USIsrael

Islamabad, Pakistan – With key differences in the Iranian and American positions seemingly intact, Pakistan is aiming for what officials describe as a realistic – if modest – outcome from the negotiations between the two warring nations set to commence in Islamabad on Saturday.

The aim: to get the United States and Iranian negotiators to find enough common ground to continue talks.

On Friday, US Vice President JD Vance left Washington for Islamabad, where he will lead the American team, which will also consist of President Donald Trump’s chief negotiator Steve Witkoff and son-in-law Jared Kushner. While Iran has not formally confirmed its representatives at the talks, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf are expected to lead Tehran’s team.

These high-level talks follow days after the US and Iran agreed to a Pakistan-mediated two-week ceasefire, and will be held exactly six weeks after the US and Israel launched their war on Iran with the killing of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on February 28.

Experts and sources close to the mediation effort said there was little expectation that a major breakthrough would be reached on Saturday. But by setting a more realistic ceiling – an agreement in Islamabad to continue deeper negotiations aimed at finding a lasting peace deal – Pakistan is hopeful it can help build on a truce that led to a collective sigh of relief globally.

“Pakistan has succeeded in getting them together. We got them to sit at a table. Now it is for the parties to decide whether they are willing to make the sacrifices necessary to reach an eventual solution,” Zamir Akram, Pakistan’s former ambassador to the United Nations, told Al Jazeera.

Now, he added, it will aim to secure an agreement for the US and Iran to continue dialogue.

The ‘proximity format’

The US and Iranian delegations will land at the Nur Khan airbase outside Islamabad and then drive to the Serena Hotel, where they will stay, and where the talks will be held.

Though the two teams will be in the same hotel, they will not come face to face for the negotiations, officials said.

Instead, they will sit in two separate rooms, with Pakistani officials shuttling messages between them.

In diplomatic jargon, such negotiations are known as proximity talks.

Pakistan’s experience with such a dialogue is not new. In 1988, Islamabad itself participated in the Geneva Accords negotiations on the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan, where UN-mediated indirect talks between Pakistan and Afghanistan produced a landmark agreement.

Akram, who has represented Pakistan at the UN in Geneva from 2008 to 2015, said that history was relevant.

“Proximity talks have been used before. Pakistan itself participated in one in Geneva in 1988 on the Afghan issue,” he told Al Jazeera. “If the parties did not trust Pakistan, they would not be here. The metric of success should be an agreement to continue this process in search of a solution. It will not happen in a couple of days.”

Building diplomatic momentum

In the days between the ceasefire announcement on April 7 and the arrival of the delegations in Islamabad, world leaders moved quickly to register support.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres welcomed the ceasefire and expressed appreciation for Pakistan’s role. Kazakhstan, Romania and the United Kingdom also issued statements endorsing Islamabad’s mediation.

French President Emmanuel Macron called Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif to congratulate him, while Turkiye’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan also spoke to the Pakistani leader.

Analysts say these calls were not only expressions of goodwill but signals of international backing, aimed at strengthening Pakistan’s hand in pushing both Washington and Tehran to deliver results.

Sharif spoke with eight world leaders, including the emir of Qatar, the presidents of France and Turkiye, the prime ministers of Italy and Lebanon, the king of Bahrain and the chancellors of Germany and Austria.

Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar, who is also deputy prime minister, engaged with more than a dozen counterparts over the past two days and held an in-person meeting with China’s ambassador in Islamabad.

In total, Pakistan’s leadership made or received more than 25 diplomatic contacts in roughly 48 hours.

Salma Malik, a professor of strategic studies at Quaid-i-Azam University, said the scale of engagement reflected confidence in Pakistan’s role.

“The two main parties showed confidence in Pakistan to act as a neutral agent, that is the first and most critical litmus test for any mediating country, and Pakistan passed it,” she told Al Jazeera.

The Lebanon problem

The most immediate threat to Saturday’s talks lies outside the negotiating room.

Iran has framed Israeli strikes on Lebanon as a direct challenge to the ceasefire. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, who spoke to Sharif earlier this week, warned that continued attacks would render negotiations meaningless.

Hours after the ceasefire was announced, Israel launched its most widespread bombardment of Lebanon since the start of the conflict, killing more than 300 people across Beirut and southern Lebanon in a single day.

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Tehran could abandon the ceasefire entirely if the strikes continued.

Sharif, in a call with Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam on April 9, strongly condemned Israel’s actions.

Whether Lebanon is covered by the ceasefire remains contested. Pakistan has maintained that the truce extends across the wider region, including Lebanon, as reflected in Sharif’s statement earlier this week.

Washington has taken a different view. US Vice President JD Vance, who will lead the American delegation, said in Budapest that Lebanon falls outside the ceasefire’s terms, a position echoed by President Donald Trump and the White House.

Seema Baloch, a former Pakistani envoy, said the issue ultimately rests with Washington.

“Lebanon is key and Israel will use it to play the spoiler role,” she told Al Jazeera. “It is now the US decision whether it will allow Israel, which is not seated at the negotiating table, to play that role.”

There are, however, signs of limited de-escalation.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Thursday that Israel was ready to begin direct negotiations with Lebanon “as soon as possible”, focusing on disarming Hezbollah and reaching a peace agreement.

The announcement followed US pressure. Trump told NBC he had asked Netanyahu to “low-key it” on Lebanon.

However, Netanyahu made clear there was no ceasefire in Lebanon, saying Israel would continue striking Hezbollah even as talks proceed.

Salman Bashir, a former Pakistani foreign secretary, said Lebanon remains within the ceasefire’s scope.

“Lebanon is very much part of the ceasefire, as was mentioned in the prime minister’s statement,” he told Al Jazeera. “The Israelis may be inclined to keep the pressure on Lebanon, but not for long if the US is keen on a cessation of hostilities, as it seems.”

Stumbling blocks

Beyond Lebanon, several other obstacles remain.

Washington is expected to push for verifiable restrictions on Iran’s nuclear programme, including limits on enrichment and the removal of stockpiled material.

Tehran, in turn, is demanding full sanctions relief, formal recognition of its right to enrich uranium and compensation for wartime damage.

The Strait of Hormuz, through which roughly a fifth of the world’s oil and gas passes in peacetime, remains a key pressure point, with Iran retaining the ability to disrupt maritime traffic.

Bashir said there could be movement on some of these issues.

“There may be an opening on the Strait of Hormuz, under Iranian control. Iran will not give up on the right to enrichment. If nothing else, there should be an extension of the ceasefire deadline,” he told Al Jazeera.

Muhammad Shoaib, a professor of international relations in Islamabad, said progress would depend on movement on core issues.

“Both parties agreeing on the need to continue or even extend the ceasefire, while in principle agreeing on crucial points such as the Strait of Hormuz, Iran’s right to enrichment and respect for sovereignty, will suggest that the first round is meaningful and successful,” he told Al Jazeera.

The regional atmosphere has also been shaped by sharp rhetoric from some of Iran’s Gulf neighbours.

The United Arab Emirates, which faced hundreds of missile and drone attacks during the conflict, has been among the most vocal.

Its ambassador to Washington wrote in The Wall Street Journal that a ceasefire alone would not be sufficient and called for a comprehensive outcome addressing Iran’s “full range of threats”.

Bahrain, meanwhile, presented a United Nations Security Council resolution on April 7 calling for the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. The measure received 11 votes in favour but was vetoed by Russia and China, with Pakistan and Colombia abstaining.

Saudi Arabia, Turkiye and Egypt are not expected to have a formal presence at the talks, despite being closely involved in pre-negotiation diplomacy. The four countries held meetings in Riyadh and later in Islamabad aimed at securing a pause in hostilities.

Israel, a party to the conflict, will also not be represented. Pakistan, like most Muslim-majority countries, does not recognise Israel and has no diplomatic relations with it.

