Shadow of Israel looms over US-Iran 'peace talks' in Pakistan

The US-Israeli war on Iran has entered a precarious phase, sailing into what is essentially uncharted waters. Talks aimed at achieving a longer-term peace are set to start in Islamabad, but the two sides remain wide apart on the key issues at stake.

The Strait of Hormuz, which was an open, freely-navigable waterway before the war, is now firmly under Iranian control, giving rise to a new, complex issue to resolve. 

Israel has already thrown a massive spanner in the works by launching brutal attacks on Lebanese cities, killing over 300 people in a single day. Given the sheer ferocity of the Israeli attacks on Lebanon immediately after the US-Iran ceasefire was announced, it would be fair to assume that the bombings were designed  to provoke an Iranian reaction in order to torpedo the peace efforts. 

Iran has held off from retaliating, which would have most likely drawn a response from the Americans, leading to the collapse of the ceasefire.

Israel clearly does not want the US to leave the war. Israel wants to pursue the destruction of not just Iranian military capabilities, but the viability of the state itself. But Israel knows it cannot sustain this level of aggression against Iran unless the US is there to provide massive firepower, air defence, vital intelligence and logistics support, as well as political cover. 

While Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu enjoys almost-total public support for the war in Lebanon, President Trump faces a different reality at home. A war of attrition with no end date, and a ceasefire negotiated by a third party is not what the US President had in mind when he launched the war on February 28. 

Election alert for Trump

The American public were never on board with this particular war, as President Trump failed to convince people beyond his Republican bubble that Iran presented an imminent threat to the US. Public opinion remained tilted against the war, even though majority of Republican supporters kept their faith with the President. 

But with all seats in the House of Representatives and one-third of seats in the Senate up for election in seven months' time, loss of support among non-partisans or "independents" could spell disaster for Trump and his party. The Republicans currently have a wafer-thin majority in Congress, but the whole show could be flipped in November. 

Regaining control of Congress would give the Democrats the opportunity to pursue one of their most cherished goals - to impeach Donald Trump. 

Trump clearly needed a way out of the war. He must have recognised that, despite the extraordinary firepower brought to bear on Iran, Tehran was able to protect much of its missile stockpiles and launchers. Prospect of the war dragging on for months, without any pathway to victory, was real. 

Killing senior leaders and demolishing buildings did not add up to "victory." There was never any doubt that Iran's home-grown air defence would not stand up to the combined might of the US and Israeli air forces. But such tactical successes, including the sinking of a dozen or so surface ships could not produce a strategic victory. 

Strategic failure 

Iran turned the war into a regional one by attacking targets, including US military bases across the Gulf; Tehran seized control of the Strait of Hormuz to trigger panic in the global oil and gas markets; and it continued to hit targets in Israel with their ballistic missiles, forcing millions of Israelis to spend their days and nights in shelters. 

The regime in Tehran did not only survive, it took the war to a higher level where it threatened the global economy. 

For the US, a ground invasion to seize Tehran and topple the regime - in a rerun of the Iraq 2003 scenario - remains on the table, but looks increasingly unlikely. A more modest goal, to capture and extract Iran's 450 kilogram of enriched uranium, is also fraught with danger and uncertainty. 

In short, the US-Israeli offensive had proved to be a tactical masterclass, but a strategic disaster. 

The choice before Trump was simple: either persuade Iran to agree to a ceasefire and sit down across the table to negotiate peace; or escalate decisively and invade the country. Trump found a third way, by threatening to destroy "Iranian civilisation" from the air. This threat exposed the extremely desperate situation the US President had found himself in. 

It is here that Pakistan played a crucial role. The South Asian country's two leaders, Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif and Army chief Field Marshal Asim Munir, have become Trump's close allies in recent months, even nominating the US President for a Nobel peace prize last year. 

Pakistan and China 

Pakistan was one of several countries working behind the scenes to achieve a ceasefire. But Islamabad was uniquely placed. They were trusted by both the Trump administration and Tehran. Crucially, Pakistan had another ally who could persuade Iran. 

On March 31, Pakistan's deputy PM and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar travelled to Beijing to hold talks with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi. They issued a joint statement calling for an "immediate cessation of hostilities," and "start of  peace talks as soo as possible," among other things. 

"Sovereignty, territorial integrity, national independence and security of Iran and the Gulf states should be safeguarded," the statement said. 

While China is hugely influential among the Gulf states and Iran, it was in no position to mediate with the US. On the other hand, Trump was looking to Pakistan to break the impasse. In the end, it is believed that China persuaded Iran to agree to a ceasefire, thus allowing both Washington and Tehran to climb down the escalation ladder. 

President Trump appears determined to find a way out of this conflict. His decision to send Vice President JD Vance, who is known to have opposed the war from the beginning, to head the US team shows that Trump recognises these negotiations need someone that the Iranians can trust.

Things can still go wrong, by accident or by design. 

The ceasefire may turn out to be a cover for the US and Israel to regroup, re-arm and launch yet another surprise attack. However, the involvement of Pakistan and China probably helped reassure Iran that the talks this time are serious and genuine. 

In short, both Islamabad and Beijing have put their credibility on the line over these talks. 

Pressure on Netanyahu

There are other factors beyond Pakistan's control: 

The two sides may simply refuse to compromise on key elements of their demands: For Iranians, US demand to handover enriched uranium and end enrichment programme, as well as restrictions on their ballistic missile project could be red lines. 

For Americans, Iranian claim to control the Strait of Hormuz and collect tolls from passing ships may be non-negotiable, as might Tehran's demand to remove US military presence from the region.  

The biggest obstacle to success, however, appears to be Israel. The ceasefire with Iran has put Netanyahu under pressure at home from opposition parties which had been calling for the total dismantling of the Islamic Republic. 

For over a year, opposition leader Yair Lapid has been calling for the destruction of Iran's oil industry. He has repeatedly called for attacks on Kharg Island, which handles 90 per cent of Iran's oil exports. The ceasefire gave him an opportunity to tear into Netanyahu. 

" Netanyahu failed to topple the regime; Netanyahu failed to eliminate the nuclear program; Netanyahu failed to eliminate the ballistic missile program," Lapid posted on X on April 9.  

With political pressure mounting at home and elections due in October, Netanyahu may see the forceful continuation of the Lebanon campaign as crucial to his political survival. Having failed to achieve desired goals in Iran, Netanyahu has massively ratcheted up attacks in Lebanon, compelling Iran to question the viability of 'peace talks.'
The issue of Lebanon is likely to play a major part in dictating how well the US-Iran dialogue in Islamabad goes. Trump's desire to achieve a face-saving exit from the mess in the Gulf - a mess that is entirely his own making - may influence how far Netanyahu is able to push the Lebanon agenda. 

No US president has ever thrown Israel under the bus, certainly not in the middle of a war. Israel has traditionally enjoyed near-unanimous support in Congress, which allowed it to resist pressure from the White House. 

But the tide is turning in the US, with public opinion becoming increasingly critical of Israel. Yair Lapid even blamed Netanyahu for "complete failure" to "mobilise the political and media system in the US."

Opinion in Western capitals already turning against Israeli aggression in Lebanon, Donald Trump's own political instincts may determine how much pressure he would be prepared to put on Israel, in order to achieve a deal with Iran.