‘Pak not suitable intermediary for negotiations’:Iranian lawmaker questions Islamabad’s neutrality, accuses it of favouring US

As diplomatic efforts to end the Iran-US conflict remain deadlocked, fresh tensions have emerged over Pakistan’s role as a mediator. An Iranian lawmaker has openly questioned Islamabad’s neutrality, accusing it of leaning towards Washington and lacking the credibility required to broker sensitive negotiations between Tehran and the US. Ebrahim Rezaei, who represents Dashtestan in Iran’s Parliament and serves as spokesperson for the National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, described Islamabad as a ‘good friend’ of Tehran but said it was not a credible or impartial intermediary. “Pakistan is a good friend and neighbour of ours, but it is not a suitable intermediary for negotiations and lacks the necessary credibility for mediation,” Rezaei wrote in a post on microblogging platform X. The Iranian lawmaker further alleged that Pakistan tends to align with US interests and avoids challenging Washington’s position. “They always take Trump’s interests into account and do not say a word against the Americans’ wishes,” he said. ‘Pakistan leaning towards Washington’ Rezaei claimed Pakistan had repeatedly failed to call out the US when Washington allegedly did not honour its commitments, including on Lebanon and blocking Iranian assets. “They are unwilling to tell the world that America first accepted Pakistan’s proposal but then went back on its word,” he said. He also referred to what he described as unfulfilled American commitments regarding Lebanon and frozen assets. “They do not say that the Americans had commitments regarding the issue of Lebanon or the blocked assets, but failed to fulfil them. A mediator must be impartial, not always leaning to one side,” Rezaei added. His remarks come as Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi travelled between Pakistan and Oman last week before flying to Russia this week, amid diplomatic efforts to bridge the gap between Tehran and Washington. The two sides remain divided over several major issues, including Iran’s nuclear programme and access through the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz. Iran can ‘pick up the phone: Trump’ The US President repeats the demand that Tehran must not possess nuclear weapons US President Donald Trump said Iran could directly contact Washington if it wanted to negotiate an end to the conflict. “If they want to talk, they can come to us, or they can call us. You know, there is a telephone. We have nice, secure lines,” Trump said during an interview on Fox News’ The Sunday Briefing. He reiterated that any agreement would require Iran to abandon any path towards acquiring nuclear weapons. “They know what has to be in the agreement. It’s very simple: They cannot have a nuclear weapon; otherwise, there’s no reason to meet,” the US President said. Ceasefire holds, but no final agreement yet Nuclear enrichment and Hormuz access remain major sticking points. Iran has long insisted that Washington must acknowledge its right to enrich uranium, maintaining that its nuclear programme is intended solely for peaceful purposes. Western powers, however, continue to argue that Tehran’s enrichment activities could be used to develop nuclear weapons. Although a ceasefire has paused full-scale fighting in the conflict, which began with US-Israeli strikes on Iran on February 28, no agreement has yet been reached on terms to permanently end the war. The conflict has killed thousands, pushed up oil prices, fuelled inflation and further weakened the outlook for global economic growth. Iranian MPs divided over Islamabad talks Some lawmakers call Pakistan-hosted negotiations a ‘tactical error’. Concerns over Pakistan’s role have also been raised by other Iranian lawmakers involved in the diplomatic process. Mahmoud Nabavian, an Iranian MP who was part of the delegation that met US officials in Islamabad, described the decision to hold talks in Pakistan as a ‘tactical error’. Speaking to SNNTV, Nabavian said allowing nuclear-related discussions to take place in a forum hosted by Pakistan was a strategic mistake. He argued that such sensitive negotiations should be handled separately and not merged with broader regional mediation efforts. Nabavian also warned that holding talks in Islamabad allowed the US to push for major concessions, including demands related to limiting Iran’s production of enriched uranium, a move many lawmakers in Tehran strongly oppose. His remarks reflect growing unease within Iran over both the structure of the negotiations and Pakistan’s role as host. Several lawmakers now believe future talks should take place in venues considered more neutral, amid concerns that Islamabad was unable to ensure balance in the discussions. ​