Diplomatic experts have dismissed recent remarks by US journalist Jeremy Scahill regarding Pakistan’s role in Iran–US discussions, describing them as a unilateral and selective interpretation of a complex diplomatic process.
Analysts say Scahill’s framing relies on assumptions rather than verifiable evidence, reflecting a particular interpretive approach rather than on-the-ground realities. They emphasize that the primary function of a mediator in international negotiations is to facilitate communication, not to guarantee outcomes.
Pakistan’s Track Record In Diplomatic Facilitation Highlighted
Pakistan has a long record of diplomatic facilitation in complex geopolitical environments. From behind-the-scenes engagement in US–China contacts in the 1970s, to the 1988 Geneva Accords, and the 2020 Doha peace process, Pakistan has repeatedly served as a communication bridge between conflicting parties.
In these cases, officials note, Pakistan’s role has been to enable dialogue rather than influence final agreements. Its efforts have previously been acknowledged by international stakeholders involved in such processes.
Mediation Described As Communication Channel, Not Outcome Control
Experts stress that maintaining communication channels between long-standing rivals such as Iran and the United States is itself a significant diplomatic function. Pakistan’s involvement is described as a facilitative mechanism aimed at reducing escalation and keeping dialogue open during periods of heightened tension.
They further note that mediators are not responsible for negotiation outcomes, which remain the sole prerogative of the parties involved. Any breakdown or disagreement in talks, analysts say, is attributable to the negotiating sides rather than the intermediary.
Analysts Say Criticism Reflects Misunderstanding Of Mediation Role
Diplomatic observers argue that interpreting Pakistan’s role as ineffective reflects a misunderstanding of international mediation practices. They emphasize that facilitation is intended to support dialogue and stability rather than produce guaranteed results.
According to analysts, in situations where direct communication between parties is limited or stalled, Pakistan’s engagement serves as an important stabilizing channel that helps maintain diplomatic contact and reduce tensions.
