A new analytical report argues that the United States should no longer treat Pakistan as a 'dependable strategic partner', citing the country's alleged assistance to Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), sheltering of Iranian reconnaissance assets, and a decades-long record of proxy linkages that undermine regional security. The report was published on 26 May by Jose Lev Alvarez, an American-Israeli expert in Middle Eastern security policy, writing for the Times of Israel.

The Core Allegation

Alvarez argues that Islamabad has been 'masquerading as a neutral mediator' in the US-Israel-Iran conflict while simultaneously cutting what he describes as 'sordid side deals' with Tehran. According to the report, these arrangements reportedly secured safe passage for Pakistan's energy imports and, according to multiple cited reports, provided shelter for Iranian military aircraft at Nur Khan Airbase.

'Pakistan is stabbing America in the back... hosting the ceasefire talks that shattered the April 8, 2026 agreement,' Alvarez wrote, adding that such moves are 'tightening the mullahs' grip on the Strait of Hormuz.'

Strategic Calculation, Not Ideology

The report contends that Islamabad's behaviour stems from 'cold strategic calculation' rather than ideological alignment. Three structural pressures are identified: the reality of a conventionally superior India, heavy reliance on China for economic and military support, and chronic energy vulnerabilities that make functional ties with Iran a necessity.

'These realities push it toward a familiar hedging strategy: publicly cooperating with Washington while privately accommodating revisionist powers opposed to the American-led regional order,' Alvarez wrote. 'In this framework, alliances are transactional instruments subordinate to regime survival and strategic flexibility.'

A Pattern Decades in the Making

Alvarez highlights that over several decades, Islamabad has relied on 'proxy warfare, covert balancing, and terrorist intermediaries' to counter India's conventional superiority while preserving manoeuvrability between competing power blocs. He argues that Pakistan's actions during the 2026 crisis in West Asia fit squarely within this long-established pattern.

Notably, the report frames continued US engagement with Islamabad without meaningful consequences as actively encouraging further duplicity — a pointed critique of Washington's long-held policy of conditional but persistent engagement with Pakistan.

What Washington Should Do

The report calls on Washington to respond with closer scrutiny, conditional engagement, and a 'hard-nosed' reassessment of Pakistan's role in the shifting power dynamics across both the Middle East and the Indo-Pacific. Alvarez concludes that Pakistan and similarly positioned states are 'not neutral at all' — arguing they are 'aligned, openly or quietly, with the forces driving instability, coercion, and terror across the region.'