Skip to content
Foundations rebuilt, and the first new thing is here: search across every topic, entity, and event.Try search
Iran Conflict 2026
11JUN

Sharif, Munir and Xi meet in Beijing

3 min read
09:17UTC

Pakistan's prime minister and army chief were in Beijing together on Monday, meeting Xi Jinping as the Iran deal nears its sequencing decision. The two principal mediators are coordinating with China face to face for the first time.

ConflictDeveloping
Key takeaway

The mediation has consolidated in the one capital that can underwrite a frozen-asset release.

Pakistani prime minister Shehbaz Sharif met Xi Jinping in Beijing on Monday 25 May, day three of a four-day state visit, with army chief Asim Munir also in the Chinese capital 1. Munir had flown to Beijing straight from Tehran, which he visited on 23 May , while Sharif and his foreign minister arrived in China on the same Saturday .

Pakistan has run as the principal back-channel between Washington and Tehran through the war. For the first time both of its principals are in Beijing at once, coordinating with China in person rather than through relayed messages, and on the days the deal sits at its closest. Munir's shuttle from Tehran on 23 May to Beijing by 25 May collapses two mediation tracks into a single room.

The venue matters more than the photographs. China holds the tools the sequencing deadlock needs a third party to provide: frozen-fund mechanics, yuan settlement, and the standing to vouch for who pays whom and when. Beijing also already hosts Iran's designated China envoy, speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, appointed in late April with sign-off from both President Masoud Pezeshkian and Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei , so the Iranian contact is already in the city.

A joint Pakistan-China statement is expected by 27 May, its content still undisclosed. Whether it names a mechanism for escrowing the frozen assets against a reopening of the strait, or leaves that clause untouched, will matter more than anything in the visit's choreography.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

Pakistan has been acting as the go-between in talks to end the war between the United States and Iran. On 25 May, both Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and its army chief Asim Munir were in Beijing at the same time, meeting Chinese President Xi Jinping. Munir had flown there directly from Tehran, which he visited on 23 May. Iran's own special envoy to China was also in Beijing. This is the first time all the main mediators have gathered in the same city at once. China matters here because it is Iran's biggest oil customer, and it may be the only country that could help resolve the argument over the $12 billion in frozen money that Iran wants released before reopening the strait.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

Pakistan's role as the principal back-channel emerged from three structural conditions: a 959-kilometre shared border with Iran, a general-officer-led military intelligence relationship with both Washington and Tehran, and the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) financial dependency that gives Pakistan unique access to Chinese credit facilities.

Asim Munir's ability to fly Tehran-to-Beijing without a 24-hour public announcement reflects the operational security of the military-to-military channel, which has carried every nuclear-monitoring concession of the war.

The simultaneous presence of both Sharif (civilian, economic track) and Munir (military, security track) in Beijing signals that the Pakistan side has concluded the $12bn sequencing problem requires both tracks resolved in parallel, not sequentially.

What could happen next?
  • Consequence

    The joint Pakistan-China statement expected by 27 May will indicate whether China is prepared to act as guarantor for the $12bn sequencing mechanism, or merely as a diplomatic host.

  • Opportunity

    If China agrees to route the $12bn release through its state banking system rather than a US Treasury channel, it bypasses the US re-freeze risk Iran has demanded protection against, potentially unlocking the sequencing deadlock.

First Reported In

Update #107 · Two markets, two prices on one Iran deal

Pakistan Today· 25 May 2026
Read original
Different Perspectives
Oil markets / Lloyd's underwriters
Oil markets / Lloyd's underwriters
Futures markets priced CENTCOM's strikes-complete statement as a de-escalation signal and pushed Brent down 1.7 per cent to $94.71, even as the IRGC declared Hormuz closed. Lloyd's war-risk premiums held elevated because institutional de-listing requires a UN Security Council resolution that Russia and China have just shown they will block.
Pakistan (mediator)
Pakistan (mediator)
Interior minister Mohsin Naqvi carried dual civilian and military letters to Mojtaba Khamenei in Tehran on 6-7 June with no public response. The IRGC's Hormuz closure on 11 June shows the corps is acting independently of the channel Pakistan is using, making the mediation structurally unable to produce a binding commitment without direct IRGC access.
Russia and China
Russia and China
Russia and China voted against GOV/2026/40 at the IAEA Board, following through on the blocking position coordinated with Grossi in Geneva on 5 June; both states continue to oppose Western institutional pressure on Iran at every multilateral venue.
E3 and IAEA (UK, France, Germany)
E3 and IAEA (UK, France, Germany)
The E3 co-sponsored IAEA resolution GOV/2026/40, adopted 21-3-10 on 10 June, demanding Iran disclose 440.9 kg of unaccounted HEU and admit inspectors to four denied facilities. The 10 abstentions and Russia-China noes leave any Security Council referral without a viable enforcement path.
IRGC / Iran military command
IRGC / Iran military command
The corps declared Hormuz closed to all traffic on 11 June and claimed two vessels struck, overriding the MoU its own civilian negotiators were pursuing through Pakistan. The closure order used the Persian Gulf Strait Authority apparatus to convert a toll mechanism into a military prohibition.
Trump administration / CENTCOM
Trump administration / CENTCOM
CENTCOM completed a second day of strikes on Tehran, Sirik and Minab, rejected the IRGC Hormuz closure as inconsistent with observed transit, and said strikes were complete. Hegseth framed the bombing explicitly as the negotiation: the method is coercive deal-making with no stated pause threshold.