A slight easing

There are, however, tentative signs of easing tensions ahead of Saturday’s talks.

On Friday, as he was departing from Washington, Vance said that the US team was “looking forward to the negotiations”.

“We think it’s going to be positive. We’ll, of course, see. As the president of the United States said, if the Iranians are willing to negotiate in good faith, we are certainly willing to extend an open hand,” the US vice president said. “If they try to play us, they’re going to find that the negotiating team is not that receptive. So we’ll try to have a positive negotiation.”

He also said that Trump had given the US team “some pretty clear guidelines”.

Earlier this week, Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister spoke with his Iranian counterpart for the first time since the war started.

And Iran’s Supreme National Security Council said on April 8 that discussions could continue for up to 15 days, suggesting readiness for a prolonged process.

Akram, the former envoy, said the benchmark for success was clear.

“What they need to agree is that they will find a solution, and that in itself would be a step in the right direction,” he told Al Jazeera. “Finding a long-term solution will take time. It will not happen in a couple of days.”

Malik, the academic in Islamabad, said Pakistan’s expectations remained modest.

“What Pakistan expects is breathing space, an opportunity for peace. It is not expecting anything big. It is a small wish, but realising it will be very difficult,” she told Al Jazeera.

Senegalese prime minister Ousmane Sonko criticised Donald Trump, accusing him of plunging the world into “chaos” by starting a war on Iran, and questioned whether the world is now less safe under Trump’s leadership.

Even though a fragile ceasefire between Iran and the United States and Israel has been announced, it’s going to be a long time before prices of oil and gas come back to pre-war levels, experts say.

In response to the US-Israeli attacks, Iran choked off the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow channel linking the Gulf to the Gulf of Oman, through which roughly 20 percent of the world’s oil and gas exports pass from the Middle East, mainly to Asia and also to Europe.

It also attacked energy infrastructure in several Gulf countries, leading to soaring prices of not just energy but also of byproducts like helium, used in a range of products like tiles used in homes and semiconductor equipment. Fertilisers that rely on some of these inputs were hit too, impacting sowing seasons.

As a result, consumers the world over, but particularly in developing countries of Asia and Africa, have felt the brunt of those shortages and soaring prices. The question on many minds: Now that there is a ceasefire in place, how quickly will prices normalise?

“Anyone who tells you they know the answer to that question is lying,” said Rockford Weitz, professor of practice in maritime studies at The Fletcher School at Tufts University. “It’s too early to tell when we return to normal.”

There needs to be a predictable and stable flow of cargo through the strait before markets can stabilise, experts say.

“What we’re seeing is the biggest disruption in the history of global oil markets,” said Weitz.

Before this conflict, approximately 120-140 ships passed through the Strait of Hormuz every day. On Wednesday, only five vessels crossed the strait, while seven passed through the waterway on Thursday.

That shows why “to get back to normal is going to be a while”, Weitz told Al Jazeera. “And it’s too complicated to know at this stage when that will happen, as it requires collaboration with the great powers [US, China and Russia], but also regional powers [UAE, Saudi Arabia, India and Pakistan]. It’s hard to say when it will end, as there are so many parties who can make it not happen.”

There is also some concern that developments, like Iran charging a toll fee to allow ships to pass through and skyrocketing insurance fees, will keep oil prices high.

“There are reports that Iran is charging fees to tankers going through the Hormuz Strait,” US President Donald Trump wrote on TruthSocial Thursday.

“They better not be and, if they are, they better stop now.”

But experts agree that those fees, rumoured to be about $2m per vessel, are not enough to move the needle on oil prices.

“What is causing oil prices to rise is not insurance. It’s about getting tankers through. Tolls won’t be the cost driver,” said Weitz.

‘Signs of strain’

Some of that reality was on display with the reopening of the strait, showing “signs of strain just hours after the ceasefire was announced”, said Usha Haley, W Frank Barton Distinguished Chair in international business at Wichita State University.

Compounding that problem was the fact that some countries, including Iraq, had shut down production because of limited storage capacity, further taking oil supplies offline.

“That will take weeks and months to reopen,” Haley added.

“It’s going to be a contested reopening … LNG [liquefied natural gas] will take months to rebalance because of the hits to infrastructure, and can take three to six months to normalise if everything else remains normal. And it’s not.”

Slower growth

On Thursday, International Monetary Fund managing director Kristalina Georgieva warned that the fund will downgrade its forecast for the world economy next week from the current expectation of 3.3 percent. “Growth will be slower – even if the new peace is durable,’’ Georgieva said.

While the war has hit most economies, “it hasn’t really affected the two primary [US] targets – Russia and China. Russia, in fact, has benefitted enormously, and Chinese ships have been allowed to go through,” said Haley.

The US has hit Russia with multiple sanctions for its war on Ukraine, including capping sales of Russian oil to undercut its income stream. Similarly, the first Trump administration put tariffs on China and curbed US exports of certain high-end technology, measures that were held up under the administration of former US President Joe Biden and further ratcheted up by Trump last year with his tariffs blitz.

But amid the war on Iran and the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz, the US temporarily eased some sanctions on Russian oil, and countries desperate for crude have since paid far higher prices to Moscow than the subsidised energy that President Vladimir Putin’s government was previously offering them.

“We [the US] really need to decide what we want to do long-term, who our targets are. There’s got to be some coherence to what we want to do.”

For now, “an overhang of greater risk premium of supplies out of the Gulf means oil prices will remain higher than what they were before the attack started”, said Rachel Ziemba, adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.

While it’s possible that some of the blocked oil and oil products could be released soon, providing a short boost of supplies in the coming days and weeks, “that would be a temporary support” and is still conditional on the ceasefire holding and converting to a broader deal, said Ziemba.

For now, she’s keeping an eye on Iraq to see if it strikes a side deal with Iran. Iraq, long a proxy battleground between the US and Iran, can produce at least 3.5 million barrels of oil per day, production that it had shut off because of limited storage capacity, said Ziemba.

Should that come back online, it will help oil flows and, eventually, prices. But the uncertainty of the truce and the history of attacks on Iraq mean that the future of the country’s oil production remains unclear. “In that environment, who wants to invest in scaling up production?” Ziemba wondered.

Iranian state TV has read out a message from new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei which says Iran ‘does not want war’ but will ‘not renounce legitimate rights’ in the face of threats from the US and Israel.

As UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer arrived in Doha as part of a Gulf tour spanning Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Qatar, he discussed efforts to secure the US-Iran ceasefire and reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Starmer warned there’s more ‘work to do’, stressing the need for regional partners to restore global energy flows.

Video shows an explosion in the sky above Erbil, in the Kurdish region of northern Iraq, in a suspected drone interception following reports of an unidentified aircraft flying over the city. Earlier, Kuwait reported a drone attack. The IRGC insists Iran has not launched anything during the ceasefire.

Iran’s parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf warns ‘time is running out’ amid Israel’s continuing attacks on Lebanon.

In a statement read out on television, Mojtaba Khamenei said Tehran will ‘demand compensation’ for damages due to the war.

Iran’s supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, has claimed a “final victory” in the war with Israel and the United States, as a fragile ceasefire continues to be threatened by Israel’s continuing offensive on Lebanon.

Marking 40 days since his father, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was killed in a US-Israeli attack on the first day of the war, Khamenei said in a statement on Thursday that, over the course of the war, Iran had “astonished the world”.

Khamenei, 58, who has not been seen or heard from since the war began, said in a statement read out on television that Tehran was not seeking war but was fighting for its legitimate rights.

“We will certainly not leave the criminal aggressors who attacked our country unpunished,” he said, adding that Iran will “demand compensation for all damages, as well as the blood of the martyrs and the wounded”.

