While Islamabad publicly positioned its diplomacy as an independent effort to de-escalate hostilities between Iran and the United States, emerging reports suggest a more complex dynamic behind the scenes.

According to a report by the Financial Times, the initiative to secure a temporary ceasefire did not originate in Islamabad but was driven by Washington, which relied on Pakistan as an intermediary to communicate its terms to Tehran.

The development has raised questions about the extent of Pakistan’s diplomatic autonomy during the negotiations.

Washington’s strategic push for a truce

The report indicates that the administration of Donald Trump had been actively encouraging Pakistan for weeks to persuade Iran to agree to a pause in hostilities.

The proposed arrangement centred on reopening the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz, a critical route for global energy shipments.

Despite publicly escalating rhetoric, including strong warnings directed at Tehran, Washington was reportedly concerned about rising oil prices and the resilience of Iran’s leadership amid sustained military pressure.

These factors contributed to an increasing urgency within the US administration to secure a temporary halt to the conflict.

Pakistan’s role as an intermediary

Pakistan’s involvement was shaped by its geographic proximity and its status as a Muslim-majority nation, factors that Washington and Islamabad believed would make Tehran more receptive to proposals delivered through this channel.

Efforts were led by Asim Munir, whose back-channel engagements with both US and Iranian officials intensified as the deadline for a ceasefire approached.

These communications reportedly included proposals drafted by the US, outlining various ceasefire frameworks ranging from short-term pauses to longer durations.

The ceasefire announcement was eventually made by Shehbaz Sharif, who presented it as a diplomatic breakthrough achieved by Islamabad.

However, reports indicate that the statement had already been reviewed and approved by the White House prior to its release.

Shehbaz Sharif's 'draft' tweet sparks controversy amid Iran conflict

Behind-the-scenes negotiations

As tensions peaked, Pakistan facilitated a series of high-level communications between Washington and Tehran.

Munir is reported to have held discussions with senior US officials, including Trump, Vice President JD Vance, and special envoy Steve Witkoff, before conveying the proposal to Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.

The negotiations involved multiple iterations of proposals, with Iran responding through its own frameworks.

While the two sides initially remained far apart, there were indications over time that Tehran showed some willingness to consider limits on aspects of its nuclear programme as part of broader negotiations.

Internal divisions in Tehran

A key challenge to finalising the ceasefire emerged within Iran’s own power structure.

While political leaders signalled conditional acceptance of a temporary truce linked to reopening the Strait of Hormuz, securing approval from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps proved more complex.

The IRGC, a dominant force in Iran’s military and political system, reportedly remained divided over the prospect of halting hostilities.

Some factions opposed ending the conflict or returning to negotiations, particularly after weeks of sustained military strikes by US and Israeli forces.

Escalation risks and regional pressures

The fragility of the negotiations became evident when an Iranian drone strike targeted a petrochemical facility in Saudi Arabia’s Jubail, raising concerns that ongoing military actions could derail diplomatic efforts.

The incident reportedly drew a strong response from Pakistan, which maintains defence ties with Saudi Arabia.

Amid these developments, Pakistan continued to project neutrality, despite the broader regional tensions and its involvement in facilitating communications between the key parties.

Ceasefire and ongoing diplomacy

Following these exchanges, Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian agreed to send representatives to Islamabad for further talks after discussions with Sharif, and the resulting agreement led to a two-week ceasefire involving the United States, Iran, and Israel.

However, the new revelations regarding Washington’s central role in shaping the deal have raised questions about the nature of Pakistan’s diplomatic positioning.

As negotiations continue, the dynamics between the involved parties are likely to remain under close scrutiny, particularly as the ceasefire faces multiple challenges on the ground.