Retired General Challenges Reliability of Pakistan, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia in Iran Negotiations

Retired Army Gen. Jack Keane has cast doubt

Retired Army Gen. Jack Keane has cast doubt on the trustworthiness of Pakistan, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia in shaping talks with Iran, suggesting these regional players have steered President Donald Trump away from military pressure while leaving the U.S. and Israel to face potential fallout from confronting Tehran.

In a Monday appearance on Fox News' "America's Newsroom," Keane, a former vice chief of staff and current senior strategic analyst for the network, claimed that Pakistan and Qatar are "compromised" intermediaries because they tend to favor Iranian interests over American ones. "It is well known in the Middle East region, by our intelligence services, by all the players, that the Pakistanis and the Qataris are compromised because they favor Iran at the expense of the United States," he said, adding that this pattern is longstanding, not a recent development.

Keane's remarks stand in contrast to Trump's favorable view of Islamabad. The president told Fox News on April 26 that he holds "great respect for Pakistan," praising its officials as "terrific" and saying they "really tried" to advance negotiations with Iran. Trump also acknowledged Pakistan's continued role in the process. After the G7 summit in France on June 18, Trump similarly credited Pakistan and Qatar for helping broker the U.S.-Iran memorandum of understanding. White House spokesperson Anna Kelly defended these partnerships, telling Fox News Digital that the president values relationships with leaders from Pakistan, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia and appreciates their assistance in the talks. Kelly added that if Iran fails to agree to a good deal, the responsibility lies with the regime, which will face consequences.

Keane, a four-star general, argued that the involvement

Keane, a four-star general, argued that the involvement of these mediators may have contributed to Washington's misreading of Iran's intentions. "And yet they're mediators," he said. "So their influence here, I think, had played a part in misleading the United States in terms of Iran's real intentions." This criticism comes as mediators were reportedly preparing a second memorandum focused solely on the Strait of Hormuz, potentially separating the immediate maritime issue from broader nuclear negotiations.

Pakistan and Qatar have been formally engaged in the diplomatic process. A June 22 joint statement from both countries said they were mediating talks between Washington and Tehran under the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding, which established working groups on nuclear issues, sanctions, monitoring, and dispute resolution, as well as a mechanism to prevent incidents involving commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz. Pakistan declined to comment on Keane's criticism, and the Saudi and Qatari embassies in Washington did not respond by publication time.

Raza Rumi, editor-at-large of Pakistan's The Friday Times, pushed back against Keane's characterization, arguing that Islamabad's working relationship with Tehran does not make it a compromised mediator. "Successful mediators are often those that enjoy channels of communication with all sides," Rumi told Fox News Digital, adding that Pakistan's approach is driven more by geography, security, and economic concerns than ideological alignment with Iran. He pointed to Pakistan's long border with Iran and its desire to prevent instability, while also maintaining ties with the U.S. and partnerships with Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Rumi also noted the exchange of strikes between Pakistan and Iran in January 2024 as evidence that their relations are not uniformly close. "The suggestion that Pakistan somehow caused Washington to misunderstand Tehran's intentions is difficult to substantiate," he said.

Keane reserved his harshest criticism for Saudi Arabia

Keane reserved his harshest criticism for Saudi Arabia, claiming that Riyadh denied the U.S. access to its airspace and a key air base during preparations for a potential operation to forcibly reopen the Strait of Hormuz. He also alleged that Saudi officials have repeatedly urged Trump not to resume major military operations against Iran. "The fact of the matter is, the Saudis are not willing to sacrifice to rid the Middle East region of Iran's aggression," Keane said, citing potential casualties and damage to Saudi oil infrastructure. He added, "They're willing for us to make that sacrifice, for sure. They're willing for Israel to make that sacrifice, for sure."

His comments highlight a broader debate over whether Saudi caution reflects an unwillingness to confront Tehran or a strategic effort to avoid an open-ended regional war. Salman Al-Ansari, a Saudi geopolitical analyst, rejected the notion that Riyadh is unwilling to confront Iran, saying the Kingdom distinguishes between credible deterrence and military action without clear objectives. "Saudi Arabia supports confronting Iranian aggression, but not an open-ended regional war without clear objectives or an endgame," Al-Ansari told Fox News Digital. He emphasized that Riyadh favors diplomacy backed by credible deterrence but insists any agreement must be enforceable and verifiable, addressing Iran's nuclear program, proxies, and freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz.

A Gulf affairs analyst, speaking anonymously due to the sensitivity of the issue, offered a different view, saying Saudi leaders fear that a wider confrontation would expose critical infrastructure to Iranian retaliation. "Saudi Arabia believes it should appease Iran because it is deeply concerned about the consequences of a broader confrontation," the analyst said, adding that Riyadh fears damage to its infrastructure and has therefore favored restraint and negotiations over a decisive military campaign. The analyst described a growing divide among Gulf states, with Saudi Arabia and Qatar favoring accommodation, while the UAE, Bahrain, and Kuwait support stronger pressure on Iran.

Richard Goldberg, a senior adviser at the Foundation

Richard Goldberg, a senior adviser at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and former National Security Council official, noted during a Fox News appearance on Wednesday that Washington still relies on Saudi infrastructure despite strategic disagreements. "When we talk about the Gulf states, we talk about Saudi Arabia and General Keane's comments, remember, we also are relying on Saudi Arabia with their overland pipelines to keep us in the game here," Goldberg said, adding that the Saudis' maximum capacity movement through the Red Sea supports the U.S. strangulation strategy.

As negotiations continue, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia are all involved in the diplomatic effort. Reports from Wednesday indicated that mediators are working on an interim arrangement to establish separate shipping routes through Iranian and Omani waters while broader nuclear talks proceed. The central question remains whether these negotiations can yield an enforceable agreement or merely allow Tehran to preserve its leverage over the waterway. Keane expressed doubt that Iran is prepared to give up meaningful control, saying, "They are not going to give up the Strait of Hormuz. They think it's a strategic asset." He also predicted that reaching an agreement on Iran's nuclear program would be even more challenging, and when asked whether Iran is ready to implement a substantive deal, he replied, "My gut feeling here is no. The president is not going to make a bad deal here."