Category: 2. World

Pakistan-US bilateral relations have taken a surprising turn in 2025, with a strategic shift in outlook of the United States towards South Asia. The year has been marked with thriving foreign policy of Pakistan and a robust strategic posture. The shift in complex South Asian dynamics can be felt vividly while Pakistan recalibrates its relationships on multiple fronts, especially with the United States. As Islamabad seeks to regain strategic relevance after years of diplomatic struggles, it is embarking on a comprehensive overhaul of its foreign policy. This transformation extends well beyond transactional agreements and points to Pakistan’s renewed quest for resilience, regional stability and global engagement.

From the Shadows of Conflict to Diplomatic Engagement

The May 2025 standoff was a sobering reminder of the fragile stability in South Asia. The conflict underscored long-standing unresolved, particularly regarding the Kashmir dispute and the persistent mistrust between India and Pakistan. However, the international response, especially from the United States, marked a subtle yet significant shift. Washington’s rapid mediation efforts brokering a ceasefire between the two countries, prevented unconventional escalation and put Kashmir dispute on discussion table once again. This move opened diplomatic avenues for Pakistan and United States bilateral ties.

In the months that followed, Pakistan’s leadership seized the diplomatic opening by adopting a more assertive but constructive tone. Islamabad publicly acknowledged and praised the U.S. role in de-escalation, signaling a willingness to engage Washington on multiple fronts including security, economic cooperation and regional diplomacy. This marked a departure from earlier years characterized by suspicion and disengagement, particularly after the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021 that had left Pakistan in deep waters to deal with terrorism and growing regional insecurity alone.

Recalibrating Pakistan–U.S. Relations: Beyond Old Paradigms

Historically, Pakistan–U.S. relations have been transactional due to increasing multilateralism and Pakistan’s obvious leaning towards China. However, 2025 has transformed the relationship giving it a fresh start. Prior to Pakistan- India standoff in May 2025, US had been appreciative of Pakistan’s efforts in counter-terrorism. In March 2025, Pakistan and US, in a collaborative operation caught a high-value target Sharifullah alias Jafar, member of ISIS- Khorasan and mastermind of Abbey Gate attack on US forces in Afghanistan in 2021. US President, Mr. Donald Trump’s response to counter terrorism efforts of Pakistan marked beginning of a new era in bi-lateral relations, which continues to prosper with multiple high level diplomatic and strategic visits between Washington and Islamabad, including that of Army Chief of Pakistan, Field Marshall Asim Munir and US CENTCOM Commander General Micheal Kurilla. 

The post-standoff rapprochement reflects a broader U.S. strategic interest in maintaining stability in South Asia amid great power competition. For Pakistan, re-engagement with the U.S. offers an avenue to diversify its diplomatic portfolio, emerging as a balancing agent between US and China while curtailing India’s regional dominance. This recalibration is not simply about trade or aid; it is a multi-dimensional realignment involving security engagement to combat terrorism more effectively, economic cooperation aimed at fostering sustainable development and investment and strategic diplomacy to position Pakistan as a key player in South Asian peace efforts.

Strategic Implications of Pakistan–U.S. Realignment Post-2025

The strategic pivot in Pakistan – US relations is not merely about restoring ties rather signals Pakistan’s reintegration into global diplomacy through a more nuanced engagement with Washington. The renewed partnership is grounded in shared interests, particularly in counterterrorism, regional stability, and economic cooperation. For Pakistan, this realignment carries multidimensional implications that could help redefine its strategic trajectory in South Asia and beyond.

First, the revival of structured security cooperation with the U.S. enables Pakistan to once again become part of broader counterterrorism frameworks. Pakistan demonstrated its capacity and willingness to act against transnational threats. In return, the United States has shown renewed interest in intelligence sharing, security assistance, and operational coordination. In a post-Afghanistan context, this re-engagement with U.S. security structures is particularly important, as it rehabilitates Pakistan’s image from that of a problematic ally to a capable regional partner.

