Islamabad aims to ...
Page 1
It seems likely that Qatar has also entered into talks from this angle, and it is even possible that Doha has proposed compensation to Iran in order to safeguard its investments. In practice, a significant portion of Qatari investments has been put on hold due to the disruption of shipping routes through the Strait of Hormuz—both outbound from and inbound to Qatar—following its complicity in an act of aggression against Iranian territory. As a result, Qatar may even move ahead of the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council framework and offer compensation independently; such a step would not be unlikely.
Pakistan’s prime minister has also traveled to China, with regional issues reportedly on the agenda. How do you assess China’s role at this juncture? Can Beijing shift the balance by exerting pressure on one side?
In reality, Sharif’s visit to China appears to be aimed at leveraging the “China card” to place pressure on Iran to show flexibility in the negotiations. However, it should not be overlooked that Pakistan-China relations have entered a fully strategic phase, and part of this visit is undoubtedly tied to broader developments in bilateral ties, which may have nothing to do with the negotiations. Still, the possibility that Pakistan has asked China to exert pressure on Iran in this context cannot be ruled out.
Given the current diplomatic efforts, how do you foresee the trajectory of these initiatives? Is there a chance of reaching a temporary understanding before resolving the core disputes?
There is no bright prospect of the negotiations reaching a successful outcome through mediation by Qatar and Pakistan alone. Perhaps if major powers such as Russia and China were to step in as guarantors of the process, there might be grounds for cautious optimism. At present, however, it does not appear that these talks will ultimately lead to a meaningful understanding between Iran and the United States. One side will have to back down from its demands. The conditions set by the United States are highly maximalist, while Iran’s demands are realistic and grounded in battlefield realities. It therefore seems that Washington is the side that will need to come to terms with those realities and scale back its position.
As the World Cup approaches, the issue takes on added significance. The tournament could act as a double-edged card: on one hand, it may box in the United States, pushing it to ease tensions in order to manage fuel prices and sustain tourism flows during the event; on the other, much like past World Cups or even Olympic Games that have coincided with conflicts, it could also become a flashpoint for renewed confrontation between Iran and the United States.