US-Iran talks and Pakistan’s strategic gamble

THE ceasefire has been extended until Iran’s proposals are formally tabled. Pakistan has intensified efforts to broker an agreement between the warring parties. Field Marshal Asim Munir travelled to Tehran, while the Prime Minister visited Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Türkiye. The outcome appears cautiously positive, though fears of spoilers persist. A major spoiler remains Israel. Its influence over the United States, particularly under Netanyahu, is widely perceived as significant. Reports suggest an unusual degree of alignment between Israeli leadership and American decision-making. Under pressure linked to the negotiations, Lebanese and Israeli sides agreed to a fragile ten-day ceasefire, though the Lebanese Prime Minister sought to delink it from broader developments. The Strait of Hormuz has alternated between being open and restricted for commercial shipping. Iran attributes disruptions to American interference, while international pressure—especially from China and Russia—aims to ensure uninterrupted maritime access. Although an agreement appears possible, delays may arise due to rigidity on both sides and the question of who concedes first. Earlier US-Iran talks facilitated through Pakistan remained inconclusive. As a pressure tactic, the United States reportedly restricted access to the Strait of Hormuz, while Iran responded by deploying sea mines, effectively deterring US naval movement. Despite tensions, the ceasefire holds, which is a positive sign. However, the risk of escalation persists if talks stall or collapse. Multiple actors appear invested in derailing the process. Despite political rhetoric, encouraging signals continue to emerge, regardless of statements from President Trump. Hosting these talks in Pakistan carries immense strategic significance and enhances its diplomatic stature. Regardless of the outcome, a multipolar world order with multiple power centres is increasingly evident. Iran is consolidating itself as a regional power, while Pakista