After the way was paved for the historic peace agreement between Iran and the United States, a new chapter appears to be unfolding in global politics. With the confirmation of this development by U.S. President Donald Trump and the Iranian leadership, Pakistan, Qatar, and other countries in the region have embraced it.
However, the greatest attention is focused on Pakistan’s role, which discharged the task of mediation and facilitation in one of the most intricate and sensitive disputes in the diplomatic world.
Pakistan’s efforts were openly praised by France, the United Kingdom, Italy, Germany, Australia, Japan, Malaysia, and many other countries, which is being regarded not only as a major diplomatic triumph for the Pakistani government but also for the entire Pakistani nation. Undoubtedly, on this occasion, the country’s top leadership, especially Chief of Defense Forces Field Marshal Asim Munir and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, deserve congratulations for playing a pivotal role in this most arduous diplomatic process. This success is not limited to a peace agreement alone; rather, it has significantly elevated Pakistan’s prestige, honor, and diplomatic credibility on the global stage. Pakistan was the country that, from the very beginning, assumed the responsibility of serving as a bridge in this precarious matter. It was a phase in which there were moments when rays of hope appeared and moments when clouds of disappointment prevailed, but according to Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, Field Marshal Asim Munir did not lose resolve despite all the difficulties and, through continuous diplomatic contacts, played a role in bringing both parties to the negotiating table.
In fact, the importance of Pakistan’s mediation in the Iran war became even greater compared to other countries in the region because, owing to the Battle of Truth, Pakistan’s foreign policy soared to new heights, while U.S. President Donald Trump’s praise for Field Marshal Asim Munir and the subsequent improvement in Pakistan-U.S. relations further cemented Islamabad’s diplomatic standing, which was the result of Operation Bunyan al-Marsous. Although in the past circumstances were so different that direct contact between the Pakistani leadership and the U.S. President was not easy, over time the global landscape shifted, and Pakistan emerged as a country that enjoys friendly and exemplary relations with both Iran and the United States, and it is precisely this balance that makes Pakistan the most fitting country for mediation.
On Sunday, U.S. President Donald Trump announced that the agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran had been concluded and that, as a result, maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz would be restored without any toll. According to media reports, the draft agreement includes a proposal to completely reopen the Strait of Hormuz within the next 30 days under Iranian supervision, reigniting hopes for the restoration of confidence in global markets. Throughout this process, U.S. President Donald Trump also faced a formidable political test, enduring intense pressure not only from American political circles but also from the Israeli lobby. Despite Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s declaration that Israel would not be part of the Iran deal, President Trump stood unwavering in his position. Furthermore, shortly before the announcement of the agreement, following an Israeli airstrike on Beirut, Trump’s displeasure also became evident, as he reportedly squarely blamed the Israeli leadership for undermining the peace process. His reaction made it clear that even a minor military action during negotiations could derail diplomatic progress.
The war also took a toll on the public popularity of the U.S. President. Rising inflation in the United States, economic uncertainty, and war expenditures intensified public pressure, resulting in growing pressure on the Trump administration to end the Iran conflict. In this context, Democratic leaders welcomed the peace agreement but also leveled criticism at the government’s decisions regarding the war. Some senators stated that the agreement was a step in the right direction, but its varying interpretations could sow the seeds of new disputes in the future, while others described it as an American capitulation before Iran, although they still regarded the end of the war as being in the interest of the United States.
On the other hand, the agreement is also being viewed in Iran as an important development. The Secretariat of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council has announced that under the concluded agreement, an immediate ceasefire will take effect on all fronts, military operations, including those in Lebanon, will be definitively halted, and the naval blockade imposed on Iran will be completely lifted. If these announcements are translated into action, they could prove to be an extraordinary step toward defusing tensions throughout the Middle East.
Until the agreement is formally signed, complete confidence cannot be instilled among the Iranian public either. In the past, attacks during ceasefires and violations of ceasefire agreements eroded that confidence, making the period between now and Friday extremely important. If tensions flare up again on the military front during this time, the proposed agreement could also be jeopardized. Multidimensional diplomatic efforts were undertaken to facilitate the ceasefire between the two countries, as a result of which both sides appear to be moving toward negotiations and an agreement. However, before signing, the technical teams of both countries will carefully scrutinize every clause and every condition of the agreement so that even a minor disagreement does not become the cause of a major crisis in the future. At this stage, diplomatic wisdom, patience, restraint, and mutual trust are the elements that can forge this historic development into lasting peace.
The agreement is also being viewed positively at the global level. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has said that he is ready to cooperate in further technical negotiations and expressed hope that the restoration of the Strait of Hormuz would steady global energy markets. French President Emmanuel Macron also lauded the agreement and announced continued support for the Lebanese government, while European Council President António Costa described it as an important step toward lasting peace. United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres also described this development as a landmark milestone toward resolving the conflict in the Middle East.
The effects of hopes for peace also immediately began to reverberate across the global economy. Brent crude oil prices recorded a decline of approximately five percent, while U.S. crude oil also became significantly cheaper. Asian stock markets witnessed a powerful rally, with the markets of Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Indonesia, Taiwan, Shanghai, and Hong Kong closing with notable gains. This indicates that investors are also viewing the peace process as a promising signal for the global economy.
Although the announcement of the agreement has unleashed a new wave of hope around the world, the real test will be its formal signing, the negotiations that follow, and the implementation of the final agreement resulting from those talks, for which a period of 60 days has been set. Will both parties be able to set aside all differences and seal the agreement on the scheduled date? Will the war truly come to a permanent end? And will a new era dawn in the Middle East? Time will answer all these questions. However, it can certainly be said that through its role in this entire diplomatic story, Pakistan has carved out a new identity in global politics as a responsible, balanced, and effective mediator.
