Instead of making accusations, Pakistan should address its internal pain!

The main goal of the Istanbul talks was to provide a diplomatic platform for examining and resolving regional issues. However, some of the Pakistani delegation's requests caused the talks to deviate from the main path.

Especially since the Pakistani delegation raised demands that were far from the principle of Afghanistan's national sovereignty and common regional interests.

Among other things, Afghan negotiators were asked to ensure that insecurity incidents no longer occur on Pakistani soil. This request is fundamentally illogical, because insecurity in Pakistan has historical and structural roots, and its solution is neither within the power nor the responsibility of another government.

Another request from Pakistan was to transfer the country’s armed opposition groups – such as the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) – to Afghan soil; a request that is not only impossible from a political, security, and practical perspective, but also meaningless. Because such an action has no relation to the reality on the ground and cannot lead to stability in Pakistan.

On the one hand, Pakistani officials claim that there are terrorist sanctuaries in Afghanistan, and on the other hand, they demand the transfer of these groups to Afghan soil. This obvious contradiction shows that the purpose of such requests is not to resolve the crisis, but to project and divert public opinion from Pakistan’s internal problems.

 

In contrast, the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan has clear and logical positions:

Pakistan’s soil and airspace should not be used by ISIS or any other destructive group against Afghanistan. The Islamic Emirate, while emphasizing the continuation of the talks, is committed to defending its people and land in a timely and decisive manner in the event of any possible aggression.

The reality is that Pakistan’s political system is facing a series of deep political, economic, and ideological crises. In the provinces of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan, the army and security institutions are unable to present a convincing narrative for their actions. As a result, in order to escape the legitimacy crisis, the focus of public opinion is shifting from domestic issues to foreign conflicts, including with Afghanistan.

Such an approach may have a short-term propaganda advantage for the Pakistani army and government, but in the long term, it will have serious consequences for the stability, economy, and regional status of the country.

The Pakistani delegation would have been better off raising logical and achievable demands in the Istanbul talks and refraining from raising issues that not only do not help resolve the crisis, but also poison the atmosphere for the talks. In contrast, the Islamic Emirate, with a correct understanding of the regional conditions and a realistic analysis, continues to emphasize the continuation of negotiations and professional interaction, but at the same time, it is also ready to defend its territory and national sovereignty.

If Pakistan truly believes in regional stability, it must first of all address its internal pains; recognize the roots of extremism, ethnic divisions, and structural crises in its economy and find logical and sustainable solutions for them. Transferring the crisis beyond its borders will not only solve any problems, but will also spread distrust and tension throughout the entire region.

In the end, the continuation of tension between Afghanistan and Pakistan has grave consequences for both countries and for the entire region. The path to achieving real stability lies through dialogue, mutual cooperation, and endogenous reform, not through accusations and policies of mutual blame.