Gulf States rely on Pakistan’s role; Islamabad leads regional talks, maintains close ties between Saudi Arabia and UAE
Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif warmly welcomes Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi during a meeting in Islamabad. Photo: app
Since the US-Israel war against Iran broke out on February 28, Pakistan’s efforts to advance mediation have been difficult to ignore.
The federal government has sent multiple peace proposals between the two capitals, expanded its diplomatic capacity to bring warring parties to the negotiating table, and, despite limited success at the early April talks in Islamabad, continues to garner considerable support from both Iran and the United States to reach a consensus on a path toward reducing tensions.
The value of having nothing to do with the game
These dynamics merit a deeper understanding of what constitutes Pakistan’s role as a key mediator in the conflict and the factors driving it to that status.
First, Islamabad does not carry some of the limitations associated with Gulf countries and traditional US-centered mediators. For example, Islamabad does not host any US military bases, making it a key player in gaining the trust of Tehran, which has attacked Middle Eastern countries, including mediators Oman and Qatar, for their perceived role in facilitating US attacks on the country.
Islamabad preserves this trust by avoiding any appearance of military complicity – even tacit support for the United States – that could put it in the line of fire of the current war.
Read more: Mojtaba Khamenei signals a new chapter in the Gulf and calls for the United States to leave Hormuz
On the other hand, Islamabad, as a chosen destination, offers extensive geographical security from the main sources of conflict.
For example, Pakistan is not very close to areas on the immediate periphery of the Strait of Hormuz, where fluctuating tensions between the United States and Iran over the opening of the waterway have caused substantial alarm across Middle Eastern economies.
This is important for American negotiators, who have shown sensitivity to regions that could lead to Iranian attacks, and similar threat perceptions for Tehran – which has seen many of its top leaders become targets of unjustified attacks between Israel and the United States – make Islamabad a destination that offers greater security and a more solid basis for serious negotiations.
The Gulf countries also view Pakistan’s role with a high degree of confidence. This was evident in the run-up to the first round of “Islamabad Talks”, when regional heavyweight Saudi Arabia partnered with Türkiye and Egypt to assess the contours of regional security in four-way talks in Islamabad.
Pakistan also maintains very close ties with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, and the leadership has made the most of its multi-vector foreign policy by making urgent visits to countries like Qatar to assess prospects for de-escalation. Pakistan is also one of the few countries that has the attention of US President Donald Trump, who has expressed his support for the top leaders.
Energy dependence as a driver of diplomacy
This proximity allows Islamabad to credibly facilitate the vital exchange of opposing peace plans for the benefit of US-Iran talks, as well as account for expectations about a lasting de-escalation scenario, seen through the lens of key Gulf partners, including Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait.
At the same time, Pakistan’s geographical proximity to Iran (a close neighbor with a history of counterterrorism cooperation and shared energy ties) makes mediation a matter of strategic value when the economy is already on the sidelines.
This reality, reinforced by growth risks and limited debt potential, makes it clear that Pakistan cannot afford to look the other way when drastic energy shocks arising from Strait of Hormuz tensions affect global energy prospects as well as domestic energy supplies.
Pakistan imports most of its gas from key Gulf countries. The energy factor gives the Islamabad mediation the additional immediacy that is essential to carry the conflict forward also for its internal constituencies.
Pakistan’s strong relationship with China is also a positive reinforcement. This alignment is reflected in both countries’ “five-point” peace plan, which calls for a reduction in tensions and the resumption of peace talks.
The federal government’s history of opposing unilateral sanctions, firmly respecting international law, and refusing to take sides in the conflict between Iran and the United States gives its potential mediator the promise of permanence, alignment with UN-backed principles of dialogue, and unusual credibility in brokering consensus.
It is this practical reading of the gradual but enduring momentum of peace talks, geographical constraints, energy drivers and close diplomatic proximity with both Tehran and Washington that gives Islamabad the influence and resilience to emerge as a major mediator in the US-Iran war.
