Modi’s Israel visit strengthened Pakistan’s hand in US–Iran truce: Ex-Indian diplomat

By Jag Jivan 

M. K. Bhadrakumar, a career diplomat with three decades of service in postings across the former Soviet Union, Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Germany, and Turkey, has warned that the current truce in the US–Iran war is “fragile and ridden with contradictions.” Writing in his blog India Punchline, Bhadrakumar argues that while Pakistan has emerged as a surprising broker of dialogue, the durability of the ceasefire remains uncertain.

According to a Tass report from Islamabad, US–Iran talks are scheduled to begin Saturday at the Serena Hotel and are expected to last several days. Bhadrakumar notes that Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Israel just before the US–Israeli attack on Iran inadvertently strengthened Pakistan’s diplomatic hand, allowing Islamabad to position itself as a mediator. He compares this moment to Pakistan’s role in facilitating the Sino-American détente 55 years ago, despite dismissive remarks from Indian officials labeling Pakistan as a mere “courier” or “postman.”

Bhadrakumar cautions, however, that the contradictions underlying the truce are profound. He cites Samuel Beckett’s famous line — “Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better.” — to underscore the tenuous nature of the effort. For Washington, the challenge lies in reconciling domestic political pressures with the need to negotiate. He points out that sanctions, while a major sticking point for Tehran, have previously been considered for removal by Donald Trump himself, as noted in a US Congressional Research Service report dated August 19, 2025.

Trump has since hinted at cooperation with Iran on nuclear material disposal, but simultaneously announced steep tariffs on countries supplying weapons to Tehran.

Bhadrakumar (photo) interprets this as part of Trump’s broader strategy of “weaponisation of tariffs,” noting that Russia and China are unlikely to be deterred. More critically, Iran’s demand for an end to Israeli military operations against Hezbollah in Lebanon poses a potential “deal breaker.” Israel has continued its strikes in Beirut, killing at least 182 people in one of the deadliest days of the conflict.

Iran’s response has been swift. The IRGC’s aerospace commander, Gen. Seyed Majid Mousavi, declared that “aggression towards Lebanon is aggression towards Iran,” signaling preparations for a heavy retaliation. Tehran has reportedly closed the Strait of Hormuz and attacked Saudi oil infrastructure, moves that intensify pressure on Washington. Bhadrakumar stresses that the ultimate test of Trump’s truce offer lies in whether he can rein in Israel, which remains opposed to any settlement until Iran is weakened into a “failed state.”

He highlights Israel’s concerns: Iran’s missile capabilities, its lucrative toll system in the Strait of Hormuz, and its growing economic ties with China through yuan-denominated oil sales. Hezbollah’s resurgence and Netanyahu’s political vulnerabilities ahead of elections further complicate the picture. Bhadrakumar concludes that if peace were to dawn, Israel would face mounting global pressure to resolve the Palestinian question — a prospect fundamentally at odds with the Zionist vision of Greater Israel.