Iran asserts that if Pakistan utilized the N-bomb, it would destroy Israel; Islamabad disputes this

This incident underscores the fragile and volatile nature of nuclear diplomacy in the Middle East and South Asia, particularly involving Israel, Iran, and Pakistan—three nations with complex and often opaque postures on nuclear weapons.

The Controversial Claim

On Iranian state television, General Mohsen Rezaei (a senior Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander and National Security Council member) claimed that:

“Pakistan has told us that if Israel uses a nuclear bomb on Iran, then Pakistan will also attack Israel with a nuclear bomb.”

This comment, if true, would mark an extraordinary shift in Pakistan’s nuclear doctrine, which has traditionally been focused solely on deterrence against India.

Islamabad’s Swift Denial

Within hours of the broadcast:

• Pakistan’s Defence Ministry dismissed the statement outright, saying no such commitment was ever made.

• Defence Minister Khawaja Asif clarified that Pakistan has made no nuclear guarantees to Iran.

However, he did voice strong support for Iran politically, warning Muslim countries that failure to unite could leave them vulnerable to Israeli aggression.

Why This Matters

1. Regional Escalation Risks
   The claim—true or not—feeds into growing fears that the Israel-Iran conflict could spiral into a multi-country, nuclear-adjacent confrontation, drawing in non-Arab, non-proliferation signatories like Pakistan.

2. Pakistan’s Nuclear Policy in Focus
   Pakistan maintains a “minimum credible deterrence” policy primarily aimed at India. An overt nuclear pledge to Iran would shatter decades of strategic posturing and could isolate Islamabad internationally, especially from the U.S. and the Gulf.

3. Israel’s Nuclear Ambiguity
   Israel has never confirmed its nuclear arsenal, but it is widely believed to possess 80–90 warheads. Its “Samson Option” implies massive retaliation if its survival is threatened—something that would likely apply to any nuclear attack by a non-Middle Eastern power.

4. OIC and Diplomatic Pressure
   Khawaja Asif’s call for Muslim nations to cut ties with Israel and for the OIC to act decisively reflects a broader push among some Islamic countries to shift from diplomatic normalisation (like the Abraham Accords) to confrontation.

Strategic Read Between the Lines

• Iran may have aired the statement to signal deterrence to Israel via third-party retaliation, even if unofficial. It’s a messaging tactic aimed at complicating Israel’s calculations.

• Pakistan, by denying it, likely seeks to balance domestic Muslim solidarity with Iran and international nuclear responsibility. It can’t afford to be seen as a reckless nuclear actor.

• Israel will likely interpret this rhetoric as further justification for its pre-emptive security doctrine—potentially tightening its own readiness posture.

The Bigger Picture

• Iran vs. Israel tensions are at their highest in decades, especially after cross-border attacks in Syria, Iraq, and Iran’s nuclear sites.

• The IAEA’s latest reports have again raised red flags over Iran’s enrichment capabilities and lack of access for inspectors.

• Meanwhile, Pakistan’s role in Muslim geopolitics is under scrutiny, especially as it tries to assert leadership while navigating its own domestic instability.