This Content Is Only For Subscribers
Pakistan Pushes New US-Iran Talks as Sharif Engages Saudi Arabia and Turkey.
The talks failed—but the diplomacy is just getting started.
Pakistan is stepping deeper into one of the world’s most volatile conflicts, betting that diplomacy can succeed where pressure and war have so far failed.
Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif is preparing urgent visits to Saudi Arabia and Turkey, part of a coordinated push to revive negotiations between the United States and Iran after high-level talks in Islamabad ended without a breakthrough. The effort, backed by President Asif Ali Zardari, signals that Pakistan is positioning itself not just as a host—but as a central diplomatic broker in the crisis.
The timing is critical.
A fragile ceasefire still holds, offering a narrow window for renewed engagement. Behind the scenes, momentum is building. Donald Trump has suggested talks could resume within days, while United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has called it “highly probable” that negotiations will restart.
But optimism masks a deeper reality: the gap between Washington and Tehran remains wide.
The last round of talks—led by JD Vance and Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf—collapsed after 21 hours with no agreement. Core disputes over sanctions relief, nuclear limits, and control of the Strait of Hormuz remain unresolved. Meanwhile, the U.S. has escalated pressure with a naval blockade, even as it signals openness to further dialogue.
That contradiction defines the current phase: negotiation under pressure.
For Pakistan, the challenge is not simply bringing both sides back to the table—it is keeping them there. Islamabad’s role as mediator depends on its ability to balance competing interests: maintaining credibility with Washington, preserving channels with Tehran, and coordinating with regional powers whose stakes are rising.
Sharif’s outreach to Riyadh and Ankara reflects that balancing act. Saudi Arabia’s influence over energy markets and regional security calculations makes it indispensable, while Turkey’s ties to both Iran and NATO position it as a critical intermediary voice.
There is also a broader strategic calculation at play.
By hosting and facilitating talks, Pakistan is reasserting itself as a diplomatic hub at a time when global power centers are shifting. The possibility that future rounds could take place either in Islamabad or cities like Geneva underscores the fluid nature of the process—and the competition to shape it.
Yet the risks are just as significant.
Failure would not simply stall diplomacy; it could accelerate escalation. The ceasefire is temporary. Military posturing continues. And every delay increases the chance that miscalculation—whether in the Gulf, Lebanon, or beyond—could collapse the fragile calm.
For now, the key indicator is simple: communication lines remain open.
That alone marks a shift from earlier phases of the conflict, when escalation outpaced diplomacy. But it is not a guarantee of success. As Guterres cautioned, a conflict decades in the making will not be resolved in a single round.
Pakistan’s gamble, then, is clear. Keep the process alive long enough for compromise to emerge—or risk watching the region slide back toward confrontation.
In this moment, diplomacy is not about breakthrough. It is about survival.
