Can Iran And Pakistan Turn Vision Into Reality? – OpEd
The trade relationship between Pakistan and Iran has always been a bit of a mixed bag. Sometimes it looks promising, other times it feels stuck in old habits of mistrust and politics. So, when I hear that trade between the two has hit $3 billion and both sides are aiming for $10 billion, I see it as both a big step forward and a test of whether either country can follow through.
The truth is, both economies need this. Pakistan is forever juggling IMF bailouts and foreign reserves, while Iran is locked out of much of the global financial system. In that context, leaning on each other is practical. A barter system makes sense because it avoids the banking mess. Pakistan can send rice and meat across the border, while Iran can provide oil, gas, or petrochemicals without either side getting tangled up in dollar shortages or sanctions headaches.
What really caught my attention was the push for border markets. These aren’t flashy mega-projects; they’re small-scale, local hubs that can change the daily lives of people along the Pakistan–Iran border. For decades, that border has been more associated with smuggling, security issues, and political suspicion than legitimate trade. Giving people in Balochistan legal avenues for cross-border business could soften tensions and create opportunities in places that usually get ignored.
But the big question is always infrastructure. Both countries talk a lot about road, rail, and port connectivity. In theory, Gwadar and Chabahar should complement each other, connecting South Asia, Central Asia, and the Middle East in ways that benefit everyone. These projects have been slow, underfunded, and often derailed by politics or outside pressure. Without actual progress on those fronts, the $10 billion target risks staying more like a slogan than a goal.
Another layer to this is competition. Pakistan and Iran often chase the same markets for agricultural exports, and both want to position their ports as the main gateways for regional trade. Finding areas where cooperation makes more sense than rivalry is going to matter. Agriculture and services are two sectors being floated, but it’ll take more than handshakes at conferences to make them real. There’s also talk about cooperation on water management and disaster response. Those might not sound like trade issues, but they’re deeply connected to stability, which is the foundation of any economic plan.
Of course, Pakistan must balance this with its ties to Saudi Arabia. Riyadh has long been Pakistan’s go-to for financial support, remittances, and political cover. Getting too close to Iran could complicate that. The same goes for the U.S., which isn’t exactly thrilled about countries doing big trade deals with Tehran. Navigating those relationships is tricky, but Pakistan doesn’t really have the luxury of avoiding tough calls. If the leadership frames this as part of a broader regional strategy rather than picking sides, maybe it can work.
Shehbaz Sharif’s emphasis on letting the private sector take the lead is probably the right call. Government-to-government deals are fine, but what really matters is whether traders and businesses feel confident that rules won’t suddenly change. In Pakistan, exporters are already used to unpredictable policies, and in Iran, sanctions make things even murkier. If businesses don’t feel protected, all the political talk in the world won’t translate into lasting trade.
What excites me most is the bigger picture of connectivity. Imagine Pakistani exports flowing into Iran and beyond into Turkey and Europe, or Iranian energy moving east into South Asia. These kinds of links could shift the region’s economic weight in serious ways. They could even bring a measure of stability by making neighbours more dependent on each other’s prosperity. That’s not wishful thinking; it’s just how trade works when it’s done consistently.
That said, it’s hard not to be sceptical. South Asia has some of the lowest levels of intra-regional trade in the world. Pakistan and India barely do business with each other. Iran has been isolated for decades. Even when leaders get excited about “historic opportunities,” the ground reality is usually poor roads, endless paperwork, and political spats. If that doesn’t change, these targets will keep slipping out of reach.
The trade is about more than just numbers on a balance sheet. It’s about trust and the ability to keep showing up even when politics gets messy. If Pakistan and Iran can stick to this path and deliver on what they’ve promised, it could mean more jobs, more investment, and a stronger sense of regional connection. That would be a big deal not just for the governments, but for the people who live near that long, complicated border.
Like what you read?
Please consider supporting Eurasia Review. Thank you for your consideration!
