Pakistan is walking a tightrope as the Iran war intensifies, with that balance growing more precarious with each passing day.

Islamabad has so far pursued cautious diplomacy, condemning the strikes on Iran, while simultaneously urging de-escalation. But analysts warn it cannot remain insulated from competing pressures.

"Pakistan is putting itself forward as a mediator between the U.S. and Iran, but unconvincingly," Edmund Fitton-Brown, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies told Fox News Digital. "Its own record of staying out of military entanglements is unimpressive."

TRUMP PRESSES NATO PARTNERS ON SUPPORT AS HEGSETH BLASTS HESITATION

At the forefront of the tensions is a new defense agreement with Saudi Arabia, which states that aggression against one will be treated as a threat to both. Widely seen as one of Pakistan's most consequential defense agreements, it commits the country to Riyadh, while risking confrontation with Iran.

Pakistan, the only nuclear-armed Muslim state, already has troops stationed in Saudi Arabia for training and defense support and has said there is "no question" of coming to the kingdom's aid.

"Remember, Pakistan is geographically part of both South Asia and Central Asia, as well as the wider Gulf/MENA region too. Pakistan has always pursued peace, dialogue and order because we know what war does to our region," Mosharraf Zaidi, spokesperson for foreign media to the Pakistani prime minister, told Fox News Digital.

Within days of the war's outbreak, the country's army chief, General Asim Munir, made an "emergency" visit to Saudi Arabia, where top officials discussed joint responses to Iranian strikes. It was the first true test of the pact.

Relations are strong between the two nations, and Riyadh remains a key economic lifeline for Islamabad. Saudi Arabia has already been making arrangements to support energy supplies, as war-driven fuel disruptions hit import-dependent Pakistan.

SHADOW FLEET UNDER FIRE: IRAN’S STRAIT SHUTDOWN COULD SQUEEZE RUSSIA’S WAR CHEST, CHINA’S OIL LIFELINE

Yet Pakistan’s relationship with Iran is equally critical. 

The two share a 565-mile border along with deep trade ties and significant religious connections. 

Pakistan is home to the world’s second-largest Shiite community after Iran. Pro-Iran regime protests in the wake of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s assassination turned deadly, forcing military intervention and curfews.

Maintaining ties with Tehran is crucial for containing domestic tensions and staving off an insurgency from the minority Baloch community there.

Iran is also an important economic partner to Pakistan, which has been facing a severe economic crisis. The two conduct significant trade, with a new goal of $10 billion by 2028.

Pakistan’s foreign minister has held "constant conversations" with his Iranian counterpart throughout the conflict. And last week, a Pakistani oil tanker transited the essentially blockaded Strait of Hormuz. Analysts noted it was the first non-Iranian cargo ship to do so since tensions escalated, suggesting that safe passage may have been negotiated. Officials add that more Pakistan-bound oil tankers are likely to cross the strait in the coming days.

Most of Pakistan’s crude and LNG imports pass through the Strait of Hormuz. But as the war grinds on, analysts warn Pakistan’s room for neutrality is shrinking. 

Pakistan recently went against Iran, backing a Gulf-led resolution at the United Nations condemning regional aggression. Russia and China abstained.

Meanwhile, Iran's foreign minister just called for regional coordination in separate ​calls with Pakistan, Turkey and Egypt.

At the same time, Islamabad must also navigate relations with Washington, yet another key partner.

Under President Donald Trump’s second term, Pakistan has sought closer relations with the U.S., even floating his name for the Nobel Peace Prize.

TRUMP IS REALIGNING WORLD ENERGY MARKETS AND THE IRAN STRIKES ARE ACTUALLY HELPING

Questions are also emerging in Washington. During a White House briefing, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the administration was coordinating with the Pentagon to assess whether Pakistan is supporting Iran, while describing India as a "good actor."

India’s positioning has added further pressure, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent visit to Israel.

"There is no contradiction in being absolutely committed to peace, dialogue and order. The strong relationships Pakistan has with the United States, with Saudi Arabia, with Iran and with China are a testament to Pakistan’s commitment," the Pakistani prime minister's spokesperson, Zaidi said.

So far, Pakistan has effectively positioned itself at the forefront of mediation efforts to end the ongoing conflict, leveraging its ties with all three powerhouses.

Reports indicate that high-level talks between the U.S. and Iran are set for Islamabad as early as this weekend.

"Pakistan wants to matter to the U.S. and to be a better partner than India. Because the Afghan Taliban have alienated Islamabad since 2021, there are few remaining sore points between the U.S. and Pakistan, with the latter able to present as an ally against terrorism," Fitton-Brown said. "And most regional parties want to see the crisis end sooner rather than later. But nobody wants to see the Islamic Republic strengthened in Iran."

