The recent blame from the Afghan Taliban accusing Pakistan of aggression is not only unjustified, it is historically dishonest. A country that has sheltered millions of Afghan refugees for over four decades, facilitated peace dialogues with global actors, and absorbed terror spillovers from the Afghan war theatre, is now being accused of “cross-border hostility” for defending its own sovereignty.
From Strategic Ally to Convenient Scapegoat
Pakistan’s recent military actions targeting terrorists operating from Afghan soil are not acts of provocation. They are direct responses to repeated, documented violations of Pakistan’s security by groups like the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), who continue to use Afghan territory as a launchpad for attacks against Pakistani civilians and security forces.
While the Taliban posture as victims of Pakistani airstrikes, they conveniently forget that they are harbouring elements responsible for thousands of deaths in Pakistan, and that the country they accuse is the same one that once shielded and supported them when the world turned its back.
Afghanistan’s Long Tradition of Pakistan-Directed Hostility
The antagonism from Kabul is not new. Even before the Taliban, successive Afghan regimes adopted an adversarial posture towards Pakistan. In the 1950s and 60s, Afghan Prime Minister Sardar Daud openly supported anti-Pakistan insurgents, providing them with training, weapons, and political backing to destabilise the newly born state.
Afghanistan was the only country to oppose Pakistan’s entry into the United Nations in 1947, citing irredentist claims over the Pashtun regions of Pakistan. This rejectionism has continued in various forms, from covert operations and support for separatists to outright diplomatic isolation attempts.
The Taliban’s current stance echoes this legacy of historical hostility. Their refusal to act against TTP militants is not just ideological sympathy, it is political continuity, rooted in a deeper Afghan discomfort with a strong, stable Pakistan.
Taliban’s Convenient Amnesia: Forgetting Who Fed Them
It is a fact often ignored in today’s narrative: the Taliban’s rise and survival would not have been possible without Pakistan’s deep involvement in the 1990s and during the post-2001 insurgency. Pakistan provided shelter, medical aid, and political space to Taliban leaders, even when doing so isolated Islamabad internationally.
At a time when Western capitals dismissed the group as spent extremists, Pakistan continued to host peace dialogues, facilitate safe passage, and push for negotiated settlements. And yet today, the very same Taliban accuse Pakistan of betrayal, while they themselves shield Pakistan’s enemies on Afghan soil.
This is not betrayal by Pakistan. It is betrayal of Pakistan, by a group that is unwilling to stand up to its ideological cousins, even when those cousins are slaughtering innocents across the border.
Pakistan’s Sacrifices in the War It Never Started
Let the facts speak. Pakistan has lost over 90,000 lives, including civilians, law enforcement officers, and soldiers, as a result of terrorism fueled by instability in Afghanistan. It has suffered thousands of terror attacks, economic losses running into billions of dollars, and social trauma spanning generations.
All this, for a war that was never Pakistan’s to begin with.
The so-called War on Terror, launched by the United States in 2001, turned Pakistan into a frontline state, not by choice, but by necessity. Yet while global powers withdrew their troops and washed their hands of the mess, Pakistan continued to pay the price.
No other country has sacrificed more in counterterrorism without being formally at war. Yet the same world continues to question Pakistan’s intent and legitimacy in defending its own soil.
The TTP Threat: A Shared Enemy the Taliban Refuse to Confront
Pakistan is not asking the Taliban to fight its war. It is demanding what every sovereign state would, to not provide sanctuary to those who kill its citizens. The TTP is not a vague threat; it is a real, ongoing terrorist organisation with blood on its hands. From the APS Peshawar massacre to attacks on mosques, police stations, and army convoys, the TTP has left a trail of horror.
Yet, the Afghan Taliban leadership continues to refuse even acknowledging TTP as terrorists, instead labelling them “mujahideen” or “Islamist opposition.”
Worse still, Taliban leaders chastise Pakistani clerics for calling TTP “khawarij,” a label historically used for extremist rebels, and instead urge “dialogue” with those responsible for mass murder.
This double standard is not just dangerous, it exposes the Taliban’s unwillingness to be a responsible state actor.
When the United States Can, Pakistan as a Neighbour Has Every Right to Defend Its Sovereignty
When the United States can project power and carry out drone strikes thousands of miles from its own borders, from Iraq to Afghanistan to Syria, to protect its national interests, why is it controversial when Pakistan, a direct neighbour, responds to cross-border threats with targeted action?
Pakistan is not bombing foreign capitals. It is striking back against militant elements entrenched across a porous and hostile border, a border that has seen countless infiltrations by groups operating with impunity from Afghan soil. These strikes are not opportunistic or expansionist. They are calculated, necessary responses to terror attacks killing Pakistani civilians and soldiers almost daily.
The international community’s silence on this hypocrisy is deafening. When Western states defend themselves, it’s “self-preservation.” When Pakistan does so, after years of restraint, diplomacy, and repeated warnings, it becomes “aggression.”
