Authorities managed to take control of the situation and transfer hundreds of inmates to other detention centers. (Reuters)
Caracas, May 26, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuelan Attorney General Larry Devoe announced on Monday a formal investigation into recent unrest at the Barinas Judicial Detention Center (INJUBA).
The prison began to make headlines last week when inmates seized control of the facility to denounce ill-treatment and physical abuse from authorities. The investigation followed the dismissal of prison director Elvis Macuare Guerrero, who had held the post for less than a week before the revolt.
“The Attorney General’s Office announces the launch of a criminal investigation into the events that took place on May 24, 2026, at INJUBA, where inmates staged a protest,” read the official statement. The investigation will focus on accusations of “cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment” allegedly carried out by security personnel inside the facility.
The probe followed dramatic scenes in which prisoners climbed onto the roof, burned mattresses, and held up banners demanding an end to what they described as a regime of terror.
According to testimonies gathered by local journalists on the ground, the inmates accused prison authorities of recurring violence and torture, including systematic beatings and forced “ice-cold baths with electric currents.”
The riot was sparked after guards reportedly confiscated belongings and subjected a group of prisoners to violent searches.
In response to the unrest, authorities transferred over 100 female inmates out of the Barinas facility to reduce tensions. On Tuesday, General Giuseppe Cacioppo, head of the Barinas governorship security office, told press that the situation at INJUBA was calm and under control, with a further 818 male prisoners transferred to other penitentiary centers throughout the country.
Rodríguez raises judicial reform priorities
The Barinas inmate unrest coincided with the Venezuelan government announcing the impending release of hundreds of prisoners. On Friday, Acting President Delcy Rodríguez announced that 500 prisoners would be liberated “in the coming hours.”
Three officers from the former Metropolitan Police were among those already confirmed free. Héctor Rovaín, Erasmo Bolívar, and Luis Molina were serving 30-year sentences for their involvement in the violence leading up to the brief 2002 coup against then-president Hugo Chávez. They had been arrested in 2003 and convicted in 2009.
According to official figures provided by the presidency, since the February approval of the Amnesty Law, a total of 8,740 people have received amnesty. Of these, 8,426 were still facing trial or under probation-type measures and had their cases dropped.
However, the government announcements have also drawn criticism. The Justicia, Encuentro y Perdón (JEP) NGO cautioned that “this type of public pronouncement [announcing more releases] generates enormous expectations,” warning that any failure to comply would represent a “new and cruel affront to human dignity.”
Rodríguez explained that the latest freed individuals had their cases and sentences reviewed through a “different mechanism,” evaluated via the Commission for Judicial Revolution and the Program for Peace and Democratic Coexistence, as opposed to the Amnesty Law.
During a televised working session on Saturday, the acting president framed the ongoing releases and the investigation into the Barinas prison riot as part of a broader transformation of the penal system. She likewise enacted a reform to the Organic Law of the Supreme Court (TSJ), expanding the number of magistrates from 20 to 32.
Rodríguez acknowledged prison overcrowding as one of the main issues plaguing the Venezuelan penitentiary system. She claimed that, according to official statistics, 68% of the incarcerated population in Venezuela comes from the poorest economic strata and vowed to advance judicial reforms that tackle the “criminalization of poverty.”
The Venezuelan leader went on to announce the beginning of the National Consultation for Penal Justice Reform on June 1. The public consultation aims to address what she identified as the “three great challenges” of the current system: procedural delays, judicial corruption, and the criminalization of poverty.
Rodríguez went on to denounce the “partisan and political” manipulation of the justice system.
The commission tasked with the consultation, headed by Attorney General Devoe, will hold meetings with academics, NGOs, judicial system workers, and other relevant actors.
Venezuela’s justice system came under the spotlight recently with the case of Victor Quero, who had an amnesty request denied despite having died in state custody months earlier. Authorities did not inform his mother, Carmen Navas, who continued to visit the prison in search of information. Navas passed away days after her son’s death was publicly acknowledged. The Attorney General opened an investigation into the case.
In recent years, human rights NGOs and prisoner relatives have denounced systematic due process violations and poor incarceration conditions.
