Days after the deadly attack in Pahalgam, Kashmir, set off a chain of events that now risks destabilizing an already fragile region, we are still waiting for the proverbial magic word. While much ink has already been spilt over the attack itself and the finger-pointing that followed, it is time (read, urgently) to shift the focus toward de-escalation and dialogue. India’s retaliatory steps, particularly the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty, would go down in history as an unprecedented low. Never before in the six decades since its signing has the treaty (a rare beacon of cooperation) been so brazenly politicized. For Pakistan, a nation where 80% of agriculture depends on the Indus system, India’s move to disrupt water sharing tantamounts to collective punishment while violating international principles that separate civilian necessities from the spectre of political disputes. Weaponizing water cannot, and must not, become a norm. It is against this backdrop that Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s recognition of Iran’s offer to mediate becomes all the more critical. Pakistan’s consistent position remains just as clear today as ever before: Kashmir is a dispute that demands resolution, not rhetorical escalation. If credible regional actors are willing to facilitate dialogue, Pakistan should and does welcome such engagement. It would do well for hawkish elements to realise how mediation is not an abdication of sovereignty. It is a mature acknowledgement that disputes of this magnitude require channels broader than brinkmanship and proxy narratives. Preserving foundational agreements like the Indus Waters Treaty, restoring diplomatic channels, and allowing impartial investigation into security incidents are what can prevent irreversible damage, not an increasingly deeper plunge down the rabbit hole. The region has learned, through bitter experience, that even the smallest sparks can ignite uncontrollable fires. From the miscalculations in 1999 to the tense military standoff of 2002, and again during the Pulwama crisis of 2019, the subcontinent has come dangerously close to the point of no return. Ergo, Pakistan’s insistence on diplomacy is not a posture of weakness but a deliberate strategic choice. Seeking dialogue does not mean surrendering principles. It means recognising that real, lasting security, whether in Kashmir, along contested borders, or across the wider region, will never be achieved through ultimatums or shows of strength alone. It will come through patient negotiation, mutual concessions, and the rebuilding of trust brick by brick. *