Pakistan Wants to Host the Next Iran Talks: Is Islamabad Becoming Trump’s New Middle East Broker?
Shehbaz Sharif praised Trump’s peace push and said Pakistan hopes to host the next round of talks soon. That may be one of the biggest diplomatic surprises of the Iran war.
Pakistan’s role in the Iran peace process is no longer background noise. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif publicly congratulated President Donald Trump for what he called “extraordinary efforts” to pursue peace and praised a “useful and productive” telephone call with leaders from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Türkiye, Egypt, the UAE, Jordan and Pakistan. He also highlighted Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir’s role and said Pakistan hopes to host the next round of talks “very soon.”
That statement matters because Pakistan is doing something unusual: it is presenting itself as a serious diplomatic bridge between Washington, Tehran and the Gulf.
At first glance, Pakistan may seem like an unexpected broker. It is not a Gulf monarchy. It is not a Western ally in the old Cold War sense. It has its own financial crises, domestic political struggles and security problems. But those weaknesses may actually make its mediation useful. Pakistan has ties with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf. It has a border region close to Iran. It has a long military and intelligence relationship with the United States. It also has an interest in preventing a regional war that could destabilize energy prices, migrant labor flows, remittances and internal security.
Pakistan also brings something the United States cannot easily manufacture: Muslim-world legitimacy. If a ceasefire or memorandum of understanding is perceived as imposed directly by Washington or Israel, Tehran may reject it as humiliation. If the framework passes through Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and other regional actors, Iran can present the outcome as regional diplomacy rather than surrender.
The presence of Field Marshal Asim Munir in the call is also important. In Pakistan, foreign and security policy is never purely civilian. The military establishment has deep influence over strategic decisions. By mentioning Munir’s “tireless efforts,” Sharif is signaling that Pakistan’s mediation has institutional backing, not just prime-ministerial rhetoric.
For Trump, Pakistan’s role is useful. He can claim that a broad coalition of Muslim and Arab leaders supported de-escalation. That helps him defend a deal against Republican hawks who may accuse him of being soft on Iran. It also lets him say he listened to regional leaders, not only Washington advisers. If the Strait of Hormuz reopens and oil calms down, Trump can frame the process as a victory for American strength and regional diplomacy.
For Iran, Pakistan is a more acceptable channel than direct U.S. pressure. Tehran can talk through Islamabad without appearing to bend to Washington. It can also use Pakistan to convey demands on sanctions, oil exports, frozen assets, maritime rules and nuclear sequencing. That is why Pakistan hosting the next round would be symbolically significant. It would move the process from emergency phone diplomacy toward structured regional negotiation.
But Pakistan’s role has risks. If the deal collapses, Islamabad may be blamed by one side for overpromising. If the deal succeeds, Pakistan may be pressured to enforce expectations it cannot control. If Iran later violates maritime terms, Washington may ask what Pakistan’s guarantees were worth. If the U.S. returns to strikes, Tehran may accuse mediators of providing diplomatic cover for coercion.
The headline says Pakistan wants to host the next Iran talks. The deeper story is that Islamabad may be trying to redefine itself: not just as a crisis-prone state, but as a Muslim nuclear power capable of brokering one of the world’s most dangerous conflicts.
That is ambitious. It may also be exactly the kind of diplomacy the region needs: not perfect, not neutral in every direction, but close enough to all sides to keep them talking when the alternative is another round of fire.