Monitoring Desk: Iran has rejected the Pakistan-demanded and US-approved ceasefire. Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi, in his X message (@araghchi), said that blockading Iranian ports is an act of war and thus a violation of the ceasefire.
He added that striking a commercial vessel and taking its crew hostage is an even greater violation, and Iran knows how to neutralize restrictions, defend its interests, and resist bullying.
Blockading Iranian ports is an act of war and thus a violation of the ceasefire.
Striking a commercial vessel and taking its crew hostage is an even greater violation.Iran knows how to neutralize restrictions, how to defend its interests, and how to resist bullying.
— Seyed Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi) April 21, 2026
Meanwhile at 1700 hours of Iranian Time, Tasnim News Agency published a news stating that Iran has not still declared any official stance on extending the ceasefire with the United States. News Agency said:
“Tasnim has obtained information that despite reports published in some channels claiming “Iran’s official agreement to extend the ceasefire”, no official position has been announced by the Islamic Republic of Iran on this matter so far.”
Pakistan has been playing a proactive role in seeking to end the war in the region, which is harming regional security and global economic health. When the whole world was standing as a bystander, Pakistan took the initiative of the Islamabad Talks, which resulted in no breakthrough when the US team left the negotiations. Pakistan provided a complete security arrangement to the Iranian delegation from their arrival to their return home, engaging PAF fighter jets to escort the Iranian guests.
Even after the failure of the first round of Islamabad Talks, Pakistan continued its shuttle diplomacy and offered a second round of talks in Islamabad. These were announced by US President Trump, but Iran kept quiet and did not officially respond to the offer. It stated that no further talks were possible unless the United States ended its closure of the Strait of Hormuz. However, this closure was not ended; rather, more US military vessels entered the region.
On my personal behalf and on behalf of Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir, I sincerely thank President Trump for graciously accepting our request to extend the ceasefire to allow ongoing diplomatic efforts to take their course.
With the trust and confidence reposed in, Pakistan…
— Shehbaz Sharif (@CMShehbaz) April 21, 2026
This situation indicated that a second round of talks was unlikely, but Pakistan continued preparations, even closing several parts of the capital city of Islamabad for security reasons. President Trump indicated that he could arrive in Islamabad for the second round of talks or a deal. However, he later announced that Vice President JD Vance would attend, and then said his envoys would participate.
From April 18 onward, public life in several parts of Islamabad was disrupted for the talks, which had a remote chance of taking place because Iran considered negotiations under the closure of the Strait of Hormuz as unacceptable. Moreover, Iranian officials claimed that under the pretext of talks and a deal, the United States and Israel were planning a massive surprise attack on Iran.
While answering question about the current scenario, senior journalist and analyst Agha Iqrar Haroon was of the view that Pakistan’s initiative for the second round of the Islamabad Talks reflects a continuation of its broader diplomatic posture as a facilitator of dialogue and a stabilizing force in a tense regional environment. Building on the initial round of discussions, Islamabad positioned itself not merely as a host but as an active peace broker working to narrow gaps between rival parties through sustained engagement and confidence-building measures.
The second round of talks was shaped by Pakistan’s multi-layered diplomatic approach. At the political level, the government maintained continuous contact with all stakeholders, ensuring that no party felt sidelined. Senior leadership, including the Prime Minister’s Office and the military establishment, coordinated closely to present a unified national stance, an important factor in maintaining credibility with both sides. Pakistan’s message remained consistent: de-escalation, mutual respect for sovereignty, and a commitment to dialogue over confrontation.
A key feature of Pakistan’s initiative was its emphasis on backchannel diplomacy. Ahead of the formal second round, Pakistani envoys engaged in quiet consultations with delegations to identify red lines and areas of potential compromise.
Pakistan also focused on broadening the agenda of the talks beyond immediate security concerns. While ceasefire mechanisms and de-escalation frameworks remained central, Islamabad encouraged discussions on humanitarian access, economic cooperation, and regional connectivity. By doing so, Pakistan sought to shift the narrative from short-term crisis management to long-term stability. The idea was to create interdependencies that would make future conflicts less likely.
Another important dimension was Pakistan’s coordination with regional and international partners. Islamabad maintained communication with key global actors to ensure support for the talks and to prevent external spoilers from undermining the process. This balancing act required diplomatic finesse, as Pakistan had to remain neutral while also leveraging its relationships to keep the process on track.
Security and logistical arrangements for the second round were also handled meticulously.
Commenting on the situation foreign affairs and International Relations (IR) expert Dr Shazia Anwer Cheema was of the view that Pakistan framed its role not as a power seeking influence but as a country with a vested interest in regional peace. Instability in neighboring regions has direct economic and security implications for Pakistan, making peacebuilding both a strategic necessity and a diplomatic priority. By promoting dialogue, Pakistan aims to position itself as a responsible regional actor capable of bridging divides.
She added that while challenges remain and outcomes depend on the willingness of the parties involved, Pakistan’s role underscores commitment to constructive engagement. Its approach, combining formal negotiations, backchannel efforts, and a broader vision for regional stability illustrates how middle powers can play a meaningful role in conflict resolution in an increasingly fragmented global landscape.
