What the US-Iran deal means for West Asian security and Pakistan
AI Summary
The United States and Iran have reached an interim agreement to conclude their regional military confrontation, which involved sustained airstrikes and competing blockades of critical maritime chokepoints. Although Iranian officials claim the settlement as a diplomatic success, many citizens question the benefit given the conflict's toll through bombardment and prolonged economic hardship. The framework remains incomplete, with negotiations continuing over nuclear provisions, Israeli involvement, and implementation procedures.
Progressive: Progressive-leaning outlets highlight critical gaps in the accord, particularly the exclusion of Israel from negotiations and the deferral of nuclear issues. They question whether substantial concessions have been secured and express concern the agreement could collapse without addressing these fundamental matters.
Moderate: Centrist outlets note the paradox of Iran's attempt to claim victory when much of the Iranian population experiences only exhaustion and hardship from the conflict's devastation. They acknowledge the agreement as a genuine diplomatic development while emphasizing remaining uncertainties in its terms and implementation.
Conservative: Conservative-leaning outlets frame the agreement as a diplomatic accomplishment while noting legitimate Israeli security concerns and the need to finalize remaining operational details, particularly regarding maritime security arrangements.
The US and Iran have agreed to a basic framework. Whether this formal consensus translates into a concrete agreement is an open question. While Iran has officially declared the end of the war, Israel insists “our struggle has not yet ended”. Between these two statements lies all the space the spoilers need.
The ceasefire was made possible by pragmatists. It will be threatened by apocalypticists. In Washington and Jerusalem, there are people at the helm of affairs who do not read this war as a security crisis to be resolved but a scheduled event — one that a ceasefire can delay but not, in their theology, prevent. For them, a deal is not a solution. It is an obstacle. And obstacles, in the eschatological imagination, are not negotiated around. They are removed.
A changed world
Whether the framework holds or collapses, one thing is clear: the West Asian security structure that existed on the morning of Feb 28, 2026, has ceased to exist.
Firstly, South Asian and West Asian security complexes are no longer analytically separable, as once theorised by British political scientist Barry Buzan. Secondly, the war subjected regional alliances and client-patron relations to a stress test, and, to the surprise of many capitals, the old security arrangements proved to be holding nothing at all.
Many in the Gulf relied on American security guarantees. And it was not for the first time that the American security umbrella failed to protect them against Israeli belligerence and Iranian retaliation. This shared sense of being treated as collateral rather than partners will continue to haunt the GCC-US relations for years to come.
The GCC, meanwhile, did not respond to the recent war in unison. Instead, the US-Israeli war of aggression against Iran deepened some older fault-lines among the Arab states of the Gulf region.
In the Pakistani imagination, Saudi-UAE relations are often assumed to be a tight axis. This is no longer the case. These countries have experienced rifts and complete ruptures in the recent past, and the war has only consolidated them. Saudi Arabia and the UAE are proposing two distinct security mechanisms that carry significant implications for Pakistan.
Where does Pakistan fit in?
Saudi Arabia desires to see an extended role for Pakistan and Turkey while normalising its relations with Iran. The starting point was the Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement Saudi Arabia signed with Pakistan on September 17, 2025 — just days after the Israeli strike on Doha.
That particular act of aggression by Israel clearly demonstrated that Qatar’s status as a major non-NATO ally and host of the largest US base in the region could not shield it from external aggression. It has also nudged Doha to diversify its security arrangements, bringing it closer to the Saudi-Pakistan framework.
There was also subsequent talk of widening this framework — reports suggested Pakistan signalled Turkey and Qatar may join the Saudi defence pact, which would essentially formalise a Riyadh-Ankara-Islamabad-Doha (RAID) mechanism.
Abu Dhabi chooses a different route
Abu Dhabi took the worst of Iran’s retaliation and answered with what American analysts termed a “defiant and forceful posture”, welcoming Israeli military assistance. Abu Dhabi’s response during the war has clearly illustrated that it is keen to integrate Israel and India into the Gulf security structure.
There are apprehensions that Emirati-Israeli-Indian intelligence and security cooperation could facilitate covert activities elsewhere in the Gulf, with destabilising consequences for the GCC as a whole. A case in point is the arrest of eight former Indian naval officers caught spying for Israel in Qatar in 2022. All of the accused were sentenced to death in late 2023. It was only after personal intervention by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi that the Qatari government released seven of the eight men in February 2024.
At a time when the Gulf’s two most consequential powers are pulling regional security in opposite directions, the question of where Pakistan plants its flag is not an academic one. Millions of Pakistani livelihoods, billions in remittances, energy imports on deferred payments and the credibility of Islamabad’s emerging mediatory role all ride on the answer.
What next for Pakistan?
Recent history offers the clearest insights. Pakistan has avoided camp politics. The recalibration of its relationship with the United States and China over the past decade is the most instructive example: Islamabad has learned to navigate the US-China rivalry without taking sides.
Pakistan’s insistence on strategic autonomy has been acknowledged at the highest level as something real, not rhetorical. Russian President Vladimir Putin recently dismissed the claim that Pakistan is a Chinese colony. In response to an Indian journalist, he emphasised that Pakistan is an independent, sovereign nation that maintains multi-faceted and diverse diplomatic ties across the globe rather than being solely aligned with or controlled by Beijing.
