Irrespective of which way the US-Iran war turns from here, Pakistan’s role as mediator will definitely be a talking point. After an initial round of failed negotiations, will Islamabad end up persuading both sides to back down? Or, given its past track record of mediation, will it end up biting off more than it can chew?

Typically, classic international mediator nations like Norway or Qatar have had established neutrality among the warring stakeholders as the bedrock for intervention. The Pakistanis have, however, have been driven to pursue mediation in a conflict by factors such as providential geography, vested security interests, alliance opportunities, or expected gratification for services rendered. However, unlike the gold standard of an impartial Norway, the Pakistanis do suffer from sovereign perceptions of duplicitousness, an interest-driven approach, and trust deficits, even amongst the warring sides. If morality has driven Norway to mediate, transactional opportunity has historically driven Pakistan.

Pakistan’s first brush with international mediation was more surreptitious, transactional, and clandestine, as it facilitated the........

© Indian Express