The European Commission on Thursday cut its 2026 growth forecast for the European economy, as the ongoing conflict in the Middle East drives energy prices sharply higher.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
The EU economy is now expected to grow by just 1.1% in 2026, down from the 1.4% projected in the Commission’s autumn forecast. The eurozone outlook was revised down further to 0.9%.
In its report, the Commission warned that disruption to global energy markets — caused by escalating tensions around the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s key oil and gas shipping routes — has significantly worsened Europe’s economic outlook.
“Before the end of February 2026, the EU economy was expected to continue expanding at a moderate pace, alongside a further decline in inflation,” the report said. “However, the outlook has changed substantially since the outbreak of the conflict.”
Inflation is also expected to rise sharply due to the disruption around Hormuz.
EU inflation is forecast to reach 3.1% this year — a full percentage point higher than previously expected — driven mainly by soaring energy costs after oil and gas prices surged amid fears of supply disruptions in the Gulf.
For EU officials, the shock recalls 2022, when Russia’s invasion of Ukraine triggered Europe’s worst energy crisis in decades.
The Commission described the latest turmoil as “the second such shock in less than five years”, warning that Europe’s dependence on imported fossil fuels leaves it highly vulnerable whenever geopolitical tensions threaten global energy supplies.
Consumer confidence has already fallen to a 40-month low, according to the forecast, as households prepare for higher heating and fuel bills while businesses face rising operating costs and weaker demand.
Investment is also expected to slow as companies confront tighter financing conditions and growing uncertainty. Export growth is weakening as global demand softens.
Despite the deteriorating outlook, Brussels said the bloc is better prepared than during the Ukraine-related energy crisis, thanks to years of investment in renewable energy, lower gas consumption and efforts to diversify away from Russian supplies.
“The push towards supply diversification, decarbonisation and lower energy consumption has left the EU economy better placed to absorb today’s shock,” the Commission said.
However, EU officials acknowledged that risks remain heavily skewed to the downside.
The report warned that prolonged disruption in the Strait of Hormuz or across wider Middle Eastern supply chains could drive energy prices even higher, derail the expected easing of inflation in 2027 and potentially stall Europe’s recovery altogether.
The Commission also cautioned that shortages of refined oil products, fertilisers and other industrial inputs could spread through global supply chains, increasing food and manufacturing costs across Europe.
Meanwhile, European governments are preparing for growing fiscal pressure. Public deficits across the EU are expected to widen as governments increase spending to protect households from rising energy bills while also boosting defence expenditure amid mounting geopolitical instability.
Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has recently urged the European Commission to relax fiscal rules for households and industries struggling with soaring energy costs, arguing that energy security should be treated with the same urgency as defence spending.
At the centre of Rome’s request is the EU’s national escape clause, adopted on 8 July, which allows member states temporary fiscal flexibility to increase defence spending under exceptional circumstances.
Meloni said Brussels had already shown a willingness to loosen budget rules in response to Russia’s war in Ukraine and growing concerns about Europe’s military preparedness. Italy is now seeking similar flexibility for emergency energy measures.
While the United States backs away from threats to resume bombing Iran if it does not agree to a peace deal, Israel’s political establishment is reportedly itching for war.
Shimon Riklin, an anchor for the right-wing Israeli Channel 14, blurted out apparently confidential plans about a renewed attack on Tehran, which included the location of what he claimed was a uranium storage facility that could be targeted.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
Members of the Israeli parliament roundly criticised Riklin’s supposed revelations, leading the anchor to say his comments were purely hypothetical.
Still, despite broad agreement that Israel is eager to restart hostilities, it is unlikely to be able to do so without US permission. That does not look like it will be quick in coming. Reports of a call overnight between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump over Washington’s push for a truce irrespective of Israeli concerns left the Israeli leader reportedly with his “hair on fire”.
This week, Israeli media reported that Netanyahu chaired the second meeting of his security cabinet to discuss renewing the conflict with Iran. Despite billions of dollars in Israeli and US ordnance thrown at Iran, the government in Tehran remains in place.
Iran’s deterrence strategy of striking regional states and the subsequent closure of the Strait of Hormuz has dented the US’s appetite for renewing a costly and perhaps unremitting war against Tehran.