Secondly, the U.S. role in mediating the May 2025 India – Pakistan stand-off and Pakistan’s willingness to accept that mediation has bolstered Islamabad’s diplomatic leverage in the region. Pakistan’s close ties with Washington challenge India’s strategic monopoly in U.S. policymaking circles. It gives Pakistan a platform to advocate its positions more effectively.

Economically, this strategic realignment is likely to yield long-term dividends for Pakistan. The renewed interest of the U.S. in Pakistan’s energy and mineral sectors, including potential investment in Reko Diq and broader infrastructure development suggests a reorientation of economic engagement grounded in strategic rather than purely commercial logic. Pakistan is diversifying its foreign economic partnerships and balancing China and Gulf economies. This form of strategic economic interdependence is more sustainable than aid-driven relationships of the past, allowing Pakistan to build resilience.

The events of 2025, including Pakistan’s measured conduct during the conflict showing restraint before response and cooperation in counterterrorism offer a chance to shift previous narratives. Recasting itself as a peace-seeking, reform-driven, and globally engaged actor can yield reputational dividends. Pakistan is writing its own story, one of resilience, responsibility and regional leadership with access to American media, think tanks, and academia. This narrative shift is not only vital for foreign investment and diplomacy but also for national self-confidence, offering the Pakistani state and society a renewed sense of purpose on the world stage.

Realignment as a Strategic Opportunity

Pakistan–U.S. relations in 2025 have taken a surprising and constructive turn, marked by renewed bilateral cooperation and strategic coordination. This positive shift in what had long been a strained relationship has begun to yield mutual benefits. Joint efforts in counterterrorism, coupled with Pakistan’s assertive yet responsible conduct during the May 2025 Pakistan–India standoff have positioned Islamabad as a credible regional player at a table once dominated by unilateral narratives. Strengthening this realignment is now essential. For Pakistan, the task lies in institutionalizing this partnership through long-term foreign policy planning. For the United States, it requires moving beyond outdated perceptions and recognizing Pakistan’s emerging role as a capable middle power in South Asia. As the Field Marshal Asim Munir embarks on yet another visit to the U.S. to attend the change of command at CENTCOM, it send a clear message to the world that Pakistan has re-integrated its significance in the international arena.

Published on: August 16, 2025 2:34 AM

In a world where alliances are increasingly transactional, the counterterrorism partnership between Pakistan and the United States remains an evolving, if at times uneasy, example of strategic necessity. Whereas public discourse is usually preoccupied with episodes of tension (drone attacks, trust gaps and changing regional priorities), the cooperation, particularly in recent years, has become increasingly professional, mature and outcome-oriented. With old threats being replaced by new ones, the US-Pakistan counterterrorism (CT) cooperation is important not only to South Asian stability, but to world security architecture as well.

A recent example of this longstanding collaboration was the January 2025 joint operation that resulted in the arrest of Sharifullah, the ISIS-K mastermind of the lethal August 2021 Kabul airport bombing. Not the arrest but the manner in which it was done was important. The Pakistani intelligence services, working in close liaison with their US counterparts, monitored then captured a high-value target without incurring political blowback and without leaking the operation. This achievement, which was celebrated by the US Department of Justice, was not so much about symbolism but rather competency, coordination and trust.

And this trust seems to be on an upward curve. Centcom Commander Gen Michael Kurilla, who has retired recently, praised Pakistan as a “phenomenal partner” in the war against ISIS-K in July 2025, and was himself honoured with the Nishan-e-Imtiaz, the highest military award of Pakistan. This act, however ceremonial, amounts to a conscious resetting of relations — a shift in the mode of suspicion to a mode of common strategic outlook.

But what has changed?

To begin with, the two countries have apparently adjusted expectations. The pre-9/11 doctrine of “with us or against us” that previously put a strain on bilateral relations has been replaced by a more realistic, decentralised system of collaboration. Examples of this change include institutions such as the National Intelligence Fusion & Threat Assessment Centre (NIFTAC), in Pakistan, which is a locally based response that is integrated with international cooperation, especially with the American and allied intelligence organisations.

