A Reading into Pakistan and its Functional Role in the Middle East

Question 1: How does Pakistan reconcile its role as a mediator regarding Iran with its alignment with Saudi Arabia regarding the Houthis?

The rulers of Pakistan have reconciled their role regarding Iran and Saudi Arabia on the basis of American interests, not “national interest” nor the interests of Muslims and Islam.

The mediation between Iran and the US was to provide an escape for Trump after he fell into a quagmire in his war with Iran. The alignment with Saudi Arabia against the Houthis is to provide Trump the US leverage against Iran through pressure on its proxies in Yemen, the Houthis.

Had the rulers of Pakistan reconciled their role on the basis of national interest, they would have mediated between the Houthis and Saudi Arabia. The rulers of Pakistan would have been busy travelling between Yemen and Saudi to mediate, as they had been travelling between Iran and the U.S.

Had the rulers of Pakistan reconciled their role on the basis of the interests of Muslims and Islam, they would have sided with Iran from the beginning to force the retreat of the U.S. Indeed, the U.S. itself is the primary source of instability and war within the Muslim World since it began its interference after the Second World War.

Question 2: Why has Pakistan not acted as a mediator between the Houthis and Saudi Arabia?

The rulers of Pakistan did not mediate between the Houthis and Saudi Arabia because it is not in the interests of the US to do so.

The Americans want a prolonged conflict between Saudi Arabia and the Houthis to pressure Iran in the long term.

As for the short term, Americans wanted the expansion of Houthis within Yemen itself, to displace the factions which have ties to the UAE, and its master Britain, the old colonialist occupier of Yemen. In addition, America allowed the expansion as a carrot for Iran to abandon independence, and deal with America on the basis of subordinance.

So the Americans ordered Bin Salman to escalate against the Houthis, but did not help Bin Salman when the Houthis responded with attacks within Saudi Arabia. America also made a deal with the Houthis in Oman to protect its ships and assets.

Question 3: What does Pakistan stand to gain from intervening in this manner?

Pakistan does not gain from aligning with Saudi Arabia, but the rulers of Pakistan do.

As for Pakistan, it is being drawn into a regional conflict that will last for months if not years, in which it will bear losses militarily and economically. Muslims will kill Muslims so that the real enemies, the Jews and the American crusaders can establish their dominance over all Muslim states. The Muslim states will spend on the regional conflict, at a time that their economies are struggling, and nearing collapse under the burden of capitalism and colonialism.

As for the rulers of Pakistan, they cling to power on the basis of foreign support from the US, not on domestic support. They are in fact losing domestic support because of their agency to the US in its war on Islam and Muslims, making them cling tighter to their master, Trump.

Question 4: Is the trilateral agreement restrictive and limited in scope?

The diplomatic language of the trilateral agreement, the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement, is that a defensive pact. So by literal wording it is restrictive but practically it gives the US flexibility to fight Iran and its proxies using the armies of the three states. Already, the rulers of Pakistan have provided a pretext for entering fighting by claiming that they want to protect the Haramayn.

Question 5: Why did Pakistan not intervene to defend Saudi Arabia in the past, despite the existence of a bilateral agreement?

There was no need for the US for Pakistan to defend Saudi Arabia before the American attack on Iran on 28 February 2026.

The conflict between Saudi Arabia and Yemen was limited in scope and area. As for Iran, it remained in the orbit of US foreign policy as a satellite state and did not allow the Houthis to escalate. So the US successfully engineered what it calls a low-intensity conflict (LIC), to achieve strategic objectives.

All this changed when Trump made the miscalculation of war on Iran and killed the leadership. The new leadership adopted independence from the US, far from the subordination that Trump aimed for. So now Trump is using the carrot of negotiations and the stick of Pakistan, the most powerful Muslim state, to tame Iran.

Question 6: Is Pakistan attempting to strike a balance between its need for Gulf funding and its fear of Iran’s disintegration?

No. It is not attempting to do so, even though its rulers are claiming to do so.

The war that Trump is inciting between the Muslim states threatens the integrity and stability of all Muslim states. The vision that Trump’s key advisor, Tom Barrack, declared for the Middle East is one of further division on the existing states, as a new Sykes Picot borders.

The weakening of Muslim states through war and division only serves the need of the US.

Regarding the Gulf States, Trump has already looted them of wealth and continues to do so.

Regarding Iran, Trump has threatened it with annihilation.

If the rulers of Pakistan really valued the wealth of the Gulf and the strength of Iran, they would have declared the establishment of the Khilafah Rashidah (rightly guided Caliphate) in order to unify the rest of the Muslim states under its command in the face of the US war and looting.