Iranophobia
For Netanyahu, the April 8 ceasefire – agreed with little Israeli involvement – has proven politically costly and, analysts say, unnerved a public conditioned to view Iran as an existential threat.
Opposition leader Yair Lapid and former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett have used the ceasefire as political currency in their attacks on Netanyahu. Lapid described the truce as one of the greatest “political disasters in all of our history”, a view that appears to be in line with that of the Israeli public.
A poll conducted by the Israel Democracy Institute in early May showed that a majority of Israelis believed a premature end to the war ran counter to their country’s security interests, while a similar percentage thought that a resumption of the conflict is likely.
To a public and political class accustomed to viewing Iran as their number one nemesis, it is unclear what solution they want in dealing with Tehran, Haggai Ram of Ben-Gurion University told Al Jazeera.
“Both politicians and public have been inculcated into seeing Iran as their ultimate foe,” said Ram, whose book Iranophobia chronicles Israel’s longstanding fixation on Iran.
Israeli people have been effectively trained for most of their lives to see war as inevitable, Ram said, a situation evident in their approach to bomb shelters when Iranian missiles fell, with Israelis whom Ram met at the time seemingly unfazed by the experience.
“It was perfectly normal to them that they should effectively stop their lives if it prevented Iran from completing its nuclear programme, or, from their perspective, if it helped ‘free the people’,” he said.
The only question for many Israelis, Ram said, is how Netanyahu – regarded in some quarters as a “magician” – would bring Iran to its knees.
A ship anchored near Larak Island, in the Strait of Hormuz, which was effectively closed as a result of the US-Israel war on Iran [File: Majid Saeedi/Getty Images]
Political necromancy
Many in Israel have grown accustomed to seeing Netanyahu defy the laws of political gravity. In 2022, he won an election despite being hounded by multiple corruption charges. He has managed to distance himself from the security failures of the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on October 7, 2023, and achieved credit – even if he officially denies it – for allegedly manipulating Trump into joining the war on Iran.
The October 2023 attacks and the US-brokered truce with Iran, which Israel had no role in, will be the foremost political concerns on Netanyahu’s mind, Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli ambassador and consul general in New York, told Al Jazeera. He noted that these could serve as an incentive for resuming military operations.
“My guess is there are three interlocking reasons why Netanyahu is looking to restart the war,” Pinkas said. “Firstly, there’s the distance he wants to put between him and October 7 – he needs a big strategic victory and he’s not going to get that in Gaza or Lebanon, so this is it.
“Secondly, the war wasn’t finished. Every taxi driver or second-rate political commentator will tell you: Israel achieved nothing with its war on Iran.
“Thirdly, and you only need to look at the polls to see it, he needs a victory with Iran to take with him into the [election] later this year.”
Iran’s seizure of the Strait of Hormuz, which has thrown global markets into turmoil, as well as Tehran’s strikes on its neighbours, appear to be consequences that Netanyahu never considered when starting the conflict. Israel’s failures in the war on Iran are expected to be key debates in the general election, slated for August.
Netanyahu, right, and Trump have denied that the Israeli leader manipulated the US into attacking Iran, leading to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the strikes upon the US allies in the Gulf region [Evelyn Hockstein/Pool via Getty Images]
Geopolitical shizzle
A few weeks after the April 8 ceasefire, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz boasted that once the US gave the green light, Israel was ready to bomb them “back to the Stone Ages”, highlighting the government’s eagerness to restart the conflict.
“There are those in Israel who would like to cut their losses and walk away,” former Israeli government adviser Daniel Levy told Al Jazeera.
“And then there are those, like Netanyahu, and much of the Israeli political mainstream, who want to double down and use all that US hardware [assembled off the coast of Iran] in an attempt to seriously degrade Iran.”
Ultimately, despite the broad political support for a renewed war with Israel, there are still limits to what Netanyahu can do. “This stops when the US says it stops,” Levy said.
Or, as Trump said of Netanyahu after their overnight call on Tuesday, he’ll “do whatever I want him to do”.
Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto unveiled ambitious economic growth and fiscal deficit targets for 2027 while promising reforms aimed at restoring investor confidence and strengthening state institutions. The announcement comes after months of market concerns over government spending plans, policy uncertainty, and weakening confidence in Southeast Asia’s largest economy.
Government Sets Ambitious Economic Targets
Prabowo outlined a growth target of 5.8 percent to 6.5 percent for next year while aiming to lower the fiscal deficit to between 1.8 percent and 2.4 percent of gross domestic product. The government also expects inflation to remain under control and pledged to improve food security and attract greater investment.
Investor Confidence Faces Pressure
Indonesia has faced growing scrutiny from investors and rating agencies this year. Credit rating outlooks were downgraded due to concerns about policymaking credibility, fiscal discipline, and transparency. Market fears intensified after discussions around possible changes to the country’s long standing fiscal deficit ceiling and rising state spending commitments.
Commodity Control Plan Sparks Market Concerns
Prabowo confirmed plans to establish a new state agency to oversee exports of major commodities including coal, palm oil, and nickel. The government says the move is intended to reduce revenue losses and strengthen national control over natural resources, but investors worry it could disrupt pricing systems and reduce private sector profitability.
Private Sector Role Remains Important
Despite increasing state involvement in strategic sectors, Prabowo stressed that Indonesia still welcomes private companies and small businesses as partners in economic development. He called for cooperation between the government and the private sector to achieve long term prosperity.
Analysis
Indonesia’s latest economic strategy reflects a balancing act between ambitious state led development goals and the need to maintain investor confidence. While the government aims to accelerate growth and strengthen control over key resources, markets remain cautious about rising fiscal risks and unpredictable policy changes.
The proposed commodity export agency could significantly reshape Indonesia’s role in global resource markets because the country is one of the world’s largest exporters of coal and palm oil. However, stronger government intervention may create uncertainty for foreign investors and commodity traders.
At the same time, maintaining fiscal discipline will be critical as Prabowo moves forward with large welfare programmes and economic reforms. The success of his agenda will likely depend on whether the government can reassure markets while delivering growth, stability, and stronger institutional credibility.
China has called on EU member states to revise the bloc’s proposed “Made in Europe” legislation, according to Suo Peng, trade and economy minister at China’s mission in Brussels.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
The European Union is currently debating the draft, which was unveiled by the European Commission in March and aims to impose stricter conditions on foreign companies seeking access to EU public procurement and investment opportunities.
The proposal — widely interpreted as targeting Chinese firms — has already drawn a warning from Beijing. Earlier this week, China’s commerce ministry said it would consider retaliatory measures if the EU proceeds without significant changes.
“Chinese embassies in EU member states have conveyed China’s comments and suggestions to the governments of their hosting countries,” Peng told journalists in Brussels.
He added that if the EU “insists on this punishment and treats China’s enterprises in a discriminatory manner,” Beijing would be forced to respond with countermeasures.
Public procurement rules and investment limits
The so-called Industrial Accelerator Act would, if adopted by EU governments and the European Parliament, prioritise European-made products in public procurement in sectors considered strategic, including automotive, green technologies, and energy-intensive industries such as aluminium and steel.
It would also place conditions on foreign direct investment exceeding €100 million in areas such as batteries, electric vehicles, solar panels and critical raw materials.
Companies from countries with more than 40% global market share in a given sector could be required to form joint ventures with European partners and transfer technology. At least half of jobs in such projects would also need to go to EU workers.
China has criticised the measures as discriminatory, with Peng accusing the EU of double standards on technology transfer rules. He pointed to a 2018 joint statement with the United States and Japan opposing forced technology transfers.
Divisions within the EU
EU member states remain split over the proposal. France is pushing for stricter local content requirements, while Germany and others are calling for a broader approach that includes cooperation with like-minded partners.
Some countries have also warned that the rules could increase costs and limit access to innovation.
The proposal includes a reciprocity principle in public procurement, meaning the EU would only open its market to countries that grant similar access to European firms.
China, which does not currently have such an agreement with the EU, says it is open to a bilateral deal on government procurement. Peng urged Brussels to respond “as soon as possible”.