Second, terrorism as such has evolved. The recurrence of Taliban in power in Afghanistan has formed new security gaps, and these gaps are easily taken advantage of by groups such as Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and ISIS-K. They are not local actors only but transnational ones that recruit and fund globally. That is why the US not only requires Pakistan as a geographic ally but also as an operational one. Drones cannot do away with ideological insurgencies, they require boots on the ground, informants on the field and information provided by local agencies.

Of course, the road ahead is not without bumps. The perennial issue of strategic mistrust, particularly when it comes to Afghanistan and regional power dynamics with India and China, will always shadow Pak-US ties. Moreover, Pakistan faces internal political instability and resurging domestic militancy, which can dilute the focus of its CT machinery. But to let these obstacles overshadow progress would be short-sighted. It is also crucial that this partnership does not become overly securitised. Counterterrorism cooperation should be complemented by economic and developmental collaboration, particularly in Pakistan’s tribal and border regions.

Ultimately, Pak-US CT cooperation is not a vestige of a long forgotten war-on-terrorism; it’s a living, breathing necessity shaped by evolving threats and mutual dependencies. If 2025 is any indicator, it seems both sides have begun to move past suspicion and toward strategic maturity. For a world teetering on new fronts of asymmetric warfare, it’s not just reassuring — it’s essential.

United States President Donald Trump said he wanted to see a ceasefire “today” as he headed to Alaska on Friday for a summit with Russia’s Vladimir Putin to help end the deadliest war in Europe since World War Two.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who was not invited to the talks, and his European allies fear Trump might sell out Ukraine by essentially freezing the conflict and recognising — if only informally — Russian control over one fifth of Ukraine.

Trump sought to assuage such concerns as he boarded Air Force One, saying he would let Ukraine decide on any possible territorial swaps. “I’m not here to negotiate for Ukraine, I’m here to get them to a table,” he said.

Asked what would make the meeting a success, he told reporters: “I want to see a ceasefire rapidly… I’m not going to be happy if it’s not today… I want the killing to stop.”

The US and Russian presidents are due to meet at a Cold War-era air force base in Alaska’s largest city at around 11am (12am PKT) for their first face-to-face talks since Trump returned to the White House.

Trump hopes a truce in the 3-1/2-year-old war will bolster his credentials as a global peacemaker worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize.

For Putin, the summit is already a big win that he can portray as evidence that years of Western attempts to isolate Russia have unravelled and that Moscow is retaking its rightful place at the top table of international diplomacy.

Russian special envoy Kirill Dmitriev described the pre-summit mood as “combative” and said the two leaders would discuss not only Ukraine but the full spectrum of bilateral relations, Russia’s RIA news agency reported.

Trump, who once said he would end Russia’s war in Ukraine within 24 hours, conceded on Thursday it had proven a tougher task than he had expected. He said that if Friday’s talks went well, quickly arranging a second, three-way summit with Zelensky would be even more important than his encounter with Putin.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said a three-way summit would be possible if the Alaska talks bore fruit, Interfax news agency reported. Peskov also said Friday’s talks could last 6-7 hours and that aides would take part in what had been expected to be one-to-one meetings.

Zelensky said the summit should open the way for a “just peace” and three-way talks that included him, but added that Russia was continuing to wage war on Friday. A Russian ballistic missile earlier struck Ukraine’s Dnipropetrovsk region, killing one person and wounding another.

“It’s time to end the war, and the necessary steps must be taken by Russia. We are counting on America,” Zelenskiy wrote on the Telegram messaging app.

‘Smart guy’

The Kremlin said Putin would arrive in Alaska at 11am (12am PKT) and would be met at his plane by Trump.

