"When a state becomes both a client and a contractor of rival powers, it ceases to be sovereign it becomes strategic terrain."
In an era where great powers increasingly pursue their ambitions through proxies, Pakistan stands out as a paradox both an agent and an object of global strategy. Once a Cold War instrument, later a war-on-terror frontline ally, and now a transactional partner to two rival hegemons the United States and China Pakistan has mastered the art of geopolitical duality.
What was once a classic "client-state" model has morphed into a dual-patronage equilibrium, where Islamabad tactically balances between Washington's security ecosystem and Beijing's economic and infrastructural embrace. But beneath this precarious dance lies a deeper reality: Pakistan has become a pivot of proxy politics, a testbed of great-power competition, and a potential fault line for South Asian stability.
The Emergence of a Dual Dependency
"Pakistan today is living proof that dependence can be monetized as diplomacy."
Since its birth in 1947, Pakistan has relied on external patrons to underwrite its survival. From U.S. Cold War alliances under SEATO and CENTO, to Chinese support post-1971, Pakistan's foreign policy has always been defined by dependency as strategy. But never before has it simultaneously courted two competing powers with equal intensity.
The U.S. Connection Rewired
After years of estrangement, Washington's engagement with Islamabad has quietly reemerged not as alliance, but as leverage. The 2024 U.S. National Defense Authorization Act earmarked $120 million in security assistance to Pakistan, primarily for counter-terrorism cooperation and border stabilization along Afghanistan (U.S. DoD Report, 2024). The U.S. Central Command's ongoing coordination with the Pakistan Army reflects an effort to retain limited but essential influence in South Asia's western flank particularly after the Afghan withdrawal.
At the same time, the International Monetary Fund's $7 billion bailout in 2024, supported heavily by the U.S., underscores Washington's pragmatic interest in keeping Pakistan economically afloat, if not strategically aligned.
"The U.S. no longer seeks an ally in Pakistan it seeks to prevent another failed state between Iran, China, and India."
The Chinese Grip Tightens
Parallelly, China's influence has reached an unprecedented depth. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) has crossed $62 billion in committed investments, with Gwadar port now operational for dual-use logistics and energy transshipment. The People's Liberation Army (PLA) has established logistical nodes under civilian cover, as confirmed by multiple maritime intelligence assessments (IISS Maritime Report, 2024).
Beijing's control extends beyond infrastructure it has penetrated Pakistan's financial, digital, and defense architecture. The Yuan-Rupee settlement mechanism, operational since 2023, has partially delinked Pakistan from dollar dependency. Meanwhile, Chinese-origin defense systems (J-10C fighters, HQ-9B SAMs, and Type-054A frigates) have reoriented Pakistan's military doctrine towards a Sino-centric model of interoperability.
Thus, Pakistan has become simultaneously indebted to the West and encircled by China a condition that offers short-term maneuverability but long-term strategic paralysis.
The Anatomy of a Proxy State
"Pakistan no longer exports textiles it exports instability as leverage."
The duality of Pakistan's external alignment is matched by the duality of its internal architecture. The military, the religious networks, and the political elite operate as overlapping fiefdoms, each aligned with different foreign sponsors.
The Pakistan Army remains the dominant institution, but it is now internally divided between the pro-U.S. counterterror wing (aligned with ISI and Western defense programs) and the pro-China modernization wing (focused on CPEC security and PLA partnerships).
Meanwhile, militant groups some dormant, others reactivated serve as calibrated instruments for external bargaining. The Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and Baloch insurgencies are alternately fought or tolerated, depending on geopolitical dividends.
A RAND study (2024) noted that "Pakistan's internal militancy ecosystem is now partially regulated by external funding flows, rather than ideological loyalty," with Saudi and Chinese capital sustaining distinct networks for different regional purposes.
"In Pakistan, terrorism is not a threat to be eliminated it is a currency to be traded."
The Economics of Strategic Subservience
Economically, Pakistan's dual dependency reflects what the World Bank (2025) calls "structured insolvency with geopolitical collateral." The state survives through aid rent, geostrategic leasing, and military monetization.
The IMF, China's Exim Bank, and Gulf sovereign funds now effectively manage Pakistan's fiscal lifeline. Each disbursement comes with conditionalities that extend beyond economics to strategic alignment, port access, and resource rights.
