THERE can be no denying the fact that peace cannot be achieved through sesame magic. Rather, sustainable peace can only be achieved through resilient and persistent efforts. In a historic moment, on June 17, US President Donald Trump signed the hardcopy of 14 points enshrined in Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding (IMOU) in the Mirror Hall of the Versailles Palace in France where the victors of the First World War had signed the Treaty of Versailles in 1919. With the help of Pakistan’s historic mediation role, the first round of technical talks was held on June 22 in Burgenstock, Switzerland, between the US and Iran, where Pakistan was the chief host. Yet the current peace breaches between Washington and Tehran have raised global concern. The quest for peaceful co-existence still remains a great challenge in so far as global multilateral diplomacy has to persistently move from “crisis management” to “crisis resolution.
Major geopolitical implications: A US-Iran peace deal would significantly reshape regional stability. First, it could lead to de-escalation of tensions in the Middle East, reducing proxy conflicts. Second, normalization of relations might allow for renewed diplomacy on Iran’s nuclear program, potentially easing international sanctions. Third, control and security of the Strait of Hormuz could improve, ensuring global oil trade flows. Fourth, Israel’s military operations in Lebanon and Syria might diminish due to reduced regional threats. Fifth, a peace deal could trigger economic revitalization in Iran, fostering investment and regional cooperation.
A US-Iran peace deal could significantly stabilize global energy markets by reducing tensions in the Middle East, easing disruptions to oil supply chains and lowering volatility in petroleum prices. This would mitigate panic buying, lower inflation pressure and support global trade. Additionally, it could restore investor confidence, boost economic growth in emerging markets reliant on stable energy costs and reduce the risk of regional conflict spillovers affecting shipping routes like the Strait of Hormuz. Long-term, it may foster greater cooperation in energy and infrastructure projects across Eurasia.
Pakistan’s foundational role: The role of a Middle Power like Pakistan reflects a new tapestry of peace weaving by creating a dynamic template in modern diplomatic history where Islamabad profoundly proves that influence today not comes from geographical size and the power of nukes, but from resilience, credibility, neutrality and the ability to guarantee face-saving to the adversaries. By demonstrating its key role in pacifying the chronic hostilities between Washington and Tehran, Islamabad peace mediation has remained a key process in this regard.
Geostrategic implications: It repositions Jerusalem into a strategic reassessment, as the traditional US-backed maximum pressure campaign gives way to managed diplomacy, leaving Israel with fewer unilateral options to counter Iranian influence. A diplomatic rapprochement reshapes traditional security parameters. Gulf Arab states, which bore the brunt of recent regional strikes, may have to recalibrate their foreign policies toward a newfound accommodation with Tehran rather than relying solely on Western deterrence. Moreover, Improved US-Iran ties will force a reshuffling among non-Western powers. Specifically, it disrupts the revisionist axis between Moscow, Tehran and Beijing, potentially easing the contest over global order and re-establishing Western clean tech and corporate footholds in the Iranian market.
Major challenges ahead: Justifiably put, If Washington acts as an unbiased broker toward a viable two-state solution or genuine Palestinian self-determination, it removes the foundational pretext for Iran’s regional militarism. It transitions US policy from “crisis management” to “crisis resolution.” Iran cannot completely dismantle or abandon these proxy networks without a political resolution to the Palestinian issue. If the US ignores the Palestinian cause, Iran will face immense ideological and structural pressure to maintain its regional architecture, eventually collapsing the peace deal. It is fairly argued that the deal requires an end to hostilities in Lebanon, conversely, Israel’s refusal to withdraw from southern Lebanon threatens to continually derail the fragile peace process.
Further, securing lasting freedom of navigation remains a friction point. While the US demands toll-free access, Iran insists on retaining sovereign management rights over the vital shipping route and has floated the idea of levying transit or service fee. And above all, trust deficits, inconsistent compliance and the potential for escalation amid geopolitical rivalries remain major hurdles. Ensuring verification mechanisms and long-term adherence will be critical to sustaining any agreement. And most importantly, the agreement defers the toughest nuclear questions to technical talks. A major challenge is: how will Iran halt all uranium enrichment while safely diluting or disposing of its current stockpiles?
Role of the global stakeholders: The Western powers—specifically the EU, UK, Australia and Canada—can play a decisive role in transforming this fragile US-Iran memorandum into a resilient security framework by acting as independent verifiers, economic shock absorbers and regional mediators. The GCC countries play a crucial role in sustaining the US-Iran nuclear deal due to their strategic geographic position and regional security concerns. Their economies have suffered from instability, with revised growth forecasts and rising inflation. Ensuring Iran’s nuclear program remains peaceful is vital for regional stability, as emphasized by GCC leaders like Prince Faisal and Mohammad Bin Salman. A successful deal could reduce tensions, enhance cooperation and create opportunities for economic recovery and broader diplomatic engagement across the Middle East.
An objective conclusion to be drawn from the US-Iran deal that the seeds of peace are pragmatically sown in this deal argues that building mutual trust among adversaries is the single most critical factor needed to transform the initial structural framework of the US-Iran nuclear deal into a lasting regional peace. Needless to say, peace in Lebanon and durable opening of Strait of Hormuz remain the pivot of the US-Iran peace deal. While the deal pragmatically outlines the technical mechanisms for containment, it serves only as a foundational blueprint; the actual cultivation of peace depends entirely on sustained, multilateral diplomatic cooperation.
—The writer, based in Pakistan, an independent IR & International Law analyst, also a Peace and Conflict Studies expert, is member of the European Consortium of Political Research, including Washington Foreign Law Society/American Society of International Law.
