Pakistan faces limits as mediator as US-Iran tensions escalate

Islamabad, Pakistan – Pakistan is racing to maintain diplomatic channels between the United States and Iran, as signals from Washington indicate a readiness to resume attacks that have been paused since the April 8 ceasefire in the US-Israel war against Iran.

Pakistan’s Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi traveled to Tehran on Saturday (May 16) for a two-day visit, meeting President Masoud Pezeshkian, Interior Minister Eskandar Momeni, and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf – who also serves as Iran’s chief peace negotiator with the US to end the war that began on February 28.

However, as Naqvi continued talks with Iranian officials on Sunday (May 17), US President Donald Trump issued a warning on Truth Social: “For Iran, time is running out, and they better act FAST, or there will be nothing left of them. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE!”

Over the weekend, Trump also met with his top national security team, including Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and special envoy Steve Witkoff.

Tehran’s version of events, however, differs markedly from Washington’s public stance.

At a weekly press briefing on Monday (May 18), Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei stated that despite Trump’s public dismissal of Iran’s response as “totally unacceptable” last week, Washington had sent “a series of revised points and considerations” through Pakistani mediators. Iran reviewed them and replied via the same channel. “The process is ongoing through Pakistan,” Baghaei said. Iran’s Tasnim news agency later reported that Iran’s proposal sent to Pakistan – for forwarding to the US – included a 14-point plan.

Tensions continue to rise. Over the weekend, a drone struck a power generator outside the Barakah Nuclear Power Plant area in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Saudi Arabia separately reported intercepting three drones launched from Iraqi airspace.

Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry on Monday (May 18) condemned the Barakah attack as “a serious violation of international law” and called on all parties to “exercise maximum restraint.”

These developments illustrate the deterioration of diplomacy since the ceasefire came into effect 40 days ago.

Both sides have exchanged proposals, rejected each other’s core demands, and increasingly shifted to military escalation language, with the possibility of renewed hostilities looming, according to analysts.

Breakdown in proposals

After the April 8 ceasefire and the collapse of negotiations in Islamabad on April 11-12, Washington and Tehran continued to exchange proposals via Pakistani mediators.

On April 28, Iran submitted a 14-point counter-proposal calling for a permanent end to hostilities within 30 days, US withdrawal from areas near Iran’s borders, lifting of the US naval blockade, release of frozen assets, war reparations, and establishment of a new mechanism to manage the Strait of Hormuz. Nuclear issues were explicitly excluded.

Washington responded in early May with its own plan. Core demands included a 20-year uranium enrichment ban, transfer of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile (estimated at 400 kg at 60% purity) abroad, and dismantlement of nuclear facilities at Natanz, Isfahan, and Fordow.

Confirming receipt of the US proposal at the time, Baghaei stressed that Iran’s plan focused solely on ending the conflict. “Our plan focuses on ending the war. There are absolutely no details related to the country’s nuclear issue in this proposal,” he said.

Tehran took 10 days to reply. Iran’s written response offered to transfer some enriched uranium to a third country while postponing nuclear talks until a permanent ceasefire was in place. But Trump rejected this as “totally unacceptable.”

Baghaei reiterated Tehran’s position on Monday: “This is absolutely not a matter for negotiation or compromise. Iran’s right to enrichment is recognized under the NPT,” he said, referring to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which Israel – the aggressor alongside the US in the war – has not signed.

Iran also laid out five preconditions for any new negotiations: cessation of hostilities on all fronts, including Lebanon; lifting of sanctions; release of frozen assets; war reparations; and recognition of Iran’s sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz.

Javad Heiran-Nia, an international relations analyst in Tehran, told Al Jazeera that the dispute over sequencing is fundamental, not tactical. Iran wants the Hormuz issue resolved first to prevent Washington from using the naval blockade as leverage in future nuclear talks. Conversely, the US wants nuclear talks upfront to maintain the naval blockade as an effective bargaining chip.

Ilhan Niaz, a history professor at Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad, said both sides have strategic reasons to hold their ground.

Pakistan’s role under pressure

Naqvi is the third senior Pakistani official to travel to Tehran in recent weeks, following a trip by Army Chief of Staff Asim Munir in late April and a joint visit by Munir and Naqvi earlier.

Heiran-Nia warned that Pakistan is approaching a critical threshold, risking a shift from an indispensable channel to a mediator ignored by both sides. However, Mehran Kamrava, a professor of international relations at Georgetown University in Qatar, countered that assessment, arguing that a ceasefire collapse does not necessarily mean Pakistan will be sidelined, as Islamabad remains a vital communication channel regardless of military developments.

Baghaei also confirmed Monday that consultations with Oman continue, including expert-level talks in Muscat focused on ensuring safe maritime passage through Hormuz.

Niaz argued that Pakistan has achieved something tangible through its diplomacy, which “has created a reprieve and the start of a diplomatic process.”

Military picture

US military assessments reported by The New York Times indicate that Iran has restored operational capability to 30 of 33 missile launchers along the Strait of Hormuz, with missile stockpiles estimated at about 70% of pre-war levels. Meanwhile, CNN reported that the Pentagon has prepared a target list including Iranian energy and infrastructure facilities.

Brigadier General Abolfazl Shekarchi, spokesman for Iran’s Armed Forces, warned that any US military action aimed at “compensating for America’s humiliation” would provoke “more powerful and devastating attacks.”

Heiran-Nia said the current crisis is more dangerous than previous escalation cycles. A direct naval clash could lead to rapid escalation “within the next 48 to 72 hours.” The drone attacks over the weekend, he said, signal how far Tehran is willing to escalate.

Kamrava warned that the risk of accidental escalation is as dangerous as deliberate escalation, and urged that the situation not be viewed solely as a US-Iran bilateral confrontation, as multiple flashpoints could erupt at any time.

After Beijing

Trump traveled to Beijing last week hoping Chinese President Xi Jinping would pressure Tehran to open the Strait of Hormuz. But the talks yielded no breakthrough on Iran. Both sides agreed the strait must remain open for trade, but China blamed the US for the war. China also instructed its domestic companies to defy US sanctions targeting refineries that purchase Iranian crude oil.

At a meeting of BRICS economies in New Delhi on May 15, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi acknowledged receiving a message from Washington about new negotiations, but “distrust” remains. He said nuclear issues would be “postponed” to later stages – a sequencing approach Washington rejects.

At Monday’s press briefing, Baghaei said “the United States no longer has international credibility” and called on regional countries, including the UAE, to learn from recent months.

Niaz compared the current impasse to the US war in Vietnam after the Tet Offensive, describing what lies ahead as “a protracted stalemate with limited ceasefire breakdowns.”