As the U.S. and Iran exchanged escalating strikes on June 11, a plane carrying Qatari mediators was stranded on the tarmac in Tehran, engaged in intensive overnight talks to halt what appeared to be a spiral back into all-out war, according to a diplomat briefed on the negotiations.
The scene on the runway encapsulated the tumultuous diplomatic process led by Pakistan and Qatar that produced last week's deal ending a conflict that destabilized the Middle East and damaged the world economy. Negotiations on implementing the agreement now face similar challenges, including violence in Lebanon and threats over the Strait of Hormuz.
The account is based on Associated Press interviews with three Pakistani officials, two regional officials and the diplomat who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive closed-door talks. Pakistan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs referred the AP to previous public statements and said it would continue mediating. The White House declined to comment. Representatives of Qatar and Iran did not respond to requests for comment.
On June 11, U.S. President Donald Trump had threatened military action, saying the U.S. would hit Iran "VERY HARD TONIGHT" and take "total control" of its oil and gas industry. Qatar's emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, spoke directly with Trump and urged him to hold off on more strikes because a deal was close, the diplomat said.
Trump announced he had canceled the planned strikes. Days later, Washington and Tehran signed an agreement to end the conflict sparked by the U.S.-Israeli attack on Iran in February. The deal aimed to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a critical waterway for oil and gas that Iran shut down at the start of the conflict, and lift a U.S. blockade to allow Iran to export oil.
What the Right Is Saying
Conservative critics of the deal have raised concerns about what they characterize as concessions to Iran without sufficient verification of its commitments. They argue that lifting sanctions and unfreezing assets provides relief to a regime that has supported militant groups across the region and continues to enrich uranium.
Republican lawmakers who opposed the original Iran nuclear deal have expressed skepticism about the 60-day deadline for negotiating a broader agreement, warning that Tehran may use diplomatic talks as cover to advance its nuclear program. Some have called for stricter verification mechanisms before any economic relief is granted.
Supporters of the Israel-U.S. alliance note with concern that Iran's demand for Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon was included in the memorandum of understanding. They argue this represents leverage given to an adversary at the expense of a key ally, and worry about whether Trump administration negotiators are adequately protecting Israeli security interests.
What the Left Is Saying
Progressive analysts have praised the diplomatic breakthrough as evidence that direct negotiations can succeed where sanctions and military pressure have failed. They argue that engaging Tehran through mediators rather than isolating it produced results that benefit global stability and reduce the risk of broader regional war.
Humanitarian organizations have pointed to the potential economic relief for ordinary Iranians, noting that years of sanctions have inflicted hardship on civilians while having limited impact on government decision-making. A ceasefire in Lebanon, included per Iran's demands, could also reduce civilian casualties there, advocates say.
Some Democrats who supported diplomatic engagement with Iran during earlier nuclear negotiations have welcomed the approach, arguing it validates their long-standing position that talks are preferable to confrontation. They note that Qatar's success in communicating with both sides demonstrates why maintaining channels with adversaries serves U.S. interests.
What the Numbers Show
The deal set a 60-day deadline for negotiating a broader agreement on Iran's disputed nuclear program. Iran initially demanded at least $500 billion in reparations according to one regional official. Tehran finally agreed to $300 billion in pledged investments linked to a final deal, though it remains unclear who would provide that funding.
Iran's highly enriched uranium stockpile became a key sticking point. Mediators convinced Tehran to include a commitment to dilute the stockpile in draft text in exchange for U.S. promises to waive sanctions on oil sales and gradually unfreeze billions in Iranian assets, regional officials said.
Pakistan had not often mediated high-stakes diplomacy before this conflict but emerged as chief mediator given its border with Iran and good relations with both Tehran and Washington. Qatar brought experience from negotiating the Gaza ceasefire and release of Israeli hostages alongside Egypt.
The Strait of Hormuz handles roughly 20 percent of global oil shipments, making its closure during the conflict a significant factor in world economic disruptions cited by analysts during negotiations.
The Bottom Line
The June 17 memorandum represents a temporary cessation of hostilities after months of conflict, but significant challenges remain. Talks on Iran's nuclear program resumed in Switzerland after a two-day delay attributed to ongoing violence in Lebanon, with an August deadline approaching.
Iran views the Lebanon ceasefire as its top priority and has indicated it will not proceed with broader negotiations if that commitment is violated, the diplomat said. The U.S. and Iran have pushed Israel and Hezbollah to agree to a new truce, though Israel's refusal to withdraw from Lebanon remains a point of contention.
Both sides continue issuing tough public statements, and Iranians briefly paused talks after what they described as an insulting message from Trump. Despite this, the diplomat described the atmosphere in Switzerland as "quite positive," with U.S. and Iranian officials having coffee together during breaks.
The success of mediation by Pakistan and Qatar demonstrates that regional actors can facilitate dialogue even amid active hostilities. Whether those channels remain open if negotiations falter will likely determine whether the interim agreement becomes a foundation for lasting peace or another failed diplomatic initiative in the long-running dispute over Iran's nuclear program.