In today’s fractured world, even a temporary ceasefire feels like a small miracle. So when tensions between the United States and Iran appeared to ease, reportedly with Pakistan playing a mediating role, it should have been a straightforward moment of cautious relief.

Instead, it has turned into something else: a debate over credit, credibility, and, in some corners, thinly disguised discomfort.

Let’s start with the obvious. A de-escalation in West Asia is good news. Not for one country or another, but for everyone. The region sits at the heart of global energy flows. Any serious conflict involving Iran risks choking the Strait of Hormuz, sending oil prices soaring and rattling economies from South Asia to the West. Countries like India and Pakistan would feel that shock almost immediately.

So the first instinct should be simple: hope it holds.

But geopolitics is rarely that simple. Who gets the credit often matters as much as what actually happens. Pakistan’s reported role in facilitating talks has been met with scepticism—and in some cases outright dismissal—particularly across sections of Indian media and strategic commentary. That reaction is not surprising. The India-Pakistan rivalry has always been about more than territory or security; it’s also about narrative. Diplomatic wins are contested just as fiercely as military ones.

Still, there’s a difference between healthy scepticism and reflexive dismissal.........

© The Friday Times