Between 2015 and 2024, Pakistan's external debt rose by 89%, while its foreign exchange reserves remain under $10 billion. Yet, it continues to maintain one of the world's largest active military forces (650,000 personnel) and spends nearly 4% of GDP on defense, more than double its education allocation (SIPRI Military Expenditure Database, 2024).
This paradox defines Pakistan's geopolitical economy: a militarized dependency model, sustained by rival sponsors who cannot afford to let it collapse but equally cannot trust it to rise.
The Great Power Convergence: Why Both U.S. and China Need Pakistan
It may appear contradictory, but both Washington and Beijing see value in maintaining Pakistan's stability for different reasons.
For the U.S., Pakistan remains a geographical necessity: a conduit for intelligence operations in Afghanistan and Iran, a balancing card against unrestrained Chinese expansion, and a marginal deterrent against Taliban overflow.
For China, Pakistan is a geostrategic linchpin: the western terminus of its Belt and Road, the insurance route against Malacca chokepoint vulnerabilities, and a loyal buffer against Indian regional assertion.
Thus, Pakistan has positioned itself as the "mutual necessity of adversaries" a state that both powers prefer to stabilize but not empower.
"Pakistan's survival lies in remaining indispensable but not invincible."
The Emerging Threat Landscape for India
India faces an increasingly complex threat matrix emanating from this dual-patronage architecture. The danger is not of direct war, but of multi-vector coercion hybrid, cyber, informational, and grey-zone operations.
Western Ambiguity:
U.S. military re-engagement with Pakistan, however limited, undermines the trust quotient in the Indo-Pacific coalition framework. While Washington prioritizes India in the QUAD, its simultaneous transactional ties with Islamabad create strategic dissonance.
Chinese Encirclement:
China's military logistics through CPEC, coupled with deep digital penetration via Huawei and Beidou integration, pose real-time intelligence and cyber vulnerabilities for India's western front.
Militant Recalibration:
The resurgence of cross-border terrorism under "new labels" such as Tehreek-e-Jihad Pakistan suggests an ISPR-managed rebranding of old proxies. Indian security agencies report renewed infiltration attempts along Rajouri Poonch and infiltration corridors aided by Chinese-origin night-vision tech.
Economic Entrapment:
With Pakistan part of the Yuan-settlement bloc, there is potential for financial opacity and trade-based terrorism financing, complicating FATF compliance and regional counter-finance coordination.
India's Strategic Imperatives
India's response cannot merely be reactive; it must be anticipatory, integrated, and multi-domain.
Intelligence Modernization and Tech Fusion
India must strengthen its cross-domain intelligence architecture integrating satellite ISR, cyber forensics, and behavioral AI analytics. A dedicated "Hybrid Threat Fusion Cell", linking RAW, NTRO, DIA, and MEA, could provide early detection of proxy manipulations and disinformation campaigns.
Economic Diplomacy and Regional Resilience
Through frameworks like I2U2, IMEC, and ASEAN outreach, India can counterbalance Chinese infrastructural dominance and offer credible development alternatives to smaller states drawn into debt dependencies.
Strategic Signaling and Deterrence
India's doctrine must emphasize proactive deterrence not by escalation, but by demonstrating capability. The calibrated use of precision strikes, grey-zone countermeasures, and information warfare should signal that proxy escalation will exact asymmetric costs.
Narrative Supremacy
Pakistan thrives on controlling the narrative. India's strategic communication ecosystem must reclaim the information domain through global think-tank partnerships, media diplomacy, and cognitive influence campaigns so that the world sees Pakistan's instability as its own making, not India's provocation.
"Strategic restraint does not mean narrative silence."
The Mirage of Leverage
Pakistan's dual patronage may appear as geopolitical agility, but it is in essence a slow-motion loss of autonomy. A nation that once exported ideology now imports survival. Both the U.S. and China are writing Pakistan's future not in partnership, but in installments.
For India, the challenge is to look beyond the smoke and mirrors of Pakistan's diplomatic balancing. The true threat lies not in Islamabad's rhetoric, but in its evolving ecosystem of deniable coercion, military, digital, and ideological funded by competing benefactors.
The imperative is clear: India must build a future-ready deterrence posture grounded in strategic foresight, intelligence fusion, economic influence, and narrative dominance.
"In a world where great powers outsource their wars, only those who master their own sovereignty will remain secure."
[Major General Dr. Dilawar Singh (Retd) is a globally recognized strategic affairs expert, former defense leader, and thought leader on emerging technologies, geopolitics, and governance transformation.]
