By Mian Iftikhar Ahmad
From Code 100 to Doomsday? Iran, America, and Israel Face to Face: Shadows of Danger over the Strait of Hormuz, a New Alignment in the Gulf, and a Stern Test for Pakistan. The Middle East once again appears to be standing at such a delicate juncture where a minor military step could push the entire region toward a wider war. Reports of Iran’s armed forces adopting an extremely sensitive state of readiness called “Code 100,” U.S. President Donald Trump’s sudden return from Camp David, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s shortened U.S. visit, protective advisories issued by American embassies for their citizens, and growing concern regarding the Gulf’s airspace and sea routes have set off alarm bells in global diplomatic and military circles. However, the most important point here is that instead of viewing these reports as separate incidents, they should be understood in the context of the region’s changing situation. The reports regarding Iran’s “Code 100” have not yet been fully independently verified by any reliable official source, so declaring it a final announcement of an imminent Iranian attack would not be correct, but it is certainly true that the intense tension between Iran, America, and Israel has placed the Persian Gulf, the Strait of Hormuz, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and the Gulf Arab states under such pressure that its effects will not remain confined to the military arena alone. The American institution Council on Foreign Relations, or CFR, has described the current conflict with Iran as a “deteriorating situation” in the context of inter-state war, and in its analyses, Iran’s nuclear program, the Strait of Hormuz, sanctions relief, and a durable political settlement have been identified as fundamental unresolved issues. On the other hand, recent research by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, or CSIS, has focused on Iran’s underground military installations, the energy crisis, and the changing security system of the Middle East. This means that the current crisis is not merely a matter of missiles and airstrikes but could become a stage for the reconstruction of the entire regional system. Regarding Iran, the most discussed possibility is that of the Strait of Hormuz. Considered one of the world’s most important maritime passages, this strait connects the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and then to the Indian Ocean, and its importance for global energy supplies is extraordinary. If shipping here is affected, the transportation of oil and gas is disrupted, or the threat to commercial vessels increases, its effects will not remain limited to Iran and the Gulf countries but can reach the global market, fuel prices, inflation, air and sea trade, and the economies of developing countries. This is why in recent days Washington and its Arab allies have also been considering alternative routes to reduce dependence on the Strait of Hormuz. According to the Financial Times, the United States has discussed with Arab allies a financial plan aimed at developing pipelines and other infrastructure to reduce dependence on energy supplies passing through the Strait of Hormuz. On the other hand, indications have also emerged from Iran that if American military pressure is reduced and some sanctions or blockade measures are eased, room for renewed negotiations on the Strait of Hormuz could emerge. This shows that war and diplomacy have become two parallel tracks running simultaneously.
Regarding Iran’s possible next step, global analysts are stating several possibilities, but declaring any one possibility a certain prediction would be premature. One possibility is that instead of entering a wider war directly with America or Israel, Iran may adopt a path of limited but pressure-increasing actions. A second possibility is that pressure may be increased on American installations in the Gulf, energy centers, or maritime routes. A third path could be an increase in indirect pressure through armed groups linked to Iran in the region. Houthi attacks in Yemen have already created an additional threat to Saudi Arabia, the Red Sea, and global shipping. According to recent Reuters reports, Houthi attacks have endangered Saudi cities, energy infrastructure, and maritime shipping. It is also necessary to understand the difference here that the action of any group and Iran’s direct military action are not the same thing; however, in tension between regional powers, the role of such non-state armed groups can become a means of expanding war. Israel’s position is also extremely complex. Israel’s primary concern relates to Iran’s nuclear capability, missile program, and Iran’s allied armed groups in the region. On the other hand, for Washington the problem is that a long war against Iran is not merely a matter of military action but is also linked to the safety of American troops, the defense of Gulf allies, the global energy market, American domestic politics, and great-power competition with China and Russia. This is why American policy simultaneously shows an effort to maintain intense military pressure on one side and keep the door to negotiations open on the other. According to a Reuters report of September 22, President Trump stressed completely isolating Iran, while indications also emerged from Iran regarding room for negotiations on the Strait of Hormuz. In this entire scenario, Saudi Arabia’s role has also become extremely important. Saudi Arabia is trying to enhance its defensive capability to protect its territory, energy centers, and urban population from missile and drone attacks. According to a recent Associated Press report, due to growing pressure on Saudi Arabia’s defense system and certain defense needs, Riyadh has contacted various countries, including France, Britain, Pakistan, and Egypt, regarding possibilities for military assistance; however, the direct participation of any country in war has not been declared automatic or certain. This is precisely the point where Pakistan’s importance increases extraordinarily. Pakistan has taken its defense relations to a new level with Saudi Arabia through the Makkah Defense Agreement. According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies, or IISS, this agreement of August 7, 2026, has created a new dimension in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the region’s defense structure. However, Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has clarified that this agreement is defensive in nature, not directed against any specific country, and should not be seen as the establishment of a new military alliance or bloc. This is why the current tension among Iran, Saudi Arabia, and America is also an extraordinary diplomatic test for Pakistan. On one hand, Pakistan has long-standing brotherly, economic, and defense relations with Saudi Arabia; on the other hand, Iran is Pakistan’s neighboring country, with which a long land border, border security, trade, energy, and regional peace matters are directly linked. The most sensitive issue for Pakistan is that as a result of any major confrontation in the region, it will have to maintain such a balance in which defense commitments with Saudi