Pakistan then walked the tightrope between Iran and the Gulf states during the most serious regional war in a generation — maintaining open channels to Tehran while standing publicly with Riyadh, mediating where others were merely spectating.
The Saudi-UAE divergence over regional security presents a similar test. Pakistan’s historic ties with both countries run very deep — not merely at the level of diplomacy, but at the human level, where ties are hardest to sever.
Nearly three million Pakistanis live and work across the two countries, sending home remittances that form a major pillar for Pakistan’s fragile economy. Pakistan will not choose between Riyadh and Abu Dhabi — not because it lacks the courage to choose, but because it has learned, at some cost, that preserving both relationships is itself the strategy. This is exactly why Pakistan has prevented a public outcry over the UAE’s demand to return a USD3.5 billion loan, terming it a routine transaction with a brotherly nation.
The no-camps policy has doctrinal backing. Pakistan’s National Security Policy 2022-26, the first ever publicly released by any Pakistani government, is explicit on this point — articulating a vision of “geo-economics over geopolitics,” of engagement with all major powers without subordination to any. In the fractured Gulf of 2026, that may be the most sophisticated position available.
The old Gulf, predictable and broadly aligned, is not coming back. However, Islamabad has learned the hard way: choosing sides among friends is not a strategy. ...
이 뉴스, 독자들은 어떻게 느꼈나요?
첫 반응을 남겨보세요로그인하면 감정 반응에 참여할 수 있어요.
공식 발표 ↔ 진영별 보도
What the US-Iran deal means for West Asian security and Pakistan
Accord entre l'Iran et les Etats-Unis : pourquoi le plus difficile reste à faire lors des 60 prochains jours de négociations
Versailles, 17 juin 2026 : la capitulation américaine
US-Iran Peace Deal: M-East stability crucial to global economy — Olawepo-Hashim
Gbenga Hashim welcomes US-Iran peace agreement
Le détroit d’Ormuz dans le flou de l’opération déminage
Cessez-le-feu prolongé, réouverture du détroit d'Ormuz, statu quo sur le nucléaire... Ce que contient le protocole d'accord entre l'Iran et les Etats-Unis
EN DIRECT - Accord entre l’Iran et les États-Unis : le détroit d’Ormuz doit rouvrir ce jeudi
L’accord entre les Etats-Unis et l’Iran signé plus tôt que prévu, la canicule s’installe, l’Angleterre domine la Croatie… L’actu de ce jeudi matin
Accord entre l'Iran et les Etats-Unis : Téhéran "rouvrira sans délai le détroit d'Ormuz" et Washington lèvera "immédiatement" son blocus des ports iraniens, selon le médiateur pakistanais
«Je l’ai signé à Versailles» : Trump et l’Iran ratifient un protocole d’accord de paix en forme de reddition pour les Etats-Unis
«Même lorsqu’ils parlent de paix, les potences sont toujours en place» : en Iran, le goût amer de l’après-guerre
‘$300bn reconstruction aid, sanctions lift’ – US–Iran MoU details emerge
L'Iran réaffirme qu'il appliquera des frais de service au niveau du détroit d'Ormuz, à l'issue de 60 jours
Protocole d’accord Iran-Etats-Unis : pourquoi Téhéran gagne sur toute la ligne
Les Etats-Unis dévoilent le texte du protocole d'accord avec l'Iran, avant la signature attendue vendredi
Etats-Unis et Iran : en plein syndrome «je t’aime moi non plus» ?
Gulf states hesitate to fund $300b. Iran reconstruction, worry of reinforcing regional rival
Who pays for Iran’s recovery? US$300 billion fund emerges as flashpoint in ceasefire deal
«85 % de leurs missiles neutralisés» : l'Iran est-il vraiment aussi affaibli que le dit Donald Trump ?
Can the US-Iran deal survive a defiant Israel and Hormuz uncertainties?
Nucléaire, pétrole, sanctions... Le protocole d’accord de Trump est beaucoup plus conciliant vis-à-vis de l’Iran que celui d’Obama en 2013
'Catastrophic capitulation': Why US and Israel are the biggest losers in Iran deal
Acordo EUA e Irã: o que pode dar errado e as perguntas ainda em aberto, segundo especialistas
Acordo de paz entre EUA e Irã: o que acontece agora? É o acordo final? A guerra acabou?
Resumão diário do JN: Acordo de paz com os EUA prevê ajuda bilionária ao Irã; Motta admite viagem em jato de Vorcaro; Neymar treina com a Seleção pela 1ª vez nos EUA
Leia a íntegra do acordo entre EUA e Irã
Acordo de paz entre EUA e Irã já foi assinado e está em vigor, diz site
Veja os 14 pontos previstos no acordo de paz entre EUA e Irã
VS maakt afspraken met Iran bekend, komen overeen met gelekte stukken
US, allies to make plan for $300 bn Iran reconstruction fund
Iran deal 'long way from accomplishing' Trump objectives: Retired general
Iranian regime likely to rebuild military with funds released by MoU, ISW assesses
Ormuz, sanctions, nucléaire… Les 14 points de l’accord entre les États-Unis et l’Iran
Iran deal reportedly includes $300 billion investment fund, majority already committed
Iranians find little cause for celebration in US peace deal: ‘99% in survival mode’
보도 없음