Revised Iranian proposal to end war shared with U.S., Pakistani source says

Pakistan’s prime minister confirmed on Sunday that Islamabad had taken custody of Iran’s formal written response to a U.S. plan aimed at ending the Middle East war, telling a ceremony in the capital that senior civil and military leaders had briefed him shortly beforehand. Iranian state news agencies said the reply had been transmitted through Pakistani mediators and pointed to priorities such as halting hostilities and stabilising maritime traffic through the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz, while stopping short of publishing the full text.

Later the same day, wire reports citing a Pakistani government official involved in the negotiation track said Pakistan had forwarded Iran’s document to the United States. The official was not named in early dispatches, and this desk has not seen an independent copy of the paper; readers should treat the chain—Tehran draft → Islamabad receipt → onward relay—as reported process, not as confirmation of every substantive demand inside the envelope.

What Iranian state media emphasised

The official IRNA agency said the Islamic Republic had sent its answer to the latest American text “through Pakistani mediators.” ISNA added, without publishing the underlying cable, that the response concentrated on “ending the war and maritime security” in the Gulf and Hormuz. State television reporting summarised in regional roundups also linked the package to ending fighting “on all fronts, especially Lebanon,” alongside shipping security—language that signals how Tehran wants the conversation sequenced before reopening harder trade and nuclear questions.

Pakistan’s visible role

Shehbaz Sharif’s on-stage remarks credited Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar and army chief Field Marshal Asim Munir for what he described as sustained de-escalation work, while acknowledging limits on what he could say in public about live diplomacy. Pakistan had already hosted a historic but inconclusive first round of direct U.S.–Iran talks in Islamabad in mid-April, days after an April 8 ceasefire announcement that paused the heaviest exchanges following late-February U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran.

Washington’s first public posture

U.S. officials quoted in the same reporting cycle declined to walk through the Iranian paper point by point, citing a policy of not airing private diplomatic traffic. They repeated standing requirements that any durable settlement block an Iranian nuclear weapon and protect American security interests over both short and long horizons—formulations that leave room for negotiation but do not, by themselves, confirm acceptance of Tehran’s sequencing.

Why the Hormuz file still dominates

Even with guns largely quiet under the truce, commercial shipping through Hormuz remains a chokepoint: Tehran has used access restrictions as leverage, Washington has kept a naval blockade on Iranian ports, and energy markets have traded far above pre-war levels. Any serious “end war” text therefore intersects with tolls, escorts, and insurance regimes as much as with headline ceasefire language—issues where the May 10 Iranian readouts pointed reporters, even while the underlying offer stayed confidential.

What is still open

It remained unclear how quickly U.S. negotiators would answer in writing, whether a second Islamabad round would convene, or how much of Iran’s response overlapped with Washington’s earlier fourteen-point framework. This desk will update if either capital publishes a formal summary, if the Pakistani Foreign Office releases a structured readout, or if the document leaks in authenticated form.