Otherwise, he warned, the plan “will seriously damage the actual interests of Chinese and European companies.”
Proposed electoral reform revives one of Argentine President Javier Milei’s campaign promises. File Photo by Demian Alday Estevez/EPA
BUENOS AIRES, April 22 (UPI) — President Javier Milei said he will send Congress a bill Wednesday to overhaul Argentina’s electoral system, including eliminating primary elections and changing the way political parties are financed.
The proposal revives one of Milei’s campaign promises and places renewed focus on a contentious issue in Argentina: how candidates are selected and how political campaigns are funded.
Milei announced the initiative on X, where he defended the reforms and intensified his criticism of the country’s traditional political establishment.
“We are eliminating the PASO: enough of forcing Argentines to pay for the internal elections of the political caste,” Milei wrote.
MAÑANA ENVIAMOS LA REFORMA ELECTORAL AL CONGRESO
ELIMINAMOS LAS PASO: basta de obligar a los argentinos a pagar internas de la casta.
CAMBIAMOS EL FINANCIAMIENTO: se termina la política viviendo de tu bolsillo.
PASO, the Spanish acronym for Open, Simultaneous and Mandatory Primaries, is a nationwide system used in Argentina to determine candidates ahead of general elections. Under the current model, all political parties participate in a unified primary election to select candidates for national offices.
The government proposal would eliminate the mandatory national primary process and allow each political party to choose its candidates through its own internal mechanisms.
The PASO system has been in place since the 2011 elections and applies to national offices. The primaries are held every two years in August and determine party lists for congressional races, as well as presidential tickets that compete in the October general elections.
If approved, the reform would mark a significant change to Argentina’s electoral structure. Since its implementation, the PASO system has served both as a mechanism to organize internal party disputes and as an early measure of political strength before general elections.
The government also proposes changes to political financing, an issue that has long generated controversy in Argentina amid concerns over campaign funding sources and the use of public resources. A bill seeks to reduce public financing for political parties and strengthen oversight mechanisms.
Another central component of the proposal is the so-called “Clean Record” initiative, which would bar individuals with final corruption convictions from running for elected office.
In his post, Milei sharpened his confrontational rhetoric.
“Impunity is over. The party is over. Long live liberty, damn it,” he wrote.
According to Argentine newspaper La Nación, the bill also includes broader disqualifications for candidates. Those barred from the electoral registry under existing laws would be ineligible to run, as would people charged with serious crimes that include genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and human rights violations.
The proposal also would prohibit members of the armed forces and security services, judges, judicial officials and executives or representatives of companies holding public service concessions or linked to gambling operations from seeking elected office.
The measure further provides that people affected by these restrictions could not hold key executive branch positions, diplomatic posts or leadership roles in state-owned companies.
With the proposal, Milei adds another measure to his broader reform agenda and shifts the debate to Congress, where lawmakers are expected to face intense negotiations in a politically divided environment.
WASHINGTON — President Trump’s nominee to chair the Federal Reserve said Tuesday that he never promised the White House that he would cut interest rates, even as the president renewed his calls for the central bank to do so.
“The president never once asked me to commit to any particular interest rate decision, period,” Kevin Warsh, a former top Fed official, said under questioning by the Senate Banking Committee. “Nor would I ever agree to do so if he had. … I will be an independent actor if confirmed as chair of the Federal Reserve.”
Warsh’s comments came just hours after Trump, in an interview on CNBC, was asked if he would be disappointed if Warsh didn’t immediately cut rates and responded, “I would.”
The comments underscore the challenge faced by Warsh, 56, a financier and former member of the Fed’s board of governors whom Trump named in January to replace the current Fed chair, Jerome H. Powell. Democrats on the committee accused Warsh of flip-flopping on interest rates over the years, supporting higher interest rates under Democratic presidents and advocating rate cuts during Trump’s time in office. Investors are watching the hearing closely to see how Warsh balances Trump’s demands with worsening inflation, as the war in Iran pushes up the price of gasoline.
Higher inflation typically leads the Fed to raise rates, or at least keep them unchanged, rather than cut them. When the Fed changes its key rate, it can affect mortgages, auto loans and business borrowing.
