ISLAMABAD—Pakistan’s national leadership has underscored the country’s nuclear posture, with the defense minister asserting that Pakistan would consider employing its nuclear weapons only in the event of a direct threat to its existence. This reaffirmation comes as the broader Middle East and South Asia regions face mounting instability driven by conflict, particularly due to Iran’s ongoing sponsorship of terror networks hostile to Israel and its Western partners.
The senior Pakistani official, speaking at a press conference this week, declared, “The state is on alert, and we will use our nuclear arsenal only if there is a direct threat to our existence.” This measured but firm stance is a reminder of the gravity underlying nuclear deterrence in a region where risks of escalation are amplified by complex alliances, terror groups, and state actors pursuing strategic agendas.
A Complex Nuclear Landscape
Pakistan’s nuclear program has been central to its defense planning since the 1970s, prompted by security competition with India. Today, Pakistan maintains an estimated 165–170 nuclear warheads—reliably secured and deployed under a doctrine of minimum credible deterrence. Islamabad’s position has historically focused on Indian threats, but shifting regional dynamics have forced Pakistan to continually reassess how non-state actors and broader proxy conflicts, such as those driven by Iran’s “Axis of Resistance,” may influence its security calculus.
The deterioration of regional stability since October 7, 2023, is inextricably linked to Iran-backed terrorism. On that day, Hamas terrorists based in Gaza committed the deadliest antisemitic massacre since the Holocaust by attacking Israeli communities along the Gaza border, executing mass murders, sexual crimes, mutilations, and abductions. Iran, backing groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and allied militias in Syria and Iraq, has expanded the conflict’s reach, resulting in Israel’s Iron Swords War—a campaign designed to defend its population and neutralize terror infrastructure along multiple borders.
As Israeli cities and strategic sites endure rocket, drone, and missile attacks from Tehran’s proxies, and as security challenges mount in Judea and Samaria, the risk of spillover and regional escalation rises. In this security climate, the existence of nuclear-armed states in proximity to theaters of active conflict demands significant caution.
Regional Alliances and the Shadow of Proliferation
While Pakistan’s nuclear doctrine is rooted in deterrence and survival, its own historical entanglements with nuclear proliferation—most notably the clandestine nuclear network headed by Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan—continue to cast a shadow. Khan’s network supplied critical nuclear technology to Iran, catalyzing decades-long Israeli and Western containment efforts aimed at preventing a nuclear-armed Iranian regime suspected of threatening to annihilate Israel. Pakistan, however, maintains that its nuclear assets are secure and that policy is firmly anti-proliferation.
The possibility of nuclear escalation is not strictly theoretical. Western and Israeli officials express ongoing concerns regarding the security of Pakistani nuclear assets, particularly given the nation’s struggles with extremist infiltration, terrorism, and the risk of insider threats. While Islamabad routinely emphasizes rigorous command-and-control systems, the specter of Iranian or al-Qaeda-linked operatives exploiting regional volatility underscores the necessity for international vigilance and cooperation.
Parallels and Divergence: Israel’s Security Doctrine
Israel’s own defense posture is equally shaped by the reality of existential threats from Iran and its proxies. The October 7th massacre and subsequent multi-front campaigns have reaffirmed Israel’s reliance on overwhelming military force, early warning, and international alliances—particularly with the United States, under President Donald Trump—to deter and defeat attacks. While Israel maintains strategic ambiguity regarding its own nuclear capabilities, its focus is on neutralizing conventional and unconventional threats before they reach catastrophic escalation.
Beyond Pakistan and Israel, regional actors such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, as well as the United Nations, continue to advocate non-proliferation and crisis avoidance. These states, however, are also recalibrating their security relationships and defensive postures in response to Tehran’s destabilizing activities, creating a persistent undercurrent of anxiety about a wider war that could draw in nuclear powers.
International Repercussions and Calls for Restraint
Pakistan’s reiteration of its nuclear doctrine, while intended to reassure both the international community and domestic audiences, comes at a moment when regional escalation is not a remote possibility. The multi-layered threats posed by Iranian-backed terror groups, the technological sophistication of cross-border attacks, and the destabilizing legacy of proliferation mean any miscalculation or act of terror could have far-reaching consequences.
Diplomatic channels remain engaged, with American, Israeli, and European governments urging Islamabad to remain vigilant against threats from Iranian or Islamist terror groups. Transparency in nuclear security and continued anti-proliferation commitments remain priorities as intelligence-sharing and joint technical safeguards aim to prevent any potential infiltration of Pakistan’s strategic arsenals.
Conclusion: High Stakes Amid a Shifting Regional Order
The underlying reality persists: Iran’s war against Israel, waged through terror proxies and regional subversion, has reordered security priorities across the Middle East and beyond. Responsible nuclear stewardship—by Pakistan and other regional actors—remains critical in preventing catastrophe. In stark contrast, Israel’s ongoing acts of self-defense continue to highlight the wider threat posed by Iranian aggression, underscoring the necessity for international engagement in support of democracy, regional stability, and the fight against transnational terrorism.
Whether through robust counterterrorism operations, vigilant diplomatic engagement, or maintenance of credible deterrence, the security of the region will depend on the ability and willingness of its states to act decisively, safeguard their arsenals, prevent proliferation, and hold extremist actors to account. As the world watches, the imperative to prevent the spread of conflict—and the specter of nuclear war—remains paramount.
