THE globe was on the brink just weeks ago. On February 28, 2026, the United States and Israel executed synchronized military operations against Iran. Tehran retaliated. Oil markets toppled. The Strait of Hormuz was choked shut for months. What began as a regional confrontation threatened a global conflagration that could have drawn in nuclear-armed powers and engulfed the entire planet. That catastrophe was averted not by Washington or Tehran alone, but by Islamabad. On June 18, the United States and Iran signed the “Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding”, a 14-point framework named for Pakistan’s singular role in shepherding negotiations through weeks of brinkmanship. Both sides agreed to terminate military operations on all fronts. Iran would reopen the Strait. The United States would lift its naval blockade. A 60-day window opened to resolve Iran’s nuclear program, sanctions, frozen assets and the contours of lasting peace.
Pakistan’s emergence as the central mediator is an achievement without parallel in modern diplomatic history. Pakistan was the only Muslim country to formally condemn the Israeli attacks on Iran, which allowed Islamabad to launch a full backchannel de-escalation campaign thereafter. The breakthrough was orchestrated through consultations between the senior leadership of both rival countries, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Chief of Army Staff, Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir. Pakistani officials held 152 separate diplomatic engagements globally to strengthen relations with key regional partners. A truce was reached on April 8, succeeded by the first direct, high-level conversations between Washington and Tehran since 1979 on April 11 and 12. After Iranian forces launched retaliatory strikes soon after negotiations started, the talks were on the brink of collapse. However, Field Marshal Munir stayed firm and kept both sides engaged. President Donald Trump acknowledged this extraordinary effort, crediting Pakistan with “really helping” secure the deal and singled out Munir as “great” while praising the prime minister. This proves that middle powers with access across rival camps can achieve what superpowers cannot.
Yet for all the triumph of this breakthrough, the ink is barely dry and the spoilers are already circling with dangerous intent. Israel disagrees sharply with the deal, whose terms resolve none of its key goals, notably eliminating Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich called the agreement “bad for Israel and the entire free world” and declared that his nation would continue the campaign to topple the regime itself. On the Iranian side, hardliners have labelled the agreement a “humiliating capitulation” and argue it involves unjustified concessions. The agreement has already been jeopardized by new confrontations between Israel and Hezbollah, as Iran reads the MoU’s first clause to require Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon, while Israel has refused. Meanwhile, technical talks in Switzerland were shelved when Iran pulled out to protest Israeli strikes. This peace is a house of cards and the spoilers are waiting for the slightest breeze.
The international community must send an unmistakable message: there will be consequences for those who seek to undermine this fragile accord. Israel must not be permitted to function as a renegade entity, unilaterally undermining an accord that has stabilized international energy markets. Iran’s hardliners cannot be permitted to torpedo a deal that offers their people economic relief. The spoilers must understand that their misadventures will be met with diplomatic isolation, economic sanctions and the full weight of international opprobrium. This is not about choosing sides; it is about choosing collective survival over the self-defeating impulses of the few.
Yet even as we guard this delicate peace, the stabilization of the Gulf should force a much larger reckoning. We have to see beyond these conflicts and have to recognize that there is a bigger force which is acting against the survival of whole of humanity and we need to fight against it as one. Whoever controls the Straits of Hormuz won’t determine our fate; what matters is whether we can rein in warming temperatures, melting glaciers and toxic water. We must invest in electric vehicles and sustainable exploration. We must initiate a worldwide tree-planting initiative, silent guardians that absorb carbon, purify the air and stabilize the soil. It is critical that we prioritize water security and protect the interests of lower riparian states, as water shortages are quickly becoming a new source of conflict and future wars.
The Islamabad MoU demonstrates something profoundly hopeful: that even the bitterest enemies can find common ground when the alternative is mutual destruction. The 60-day clock is already ticking and while the Obama Administration took 20 months to reach the original Iran nuclear deal, we have given ourselves just 60 days. The odds are long, the spoilers are many and the stakes could not be higher. Yet the real challenge extends far beyond the negotiation tables. The world must choose: continue down the path of endless war and ecological suicide or embrace a new vision of human security built on climate resilience, water cooperation and the simple act of planting trees for generations to come. We have averted one catastrophe through extraordinary Pakistani diplomacy. Let us not waste this reprieve. Together, we can create a world where life flourishes and war ceases to exist.
—The writer is an international law expert and an internationally accredited arbitrator and mediator.
