Maximalist negotiating positions by both the US and Iran have prevented an end to the Middle East conflict, amid worrying signs of the war escalating, a former prime minister of Pakistan told The National.
“I think when you go for a maximalist position, that's a stumbling block,” Anwaar Ul Haq Kakar said in a rare interview from Islamabad.
“I think both sides probably choose to remain maximalist, and that is the prime reason for [a lack of] progress on this account when it comes to the resolution of the conflict.”
The US and Iran have disagreed on the scale and timing of commitments to end the war, including an end to the US blockade of Iran’s seaports, a reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, sanctions relief for Tehran and guarantees of an end to fighting across all fronts in the region.
Pakistan brought together Iranian and US officials for the highest-level diplomatic contacts between the two countries in decades following the start of US-Israeli operations against Iran in February. In June, the two countries agreed in Islamabad on a plan to end the war, but the conflict continued, albeit at a lesser intensity. Since then, mediators including Pakistan have been urging both sides to return to the negotiating table amid a deadlock over progress.
Pakistan’s foremost aim is that military conflict should not resume, said Mr Kakar, who served as acting prime minister of Pakistan before incumbent Shehbaz Sharif took office in March 2024.
“Well, this is a desire. This is a wish list. Whether we would be able to achieve that or not, that needs to be tested in probably few days or weeks from now,” he said.
"US withdrawals of diplomatic staff from the region in recent days are an indication that the US and Israel could be preparing to resume military strikes," he added, “which is not a good sign."
Already hit economically by energy price spikes caused by the war, Pakistan would be further squeezed by renewed fighting, as would other countries around the world, he added. The nation of 260 million people has already endured sharp fuel price increases following a surge in global oil prices prompted by the war.
“It would hit us badly,” Mr Kakar said. “Whether it comes to inflation or levying the petrol and then its increased prices, which would be a trickle down effect on the rest of the commodities, we are expecting an adverse economic impact if that is resumed, if the escalation goes on.”
US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have pointed to renewed military operations against Tehran in recent days, prompting a flurry of diplomatic activity to rein in any further conflict.
“There is only one way to remove this threat once and for all: overthrow the regime in Iran,” Mr Netanyahu said on Thursday. “And that is my directive to the [military], the Mossad and the security branches.” The US has prepared for renewed strikes, US media have reported, although Washington has ruled out action before the midterm elections on November 3.
The results of the coming Israeli elections on Tuesday will probably not change the country's appetite for conflict, Mr Kakar believes.
"With or without Netanyahu, I do not see an alteration of the policies of that sense of continuous conflict with the region," he said.
Pakistan is among the nations opposing any renewed escalation. Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar joined meetings between counterparts from Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Europe in Istanbul on Friday, and the ministers said they would be telling parties to the conflict that they should not escalate attacks.
Islamabad has attempted to keep negotiations alive, and military chief Field Marshal Asim Munir travelled to Tehran this week for meetings with senior Iranian officials, including National Security Council chief Mohsen Rezaei and Speaker of Parliament Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf.
Mr Ghalibaf told Mr Munir that the US could not win Tehran’s trust unless it implemented seven conditions put forward in a proposal in September, including an end to US military operations, a release of frozen Iranian assets and a lifting of the naval blockade, according to the Iranian National Security Council-affiliated Nour News outlet.
That seven-point proposal put forward by Tehran last month to revive the Islamabad agreement was a “pure Iranian plan”, and Pakistan’s role had been limited to influencing, advising and making suggestions, Mr Kakar said.
former caretaker Prime Minister of Pakistan
“Primarily the two parties who are in conflict here are the US and Iran, not Pakistan,” he said. “We are only doing the role of mediation, so they are grown ups in the room. So they do their own proposals, both sides. We can only suggest to them what is reasonable and what should be accepted or not accepted, and the rest is their choice.”
One of the complications in Iran is the multiple schools of thought over what the country’s strategy should be. “You have a mix when you interact with the ruling elite. There are quiet pragmatists who are there, but then there are a bunch of ideologues also. So you have to cater for both the audiences,” Mr Kakar said.
Iranians, who have struggled under sanctions for decades, have not had the same opportunities as people in neighbouring countries, he added.
“Almost three to four generations have been bereft of their counterparts in the region, particularly the Gulf Co-operation Council [countries]. Their entire lifestyle has transformed, and they are on a different model of progress as compared to Iran,” he said.
Born in Pakistan’s south-western Balochistan province, which neighbours Iran, Mr Kakar, who is also a current senator in Pakistan’s upper house, said there was room for political debate over a recent defence pact concluded with Saudi Arabia and Turkey, but that further political approval was not needed for it to enter into force.
Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey signed the Makkah defence agreement in August, and have since co-ordinated to support Saudi Arabia in the face of attacks by Iran-backed Houthi rebels in neighbouring Yemen.
Unlike Turkey, where parliamentary approval for the pact is required, Pakistan’s legislators can debate it, but the constitution does not require their green light.
Pakistan already has troops and military equipment in Saudi Arabia under long-standing agreements, and any decision to send more “would be a conversation between the three sides” in the Makkah defence pact, Mr Kakar said. “The initial assessment definitely is this: that Pakistan would also be in the role of defending Saudi territories, anyone who violates the Saudi sovereignty or territorial integrity gets challenged.
“No one can peek into the future, so there are no manifested clauses where it says that Pakistan would either go to Yemen or any other country, but I'm being very cautious. All I can say is that Pakistan is fully committed to defend Saudi Arabia, no matter what.”
Defending the holy cities of Makkah and Madinah is key, he added.
“If either Medina or Makkah is, God forbid, attacked by Houthi or by Israelis or by aliens - by anyone - I don't think that there would be a single soul in Pakistan or maybe around the Muslim world who would have a relaxed sleep during the night. That is the red line. Everyone knows that, and I think the Houthis would know that too.”
With the US reducing its role as security guarantor in the Middle East, the Makkah pact is a key part of countries in the region finding a way of filling that “vacuum,” Mr Kakar said.
Any future expansion of the pact - which he underlined was not just about the Houthis and Saudi Arabia, but about a long-term regional security architecture - would take place in a “very systematic manner,” he said. “They probably would receive applications from the interested parties in the region, and that would be deliberated over there in the newly built secretariat for Makkah agreement,” he said. “Then probably for a year or so, these applications would be tested as observant parties, and then a formal decision by all three would be made that on whom to give permission to enter the club.”
Closer to home, Pakistan is currently engaged in a grinding conflict with insurgents in neighbouring Afghanistan, and a peace deal remains elusive despite fatal strikes on both sides this year.
Mr Kakar said Pakistan's sole demand was an end to the presence of insurgents from the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), a group proscribed as a terrorist organisation by Islamabad, as well as the UK, US and other nations. "Once that is removed, I think so from Pakistan's side, the situation would normalize within 24 hours," he said.
A major problem in Afghanistan was the lack of accountability for weapons following the fall of the country to the Taliban in 2021 and the withdrawal of US and Nato forces. Arms are now being sold across the region as well as in Afghanistan, he said.
"All those small gadgets are now being sold in the black market, which is probably even available from Peshawar and Quetta to the Syrian capital and Yemeni capital and other areas," he said. "So that is the challenge in which Pakistan is being compelled to respond to the presence of TTP on the Afghan side, we go for the precision strikes against their presence on Afghan side."
Asked about the UN and human rights organisations' criticisms of civilian killings in Pakistani strikes on Afghanistan, he said the TTP's wearing of civilian clothing did not mean they were non-combatants.
"You cannot determine just on the basis of clothes that they were not the legitimate targets," he said.
