On 31 August 2026, the Court of Arbitration at The Hague ruled unanimously that India had no legal basis for placing the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) in abeyance, and that the 1960 agreement remains fully operational. A separate order restricted Indian construction activity at the Ratle hydroelectric project while technical questions remain under review (Court of Arbitration, 2026). It was a comprehensive victory for Pakistan, delivered in an arena where Pakistan holds no material advantage whatever, against an adversary with eight times its economy. India rejected the award within hours, describing the tribunal as illegally constituted and restating that the treaty remains suspended.
Pakistan won this ruling because it selected the one arena where its weakness did not matter. It cannot compel India militarily, and it cannot outspend India diplomatically, so it spent years building a legal case instead, securing an award on treaty interpretation in August 2025, a supplemental award on maximum pondage in May 2026, and now a unanimous finding on the treaty’s status. That is deliberate strategy, and it worked. What it has not produced is water. The treaty is legally operational, and India continues to treat it as suspended, which means enforcement now depends on Washington, Riyadh, or Beijing deciding to spend their own leverage on Pakistan’s behalf. The same structure governs everything Pakistan has gained since May 2025. Its deterrent is credible because Gulf states pay for it. Its solvency is maintained by Gulf remittances. Its diplomatic access exists because Washington currently finds it useful. Each gain is real, each was earned by good judgement, and each depends on a decision taken in a capital other than Islamabad.
The distinction at work is old and precise. Machiavelli divided rising powers into those that ascend through their own capacity, which is difficult to accomplish and durable once accomplished, and those that ascend through fortune and the strength of others, which is rapid and precarious. He did not treat the second category with contempt. His exemplar of the able new prince was Cesare Borgia, who rose entirely on power lent to him and deployed it with a skill Machiavelli ranked above every contemporary. The lesson drawn from Borgia was never that borrowed strength is contemptible. It was that borrowed strength carries a deadline. Borgia understood this and moved to convert his position into holdings he controlled outright. He was overtaken by events before the conversion finished. Francesco Sforza faced the identical problem as a commander fighting other men’s wars for payment, and he completed his conversion, turning a hired command into the Duchy of Milan and retaining with ease what he had acquired with difficulty. The difference between the two was not talent. Both had it. The difference was whether the conversion finished in time.
This produces a test with two stages. The first asks whether an ascent reflects capability. The second asks whether the state is converting position into assets no external actor can withdraw. Pakistan has passed the first stage convincingly. The evidence on the second is mixed, and it is quantitative rather than interpretive.
The ascent is not in dispute. The four days of fighting with India in May 2025 began in an event Pakistan did not select, and what followed was the conversion of an unchosen crisis into a demonstrated capability. Observers assessed that Pakistan’s Chinese-supplied aircraft outperformed their Indian counterparts, though specific losses remain contested (Congress, 2025). What is not contested is that the systems Pakistan fielded became an object of serious study in defence ministries well beyond South Asia (Stimson, 2025), and that both governments claimed vindication when the American-brokered ceasefire held (Al Jazeera, 2025). Pakistan pressed the demonstration while attention was still on it. A less capable state would have let the moment close unexploited.
The agreements that followed show the same quality of judgement. The Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement signed with Saudi Arabia on 17 September 2025 commits both parties to treat aggression against one as aggression against both, and it is the first military pact concluded between a Gulf state and a nuclear power (Belfer, 2025). Its most valuable characteristic is its ambiguity. Pakistan’s defence minister indicated that nuclear capabilities would be made available and then withdrew the statement, and the text itself does not address nuclear matters (Arms Control Association, 2025). Independent assessment concludes the agreement functions as political signalling rather than operational extended deterrence (APLN, 2025). Nevertheless, this is an accomplishment rather than a shortfall. Pakistan obtained the strategic returns of an extended deterrence commitment without incurring its operational costs or its proliferation liabilities.
Additionally, the framework was expanded to include Turkey in August 2026 (Al Jazeera, 2026). A state that sells the same asset to several counterparties, at a price set by scarcity, without accepting the obligations that would normally accompany it, is negotiating well.
Pakistan also moved from supplying ‘a service’ to supplying ‘a channel’. When hostilities opened between the United States and Iran, it positioned itself as the intermediary between adversaries who would not address one another directly. The elevation in standing followed the elevation in function. For instance, in June 2025, the American president received Pakistan’s army chief Asim Munir right at the White House, the first occasion a serving Pakistani commander was hosted at that level without also holding the headship of state (Al Jazeera, 2025).
