By: Sheikh Gulzar
The claim that only China and Pakistan can bring about a ceasefire between the United States and Iran is an oversimplification of a much more complex geopolitical reality.
It is true that China and Pakistan have actively called for de-escalation. China, in particular, has repeatedly urged dialogue and condemned military escalation, positioning itself as a diplomatic actor seeking stability in the Middle East. Pakistan has also supported ceasefire initiatives at international forums like the United Nations, often working alongside China and other countries to push for negotiations.
However, global diplomacy is rarely limited to just two countries. Historically, ceasefires involving the United States and Iran—or conflicts linked to them—have involved multiple actors, including the United Nations, European powers, regional states like Oman or Qatar, and sometimes even direct backchannel talks. In fact, a recent UN Security Council resolution called for an immediate ceasefire in the 2026 Iran conflict, showing that multilateral institutions still play a central role.
The idea that Iran “does not trust any other country” is also not entirely accurate. While Iran has strategic partnerships and varying levels of trust with different nations, it has historically engaged in negotiations with multiple parties, including the U.S. itself during nuclear talks, as well as European intermediaries.
In reality, China and Pakistan are important voices advocating peace, but they are not the only ones capable of influencing a ceasefire. Achieving lasting peace between the United States and Iran would require broad international cooperation, complex negotiations, and mutual willingness from the primary parties involved.