Regarding the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran has effectively blockaded since the war broke out on February 28 and has become a key sticking point in US-Iran proposals to end the war, Khamenei said that his country will move towards a “new phase” without elaborating.

On Wednesday, the US and Iran agreed to a two-week ceasefire in a deal mediated by Pakistan to allow for negotiations to take place, after attacks on Gulf nations and the near-closure of the Strait of Hormuz had caused fears of a longer conflict whose impact would be felt long after it ended.

As part of the ceasefire, Iran agreed to allow shipping to pass through the important waterway, with reports that Tehran would impose a toll on ships transiting the strait to fund the country’s reconstruction efforts.

Yet, Khamenei warned that Iran was ready to respond if attacks were to end the pause in hostilities.

“Our hands are on the trigger,” he said.

However, a devastating wave of Israeli air strikes across Lebanon on Wednesday killed more than 300 people, threatening the US-Iran truce amid disagreement on whether Beirut was part of the agreement.

While Iran and Pakistan state that Lebanon was part of the deal, the US and Israel have said that it was not. World leaders have also called for Lebanon to be part of the agreement, urging for peace in the region.

Still, Khamenei said that while they did not start the war, they will not “renounce our legitimate rights under any circumstances, and in this respect, we consider the entire resistance front as a whole,” an apparent reference to Lebanon.

On Saturday, delegations from Iran and the US are expected in Pakistan to hold talks on ending the war.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says his government is ready to hold direct talks with Lebanon, a day after Israeli attacks on its northern neighbour killed hundreds of people on the deadliest day of the ongoing round of fighting.

“In light of Lebanon’s repeated requests to open direct negotiations with ⁠Israel, I instructed ⁠the cabinet yesterday to start direct negotiations with Lebanon ⁠as soon as ⁠possible,” Netanyahu’s office wrote ⁠in a statement on Thursday.

“The negotiations will focus on disarming Hezbollah ‌and establishing peaceful relations between Israel and ‌Lebanon.”

The statement comes a day after Israeli attacks across Lebanon killed more than 300 people in a series of devastating strikes that have threatened to undermine a United States-Iran ceasefire.

Israel and the US have said Lebanon was not included in the US-Iran two-week truce, which aims to allow for negotiations on ending their more than monthlong war. Iran and mediator Pakistan have said Lebanon was included in the ceasefire, and several international leaders have called for Lebanon to be included.

Shortly before Netanyahu’s surprise announcement about potential talks, Lebanese President Joseph Aoun said he ⁠was working on a diplomatic track on this matter that was starting to be seen “positively” by international actors.

And Lebanon’s cabinet instructed security forces to restrict weapons in Beirut exclusively to state institutions, in a warning to the armed group Hezbollah.

“The army and security forces are requested to immediately begin reinforcing the full imposition of state authority over Beirut Governorate and to monopolise weapons in the hands of legitimate authorities alone,” Prime Minister Nawaf Salam said at the end of a cabinet meeting.

Attacks on Hezbollah

Hours before opening the way for talks with Lebanon, Netanyahu said Israel would continue striking Hezbollah “with force, precision and determination”.

Lebanon’s health ministry said at least 303 people were killed and more than 1,000 wounded on Wednesday in Israeli strikes in central Beirut and other areas of Lebanon, with Salam declaring Thursday a “national day of mourning”.

But Israel continued its bombardment overnight and into Thursday, saying it killed Ali Yusuf Harshi, an aide to Hezbollah leader Naim Kassem. There was no immediate comment from the Lebanese armed group.

Meanwhile, Lebanon’s National News Agency (NNA) reported on Thursday that the Israeli army targeted the centre of Bint Jbeil city with heavy artillery shelling.

At the same time, Hezbollah has announced at least 20 operations against Israel and said it had targeted Israeli vehicles on Lebanese territory.

Reporting from Beirut, Al Jazeera’s Malcolm Webb said the Israeli army had issued new forced evacuation orders for the capital’s southern suburbs in advance of an attack.

“[This is an] area where thousands of people had initially fled, so this will force people to be on the move once again, looking yet again for somewhere safe to go to avoid the kind of destruction we can see here at one of the sites in central Beirut that was hit just over 24 hours ago in that wave of bombings across the city,” Webb said.

Since the ongoing Israel-Lebanon conflict began on March 2, Israel has issued evacuation orders for about 15 percent of Lebanese territory, displacing more than 1.2 million people, according to the United Nations. Israeli attacks have killed at least 1,888 people and wounded more than 6,000 others, according to Lebanese health authorities.

Ceasefire deal

As Israel continues its attacks on Lebanon, concerns are growing about the effect it could have on the originally fragile deal.

Since Wednesday, Iran has argued that attacks in Lebanon violate the ceasefire deal, with President Masoud Pezeshkian saying on Thursday that Israeli strikes on Lebanon would render negotiations meaningless, adding that Iran would not abandon the Lebanese people.

However, the US has said Lebanon is not covered by the truce, despite Pakistan, which acted as mediator, saying it was part of the deal.

Other countries, including the United Kingdom, France, Russia and Turkiye, have said the truce should extend to Lebanon.

Delegations from the US and Iran are expected to meet in the Pakistani capital, Islamabad, on Saturday for talks on ending the war.

The United States and Iran may have agreed to a ceasefire for now, but the world’s supply chains will continue to feel the effects.

Beyond oil and gas, Iran’s near closure of the Strait of Hormuz has blocked shipments of critical raw materials from the Gulf.

Petrochemicals, helium and aluminium are just some of the products that have not been able to reach manufacturing hubs around the world.

Many everyday items are affected, from plastic packaging to the advanced semiconductors in our smartphones.

How will our supply chains recover, and can they become more resilient to global shocks?

The Strait of Hormuz, which links the Gulf to the Gulf of Oman, has held global attention since Israel and the US began their war on Iran in February.

Until fighting began, the narrow channel, through which 20 per cent of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies are shipped from Gulf producers in peacetime, remained toll-free and safe for vessels. The strait is shared by Iran and Oman and does not fall into the category of international waters.

After the US and Israel began strikes, Iran retaliated by attacking “enemy” merchant ships in the strait, effectively halting passage for all, stranding shipping, and creating one of the worst-ever global energy distribution crises.

Tehran continued to refuse to re-open the strait to all traffic at the start of this week, despite US President Donald Trump’s threats to bomb Iran’s power plants and bridges if it did not relent. Trump backed away from his threat on Tuesday night when a two-week ceasefire, brokered by Pakistan, was declared.

That followed a 10-point peace proposal from Iran that Trump described as a “workable” basis on which to negotiate a permanent end to hostilities.

As part of the truce, Tehran has now issued official terms it says will guide its control of the Strait going forward. The US has not directly acknowledged the terms ahead of talks set to begin in Islamabad on Friday. However, analysts say Tehran’s continued control will be unpopular with Washington, as well as other countries.

During the crisis, only a few ships from specific countries deemed friendly to Iran and those which pay a toll have been granted safe passage. At least two tolls for ships are believed to have been paid in Chinese yuan, in what appears to be a strategy to weaken the US dollar, but also to avoid US sanctions. China, which buys 80 percent of Iran’s oil, already pays Tehran in yuan.

Here’s what we know about how shipments will work from now on:

Who is controlling the strait now?

On Tuesday, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Aragchi said Iran would grant safe passage through the strait during the ceasefire in “coordination with Iran’s Armed Forces and with due consideration of technical limitations”.

On Wednesday, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) released a map of the strait showing a safe route for ships to follow. The map appears to direct ships further north towards the Iranian coast and away from the traditional route closer to the coast of Oman.

In a statement, the IRGC said all vessels must use the new map for navigation due to “the likelihood of the presence of various types of anti-ship mines in the main traffic zone”.

