Iran has sent a response to a United States ceasefire proposal through Pakistan, with Tehran using Islamabad as a diplomatic channel to communicate its position to Washington.

Iran's stated priorities in the talks are straightforward: stop the fighting and get binding guarantees that rule out future military strikes against it. Tehran has made clear it wants any deal to address both the immediate halt to hostilities and longer-term security assurances, not just a temporary pause.

Why Pakistan Is Carrying the Message

The use of Pakistan as an intermediary reflects the absence of direct diplomatic relations between Iran and the United States. When countries cannot or choose not to talk directly, they route communications through a third party both sides trust enough to deliver messages accurately. Pakistan, which shares a border with Iran and maintains ties with Washington, has taken on that role here.

What This Means for the Talks

The fact that Iran has sent a formal response, rather than rejecting talks outright, signals that a diplomatic channel is open. But the content of Tehran's demands, guaranteed protection from future attacks, is a high bar. Such guarantees are difficult to structure and verify, and the US has not publicly confirmed what its ceasefire proposal contained or what guarantees, if any, it offered.

The sequence now matters. A response has been delivered, but whether the US accepts, counters, or rejects Iran's terms will determine whether negotiations advance or stall. Any agreement would also need to account for the positions of other parties involved in the broader conflict.

Investors and policymakers watching the Middle East will note that an open channel is better than none, but the gap between Iran's demand for security guarantees and a workable ceasefire framework could still be wide. Oil markets, regional stability, and US foreign policy posture in the Gulf all remain sensitive to how this unfolds.

The next signal to watch is Washington's public or private reaction to Iran's response, and whether Pakistan continues in the intermediary role or a broader diplomatic format takes shape.