The US–Iran–Israel Conflict and the Reordering of Pakistan's Strategic Environment: Explaining Middle-Power Agency through Material Dynamics and Strategic Narratives

Authors

  • Rabia Anwar PhD Scholar, Department of International Relations, Lahore College for Women University, Lahore, Pakistan
  • Areesha Batool Assistant Professor, Higher Education Department, Lahore, Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21806197

Keywords:

U.S.–Iran–Israel Conflict, Pakistan's Strategic Environment, Structural Realism, Critical Discourse Analysis, Strategic Narratives, Middle-Power, Strategic Autonomy, Energy Security

Abstract

Purpose: In 2026, the war between the United States, Iran, and Israel proved to be a significant geopolitical shock that redefined the geostrategic environment of West and South Asia. The 2026 U.S.-Iran-Israel war had important ramifications for Pakistan, both in terms of security challenges and its foreign policy, due to Pakistan's exposure to various material risks associated with regional energy market disruptions and maritime routes. On the other hand, the situation presented possibilities for diplomatic adaptability and strategic realignment.

Design/Methodology/Approach: This paper analyses the impact that the relationship between material vulnerabilities and strategic discourses had on the ways Pakistan responded to the situation. Adopting the approach of Qualitative Single-Case Study research, this study combines Structural Realism and Fairclough’s three-dimensional critical discourse analysis to examine official discourses, speeches, media discourses, and international reports from February to June 2026.

Findings: These findings reveal that material obstacles limited Pakistani policy options through heightening fears of energy security, economic stability, and border management. Yet, Pakistan used strategic narratives focusing on neutrality, international law, strategic autonomy, and state responsibility to maintain diplomatic flexibility and assert credibility as a negotiating partner. In fact, it is through these two processes, which were interlinked with each other in nature, that Pakistan was able to turn its systemic weaknesses into strengths and thus boost its diplomatic importance.

References

Barnett, M. N., Pevehouse, J. C. W., & Raustiala, K. (2022). Global governance in a world of change. Cambridge University Press.

Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027

Ch, A., Zaheer, N., Uddin, N. S., & Hussain, N. Z. (2025). Pakistan's strategic balancing act: Navigating relations between China, the US and the emerging multipolar world order. The Critical Review of Social Sciences Studies, 3(2), 553–566. https://doi.org/10.59075/t3kkh396

Ciorciari, J. D., & Haacke, J. (2019). Hedging in international relations: An introduction. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 19(3), 367–374. https://doi.org/10.1093/irap/lcz017

Cooper, A. F. (2013). Squeezed or revitalised? Middle powers, the G20 and the evolution of global governance. Third World Quarterly, 34(6), 963–984. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2013.802508

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage.

Denzin, N. K. (2017). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. Routledge.

Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Longman.

Goddard, S. E. (2018). When right makes might. Cornell University Press.

Haacke, J., & Ciorciari, J. D. (Eds.). (2021). Hedging in international relations: An age of uncertainty. Oxford University Press.

Kuik, C.-C. (2021). Getting hedging right: A small-state perspective. China International Strategy Review, 3(2), 300–315. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42533-021-00089-5

Mearsheimer, J. J. (2001). The tragedy of great power politics. W. W. Norton & Company.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Government of Pakistan. (2026, February 26). Statement by the spokesperson. https://mofa.gov.pk/

Miskimmon, A., O'Loughlin, B., & Roselle, L. (2013). Strategic narratives: Communication power and the new world order. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315871264

Nasr, V. (2006). The Shia revival: How conflicts within Islam will shape the future. W. W. Norton & Company.

Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). Sage.

Roselle, L., Miskimmon, A., & O'Loughlin, B. (2014). Strategic narrative: A new means to understand soft power. Media, War & Conflict, 7(1), 70–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750635213516696

Tooze, A. (2021). Shutdown: How Covid shook the world's economy. Viking.

Vu, H. L. T., Ngo, L. D., & Nguyen, T. T. (2024). A spectrum of autonomy: Towards a theoretical framework of strategic autonomy. International Journal, 79(2), 230–249. https://doi.org/10.1177/00207020241256000

Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of international politics. McGraw-Hill.

Wendt, A. (1999). Social theory of international politics. Cambridge University Press.

Yergin, D. (2021). The new map: Energy, climate, and the clash of nations. Penguin Press.

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Sage.

Downloads

Published

2026-06-30

How to Cite

Anwar, R., & Batool, A. (2026). The US–Iran–Israel Conflict and the Reordering of Pakistan’s Strategic Environment: Explaining Middle-Power Agency through Material Dynamics and Strategic Narratives. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences, 46(2), 181-193. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21806197