PUBLISHED on April 19, 2026
KARACHI:
This has probably been said many times over the past few weeks, but it bears repeating. The world is living in unprecedented times, in more ways than one. In trying to find a way out of the US-Israeli war against Iran, we are navigating uncharted waters, boldly going where no one has gone before, to borrow from Star Trek.
It is not just the stakes that are unprecedented: the global economy, the specter of nuclear holocaust and the possibility of another world war are at stake. It is the very nature of the challenge. This is a war that began with the beheading of a country’s leaders just as they appeared ready to accept their opponent’s demands at the negotiating table – an ultimate act of bad faith. Add to that the leader of a global superpower who seems to see the world through the logic of WWE or The Apprentice, conducting “diplomacy” through bombastic social media posts, all while remaining beholden to the ultimate bad faith actor in Israel.
It is no wonder that Pakistan’s efforts to bridge the gap toward peace seemed — still seem — so improbable. And yet, against all odds, with time running out since Donald Trump’s ultimatum, Islamabad has contributed to a breakthrough: a fragile ceasefire that, for now, continues to hold, albeit tenuously.
The first round of talks in Islamabad between Iranian leaders and a US delegation led by Vice President JD Vance ended in an impasse, with Tehran and the Trump administration once again standing their ground. Since then, all eyes have been on Pakistani leaders who this week launched an unprecedented diplomatic offensive on the eve of a possible second, perhaps decisive, round of negotiations between Iran and the United States. The country’s top civilian and military leaders fanned out to key regional capitals to build momentum for a breakthrough, with Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif visiting Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, while Chief of Defense Staff and Army Chief Marshal Asim Munir undertook a surprise trip to Tehran.
Regardless of how the next phase plays out, Pakistan’s agile and tireless diplomacy has already earned it rare recognition from world leaders and geopolitical observers. Trump himself has repeatedly praised Prime Minister Shehbaz and Field Marshal Munir. “Thank you to Pakistan and its great Prime Minister and Marshal, two fantastic people! he wrote in a recent article on Truth Social. Earlier in the week, Vice President Vance, in an interview with Fox News, thanked both leaders for their role in mediating between Washington and Tehran, calling them exceptional hosts who demonstrated true statesmanship.
From Tehran also, the response was particularly warm. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian praised Islamabad for its role in mediating and helping to establish a ceasefire in the US-Israeli war, according to the official IRNA news agency. Welcoming Field Marshal Munir to Tehran, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who was part of the Iranian delegation in Islamabad, expressed his “gratitude for Pakistan’s gracious reception of the dialogue.”
The United Nations has also taken note. Secretary-General António Guterres, in a call with Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar, appreciated Pakistan’s constructive role in hosting the Islamabad talks and expressed the UN’s full support for its continued efforts in the peace process.
For analysts and observers, Pakistan’s role borders on the extraordinary. “Pakistan’s tireless efforts have brought hope to the world,” Indian defense analyst Pravin Sawhney wrote in an article on X, adding that Islamabad could take on an important security role in West Asia if the talks progress further.
Geopolitical analyst Pepe Escobar described Pakistan’s diplomacy in the crisis as “a very intelligent way of handling a situation that is practically impossible from any point of view.”
“Munir is probably the only person on the planet, right now, who can pick up the phone and talk to Trump whenever he wants, and at the same time be received like a brother in Tehran,” he said in a podcast with Mario Nawfal.
Around the world, the growing consensus is that few countries could have threaded this needle.
“Pakistan brings a different set of assets to the table. Its established military channels around the world, regional familiarity and tactical flexibility are useful in facilitating sensitive dialogue. Like Norway, Pakistan also contributes troops to peacekeeping missions,” wrote Tanya Goudsouzian, a Canadian journalist who has covered Afghanistan and the Middle East for more than two decades, in an article on X.
As this chorus of praise grows, it is worth stopping to ask what exactly Pakistan has accomplished. To reduce its role to simple logistics would be to miss what is truly new in this moment. This is not traditional mediation, of the type long associated with Oman or Qatar – small, wealthy, neutral states that have built their reputations on quiet facilitation and discreet back channels. These models were designed for slower, more predictable crises, not war playing out in real time, under the pressure of imminent escalation and the constant threat of miscalculation.
What is emerging instead is something closer to crisis intermediation under fire: a form of diplomacy that combines access, leverage and, above all, implicit support of a hard power.
The choice of Pakistan as the venue for the negotiations is not due to chance. This reflects a convergence of strategic realities. Tehran views Islamabad as a neighbor with which it shares not only geography but also deep societal ties, including one of the largest Shiite populations outside of Iran. At the same time, Pakistan’s long-standing ties with Saudi Arabia, recently formalized by a mutual defense pact, give it credibility in Riyadh. Added to this is China’s discreet but decisive support, anchored in its own strategic partnerships with Pakistan and Iran.
On the American side, the calculation is more personal, but no less significant. The well-documented relationship between Donald Trump and Field Marshal Munir – forged during last year’s war with India – has created an unusual access channel that bypasses the bureaucratic inertia that often blocks diplomacy in moments of emergency. In a crisis defined as much by personalities as by politics, this matters.
But if Pakistan’s comparative advantage lies in access, it is its willingness and ability to operate in the shadow of coercive power that sets it apart.
Consider the events around the first round of talks. As Iranian negotiators traveled to and from Islamabad, fearing being targeted along the way, Pakistan mounted a large-scale air escort operation, deploying fighter jets alongside airborne early warning systems to ensure their safe passage. This was not neutrality in the classic sense of the term. It was an assertion of responsibility, blurring the line between diplomatic facilitation and military guarantee.
At the same time, Islamabad’s decision to deploy fighter jets to Saudi Arabia as part of its recently signed mutual defense agreement around the same time speaks to a broader strategy. In some ways, this decision served as a safeguard for the ceasefire, signaling to Tehran that any extension of the conflict into Saudi territory would have consequences. On the other hand, it sent a message to Israel that the regional balance was not entirely permissive. In both cases, Pakistan did not just welcome the dialogue; it actively shapes the strategic environment in which this dialogue takes place.
This is a fundamentally different model of engagement, which reflects Pakistan’s geopolitical realities. Unlike European mediators like Norway, whose success has been built on decades of cultivated neutrality and institutional depth, Pakistan is deeply embedded in the very conflicts it seeks to defuse. Its proximity is both constraint and leverage.
In taking on this role, Islamabad is testing the limits of what middle powers can achieve at a time when traditional diplomatic frameworks are ill-suited to the pace and complexity of modern conflict. If the current ceasefire holds and subsequent rounds of negotiations result in even incremental progress, Pakistan will have demonstrated that influence in today’s world does not necessarily come from neutrality alone. It can also emerge from a more complex interaction of proximity, access and controlled self-affirmation. The ability to act simultaneously as host, stakeholder and, where applicable, guarantor.
For now, Pakistan has done something few believed possible: it has inserted itself into the center of one of the most dangerous geopolitical crises of our time, not as a spectator, but as an active participant in search of a way out. What comes next will require a delicate balancing act that will test its diplomatic capacity, its internal coherence and its ability to deal with competing external pressures.
Zeeshan Ahmad is an independent journalist and media specialist who writes on politics, security, technology and media.
All facts and information are the sole responsibility of the author
