Pakistan renewed its call for implementation of the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and Iran during a September 15 meeting between Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar and US Chargé d'Affaires Natalie A. Baker.
According to reporting based on the Foreign Office account, Dar discussed Pakistan-US relations and the regional situation with Baker and stressed continued diplomatic engagement. He also reiterated Pakistan's position that implementing the Islamabad MoU remained an important route toward reducing tensions between Washington and Tehran.
Reporting on the September 15 meeting said Dar welcomed the positive trajectory of Pakistan-US relations and emphasised regular engagement on issues of mutual interest.
What is the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding?
The Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding was signed in June 2026 as a framework intended to halt the US-Iran conflict and create a path toward a broader settlement.
On June 18, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif announced that US President Donald Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian had electronically signed the agreement, with Pakistan endorsing it in its role as mediator.
The President's Secretariat subsequently welcomed the signing and called for the agreement to be fully implemented and followed by efforts toward a final settlement.
The White House also transmitted the text of the interim agreement to the US Congress. Reuters reported on June 18 that the agreement provided for an end to military operations and contained commitments involving the Strait of Hormuz, the US naval blockade and negotiations toward a final peace agreement.
Pakistan's role in the agreement
Pakistan played a mediation role in the diplomatic process that produced the Islamabad MoU.
Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif signed the document as mediator after the US and Iranian presidents signed it. The Associated Press of Pakistan reported that the final document carried the signatures of Trump and Pezeshkian as well as Sharif's endorsement as mediator.
Pakistani officials have since continued to describe implementation of the agreement as central to reducing regional tensions.
That diplomatic role does not mean Pakistan controls whether Washington and Tehran fulfil their commitments. Implementation ultimately depends on decisions taken by the United States and Iran.
What the agreement was supposed to achieve
The agreement established a framework for ending military confrontation and moving toward a more comprehensive settlement.
Pakistan said at the time of signing that Iran would reopen the Strait of Hormuz and the United States would lift its naval blockade. The agreement also envisaged further negotiations rather than treating the memorandum itself as the final settlement of every dispute between the two countries.
The distinction between signing and implementation is important. The existence of the MoU established agreed commitments, but later disagreements over their implementation continued to affect US-Iran diplomacy.
Why Dar raised the agreement again
Dar's September 15 comments came against that background. Pakistan was not announcing a new US-Iran agreement during his meeting with Baker. Instead, it was urging the parties to return to commitments contained in the existing June framework.
Dar also stressed dialogue and diplomacy as Pakistan's preferred approach to regional tensions and called for continued engagement with Washington.
The meeting therefore represented another Pakistani diplomatic intervention rather than evidence that Washington and Tehran had reached a new breakthrough.
Diplomacy continued after the September 15 meeting
The diplomatic process did not end with Dar's meeting with Baker. Later in September, Iran presented another proposal connected to reopening the Strait of Hormuz and renewed negotiations with the United States.
That later diplomacy again referred back to implementation of the June framework, showing that the Islamabad MoU remained relevant even though its original commitments had not produced a comprehensive final settlement.
The continued negotiations also demonstrate why the September 15 meeting should be understood as one stage in an evolving diplomatic process rather than the final status of US-Iran relations.
What Pakistan can and cannot do
Pakistan can continue diplomatic engagement with Washington and Tehran, encourage implementation of the agreement and offer mediation where both parties are willing to participate.
It cannot independently enforce the commitments made by either government.
For Pakistan, the issue also has an economic dimension. Conflict involving Iran and disruption around the Strait of Hormuz can affect international energy markets and shipping routes, making regional de-escalation relevant to an energy-importing economy such as Pakistan.
Where the process stands
The Islamabad MoU remains an important reference point in diplomatic efforts surrounding the US-Iran conflict, but signing the agreement did not by itself resolve every dispute between Washington and Tehran.
Pakistan continues to advocate dialogue and implementation of the framework it helped mediate. Subsequent diplomatic activity has shown that significant disagreements remain over how a broader settlement should be implemented.
Update, October 2, 2026: This article has been revised to add direct sources for the September 15 diplomatic meeting and the June Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding, clarify Pakistan's role as mediator, and distinguish the signing of the MoU from its subsequent implementation. Later diplomatic activity is included to prevent the September 15 account from being presented as the current endpoint of US-Iran negotiations.
