However, the diplomatic process remains uncertain, with Iran denying reports that any formal delegation has left Tehran and reiterating that its participation depends on the cessation of Israeli military operations in Lebanon.
Pakistan has meanwhile tightened security across Islamabad, introducing road closures, increased troop deployment, and restricted access around key venues as preparations for the proposed talks continue.
Proposed structure of negotiations
According to officials familiar with the planning, Pakistan is expected to act as a shuttle mediator, with US and Iranian delegations placed in separate rooms while proposals and responses are exchanged through intermediaries.
The US delegation is expected to be led by JD Vance, alongside special envoy Steve Witkoff and senior adviser Jared Kushner, as reported in early planning discussions cited by officials and referenced in reporting linked to the Associated Press.
Iran’s participation, however, remains highly uncertain, with Iranian state-linked media rejecting claims that any delegation has already been dispatched to Pakistan.
Iran questions timing and conditions for talks
Iran has publicly cast doubt on both the timing and feasibility of the Islamabad negotiations, linking its engagement directly to developments in Lebanon and ongoing Israeli strikes.
Tehran’s position suggests that any diplomatic progress is conditional on a halt in Israeli military activity in Lebanon, significantly complicating efforts to maintain an active US–Iran communication channel.
State-affiliated reporting has also reiterated that no senior Iranian officials, including Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi or Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, have travelled for any such negotiations.
An Iranian source quoted in state media dismissed reports of travel or participation, stating that claims of an Iranian delegation arriving in Islamabad are “completely false,” according to Iran’s Fars News Agency.
Lebanon emerges as central point of contention
Lebanon has become a key fault line in the broader ceasefire framework, with competing interpretations threatening to derail diplomatic progress.
Iran and allied regional actors argue that developments in Lebanon cannot be separated from any wider ceasefire arrangement, particularly in light of continued Israeli strikes and Hezbollah-linked cross-border tensions.
Israel, however, rejects this linkage, maintaining that its operations in Lebanon are separate from any US–Iran diplomatic track and asserting its right to continue targeting Hezbollah infrastructure.
This divergence has created a major obstacle to advancing negotiations, with Lebanon increasingly shaping the viability of any potential agreement.
Israel rejects Pakistan’s mediation role
Israel has strongly objected to Pakistan’s involvement as a mediator, particularly following controversial remarks by Pakistan’s Defence Minister Khawaja Asif, who had referred to Israel in sharply critical terms in a post that was later deleted.
Israeli officials criticised the statement and questioned Pakistan’s neutrality in facilitating sensitive negotiations.
The Israeli Prime Minister’s Office described the remarks as unacceptable for any government claiming to act as a neutral intermediary, while Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar also raised concerns over Pakistan’s credibility as a facilitator.
Pakistan’s balancing act under scrutiny
Pakistan’s role as a potential facilitator places it in a delicate diplomatic position, as it maintains working relationships with both Washington and Tehran while lacking formal diplomatic ties with Israel.
Islamabad has previously played a behind-the-scenes role in facilitating communication between the US and Iran, including relaying proposals and counter-proposals through indirect channels.
However, recent political statements and escalating regional tensions have complicated Pakistan’s efforts to maintain neutrality, raising questions over whether it can sustain its role as a trusted intermediary.
Wider agenda: nuclear issue, sanctions, and energy security
Beyond the immediate ceasefire discussions, the proposed talks in Islamabad are expected to address broader strategic issues, including Iran’s nuclear programme, sanctions relief, and regional security guarantees.
A key global concern is the Strait of Hormuz, a critical maritime corridor through which a significant portion of global oil shipments passes. Its stability remains central not only to regional security but also to global economic stability.
As diplomatic uncertainty continues, the success or failure of any engagement in Islamabad could have wide-ranging implications for regional peace and international energy markets.
