Pakistani journalist Hamid Mir stated that Pakistan played the role of a facilitator, rather than a direct mediator, in efforts to secure a two-week ceasefire between the United States and Iran. The temporary truce, agreed upon on Tuesday, brought a pause to a six-week-long conflict that had resulted in thousands of casualties, spread across the Middle East, and disrupted global energy supplies. According to Mir, Pakistan’s contribution to de-escalation was acknowledged by multiple stakeholders, including US President Donald Trump and the Iranian leadership.
In an interview with Rajdeep Sardesai, Mir clarified the distinction between mediation and facilitation. He explained that the conflict involved multiple sides, including the US and Israel on one hand and Iran on the other, with some Gulf countries aligning with the US and Israel after Iran retaliated by targeting American bases. He emphasized that a true mediator must have access to all parties involved, which Pakistan lacked due to its absence of diplomatic relations with Israel. As a result, Pakistan’s role was limited to facilitating communication primarily between the US and Iran as part of a broader peace initiative.
Mir noted that the ceasefire agreement came shortly before a deadline set by Donald Trump, who had earlier warned of severe consequences if Iran did not agree to terms that included reopening the Strait of Hormuz. The agreement marked a significant shift from earlier aggressive rhetoric, indicating a temporary easing of tensions.
He further explained that Pakistan’s diplomatic efforts began soon after the escalation of the conflict following US-Israeli strikes on Iran. Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar initiated contact with key parties, including Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, the US administration, and leaders in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf nations. Initially, Pakistan’s focus was on preventing a direct escalation between Iran and Saudi Arabia, given Pakistan’s defense cooperation agreement with Saudi Arabia.
According to Mir, Pakistan urged Iran to avoid targeting Saudi Arabia to prevent a situation that could force Pakistan into difficult strategic decisions. Over time, as the situation evolved and additional countries like Turkey became involved, Pakistan’s role expanded into that of a facilitator working to ease tensions among multiple stakeholders.
Addressing questions about leadership behind the diplomatic efforts, Mir highlighted Ishaq Dar as the central figure, stating that he worked to bridge gaps not only between Iran and Saudi Arabia but also between Iran and the United States. Dar’s diplomatic outreach included visits to several countries, including China, and was carried out with the full backing of both Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Army Chief Asim Munir.
Despite the ceasefire, Mir cautioned that the agreement should not be seen as a long-term resolution. He described it as a temporary pause rather than a solution to the underlying conflict. He also downplayed the significance of reopening the Strait of Hormuz for a limited period, arguing that Iran is seeking a more permanent settlement that would ideally be endorsed by the United Nations Security Council.
Finally, Mir outlined what he described as Iran’s perspective on a lasting resolution. According to him, Iran believes that a sustainable solution would involve the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza and changes related to the status of the Al-Aqsa Mosque, indicating that deeper geopolitical issues remain unresolved.
