In the ever-shifting sands of global geopolitics, the United States’ recent push to reclaim Afghanistan’s Bagram Airbase has raised eyebrows. But is this really about Bagram, or is Pakistan the real focus? With the ink barely dry on the Saudi-Pakistan mutual defense pact signed just three days ago, analysts are buzzing about Washington’s maneuvers.
A Game-Changer Prompting US Rethink
First off, let’s set the stage. On September 17, 2025, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan inked a “Strategic Mutual Defense Agreement,” declaring that an attack on one is an attack on both. This isn’t your average handshake—Pakistan, the only Muslim-majority nuclear power, has hinted at extending its nuclear umbrella to Saudi Arabia if push comes to shove. Saudi’s defense attaché described it as covering tech transfers, joint production, and full military collaboration.
For the US, this pact signals a crack in its Gulf influence. Saudi’s move comes after perceived US unreliability—think Israel’s recent strikes on Iranian nuclear sites in June 2025 and Qatar, which left Gulf states feeling exposed. President Trump’s administration has imposed sanctions on Pakistani entities multiple times since 2021, targeting ballistic missile programs and more. Now, with Saudi pivoting toward nuclear-armed Pakistan, the US seems to be recalibrating. Experts call it a “watershed” moment, reshaping regional geopolitics and potentially undermining US-led initiatives like the India-Middle East-Europe Corridor (IMEC).
The big question: Is the US eyeing Pakistan as the true target, using Bagram as a chess piece? It sure looks that way, as Washington seeks to counter this new axis without direct confrontation.
Why Does America Suddenly Want Bagram Amid Middle East Shifts?
Bagram Airbase, once the nerve center of US operations in Afghanistan, was abandoned in 2021 during the chaotic withdrawal. Fast-forward to September 2025, and President Trump is openly pushing to “get it back.” He told reporters the US is negotiating with the Taliban, who now control it, because “they need things from us.” The Taliban has flat-out rejected this, insisting on engagement without military footprints.
So, why now? The Middle East is on fire. Israel’s June strikes delayed Iran’s nuclear program, but Tehran’s closer than ever to a bomb, heightening Gulf anxieties. With Saudi cozying up to Pakistan for defense, Bagram offers the US a strategic perch to monitor not just Afghanistan, but Pakistan, Iran, and even China (Trump’s cited concerns about Beijing’s influence there). It’s like a forward base for drone ops, intel gathering, and projecting power—especially if the US wants to keep tabs on Pakistan’s nuclear moves in the Gulf.
In human terms, it’s the US saying, “If Saudi’s going rogue with Pakistan, we’ll set up shop next door to watch.” This isn’t sudden—it’s a response to the pact shaking up alliances.
Does America Want to Keep Pakistan Busy in Afghanistan?
Absolutely, this seems part of the playbook. Pakistan has deep ties to the Taliban, dating back to the US-led war post-9/11. The US-Pakistan relationship has always been rocky: cooperative on counterterrorism but fraught with mistrust. By pushing for Bagram, the US could drag Pakistan back into Afghan quagmires—border skirmishes, refugee flows, and Taliban diplomacy—to divert its focus from the Middle East.
Think about it: Pakistan’s already stretched with India on one side and Afghanistan on the other. If the US re-enters via Bagram, it might force Islamabad to mediate or counter Taliban resistance, keeping its military bogged down. This aligns with historical patterns—during the 2000s, the US leaned on Pakistan for Afghan stability while eyeing its nuclear arsenal. Post-pact, a distracted Pakistan means less bandwidth for Gulf adventures, like deploying troops or missiles to Saudi.
It’s a classic divide-and-conquer: Keep Pakistan entangled in its backyard so it can’t project power eastward.
Will Pakistan Be Able to Compete From All Sides?
Pakistan’s got grit, but competing on multiple fronts? It’s a tall order. Militarily, its 170-warhead nuclear arsenal and battle-hardened army (with Saudi training ties since 1967) give it edge, but the 2025 defense budget jumped 20% to $9 billion amid economic woes. The Saudi pact boosts this—joint exercises, tech from China-integrated systems like J-10C jets.
Economically, though, it’s shaky. GDP growth hovers at 3%, with poverty and unemployment rising. Balancing India (recent May 2025 crisis), Afghanistan (Taliban ties), Iran (cooperative rivalry), and now Gulf commitments? Analysts say Pakistan risks overstretch. The pact elevates ties, but if squeezed by US sanctions, it might falter.
In short, Pakistan can punch above its weight with allies like Saudi and China, but sustained multi-front competition? Doubtful without economic reforms.
Will America Achieve Its Goals by Increasing Pakistan’s Economic Difficulties?
The US has a history of using economic levers—aid cuts, sanctions—to influence Pakistan. Trump’s 2025 aid suspension of $845 million hit hard, limiting policy autonomy. Tariffs could worsen unemployment and strain forex reserves. With Pakistan diversifying toward Gulf and China (20% FDI growth in early 2025), US pressure might backfire, pushing Islamabad deeper into anti-US camps.
Could it work? Short-term, yes—economic pain might curb Pakistan’s Gulf ambitions. Long-term? Probably not, as it risks alienating a key player in South Asia.
Bagram as a Proxy for Bigger Plays
Is Bagram the endgame, or Pakistan the prize? It feels like the latter— a way for the US to counter the Saudi-Pakistan axis without full-blown conflict. As Middle East dynamics evolve, Washington’s strategy blends military posturing, economic squeezes, and Afghan distractions. Pakistan’s resilience will be tested, but overplaying the hand could reshape alliances in unpredictable ways.
