Samee Ullah
ON 31 March 2026, Pakistan and China came together to present a shared vision for peace in the Gulf and the wider Middle East.
Following a high-level meeting in Beijing between Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar and China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi, both sides announced a Five-Point Initiative focused on easing tensions and promoting regional stability. The announcement reflected a joint commitment to dialogue, cooperation and a more secure future for the region.
The plan urges an immediate ceasefire, swift peace talks respecting Iran’s and Gulf states’ sovereignty, protection of civilians and infrastructure, secure navigation in the Strait of Hormuz and adherence to the UN Charter. Such an initiative, while reflecting diplomatic ambition, also places Pakistan in a particularly delicate position. It must carefully balance its longstanding partnerships with countries like China and Iran, while at the same time maintaining a measured and constructive posture toward other key players.
The initiative emerged amid a raging war by US and Israeli strikes on Iran starting February 28, 2026, which killed key Iranian leaders and prompted Tehran’s retaliation against US assets and Gulf hosts. Pakistan has thrust itself forward as a mediator, hosting quadrilateral talks with Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Turkiye and shuttling proposals like the US’s 15-point demands to Tehran. But Pakistan’s domestic Shia minority (15–20% of the population), shared border vulnerabilities and deep economic ties via the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor make Pakistan at a crossroads to balance between key parties. For China, Pakistan’s efforts seem like a practical step linked to the Belt and Road Initiative, focusing on reopening the Strait of Hormuz to prevent disruptions in energy supplies.
If Pakistan engages too visibly with US demands, such as reparations rejection or base removals, it betrays China’s vision of a multipolar order where America retreats. Iran’s push for Beijing as guarantor may further sideline Pakistan. Meanwhile, Gulf allies like Saudi Arabia, bound by Pakistan’s recent mutual defense pact, demand Hormuz’s normal passage, clashing with Iran’s toll system and forcing Pakistan into awkward compromises.
After being re-elected, President Donald Trump’s Administration has focused more on strong action. It has paused further strikes for now, saying there has been some progress, while US allies like Saudi Arabia and the UAE, where American forces are based, have faced attacks from Iran. No official US response endorses the plan, as analysts note Washington’s 15 conditions are non-negotiable. Israel, locked in an existential conflict, dismisses multilateral talks omitting its security, especially as the proposal vaguely alludes without naming aggressors.
Pakistan’s historical foreign policy amplifies this conundrum. Long a US ally against Soviet Afghanistan and post-9/11, it pivoted to China amid CPEC’s $62 billion infusion and 80% arms dependency, while maintaining Iran ties despite sectarian risks. Efforts to maintain a non-aligned or “no camps” approach have become increasingly difficult, especially as renewed engagement with the United States under Trump highlights competing pressures from both Iran and China.
Pakistan’s effort will elevate its profile, but the gap between ambition and capability should be dealt with in a very cautious way after much deliberation. Where different expectations exist—whether from China, Iran and the United States—Pakistan’s consistent emphasis on dialogue, de-escalation and regional stability must gradually enhance its credibility as a responsible mediator by streamlining all parties to sail through this uneven saga. The real test lies in maintaining strict diplomatic balance.
Pakistan would remain wiser to redirect its diplomatic initiatives toward internal stabilization rather than focusing on mediating distant conflicts. With its economy still fragile, remittances from Gulf workers under threat from regional instability and internal security challenges like militancy and political polarization persisting, its resources are better spent fortifying domestic resilience. Prioritizing counterterrorism reforms, economic recovery through IMF-backed measures and infrastructure development such as stabilizing power supplies and boosting local energy sources would yield more tangible gains on the external front and enhance its credibility far more in peace initiatives. True regional influence begins with itself, where Pakistan can build the strength to weather external shocks without compromising its sovereignty.
—The writer is contributing columnist, based in Islamabad.