It is unclear whether Iran is collecting toll fees during the ceasefire period.

However, Trump said on Tuesday the US would be “helping with the traffic buildup” in the strait and that the US army would be “hanging around” as the negotiations go on.

The Strait will be “OPEN & SAFE” he posted on his Truth Social media site on Thursday, adding that US troops would not leave the area, and threatening to resume attacks if the talks don’t go well.

It’s not known to what extent US troops are directing what happens in the strait now.

Delhi-based maritime analyst C Uday Bhaskar told Al Jazeera that there is a lot of “uncertainty” about who can sail through the strait, and that only between three and five ships have transited since the war was paused.

How does Iran’s 10-point plan affect the Strait?

Among Tehran’s main demands listed on its 10-point plan are that the US and Israel permanently cease all attacks on Iran and its allies – particularly Lebanon – lift all sanctions, and allow Iran to retain control over Hormuz. The plan has not been fully published but is understood to be a starting point for talks.

Iranian media say Iran is considering a plan to charge up to $2m per vessel to be shared with Oman on the opposite side of the strait. Other reports suggest Iran could charge $1 per barrel of oil being shipped.

Revenues raised would be used to rebuild military and civilian infrastructure damaged by US-Israeli strikes, Tehran said.

Oman has rejected the idea. Transport minister Said Al-Maawali said on Wednesday that the Omanis previously “signed all international maritime transport agreements” which bar taking fees.

What does international law say about tolls on shipping?

Critics of Iran’s plan to charge tolls say it violates international law guiding safe maritime passage, and should not be part of a final ceasefire agreement.

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) says levies cannot be charged on ships sailing through international straits or territorial seas.

The law allows coastal states to collect fees for services rendered, such as navigation assistance or port use, but not for passage itself.

Neither the US nor Iran has ratified that particular convention, however.

Even if they had, there could be ways to get around this law anyway. Analyst Bhaskar told Al Jazeera that if Iran instead charged fees to de-mine the strait and make it safe for passage again, that could be allowable under maritime laws.

There is no precedent in recent history of countries officially taxing passage through international straits or waterways.

In October 2024, a United Nations Security Council report alleged that the Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen were collecting “illegal fees” from shipping companies to allow vessels to pass through the Red Sea and the Bab-el-Mandeb strait, where it was targeting ships linked to Israel during the Gaza war.

Last week, a top adviser to Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei suggested the Houthis could shut the Bab al-Mandeb shipping route again in light of the war on Iran.

How might countries react to a Hormuz toll?

Tolls for passage through the Strait of Hormuz would likely most affect oil and gas-producing countries in the Gulf, but ripple effects will spread to others as well, as the current supply shocks have shown.

Gulf countries, which issued statements calling for the reopening of the passage and praising the ceasefire on Wednesday, would also face a continuing degree of uncertainty, analysts say, as Iran could again disrupt flows in the future.

Before the ceasefire was announced, Bahrain had already proposed a resolution at the UN Security Council calling on member states to coordinate and jointly reopen the passage by “all necessary means”. It was backed by Qatar, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Jordan. On April 7, 11 of 15 UNSC members voted in favour of that resolution.

But Russia and China vetoed the resolution, saying it was biased against Iran and did not address the initial strikes on Iran by the US and Israel.

Beyond the region, observers say the US is unlikely to accept indefinite toll demands by Iran as part of the negotiations expected to begin on Friday.

A toll to pass through the Strait of Hormuz “is not going to go down well with President Trump and his expectations that the strait should be open for everyone”, Amin Saikal, a professor at the Australian National University, said.

Other major powers have also voiced opposition. Ahead of the ceasefire, Britain had begun discussions with 40 other countries to find a way to reopen the strait.

Practical realities in the strait might see a different scenario play out with ship owners losing millions each day their vessels remain stranded seeking to get them out quickly and undamaged experts say. They are more likely to comply with Iran, at least for now.

“If I were the owner of a VLCC [very large crude carrier] which weighs about 300,000 tonnes, whose value could be a quarter billion dollars…I would believe the Iranians if they said we have laid mines,” Bhaskar said.

Today, to borrow a phrase, we are all Iranians.

We are Iranians, witnessing the failure of a thuggish logic practised by the United States and Israel, which operates on a single, crude premise: that enough pain can bend any nation to their imperial designs.

The US-Israel axis has long believed that force and coercion would eventually compel Iranians to abandon their sovereignty and accept the leash. It has failed. By refusing to surrender, Iranians have turned a lonely struggle for survival into a universal symbol of resistance — a testament to the endurance of the human spirit.

For weeks, we have watched the predictable mechanics of an empire trying to drain a people’s will. We have seen the familiar script of demonisation followed by the machinery of industrial slaughter. Then, we saw America’s “commander-in-chief” issue a threat that defied decency and defiled statecraft.

US President Donald Trump did not just threaten a government or a military. He threatened to end “civilisation” in Iran.

It was a monstrous decree. It was also a transparent one. This was the desperate act of a desperate man. It was the foul howl of a leader who knew he had lost a war.

So, Trump resorted to the “madman theory” of diplomacy, hoping that by appearing unhinged and capable of infinite destruction, he could scare a proud country into capitulation.

He failed. The prospect of annihilation was meant to trigger a collapse. It was meant to prompt the surviving leadership in Tehran to flee and panicked Iranians to yield.

The American-Israeli axis has made a fatal miscalculation. It remains wedded to the discredited conceit that resolve is a commodity to be bought or broken.

Instead, Iran and Iranians stood fast. The “madman” in the White House was obliged to negotiate with an adversary he claimed had already been defeated.

The moving measure of Iran’s success is found in that defiance. The Iranian people could have wilted, succumbed under the burden of such military, economic and psychological terror.

But Iranians fought back. They proved that you cannot bomb a civilisation into oblivion, nor can you erase a history that spans five millennia with a venomous post on social media.

Iran is prevailing. It is winning a war of attrition militarily, strategically, politically and diplomatically. Iran is winning because it understood its enemies’ limits better than they understood themselves.

Iran is winning strategically since it refuses to fight the war its enemies prepared for. It does not try to match the axis ship for ship or jet for jet. Rather, it stretches the battlefield across borders, allies and time.

It absorbs blows and keeps moving. Its doctrine is simple: survive, retaliate, prolong. In doing so, it raises the price of every strike against it. The axis is now trapped in a reactive crouch — bogged down, bleeding money and credibility, while Iran moves its pieces with precision.

Analysts now warn that the war meant to weaken Tehran may leave it stronger. Iran is winning because it adapts. It uses drones, proxies and patience. It does not need air superiority to impose pressure. It needs endurance. Its “mosaic” strategy — layers of command and decentralised power — means leaders can be killed, but the system survives. It turns vulnerability into resilience. It turns time into a weapon.

Of course, Iran’s control over the Strait of Hormuz serves as a masterclass in “asymmetric leverage”. By sitting atop a chokepoint through which approximately one-fifth of the world’s liquid petroleum passes, Iran effectively holds a “kill switch” for the global economy.

This geographic reality transforms a narrow waterway into a powerful diplomatic shield. For Iran, “winning” isn’t necessarily about permanently closing the strait — which would hurt its own fragile economy — but about maintaining the credible capability to do so.

This creates a permanent state of strategic caution among Western powers and energy-dependent Asian economies, ensuring that Tehran continues to be an indispensable architect of Middle Eastern security.

Politically, the win is even more stark. The axis has not achieved its paramount goal: “regime change.” The war was launched to fracture the Iranian state. It did the opposite. It appears to have fused the people and the state together against an external existential threat. The American-Israeli axis is not viewed as a force of liberation. It is seen as a collection of would-be occupiers. That perception matters more than any missile.

