Opinion C Raja Mohan writes: Rise of the new peacemakers
Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and increasingly China, have inserted themselves into conflict resolution as Western power fragments and the UN weakens. Mediation has become the new language of power
Taken together, these cases show how mediation has become the new language of power. (Illustration by C R Sasikumar) As violence escalated between Pakistan and Afghanistan last week, the initiative to stop it did not come from Washington but from the Middle East. The Pak-Afghan ceasefire talks took place in Doha, with Turkish intelligence officials in attendance. The next meeting is likely to be held in Turkey.
This reflects a striking departure from the past. In the 20th century, peace talks were synonymous with European venues. In the 1980s, the Soviet military withdrawal from Afghanistan was negotiated in Geneva. The secret Israel-PLO talks after America’s first Gulf War in Norway led to the Oslo Accords of 1993, signed in Washington. Earlier this month, the Gaza peace deal was signed in Egypt’s Sharm el-Sheikh after negotiations led by the US with support from Egypt, Qatar, and Turkey. While Donald Trump now leads a direct peace effort in Ukraine, Middle Eastern states — Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE — have all played crucial roles in brokering talks between Moscow and Kyiv and implementing humanitarian measures. Another big change is the declining role of the UN. It was central to the Afghan peace process in the 1980s and supported the Oslo Accords. Today, the UN is absent — whether in Afghanistan or the Middle East. Instead, Trump has floated a “Board of Peace,” headed by himself, to oversee the Gaza agreement.
The new diplomacy of mediation highlights the rise of unconventional players. Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and increasingly China, have inserted themselves into conflict resolution as Western power fragments and the UN weakens. Mediation is becoming a new marker of global relevance and, even more significantly, of power projection.
Turkey, a rising regional power at the crossroads of Europe, Africa, the Middle East and Asia, has been at the forefront of the new peace diplomacy. It has been an active champion of mediation in various international forums – including the UN and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation — and has been hosting several conferences and training programmes on mediation. Ankara has set up a division on international peace and mediation within its foreign office. Complementing its diplomatic efforts is the active role of Turkish Intelligence, which has emerged as a power to reckon with in the region.
Ankara turned mediation into strategic capital after the Russia-Ukraine war of 2022. Trusted by both Moscow and Kyiv, it brokered the Black Sea Grain Initiative and successive prisoner exchanges. Ankara also played a backchannel role in Gaza alongside Qatar, Egypt, and the US.
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has sought to reclaim leadership of the Middle East through active engagement with Islamic movements such as the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. Turkey is hardly neutral — it is a NATO member, condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, blocked the Russian navy in the Black Sea, and supplied arms to both sides. Yet, its ongoing collaboration with Moscow in the Middle East gave it leverage. Talks in Istanbul in mid-2022 came close to announcing a ceasefire.
Qatar, meanwhile, has perfected what scholars call “small-state mega-politics”. Long a supporter of groups such as Hamas and the Taliban, it used its wealth to keep them afloat in adversity. It also brokered humanitarian exchanges in Ukraine, including child reunifications. Backed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Qatar Fund for Development, Qatar has projected influence far beyond its size.
Turkey and Qatar are no Nordic-style neutral mediators. They are active participants in conflicts, yet their entanglement gives them channels to the key players in the conflict, not always available to the traditional peacemakers.
Saudi Arabia, under Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has turned peace diplomacy into a tool for prestige. The 2023 Jeddah summit on Ukraine and the 2025 US-Russia meeting in Riyadh underlined its new global convening power. Saudi efforts in Yemen and Sudan have had mixed results, but they underscore Riyadh’s eagerness to shape war and peace in its neighbourhood.
Abu Dhabi, in contrast, pursues quiet mediation. Between 2024 and 2025, it facilitated more than a dozen Russia-Ukraine prisoner exchanges, including one freeing 2,500 detainees. It also mediated between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and organised humanitarian corridors in Gaza in coordination with the EU, Cyprus, and the US. The UAE reportedly played a role in brokering the India-Pakistan ceasefire of 2021. Like Riyadh and Doha, Abu Dhabi is converting wealth into diplomatic clout.
But the new player in mediation to watch out for is China. Once wary of entanglement, Beijing now casts itself as both great power and peacemaker. The 2023 Saudi-Iran détente was a landmark, followed by initiatives in Yemen, Afghanistan, and backchannels on Ukraine and Gaza. China has also taken an interest in conflicts within Burma and between Dhaka and Rangoon. Beijing has institutionalised this new activism by launching the International Organisation for Mediation in Hong Kong, offering the Global South an alternative to Western-led platforms.
Taken together, these cases show how mediation has become the new language of power. For Turkey, it enhances bargaining space with NATO and Russia, and increases its influence across the Middle East and Eurasia. For Qatar, it ensures relevance with Washington while boosting its regional agency. For Riyadh and Abu Dhabi, it strengthens their leadership within the Global South. For Beijing, it advances its ambition to reshape global governance. Mediation is at once pragmatic and performative: A tool of diplomacy and a display of power.
In India, Trump’s recent claims of mediating between Delhi and Rawalpindi have made “mediation” a dirty word. No large state, least of all India, accepts third-party involvement in its disputes. The history of Kashmir is littered with failed external mediation efforts. The most successful advances on Kashmir occurred when the two sides talked to each other directly.
In the outrage against Trump’s claims, it is easy to overlook India’s own tradition of peacemaking —from its role in the Korean War to its regional peacemaking in Maldives, Nepal, and Sri Lanka. More importantly, India’s domestic experience in ending insurgencies — bringing militants into the mainstream and turning rebels into rulers — offers unique lessons. This legacy should position India well for mediation in conflicts in the world.
The key, however, is leverage. Successful mediation requires credible influence with all parties. For India, that means active engagement with conflicts in the subcontinent and beyond, and renewing ties with diverse political forces in its neighbourhood.
Mediation is no longer the preserve of the West or the UN. In a changing world, it has become a tool for ambitious middle powers and rising states. India would do well to reclaim its own place in this emerging landscape of new peacemakers.
The writer is contributing editor on international affairs for The Indian Express. He is also a distinguished professor at the Motwani Jadeja Institute of American Studies, Jindal Global University, and the Korea Foundation Chair on Asian Geopolitics at the Council on Strategic and Defence Studies, Delhi
Share