Underlying all of it, the macroeconomic ground held rather than subsiding. Not that economic revival but the growth reached 3.7 percent in the 2025/26 fiscal year, the highest in four years, with the economy at 452.1 billion dollars, reserves recovering to 22.6 billion dollars by May 2026, and the fiscal deficit narrowing to 0.7 percent of GDP (Business Recorder, 2026, and Pakistan Today, 2026). Remittances reached 33.9 billion dollars (Arab News, 2026, and Express Tribune, 2026). However, the point to be noted is that a state that is not weeks from default can decline terms it dislikes, and surprisingly, that capacity is the substance of bargaining power.
The Hague ruling belongs in this sequence rather than apart from it, obtained through legal process rather than leverage by a state that knows which instruments are available to it. So much for the first stage. The second is where the analysis becomes uncomfortable, and it does so on the numbers.
Pakistan’s external account remains structurally dependent in a way two years of diplomatic success has not altered. Goods and services exports stood at 37.4 billion dollars against imports of 69.6 billion in the 2026 fiscal year (Pakistan Today, 2026), and remittances of between 34 and 38 billion close that gap almost exactly. Pakistan earns roughly as much from labour it exports as from everything it produces and sells. Remittances are not a supplement to the external account. They are the external account, and the bulk originate in the Gulf economies whose security Pakistan now guarantees and from which it buys most of its fuel (Dawn, 2026). Composition has not shifted either. Total exports were flat year on year, and information technology at 3.39 billion dollars is the fastest-growing category while remaining below ten percent of the total (Business Recorder, 2026).
Pakistan has secured the first and not the second, and the Indus award shows the pattern in another register, since a unanimous ruling India has already rejected converts into water only if other states expend capital enforcing it.
The critical minerals partnership is the exception, and it is a genuine one. In September 2025 the Frontier Works Organisation signed a 500 million dollar agreement with US Strategic Metals covering antimony, copper concentrate, and rare earth elements including neodymium and praseodymium, with the first shipment delivered. The phasing is explicit. Extraction of available minerals to 2026, processing plants and refineries inside Pakistan with technology transfer from 2026 to 2028, then large scale extraction (SFA Oxford, 2026, and Centre for Development and Stability, 2025). This is the conversion thesis rendered as a schedule, the first phase producing rent and the second producing patrimony, and whether Pakistan reaches the second on time is answerable within two years. The arrangement also displays the problem it is meant to solve. The Frontier Works Organisation is an engineering formation of the Pakistan Army, so the instrument chosen to convert borrowed position into owned industrial capacity is itself military. That accelerates execution and deepens the concentration that makes the gains reversible.
The historical base rate explains why the concentration matters. Pakistan held positions of comparable strategic value in the 1980s and after 2001, and both ended in withdrawal, the first with sanctions under the Pressler Amendment and the second with dismissal and international watch list designation (CNN, 2025). Each relationship was institutionally narrow and terminated when the counterpart’s requirement expired, and the relationships that reopened remain transactional by the assessment of those who study them most closely (ORF, 2025). What distinguishes this episode is not the quality of Pakistani statecraft, which is demonstrably higher, nor the number of counterparties, which is greater. It is whether the domestic base underwriting the arrangement broadens. That variable has not yet moved.
The assessment is that Pakistan has done something genuinely difficult and has done it well. It identified its scarce assets, priced them against several buyers, elevated its function from useful to necessary, restored the solvency that permits negotiation, and won on legal ground where it could not win on material ground. Judged by the first standard, this is success and should be described as such without hedging. Judged by the second, conversion has begun and is unfinished. The minerals partnership contains a real pathway. The external account does not yet reflect one. The institutional base remains narrow.
Machiavelli’s verdict on Borgia was that he had done everything a capable new prince could do and was overtaken by a change in circumstances he had not yet secured himself against. The point for Pakistan is not that reversal is probable. It is that the interval in which borrowed position can be converted into owned capacity is finite, and Pakistan is inside that interval now, with more room to work than at any point in a generation. The Hague ruling, the Gulf agreements, and the American opening have purchased time, attention, and credibility. What determines whether the country becomes permanently consequential rather than periodically valuable is what it builds with them, and how much of the building is done by the state as a whole rather than by one part of it.
References
Al Jazeera (2025) ‘What did India and Pakistan gain and lose in their military standoff?’, Al Jazeera, 14 May. Available at: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/5/14/what-did-india-and-pakistan-gain-and-lose-in-their-military-standoff (Accessed: 1 September 2026).
Al Jazeera (2026) ‘Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Türkiye sign defence deal amid regional turmoil’, Al Jazeera, 7 August. Available at: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/8/7/saudi-arabia-pakistan-and-turkiye-sign-defence-deal-amid-regional-turmoil (Accessed: 1 September 2026).