While Washington is paralysed by chaos and tribalism and Israel is consumed by a descent into blatant, corrosive authoritarianism, Iran — although damaged — is sturdy and intact.

Diplomatically, the United States has never been more isolated. Trump’s ignorance, incoherence, bluster and erratic behaviour have alienated America’s closest allies. Europe, once a reliable partner in so-called “containment,” looks at the bizarre cacophony on display day after dizzying day in Washington and turns away.

Iran, meanwhile, has deepened its ties with the East. It secured its flank with China and Russia. It played the long game while Trump played for the next news cycle.

The world is moving towards Beijing and Brussels, while Washington shouts into the void of its own fading relevance. Iran has turned the “maximum pressure” campaign into a “maximum cost” reality for the West.

The axis can no longer move in the Middle East without accounting for Iranian influence. The hunter has become the hunted.

Still, we must be clear. Iran’s success is not a sterile “win” on a geopolitical scoreboard.  It is not a triumph of flags and parades. Its survival is born of fire and bone. It is draped in black and soaked in grief.

The halting human costs and trauma of this war of choice will last for generations. We must remember the thousands who have been killed and maimed. We must remember the schoolchildren whose lives were extinguished by “precision” munitions. The axis failed to break Iran’s back, but it has broken Iranian hearts. That is the nature of war: the winners are merely those who inherit the ruins.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Protesters have blocked roads outside the Israeli embassy in London, condemning Israel’s violent strikes on Lebanon which killed hundreds across the country on the day the US-Iran ceasefire was announced. Many demonstrators also expressed solidarity with Iranians and Palestinians who have all suffered under Israeli bombardment.

US Vice President JD Vance says Lebanon is not part of the US-Iran ceasefire, stressing that neither Washington nor Israel agreed to that. After Pakistan said Lebanon was included, Israel killed hundreds of people when it carried out around 100 strikes across Lebanon in just 10 minutes.

UN human rights chief Volker Turk describes Israel’s attacks on Lebanon as ‘horrific’ coming so soon after US-Iran ceasefire announcement.

The US president has stepped back from the brink.

After calling for the destruction of an entire civilisation, it appears Donald Trump is in the mood for peace.

He has confirmed that Israel and the United States will stop attacking Iran for two weeks.

And while it’s not clear if the agreement will lead to lasting peace, what is certain is that the US – and the world stage – have been changed.

So how has the US been shaped by Trump’s war on Iran? How has the world order?

And can any of it be walked back?

Presenter: James Bays

Guests:

Sanam Vakil – Director of the Middle East and North Africa programme at Chatham House

Robert Pape – Professor of political science at the University of Chicago

Kim Wehle – Professor of constitutional law at the University of Baltimore Law School

Israeli forces have launched an intense bombardment across Lebanon, killing hundreds of people, hours after a two-week ceasefire was announced in the United States-Iran war.

Lebanon’s Civil Defence said at least 254 people were killed and 1,165 others were wounded in air strikes that targeted areas in Beirut, the Bekaa Valley, Mount Lebanon, Sidon, and several villages in southern Lebanon.

The Israeli military said that the attack was its largest coordinated assault on Lebanon since it started a new military operation in the country on March 2, “targeting more than 100 Hezbollah command centres and military sites”.

In a written statement, the head of Lebanon’s syndicate of doctors, Elias Chlela, urgently called for “all physicians from all specialities” to head to any hospital they could to offer help, with one of Beirut’s biggest hospitals saying it needed donations of all blood types.

Here’s how the world has reacted to the attacks:

Lebanon

Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri called the attacks on densely populated areas a “full-fledged war crime.”

⁠“Today’s crime, coinciding with the ceasefire agreement declared in the region — an agreement that Israel and its political and security apparatus have failed to uphold — is a serious test for the international community and a blatant challenge to all international laws, norms, and conventions, which Israel violates daily through its unprecedented campaign of human assassination in modern history,” Berri said.

“It is also a test for all Lebanese — political, religious, and civil leaders — to unite in solidarity with the martyrs. May God have mercy on the martyrs, grant a speedy recovery to the wounded, and protect Lebanon,” he added.

Hezbollah

The Lebanese armed group said it had a “right” to respond to the attacks.

“We affirm that the blood of the martyrs and the wounded will not be shed in vain, and that today’s massacres, like all acts of aggression and savage crimes, confirm our natural and legal right to resist the occupation and respond to its aggression,” Hezbollah said in a statement.

Hezbollah lawmaker Hassan Fadlallah told the news agency Reuters that the Israeli strikes were “a grave violation of the ceasefire”, adding there would be “repercussions for the entire agreement” if they continued.

Israel

Defence Minister Israel Katz said Israel “insisted on separating the war with Iran with the fighting in Lebanon in order to change the reality in Lebanon”.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also told a news conference that Israel would “continue to strike” Lebanon as the US-Iran ceasefire did not apply to Hezbollah.

Iran

The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) warned that it will respond to the attacks on Lebanon if Israel does not stop the assault.

“We issue a firm warning to the United States, which violates treaties, and to its Zionist ally, its executioner: if the aggression against beloved Lebanon does not cease immediately, we will fulfil our duty and deliver a response,” the IRGC said in a statement carried on Iran’s state-owned TV channel, using a reference to Israel.

In a post on X, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the terms of the ceasefire were “clear and explicit: the US must choose — ceasefire or continued war via Israel. It cannot have both.”

“The world sees the massacres in Lebanon. The ball is in the US court, and the world is watching whether it will act on its commitments,” he added.

Qatar

The foreign ministry condemned the “brutal series” of Israeli attacks on Lebanon that had killed hundreds of people, calling the attacks a “dangerous escalation and a flagrant violation of the sovereignty of the sister Lebanese Republic, the rules of international humanitarian law, and United Nations Security Council Resolution (1701).”

“The Ministry of Foreign Affairs calls on the international community to fulfill its responsibilities by compelling the Israeli occupation authorities to halt their barbaric massacres and repeated attacks on Lebanon, and to hold them accountable for respecting international covenants and laws,” a statement posted on X read.

It added that Qatar was in “full solidarity” with Lebanon.

Egypt

The Ministry of Foreign Affiars called Israel’s attacks on Lebanon had a “premediatated intent” to undermine regional and international efforts to reduce escalation.

The ministry added that the attacks were an attempt by Israel to drag the region into “total chaos”.

Spain

In a post on X, Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez said Netanyahu’s “contempt for life and international law is intolerable” in light of the attacks.

“It’s time to speak clearly: – Lebanon must be included in the ceasefire. – The international community must condemn this new violation of international law. – The European Union must suspend its Association Agreement with Israel. – And there must be no impunity for these criminal acts,” Sanchez said.

Italy

Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani said he spoke to the Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and expressed solidarity for the “unjustified and unacceptable attacks he is suffering from Israel.”

“We want to avoid there being a second Gaza. We will reiterate this concept to the Israeli Ambassador as well, whom I have summoned to the Farnesina. We condemn the bombings on the Lebanese civilian population, including the gunfire incidents suffered by our UNIFIL [UN Interim Force in Lebanon] troops, for which we continue to demand guarantees of total safety. We must absolutely avoid any further expansion of the conflict that would jeopardise the ceasefire in Iran and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz,” Tajani added.

United Nations

The deputy spokesperson for United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, Farhan Haq, said the UN “strongly condemns” Israel’s attacks on Lebanon.

“The United Nations strongly condemns the strikes by Israel across Lebanon that resulted in significant civilian casualties,” said Haq.

“We continue to call on all sides to avail themselves of diplomatic channels, cease hostilities”, and use the new US-Iran ceasefire as an opportunity to prevent further loss of life,” he added.

Before a single term has been negotiated, Trump is claiming total victory over Iran, but with leadership intact, enrichment continuing, and a new Strait of Hormuz toll that didn’t exist before the conflict, is this really a win? Al Jazeera’s Kimberly Halkett explains.

