Pakistan Signals Independence From US Sanctions on Iran, Citing International Law

Following the U.S. announcement of a new extensive sanctions campaign against Iran, Pakistan has issued a measured statement signaling no change to its existing policy towards Tehran. The U.S. government has described the move as an "economic D-Day," an unprecedented effort to sever every remaining economic lifeline sustaining the Iranian government. The newly announced sanctions are set to target key sectors, including digital assets, technology, gold, aviation, and shipping. Another part of these sanctions is aimed at warning countries and companies that continue to deal with Iran that they risk exclusion from the U.S. financial system. In response, Pakistan's Foreign Office spokesperson made it clear that "Pakistan is following international law, and our bilateral trade agreements with Iran" regarding trade with Iran. This statement is interpreted as a clear indication of prioritizing commitments to Iran over any expectation of compliance with American secondary sanctions. There was no suggestion of a review or suspension of commercial ties between the two countries. Pakistan's stance sends a clear signal to Tehran that it will not undermine a relationship or existing trade ties that have long faced pressure from U.S. sanctions. On the other hand, it avoids directly criticizing the American measures. Pakistan has framed the sanctions within the broader context of the U.S.-Iran confrontation, positioning it as an issue that Pakistan is trying to resolve through its mediation efforts. The spokesperson stated, "Pakistan hopes that, as part of a wider settlement of the U.S.-Iran standoff, all economic issues will also be settled in the long run, as they form an important part of a viable settlement." He added that Pakistan "remains engaged in its mediatory role in this regard." This approach effectively allows Pakistan to decline addressing the sanctions as a bilateral problem between itself and Washington, instead positioning itself as a facilitator seeking a comprehensive diplomatic outcome. Internationally, there is a growing sentiment that the latest U.S. measures reveal more desperation than a well-calibrated approach. Iran has lived under layers of U.S. sanctions for decades, which have constrained its oil exports and imposed painful economic costs, but have not fundamentally altered Tehran's core positions. The question now is whether a fresh unilateral campaign, lacking the backing of a multilateral body or a clear basis in international law, can succeed where previous efforts have fallen short. China has also signaled its firm resistance to the U.S. measures, stating that Beijing firmly opposes "illegal unilateral sanctions" and will take "all necessary measures" to safeguard its rights and interests. It argues that "Cooperation between China and Iran has always been conducted within the framework of international law and should not be interfered with or disrupted." It is noteworthy that both Pakistan and China have framed their responses around adherence to international law. This shared language effectively denies legitimacy to unilateral U.S. measures that lack United Nations authorization. Analysts note that such sanctions often function more as rhetorical escalation than as channels capable of producing decisive change on the ground. Their primary cost may ultimately be borne by Washington's own reputation. This is arguably more true as the gap between unilateral pressure and multilateral consensus has become harder to ignore in the wake of the ongoing U.S.-Iran tensions. In this context, Pakistan's position seems measured and reflects an understanding that these new sanctions are not going to work and that issues with Iran should be addressed via dialogue. Pakistan's response effectively avoids direct confrontation with the U.S. while quietly aligning itself with a wider international sentiment that questions the efficacy and legality of Washington's sanctions. By insisting on the primacy of international law, bilateral agreements, and a comprehensive diplomatic settlement, Islamabad is trying to protect its own economic interests while making sure it doesn't close the door on its mediatory role between Iran and the United States. Subscribe today and join thousands of diplomats, analysts, policy professionals and business readers who rely on The Diplomat for expert Asia-Pacific coverage. Get unlimited access to in-depth analysis you won't find anywhere else, from South China Sea tensions to ASEAN diplomacy to India-Pakistan relations. More than 5,000 articles a year. Already have an account? Log in. Umair Jamal is a freelance journalist, independent researcher, and teaching