Question 7: Are Pakistan and Türkiye capable of repelling Houthi attacks?

Yes. Pakistan and Türkiye are amongst the most militarily capable states in the world. In May 2025, Pakistan crushed India to the point that the liberation of Kashmir was inevitable. However, Türkiye remains in the orbit of US foreign policy as a satellite state and Pakistan is a subordinate state of the US despite being the strongest state in the Muslim World.

Thus, they will only repel, or not repel, Houthis according to the US foreign policy directives.

Before the war on Iran, the US did not order them to repel the Houthis.

After the war on Iran began and the Houthis responded to the strikes of Saudi, the US did not order them to repel the Houthis because it wanted them to displace the proxies of the UAE, and Britain standing behind UAE.

Now, if Iran does not respond to the carrot, the US will beat Iran with the stick of the armies of Türkiye and Pakistan.

Question 8: Does Pakistan’s intervention affect its military readiness vis-à-vis India?

Yes, it does. Of course, Pakistan is strong enough to face war on more than one front due to its physical capabilities and the Iman of its soldiers and officers. However due to its agency to the US, the rulers of Pakistan are now undermining its readiness against India.

It has deployed at least 30,000 troops, and as many as 40,000 troops, in Saudi Arabia so that the US can pressure the rulers of Iran into subordination.

It is actively engaged in war with Muslims in Afghanistan and the tribal areas so that the US can pressure the rulers of Afghanistan, the Taliban movement, into subordination. Trump seeks control of Bagram Airbase and the huge amounts of Rare Earth Elements in Afghanistan.

Due to the agency to America, instead of raising their weapons against the enemies from amongst the Hindus and Jews, Muslim troops will fight and kill Muslims.

Question 9: Does Pakistan’s economy depend on Saudi financial support?

Yes, but not only from Saudi Arabia. Pakistan is a rich country, with an abundance of land, youth, energy and minerals, but it is made poor because of riba. Over half of its revenues are spent on riba (interest). There is no escape from the debt trap for any state that involves in the sin of riba.

So, Pakistan takes new loans to pay the riba on previous loans, from Saudi Arabia, or China, or the US or the international financial institutions.

The way to end this dependence is to implement the Shariah rulings: abolish riba and seize the misappropriated wealth from the corrupt officials to pay any outstanding principals.

Question 10: What is the reality behind the regional states’ shift toward collective self-reliance in security, following the failure of the American security umbrella?

At the peak of its strength, the US fought wars against the Muslims using its army and the support of the rulers of Muslims in terms of intelligence, bases and logistics.

Now that it has weakened, the US wants to fight wars against Muslims using the armies of Muslims, and the wealth of the Muslims.

This is the reality of so-called collective self-reliance.

The actual collective self-reliance is through the unification of the Muslim states as a single Islamic state, ruling by the Book of Allah (swt) and the Sunnah of the Prophet (saw).

Question 11:  Is the American "trap"—designed to entangle regional states—not apparent to Pakistan?

It is apparent as the sun is in the sky. The American trap is apparent to the aware sons and daughters of Pakistan, but the rulers of Pakistan are only concerned about securing the interest of the US. So they blind themselves through slavery.

Amongst the Muslims of Pakistan, there is a strong rejection of entering into America's war on Iran, which is creating pressure on the rulers of Pakistan. The social media, the masajid and the work spaces of Muslims are filled with opposition to this new war of Fitnah between Muslims. As for the rulers of Pakistan, they are responding as usual with threats and intimidation, in accordance to their policy of the "hard state." They cannot see beyond the interests of the US. For them foreign policy is about America First, even though they speak of Pakistan First.

Question 12: Will Pakistan end up mired in the region’s quagmire?

Yes and no!

Yes, if Pakistan continues to be subordinate to the US, with agents of Trump governing it, it will be mired in the region’s quagmire for at least months and most likely years.

But no, if the Muslims of Pakistan and the sincere officers within their armed forces succeed in uprooting the traitors, turning the tables on the American plan.

So the imperative for the Muslims is to strive with the shebaab of Hizb ut Tahrir for the establishment of the second Khilafah Rashidah (rightly-guided Caliphate) on the Method of the Prophethood. They must contact all their friends and relatives amongst the officers of the armed forces, and demand that they grant nussrah (military support) to Hizb ut Tahrir for the resumption of Islam as a way of life, the unification of the Muslims as a single community under a single Imam and Dawah and Jihad to establish the dominance of the Deen for the pleasure of Allah (swt).

[وَاللَّهُ غَالِبٌ عَلَى أَمْرِهِ وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ]

“And Allah has full power over His affairs, but most people do not know.” [TMQ Surah Yusuf: 21].