How Pakistan has served as a bridge in US diplomacy from the Cold War to the Iran war
The visit marks the first time in a decade that a senior US delegation has travelled to Pakistan, reviving a long-standing pattern in which Islamabad has acted as a conduit for American diplomacy during periods of geopolitical tension
Pakistan is once again hosting high-level diplomacy as JD Vance arrives in Islamabad for talks with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi on 11 April 2026, amid the ongoing conflict involving Iran.
The visit marks the first time in a decade that a senior US delegation has travelled to Pakistan, reviving a long-standing pattern in which Islamabad has acted as a conduit for American diplomacy during periods of geopolitical tension, sasy Dawn.
Below is a look at how US-Pakistan diplomatic engagement has evolved and how it connects to the current Iran war context.
Cold war foundations
The relationship dates back to the early Cold War, when Pakistan aligned itself with the United States.
In 1959, Dwight D. Eisenhower became the first US president to visit Pakistan, travelling to Karachi. The trip underscored Washington's strategic interest in South Asia and resulted in a significant expansion of military and economic assistance to Pakistan.
Lyndon B. Johnson also visited Pakistan twice—first as vice president in 1961 and later as president in 1967—reflecting sustained engagement during a period when both countries were closely aligned.
Pakistan as a diplomatic intermediary
By the late 1960s, Pakistan's role had expanded beyond bilateral ties to acting as a diplomatic bridge.
In 1969, Richard Nixon leveraged Pakistan's relations with both Washington and Beijing to open communication with China. This effort, supported by Pakistani leadership, led to Henry Kissinger's secret 1971 trip to China aboard a Pakistani aircraft, a key step towards normalising US-China relations.
This period established a precedent for Pakistan's involvement in facilitating sensitive negotiations between global powers.
Strains and strategic cooperation
During the 1980s, ties remained important but were shaped by regional conflicts.
In 1984, George H.W. Bush visited Pakistan and met military ruler Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq, discussing the Soviet-Afghan War and the Iran-Iraq conflict—an earlier instance of US-Pakistan coordination during tensions involving Iran.
Relations cooled after Pakistan's 1999 military coup. When Bill Clinton visited in 2000, his brief stop was marked by visible caution in dealing with Pervez Musharraf, reflecting US concerns over democratic governance.
The war on terror era
After the 11 September attacks, Pakistan again became central to US strategy.
Dick Cheney visited in 2005 and 2007, with the latter trip focusing on counterterrorism cooperation. In 2006, George W. Bush travelled to Pakistan under tight security, highlighting the country's role in combating militant groups.
Joe Biden, then vice president, visited in 2009 and 2011. While his first trip emphasised partnership, the second reflected growing US pressure on Pakistan over militant sanctuaries.
The 2026 Iran war
The current talks in Islamabad come as the United States and Iran face heightened tensions linked to the ongoing war involving Iran.
Pakistan's role as host reflects its longstanding position as a country able to maintain working relations with multiple sides in a conflict. Similar to its role in facilitating US-China contacts in the 1970s, Islamabad is now providing a venue for dialogue at a time when direct engagement is limited.
The meeting between Vance and Araghchi is seen by analysts as part of broader efforts to prevent further escalation in the Middle East.
A recurring diplomatic role
Over decades, Pakistan has repeatedly served as a venue or intermediary for US diplomacy during periods of international tension—from the Cold War to the War on Terror and now the Iran war.
While the outcomes of such engagements have varied, the pattern highlights Islamabad's continued relevance in global diplomacy, particularly when communication channels between adversaries are constrained.
