President Donald Trump’s two-week ceasefire with Iran carries significant risks, particularly with Pakistan stepping in as a mediator.
This is noteworthy because Pakistan is the country where Osama bin Laden hid for a decade following the 9/11 attacks.
For 20 years, the Taliban found refuge there, continuing to target American and NATO forces on their resurgence in Afghanistan.
Today, Pakistan operates as a regional ally of China.
Tehran, backed by Islamabad, has introduced a 10-point plan as a framework for negotiations.
However, this proposal should not be taken seriously by the United States.
Iran hasn’t committed to any changes regarding its ballistic missile initiatives or promised to dismantle its network of militant proxies in the region.
No commitments have been made to disband militias, cease weapons transfers, or withdraw threats against U.S. personnel or allies.
In exchange, Iran is seeking extensive sanctions relief, which would infuse billions into its government.
On the critical issue of nuclear enrichment, Iran insists on the unrestricted right to enrich uranium, with no limits, which is quite concerning.
This scenario clearly signals bad faith on Iran’s part.
Despite these signals, President Trump has allowed Pakistan to emerge as a connector between the U.S. and Iran as talks are set for this weekend in Islamabad.
While Pakistan desires peace, it is a peace that notably favors Iran.
Pakistan seems to act more as Tehran’s advocate rather than an unbiased mediator.
Leading this effort is Field Marshal Asim Munir, Pakistan’s military chief and effective ruler, who is trying to win over President Trump.
He even nominated Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize last year after returning a suspect linked to a deadly monastery bombing that resulted in the deaths of 13 U.S. service members during the chaotic Afghanistan withdrawal.
Additionally, Pakistan is participating in the peace commission focused on transforming Gaza into a center of “opportunity, hope, and vitality,” attempting to align itself with Trump’s Middle Eastern vision.
In his first term, Trump had a clearer view of Pakistan.
In 2018, he criticized Islamabad for providing only “lies and deceit” despite receiving $33 billion in U.S. aid over 15 years.
He correctly pointed out that Pakistan harbored the very terrorists the U.S. was pursuing in Afghanistan, demanding, “No more!”
Trump should heed this past perspective now as Pakistan tries to broker a deal that might shield Iran from consistent U.S. military pressure.
Pakistan and Iran’s shared border runs through insurgent territories.
A destabilized Iran could lead to violence and increased refugee flows to Pakistan, further complicating the security situation Pakistan is already managing.
Moreover, Pakistan relies heavily on energy imports from the Gulf.
Shipping disruptions through the Strait of Hormuz have severely impacted Pakistan’s economy.
Pakistan’s military ties with Saudi Arabia also motivate it to seek an end to the conflict.
If Iran continues its assaults on Saudi territories, Pakistan might be forced to balance its alliances amidst potential domestic backlash.
With the world’s second-largest Shiite Muslim population after Iran, rising sectarian tensions have been evident, especially following recent protests in Karachi after Ali Khamenei’s death.
Additionally, Pakistan’s relationship with China grows stronger.
Islamabad uses China’s advanced military technology and collaborates closely with its military.
Pakistan backs China’s strategic interests in the Indian Ocean, which are essential for global energy routes.
China aims to restore a reliable energy supply from the Gulf for its economic interests and is positioning itself as a stabilizing force in the region, a role previously held by the U.S.
Beijing supports Pakistan’s mediation efforts and is leveraging its connections with Iran to advocate for negotiations.
This pressure seems directed at creating a ceasefire while ensuring the Iranian regime remains intact.
During his previous term, Trump witnessed Pakistan’s unreliability firsthand.
In 2020, Islamabad facilitated negotiations with the Taliban, presenting itself as a mediator.
This arrangement, which included supposed safeguards against al-Qaeda exploits, turned out to be largely superficial.
Ultimately, it led to a problematic U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan and allowed the Taliban to regain control in 2021.
The stakes are high; if a deal with Tehran falters, it could provide Iran and its proxies the necessary time to rearm and launch more focused assaults.
For any lasting peace, Iran’s nuclear threat needs to be unequivocally addressed, and its longstanding campaign of intimidation against neighboring countries should cease.
There’s really no need for unreliable brokers like Pakistan to have a seat in these discussions.
