It has emerged as a key interlocutor between the US and Iran, but its position is as precarious as it is prestigious Read more at The Business Times.
Source: The Business Times
https://search.app/QKrY5a3Px9K1HAzY9
Pakistan's Pivotal Moment: Peacemaker, Partner, or Tightrope Walker?
By Leon Hadar
In the fog of a Middle East war that has shuttered the Strait of Hormuz and triggered the worst energy crisis since 1973, an unlikely diplomatic capital has emerged: Islamabad. Pakistan's willingness to host U.S.-Iran peace talks is not an accident of geography, it is the fruit of a carefully cultivated relationship with Washington that has been quietly ripening since Donald Trump returned to the White House.
The moment is as revealing as it is consequential for understanding where U.S.-Pakistan relations truly stand.
A Relationship Reborn Under Trump
For much of the past decade, U.S.-Pakistan ties were defined by mutual suspicion, American frustration over Pakistan's alleged sheltering of Taliban elements, and Pakistani resentment over drone strikes and perceived disrespect. The Biden years did little to warm things. But ties between Washington and Islamabad have warmed significantly since Trump succeeded Biden, and the rapprochement has been personal as well as strategic. Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and army chief Field Marshal Asim Munir struck up a personal rapport with President Trump, culminating in a high-profile White House meeting in September 2025. That personal chemistry is now paying geopolitical dividends.
The Architecture of Pakistan's Mediation
Pakistan's emergence as a mediator is not merely opportunistic, it rests on genuine structural advantages. Pakistan shares a 909-kilometer border and deep cultural ties with Iran, maintains close defence ties with Saudi Arabia, and is home to the second-largest Shia Muslim population in the world after Iran itself. This means Islamabad can speak credibly in Tehran's ear while simultaneously holding Washington's hand, a rare dual legitimacy in an era of hardened camps.
Pakistan has emerged as a key interlocutor between the U.S. and Iran, passing messages between the two sides as part of the mediation efforts. This back-channel role is what has earned Pakistan the trust of both parties. Pakistani Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar confirmed that both Iran and the U.S. have "expressed their confidence in Pakistan to facilitate their talks." For a country long treated as a problem to be managed rather than a partner to be respected, this is a significant diplomatic validation.
The Tightrope Act
Yet Pakistan's position is as precarious as it is prestigious. Islamabad is engaged in a very delicate balancing act. The tension is already visible: while Pakistan condemned recent attacks on Iran and Gulf states, it explicitly named Israel while carefully refraining from naming the United States. This asymmetry of blame reveals the bind Pakistan is in, it cannot afford to alienate Washington, its security partner and economic lifeline, but it cannot ignore the sentiments of its own population, the Muslim world, or its neighbor Iran.
The early results of that balancing act have been modest but meaningful. As an initial confidence-building measure, Islamabad announced that Tehran agreed to allow 20 Pakistani-flagged ships to pass through the Strait of Hormuz at a rate of two per day, a small opening in a critically blocked artery. Pakistani officials framed this deliberately as a signal to Washington that diplomacy was bearing fruit.
The Limits of Goodwill
There are, however, serious clouds on the horizon. Iran rejected Trump's 15-point peace plan as "excessive, unrealistic and unreasonable," directly contradicting Trump's claim that Iran had agreed to most of the points. More sobering still, Iran confirmed it did not participate in Sunday's meetings between regional foreign ministers in Pakistan, undermining the narrative of imminent talks. The gap between the atmospherics of diplomacy and its substance remains wide.
Meanwhile, the head of the International Energy Agency warned that the disruption to the Strait of Hormuz already exceeds the combined oil crises of 1973 and 1979, which means pressure for a breakthrough is immense but so is the risk of failure. If talks collapse in Islamabad, Pakistan bears the reputational cost.
What This Means for the U.S.-Pakistan Partnership
For the United States, Pakistan's diplomatic activism offers a rare asset: a Muslim-majority, nuclear-armed state with regional reach that is willing to serve American strategic interests through soft power rather than just military basing rights. The old transactional relationship, dollars for cooperation on counterterrorism, is giving way to something potentially more durable: a shared interest in regional stability.
But this new chapter in U.S.-Pakistan relations should not be romanticized. Pakistan is acting in its own interests — the energy crisis has hit it hard, the Iran-Pakistan border is volatile, and Islamabad urgently needs IMF support and American goodwill for its own economic survival. The personal warmth between Sharif, Munir, and Trump is real, but relationships built on personalities are fragile. They do not automatically translate into long-term institutional trust.
Pakistan's moment as a peacemaker in the most dangerous conflict of 2026 is a testament to the country's strategic reinvention — and to the possibilities that emerge when two countries choose engagement over estrangement. Washington should recognize that Pakistan's mediation is not a favor being done to America; it is Pakistan asserting itself as an indispensable middle power. The United States would do well to treat it accordingly, not as a client state, but as a genuine partner whose interests must also be respected in any eventual settlement.
The tightrope Islamabad is walking is extraordinary. Whether it crosses to the other side depends not just on Pakistani dexterity, but on whether Washington is wise enough to hold the rope steady.