Gen Keane questions whether Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Qatar can be trusted in Iran talks
Retired Army Gen. Jack Keane questioned whether Pakistan, Qatar and Saudi Arabia can be trusted to help shape negotiations with Iran, accusing the regional partners of steering President Donald Trump away from military pressure while leaving the United States and Israel to bear the risks of confronting Tehran.
Keane, a Fox News senior strategic analyst and former Army vice chief of staff, said during a Monday appearance on Fox News’ "America’s Newsroom" that Pakistan and Qatar were "compromised" as mediators because, in his view, they favor Iran over the United States.
"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," Keane said. "This is historical. This is not new."
NUCLEAR EXPERTS URGE TRUMP NOT TO LET IRAN STEER TALKS AWAY FROM REGIME'S ATOMIC THREAT
Keane’s criticism contrasts with Trump’s public praise for Islamabad.
Trump said April 26 during a phone interview with Fox News that he had "great respect for Pakistan" because its officials had "been terrific" and "really tried" to advance negotiations with Iran. He added that Pakistan would remain involved in the process.
While speaking to reporters after the G7 summit in France on June 18, Trump also credited Pakistan and Qatar with helping advance the negotiations that produced the U.S.–Iran memorandum of understanding.
White House spokesperson Anna Kelly also defended the administration’s regional partners, telling Fox News Digital that, "President Trump has great relationships with leaders from Pakistan, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, and he appreciates the involvement of all of our regional partners who are assisting with negotiations."
"If Iran cannot agree to a good deal with the United States, the fault will lie squarely with the regime, who will suffer the consequences," Kelly added.
Mediators were preparing a second memorandum focused exclusively on the Strait of Hormuz, Wednesday reports indicated, potentially separating the immediate maritime crisis from the broader dispute over Iran’s nuclear activities.
Keane, a former four-star general, argued that their involvement may have contributed to Washington misunderstanding Iran’s intentions.
"And yet they’re mediators," Keane said. "So their influence here, I think, had played a part in misleading the United States in terms of Iran’s real intentions."
Pakistan and Qatar have played formal roles in the diplomatic process.
A June 22 joint statement from the two countries said they were mediating talks between the United States and Iran under the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding. The framework established working groups on nuclear issues, sanctions, monitoring and dispute resolution, as well as a mechanism intended to prevent incidents involving commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz.
Pakistan declined to comment on Keane’s criticism. The Saudi and Qatari embassies in Washington did not respond by the time of publication.
Raza Rumi, editor-at-large of Pakistan’s The Friday Times, disputed Keane’s characterization, arguing that Islamabad’s working relationship with Tehran does not make it a compromised mediator.
IS THIS TRUMP’S LAST ‘LAST CHANCE’? CEASELESS STRING OF BROKEN CEASEFIRES FUELS DOUBT OVER IRAN DEAL
"Successful mediators are often those that enjoy channels of communication with all sides," Rumi told Fox News Digital, saying Pakistan’s approach is shaped more by geography, security and economic concerns than ideological alignment with Iran.
He noted that Pakistan shares a long border with Iran and wants to prevent further instability, while also maintaining longstanding ties with the United States and close partnerships with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Rumi also pointed to the exchange of strikes between Pakistan and Iran in January 2024 as evidence that relations between the neighbors are not uniformly close.
"The suggestion that Pakistan somehow caused Washington to misunderstand Tehran’s intentions is difficult to substantiate," Rumi said. "It would be a considerable stretch to attribute any American misreading of Iran’s intentions to Pakistani mediation."
Keane directed even sharper criticism at Saudi Arabia, saying that Riyadh denied the United States access to Saudi airspace and a U.S. air base during preparations for a possible operation to forcibly reopen the Strait of Hormuz. He also claimed Saudi officials had repeatedly persuaded 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, describing the potential costs as casualties and damage to Saudi oil infrastructure.
"They’re willing for us to make that sacrifice, for sure," he added. "They’re willing for Israel to make that sacrifice, for sure."
His remarks highlighted a broader debate over whether Saudi caution represents an unwillingness to confront Tehran or a strategic effort to prevent an open-ended regional war.
GULF COUNTRIES STRONGLY CONDEMN IRAN'S DRONE ATTACK ON BAHRAIN AS RISING TENSIONS THREATEN MOU
Salman Al-Ansari, a Saudi geopolitical analyst, rejected the suggestion 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.
"Riyadh favors diplomacy backed by credible deterrence, but any agreement must be enforceable and verifiable, addressing Iran’s nuclear program, its proxies, and freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz," he added.
A Gulf affairs analyst who requested anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue offered a different assessment, saying Saudi leaders fear that a wider confrontation would expose the Kingdom’s 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. "Riyadh fears the damage Iran could inflict on the Kingdom’s infrastructure and has therefore favored restraint and negotiations over a decisive military campaign."
The analyst described a widening divide among Gulf states, arguing that Saudi Arabia and Qatar favor accommodation while the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Kuwait support stronger pressure on Iran.
Richard Goldberg, a senior adviser at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies think tank and former National Security Council official, said during a separate Fox News appearance Wednesday, that Washington continues to depend on Saudi infrastructure even as disagreements persist over military strategy.
"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. "The fact that they’re at maximum capacity moving through the Red Sea also allows us to continue the strangulation strategy."
TRUMP WARNS IRAN FIGHTING ISN'T OVER AS HE VOWS US WILL 'WIN' AS TALKS FADE
The debate comes as the United States and Iran continue negotiations over the Strait of Hormuz.
Oman, Pakistan, Qatar and Saudi Arabia all have been involved in the diplomatic effort, while reports Wednesday indicated that mediators were working on an interim arrangement that could establish separate shipping routes through Iranian and Omani waters as broader nuclear negotiations continue.
The central question is whether those negotiations can produce an enforceable agreement or merely allow Tehran to preserve its leverage over the waterway.
Keane said he remained doubtful that Iran was prepared to surrender meaningful control.
"They are not going to give up the Strait of Hormuz," he said. "They think it’s a strategic asset."
He predicted Iran would seek to retain some degree of control over the waterway and warned that reaching an agreement on Iran’s nuclear program would be even more difficult.
"My gut feeling here is no," Keane said when asked whether Iran was prepared to reach and implement a substantive agreement. "The president is not going to make a bad deal here."