Islamabad/New Delhi: The attention surrounding Pakistan’s role in facilitating a ceasefire between Iran and the US is largely symbolic rather than substantive.
While a series of social media posts from Iran and the US have been cited as credible evidence suggesting Pakistan’s role in brokering a two-week ceasefire, diplomatic assessment and logical analysis do not justify the claims, a report said on Friday.
“After nearly 40 days of intense conflict in the Middle East, the guns have at least been silent for two weeks, but this silence hangs by a single thread that can snap at any moment. This ceasefire is a result of desperation and the lack of options. The US’s rapid strike exit strategy did not inspire confidence in the security community. The last attempt was to strike Kharg Island to assess the ground, but that also seemed to present an unstable and risky situation for ground operations. As the US ran out of options a day before Trump’s ultimatum, the US had no choice but to make a quick move for survival, facing diplomatic pressure, and thus a ceasefire circus ensued,” a report in India Narrative detailed.
According to the report, several factors indicate that Pakistan’s role in the ceasefire is “merely engaging in a high-voltage symbolism game through propaganda” to project itself as a central player.
The report mentioned that the diplomatic and persuasive significance remains absent, with Pakistan acting as a “simple facilitator” despite being desperately promoted by its media as a key mediator. Recently, Iran’s envoy to India dismissed the claims of Pakistan’s involvement in mediating the conflict.
“The only support Pakistan relies on is its Islamic politics, which limits Islamabad’s role in the conflict, allowing it only to act as an intermediary or middleman with very little diplomatic influence or impact on mediation, contrary to what has been suggested. Diplomatic wisdom depends on a crucial question: What leverage or influence does Pakistan hold to persuade Iran or the US to agree to a ceasefire? Barely anything, so what justifies Pakistan as the primary player in this event? Only symbolism,” the report noted.
The statements from Iran and the US acknowledging Pakistan’s role in mediation have been widely misinterpreted, portraying Islamabad as a key player in the process. “The main takeaway from the statements issued by the leaders of both countries is that Pakistan should act as a facilitator rather than a mediator,” the report added.
Speaking exclusively to IANS on Thursday, Reuven Azar, the Ambassador of Israel to India, when asked about Pakistan’s involvement during the war, said that it has not played any major role.
“We have not seen Pakistan participating in the war, but they have not been playing a positive role. The United States has chosen to use them as a facilitator for their own reasons. We trust the United States to implement the 15-point plan,” he stated.
(IANS)
