Former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) officer John Kiriakou has said that Pakistan would lose any conventional military confrontation with India, urging Islamabad to abandon its confrontational stance and reassess its national security policies.

In a candid interview with ANI, Kiriakou argued that there is “nothing positive” for Pakistan in maintaining hostility towards India, given the disparity in capabilities and outcomes of past engagements.

Kiriakou, who served in the CIA for 15 years and headed counterterrorism operations in Pakistan, noted that India’s response to terrorism has consistently demonstrated its military superiority. He referred to India’s surgical strikes in 2016, the Balakot airstrikes in 2019, and Operation Sindoor earlier in 2025 — the latter launched in retaliation for the Pahalgam terror attack that killed 26 civilians. These precision strikes, according to him, underscored India’s willingness and capacity to decisively punish cross-border terrorism.

The former officer recalled that during his posting in Islamabad in 2002, he had been told unofficially that the Pentagon exercised control over Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal under President Pervez Musharraf’s rule. However, he acknowledged that in the years since, Pakistan’s military leadership has consistently rejected that claim, insisting that their nuclear assets remain under domestic control.

When asked whether such information had ever been shared with India, Kiriakou expressed doubt. He emphasised that Washington’s stance historically urged both nations to keep conflicts limited and non-nuclear. “The State Department told both sides — if you’re going to fight, fight short and keep it non-nuclear. If nuclear weapons are introduced, the whole world changes,” he said, pointing to the restraint exercised by both governments despite grave provocations.

Kiriakou bluntly stated that Pakistan would unequivocally lose in a conventional war, without even considering nuclear escalation. “Nothing good will come out of an actual war between India and Pakistan because the Pakistanis will lose. It’s as simple as that,” he asserted, highlighting that provoking India yields no strategic advantage.

Commenting on Pakistan’s controversial nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, Kiriakou revealed that Washington had enough intelligence to target him directly but decided against it due to Saudi Arabia’s intervention. “We could have taken the Israeli approach and eliminated him. We knew where he lived. But the Saudis requested we leave him alone because they were working with him,” he said, calling that a grave misjudgement by the US government given Khan’s role in global nuclear proliferation.

Kiriakou, who became widely known for exposing the CIA’s torture programme in 2007, later faced prosecution and served 23 months in prison. Reflecting on that period, he maintained that he had acted ethically, saying he had “no regrets and no remorse” for revealing what he described as unlawful interrogation practices.

His remarks once again bring attention to the fragile equilibrium of nuclear deterrence in South Asia and the implications of terrorism-driven conflict cycles. Kiriakou’s perspective, shaped by close field experience and later dissent against the CIA’s policies, adds weight to concerns about the futility and risks of any renewed military escalation between India and Pakistan.

Based On ANI Report