Islamabad on edge as US–Iran talks loom after tenuous ceasefire. Here's what to expect

As American and Iranian delegates prepare to meet for talks in Islamabad over the weekend, experts say any substantial breakthrough appears unlikely.

The meeting that is expected to take place on Saturday follows a two-week ceasefire brokered by Pakistan between Iran and the United States earlier in the week.

But the fragile truce, which came into effect on Tuesday night, is already under strain as Israel carries out devastating bombing in Lebanon, which, according to Pakistan and Iran, wasn’t supposed to be attacked under the deal. The US says it didn’t agree to any such demand.

Shamshad Ahmed Khan, a former Pakistani foreign secretary with decades of diplomatic experience, warns that the basic conditions for meaningful talks are not yet firmly in place.

“It’s too early to predict the outcome… the ceasefire did not last even a single day,” he tells TRT World, pointing to continued Israeli violence in Lebanon. “That must stop if the Islamabad talks are to start purposefully.”

“The endgame will depend on how sincerely the Americans placate Iran’s genuine fears,” he says.

The truce marked a rare diplomatic opening after military escalation rattled the Middle East and global energy markets.

But with continued violence in the region and deep mistrust between Washington and Tehran, the talks are shaping up as a test of whether diplomacy can take hold at all.

From Washington, the talks are expected to be led by US Vice President JD Vance, alongside envoy Steve Witkoff and senior adviser Jared Kushner.

Iran is expected to field a high-level delegation that could include Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and parliamentary speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, although Tehran has yet to officially confirm its lineup.

Deep mistrust looms over the talks with unresolved differences over Strait of Hormuz access, sanctions relief, Iran's nuclear programme, and broader regional de-escalation, including Lebanon, still standing.

Analysts stress this is far from a formal peace deal, with both sides still testing the early contours of trust.

What can realistically be expected in Islamabad?

Maintaining the process is key, experts agree.

Mohammad Eslami, an Iranian political scientist and geopolitical analyst at the European University Institute, stressed the structural limits of the talks.

“The only realistic outcome I can imagine for this round of talks is the one that can fit under the UN charter. Neither Iran will give up uranium enrichment, nor will the US allow Iran to get the bomb,” he tells TRT World.

He says lifting Iran's sanctions by the US is also "not realistic", saying the US could do so if it wanted, without imposing a war on Iran and that Tehran was also ready to guarantee that they don't want nuclear bombs.

Pakistani interlocutors will aim to ensure that the uneasy ceasefire holds as the two sides agree on some sort of terms to carry the negotiations to the next stage.

Ambassador Mansoor Ahmed, a veteran Pakistani diplomat, says the immediate priority is simply to maintain the fragile ceasefire and keep negotiations moving forward.

“The ceasefire is a tenuous one due to underlying complexities… the most realistic and meaningful outcome would be a continuing process making progress on various issues,” he tells TRT World.

He suggests that this may even require extending the current truce if early progress is made.

Ahmed says the first signs of forward movement will be visible over the weekend if the delegations begin constructive discussions on a permanent ceasefire, framework for reopening the Strait of Hormuz, and finding common ground on nuclear enrichment and sanctions — all issues that have been among the most contentious.

He underlines that timeline predictions remain difficult, but early momentum in these areas would be meaningful.

He also stressed the importance of engaging relevant stakeholders — including China, Russia, Türkiye, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UN, and the EU — to prevent spoilers from derailing the process.

“There remain many impediments, most serious being the role of spoilers like we saw Israel’s brutal attacks on Lebanon yesterday,” he says.

What progress could look like

Rather than sweeping agreements, analysts point to incremental gains as the most realistic outcome of the Islamabad talks.

Dr Sadia Rafique, an assistant professor of political science specialising in the Middle East and Gulf issues, tells TRT World that initial movement is likely to emerge in economic and diplomatic domains.

She points to potential limited reforms, conditional external support, and small policy adjustments, alongside a reduction in tensions through sustained dialogue.

Early signs of progress, she notes, could include “economic agreements, small policy changes… and a shift in domestic and international narratives supporting the process.”

For global observers, the signals to watch will be practical rather than rhetorical in her opinion, like agreements signed, sanctions shifts, policy implementation, and increased diplomatic engagement.

Fault lines remain

Yet even these modest expectations are clouded by uncertainty.

Former Pakistani ambassador Asif Durrani says it is too early to predict concrete outcomes from the Islamabad talks.

“The main thing is that the war has stopped, and that’s the first step towards peace,” he tells TRT World.

He noted that Pakistan’s efforts, with support from Türkiye and China, have created a framework for dialogue, but ultimate progress will depend on how Washington and Tehran calculate their gains and losses and reach a negotiated settlement.

“Let’s keep our fingers crossed,” he says.

European University Institute’s Eslami, meanwhile, warned that divergent US and Israeli interests pose the "most dangerous" risk, as Tel Aviv can start the war again "at any point" and Iran would be forced to respond.

"In general, I am not optimistic about peace," he says, emphasising that this is not a stage where the warring parties can declare a permanent end to the war.

Beyond the ceasefire

For Khan, Pakistan’s former foreign secretary, the answer goes far beyond a temporary halt in fighting.

“Mere ceasefire is not the endgame. Genuine, durable peace is what will mean success,” he says, arguing that this requires addressing Iran’s core security concerns and rethinking broader regional security arrangements.

He suggests major Muslim countries like Iran, Pakistan, Türkiye, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Egypt, Iraq, Indonesia and Malaysia join together “under a NATO-type treaty to become a strong united Muslim entity to guarantee security of the region without any American bases in the region”.

He shared his perspective for the Muslim world “which must now regain its lost strength and power”. 

While Pakistan’s diplomacy has earned praise from some world leaders and generated cautious optimism on the ground, there remain deep structural challenges, including long‑standing mistrust between Tehran and Washington, divergent strategic goals, and domestic political pressures on both sides.

So as Islamabad attempts to shepherd the fragile talks, the limits of diplomacy remain starkly evident. Eslami puts it bluntly: “We need the defeat of one certain party to an undeniable extent so the war can stop.”