{"id":61961,"date":"2026-04-16T01:44:32","date_gmt":"2026-04-16T01:44:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/dk\/61961\/"},"modified":"2026-04-16T01:44:32","modified_gmt":"2026-04-16T01:44:32","slug":"x-users-peace-talks-post-sparks-online-debate-firstpost","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/dk\/61961\/","title":{"rendered":"X user’s peace talks post sparks online debate \u2013 Firstpost"},"content":{"rendered":"

On Sunday, US Vice President
\nJD Vance<\/a> came in front of the media after 21-hour-long marathon negotiations and announced that both Iran and the United States failed to reach a deal. The talks held in Islamabad, Pakistan, were aimed at ending the war that has been raging on in West Asia for the past six weeks.<\/p>\n

Vance cited shortcomings in the talks, saying that Iran had chosen not to accept American terms, including not to build nuclear weapons. \u201cThe bad news is that we have not reached an agreement, and I think that\u2019s bad news for Iran much more than it\u2019s bad news for the United States of America,\u201d Vance said. \u201cSo we go back to the United States, having not agreed. We\u2019ve made very clear what our red lines are,” he added.<\/p>\n

STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD<\/p>\n

Meanwhile,
\nIran’s foreign ministry<\/a> also released a statement confirming the news and insisted that the two sides continue to disagree on the two to three points of contention. The failure of what was commonly dubbed the \u201c
\nIslamabad Talks<\/a>\u201d also dealt a major blow to Pakistan\u2019s position as the mediator.<\/p>\n

In a run-up to the talks, Pakistan attempted to \u201crebrand itself\u201d and elevate its global standing by mediating the ravaging war that has rocked West Asia. Pakistan was in a comfortable position to mediate since it has strong ties with the United States under President Donald Trump, and it borders Iran. Hence, stability in Tehran was also instrumental for Pakistan\u2019s own security amid Islamabad\u2019s growing animosities with New Delhi and Kabul.<\/p>\n

Right after both nations agreed to arrive in Islamabad for negotiations, Pakistan\u2019s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Field Marshal Asim Munir were painted as key players. Karachi Chamber of Commerce and Industry (KCCI) went ahead to ask Nobel organisers to award Sharif and Munir a Nobel Peace Prize.<\/p>\n

Even before the talks ended in a stalemate, a user on X compared the Islamabad talks and Norway\u2019s Oslo Accord between Israel and Palestine. However, many pointed out that the parallels cannot be drawn between the two events.<\/p>\n

What the X user said<\/p>\n

While sharing his personal views, a Twitter user compared the Islamabad talks with the Norway-hosting negotiations for the 1993 Oslo Accord. He pointed out how Norway kept the talks between the Israeli and Palestinian delegations under wraps, and no media were allowed to cover it.<\/p>\n

The X user noted that the talks were kept secret and conducted through backchannels. He also pointed out how the Colombian peace process, also launched in Oslo and then moved to Havana, followed the same level of secrecy.<\/p>\n

STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD<\/p>\n

In contrast to this, the Twitter user noted how Islamabad promoted the fact that it was the mediator in the ongoing Iran-US war. \u201cNow look at Islamabad today. Digital billboards across the city are branding it \u201cThe Islamabad Talks\u201d with Pakistani, American, and Iranian flags side by side. A five-star hotel cleared of guests. Two-day public holiday declared. Streets emptied by security lockdown. Pavements literally being painted,\u201d the X user wrote in the post.<\/p>\n

Pakistan is hosting the US-Iran talks right now. And doing everything a serious mediator isn’t supposed to be doing. I did some digging on how Norway does it. The contrast is remarkable.
When Norway brokered the Oslo Accords in 1993, the Israeli and Palestinian delegations\u2026<\/p>\n

\u2014 Ram (@ramprasad_c) April 11, 2026<\/a><\/p>\n

\u201cThis is not mediation. This is a state throwing itself a party for being invited to host one. Every billboard, every painted curb, every flag display says: \u201cLook at us.\u201d Norway\u2019s entire philosophy said: \u201cDon\u2019t look at us. Look at each other,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n

What happened in Norway in 1993<\/p>\n

Norway didn\u2019t appear randomly to mediate the
\nIsrael-Palestine issue<\/a>. For decades, the Nordic nations had decades-long informal ties with the actors in West Asia. Norwegian politicians and officials had a strong relationship with Israel, and at the same time, they engaged with the PLO. This gave Norway access to both sides, which many nations don\u2019t have.<\/p>\n

After the formal negotiations in Washington reached a deadlock, Israeli and Palestinian actors were looking for alternative channels. Norway stepped in to create a \u201cback channel\u201d when official diplomacy failed. Since the country was politically independent and free from any form of heavy geopolitical baggage, Norway turned out to be a strong mediator.<\/p>\n

The most crucial feature of the 1993 talks was the fact that they were conducted in complete secrecy. Even many officials were unaware initially. The negotiations began in 1992 as informal, hidden meetings in Oslo. No media involvement and the secrecy helped both sides to bypass political pressure and public posturing.<\/p>\n

Interestingly, the Norwegian institute Fafo Institute for Labour and Social Research hosted the talks. This way, the meetings could be disguised as academic activity or research collaboration and not a leaders\u2019 summit. The final agreement was initialled secretly in Oslo during what appeared to be a routine diplomatic visit.<\/p>\n

STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS ADHow Norway was different from Islamabad<\/p>\n

While the Oslo model was Quiet, secret and focused on relationship-first diplomacy. The Islamabad talks were high-stakes, visible and focused on crisis-driven diplomacy. The negotiations in Norway started as an informal backchannel and gradually evolved into an official agreement.<\/p>\n

The talks in Islamabad, on the other hand, began as high-level formal talks from day one. It was structured around defined agendas such as the issue of the Strait of Hormuz, Lebanon, etc. Another crucial difference between the two was the fact that the talks took place amid a long-drawn-out conflict, but there was no active full-scale war at that time, which helped with the secrecy.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, the US-Israel war in Iran has been escalating for the past six weeks, and no matter how hard all the sides attempt to downplay the talks, the world was watching it closely.<\/p>\n

Reactions to the post<\/p>\n

The reaction to the Twitter user\u2019s post was mixed. While some supported the X user\u2019s take, others pointed out how both the summits were different from each other and cannot be compared.<\/p>\n

\u201cPakistan is not doing this for peace; they\u2019re just trying to whitewash their image as a global terrorism hub,\u201d a X user commented. \u201cA very insightful analysis,\u201d another exclaimed.<\/p>\n

However, there were some who pointed out the differences between the two sides. \u201cCome on, even the President of the USA kept boasting about brokering peace between India and Pakistan and many other wars. Pakistan is a third-world country; it doesn\u2019t matter to them if talks of this level are being held there,\u201d one user wrote. \u201cWhy would you even want to make comparisons? Every conflict is different – so are mediators,\u201d another commented.<\/p>\n

STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD<\/p>\n

First Published:
\nApril 12, 2026, 15:00 IST<\/p>\n

Home<\/a>World<\/a>Oslo vs Islamabad: X user’s US-Iran peace talks post sparks online debateEnd of Article