What does the China-Pakistan plan for the Iran crisis mean for a post-war order?

By issuing a joint five-point plan on the Iran crisis on Tuesday, China and Pakistan have laid out what Chinese analysts described as a “feasible path” towards a ceasefire and renewed diplomacy. At the same time, the move quietly signalled an early effort to shape the post-war Middle East order in a region where the long-standing US-dominated security framework was already facing growing strain and uncertainty, the observers said. In recent weeks, regional powers have emerged as mediators to prevent Iran’s total collapse and the permanent closure of global energy lanes. Turkey has joined Pakistan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia to form a united regional diplomatic front. During talks in Islamabad earlier this week, the four countries’ foreign ministers sought to establish a formal peace-broker channel distinct from a Western-led plan. The initiative by China and Pakistan – following talks in Beijing on Tuesday between Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and Pakistani Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar – called for an immediate cessation of hostilities and the prompt start of peace talks. It also urged guarantees for the sovereignty, territorial integrity and security of Iran and the Gulf states. It further called for restoring safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz and a peace framework grounded in the UN Charter and international law. Washington has yet to formally respond to the joint plan, but US President Donald Trump said hours later that America could end its military operations against Iran “within two to three weeks”. Trump also said “we’ll be leaving very soon”, and that Tehran “doesn’t have to make a deal” as a prerequisite for the US to conclude Operation Epic Fury. Niu Xinchun, vice-president of Ningxia University and a prominent Chinese expert on Middle East politics, described Beijing’s points as “step-by-step linked” to the war’s trajectory. “Without halting the fighting, no other issues can even be discussed,” Niu said of the first point calling for an unconditional ceasefire. He noted that while the initiative avoided direct mention of the United States or Israel, it was clearly aimed at their recent actions, particularly Washington’s claims of negotiating with Iran while expanding the war and threatening further strikes. With the conflict widening beyond the battlefield into energy and industrial sites in neighbouring Gulf nations, Niu said the war had exposed the limitations of Washington’s deterrence. For decades, Gulf states relied heavily on US military protection, but their confidence in the American security umbrella has been shaken by the broadening confrontation and attacks on major infrastructure. Niu said the initiative’s emphasis on UN Charter principles was especially forward-looking, pointing to a different foundation for future stability. “For regional countries, this clearly prepares the ground for post-war peace once the fighting stops,” he said. Still, Niu cautioned that it was “too early to talk about the post-war landscape”, adding that “how and when the war ends will determine the outcome”. Jodie Wen, a researcher at Tsinghua University’s Centre for International Security and Strategy, said shifts in the Gulf states’ security structure were already under way. “Since 2023, Iran’s power has weakened while Israel’s has grown,” she said. “Gulf states, reliant on US security guarantees, feel vulnerable and have sought external powers like Pakistan and China to balance the region.” Wen argued that the future order largely depended on how the war concluded, but the shifting dynamics and uncertainty in Washington were creating a vacuum that could open opportunities for a wider set of actors, including China and Pakistan. She voiced cautious optimism about the prospects for mediation while warning against over-interpreting China’s role, saying regional states were usually the main interlocutors in Middle Eastern conflicts. “But as the war drags on, China, as a major external power, is increasingly seen as necessary.” Wen compared the present circumstances to the Saudi-Iranian reconciliation of 2023, when China was viewed as a trusted guarantor. “Iran distrusts the US, Pakistan lacks sufficient weight, so a major power is needed,” she explained. “China has both capability and credibility. But this does not mean China’s deeper military involvement. Rather, it will act as a responsible major power, contributing diplomatically, politically and morally, but not militarily.” Farzan Sabet, a managing researcher at the Geneva Graduate Institute, expressed greater scepticism over the joint initiative and China’s willingness to get more involved in the Middle East. Although Sabet saw the plan as “a useful platform and channel” for addressing Iran-Gulf issues, he doubted its relevance for the US-Israel war on Iran. “At a very basic level, would Trump want to give China the win letting it play this role?” he asked in a social media post. Sabet also said the call to restore normal passage through the Strait of Hormuz “seems unrealistic”.

What does the China-Pakistan plan for the Iran crisis mean for a post-war order?

.css-1c6uqr6{color:inherit;font-weight:inherit;font-size:inherit;font-family:inherit;line-height:inherit;overflow-wrap:break-word;}Diplomatic initiative comes as long-standing US-dominated security framework faces growing strain and uncertainty, analysts say

Diplomatic initiative comes as long-standing US-dominated security framework faces growing strain and uncertainty, analysts say