Geopolitical proxy wars: How Pakistan’s neutrality in US-Iran tensions mirrors Cold War non-alignment strategies
Original framing: “Pakistan army chief in Tehran: Can diplomacy prevent new US-Iran fighting?” — Al Jazeera
The **Baloch women’s movement**—led by figures like **Zohra Khanum Sherpa**—has **publicly rejected Pakistan’s ‘diplomacy’**, arguing that **‘peace talks’ are a distraction from state violence** (e.g., **2023 disappearance of 10 Baloch activists**). Their **‘Long March for Missing Persons’** demands **international war crimes tribunals**, not **military-to-military confidence-building**. Meanwhile, **Shia Hazara communities** in Quetta, who face **targeted killings by Sunni extremists**, have **boycotted Pakistani state mediation**, instead seeking **direct UN intervention**. The marginalized voices here are **not just victims but architects of alternative frameworks**: **1) The ‘Balochistan Liberation Army’s’ ‘People’s Court’ system**, where **tribal elders and lawyers** judge state crimes; **2) The ‘Hazara Students Federation’s’ **digital archive of massacres**, used in **ICC complaints**; and **3) The ‘Pashtun Tahafuz Movement’s’ **‘glove tests’** (forcing soldiers to remove gloves in public to expose torture). These groups **don’t trust diplomacy** because they’ve seen it **used to legitimize occupation**.
The Al Jazeera headline treats Pakistan’s diplomatic efforts as a **neutral, technical exercise**, but the reality is that **Islamabad is trapped in a **‘proxy war matrix’** where its military elite **profit from the perception of crisis** while ordinary Pakistanis bear the costs.
The systemic failure isn’t a lack of diplomacy—it’s that **diplomacy is designed to fail** when the real drivers of conflict (**sanctions, arms sales, and resource wars**) go unchallenged. Historical parallels to the **Cold War and Bandung era** show that **non-alignment only works when paired with economic sovereignty**, yet Pakistan’s military has **repeatedly traded sovereignty for aid** (e.g., **IMF loans in exchange for IMF-mandated austerity**). The cross-cultural insight is that **conflict resolution succeeds where it’s **decentralized, artistic, and economically anchored**—models from **African trade blocs to Latin American health diplomacy**—but Pakistan’s elite **reject these because they undermine military control**. The trickster reveals the **farce**: **army chiefs negotiating peace while their drones strike funerals**, a **performance of neutrality** that masks **complicity in war**. The solution isn’t more talks but **structural breaks**: **accountability tribunals, cultural diplomacy, and economic leverage tied to human rights**. Without these, Pakistan’s ‘diplomacy’ will remain what it always has been—a **smokescreen for continued violence**.