Pakistan Mediating Between U.S. and Iran Out of Necessity, Report Says
ISLAMABAD — Pakistan’s role in mediating between the United States and Iran is driven more by necessity than strategic choice, according to an opinion piece published in The News International, which argues that Islamabad is seeking to manage regional risks rather than gain immediate economic benefit.
The report says a destabilized Iran would create greater space for militant activity along Pakistan’s western border, while heightened tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran could trigger treaty obligations and spill over into domestic instability.
“Pakistan is not mediating out of choice. Pakistan is mediating out of necessity,” wrote Farrukh Saleem in the opinion article. “For Pakistan, a destabilized Iran expands space for militants across our western flank. For Pakistan, a Saudi-Iran escalation risks triggering treaty obligations. For Pakistan, a regional war imports sectarian stress into domestic politics. For Pakistan, mediation is risk containment.”
While Pakistan’s involvement has increased its diplomatic visibility and secured it a place at key negotiation tables, the report argues that such engagement has yet to translate into tangible economic gains.
“Is Pakistan a pillar or a bridge? A bridge connects others. A pillar anchors value,” Saleem wrote, suggesting that Pakistan currently functions more as a facilitator than a power able to extract benefits. “Yes, Pakistan has become a repeat-use mediator. Yes, Pakistan has secured seats at select negotiation tables. But Pakistan remains balance-sheet dependent.”
The article contends that Pakistan lacks a clear framework to monetize its geopolitical role, including pricing mechanisms or structured agreements that could convert diplomatic access into economic returns.
“Pakistan has no monetisation framework. Pakistan has no pricing mechanism. And Pakistan has no contract pipeline,” Saleem wrote, adding that without such systems, the country risks being used rather than compensated for its role.
The piece draws comparisons to earlier periods when Pakistan leveraged its geographic position for financial inflows, including during the Soviet-Afghan war from 1979 to 1989 and in the years following the Sept. 11 attacks, when it received significant international funding.
According to the report, turning diplomatic engagement into economic value requires moving beyond dialogue to concrete agreements and strategic planning.
“In geopolitics, bridges are crossed while pillars are given compensation,” Saleem wrote. “A bridge gets used while a pillar gets paid.” (Source: IANS)
