\n
![](\"https:\/\/i.dawn.com\/large\/2026\/04\/12122926469f594.webp\")
<\/p>\n
\n<\/p>\n
After a marathon 21 hours of high-level talks, delegations from the United States and Iran departed from Islamabad<\/a> on Sunday morning without reaching an agreement.<\/p>\n The Islamabad Talks had the world, especially the Middle East, hoping that the 40-day US-Iran war would come to a permanent end. Both countries had agreed to a two-week ceasefire earlier this week, with Pakistan playing a key diplomatic role.<\/p>\n However, speaking to the media earlier today, US Vice President JD Vance said: \u201cThe bad news is that we have not reached an agreement, and I think that\u2019s bad news for Iran much more than it\u2019s bad news for the United States of America.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cSo we go back to the United States, having not come to an agreement. We\u2019ve made very clear what our red lines are.\u201d He also cited shortcomings in the talks, saying that Tehran had chosen not to accept American terms, including the building of nuclear weapons.<\/p>\n On the other hand, Iran\u2019s semi-official Tasnim<\/em> news agency said that \u201cexcessive\u201d US demands had hindered an agreement.<\/p>\n \u201cThe success of this diplomatic process depends on the seriousness and good faith of the opposing side, refraining from excessive demands and unlawful requests, and the acceptance of Iran\u2019s legitimate rights and interests,\u201d wrote Iran\u2019s Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesperson Esmaeil Baqaei in an X post.<\/p>\n He added that the delegations had reached an \u201cunderstanding\u201d on several issues; however, Baqaei stated that \u201con 2-3 important issues, views were far apart, and ultimately, the talks did not lead to an agreement\u201d.<\/p>\n Here\u2019s what analysts and journalists are saying about the latest developments:<\/p>\n In a post on X, Michael Kugelman, a Washington-based scholar of South Asian affairs, said the talks likely weren\u2019t over. \u201cMore talks could come, but it\u2019s unclear if they\u2019ll be in Pakistan or elsewhere.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe US, for domestic political reasons, wants a deal that enables it to exit the war. That such a senior group flew all the way to Pak shows the US commitment,\u201d he wrote.<\/p>\n \u201cDespite Vance\u2019s comments, this likely isn\u2019t over.\u201d<\/p>\n \n <\/a>\n <\/p><\/blockquote>\n <\/span><\/div>\n<\/figure>\n Daniel DePetris, a foreign affairs columnist, said that a comprehensive agreement between Iran and the US was not possible in one day.<\/p>\n \u201cNearly 24 hours of talks is a lot, but it\u2019s only 24 hours [\u2026] you weren\u2019t going to solve nuclear, sanctions, Strait of Hormuz and terms to end the war in 21 hours,\u201d he wrote on X.<\/p>\n \u201cHe (Vance) basically gave Iran an ultimatum: accept our terms because you\u2019re not going to get a better agreement.<\/p>\n \u201cThe fact that Iran is still rejecting US demands despite 6 weeks of war shows just how confident it is right now,\u201d DePetris added.<\/p>\n \n <\/a>\n <\/p><\/blockquote>\n <\/span><\/div>\n<\/figure>\n Journalist Raza Ahmad Rumi was also of the opinion that talks will resume, highlighting that Vance\u2019s signal of no deal after last night\u2019s talks reflected a \u201cstructural deadlock\u201d.<\/p>\n \u201cWashington is pushing for verifiable limits on enrichment and regional de-escalation, while Tehran is holding firm on sanctions relief and strategic autonomy. The gap was always going to be wide. The first round was less about agreement and more about testing red lines.<\/p>\n But this is diplomacy, not a one-shot negotiation,\u201d he wrote on X.<\/p>\n Rumi said that \u201ca collapse\u201d would risk escalation in an already volatile region. \u201cMarkets, supply chains, and vulnerable economies would all take the hit. No serious actor can afford that outcome.\u201d<\/p>\n Which is why, he continued, talks will resume.<\/p>\n \n <\/a>\n <\/p><\/blockquote>\n <\/span><\/div>\n<\/figure>\n \u201cAnd in all this, Pakistan has quietly delivered a strategic win. By bringing Washington and Tehran into the same diplomatic space and opening a credible channel, it has shifted from the margins to the table at a critical geopolitical moment. Outcomes remain uncertain, but the fact of engagement itself is a durable achievement.<\/p>\n \u201cIn a fragmented world, creating the conditions for dialogue is no small feat,\u201d the journalist added.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, journalist Iftikhar Firdous said there was a \u201cstark contrast\u201d between the statements issued by Iran and Vance, which reflected their two \u201cfundamentally different diplomatic mindsets\u201d.<\/p>\n \u201cIran frames the outcomes as part of a larger, broader historical and ideological struggle; we\u2019ll endure, and therefore we will resist.<\/p>\n \u201cWhile the US messaging is to leverage outcomes and national interest. We have the leverage, and therefore we can shape the outcome,\u201d he explained in a post on X.<\/p>\n \n <\/a>\n <\/p><\/blockquote>\n <\/span><\/div>\n<\/figure>\n \u201cOn Pakistan\u2019s side, it\u2019s clear, as Foreign Minister Dar put it, it will continue to play the role to facilitate, it doesn\u2019t end here,\u201d Firdous added.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, anchorperson Kamran Yousaf emphasised that even though the talks remain inconclusive, the dialogue was the \u201cmost serious effort yet to reach a deal\u201d.<\/p>\n \u201cNever before have the US and Iran spoken to each other directly at the highest level. The sticking point that eludes the deal remains the Strait of Hormuz,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Yousaf added that several ideas were floated during marathon talks, \u201cbut the stalemate persists\u201d.<\/p>\n \u201cIn the end, Pakistan may not have achieved its ultimate goal, but its efforts to help broker a deal of the century will be in the history books,\u201d the journalist said.<\/p>\n \n <\/a>\n <\/p><\/blockquote>\n <\/span><\/div>\n<\/figure>\n Dr Tehmina Aslam Ranjha, columnist and research analyst, noted that even though the talks did not produce an agreement, Islamabad created space for dialogue in a moment charged with mistrust and brinkmanship.<\/p>\n \u201cBringing adversaries to the same table after decades is not routine diplomacy; it is strategic credibility in action,\u201d she wrote on X.<\/p>\n<\/a>\u2018Not over\u2019<\/strong><\/h2>\n
<\/p>\n<\/a>\u2018Only 24 hours\u2019<\/strong><\/h2>\n
<\/p>\n<\/a>\u2018Diplomacy, not one-shot negotiation\u2019<\/strong><\/h2>\n
<\/p>\n<\/a>\u2018It doesn\u2019t end here\u2019<\/h2>\n
<\/p>\n<\/a>\u2018Most serious effort\u2019<\/strong><\/h2>\n
<\/p>\n<\/a>\u2018Space for dialogue\u2019<\/strong><\/h2>\n