Pakistani mediation efforts reached their peak in recent days. Following a visit by Pakistani Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi to Tehran, where he met with Iranian officials managing the negotiations, Pakistani Army Chief Asim Munir is now heading to the Iranian capital, signaling progress being made through Islamabad's mediation efforts between Tehran and Washington.
There is virtually no previous instance of a government engaging in such extensive mediation between Iran and the United States.
The US-Israeli war on Iran was halted through Pakistani mediation, with the two countries agreeing to a two-week truce and negotiations. This truce was subsequently extended for a second, indefinite period at the request of Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and with the approval of US President Donald Trump.
To date, one round of in-person negotiations has been held in Islamabad between Iran and the United States, hosted and facilitated by Pakistan. Direct, face-to-face negotiations took place between U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance and Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, in the presence of the Pakistani Prime Minister, Foreign Minister, and Army Chief, on April 11 and 12, 2026, in Islamabad.
These were the first face-to-face negotiations between Iran and the United States since the U.S. withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear agreement in 2018. They also represented the highest level of negotiations between Iran and the United States since the fall of the Shah's regime in 1979 and the establishment of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
All these developments demonstrate the intensive and unprecedented efforts undertaken by Pakistan to successfully mediate between Iran and the United States, with the aim of preventing a renewed outbreak of war and transforming the current temporary truce into a permanent one.
Iran and Pakistan are neighboring countries with high-level political, security, and economic relations, as well as shared cultural, historical, and religious ties. Pakistan's history of mediation extends back decades. During the eight-year Iran-Iraq War (1980–1988), Pakistan attempted to mediate between Iran and Iraq, but these efforts were unsuccessful. Pakistan also currently represents Iranian interests in the United States.
Following the severing of diplomatic relations between the United States and Iran in 1980 after the storming of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, Pakistan assumed responsibility for protecting Iranian interests in the United States. The Iranian Interests Section in the United States, located within the Pakistani Embassy in Washington, D.C., provides consular services to Iranian citizens residing in the U.S., as well as issuing visas to U.S. citizens.
Iranian analyst Ahmad Fartash, writing on the Asr-e Iran website, argued that one reason Iran accepted Pakistani mediation was the absence of US military bases in Pakistan. Unlike many Gulf Arab states, Pakistan does not host permanent US military bases. This gives Tehran greater confidence in Pakistan's independent decision-making. He added, "If Pakistan, like some countries in the region, were hosting thousands of American soldiers and massive weapons depots for them, Tehran would not have been able to trust Islamabad as a neutral or at least less dangerous player." He continued, "The close military and political ties between the Pakistani government and the Trump administration are another reason." The Pakistani army, particularly its commander General Asim Munir, succeeded in establishing direct and effective channels of communication with Donald Trump. Some analysts believe that Islamabad "knew how to deal with Trump" and managed to present itself to him as a strategic partner.
The official Iranian news agency IRNA, in an analysis, wrote that the expansion of the Israeli-American war against Iran to the region is a serious warning sign for Pakistan. IRNA added that the risk of armed terrorist groups becoming active in the border regions between Iran and Pakistan is a source of concern for both sides. From Pakistan's perspective, this border could become a corridor for large waves of refugees into Pakistani territory should the war in Iran escalate. The Pakistani army also fears a disruption of the military and security balance on its western border with Iran.
Javad Mansouri, the former Iranian ambassador to Islamabad, said in an interview with the website "Recording the Documents of the Islamic Revolution" regarding the reasons for Pakistan's involvement in mediating between Iran and the United States: "The Americans believed that the Arab states had been harmed by this war and might not be willing or able to play the role of mediator. Therefore, they suggested that Pakistan, which was relatively far from the battlefield and enjoyed good relations with Iran, act as a mediator. Naturally, Pakistan welcomed this opportunity to further its own interests."
As Mohammad Hossein Bani Asadi, the former Iranian consul in Lahore, said in an interview with the Shargh newspaper: “After some Arab countries in the region, especially Oman and Qatar, gradually distanced themselves from playing an active role in mediating between Iran and America, a kind of diplomatic vacuum emerged in this field. Pakistan tried to exploit this vacuum, relying on its geopolitical position and its network of regional and international relations, to assume the role of mediator; a role that could have brought Islamabad political, security and reputational gains.”
He added: “Pakistan faced at least two crucial strategic concerns regarding the continuation and escalation of tensions between Iran and the United States, which ultimately led it to play a mediating role. The first of these concerns was the possibility of the crisis escalating into a direct and comprehensive confrontation between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Given its extensive strategic, security, and military ties with Riyadh, Pakistan felt obligated to Saudi Arabia and would naturally have been pressured to side with Riyadh if a full-scale war broke out between Tehran and Riyadh. Such a scenario would have meant Pakistan becoming embroiled in a complex and costly crisis in its regional environment.” Asadi continued: “Islamabad’s second concern was the security and geopolitical repercussions of the Iranian crisis spreading to South Asia. A continuation of the war or a worsening of the situation in Iran could have unleashed a wave of insecurity, economic instability, extremism, and border unrest across the region, impacting Pakistan’s internal security. This is why Pakistan entered the mediation phase.”
Abdul Mohammad Taheri, an expert on international affairs and former Iranian cultural attaché to Afghanistan, explained the dimensions of Pakistani mediation in the Iranian-American negotiations in an interview with the Iranian news agency ILNA: “Pakistan was chosen for three main reasons. First, Pakistan and Iran have maintained good and friendly relations for the past thirty or forty years, and unlike many other countries, these relations have not witnessed sharp fluctuations. Furthermore, each country holds special importance for the other in different respects. As for why the Americans chose Pakistan, it can be said that Pakistan possesses, firstly, a large military force; secondly, it has nuclear weapons; thirdly, it shares a border with Iran; and fourthly, it also has a relative ideological affinity with Iran, as it includes both Shia and Sunni Muslims, in addition to trade, economic exchanges, and other forms of relations.”
He continued, “The second point is that Shehbaz Sharif had a good relationship with Trump during the Cairo conference; whether this relationship was formed at that time or for some other reason, Trump trusted him.”
He emphasized: “I feel that the Pakistanis are playing their part correctly, and I believe that if the issue of tension between Iran and the United States is to move forward from various angles, the Pakistanis can indeed be a facilitator and lead this path towards a clear and specific outcome.”
Tags:
asiawest
