Hosting talks at such a level has already given Islamabad a big reputation boost
ISLAMABAD:
All eyes are on Islamabad as Pakistan prepares to host the second round of Iran-US talks. The fragile ceasefire between the two sides is about to expire, leaving little room for failure.
Both sides had signaled they would attend the long-awaited talks, where US Vice President JD Vance and Iran’s parliamentary speaker, Mohammad Bagher-Ghalibaf, are expected to lead their delegations. Still, uncertainty hangs in the air as Iran has yet to formally confirm its participation.
On Tuesday, Pakistan’s Federal Minister for Information and Broadcasting, Attaullah Tarar, wrote on X that a “formal response from the Iranian side on confirmation of the delegation to participate in the peace talks in Islamabad” is still awaited.
US President Donald Trump does not hide his impatience. He has warned that he “expects to be bombed” if there is no progress and has made it clear that he will not extend the ceasefire unless a deal is reached.
At the same time, he has expressed optimism that an agreement is still possible, even if US operations against Iranian ships continue.
The crisis erupted on February 28, 2026, when the United States and Israel launched coordinated attacks across Iran.
The attacks targeted leaders in Tehran, nuclear facilities, ballistic missile sites and military installations, killing Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei along with several senior officials.
Iran hit back with missile barrages and proxy actions that pushed the region to the brink of full-scale war when it closed the Strait of Hormuz, sending global oil prices skyrocketing.
Pakistan moved quickly to contain the danger. On the back of decades of working relations with both Washington and Tehran, Islamabad opened negotiations on the back foot.
In early April, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Field Marshal General Syed Asim Munir helped broker a two-week ceasefire that came into effect on 8 April. The first round of direct talks, known as the Islamabad Talks, took place on 11-12 April at the Serena Hotel.
A large American team led by Vice President JD Vance faced an Iranian delegation led by Parliamentary Speaker Mohammad Bagher-Ghalibaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, with Pakistani officials acting as mediators.
The sessions spanned more than 21 hours. There was no final agreement to end the war, but both sides agreed to continue dialogue. The “neither breakthrough nor collapse” result kept the ceasefire alive until today.
Now the pressure is heavier than ever. An agreement could stabilize oil markets and reduce fears of renewed clashes in the Strait of Hormuz. Failures could reignite fighting, raise energy prices and send economic pain far beyond the Middle East
What the experts see ahead
Three experienced voices – former ambassadors Asif Durrani and Ali Imran and foreign policy analyst Michael Kugelman – lay out the most likely paths and what they would mean for Pakistan and the world.
Durrani frames the standoff as a high-tension confrontation between Iran on one side and Israel plus the United States on the other. Success, in his view, would stop further hostilities and open the door to solving larger problems through dialogue.
For Pakistan, this would be a genuine victory, built on what he calls Islamabad’s “unique” position, strong relations and a degree of trust with both Tehran and Washington.
Ali Imran is hoping for something more substantial, a broader agreement that keeps the process alive, even if there are differences. “If the talks are successful,” he says, “Pakistan will be seen as having played a key role in preventing a major conflict.”
Kugelman stops short of optimism, but sees a realistic opening.
Facilitating even a limited agreement, an extension of the ceasefire or quiet understandings on flashpoints like the Strait of Hormuz would portray Pakistan as a responsible, peace-oriented actor, potentially unlocking investment and deeper international engagement.
For the wider world, the payoff would be calmer energy markets and a lower risk of major war. However, he warns that global attention often fades when the immediate crisis subsides, and a weak agreement might just paper over deeper problems and postpone the next confrontation.
Best case scenario if the talks break down
Even failure is not a total loss. Kugelman notes that Pakistan could still take credit for making a sincere effort to de-escalate. In a contained flare-up, the world can gain clearer leverage for future rounds or accelerate moves towards alternative energy sources.
Worst case if the conversations break down
This is where the warnings get serious. Durrani says a collapse would mean renewed attacks and a wider regional escalation. Pakistan is already feeling the heat through rising oil prices; further problems would deliver a sharp economic shock while destabilizing the wider region.
The ripple effects extend far beyond the immediate actors: the entire Middle East is already strained, and global energy prices – already rising even in the US – will rise even higher.
Imran is equally obtuse. The nightmare scenario, he says, is that Iran simply doesn’t show up. “It would lead to a breakdown in engagement and a wider conflict,” he warns, with destabilizing effects across the Middle East and new inflationary pressures felt worldwide.
For Pakistan, the reputational risk is real after investing so visibly in mediation that failure could undermine its credibility as a negotiator. Kugelman agrees that could expose Islamabad to criticism for overestimating its influence, though he believes the country can still command respect simply to stay at the table.
Pakistan’s diplomatic balancing act
All three experts praise Islamabad’s approach so far. Durrani calls the positioning “unique”. Imran describes it as “positive and constructive”, rooted in Pakistan’s long tradition of trying to reduce conflict in the Muslim world and the Middle East.
However, he warns that this second round will be tougher: A more assertive American stance meets a more cautious Iranian one.
Kugelman sees the mediation effort as part of Pakistan’s broader push for strategic autonomy and a better global image. Regardless of whether today produces a breakthrough or not, just hosting the talks at this level has already given Islamabad a reputational boost.
