Pakistan’s efforts to host peace talks between the United States and Iran are shaped as much by urgency as by opportunity. Islamabad is increasingly concerned that its defense agreement with Saudi Arabia could drag it into a widening regional conflict.Pakistan is scheduled to host a quadrilateral meeting including Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Egypt on March 30 in Islamabad. It is trying to position itself as a mediator between Washington and Tehran, and seeks to stop the escalation of the month-long conflict that threatens regional stability and its fragile economy. All this while trying to avoid being drawn into war through existing security commitments.
He watches
India mocks Pakistani mediator’s claims, cites Khawaja Asif’s statements and record of atrocities committed in 1971
The planned four-way talks are the first since tensions escalated, and come as Pakistan intensifies its diplomatic efforts.
It has already conveyed the US 15-point peace proposal to Iran and offered to host direct negotiations.But beneath this diplomatic push lies a growing sense of unease within Islamabad’s security establishment.Pakistan reportedly signed a mutual defense treaty with Saudi Arabia last year, but it has now been shown to be a strategic liability amid growing hostilities. The recent Iranian strikes on Saudi territory have increased fears that Pakistan may be forced to take sides in a conflict it is keen to avoid.
According to a Financial Times report, Pakistani officials increasingly see the Saudi agreement as “becoming a problem,” especially since deterrence appears to have faltered without achieving the expected economic benefits.“The Saudi agreement has become a problem for us,” the Financial Times reported, citing a person in Pakistan who has an understanding of the thinking of senior Pakistani military leaders. “It was supposed to be money for deterrence.
But we did not get any new Saudi investments, and deterrence failed.”The risk of involvement is exacerbated by the close military ties between Islamabad and Riyadh and its simultaneous efforts to maintain practical relations with Tehran.These internal pressures further complicate the balancing process.Strong anti-American and anti-Israel sentiment, coupled with widespread popular sympathy for Iran, especially among Pakistan’s large Shiite population, limits the government’s room to maneuver.
Any overt alliance with Washington or Riyadh risks sparking internal unrest.“The problem for Islamabad is not just a geo-sectarian problem, but also the rampant anti-American and anti-Israeli sentiment in the country that created popular sympathy for Iran during the conflict,” Kamran Bukhari, a senior resident fellow at the Middle East Policy Council in Washington, was quoted as saying by the Financial Times. He added: “The Pakistanis have engaged in diplomacy so that they can avoid being drawn into the fighting.”At the same time, the Pakistani leadership views diplomatic engagement as a strategic necessity. The protracted conflict in the Gulf threatens energy supplies, trade routes and an already strained economy. Acting as a mediator also enhances Islamabad’s global importance and helps support local legitimacy at a time of political and economic pressure.Pakistan has communicated with the US and Iranian leadership through back channels, while also coordinating with regional powers, including Türkiye and Egypt.
This nascent grouping has drawn comparisons to the loosely knit “Islamic NATO,” although officials see it as a platform for stability rather than a military bloc.The Financial Times report indicated that the longer the conflict lasts, the more difficult it becomes to achieve balance in Pakistan. Failed diplomatic efforts could erode trust with both Washington and Tehran, leaving Islamabad isolated even as the risk of regional repercussions increases.Currently, Pakistan is betting on diplomacy to keep itself out of the line of fire. But as alliances tighten and tensions rise, its room for maneuver may quickly narrow.
