Pakistan's Foreign Ministry is in active contact with both Washington and Tehran to arrange a second round of negotiations before the ceasefire expires on approximately April 22, according to journalist Ansar Abbasi, who reported the outreach on X and cited senior diplomatic sources. [1] The push comes forty-eight hours after this paper reported on the two irreconcilable versions of why the first round collapsed — Iran saying a deal was "inches away," Vance saying Tehran refused American terms.

The rebranding is the story. What collapsed on Saturday as failed talks has been repackaged by Islamabad as the "Islamabad Process" — a term that implies continuity, structure, and institutional weight. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif used the phrase in a call with Turkish President Erdogan on Monday, and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar has repeated it in diplomatic communications with both capitals. [2] The language is borrowed from Middle East peace negotiations, where processes outlive agreements and the process itself becomes the product.

The tactical logic is clear. Pakistan staked enormous diplomatic capital on hosting the first direct U.S.-Iran engagement since 1979. If the talks become a one-off failure, that capital evaporates. If they become a "process," Pakistan retains its role as convener. [3]

Whether either party will return is a different question. The blockade that began Sunday — announced eight hours after Vance left Islamabad — has fundamentally altered the negotiating environment. Iran's Supreme National Security Council called the blockade "an act of war against the Iranian nation." [4] The American position is that the blockade is "enforcement, not escalation," contingent on Iranian compliance with demands the first round already rejected. [1]

Pakistan, Egypt, and Turkey are now working in parallel to bridge the gap. [5] But none of the three mediators can deliver the core concession each side requires: Iran will not abandon enrichment, and the United States will not lift the blockade without verification.

The April 22 ceasefire expiration adds urgency that may be artificial. The ceasefire has been violated hundreds of times by both sides. Its formal expiration is a diplomatic event, not a military one — the blockade already supersedes it. But the date functions as a deadline, giving Pakistan a narrative frame: act before April 22, or lose the window.

The gap between the two sides has not narrowed since Saturday. What has changed is that Pakistan now has a name for it.

-- PRIYA SHARMA, Delhi