AMID a surge of terrorist attacks across Pakistan—particularly in Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa—the defence forces were compelled to respond by targeting militant sanctuaries across the western border.
These operations, focused on dismantling terrorist networks, drew concern from friendly regional partners, including Turkey and Qatar, who urged restraint and dialogue. Despite these challenges, Pakistan remained committed to pursuing diplomatic avenues, culminating in the Istanbul Talks—an initiative aimed at restoring regional stability. Hosted by Turkey and Qatar, the Istanbul Talks brought together Pakistan’s senior civilian and military leadership. Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar, Defence Minister Khawaja Asif and top military officials participated under the direct oversight of Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. The Prime Minister underscored Pakistan’s position unequivocally: the country seeks peace but never at the expense of its sovereignty or the security of its citizens.
Central to Pakistan’s demands was verifiable action against terrorist organizations operating from Afghan soil, primarily the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). Islamabad stressed that decades of verbal assurances had failed to curb cross-border militancy; what was now required was concrete, actionable cooperation to dismantle these networks. Representing the national security perspective, Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir emphasized Pakistan’s zero-tolerance stance toward non-state actors threatening its territory. ISPR spokesperson Lieutenant General Ahmed Sharif reinforced this position, stating: “Pakistan seeks peace, but peace should never be mistaken for weakness. Cross-border terrorism from Afghan soil is unacceptable.” This alignment between Pakistan’s civilian and military leadership underscored a critical principle: negotiations must be backed by written, enforceable commitments, not empty promises. Investigations into recent terrorist incidents consistently point to Afghan territory as the source of leadership, training facilities and financing for the TTP and its affiliates—a fact recognized even by international observers.
During the Istanbul Talks, Pakistan’s proposals were firmly grounded in international law and UN resolutions. Key demands included: (i) Immediate and verifiable action to dismantle TTP networks operating from Afghan soil, (ii) Extradition or written assurances for the handover of wanted militant leaders and (iii) Establishment of a joint monitoring mechanism, including international observers, to ensure transparency and accountability. These measures were framed not as a challenge to Afghan sovereignty but as essential steps to ensure mutual security and build regional trust. Following the talks, Afghan government spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid attempted to misrepresent Pakistan’s position, denying the presence of terrorist groups on Afghan soil. Such denials, reminiscent of past propaganda tactics used to obscure cross-border militancy, only deepened mistrust. If Kabul genuinely believes its territory is free of militant sanctuaries, it should welcome independent verification through the proposed monitoring framework involving Turkey, Qatar or neutral observers. Rejection of this mechanism, however, signals a lack of transparency and credibility.
Pakistan’s restraint has been remarkable. For over four decades, it has hosted millions of Afghan refugees, providing shelter, education and livelihoods. It has supported Afghanistan through wars and humanitarian crises, often at great domestic cost. Yet, cross-border attacks continue to threaten Pakistani citizens despite this generosity. Having sacrificed thousands of lives in the global fight against terrorism, Pakistan’s tolerance has limits. Today, its stance is neither aggressive nor reactionary; it is defensive, rooted in the moral and legal imperative to protect its people. The Istanbul Talks faltered primarily due to Afghanistan’s non-cooperation and credibility deficit. No tangible progress was made against TTP elements; their networks remain intact. Kabul rejected the joint monitoring mechanism, further undermining trust and distorted Pakistan’s peace-oriented position in public statements. Without verifiable steps, dialogue became meaningless—a temporary distraction while terrorist groups continued their operations.
Pakistan has made it clear that its door to dialogue remains open, but peace without accountability is impossible. Both civilian and military leadership convey a unified message: peace will be pursued, but terrorism will be confronted decisively. As Field Marshal Asim Munir stated: “We pursue peace, but if terrorism stands in the way of peace, Pakistan knows how to defend its land and its people.” Pakistan’s approach is principled, grounded in decades of sacrifice, international law and moral responsibility. The country, which has borne one of the highest human costs in global counterterrorism, deserves recognition rather than censure. The responsibility now rests with Kabul. To regain credibility, Afghanistan must convert promises into policy and rhetoric into action. Only then can genuine regional peace and cooperation take root. Until that occurs, Pakistan’s position is clear: peace is the preference, but defence of its territory and citizens remains an uncompromisable duty.
—The writer is a Supreme Court lawyer and former member & Chairman Standing Committee of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Council. Islamabad
