Iranian President visits Pakistan amidst the Middle-East crisis, and not long after the two countries hit each other with airstrikes
26-04-2024
Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi’s 22 to 24 April official visit to Pakistan was the first by an Iranian President in eight years. Raisi was accompanied by his spouse and a high-level delegation comprising the Foreign Minister and other members of the Iranian cabinet, senior officials, as well as a large business delegation. During the visit, Raisi met Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, Senate Chairman Syed Yusuf Raza Gillani, National Assembly Speaker Sardar Sadiq, and the provincial leadership of Punjab and Sindh during trips to Lahore and Karachi. Significantly, he also held discussions with Army Chief General Asim Munir.
Raisi’s visit came amidst escalating tensions in the Middle East, and months after ties between Tehran and Islamabad became stressed due to Iran’s unexpected airstrikes against alleged militant hideouts in the restive Pakistani province of Balochistan in January. Pakistan swiftly retaliated by using drones and rockets to carry out strikes against what it called terrorist hideouts in Iran’s Sistan-Balochistan province, killing 9 people. If from Iran’s perspective the visit was aimed at garnering Pakistani support as Tehran comes under increasing pressure from Israel and the United States (US)-led West over its role in the Gaza conflict, Pakistan’s rolling out of the red carpet for the Iranian leader was meant to dilute the bitterness that had crept into bilateral ties following the air strikes on each other’s territory. The country also desperately needs support to overcome its deep economic crisis as well as the militant threat from Pakistani terrorist groups that Islamabad alleges are operating out of Afghanistan.
The visit was marked by mutual praise, and promises to improve ties, particularly in the economic sphere. Trade topped the Iranian President’s agenda, while security issues were also discussed. Raisi termed the current level of bilateral trade as “unacceptable”, and desired to see annual trade go up to $10bn. The Pakistani daily Dawn noted, however, that “Foreign sanctions, as well as the lack of proper banking channels, stand as major obstacles in enhancing bilateral commerce. Expanding the number of border markets can help remove these obstacles, and bring socioeconomic opportunities to border communities on both sides. Pakistan also seeks to expand foreign trade to improve its economic position. While searching for trade partners across the oceans should continue, we must work to expand regional commerce. As things stand, South Asia is among the world’s least integrated regions”.
In Pakistan, Raisi said that “I am here with a message of peace and prosperity for the Pakistani nation from the people of Iran and its leadership. The governments on both sides are willing to remove all obstacles to expanding trade between the two countries and in this regard, several options were discussed”. He added that Iran had made strides in industry, science, and technology despite “unfavourable conditions”, and was ready to exchange this knowledge with Islamabad. He opined that a strong trade partnership would further strengthen Iran-Pakistan relations, adding that no power on Earth “can affect the historical ties between the two countries”. Pakistan’s Foreign Office said the two sides had additionally agreed to cooperate in the energy sector, including trade in electricity, power transmission lines and the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project. The gas pipeline project has languished for more than a decade because of political turmoil and international sanctions.
The joint statement issued at the conclusion of the visit recalled the exchanges and meetings during Raisi’s visit, saying that the two sides had “reviewed the entire spectrum of Pakistan-Iran bilateral relations”, and had agreed to “enhance mutual interaction through regular exchange of high-level visits”. It added that both countries “affirmed their commitment to transform their common border from ‘border of peace’ to a ‘border of prosperity’ through joint development-oriented economic projects, including setting up of joint border markets, economic free zones, and new border openings”. It further said that, “They also reiterated the importance of cooperation in the energy domain, including trade in electricity, power transmission lines and Iran-Pakistan Gas Pipeline Project”. The statement noted the aim of the leaders to increase the volume of bilateral trade to $10bn over the next five years.
On the issue of terrorism, the statement noted that it “posed a common threat to regional peace and stability and presented a major impediment to the development of the region”, and informed that the two countries had agreed to “adopt a collaborative approach to confront this menace while fully upholding the principles of the UN Charter”. It continued, “Both sides reaffirmed their commitment to the development of Afghanistan as a peaceful, united, sovereign and independent state, free from the threats of terrorism and drug trafficking”.
On the Gaza conflict, Pakistan and Iran “expressed their strong and unequivocal condemnation of the ongoing Israeli regime’s aggression and atrocities against the Palestinian people”. They called for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire in Gaza, as well as “ensuring accountability of the crimes being committed by the Israeli regime”. The two sides also “strongly condemned the attack on the consular section” of the Iranian Embassy in Syria’s Damascus, calling it a “violation of international law and the UN Charter”. The statement added that “Recognising that the irresponsible act of the Israeli regime forces was a major escalation in an already volatile region, both sides called on the UN Security Council to prevent Israeli regime from its adventurism in the region and its illegal acts attacking its neighbours and targeting foreign diplomatic facilities”.
The issue of Jammu & Kashmir (J&K) also came up in the talks. The joint statement called for the resolution of the Kashmir issue through “dialogue and peaceful means based on the will of the people of that region and in accordance with international law”. However, when Prime Minister Sharif raked up the Kashmir issue at the joint press conference after his talks with Raisi on 22 April, and the Iranian President, possibly in deference to his country’s close ties with India, had refrained from mentioning Kashmir at all.
