Behind the truce: Pakistan mediation proves pivotal

Safe passage

Central to these deliberations was the question of how to restore safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz, a lifeline for global commerce. As of Wednesday evening, the strait appeared to still be closed, owing to Israel's continued aggression in Lebanon, despite the White House denying that it was included.

Proposals under consideration reportedly include the creation of a multinational mechanism to oversee shipping security, as well as financial arrangements modelled on established transit systems such as the Suez Canal. Their inclusion underscores the extent to which economic imperatives are driving the urgency of diplomacy and shaping the contours of potential agreements.

Pakistan's role in this process reflects a calculated strategic positioning. Unlike many regional actors, Islamabad maintains working relationships with both Tehran and Washington, while also enjoying close ties with Gulf capitals. This network of relationships has enabled it to act as a conduit at a crunch time.

Chinese input

In Beijing on 31 March, China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi met with Ishaq Dar to discuss the crisis. Beijing and Islamabad were aligned on the need for urgent de-escalation and laid out a structured five-point framework for managing the conflict, including an immediate cessation of hostilities to prevent the conflict from spreading and to allow humanitarian assistance to reach all affected areas without obstruction.

They urged peace talks, emphasising the importance of safeguarding the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and national independence of Iran and Gulf states. They also called for strict adherence to international humanitarian law, urging all parties to halt attacks on civilians and non-military infrastructure, including energy facilities and nuclear installations.

The security of maritime routes featured prominently, with both China and Pakistan emphasising the need to ensure safe navigation through the Strait of Hormuz. Finally, the framework reaffirmed the primacy of the United Nations Charter and called for strengthened multilateral cooperation to achieve a comprehensive and lasting peace.

Regional buy-in

Saudi Arabia, Türkiye, and Egypt each brought distinct priorities shaped by their own interests. Despite their differences, all agreed that the costs of continued escalation are unsustainable. The conflict had already drawn in non-state actors, raising the risk of a broader, multi-front confrontation that could destabilise the entire region. 

Iftikhar Hussain Kazmi, Pakistan's former ambassador to Bahrain, told Al Majalla that it was "as much an honour as a responsibility for Pakistan to play host to talks between Iran and the US," adding: "It indicates the trust that they place in Pakistan." He said Islamabad "feared a spillover of this catastrophic war into Pakistan," explaining: "We had as much a stake in peace and stability in this volatile region as the other countries involved." Finally, he said China's leaders "played a critical role behind the scenes in bringing the parties concerned to the negotiating table".

Analysts caution that any agreement between the US and Iran risks failure if it does not incorporate the concerns of the Gulf states, which have been left deeply uneasy at what they see as key regional security issues being overlooked in the current ceasefire discussions.

Gulf concerns

One of the Gulf states' most critical demands is the guarantee of freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. Equally important is the cessation of Iranian missile and drone attacks targeting Gulf states such as Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia. Peace is not sustainable if such attacks continue, officials say, as it undermines trust and threatens critical infrastructure.

"Any agreement between the United States and Iran must meaningfully address the security concerns and demands of the Gulf Cooperation Council countries," said Mustansar Klasra, a politics lecturer at Bahria University, Islamabad. "Without taking their concerns seriously, any deal will lack credibility and fail to be a lasting peace." Another major concern is Iran's support for regional militias operating in Yemen, Iraq, and Lebanon. Gulf states view this as a primary driver of instability and argue that ceasefire negotiations must include commitments to end such support.

For Pakistan, the stakes are high. The current diplomatic opening presents an opportunity to establish itself as a credible mediator in one of the world's most volatile regions. At the same time, failure could expose the limits of its influence and the fragility of the ceasefire. At the time of writing, the guns had fallen silent, and attention was shifting from the battlefield to the negotiating table. Whether this pause can become a peace remains uncertain.