Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif

Islamabad’s role as the intermediary underscores a strategic attempt by Pakistan to leverage its diplomatic position to stabilize a volatile region. By facilitating communication between Washington and Tehran, Pakistan seeks to play a central role in a peace process that could reshape the security architecture of the Middle East.

Terms of the Proposed Peace Framework

The draft agreement aims to address the core drivers of the conflict, targeting both nuclear proliferation and regional maritime security. According to reports from the Iranian news agency Mehr, the declaration provides for a permanent and immediate cessation of hostilities across all fronts, including Lebanon.

The framework establishes a specific timeline for economic and nuclear concessions. The proposed deal includes:

• A 60-day negotiation period to reach an agreement on nuclear issues and the total lifting of U.S. sanctions.
• The release of frozen Iranian assets.
• The opening of the Strait of Hormuz to international traffic.
• The dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program and the handover of nuclear materials.

The lifting of U.S. sanctions and the release of frozen assets represent the primary economic incentives for Tehran. In previous diplomatic frameworks, such as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the restoration of access to international banking systems and the unfreezing of central bank assets have been central pillars used to facilitate compliance with international nuclear restrictions.

The inclusion of the Strait of Hormuz in the framework addresses a critical vulnerability in global energy markets. As a primary transit point for petroleum from the Persian Gulf, any disruption in the strait has historically led to significant fluctuations in global oil prices. Ensuring the strait’s openness to international traffic is a key requirement for stabilizing maritime security and reducing the risk of skirmishes that could impact global shipping.

For more on this story, see Pakistan sends new Iranian peace proposal to US.

The technical requirements of the deal—specifically the dismantling of the nuclear program and the handover of nuclear materials—represent the most complex aspect of the negotiations. Such processes typically require rigorous international oversight and verification protocols to ensure compliance with non-proliferation standards and to provide guarantees to the international community.

A high-ranking US government official noted that the agreement’s scope is broad, potentially encompassing the Gulf states, Israel, and Lebanon. This follows a period of intense instability; while a ceasefire has been in place since early April, the US military and Iranian forces have continued to exchange strikes against targets in Iran and US bases in Bahrain, Jordan, and Kuwait.

Conflicting Reports on the Deal’s Readiness

Despite the optimism from Islamabad, significant discrepancies remain regarding how close the parties are to a formal signature. While Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif confirmed that a mutually agreed-upon text exists, Iranian officials have offered a more tempered assessment.

This follows our earlier report, Iran War Live Updates: Trump Again Claims Deal Is Close After Retracting Threat of Strikes.

“The Islamabad declaration has never been so close to completion.”
Abbas Arakchi, Iranian Foreign Minister, via

The discrepancy between the US official’s optimism and the Iranian Foreign Minister’s caution highlights the final hurdles of the negotiation. While Washington’s assessment focuses on the structural achievement of a finalized text, Tehran’s position emphasizes that the document is not yet legally binding. This gap suggests that while the framework is established, the specific language regarding implementation and verification remains a point of contention.

Arakchi later clarified on state television that the declaration with the United States has not yet been signed and remains subject to potential changes. This caution contrasts sharply with the stance taken by Washington. The US official expressed a probability of 80 to 85 percent that the agreement will be signed in the coming days, though they admitted the parties are “not quite over the finish line.”

This pattern of high-stakes announcements followed by delays has drawn skepticism. DIE ZEIT noted that President Donald Trump has frequently promised imminent “deals” with Iran since the April ceasefire that ultimately failed to materialize, a phenomenon described locally as a “nothingburger.” While Trump claimed a “great agreement” had been reached, Tehran has dismissed those specific characterizations.

Read also: U.S.-Iran strikes disrupt peace talks, send oil prices surging 2%.

Diplomatic Venue and the Path to Signing

With the text finalized, the focus shifts to where and when the formal signing will occur. While the United States has suggested that Europe could serve as the venue, the Swiss government has officially stepped forward as a potential host.

“We are in close contact with the United States and Iran. Switzerland has proposed itself as a location for a possible signing, should the parties agree.

Switzerland’s emergence as a potential host is consistent with its long-standing tradition of providing a neutral platform for high-stakes international diplomacy. The Swiss government’s involvement offers a venue that is perceived as impartial, a factor that is often essential for parties in deep-seated conflict to move from tentative agreements to formal signing ceremonies.

The timeline for the peace process remains tied to the 60-day window for nuclear negotiations. If the framework holds, the immediate priority will be the technical implementation of the nuclear dismantlement and the subsequent lifting of economic restrictions. The success of the deal hinges on whether the current draft can survive the final round of revisions mentioned by Iranian officials.

Find more reporting in our World section.