The spiraling war comes at a critical time for Pakistan's already stretched military. Tensions with India remain elevated, while border clashes, airstrikes, drone attacks and rising civilian casualties have become the norm with once friendly neighbor Afghanistan.

The nations nosedived into an "all-out war," just days before the Iran conflict broke out, and the violence shows no signs of easing after fresh Pakistani strikes recently hit the Afghan capital city of Kabul.

"This geography and the region’s history is why Pakistan steadfastly rejects India’s efforts at regional hegemony, it is why Pakistan is pursuing a termination of the Afghan Taliban regime’s support for terrorist groups," Zaidi said. "We seek a complete cessation of terrorism emanating from territory currently controlled by the Afghan Taliban."

With Pakistan already managing tensions on both its eastern border with India and its western frontier with Afghanistan, a destabilized Iran could push that strain further.

"If Islamabad is destabilized, it will be extremely bad news regionally and globally," Edmund Fitton-Brown told Fox. "The idea of a nuclear power under jihadi rule doesn’t bear thinking about."

A reported airstrike on a hospital in Afghanistan that allegedly left hundreds dead is drawing growing scrutiny, not only over the strike itself but over what critics describe as a muted international response.

Afghanistan’s Taliban-led government said more than 400 people were killed and hundreds were wounded after a strike hit the Omid Hospital, a major drug rehabilitation facility in Kabul, Afghanistan, according to Reuters. Civilians, including children, also have been killed in escalating cross-border strikes in Pakistan, The Associated Press reported. 

The casualty figures have not been independently verified.

The strike comes amid a rapidly escalating military campaign between Pakistan and Afghanistan that has intensified over the past three weeks.

INDIA STEPS UP DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS WITH THE TALIBAN AS RIVAL PAKISTAN LOSES INFLUENCE IN AFGHANISTAN

Cross-border airstrikes and clashes have expanded across multiple provinces, with Pakistan targeting what it says are bases of the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), a militant group responsible for attacks inside Pakistan and designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S. The Taliban government has accused Islamabad of violating Afghanistan’s sovereignty.

At a United Nations briefing Wednesday, a U.N. spokesperson said the conflict has now entered its third week, with widespread civilian impact. More than 115,000 people have been displaced, more than 300 shelters damaged or destroyed, and at least 25 health facilities closed or disrupted due to the fighting, according to U.N. humanitarian agencies.

Pakistan has denied targeting a hospital, saying the operation struck militant infrastructure.

"Since the beginning of this counterterrorism campaign, Pakistan has sought to defend and protect the people of Pakistan … by targeting terrorists and terrorist infrastructure that are incubated and nurtured by the Afghan Taliban," the prime minister’s spokesperson Mosharraf Zaidi told Fox News Digital.

PAKISTAN DECLARES 'OPEN WAR' ON AFGHANISTAN IN RESPONSE TO TALIBAN'S RETALIATORY STRIKES

Zaidi said the strike targeted weapons and ammunition at Camp Phoenix in Kabulm Afghanistan, and insisted, "There are no civilian hospitals in Camp Phoenix," adding that reports of a rehabilitation facility being hit may be due to "secondary explosions" from stored weapons.

The United Nations on Wednesday, two days after the attack, condemned the reported strike, with Secretary-General António Guterres, through a spokesperson, "strongly condemning" an airstrike that "reportedly resulted in the death (and) injury of civilians at a hospital," and calling for an independent investigation.

Still, some analysts say the response does not match the scale of the incident.

"U.N. officials swiftly condemned U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran’s regime as unlawful ‘aggression’ … Yet Pakistan’s airstrike on Kabul’s Omid Hospital — killing over 400 civilians — has drawn only a belated ‘strong condemnation’ … and standard pleas for ‘de-escalation’," Executive Director of UN Watch Hillel Neuer told Fox News Digital.

"This restrained response — no personal outrage from Guterres, no emergency session naming Pakistan, and no equivalent chorus from U.N. rapporteurs, or agencies like WHO, U.N. Women, and UNICEF — reveals rank hypocrisy," he said. "When hundreds of vulnerable Afghans die in a hospital, the U.N. offers measured words. Yet when the U.S. or Israel can be blamed — justifiably or not — the condemnation is immediate and overwhelming. When some victims matter far more than others, the U.N. reveals its cynical political agenda. This double standard doesn’t uphold human rights, it erodes them." 

Australian human rights lawyer Arsen Ostrovsky echoed that criticism in a post on X, calling the strike "an absolute massacre," while noting what he described as a lack of global outrage: "World outrage? Zero. Could barely muster p17 in the newspaper here."