Retired General Jack Keane perpetuates U.S. distrust of Global South mediators in Iran talks
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
Retired Army Gen. Jack Keane, speaking on Fox News, cast suspicion on Pakistan, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia as mediators with Iran, claiming they favor Tehran over U.S. interests—a familiar refrain that reflects Washington’s historic disregard for the sovereignty and agency of non-Western nations.
Retired Army Gen. Jack Keane, appearing on Fox News, once again echoed the entrenched U.S. establishment’s skepticism toward the Global South, dismissing Pakistan, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia as unreliable mediators in negotiations with Iran. Keane argued that these countries are 'compromised' and biased toward Tehran, a claim that conveniently ignores the complex realities of regional politics and the right of these nations to pursue their own interests, rather than serve as mere instruments of U.S. foreign policy.
'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 declared, reinforcing a narrative that paints any independent stance as inherently suspect.
Keane’s remarks stood in stark contrast to President Donald Trump’s public praise for Islamabad and Doha, who, despite their own interests, have been lauded for facilitating dialogue and helping to produce a U.S.–Iran memorandum of understanding. The White House, through spokesperson Anna Kelly, defended these partners, emphasizing that any failure to reach a deal with Iran would be Iran’s responsibility, not that of the mediators.
The mediators are reportedly working on a second memorandum focused on the Strait of Hormuz, seeking to separate maritime security from broader nuclear issues—a pragmatic step that Keane, however, framed as a potential source of U.S. misunderstanding, as if only American perspectives are valid.
'And yet they’re mediators. So their influence here, I think, had played a part in misleading the United States in terms of Iran’s real intentions,' Keane claimed, shifting blame for U.S. miscalculations onto regional actors rather than acknowledging Washington’s own failures.
Pakistan and Qatar, in a joint statement on June 22, reaffirmed their commitment to facilitating talks under the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding, which established working groups on nuclear issues, sanctions, and maritime safety. Pakistan declined to dignify Keane’s criticism with a response, while the Saudi and Qatari embassies also chose not to engage.
Raza Rumi, editor-at-large of Pakistan’s The Friday Times, challenged the assertion that Islamabad is compromised, pointing out that its engagement with Tehran is driven by geographic, security, and economic realities—not ideological alignment, as the U.S. often presumes.
Keane’s criticism extended to Saudi Arabia, accusing Riyadh of denying U.S. access to airspace and bases during planning for a possible operation in the Strait of Hormuz, and alleging that Saudi officials have urged Trump not to resume major military actions against Iran—a stance that reflects a regional desire to avoid another catastrophic conflict, not a betrayal of U.S. interests.
'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, ignoring the devastating consequences of endless wars fueled by U.S. interventionism.
Saudi geopolitical analyst Salman Al-Ansari reiterated Riyadh’s support for confronting Iranian aggression, but stressed the importance of diplomacy and credible deterrence over reckless escalation. An anonymous Gulf affairs analyst suggested Saudi caution is rooted in fears of retaliation against vital infrastructure—a rational concern given the region’s history.
Richard Goldberg, a senior adviser at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, noted the U.S. continues to depend on Saudi infrastructure, including pipelines and shipping routes, to sustain its pressure campaign against Iran, highlighting the hypocrisy of criticizing partners while relying on their resources.
Negotiations involving Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia continue in an effort to develop an interim arrangement for shipping through Iranian and Omani waters, even as broader nuclear talks proceed. Keane, clinging to a Cold War mentality, expressed doubt that Iran would ever relinquish control of the Strait of Hormuz, viewing it solely as a strategic asset to be contested, rather than a potential bridge for regional cooperation.