Islamabad, Pakistan – Just under 90 minutes remained until United States President Donald Trump’s deadline to destroy Iran’s “civilisation” late on Tuesday in Washington, DC, when he took to his favourite social media platform, Truth Social, again.

He said he had agreed to a two-week ceasefire with Iran after almost six weeks of bombing.

Soon after, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi confirmed the ceasefire on X, giving a world on edge a chance to breathe again.

Beyond the fact of the ceasefire, much remains unclear. Trump claimed Iran would allow unimpeded transit through the Strait of Hormuz while Araghchi said passage through the waterway would need to be done under the auspices of the Iranian armed forces. Other key differences quickly emerged: Was Lebanon included in the ceasefire? Has the US agreed to allow Iran to pursue uranium enrichment? Has Trump agreed to a 10-point Iranian list of demands or accepted that merely as a conversation starter?

But there also was a common glue that bound both Trump’s statement and Araghchi’s assertions: acknowledgement of Pakistan’s central role as the mediator that managed to persuade warring nations deeply distrustful of each other back to the negotiating table.

Trump said he agreed to the ceasefire “based on conversations with Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Field Marshal Asim Munir, of Pakistan”, adding that they had “requested that I hold off the destructive force being sent tonight to Iran”.

Araghchi was even more profuse in his praise for Pakistan. “On behalf of the Islamic Republic of Iran, I express gratitude and appreciation for his dear brothers HE Prime Minister of Pakistan Sharif and HE Field Marshal Munir for their tireless efforts to end the war in the region,” he said in a statement, adding that Iran had accepted the ceasefire “in response to the brotherly request of PM Sharif”.

Sharif, who had publicly called on the US and Iran to accept a ceasefire a short time before, posted again 90 minutes later, highlighting what may be Pakistan’s most significant diplomatic achievement in years.

“With the greatest humility, I am pleased to announce that the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States of America, along with their allies, have agreed to an immediate ceasefire everywhere including Lebanon and elsewhere, EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY,” he wrote, inviting both delegations to Islamabad on Friday “to further negotiate for a conclusive agreement to settle all disputes”.

By Wednesday afternoon, Sharif had spoken directly with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian too. Formal talks were expected to begin in Islamabad on Friday with a US delegation that could potentially be led by Vice President JD Vance, accompanied by Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff and son-in-law Jared Kushner, who had previously been engaged in dialogue with Iran before the war.

The war, which began on February 28 when the US and Israel launched coordinated strikes that killed Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and struck Iran’s military and nuclear infrastructure, has killed more than 2,000 people in Iran in five weeks, disrupted roughly a fifth of the world’s oil supplies and threatened to draw in regional powers.

That it has been paused, even temporarily, is the result of weeks of painstaking diplomacy that few believed Pakistan could deliver.

Early moves and a balancing act

Pakistan’s diplomatic engagement began almost immediately after the first US-Israeli attacks of the war, largely behind the scenes.

When the first strikes hit Tehran, Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar, who is also deputy prime minister, was in Saudi Arabia, attending a meeting of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation. Within hours, Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement, and Dar called Araghchi to convey solidarity.

By March 3, Dar was addressing the country’s Senate, outlining Pakistan’s position. “Pakistan is ready to facilitate dialogue between Washington and Tehran in Islamabad,” he told lawmakers.

At home, meanwhile, protests erupted. In Karachi, demonstrators tried to storm the US consulate on March 1, leaving at least 10 people dead.

Pakistan’s Shia Muslim population, estimated at 15 to 20 percent of the country’s roughly 250 million people, was watching closely. As sectarian tensions rose, Munir summoned Shia clerics to Rawalpindi and warned that violence inside Pakistan would not be tolerated.

At the same time, Islamabad was dealing with multiple pressures. It remained engaged in what officials described as an “open war” against the Afghan Taliban. It was also grappling with rising fuel costs due to disruptions to shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and concerns over remittances from Pakistani workers in Gulf states.

On March 12, Sharif travelled to Jeddah with Munir to meet Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, expressing “full solidarity” while urging restraint against mounting Iranian attacks against Gulf countries.

It was a delicate balancing act. Pakistan had to maintain its mutual defence pact with Riyadh, signed in September, without being drawn into a direct confrontation with Iran, its southwesterly neighbour with which it shares a nearly 1,000km (620-mile) border.

Qamar Cheema, executive director of the Islamabad-based Sanober Institute, said Pakistan’s early condemnation of the US-Israeli strikes proved crucial.

“When Pakistan condemned American strikes,” he told Al Jazeera, “that was where Pakistan won over the Iranians as well. This role as a global peacemaker is the result of personal diplomatic investment in Iran and the protection of international law.”

Masood Khan, a former Pakistan ambassador to the United Nations and the US, said regional actors were looking for “reliability, impartiality, consistency, restraint and deliverables”.

“We fit the bill and delivered on all counts,” Khan told Al Jazeera. “We did not seek strategic opportunism. We earned their trust.”

War escalates as diplomacy deepens

On the night of March 16-17, Israeli strikes killed Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, and, since Khamenei’s death, one of the most powerful figures in Tehran.

On March 18, Israeli jets struck South Pars, the world’s largest natural gasfield, which Iran shares with Qatar and which accounts for roughly 70 percent of Iran’s domestic gas production.

The attack triggered a new wave of Iranian retaliation on Gulf energy infrastructure, sending oil and gas prices soaring.

Against this backdrop, Dar arrived in Riyadh on March 18 for a meeting of 12 foreign ministers convened by Saudi Arabia.

The gathering produced a joint statement condemning Israeli actions. Turkiye and Pakistan resisted harsher language that could have undermined Islamabad’s credibility with Tehran, according to officials aware of the deliberations in Riyadh.

It was in Riyadh that a quadrilateral mechanism also took shape, bringing together Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkiye and Egypt.

Betul Dogan-Akkas, assistant professor of international relations at Ankara University, said the format emerged partly from divisions within Gulf diplomacy. While some Gulf countries, such as the United Arab Emirates, were by late March increasingly losing patience with Iran’s attacks and raising the prospects of hitting back, others, while also upset with Iran, were still pushing for de-escalation.

“The intra-GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council] disagreements over a ceasefire and a diplomatic dialogue with Iran created the need for exactly that kind of actor,” Dogan-Akkas told Al Jazeera, adding that Pakistan’s ties with both sides made it a natural choice for a mediator.

From March 22 to 23, officials confirmed that Munir spoke directly to Trump. The US president had already announced a five-day pause on strikes targeting Iranian energy infrastructure by then, signalling he was open to a diplomatic exit.

On March 23, Pakistan formally offered to host talks. Sharif echoed the offer publicly hours later on X, tagging Trump, Araghchi and Witkoff.

Initial reactions were mixed. Reports suggested talks could take place in Islamabad within days with Vance, Witkoff and Kushner named as possible members of a US delegation.

Iran, however, denied that negotiations were under way while the White House sought to dampen speculation. “The US will not negotiate through the press,” White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said.

On March 26, Dar confirmed that the US had shared a 15-point proposal with Iran via Pakistan. It demanded commitments on Iran’s nuclear programme, limits on its ballistic missiles and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

Tehran rejected the proposal and responded with a 10-point counteroffer, demanding an end to hostilities, sanctions relief, reparations, recognition of its sovereignty over the strait and the withdrawal of US forces from the region.

The positions remained far apart. But the fact that both proposals passed through Islamabad underscored Pakistan’s central role.

On March 29, the foreign ministers of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkiye and Egypt reconvened in Islamabad. Before the meeting, Sharif held a lengthy call with Pezeshkian, his second in five days.

