• user03-ExamPen
• Blog

Pakistan’s Afghan Policy: Between Security Imperatives and Diplomatic Realities

Introduction

The relationship between Pakistan and Afghanistan has always been turbulent, but recent developments have added new urgency to an already volatile equation. Reports of explosions in Kabul and speculation about the fate of Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) chief Noor Wali Mehsud have thrown the spotlight back on cross-border militancy. Although the Afghan Taliban authorities deny that Pakistan’s enemies are sheltered on their soil, Islamabad insists the opposite.

For Pakistan, the issue is existential: militant attacks erode its internal security, destabilize its borders, and undermine economic recovery. Yet any aggressive response — cross-border strikes or unilateral incursions — risks escalating tensions with a neighbor already mired in instability. This dilemma is what makes formulating an Afghan policy both urgent and complex.

Timeline of Key Events

Understanding Pakistan’s Afghan dilemma requires a look at key milestones that shaped the current moment.

• 2014 – National Action Plan (NAP): Following the APS Peshawar massacre, Pakistan unveiled a comprehensive counter-terror strategy. While its kinetic aspects (military operations) were emphasized, the non-kinetic dimensions (rehabilitation, policing, de-radicalization) were under-implemented.
• 2021 – Taliban Takeover of Kabul: The U.S. withdrawal left the Taliban in power. Pakistan initially hoped for a friendlier regime, but the opposite occurred: TTP militants found breathing space under Taliban rule.
• 2022 – The Zawahiri Strike: The U.S. eliminated al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri in Kabul. The incident embarrassed the Taliban government and confirmed suspicions of terrorist safe havens in Afghanistan.
• 2022–2024 – Border Escalations: Pakistan carried out occasional cross-border operations against militants. These were met with denials and sometimes angry responses from Kabul.
• 2025 – The Kabul Explosions: Reports in October suggested Noor Wali Mehsud may have been eliminated in Kabul. Though unverified, the development highlighted the seriousness of Pakistan’s concerns.

• October 2025 – Official Responses: Pakistan’s Defence Minister raised the matter in parliament, advocating for a delegation to Kabul to press the Taliban for action. The Afghan government continued to deny the presence of TTP elements.

This timeline shows how expectations of cooperation after 2021 soured into suspicion and confrontation by 2025.

Background and Dimensions

Pakistan’s Afghan dilemma is multi-layered. To understand the stakes, we must examine several dimensions.

1. Security and Counterterrorism

Militancy remains the core of Pakistan’s Afghan problem. The TTP and allied groups use Afghan soil as a safe haven to regroup and launch attacks inside Pakistan. For Islamabad, allowing this status quo means tolerating a permanent security threat. Yet launching repeated cross-border strikes risks escalation and potential blowback from the Afghan Taliban.

2. Diplomatic Complexity

Pakistan cannot afford outright hostility with Kabul. The two countries share a long border, deep cultural ties, and significant trade. At the same time, Afghanistan’s Taliban rulers rely on external recognition and assistance. That creates leverage for Pakistan, but also responsibilities: pushing too hard risks destabilizing the regime and worsening chaos, which inevitably spills over the border.

3. Regional and International Dimensions

Afghanistan is not just a bilateral issue. China fears spillover into Xinjiang, Russia worries about instability in Central Asia, and Iran has its own border security concerns. Pakistan can therefore expand the issue into a regional security framework, urging neighbors to collectively pressure the Taliban to act against militancy.

4. Internal Security Dynamics

Even if Afghanistan sealed its borders, Pakistan would still need to prevent radicalization and extremist recruitment at home. The National Action Plan remains the blueprint, but it requires full implementation of both military and civilian measures: policing, education reforms, madrassa regulation, and community-based de-radicalization.

5. Risks of Escalation

Aggressive military action in Afghanistan risks direct conflict with the Taliban. Border clashes, retaliatory violence, or economic disruptions could ensue. Equally dangerous is the risk of alienating Afghan civilians, creating resentment that fuels militancy rather than eliminating it.

Conclusion

The status quo is unsustainable. Pakistan cannot watch passively as militants plot attacks from across the border, nor can it recklessly plunge into hostilities with Kabul. The real challenge lies in striking a balance: protecting its citizens, deterring militant groups, and avoiding uncontrolled escalation.

The editorial consensus is clear — a successful Afghan policy cannot be based on military power alone. It requires diplomacy, intelligence, coordination with regional partners, and a renewed commitment to internal security reforms.

Way Forward: Policy Recommendations

To translate this analysis into action, Pakistan needs a structured and multi-pronged approach:

1. Diplomatic Red Lines and Conditional Engagement
   • Communicate explicitly to Kabul: militant safe havens are unacceptable.
   • Tie trade, transit, and economic cooperation to verifiable counterterrorism commitments.
   • Downgrade relations or restrict border movement if red lines are crossed.
2. Regional Partnerships
   • Work with China, Russia, Iran, and Central Asia to present a united front.
   • Use platforms like SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization) to formalize counter-terror commitments.
3. Targeted Security Operations
   • Carry out precise, intelligence-driven strikes against high-value targets.
   • Avoid indiscriminate operations that may alienate Afghan civilians or destabilize bilateral ties.
4. Strengthening Non-Kinetic Measures
   • Revive the National Action Plan’s social and governance components.
   • Expand community policing, counter-radicalization programs, and madrassa oversight.
   • Invest in rehabilitation and reintegration for surrendered militants.

5. Institutional Coordination
   • Build consensus across civilian leadership, military establishment, and provincial governments.
   • Frame Afghan policy as a national rather than partisan agenda.
6. Strategic Signaling
   • Maintain a posture of readiness without unnecessary provocation.
   • Keep adversaries uncertain through ambiguity, while avoiding outright escalation.
7. Humanitarian Diplomacy
   • Link Pakistan’s support for Afghan humanitarian and reconstruction projects to Taliban commitments against militancy.
   • Use “carrot and stick” diplomacy: assistance in return for compliance.

Final Thoughts

Afghanistan has always been central to Pakistan’s security landscape, but the Taliban’s return to power has complicated the relationship further. Islamabad’s Afghan policy must therefore be pragmatic, multi-dimensional, and forward-looking.

Military force can neutralize threats, but only diplomacy and non-kinetic reforms can provide long-term stability. Pakistan’s leadership faces a delicate but unavoidable choice: to move beyond reactionary policies and craft a strategy that secures its borders, strengthens its society, and nudges Kabul toward regional responsibility.

Only then can Pakistan turn its Afghan policy from a cycle of crises into a framework for durable peace.