Pakistan emerges as ...
Page 1
IRAN DAILY: Given Pakistan's record of relations with Iran and the United States, what is Pakistan's most significant advantage in assuming the role of mediator?
REZAEINEJAD: Pakistan's mediation efforts hinge on its track record in diplomacy rather than solely on its relationship with Iran and the United States. Pakistan has previously stepped in as a mediator between the United States and China. Consequently, it is regarded favorably by Washington, having once pulled off a successful mediation for that country, while also sharing a border with Iran, whose leadership holds Pakistan in particular regard. Also, from the standpoint of modern issues and contemporary matters, the unsuccessful experience with Oman's mediation made it necessary to change mediators. Pakistan represents Iran in the United States and the Iranian Interests Section in Washington being under Pakistani oversight, while the country’s army, which is playing a role in this mediation, maintains strong ties with the United States. These are altogether factors that make Pakistan a viable option for mediation both from a historical and contemporary standpoint.
What is the most significant obstacle Pakistan will face along this path: Israeli pressure on Washington, domestic opposition within Iran, or Pakistan's limited tools for enforcing commitments?
A mediator is generally expected to share tangible common interests with both parties, such that if those shared interests were to be compromised, the relationship between the mediating country and the conflicting parties could be disrupted. Pakistan is not seen as having such geopolitical and interest-based entanglement with Iran and the United States. Consequently, in terms of political weight, it is not regarded as a highly reliable country for successful mediation. For instance, Pakistan could not effectively persuade Washington to lean on its ally, the Israeli regime, to halt attacks on Lebanon in order for negotiations to commence. Pakistan's initial experience has shown that, due to its lack of intertwined and complex interests with both sides, it may not be able to carry through successfully in this mediation. It is considered a good option for mediation given that no alternative is available for this matter. However, whether it can succeed depends on that entanglement of interests, which it lacks.
From a geopolitical standpoint, what advantages does Pakistan hold over Oman? Could Pakistan's closeness to China (in the form of CPEC) serve as leverage to pressure the United States or as a guarantee for Iran?
No, the issue of CPEC and the relationship between Pakistan and China is not closely tied to this mediation. From a geopolitical perspective, Pakistan does not hold an advantage over Oman, nor can this be cited as a strength. Generally speaking, because no other mediator is available and Oman's experience has fallen short, Pakistan is considered a suitable option. Otherwise, it holds no particular advantage over other alternatives.
How do you see the outlook for Iran-US talks with Pakistan's mediation, and what is the likelihood of conflict resuming?
Given the history of negotiations with the United States in recent years, it appears that Washington is primarily seeking to buy time in order to extricate itself from the Iran deadlock without conceding ground, and that these two weeks could potentially kick off an extension of the ceasefire period and provide additional time to reconfigure and adjust its defensive posture in the region in preparation for potential action. A clear outlook for the negotiations does not appear to be on the horizon, based on signals coming out of the United States, unless Iran chooses to back down again, as it did with the JCPOA, in which case it would once again face the fate and consequences of that agreement. Yet, it is unlikely that conflict will erupt in the near term as the United States, under current circumstances, is not in a position to sustain further escalation and efforts are being directed toward dragging out negotiations and prolonging the ceasefire process. A quick resumption of hostilities is unlikely unless the Israeli regime seeks it, given that Netanyahu has limited time and is once again approaching legal proceedings, for whom wartime conditions represent a favorable scenario.