Pakistan's public diplomacy, especially under the leadership of Bilawal Bhutto Zardari and the poised Hina Rabbani Khar, seemed promising but ultimately faltered spectacularly when the nation openly aligned itself with Iran, risking international isolation. The parallels between Iran and Pakistan are clear. Islamist fanatical Governments hell bent on the destruction of Israel. These are not the pragmatic minds of Saudi, Qatar, Jordan, UAE. The Islamic Ummah, which in some delusion Pakistan believes it leads, is divided in two. Throw in Turkey, thankfully on a leash because of Nato but keen to be in bed with Russia. Not between Shia and Sunni is the division, but the fanatical and the those progressing focussed on wealth creation.
Initially, Bhutto and Khar represented a fresh face for Pakistan—youthful, slick (he needs to reduce the grease in his hair), and potentially internationally appealing. Their diplomatic engagements, especially in Western capitals, suggested Pakistan might finally be presenting itself as a rational, cooperative player on the global stage. Yet, the veneer of sophistication quickly cracked when geopolitical realities intervened. And when they opened their mouths. Khar, whose uncle was famously outted as a wife-beating mysogenist by his then wife in the acclaimed book, “my Feudal Lord”, (the woman, Tehmina Durrani, is now married to the PM of Pakistan). Khar lacks the intellect which nepotism cannot replace.
When Pakistan chose to side with Iran amidst escalating tensions involving Israel and the broader Western alliance, it revealed a deeper, troubling aspect of its foreign policy mindset. The choice wasn't merely a strategic miscalculation; it represented an entrenched mentality: declaring victory even in obvious defeat.
This behaviour has notable historical parallels. Remember "Comical Ali," the Iraqi information minister who absurdly declared Saddam Hussein's forces victorious even as American tanks rolled into Baghdad? Iran frequently follows a similar script, presenting its repeated setbacks in the Middle East as victories against Israel and its allies. Pakistan appears to have joined this club of countries habitually rewriting losses as triumphs, including most recently in India’s Operation Sindoor. Iran claims to have shot down 10 Israeli F35 5th Generation fighters – presumably not to be outdone by Pakistan’s apparent shooting down of half the Indian Airforce with made in China planes.
Pakistan's narrative following recent confrontations with India exemplifies this attitude vividly. Even after international forums overwhelmingly sided against Pakistan on key issues ranging from Kashmir to cross-border terrorism, its diplomats continued to frame outcomes as diplomatic victories. This practice is not merely disingenuous—it corrodes credibility on the global stage.
Bhutto and Khar's public diplomacy aimed to project strength and influence. Instead, by siding with Iran and perpetuating false narratives of victory, they reinforced perceptions of Pakistan as diplomatically immature and strategically misguided. The international community possesses a long memory. Each diplomatic exaggeration erodes trust, reduces leverage in future negotiations, and ultimately isolates the nation further.
Public diplomacy requires authenticity and consistency; pretending victory where defeat is evident impresses nobody. The leadership's indulgence in such unrealistic portrayals suggests a deeper insecurity and unwillingness to confront harsh realities. For Pakistan to genuinely advance its diplomatic stature, it must abandon this "Comical Ali" diplomacy. It needs instead a sober reflection, grounded realism, and the courage to admit defeat when it occurs. Only then will the world genuinely listen to Pakistan’s voice, rather than dismissing it as another attempt to rewrite history in real-time.