Akhtar, R. (2025) Beyond the hype: Pakistan-Saudi defense pact is not a Saudi nuclear umbrella. Cambridge, MA: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School. Available at: https://www.belfercenter.org/research-analysis/beyond-hype-pakistan-saudi-defense-pact-not-saudi-nuclear-umbrella-0 (Accessed: 1 September 2026).
Arab News (2026) ‘Pakistan’s remittances hit record high in ten months of fiscal year’, Arab News. Available at: https://www.arabnews.com/node/2643650/pakistan (Accessed: 1 September 2026).
Arms Control Association (2025) ‘Pakistan extends nuclear deterrence to Saudi Arabia’, Arms Control Today, October. Available at: https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2025-10/news-briefs/pakistan-extends-nuclear-deterrence-saudi-arabia (Accessed: 1 September 2026).
Asia-Pacific Leadership Network (2025) Paper promises: the limits of Pakistan’s defence guarantee to Saudi Arabia. Available at: https://www.apln.network/analysis/commentaries/paper-promises-the-limits-of-pakistans-defense-guarantee-to-saudi-arabia (Accessed: 1 September 2026).
Business Recorder (2026) ‘Key highlights of Pakistan Economic Survey 2025-26’, Business Recorder, 11 June. Available at: https://www.brecorder.com/news/40425051/key-highlights-of-pakistan-economic-survey-2025-26 (Accessed: 1 September 2026).
Centre for Development and Stability (2025) Pakistan-US cooperation on rare earth and critical minerals: from geological potential to geopolitical partnership. Available at: https://centrefordevelopmentandstability.com/pakistan-us-cooperation-on-rare-earth-and-critical-minerals-from-geological-potential-to-geopolitical-partnership-2025/ (Accessed: 1 September 2026).
Clary, C. (2025) Four days in May: the India-Pakistan crisis of 2025. Washington, DC: Stimson Center, 28 May. Available at: https://www.stimson.org/2025/four-days-in-may-the-india-pakistan-crisis-of-2025/ (Accessed: 1 September 2026).
CNN (2025) ‘Pakistan’s diplomatic turn and the rare earths opening’, CNN, 18 October. Available at: https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/18/asia/pakistan-trump-diplomacy-rare-earths-int-hnk (Accessed: 1 September 2026).
Court of Arbitration (2026) Award on the status of the Indus Waters Treaty and order on interim measures (Islamic Republic of Pakistan v. Republic of India), PCA Case No. 2023-01. The Hague: Permanent Court of Arbitration, 31 August.
Dawn (2026) ‘Remittances and the Gulf dependency question’, Dawn. Available at: https://www.dawn.com/news/2000334 (Accessed: 1 September 2026).
Express Tribune (2026) ‘Remittances expose Gulf dependency’, The Express Tribune. Available at: https://tribune.com.pk/story/2607597/remittances-expose-gulf-dependency (Accessed: 1 September 2026).
Hashim, A. (2025) ‘Trump’s Pakistan embrace: “tactical romance” or a new “inner circle”?’, Al Jazeera, 19 June. Available at: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/6/19/trumps-pakistan-embrace-tactical-romance-or-a-new-inner-circle (Accessed: 1 September 2026).
Kaura, V. (2025) Trump and Munir’s bonhomie and the revival of U.S.-Pakistan transactional engagement. ORF Issue Brief No. 847. New Delhi: Observer Research Foundation, November. Available at: https://www.orfonline.org/research/trump-and-munir-s-bonhomie-and-the-revival-of-u-s-pakistan-transactional-engagement (Accessed: 1 September 2026).
Kronstadt, K.A. (2025) India-Pakistan conflict in spring 2025. CRS Report IF13000. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, 13 May. Available at: https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF13000 (Accessed: 1 September 2026).
Machiavelli, N. (2005) The Prince. Translated by P. Bondanella. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pakistan Today (2026) ‘Pakistan’s economy expands to $452.1 billion as GDP growth hits four-year high of 3.7% in FY2026’, Profit by Pakistan Today, 1 July. Available at: https://profit.pakistantoday.com.pk/2026/07/01/ (Accessed: 1 September 2026).
SFA (Oxford) (2026) Pakistan’s rare earths partnership advances US supply chain security and independence. Available at: https://www.sfa-oxford.com/market-news-and-insights/sfa-pakistan-s-rare-earths-partnership-advances-us-supply-chain-security-and-independence/ (Accessed: 1 September 2026).
