Skip to content
You can now search across every topic, entity and event.What's new
Iran Conflict 2026
21SEP

Sharif, Munir and Xi meet in Beijing

3 min read
15:34UTC

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
Shipping and insurance industry
Shipping and insurance industry
UKMTO counted about 20 US-facilitated Hormuz transits a day to 11 September against only 6 visible on AIS, with traffic still around 90% below the 138-a-day pre-war baseline. War-risk underwriters cannot price hulls they cannot see, or resolve whether the tanker El Gaia hit a mine, as Iran claims, or a missile and drone, as CENTCOM says.
European refiners
European refiners
European refiners, including Poland's Orlen, absorbed a roughly $26 gap between Dated Brent at $130.80 on 15 September and ICE Brent futures settling at $103.87 on 18 September, a spread that widened from $13.45 on 9 September rather than newly opening. Their futures hedges no longer cover what they now pay for physical barrels.
Saudi Arabia
Saudi Arabia
Saudi Aramco zeroed European term customers' October allocations and rerouted roughly 60 million barrels to Asia through Ras Tanura and Sohar, using Red Sea and Gulf terminal capacity built years ago to cut Hormuz exposure. Riyadh reallocated existing supply rather than negotiating a shortfall with Europe.
Qatar
Qatar
Qatar's energy minister Saad al-Kaabi told Bloomberg at the Qatar Economic Forum on 20 September that Bessent's two-year Hormuz-obsolescence forecast is wrong, and that Doha has deliberately built no bypass pipeline. Qatar's gas exports run through one waterway by choice, not oversight.
Iran (foreign ministry and Majlis)
Iran (foreign ministry and Majlis)
Iran's foreign ministry and 130 Majlis deputies moved toward NPT withdrawal this week, with lawmaker Hossein-Ali Haji Deligani filing a triple-urgency bill on 20 September that Speaker Qalibaf has not yet scheduled. Tehran treats treaty membership as leverage still on the table, not yet spent.
Russia and China
Russia and China
Moscow and Beijing vetoed the Panel of Experts' renewal, maintaining Resolution 2231 lapsed in October 2025 and the 2025 snapback was never validly triggered, so the sanctions architecture the Panel enforces has no current legal standing. Both governments frame the veto as upholding law, not shielding Tehran.