As the world waited with bated breath for 'severe revenge' Tehran had vowed to take for the killing by America of Gen Qassem Soleimani, Iranian forces fired as many as 22 missiles at two military bases housing US troops in Iraq, timed to match the last rites of their slain leader. No one was killed. Apparently, Iran had purposely chosen not to cause causalities to avoid further escalation while demonstrating it had the ability to hit any target in the region. This was the first direct attack on US military facilities, a high risk affair that could have led to serious consequences. Mercifully, neither side wants an open war. President Trump responded by saying "Iran appears to be standing down, which is a good thing.... We have this great military and equipment, however, [that] does not mean we have to use it, we do not want to use it." This is a significant retreat from his earlier threats of targeting 52 Iranian cultural sites if Iran retaliated for Soleimani's killing. And Iranian foreign minister Javad Zarif took to Twitter to say the strikes had "concluded" his country's response to Soleimani's assassination, and that "we do not seek escalation or war."

The likely perils may have been avoided for now but not for the longer term. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei hinted at what may lie in the future when he said the question of revenge is another issue, adding that "military actions in this form are not sufficient for that issue, what is important is that America's corrupting presence must come to an end in this region." Moreover, Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commander Abdollah Araghi has reportedly said that Iran would take "intiqaam sakht (harsher revenge)" soon. These are no empty threat considering that Iran has a web of proxies in what is known as its 'arc of influence' stretching from its next-door neighbour Iraq to the Mediterranean Sea. It can rely on these groups to give grief to the US and its regional allies by attacking US forces as well as oil infrastructure and its transportation via the Strait of Hormuz. In fact, hours after Iran's strike on American bases two rockets - believed to be fired by one of the local pro-Iran groups - landed inside the heavily fortified Green Zone in Baghdad, where US embassy is also located. Although in this instance, too, no casualties were reported, it shows what might happen in the days and months to come. These people would do all they can to oust the US from Iraq. Meanwhile, Washington has announced "additional punishing sanctions" on Tehran. And as the other members of the Iran nuclear deal look on in exasperation, the Islamic Republic has declared it will no longer abide by the restrictions imposed by that deal. Like North Korea, it may deem full-scale resumption of its nuclear programme as the best insurance against any American military adventure.

The only way out of this disconcerting scenario is constructive engagement between the two sides. Prime Minister Imran Khan on Wednesday asked Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi to visit Tehran, Riyadh, and Washington with a message of neutrality in the Iran-US confrontation, and also an offer of mediation. As regards the neutrality bit, that is absolutely essential for Pakistan to observe for the sake of safeguarding its own interests. But the prospects of a meaningful engagement between the two protagonists are rather dim, if not unreal as long as President Trump is at the helm.