Yet Warsh’s account was challenged by Sen. Ruben Gallego, an Arizona Democrat, who said that Wall Street Journal reporting last year found that Trump had urged Warsh to reduce borrowing costs.
“Who’s lying here? Is it you or the president?” Gallego asked.
“I think those reporters need better sources,” Warsh responded.
For all the back and forth, the hearing didn’t appear to advance Warsh’s nomination, which has been delayed by a Justice Department investigation into the Fed and Powell, over brief testimony Powell gave last June before the same panel about a building renovation.
Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican on the committee, reiterated Tuesday he wouldn’t vote for Warsh until the investigation is dropped. With the committee closely divided and all Democrats opposed to his nomination, Tillis’ opposition is enough to bottle it up in committee.
“We have got to get rid of this investigation,” Tillis said, “so I can support your nomination.”
Tillis has previously said that all seven Republicans on the committee have signed a letter stating that Powell did not commit a crime when he testified before the panel last June. Federal prosecutors, led by U.S. Atty. Jeanine Pirro, are investigating his testimony for potential perjury, though a judge said last month they offered no evidence to support the charge when he threw out subpoenas Pirro had issued.
Prosecutors from her office as recently as last week sought access to the Fed’s building project but were turned away, revealing that the Trump administration has not reversed course despite opposition from members of his own party that are essential to Warsh’s confirmation.
In his opening remarks, Warsh told the Senate Banking Committee that one of his top goals would be to fight inflation, which remains elevated at 3.3% annually.
“Congress tasked the Fed with the mission to ensure price stability, without excuse or equivocation, argument or anguish,” Warsh said. “Inflation is a choice, and the Fed must take responsibility for it.”
Warsh would be in a tough spot if confirmed. Inflation is worsening, making it much harder for the Fed to implement the interest rate cuts Trump so desperately seeks. The conflict could also slow the economy, as well as hiring. And if Warsh ultimately becomes chair, he may very well find his predecessor, Powell, still sitting on the Fed’s governing board, an uncomfortable arrangement that hasn’t occurred since the late 1940s.
Warsh said the Fed’s political independence is “essential,” and that the central bank wasn’t threatened when “elected officials — presidents, senators, or members of the House — state their views on interest rates.” Trump has repeatedly urged Powell to cut the Fed’s key rate from its current level of about 3.6% to as low as 1%, a view almost no economist shares.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat, said that Trump has not just stated his opinions on rates, but has sought to fire a Fed governor and is investigating Powell.
“The Senate should not be aiding and abetting Donald Trump’s illegal takeover of the Fed by installing his chosen sock puppet as chair,” she said Tuesday.
Warren also noted that Warsh has not disclosed all of his financial holdings, which include investments in startups and private companies, or the size of those financial stakes. For example, Warsh has said he has holdings in SpaceX and Polymarket, but has not said how large those investments are.
Warren charged that Warsh is not in compliance with ethics requirements. Warsh argued that the Office of Government Ethics has signed off on his plan to sell all his assets within 90 days of his confirmation.
The turmoil could make a potential transition from Powell to Warsh an unusually turbulent one for the world’s most pivotal central bank, which has historically experienced smooth transfers of power. Should the change in leadership prove particularly bumpy, it could unnerve markets and lift longer-term interest rates.
Powell’s term as chair ends May 15. He said last month that he would remain as chair until a successor is named. Powell also is serving a separate term as a member of the Fed’s governing board that lasts until January 2028. Fed chairs typically leave the board when their terms as chair end, but Powell said last month he would remain on the board, even if a new chair is approved, until the investigation is dropped.
Trump said he would fire Powell if he attempted to remain at the Fed. Yet Trump’s previous attempt to remove a Fed governor, Lisa Cook, has been tied up in court. During oral arguments in January, a majority of justices on the Supreme Court appeared to lean toward leaving Cook at the Fed.
Islamabad, Pakistan – Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry on Thursday confirmed that the United States and Iran were in discussions – through Islamabad – to hold a second meeting between their negotiators to end their now nearly seven-week war, with a fragile ceasefire announced on April 8 days away from expiring.
