By Sardar Khan Niazi

The latest cycle of confrontation between the US and Iran has once again underscored a familiar truth: military pressure can alter the tactical landscape, but it rarely resolves the strategic dispute. Airstrikes, sanctions and retaliatory threats may temporarily shift the balance, yet none addresses the deep mistrust that has accumulated over more than four decades. If there is to be a durable path away from recurring crises, diplomacy must return to the center of policy  and it must be supported by trusted mediators capable of ensuring that agreements survive changes in political winds. The collapse of previous diplomatic understandings offers an important lesson. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), negotiated with the support of multiple international stakeholders, demonstrated that painstaking diplomacy could produce verifiable constraints on Iran’s nuclear program while offering Tehran sanctions relief. However, the agreement also exposed a critical weakness: it lacked sufficient political durability. When one administration withdrew from the accord, years of diplomatic effort quickly unraveled, reinforcing Iranian skepticism about Washington’s reliability and strengthening hardliners on both sides. This history explains why future negotiations cannot rely solely on bilateral commitments. They require credible third parties that both Washington and Tehran consider impartial enough to facilitate dialogue and robust enough to guarantee implementation. Countries such as Oman and Qatar have repeatedly demonstrated their ability to maintain communication channels even during periods of heightened hostility. European governments, despite diminished influence, continue to possess diplomatic expertise and institutional experience. Together, such actors can provide the continuity that direct US-Iran engagement often lacks. Yet mediation alone is insufficient. Successful diplomacy requires political backing from the major powers involved. Mediators cannot perform miracles if agreements remain vulnerable to domestic political shifts in Washington or Tehran. For diplomacy to succeed, both governments must recognize that compromise is not a concession to weakness but an investment in long-term security. Confidence-building measures, phased implementation and independent verification mechanisms can help reassure both parties that commitments will be honored. The international community also has a stake in ensuring that diplomacy prevails. An escalation between the US and Iran would not remain confined to the Gulf. Global energy markets, maritime trade routes and regional stability would all suffer severe consequences. Countries across the Middle East have prioritized economic development over geopolitical confrontation, creating an environment in which sustained dialogue is more valuable than renewed conflict. Regional actors therefore have every incentive to support diplomatic initiatives rather than proxy competition. Equally important is the recognition that neither maximum pressure nor maximalist demands have delivered lasting results. Sanctions have inflicted significant economic hardship on Iran but have not produced a comprehensive political settlement. Conversely, Iran’s expanding nuclear capabilities have increased international anxiety without improving its strategic security. The logic of escalation has reached diminishing returns for both sides. A renewed diplomatic process must  seek practical, incremental agreements that reduce tensions while laying the groundwork for broader discussions on regional security, missile programs and  economic cooperation. Such an approach requires patience rather than headlines and persistence rather than political symbolism. Diplomacy is often criticized for being slow and imperfect. Yet history repeatedly shows that negotiated settlements, however fragile, provide greater stability than cycles of coercion and retaliation. The challenge is not merely bringing Washington and Tehran back to the negotiating table. It is ensuring that the next agreement is resilient enough to withstand domestic political changes, regional crises and inevitable disagreements. Trusted mediators, backed by sustained international support and genuine political commitment, offer the best chance of transforming temporary understandings into lasting peace. Without such support, diplomacy risks becoming another missed opportunity, leaving the region trapped in an endless cycle of confrontation that serves no one’s long-term interests.