Pakistan says US-Iran ceasefire holds after Islamabad talks

Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said on Monday that the ceasefire between the United States and Iran remains in place despite the failure of the latest Islamabad talks to produce a final agreement. Speaking during a special federal cabinet session in Islamabad, he said Pakistan was still actively engaged with both sides and continued to push for a settlement on the unresolved points that blocked a full breakthrough over the weekend.

The prime minister presented the development as an important diplomatic moment for Pakistan, arguing that the contact achieved in Islamabad had already lowered the immediate risk of wider war. According to the official account, delegations from Washington and Tehran stayed in negotiations for roughly 21 hours, with Pakistan helping keep the process alive even when the discussions came close to collapse. Sharif said the fact that the ceasefire endured after the talks ended was itself a sign that the channel Pakistan helped open had not closed.

Officials linked to the government’s messaging described the engagement as unusually significant because the two sides met directly rather than relying only on intermediaries. That detail has been central to Islamabad’s effort to frame the talks as more than symbolic diplomacy. Pakistani authorities say the session allowed both delegations to air their positions face to face at a level and in a format that had not been possible for many years, even though the gap between them remained too wide for a final settlement.

In his remarks, Sharif thanked both countries for accepting Pakistan’s invitation and for acknowledging the role played by the country’s political and military leadership. He singled out Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar as well as Chief of Defence Forces and Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir and their teams for helping sustain the ceasefire and manage the pressure surrounding the talks. The prime minister also said friendly capitals, including Tokyo and several European governments, had conveyed appreciation for Pakistan’s de-escalatory role.

The statement matters because it places Pakistan at the center of one of the region’s most dangerous crises at a time when energy markets, shipping lanes and wider geopolitical stability remain under severe strain. Islamabad has sought to project itself as a credible bridge between hostile capitals, and the prime minister’s account suggests the government believes that role has strengthened rather than weakened after the stalled negotiations. Even without a final deal, maintaining contact reduces the likelihood of an immediate collapse into unrestricted confrontation.

There is also a domestic dimension to the announcement. Pakistan has repeatedly warned that conflict in the Gulf can quickly spill into its own economy through higher fuel costs, supply disruptions and market pressure. By emphasizing that the ceasefire is still intact, the government appears to be reassuring businesses and the public that it is not merely observing the crisis from the sidelines but is trying to limit the economic and strategic fallout for Pakistan.

The background to the Islamabad meeting has made the latest update especially prominent. Pakistan had already been credited by its own leadership with helping secure a temporary pause in hostilities, after which fresh talks were arranged in the capital. The negotiations did not end in a comprehensive understanding, but officials now argue that peace processes rarely succeed in a single sitting and that difficult conflicts often require repeated rounds before a durable formula is found.

That is why Sharif cast the talks as the beginning of a longer process rather than the end of one. By invoking earlier international peace efforts that took months or years to mature, he appeared to be lowering expectations of an instant settlement while defending the value of incremental diplomacy. The message from Islamabad is that the absence of a final accord should not be mistaken for failure so long as the ceasefire continues to hold and direct engagement remains possible.

For Pakistan, the next stage will test whether it can convert diplomatic visibility into sustained influence. Much will depend on whether Washington and Tehran return to the table before the fragile calm breaks down. If the truce survives and another round is convened, Islamabad may strengthen its standing as a regional facilitator. If it unravels, Pakistan will face the harder task of preserving dialogue in an environment where military escalation could once again overtake diplomacy.