Ceasefire or no ceasefire, the Middle East’s reshuffling is not yet done
Ceasefire or no ceasefire, the Middle East’s reshuffling is not yet done
The ongoing ceasefire discussions in Pakistan hinge on the United States and Iran maintaining a shared interest in halting hostilities. Yet, a critical barrier remains: the lack of trust between the two nations, coupled with the absence of clear mutual objectives. Israel’s intensified attacks on Lebanon, as America’s key ally in the conflict, complicate matters further, making it harder to envision a swift resolution.
President Donald Trump has begun referring to the conflict in past tense, signaling his desire for an end. His upcoming schedule includes a visit from King Charles and a summit with President Xi Jinping in May, alongside the looming midterm elections in November. With summer holidays approaching, Trump also seeks to stabilize rising fuel costs, which threaten his political momentum. Wars disrupt these plans, and the current situation demands a rapid exit strategy.
Iran’s leadership, though defiant, faces internal and external pressures. Despite its ability to deploy missiles and drones, the regime has suffered severe economic setbacks. Cities like Tehran now grapple with stagnation, and the government aims to leverage the Pakistan talks to consolidate its standing. Social media campaigns, featuring AI-generated content, have amplified Iran’s critique of Trump, even as the leader’s personal stakes in the war remain high.
The intermediaries facilitating talks in Islamabad face a daunting task. The stark divergence between the US and Iran’s positions makes consensus difficult. Trump’s 15-point plan, though unannounced, has been described as resembling a surrender. Meanwhile, Iran’s 10-point demands echo past rejections by the US, highlighting the deepening rift. Any lasting agreement will require both sides to acknowledge their conflicting priorities, even as the war continues.
Recent developments have shifted focus to the Strait of Hormuz, a vital maritime route through the Gulf. Maintaining its closure allows Iran to exert economic leverage, while reopening it is now central to the negotiations. The strategic importance of this waterway has grown as attacks on Iranian vessels disrupt global energy supplies, forcing urgency into the talks.
“A capital V military victory,” stated US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, reflecting the administration’s belief in their success.
Despite initial hopes that striking Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamanei, would dismantle the regime, the outcome has proven more resilient than anticipated. His son Mojtaba, appointed as successor, has remained elusive since the attack on 28 February, with rumors suggesting he was injured. The strike also reportedly claimed the lives of his wife, sister, and one of his sons, yet the regime endures.
The war, ignited by US and Israeli strikes, has already reshaped Middle Eastern power dynamics. As its long-term effects unfold, this transformation will intensify. Though Iran’s military infrastructure has been heavily damaged, the regime remains intact, demonstrating its ability to withstand tactical setbacks. The strategic advantage sought by the US and Israel has not yet materialized, leaving the region in flux.
