Pakistan’s army chief has travelled to Tehran to advance a Pakistani-brokered de‑escalation initiative between Iran and the United States built around a “calm for freeze” formula that would curb military escalation while broader issues are negotiated.
Pakistan’s Chief of Army Staff, General Asim Munir, is visiting Tehran on Thursday as part of Islamabad’s ongoing mediation efforts between Iran and Washington, in coordination with Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, according to Iranian agency ISNA and Al Mayadeen. The visit coincides with talks in Tehran between Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Pakistan’s Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi, underscoring the multiplicity of channels Islamabad is using to anchor its initiative.
The Pakistani move comes against the backdrop of intense regional tensions following U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran and fears that any miscalculation could trigger a broader regional confrontation.
The “Calm for Freeze” Formula
According to available reports, Islamabad is promoting an interim “framework of phased understanding” that falls short of a comprehensive agreement but aims to prevent a slide into a regional war. At its core is the principle of “calm in exchange for freeze”: de‑escalation on the ground in return for a halt to steps viewed by each side as provocative.
Under this proposed framework, the United States and Israel would suspend strikes on Iran, while Tehran would pledge not to expand attacks on U.S. bases or international shipping. The initiative also envisions regulating navigation in the Strait of Hormuz to guarantee oil flows, alongside launching 30‑ to 60‑day negotiations covering nuclear and missile issues, Iran’s regional role, and, ultimately, the gradual lifting of U.S. sanctions.
Leaked details suggest mediators are trying to design the proposal so that neither side can claim an early “political victory,” a key concern for both Washington and Tehran. For the current U.S. administration, the arrangement would be presented as an extension of its “maximum pressure” strategy that has, in its narrative, pushed Iran back to the table.
For Tehran, the same framework would be framed as proof that the Islamic Republic has not bowed to war or siege, but forced Washington to deal with it as an indispensable regional actor. Pakistani officials, for their part, are reportedly keen to postpone the most contentious files to later stages, hoping to protect the talks from early collapse.
Israeli Concerns and U.S. Calculus
Israeli media coverage has highlighted deep unease in Tel Aviv over the Pakistani‑led initiative. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has reportedly voiced his concerns to U.S. President Donald Trump that any truce could give Iran the breathing space it needs to rebuild its capabilities after months of confrontation.
In Washington, however, the proposal is seen by some policymakers as a way to avoid a full‑scale regional war while maintaining the image of sustained pressure on Tehran. The United States is attempting to reconcile its stated goal of containing Iran with the clear risks of further escalation in a region already strained by multiple crises.
Parallel political signals from Tehran underline both Iran’s readiness to engage and its insistence on deterrence. Iranian outlet Tasnim, citing a source close to the negotiating team, reported that Washington recently sent a new draft to Tehran through the Pakistani channel, days after Iran had submitted a 14‑point proposal of its own; Iranian officials are now studying the U.S. text without having issued a formal response.
At the same time, Iranian Parliamentary Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf warned that the “open and covert moves of the enemy” indicate a push toward a new round of war, while the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has cautioned that any renewed aggression could expand the conflict beyond the region’s borders.