“He is a smart guy, been doing it for a long time, but so have I… We get along, there’s a good respect level on both sides,” Trump said of Putin. He also welcomed Putin’s decision to bring a lot of businesspeople with him to Alaska.

“But they’re not doing business until we get the war settled,” he said, repeating a threat of “economically severe” consequences for Russia if the summit goes badly.

One source acquainted with Kremlin thinking said there were signs that Moscow could be ready to strike a compromise on Ukraine, given that Putin understood Russia’s economic vulnerability and the costs of continuing the war.

Reuters has previously reported that Putin might be willing to freeze the conflict along the front lines, provided there was a legally binding pledge not to enlarge NATO eastwards and to lift some Western sanctions. NATO has said that Ukraine’s future is in the alliance.

Russia, whose war economy is showing signs of strain, is vulnerable to further US sanctions — and Trump has threatened tariffs on buyers of Russian crude, primarily China and India.

“For Putin, economic problems are secondary to goals, but he understands our vulnerability and costs,” the Russian source said.

Putin this week held out the prospect of something else he knows Trump wants — a new nuclear arms control accord to replace the last surviving one, which is due to expire next February.

Common ground?

The source familiar with Kremlin thinking said it looked as if the two sides had been able to find some common ground.

“Apparently, some terms will be agreed upon… because Trump cannot be refused, and we are not in a position to refuse (due to sanctions pressure),” said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the matter’s sensitivity.

Putin has said he is open to a full ceasefire but that issues of verification must first be sorted out. One compromise could be a truce in the air war.

Zelensky has ruled out formally handing Moscow any territory and is also seeking a security guarantee backed by the United States. It is unclear how that guarantee could work.

Ukrainians who spoke to Reuters in central Kyiv on Friday were not optimistic about the summit.

“Nothing good will happen there, because war is war; it will not end. The territories — we’re not going to give anything to anyone,” said Tetiana Harkavenko, a 65-year-old cleaner.

JERUSALEM: The UN human rights office said Friday that at least 1,760 Palestinians had been killed while seeking aid in Gaza since late May, a jump of several hundred since its last published figure at the beginning of August.

“Since 27 May, and as of 13 August, we have recorded that at least 1,760 Palestinians have been killed while seeking aid; 994 in the vicinity of GHF (Gaza Humanitarian Foundation) sites and 766 along the routes of supply convoys. Most of these killings were committed by the Israeli military,” the agency’s office for the Palestinian territories said in a statement.

That compares with a figure of 1,373 killed the office reported on August 1.

The update came as Gaza’s civil defence agency said at least 31 people were killed by Israeli fire on Friday, including 12 who were waiting for humanitarian aid.

The Israeli military said its troops were working to “dismantle Hamas military capabilities”, adding its forces were taking precautions “to mitigate civilian harm”.

Media restrictions in Gaza and difficulties accessing swathes of the territory mean AFP is unable to independently verify the tolls and details provided by the civil defence agency and the Israeli military.

Israel’s Gaza plan risks ‘another calamity’: UN

On Wednesday, the chief of staff of the Israeli military said plans had been approved for a new offensive in Gaza, aimed at defeating Hamas and freeing all the remaining hostages.

The military intends to take control of Gaza City and nearby refugee camps, some of the most densely populated parts of the territory, which has been devastated by more than 22 months of war.

In recent days, Gaza City residents have told AFP of more frequent air strikes targeting residential areas, while earlier this week Hamas denounced “aggressive” Israeli ground incursions in the area.

The Israeli government’s plans to expand the war have sparked an international outcry as well as domestic opposition.

UN-backed experts have warned of widespread famine unfolding in the territory, where Israel has drastically curtailed the amount of humanitarian aid it allows in.

Hamas’s October 2023 attack which triggered the war resulted in the deaths of 1,219 people, according to an AFP tally based on official figures.

Israel’s offensive has killed at least 61,827 Palestinians, according to figures from the health ministry in Hamas-run Gaza which the United Nations considers reliable.