After the talks, Dar travelled to Beijing, reflecting China’s growing involvement. He met Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, and the two sides outlined a five-point initiative that included a ceasefire, early dialogue, civilian protection, restoration of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz and a larger UN role. On Tuesday, Trump confirmed that China appeared to have played a role in pushing Iran towards talks.

Some critics have described Pakistan’s role as that of a messenger, but Ishtiaq Ahmad, professor emeritus of international relations at Quaid-i-Azam University in Islamabad, rejected that notion.

“A messenger transmits, but Pakistan shaped the sequencing, timing and framing of proposals,” he told Al Jazeera. “It had leverage with all sides.”

Dogan-Akkas said Tehran’s choice of Pakistan as mediator was deliberate.

“I believe it is a strategic choice to not project a powerful middle power with a US military base as the mediator but to have another regional country convey the message,” she said.

The Munir factor

Central to Pakistan’s role was its army chief, Munir.

His relationship with Trump dates back to early last year when Pakistan arrested the alleged perpetrator of the Abbey Gate bombing in Kabul in 2021, which occurred as thousands of Afghans tried to flee after the Taliban takeover. Thirteen American service members were killed in that attack.

But their relationship truly took root after the brief conflict between Pakistan and India in May when Trump publicly claimed credit for brokering a ceasefire, a claim acknowledged by Pakistan but rejected by India.

That episode opened a direct channel between Munir and the White House. He has since visited Washington, DC, twice, and Trump has publicly praised him on several occasions.

Pakistan also maintained connections with figures close to the Trump administration, including through business engagements involving Witkoff’s family.

Trump himself acknowledged Pakistan’s ties with Iran, telling reporters that Pakistanis “know Iran very well, better than most,” after hosting Munir for an unprecedented lunch in June.

However, Ahmad cautioned against overstating the personal dimension.

“The personal equation helped accelerate decision-making at a critical moment, but the mediation was not built on personalities alone,” he told Al Jazeera.

“It rested on institutional alignment between Pakistan’s civil and military leadership and on sustained engagement with Washington over the past year. Even if personalities shift, the channel Pakistan has built is now institutionalised,” he said.

Cheema argued that the calculus was also structural.

“Trump understands that in the entire Muslim world, this is the only nuclear-capable country, and it can change the course of history,” he told Al Jazeera, referring to Pakistan.

Countdown to a ceasefire

It was on Sunday on the Christian holiday of Easter when tensions peaked. As Pope Leo XIV called for peace from the Vatican, Trump issued a stark warning on Truth Social.

“Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one, in Iran,” he wrote, threatening to blow up all of Iran’s bridges and power facilities if it did not reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran dismissed the remarks, but behind the scenes, Pakistani officials intensified their diplomatic efforts.

By Monday, Pakistan had put forward a two-phase ceasefire proposal with Munir in contact with Vance, Witkoff and Araghchi.

Trump initially rejected the plan. He set a final deadline of 8pm Washington, DC, time on Tuesday (midnight GMT) and, hours before it expired, warned of catastrophic consequences.

“A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again,” he posted. “I don’t want that to happen, but it probably will.”

According to officials, Munir continued engaging both sides in the final hours, even as much of the diplomacy remained out of public view, until Sharif’s public appeal came with about five hours remaining.

The breakthrough followed shortly after.

As Trump announced the ceasefire and Iran confirmed it, the immediate impact was visible.

Oil prices dropped by 16 percent. The Strait of Hormuz was set to reopen for the first time in five weeks. And Islamabad was ready to become the centre of diplomatic activity.

What comes next?

The temporary ceasefire is not a peace deal. Iran’s Supreme National Security Council described it as a victory while warning that “our hands are on the trigger.”

Key differences remained unresolved, and expectations for the upcoming talks are cautious.

Despite Sharif’s claim that Lebanon was included, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said the arrangement does not cover Lebanon, and Israeli attacks there on Wednesday killed dozens of people and wounded hundreds.

Still, analysts said Pakistan’s role marks a significant shift.

A country that was not at the table for talks that resulted in the 2015 Iran nuclear deal or the Abraham Accords has now positioned itself at the centre of a major diplomatic effort.

“This is the first time Pakistan has simultaneously managed active conflict mediation between two adversaries under ongoing military escalation without direct contact between them,” Ahmad said.

Dogan-Akkas offered a more cautious assessment, noting that Pakistan does not have a long history of mediation compared with countries such as Kuwait, Oman or Qatar.

The outcome, she said, reflects Pakistan’s ties in the Gulf and its improving relationship with Washington rather than a deeply institutionalised mediation role.

When Pakistan quietly facilitated US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger’s secret trip to Beijing in 1971, its role remained unacknowledged for years.

This time, recognition came almost immediately, from both Washington and Tehran.

“Our effort this year is a continuation of the facilitation we undertook between the US and Iran in 2025,” Khan, the former envoy, said.

“But the stakes this time were very high. We did not want to see the richest bloc of the Muslim world decimated nor the world pushed towards a wider war.”

He added a note of caution.

“No relationships are, however, assured in perpetuity. Look at the Trump-Modi bonhomie in the first Trump administration and its unravelling now,” he said, referring to the warm friendship between the US president and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, which appears to have cooled during Trump’s second term.

Even so, he argued, Pakistan has already secured a lasting gain.

“While ultimate success will depend on the outcome of the process, however, even at this preliminary stage, Pakistan has already carved a niche for itself in diplomatic chronicles,” Khan said.

The multi-discipline event scheduled for May 8 will now be held on June 19 should conditions allow, organisers say.

World Athletics has postponed its season-opening event in Qatar’s capital, Doha, due to concerns for “player and spectator safety” as the  US-Israel war on Iran continues to affect the Middle East.

The Doha Diamond League has been rescheduled from May 8 to June 19, conditional on the safety and security situation in the region, World Athletics said in a statement on Wednesday.

“In the interests of athlete and spectator safety, a decision has been taken to postpone the meeting,” the global governing body for athletics said, adding that the event will go ahead on the new date “should conditions allow”.

The Diamond League said it had been “monitoring the situation in Doha” in recent weeks and was “working in close coordination with meeting organisers, Qatari authorities and other stakeholders”.

While Iran and the United States accepted a two-week ceasefire deal – mediated by Pakistan – Gulf states continued to intercept missile and drone attacks on their territories.

Qatar’s Ministry of Defence said on Wednesday that it intercepted a missile attack in the hours leading up to the ceasefire announcement, and the UAE, Kuwait and Bahrain reported strikes after news of the ceasefire was confirmed.

The organisers said they would continue to monitor developments in the Middle East in the coming weeks to deliver “the highest level of safe and secure competition for athletes, media and spectators”.

The Doha meeting was originally scheduled to take place at the Qatar Sports Club as the opening event of the 2026 Wanda Diamond League season, but will now be held at the Khalifa International Stadium, a temperature-regulated venue with air cooling vents.

The stadium hosted the World Athletics Championships in 2019 and was one of the FIFA World Cup 2022 venues in Qatar.

Olympic gold medallist from Botswana, Letsile Tebogo, headlined the 2025 event, winning the 200m race, while Jamaica’s Tia Clayton won the women’s 100m event.

Indian javelin star Neeraj Chopra was the crowd favourite for the field event but finished behind Julian Weber of Germany.

Chopra, Olympic gold medallist in 2021 and silver winner in 2024, has finished on the Doha Diamond League podium on five occasions.

The new date of the Doha Diamond League will fall between the Bislett Games in Oslo on June 10 and the Meeting de Paris on June 28, making it the eighth leg of the 2026 season.

The series will begin in Shanghai on May 16 and end at the Diamond League final in Brussels on September 5.

Countries in the region welcome the temporary truce and urge negotiations for the war’s permanent end.

Iran and the United States have agreed to a two-week ceasefire and allow safe transit through the Strait of Hormuz.

