In his testimony before the US Senate Armed Services Committee this week, CENTCOM Commander Admiral Brad Cooper acknowledged Pakistan as “a reliable partner in counter?terrorism operations” against Islamic State Khorasan, noting that joint operations had yielded tangible outcomes. Of course, for those in Islamabad, this does not read like an exaggerated compliment. Admiral Cooper was simply stating an operational fact that years of selective American debate had often buried under impatience and old talking points.
Pakistan has heard praise from Washington before, typically when American policy required its geostrategic location for access. What is different this time around is the wider setting. The region around Pakistan is again unstable, especially Afghanistan, which is fast emerging as a promised land for militant networks. IS-K has shown both ambition and reach. The TTP continues to draw strength from cross-border sanctuaries, and Balochistan has seen insurgent violence acquire sharper propaganda and external oxygen. In such an environment, Pakistan is not a marginal partner. It is one of the few states with the required intelligence depth and on-ground experience to help contain the threat.
That experience has come at a staggering price. In 2025, Pakistan recorded one of its bloodiest years in more than a decade. The Pakistan Institute for Conflict and Security Studies put combat-related deaths at 3,387, including 664 security personnel and 580 civilians. Violence remained concentrated in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan. Police posts, checkposts, bazaars and convoys have carried the burden.
Washington’s reassessment should also be seen in the light of recent policy choices. The US decision to list the Balochistan Liberation Army as a foreign terrorist organisation and Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s assertion that the move demonstrates a commitment to countering terrorism validated Pakistan’s long-standing demand that separatist violence be delegitimised and treated as terrorism. The new designation makes it a crime for anyone in the US to support the group. That matters. For years, Islamabad has argued that violence cannot be condemned only when it threatens Western interests and explained away when it bleeds in the Global South.
Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi’s recent remarks that Pak-US ties have strengthened during President Trump’s tenure should also be read in the same context. His emphasis on security cooperation, counter-terrorism, narcotics control, Reko Diq security and the hope for direct flights points to a relationship trying to escape its old trap.
There is also a diplomatic layer to this moment. Pakistan’s role in keeping the US-Iran channel alive and helping secure a ceasefire at a dangerous hour has added to its regional value. Recognition, then, should become leverage, with Pakistan holding its ground on continuous intelligence-sharing and firm pressure on Kabul over terror sanctuaries. Military cooperation alone cannot defeat networks that move through informal economies.
This is a vindication of Pakistan’s position. However, as always, the harder test lies at home: building the police, prosecution and political consensus needed to make that recognition matter. *