But it added that no date had been set for that next round of negotiations, even as Islamabad stepped up a parallel diplomatic push to keep the process alive.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
“Who will come, how big the delegation will be, who will stay, and who will go is for the parties to decide,” Foreign Ministry spokesperson Tahir Andrabi told reporters in Islamabad, referring to what upcoming talks might look like. “As a mediator, it’s important for us to keep the talks confidential. We had the details and information of the talks entrusted to us by the negotiating parties.”
Speaking of the first round of talks on April 12 in Islamabad, which concluded without a deal, Andrabi said: “There was neither a breakthrough nor a breakdown.”
The spokesperson confirmed that nuclear issues remained among the key subjects under discussion, but declined to elaborate.
His comments came as Pakistan’s civil and military leadership is travelling across the region in what some observers have begun calling the “Islamabad Process”, reflecting the government’s attempt to frame negotiations as an ongoing diplomatic effort rather than a one-off engagement.
Parallel diplomatic tracks
Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif arrived in Doha on Thursday, the second stop of a four-day regional tour that began with Jeddah on Wednesday, and will see him visiting Antalya next.
Meanwhile, Pakistan’s Chief of Defence Forces (CDF) Asim Munir arrived in Tehran on Wednesday with a delegation that included Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi.
Munir was received at the airport with a warm hug from Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who said he was “delighted” to welcome the field marshal and expressed gratitude for Pakistan’s “gracious hosting of dialogue”.
On Thursday, Iranian Parliamentary Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who led Tehran’s delegation at the Islamabad talks, also met Munir.
Reza Amiri Moghadam, Iran’s ambassador to Pakistan, said at an event in Islamabad that Tehran would not consider any venue other than Pakistan for talks with Washington.
“We will do talks in Pakistan and nowhere else, because we trust Pakistan,” he said.
Muhammad Faisal, a Pakistani security analyst and scholar at the University of Technology Sydney, said the parallel outreach reflected a deliberate division of labour.
“Pakistan’s strategy appears to be dual-tracked: PM Sharif is reassuring Gulf allies and attempting to build a broader support coalition, while CDF Munir is engaged in hard negotiations between the two sides to narrow gaps between Iran and the US, with an eye on extending the ceasefire and reaching a broader understanding,” he told Al Jazeera.
Reports that Munir might travel to Washington, DC after Tehran were denied by security officials, who called them “speculative”. Andrabi said he was not aware of any such development.
Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (right) greeting Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif prior to their meeting in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia on Wednesday [Handout/Prime Minister’s Office via AFP]
In Jeddah on Wednesday, Sharif met Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and expressed “full solidarity and support” for the kingdom following regional escalation, according to Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry. The crown prince praised what Riyadh described as the “constructive role” played by both Sharif and Munir.
In Doha, Sharif met Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani and discussed “the regional situation, particularly in the Gulf region”, underscoring “the importance of de-escalation, dialogue and close international coordination to ensure peace and stability”, the prime minister’s office said.
From Doha, Sharif heads to Antalya with Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar. They are expected to meet counterparts from Saudi Arabia, Turkiye and potentially Egypt on the sidelines of the Antalya Diplomacy Forum on April 17.
Regional security push
The Antalya meeting is part of a broader diplomatic effort. Turkiye is preparing to host talks on a regional security platform involving Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and possibly Egypt, according to officials familiar with the discussions.
It would be the third such meeting in a month, following earlier rounds of talks in Riyadh and Islamabad.
The goal is to establish a platform for regular, structured cooperation on regional security issues, the officials said, stressing the discussions are distinct from current efforts to end the Iran war.
Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan confirmed that discussions were under way, but said no agreement had been finalised.
“This pact is necessary so that countries can be assured of one another,” he told the state-run Anadolu Agency on Monday.
Turkiye also reaffirmed support for the US-Iran peace process on Thursday.
“We will continue to provide the necessary support for the ongoing ceasefire to turn into a permanent truce and eventually lasting peace, without becoming more complex and difficult to manage,” the Defence Ministry said, adding that it expected “the parties will be constructive in the ongoing negotiation process”.
Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry said senior officials from the four countries had also met in Islamabad earlier this week to prepare recommendations for Antalya.
Ceasefire under strain
The two-week ceasefire brokered by Pakistan on April 8, which halted attacks in Iran and the Gulf, is due to expire on April 22. While still holding, it is under increasing strain.
A US naval blockade on Iranian ports remains in place, with the US Central Command saying its forces had turned away nine ships as of Wednesday.
Kamran Yousuf, an Islamabad-based journalist and expert on diplomatic affairs, said he expected the ceasefire to be extended.
“I would be really surprised if the current ceasefire is not extended. There is little appetite on both sides to go back to war. There are enough signs on the ground that if there is no deal before the truce expires, the ceasefire will be extended,” he told Al Jazeera.
Faisal offered a more cautious assessment, warning that failure to secure a second round would shift Pakistan’s role.
“Pakistan’s mediation will not collapse immediately, but Islamabad’s role will change from mediator to crisis manager. If hostilities resume, Pakistan will focus again on brokering a ceasefire,” he said.
Despite uncertainty, signals from both Washington and Tehran have remained cautiously optimistic.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said further talks would “very likely” take place in Islamabad, adding, “We feel good about the prospects of a deal.”
Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said multiple messages had been exchanged with Washington through Pakistan since April 12.
US President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that talks could resume within two days and that Washington was “more inclined to go” to Pakistan.
Sticking points remain
The path to a second round remains complicated by unresolved disputes.
Iran has insisted that Lebanon be included in any agreement, arguing that ongoing Israeli strikes there, which have killed more than 2,000 people and displaced 1.2 million, cannot be separated from the wider conflict.
On April 14, the United States convened a trilateral meeting in Washington with the ambassadors of Israel and Lebanon, the first direct engagement between the two sides since 1993.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio mediated the talks, which both sides described as “productive”, but no ceasefire or follow-up meeting was agreed.
Washington has maintained that any Lebanon deal must remain separate from US-Iran negotiations, rejecting Tehran’s position. On Thursday, Israel said its Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would speak on the phone with Lebanese President Joseph Aoun — but Beirut had not confirmed any plans for a telephone conversation. The two countries do not have formal diplomatic relations.
At Thursday’s briefing, Andrabi aligned Pakistan with Iran on this issue.
“Peace in Lebanon is essential for US-Iran peace talks,” he said, adding that “signs of improvement on the Israel-Lebanon front over the past two days are encouraging.”
Yousuf said a Lebanon ceasefire would send an important signal to Iran.
“Extending the ceasefire to Lebanon will be an important confidence-building measure, a signal from the US that it is serious about a second round. It will also give Tehran good reason to return to the table,” he said.
But he added that the deeper challenge remained Iran’s nuclear programme.
“The nuclear issue is at the heart of the real problem. The flurry of shuttle diplomacy initiated by Pakistan is aimed at bridging the gap between the two sides,” he said.
Grace Wermenbol, a former US national security official and senior visiting fellow at the German Marshall Fund, said Washington’s approach to Lebanon would hinge on Trump’s willingness to pressure Israel.
“A clear pathway to a cessation of hostilities in Lebanon exists,” she told Al Jazeera. “The question is whether Trump will be willing to apply the pressure necessary on Israel to halt its military offensive and allow the Lebanese government to continue its military disarmament efforts. So far, and this is also true for the months preceding the latest escalation between Israel and Hezbollah, we have not seen this pressure materialise.”
The Strait of Hormuz remains another major obstacle.
The waterway, through which roughly a fifth of the world’s oil passes during peacetime, has effectively been blocked by Iran since early in the war, except for ships belonging to countries that have struck individual deals with Tehran.
Starting Monday, the US imposed its own naval blockade on the strait, to prevent any Iran-linked vessel from passing through.
“Iran’s effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz has emerged as the primary issue in US-Iranian negotiations. Opening it is crucial to easing upward pressure on oil prices and instilling confidence in global markets,” Wermenbol said.
She added that Tehran appeared to be betting Washington would eventually back down.
“There is no easy military option here,” she said. “The only way to resolve this issue and remove the threat to maritime traffic will need to involve a diplomatic deal.”