terrorist groups have claimed that none of them suffered any casualties in the attacks, though they were targets.
 
Iranian foreign minister, Hossein Amir-Abdollahian had met Pakistan’s caretaker PM, Anwaar Kakar in Davos barely 30 minutes before the Iranian strike. It appears that Pakistan refused to respond to Tehran’s last-minute request to curb the Jaish al-Adl, claiming it does not support terrorism. The Iranian strike followed similar attacks launched on Iraq and Syria targeting a ‘supposed Israeli spy Headquarters’ and ISIL camps.
 
The attack by Tehran highlighted Pakistan’s frayed relations with all its major neighbours, India, Afghanistan, and Iran. All have accused it of backing terrorist groups. While the Indo-Pak border witnesses a ceasefire, the Iranian and Afghan border will remain tense.
 
Pakistan was forced to react in a calibrated manner to the Iranian strike to stem growing domestic pressure on its armed forces. It simultaneously could not risk a regional conflict. Islamabad also needs Tehran’s support as it meets its oil needs by smuggling it from Iran. If Iran blocks movement of oil, Pakistan’s economic concerns will increase.
 
China, which has close ties with both Pakistan and Iran, requested restraint. Its Foreign Ministry spokesperson stated, “We call on both sides to exercise restraint, avoid actions that would lead to an escalation of tension and work together to maintain peace and stability.” 
 
The current fragile peace between Pakistan and Iran is because neither lost its own citizens. The Baloch, who were killed in both strikes, are not considered citizens of Iran nor Pakistan and hence, are expendable. All targeted terrorist groups have sworn revenge. The fact that neither nation’s air defences detected the strikes implies that either they were staged or their current air defence systems are ineffective. Pakistan’s air defence had also failed to detect India’s Balakot strike.
 
Pakistan is the first nation to have struck Iran post the Hamas attack on Israel on October7, 2023. There is no doubt that Rawalpindi would have kept Washington in the loop on its decision, timing, and targets. Hence, the US would have monitored Pakistan’s strike and observed capabilities and gaps in Iran’s air defence.
 
The US State Department spokesperson, Mathew Miller, bypassed the subject when questioned on Pakistan’s counter-strike by stating, “I do not have any private conversations to read out.” Iran backing down also implies that it is hesitant to commence a conflict which could weaken its military power as tensions increase between the US and Israel and its proxies, Houthi’s, Hamas, and Hezbollah.
 
Ultimately for the West, Iran is the target. The Iranian strikes across the region also sent a message that despite sanctions and western pressure, it possesses the capability to hit back and will not hesitate. Whether Iran hit its intended targets in Syria, Iraq and Pakistan is secondary, what is of prominence is conveying its intent.
 
It also sends a message that any strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities (it is close to developing nuclear weapons, with enrichment touching 80%) would be unacceptable and retaliation would follow. Israel, which has sworn to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, is involved in its own battle in Gaza and would hesitate to open a new front. The timing of the Hamas attack could also be linked to this factor.
 
Further, Israel and the US had recently targeted Iranian military personnel in Syria and Lebanon. These strikes also convey Iran’s intent to enter the Israel-Gaza conflict in case attacks against its personnel continue. The US is currently engaged in supporting Israel against Hamas as also keeping the Houthis under pressure, hence would hesitate to challenge Iran militarily.
 
The attack and deteriorating ties of Pakistan with all its major neighbours pushes its geo-economic policy into the dustbin. Iran by its attack also highlighted the failure of Pakistan’s famed spy agency, the ISI. The ISI failed to read Iran’s intent. Iranian accusations followed by the strike also exposes Pakistan as a global supporter of terrorism. The Iranian government has been facing domestic pressure as its people are being targeted internally and externally. The strike would reduce that to some extent.  
 
India, which had launched two strikes into Pakistan, backed Iran.  Ministry of External Affairs' spokesperson, Randhir Jaiswal said, “This is a matter between Iran and Pakistan. Insofar as India is concerned, we have an uncompromising position of zero tolerance towards terrorism. We understand actions that countries take in their self-defence.” India conveyed that it backs military action against terrorist groups, no matter where they are based, including nuclear armed Pakistan.
 
While Iran-Pak tensions may have reduced, they have not ended. However, the incident has shown the international community that Pakistan continues to be a haven for terrorists and that there is need for concerted action against it for the larger interest of peace and security in the region.
 
*** The writer is a security and strategic affairs commentator; views expressed are his own