The National Security Committee’s statement reaffirming Iran’s right to self-defence, issued after the recent US strikes on Iranian nuclear-related sites, is a necessary and correct step. It signals that Pakistan will not endorse the erosion of international law through silence. Ergo, Islamabad appeared to have done its homework well, understanding the strategic risks of allowing unilateral military actions to go unchecked in an already volatile region.
The US strikes, carried out without any United Nations Security Council mandate, raise serious legal and political concerns. Washington has cited collective self-defence on behalf of Israel but has provided no evidence of any imminent threat emanating from Iran. The targeted sites are reportedly under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Pre-emptive attacks on nuclear infrastructure, in the absence of an armed attack, are not permitted under the UN Charter. On legal grounds alone, the US action is indefensible.
Iran, for its part, has the right under Article 51 of the Charter to defend itself if it comes under attack. The NSC’s statement reflects this reality. Defending the core principles of international law means holding all countries accountable, no matter their power or alliances. Allowing exceptions undermines the entire system and invites chaos.
Pakistan’s position is also rooted in its history. For decades, it has been on the receiving end of external military actions–drone strikes, cross-border operations, and coercive diplomacy. Pakistan understands the consequences of a global order where some countries reserve for themselves rights they deny to others. That understanding, not ideology or alignment, is what informs the current stance.
Strategically, this is a delicate balancing act. Pakistan maintains important ties with both the US and Iran, as well as with Gulf Arab states. However, these relationships cannot come at the expense of consistency in core international principles. The region is already teetering: Gaza is in crisis, nuclear diplomacy with Iran is stalled, and global oil markets remain fragile. Further escalation with Iran will benefit no one.
Islamabad should continue working with regional and global partners to push for restraint and a return to diplomacy. If international norms are to mean anything, they must be defended when violated, especially by those who helped build them. *