Iran drags Pakistan into the fire of its macabre theatre
This week’s dramatic escalation between Israel and Iran has not only shaken the Middle East but also drawn in unexpected players—at least in name, if not in action. Tehran, reeling from the most direct and devastating Israeli strikes on its soil in decades, has turned to a familiar strategy: weaponizing fear. In an extraordinary move, senior Iranian officials claimed that Pakistan, a nuclear-armed Muslim nation with an “Islamic” nuke, had pledged to retaliate against Israel with nuclear force should the Jewish state deploy its own nuclear arsenal against Iran.
The assertion, issued by figures such as IRGC commander Mohsen Rezaei, seemed designed for maximum psychological impact. The implication was chilling: that the world stood a hair-trigger away from a nuclear war involving not just Iran and Israel, but also Pakistan-bringing South Asia into the West Asian conflict. Iranian state media amplified the message, with anchors proudly referencing the Shaheen-III missile—capable of striking Tel Aviv—and suggesting that “brotherly” Islamic nations would not sit idly by if Iran faced annihilation.
Yet behind the bravado, the truth tells a very different story.
Islamabad did not issue any such nuclear threat against Israel. While the Pakistani foreign ministry expressed “deep concern” over Israel’s attack on Iran’s sovereign territory and warned of “catastrophic regional consequences,” there was no formal commitment to military intervention, let alone the use of nuclear weapons. Nonetheless, elements of the Pakistani political class—particularly members of opposition religious parties and hardline clerics—rallied in fiery protest, calling on the government to “break all ties” with Western allies and to “prepare for a regional jihad” if Israel escalated further. In Lahore, Karachi, and Rawalpindi, massive anti-Israel demonstrations erupted, with effigies of Israeli leaders burned and chants demanding vengeance echoing across city squares.
Pakistan’s military, for its part, went on heightened alert in response to growing regional tensions given it shares an important border with Iran, in the volatile Baluchistan region. While no overt mobilisation occurred, senior generals held emergency briefings with the Prime Minister and the National Security Council. Pakistani Air Force assets were quietly repositioned, and media outlets close to the military establishment aired editorials emphasizing “the necessity of regional deterrence in the face of Zionist aggression.” Though these gestures stopped short of a declaration of war, they painted a far more aggressive picture than Islamabad’s official diplomatic posture suggested.
The Iranian regime, meanwhile, flooded the internet with fake news and doctored videos—some purporting to show Pakistani nuclear convoys headed toward Iran, others falsely claiming that Pakistan had issued a “final warning” to Israel. These fabrications, quickly debunked by independent observers, were clearly designed to sow panic, rally the Muslim world, and create the illusion of an emerging anti-Israel coalition willing to act with apocalyptic force.
This psychological warfare serves multiple Iranian objectives. First, it distracts from the severe damage inflicted by Israel’s “Operation Rising Lion,” which struck critical Iranian nuclear and military infrastructure, including sites near Natanz, Fordow, and the outskirts of Tehran. Satellite images confirmed major damage at underground facilities and weapons depots, with hundreds reportedly killed or injured, including IRGC personnel. The Iranian government has attempted to downplay these losses domestically—tightening media controls while turning outward to manufacture a global crisis narrative in which Iran is not the aggressor, but the victim of Israeli “Zionist terrorism.”
Second, by dragging Pakistan into its propaganda, Iran seeks to elevate its perceived strategic depth. If Tehran can convince the world that it has nuclear-armed allies willing to retaliate on its behalf, it could deter further Israeli strikes and complicate U.S. and European diplomatic efforts. It’s a high-risk bluff—a diplomatic fantasy masquerading as geopolitical reality.
But the danger is real. In moments of extreme tension, perception often becomes policy. What starts as misinformation can become a catalyst for miscalculation. The mere suggestion of nuclear involvement by Pakistan, even if untrue, has already raised alarm in Jerusalem and Washington. Israeli officials have called Iran’s statements “irresponsible incitement,” warning that attempts to involve third parties in nuclear posturing could lead to “consequences beyond anyone’s control.”
And that may well be Iran’s point. Faced with internal dissent, economic collapse, and a devastating Israeli military campaign, the regime is turning to chaos as a strategy. If it cannot win on the battlefield, it will try to win in the shadows—through lies, fear, and threats of apocalyptic war.
It is essential, then, for responsible global actors—including Pakistan’s civilian and military leadership—to publicly clarify their positions and condemn Iran’s attempt to weaponize their nuclear arsenal in rhetoric. Silence breeds suspicion; ambiguity invites escalation. The world cannot afford for nuclear threats—real or imagined—to become the new normal in an already explosive region.
In the fog of war, truth is often the first casualty. But in this case, the fog is deliberate, and its consequences could be catastrophic.