The timing and the purpose of Raisi’s visit has been a subject of discussion. Al Jazeera said that Mosharraf Zaidi, a partner at advisory services firm Tabadlab and former adviser to Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry, believed that Raisi’s trip was “an effort to secure an expression of support from Islamabad and Rawalpindi (the military leadership) for Iran – as it stumbles deeper into a dangerous conflict with Israel”. However, Zaidi added that Iran’s strategic thinkers are aware that Pakistan has both a domestic political crisis and a growing range of economic compulsions that limit the range of movement on Pakistan’s engagement in the ongoing conflict in the Middle East.
Former senior Pakistani diplomat Maleeha Lodhi, who has served as Pakistan’s envoy to the United Kingdom (UK), the US and the United Nations (UN), is of the view that “This visit is an effort to normalise relations between the two neighbours… it is a strategic compulsion for both”. Lodhi pointed out that “Pakistan has troubled borders with India as well as with Afghanistan. And therefore, to have a normal, stable relationship with Iran has been of utmost importance for Pakistan, and it remains so”.
Earlier, in a statement issued on 21 April, Pakistan’s Foreign Office had said that “The two sides will have a wide-ranging agenda to further strengthen Pakistan-Iran ties and enhance cooperation in diverse fields including trade, connectivity, energy, agriculture, and people-to-people contacts”. This “wide-ranging agenda”, however, came under a cloud when even as Raisi’s visit was ongoing, Dawn reported that the US State Department had warned that anyone considering business deals with Iran should be aware of the potential risks of US sanctions. It quoted the department’s Principal Deputy Spokesperson Vedant Patel as responding to a query about efforts to expand trade ties between Pakistan and Iran with “Let me say broadly we advise anyone considering business deals with Iran to be aware of the potential risk of sanctions. But ultimately, the government of Pakistan can speak to their own foreign policy pursuits”. Patel also informed that the US had decided last week to sanction three Chinese and one Belarusian firm for allegedly supplying missile components to Pakistan, adding that “The sanctions were made because these were entities that were proliferators of weapons of mass destruction and because of the means of their delivery”.
The plan to build a pipeline to export Iranian natural gas to Pakistan has been stalled amid opposition from the US, which has slapped a wide range of sanctions on Tehran over its nuclear programme. Explaining the background of the issue, Reuters wrote that “Their highest-profile agreement is a stalled gas supply deal signed in 2010 to build a pipeline from Iran's South Fars gas field to Pakistan's southern provinces of Balochistan and Sindh. Despite Pakistan's dire need of gas, Islamabad has yet to begin construction of its part of the pipeline, citing fears over US sanctions – a concern Tehran has rejected. Pakistan said it would seek waivers from the US, but Washington has said it does not support the project and warned of the risk of sanctions in doing business with Tehran. Despite facing possible contract breach penalties running into the billions of dollars, Islamabad recently gave the go-ahead for construction of an 80-km (50-mile) stretch of the pipeline”.
In February, the outgoing caretaker government in Pakistan had approved the construction of the 80km section of the pipeline, primarily to avoid the payment of billions of dollars in penalties to Iran due to years of delays. Ahmad Irfan Aslam, the former Law Minister in that caretaker government that had green-lighted construction of the 80km section of the pipeline, pointed out that Pakistan’s reliance on the US for “everything from economic bailouts to its security” meant that “We cannot bear American sanctions. We will present our stance to the US. Iran has been told multiple times that we need their gas. We want to complete this project but without any sanctions”. Aslam was in favour of seeking a waiver from the US, which “would require support from both Saudi Arabia and the UAE”. He cautioned that any waiver request would necessitate complex negotiations.
Foreign policy expert Muhammad Faisal feels that the US threat of sanctions was essentially meant to dissuade Pakistan and “increase the cost of doing business with Iran”. He pointed out that a wide-ranging list of business-related activities with Iran could trigger US sanctions, and the regulations also bar business dealings with Iranian financial institutions. He explained to Al Jazeera that “Any expansion of formal trade and banking activity between the two nations will be slow, as Pakistani banks are reluctant to do direct business with Iranian banks”.
Micheal Kugelman, director of the Wilson Centre’s South Asia Institute in Washington, believes that as tensions mount in the Middle East over the war in Gaza, and with new US sanctions against Iran being announced on 18 April, it was unlikely that the US would grant Pakistan a sanctions waiver to proceed with the project. He summarized the predicament by saying that “Pakistan is seemingly caught between the devil and the deep blue sea — build the pipeline and risk being sanctioned, or don’t build it and get slapped with a massive fine”.
The broader fear in the Pakistani establishment, elucidated in a question asked in a 24 April editorial in Dawn, is “Today, the US does not want the Iran pipeline to proceed. Tomorrow, if ties between Washington and Beijing nosedive, and the US asks Pakistan to reconsider CPEC, or our defence cooperation with China, will we comply?”
