AFTER more than three and a half months of devastating conflict involving the United States, Israel and Iran, and following an uneasy and often fragile ceasefire, the prospect of a genuine peace settlement finally appears within reach. On Monday, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif announced what much of the international community had been hoping for: an agreement providing for the immediate and permanent cessation of military operations across all fronts, including Lebanon. The announcement was quickly welcomed by US President Donald Trump, who congratulated all parties involved, while Tehran also confirmed its acceptance of the arrangement. For a region battered by war and uncertainty, the development offers a rare moment of optimism.
The conflict had consequences far beyond the Middle East. What began as a regional confrontation soon evolved into a crisis with global economic implications. Iran’s blockade of the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz disrupted one of the world’s most important energy and trade routes, while the United States responded by imposing a naval blockade on Iranian ports. The resulting strain on international commerce raised concerns among governments, businesses and financial markets worldwide. The agreement, scheduled to be formally signed in Geneva on Friday under Pakistan’s facilitation, is expected to remove these major obstacles and restore a measure of stability to global trade flows.
Pakistan’s role in bringing the parties to the negotiating table deserves recognition. From hosting early rounds of US-Iran talks in Islamabad to maintaining intensive diplomatic engagement aimed at preventing the collapse of previous ceasefire arrangements, Islamabad invested significant political capital in the peace process. Its efforts, complemented by those of regional actors such as Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, helped create an environment conducive to dialogue. The international appreciation expressed by the United Nations and numerous governments reflects the importance of this diplomatic achievement and highlights Pakistan’s growing relevance as a mediator in regional affairs.
While much of the world has welcomed the agreement, the reaction has not been universally positive. In Tel Aviv, there is evident dissatisfaction with the outcome. Israeli leaders had strongly advocated a tougher military approach toward Iran and had viewed the conflict as an opportunity to weaken the Islamic Republic significantly. Instead, Iran has emerged battered but intact, while the reported terms of the agreement include provisions aimed at ending Israeli military operations in Lebanon. These developments have fuelled concerns among Israeli policymakers that the strategic objectives they sought during the conflict remain largely unfulfilled.
Despite the optimism surrounding the agreement, important questions remain about its durability. The current arrangement is not a comprehensive peace treaty but rather a framework designed to halt hostilities and create space for broader negotiations. History offers reasons for caution. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), negotiated during the Obama administration, required nearly two years of intensive diplomacy before it was finalised. Expecting similarly complex disputes to be resolved within days or weeks would be unrealistic. The memorandum scheduled for signing in Geneva should therefore be viewed as the beginning of a process rather than its conclusion.
For this process to succeed, both Washington and Tehran must demonstrate patience, flexibility and a willingness to rebuild trust. The United States, in particular, will need to consider meaningful sanctions relief if it hopes to convince Iranian leaders that diplomacy can deliver tangible benefits. Years of sanctions, the collapse of previous agreements and recent military confrontations have created deep mistrust within Iran’s political establishment. Rebuilding confidence will require consistent actions rather than symbolic gestures.
Ultimately, the most important achievement at this stage is the commitment to dialogue and the cessation of violence. Peace in the Middle East has often been undermined by suspicion, competing interests and external interference. Yet diplomacy remains the only sustainable path forward. If all parties engage sincerely, respect each other’s concerns and avoid actions that could reignite tensions, the current agreement may evolve into a more comprehensive and lasting settlement. The road ahead will be difficult, but after months of war and instability, even a fragile peace is worth pursuing.
Shafaqna Pakistan
pakistan.shafaqna.com
Note: Shafaqna do not endorse the views expressed in the article