The warring sides agreed to suspend attacks as the war entered its 40th day, with hopes now pinned on a peace deal through talks set to begin in Pakistan on Friday.

The truce in the early hours of Wednesday came after US President Donald Trump said he would suspend attacks, subject to Tehran agreeing to fully reopen the crucial Strait of Hormuz, through which 20 percent of global oil flows.

Iran’s foreign ministry said a safe passage through the vital waterway will be possible for a period of two weeks through coordination with the country’s armed forces.

Meanwhile, celebrations rang across Iran following the announcement and many world leaders welcomed the development.

The weeks-long fighting had embroiled nearly the entire Middle East. Iran launched retaliatory attacks by claiming to target US assets in Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries. Gulf states alleged the Iranian attacks targeted civilian infrastructure as well.

Lebanon was also drawn into the war on March 2 after Tehran-aligned Hezbollah launched attacks on Israel. Israel has backed the two-week ceasefire with Iran, but has said it does not include Lebanon, despite Pakistan first announcing that the truce does.

Against this backdrop, here is how the Gulf and other Middle Eastern nations are reacting to the ceasefire announcement:

Saudi Arabia

The kingdom’s foreign ministry said it “welcomes” the ceasefire announcement. It urged an end to attacks on countries in the region and said that the Strait of Hormuz should be opened.

Saudi Arabia also hopes the ceasefire will “lead to a comprehensive sustainable pacification”, the foreign ministry said in a statement.

United Arab Emirates

Anwar Gargash, the diplomatic adviser to the UAE President, said the “UAE triumphed in a war we sincerely sought to avoid”.

“We prevailed through an epic national defense that safeguarded sovereignty and dignity and protected our achievements in the face of treacherous aggression,” Gragash said in a post on X.

“Today, we move forward to manage a complex regional landscape with greater leverage, sharper insight, and a more solid capacity to influence and shape the future”, he added, hailing “the UAE’s renaissance model”.

Oman

Oman’s foreign ministry said in a statement published on X that it welcomes the announcement of a ceasefire between Iran and the US and appreciates “the efforts of Pakistan and all parties calling for an end to the war”.

“We affirm the importance of intensifying efforts now to find solutions that can end the crisis from its roots and achieve a permanent cessation of the state of war and hostilities in the region,” the ministry said.

Iraq

Iraq’s foreign ministry said it “welcomes” the ceasefire but called for “serious and sustainable dialogue” between the US and Iran.

The ministry “calls for building upon this positive step by launching serious and sustainable dialogue tracks that address the root causes of the disputes and strengthen mutual trust,” it said on X.

Iraq has been drawn into the US-Israeli war on Iran, with Tehran-backed armed groups and US forces trading fire in an escalating cycle of violence.

Egypt

The Egyptian foreign ministry said the ceasefire “represents a very important opportunity that must be seized to make room for negotiations, diplomacy, and constructive dialogue”.

The ministry said in a statement on Facebook that a truce must be built upon with a full commitment to “stopping military operations and respecting freedom of international navigation”.

The post also said that Egypt will continue efforts with Pakistan and Turkiye “to promote security and stability in the region”, and that the talks between the US and Iran “must take into account the legitimate security concerns” of Gulf nations.

Turkiye

⁠Turkiye ⁠welcomed a ceasefire in the ⁠Iran war and ⁠said it would support negotiations set to take ‌place in Islamabad, the Turkish foreign ministry said on Wednesday.

It ⁠stressed the need ⁠for the ceasefire to be ⁠fully implemented on ⁠the ⁠ground and said all parties must ‌adhere to the agreement.

The United States and Iran have agreed to a two-week ceasefire, with talks to finalise a peace deal set to begin in Pakistan’s Islamabad on Friday.

The truce, announced by US President Donald Trump on Tuesday, will see Iran reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a vital maritime corridor through which a fifth of the world’s oil supply passes.

Countries around the world have welcomed the development.

Here’s a roundup of the reaction:

Israel

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on X that he supports Trump’s decision to suspend strikes on Iran, and the “US effort to ensure that Iran no longer poses a nuclear, missile and terror threat to America, Israel, Iran’s Arab neighbours and the world”.

Netanyahu said, however, that the ceasefire does “not include Lebanon“, where Israeli forces have launched a ground invasion and are fighting with the Iran-aligned Hezbollah.

Iraq

Iraq’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs welcomed the news of the ceasefire but said that both the US and Iran must commit to the deal to achieve a lasting resolution.

“As the ministry asserts its support for regional and international efforts to contain crises and prioritise the language of dialogue and diplomacy, it stresses the need for full commitment to the ceasefire and refraining from any escalations,” the ministry said.

Iraq has been drawn into the US-Israeli war on Iran, with Tehran-backed armed groups and US forces trading fire in an escalating cycle of violence.

Egypt

The Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs said the ceasefire “represents a very important opportunity that must be seized to make room for negotiations, diplomacy, and constructive dialogue”.

The ministry said in a statement on Facebook that a truce must be built upon with a full commitment to “stopping military operations and respecting freedom of international navigation”.

The post also said that Egypt will continue efforts with Pakistan and Turkiye “to promote security and stability in the region”, and that the talks between the US and Iran “must take into account the legitimate security concerns” of Gulf nations.

United Nations

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres welcomed the announcement and called on all parties to abide by the terms of the ceasefire “in order to pave the way toward a lasting and comprehensive peace in the region”, according to his spokesperson.

Guterres underscored “that an end to hostilities is urgently needed to protect civilian lives and alleviate human suffering”, and thanked Pakistan and other nations involved in facilitating the truce.

Japan

Japan’s Chief Cabinet Secretary Minoru Kihara told reporters that Tokyo welcomes the news of a two-week ceasefire between the US and Iran as a “positive move” as it awaits a “final agreement”.

Minoru said the de-escalation of hostilities in the Middle East remains a top priority, according to the Kyodo News Agency.

Indonesia

Indonesia’s Foreign Ministry Yvonne Mewengkang said Jakarta welcomes a ceasefire deal and called on Iran and the US to respect the “sovereignty, territorial integrity and diplomacy” of each side, according to the Reuters news agency.

Mewengkang also called for a thorough investigation into the deaths of three Indonesian UN peacekeepers killed by explosions in Lebanon in late March amid fighting between Israeli forces and Hezbollah fighters.

Malaysia

Malaysia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said the ceasefire marks a “significant development [and] serves as a crucial step towards de-escalating tensions and restoring much-needed peace and stability” to the Middle East.

It also urged “all parties to fully respect and implement all terms of the ceasefire in good faith to prevent any return to hostilities”, while also avoiding any “provocative actions or unilateral measures that could negatively impact the fragile stability of the region or jeopardise global economic and energy security”.

Australia

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Minister for Foreign Affairs Penny Wong issued a joint statement welcoming the news and expressing their hopes that the deal will lead to a long-lasting resolution.

“Iran’s de facto closure of the Strait of Hormuz, coupled with its attacks on commercial vessels, civilian infrastructure, and oil and gas facilities, is causing unprecedented energy supply shocks and impacting oil and fuel prices,” they said.

“We have been clear that the longer the war goes on, the more significant the impact on the global economy will be, and the greater the human cost.”

Albanese and Wong thanked Pakistan, Egypt, Turkiye, and Saudi Arabia for their work as negotiators.

New Zealand

New Zealand Minister of Foreign Affairs Winston Peters said his government welcomes the news of a ceasefire, although many concerns remain.

“While this is encouraging news, there remains significant important work to be done in the coming days to secure a lasting ceasefire”, as the war has had “wide-ranging impacts and disruptions” on the Middle East and beyond, he wrote in a post on X.

Peters praised countries like Pakistan, Turkiye, and Egypt for their work negotiating a deal.