Ceasefire may hold as global powers push US, Iran toward uneasy calm

By Akhtar Pathan

KARACHI, Pakistan (MNTV) — The fragile ceasefire between the United States and Iran is likely to hold despite persistent threats, as major and middle powers — including Russia and China — push in earnest for de-escalation, according to a Pakistani analyst.

Faisal Javaid, head of the International Relations Department at Federal Urdu University in Islamabad, describes the first in-person talks between Washington and Tehran since 1979 as a major breakthrough, even as Iran bears the major brunt of a war that has devastated its leadership.

He says both sides entered the talks with hardened positions, drawing clear red lines on key issues that appear difficult to reconcile. But such rigidity, he argues, is typical in the early stages of negotiations between long-standing adversaries.

“I believe this ceasefire will hold and sustain,” he says, citing a broad international consensus in favor of stability. “All major and middle powers have joined the chorus for peace and are pushing for continuation of this ceasefire because it is in the interest of all countries.”

For now, he adds, the duration and outcome of the talks matter less than the immediate effect of halting hostilities. Even without a formal agreement, a sustained status quo could ease tensions and gradually move both sides toward normalization, while ensuring that critical waterways such as the Strait of Hormuz remain open.

Javaid suggests that the European Union could eventually step in diplomatically to help prevent a resumption of hostilities. Such involvement, he says, could lower temperatures further and allow countries affected by the conflict to manage disputes while keeping global trade flowing.

‘Iran using Hormuz leverage cleverly’

Javaid says Iran has used its leverage over the Strait of Hormuz strategically, exerting pressure on global markets and, in his view, forcing Washington to search for an exit from the conflict.

“Most analysts agree that Iran has used its leverage so cleverly that it has brought the world, foremost among them Americans, to its knees,” he says, adding that the United States appeared increasingly eager to find an “off-ramp” — a process he says was facilitated by Pakistan.

He acknowledges that the war has degraded Iran’s military capabilities and may have slowed its nuclear progress, despite official denials. Yet he argues that Tehran has managed to counterbalance its vulnerabilities by effectively blockading the strait, creating what he describes as a strategic quagmire for Washington.

“The more the U.S. fights to pry itself free, the more it gets sucked in,” he says.

“Spoiler: Israel will not sit idle’

Javaid describes Israel as a potential spoiler in the peace process, pointing to a recent violation of the U.S.-Iran ceasefire through a deadly airstrike on Lebanon that killed hundreds of civilians.

At the same time, he says Israel’s position has shifted significantly since the events of Oct. 7, 2023, and the subsequent war in Gaza. According to him, the country now faces growing criticism even from traditional allies in Europe and North America, eroding its long-standing diplomatic latitude.

He notes that several European countries condemned the strike on Lebanon and rejected Israel’s assertion that Beirut was outside the scope of the ceasefire arrangement. That pressure, combined with Iran’s insistence on including Lebanon in the agreement, appears to have contributed to Israel’s decision to reconsider its stance and signal openness to talks with Beirut.

Even so, Javaid warns that Israel is unlikely to remain passive.

“Israel will not sit idle and will most likely do something in the future to breach the ceasefire and resume hostilities,” he says, adding that while Iran seeks guarantees against future attacks, Israel may prefer to keep Tehran under sustained pressure.

‘Image and influence under strain’

Javaid argues that Israel’s global image has deteriorated in recent months, including among audiences in Europe and the United States, where he says public and political criticism has intensified.

For now, he says, pro-Israel lobbying groups retain significant influence within the administration of Donald Trump, where hardline voices continue to advocate for a prolonged campaign. At the same time, he suggests Trump himself may be weighing the political costs of continued conflict.

He points to growing dissent within Trump’s own political base and declining Republican popularity as indicators that U.S. policy toward Israel could shift in the future, particularly with a potential change in administration.

‘Pakistan’s mediation is no small feat’

Javaid describes Pakistan’s diplomatic role in facilitating dialogue as a significant achievement, arguing that it surpasses earlier milestones such as its involvement in the Geneva Accords and the Doha talks.

“This diplomatic victory has no parallel in Pakistan’s history,” he says, noting that the current crisis carried global economic implications and brought the world to the brink of wider conflict.

He adds that, if Trump’s characterization is taken at face value, the confrontation with Iran risked escalating into a broader war before Pakistan intervened.

By stepping in, he says, Pakistan not only helped defuse tensions but also reshaped its international image — moving away from associations with instability and toward that of a peacemaker capable of averting global crises.

Whether that perception endures, however, may depend on the durability of the ceasefire and the uncertain trajectory of a conflict that continues to test the limits of diplomacy.