Arabia are not affected and relations with Iran as a neighboring state are not damaged. This is why the current crisis is not merely a matter of foreign policy for Pakistan but an issue linked to national security, energy, trade, remittances, and the domestic economy. For Pakistan’s economy, remittances coming from Gulf countries are extremely important. If a long war breaks out in the Gulf, energy prices rise, or severe disruption occurs in maritime routes, direct pressure could increase on a country like Pakistan that depends on imported energy. At the same time, the security situation in border areas with Iran could also become more sensitive. Therefore, for Islamabad, an important objective of diplomatic efforts could be to prevent the spread of war and preserve room for negotiations. This aspect also makes Pakistan important as a possible interlocutor, although the success of any mediation role will depend on the consent of the relevant parties. Meanwhile, in a Chatham House analysis examining the possible regional effects of this war, it was pointed out that Arab states’ thinking regarding American primacy in the Gulf could change, and it could also affect Iran’s influence, the regional balance of power, and the diplomatic opportunities created for China. An important aspect of this analysis is that if the current war becomes prolonged, the outcome of the war may appear not only on the battlefield but also in a new arrangement of diplomatic relations, defense agreements, energy routes, and regional alliances. In Atlantic Council analyses as well, discussion has continued to emerge regarding regional cooperation for Gulf security and the possibilities of new security arrangements around the Strait of Hormuz. This raises a fundamental question: could a new security system be formed in the Middle East for the coming years in which dependence on only America’s military presence is reduced and regional states enhance their collective defense capability? The Makkah Defense Agreement, Saudi Arabia and Turkey’s growing relations, Pakistan’s defense partnership, and the changing strategy of Gulf states can be seen in the context of this broader change. However, it would not be correct to declare this process a complete regional military alliance yet. Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has also described this agreement as defensive and supportive of regional peace, not the beginning of a new military bloc. Now the question is in which direction the situation may move in the coming days. One possible scenario is limited tension in which pressure is maintained on each other through missile attacks, drone operations, maritime pressure, and limited military retaliatory actions, but full-scale regional war is avoided. A second scenario is more dangerous, in which the Strait of Hormuz, Gulf energy centers, and American military bases become directly part of the conflict and multiple fronts, including Yemen, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon, become linked to one another. A third scenario is diplomatic progress in which, despite military pressure, America, Iran, and other regional powers move toward a limited understanding, ceasefire, or new security arrangement. Declaring any one of these three possibilities a final future would not be correct, because in the current crisis many factors are changing simultaneously. CFR itself has highlighted the nuclear program and a durable political settlement along with the Strait of Hormuz among the conflict’s fundamental issues, which makes clear that the real end of the war is linked not merely to military action but to some political arrangement. Here another important aspect is the rivalry of global powers. America is trying to maintain the security of its allies and its military presence in the Middle East, China has energy and trade interests in the region, and Russia also tries to maintain its role in the regional balance of power. If a long confrontation continues between America and Iran, opportunities could arise for China to increase economic and diplomatic ties with Gulf states. Chatham House has also indicated this possibility, that as a result of war the current security structure of the Gulf could change. In this entire situation, the greatest attention should be given to those practical signals that can show a real change in the intensity of the crisis. The movement of commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz, the activity of air defense systems in Gulf countries, American military movement, the nature of Israeli airstrikes, the range of Iran’s missile and drone attacks, the intensity of Houthi actions in Yemen, the price of crude oil in the global market, the pace of diplomatic contacts, and proposals emerging for ceasefire or negotiations are factors that carry more importance than any “code” or unverified news. Therefore, the report of “Code 100” can be seen as a sensitive warning, but it would not be correct to understand it as proof of the certain start of war. The real question is not which code Iran has allegedly activated; the real question is whether Iran, America, Israel, and Gulf countries have reached a point where even a limited action could turn into a major confrontation. This is the question that has put Washington, Tel Aviv, Tehran, Riyadh, and other capitals under extraordinary pressure. The current tension in the Middle East is no longer merely a bilateral conflict between Iran and Israel or Iran and America but has become a complex web of energy, trade, defense, diplomacy, regional alliances, and the interests of global powers. For Pakistan, the lesson of this crisis is also clear: in the coming days, what will be needed is balanced diplomacy rather than emotional slogans, the requirements of national security, energy protection, border monitoring, and strong contacts with Gulf countries. If tension in the region remains limited, an opportunity may arise to expand diplomatic contacts; if war spreads, Pakistan will need an immediate and comprehensive strategy for the protection of its borders, economy, and energy; and if the door to negotiations opens, Pakistan can try to play a constructive diplomatic role based on its geographical position, its connections in the Muslim world, and its relations with both Saudi Arabia and Iran. Thus, today’s real news is not only “Code 100” but the possible change in the balance of power in the Middle East. The real danger is not just one missile but the chain in which one attack can give rise to a retaliatory attack, a retaliatory attack to a regional front, and a regional front to a global energy crisis. The world’s eyes are now on Tehran, Tel Aviv, Washington, and Riyadh, but the effects of this crisis are also reaching Islamabad. The coming days will determine whether this tension remains a limited military clash, turns into a major regional crisis, or, after intense pressure, becomes the basis for a new regional settlement through diplomacy. For now, more important than any final outcome is that the world is seriously watching all those signals emerging regarding peace in the Persian Gulf, freedom of the Strait of Hormuz, global energy supplies, and the future security system of the Middle East.
