Pakistan’s Moment as a Mediator: Opportunity or Strategic Overreach?

At a time when the Middle East is at the point of a broader regional war, Pakistan has surprisingly become at the center of the diplomatic stage. With the hosting and indirect negotiations between the United States and Iran in Islamabad, Pakistan has placed itself in the role of a mediator in one of the most complicated and stakeholder conflict in the history of the international politics. However, behind the scenes of this diplomatic breakthrough, lies another question, is Pakistan making the events or is it getting into a conflict it cannot manage?

Recent events have shown that the role of Pakistan is not merely a symbolic one. Both Washington and Tehran have visited each other at high levels- either directly or indirectly- via Islamabad, and the Pakistani leadership has been working tirelessly to maintain a weak ceasefire. The goal, though, is small. Even Pakistani leaders admit that the short-term objective is not a full-fledged peace treaty but just to continue the dialogue in the atmosphere of strong mistrust and conflicting interests. This in itself speaks of the complexity of the conflict. The United States is insisting on restriction of nuclear and missile capabilities of Iran, whereas Iran is insisting on the abolition of sanctions and wider assurances in the region. These roles are incompatible and the distance between them underscores the structuralism of the competition. Here, the role of Pakistan is not so much in the conflict resolution, but in the avoidance of escalation.

To Islamabad, this mediation initiative is an opportunity in a rare chance to rebrand itself in the international scene. Traditionally perceived through the prism of regional security issues, Pakistan is currently trying to position itself as a responsible member of the diplomatic community that can help to stabilize the situation in the world. Its involvement in promoting negotiations, as well as its coordination with other states like Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, indicates a change in the foreign policy towards a more active one. This is not the first one. Pakistan has in the past been involved in silent diplomacy in regional crises, but the magnitude and exposure of the present scenario is different. The US-Iran negotiations, especially during such an ongoing conflict, put Pakistan at the focus of global strategies. Nevertheless, this publicity is fraught with dangers.

A balancing act has been very important in the foreign policy of Pakistan. It is strategically related to the United States, is profoundly economically related to the Gulf states and has an uneasy yet crucial relationship with Iran. This makes mediation in a conflict between all the three a complicated diplomatic balancing act. Any perceived bias would hurt the credibility of Pakistan and put strain on the key relationships. Additionally, Pakistan has little leverage in this process. It is not a major power, unlike major powers, and it does not have the economic and military means to impose agreements or ensure results. It can thus only play a facilitation role- passing messages, organizing discussions, and promoting restraint. This is diplomatically useful but also reveals a weakness of the structure: Pakistan can invite actors to the table, but not force them into agreement.

The vulnerability of the process is already apparent. It is reported that talks have fallen apart several times because of new military operations and opposing preconditions. Even the existing ceasefire is not very sure, and both parties accuse each other of violations and are ready to deteriorate. This calls into question whether any diplomatic advances made by mediation alone can be sustained. In addition to diplomacy, an economic aspect is also evident that motivates the participation of Pakistan. The current war has caused an upset to the world energy markets especially by the instability in the Strait of Hormuz. In the case of Pakistan, an energy-importing economy which is already under fiscal pressures, the increased oil prices result in inflation, increased import bills and economic pressure. Mediation, then, is not simply an international act of goodwill, it is also an effort to stabilize an external environment that has a direct impact on the domestic economy of Pakistan.

Pakistan deploys Air Force contingent to Saudi Arabia under defence agreement

On a larger scale, the role of Pakistan is indicative of a wider trend in international politics, the growing role of middle powers in conflict management. With an international system that is highly fragmented and is often characterized by major powers being at the core of conflicts, a neutral or semi-neutral state is intervening to broker a dialogue. The mediation process by Pakistan gives an example of the promise and the constraints of the this method. On the one hand, middle powers are able to offer neutral grounds and keep dialogue channels open when it is politically challenging to engage in direct interaction. Conversely, their power is also limited by strategic calculations of main actors. The emergence of the US Iran crisis in Pakistan highlights this duality.

Finally, the diplomatic move of Pakistan is both ambitious and risky. It is an indication of the interest in shifting towards an active foreign policy rather than a reactive one and participate actively in the conflict resolution on the international arena. Concurrently, it subjects the country to geopolitical pressures that can be challenging to control.

Whether peace agreement is achieved will not be seen as the success of this effort. Ideally more realistically, it will be determined by whether Pakistan will be able to maintain dialogue, avoid escalation and manoeuvre this complex environment without jeopardizing its own strategic interests. In a world where war and diplomacy are becoming more and more intertwined, Pakistan as an arbiter provides a peep into the dynamic nature of international politics; the one that even the smallest impact can change the course of events, yet the stakes are too high to afford mistakes.