This double standard not only undermines Pakistan’s right to security, it emboldens the very actors that thrive in the chaos. If Washington can defend Connecticut from Kandahar, surely Islamabad can protect Peshawar from Khost.
The Indo-Afghan Nexus: Destabilisation by Design
What makes the Taliban’s current behaviour even more suspicious is the growing strategic convergence between anti-Pakistan elements in Afghanistan and Indian interests in the region. While New Delhi maintains a low official footprint in Kabul, its influence is visible, in consulates, intelligence liaisons, and “humanitarian aid” that conveniently aligns with anti-Pakistan operations.
India has long used Afghan soil as a second front. From backing Baloch separatists to training operatives linked to terror plots in Pakistani urban centres, its objectives are no mystery. Today, the remnants of RAW-linked networks continue to find shelter under Taliban indifference, if not outright complicity.
The Taliban’s increasing tolerance of Indian overtures, while ignoring Pakistan’s legitimate security concerns, betrays their claim of neutrality. It also raises serious questions: Is Afghanistan, once again, being used as a proxy battleground, not for freedom or faith, but for a regional rivalry aimed at weakening Pakistan from within?
Rewriting “Strategic Depth”: A Misused Narrative
Critics often invoke Pakistan’s historical pursuit of “strategic depth” in Afghanistan as if it were a smoking gun. But the reality is far more nuanced. Pakistan’s engagement with Afghan factions during the 1990s and 2000s was driven not by expansionism but by survival. A hostile, pro-India regime in Kabul, like that of Northern Alliance leaders or today’s Taliban, has always posed an existential threat to Pakistan’s western front.
The idea was never to colonise or control Afghanistan. It was to prevent encirclement by hostile forces on both borders. A stable, friendly Afghanistan was always in Pakistan’s interest. In fact, Pakistan pushed harder than most regional powers for an inclusive government in post-occupation Kabul, one that could accommodate all factions and avoid another civil war.
Yet, the phrase “strategic depth” is now weaponized to blame Pakistan for every problem in the region, while ignoring how regional spoilers, from India to Iran, have used Afghanistan for their own strategic leverage.
Pakistan: A Victim of Terror, Not Its Sponsor
Contrary to popular perception, Pakistan is not the architect of terrorism in South Asia. It is one of its biggest victims. From schoolchildren massacred in Peshawar to suicide bombings in Quetta, Karachi, and Lahore, the scars of terrorism run deep across all provinces and all communities.
Terrorism has not been selective in Pakistan. It has attacked mosques, shrines, markets, military bases, and even voting booths. The aim has always been the same, to destabilise, divide, and demoralise. And yet, Pakistan is constantly portrayed as a patron of the same forces that have ripped it apart.
This is not just wrong. It is malicious. It erases the sacrifices of thousands of martyrs, police officers, soldiers, journalists, tribal elders, teachers, who stood up to extremism and paid with their lives.
Pakistan’s battle against terrorism is not a PR campaign. It is a daily war for survival.
TTP and the Taliban: Ideological Cousins, Not Enemies
The Taliban’s refusal to take action against the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan is not a logistical issue. It is ideological. The two groups share theological training, tribal affiliations, and battlefield history. For over two decades, they fought side by side in what they saw as a holy war, only their targets differed.
To the Taliban, asking them to expel or disarm the TTP is like asking them to shoot at their own reflection. This is why even the most basic demands from Pakistan, like closing training camps or arresting known TTP leaders, are met with vague denials or deafening silence.
Even when Pakistani clerics branded the TTP “khawarij,” rebels against Islam, the Afghan Taliban objected, calling the term inflammatory. Their message was clear: they may run a state now, but their loyalty remains with the militants, not the victims.
The Price of Fighting Someone Else’s War
What the world forgets, or ignores, is that the seeds of this chaos were not planted by Pakistan. They were sown in the 1980s by the very powers that now accuse Islamabad of duplicity. The United States, along with its allies, armed and radicalised Afghan militias to fight the Soviets, with Pakistan as the staging ground.
When the war ended, they left, but the chaos, drugs, and weapons stayed. Pakistan was left to clean up a mess it didn’t make. It inherited millions of refugees, a destroyed border economy, and a rising tide of extremism, all while being told to “do more.”
The so-called War on Terror was no different. Pakistan was thrust into the front-lines, forced to fight a war that was not its own, and punished when it bled. American drones struck Pakistani soil. NATO forces violated its sovereignty. And yet, Pakistan remained a reluctant ally, because walking away meant letting terrorism win.
The Forgotten Burden of Refugees
No country in the world has done more for Afghans than Pakistan. It has hosted over 4 million Afghan refugees, often without international support, even during times of economic crisis and internal security threats.
These refugees were not just sheltered. They were given access to education, healthcare, and work. Generations of Afghans grew up in Pakistan’s cities and towns, blending into the social fabric. And yet, despite this unparalleled generosity, Pakistan receives accusations instead of appreciation.
Today, many of those same refugee communities have become vulnerable to infiltration by anti-Pakistan elements, criminal networks, and radical recruiters. Still, Pakistan faces global scrutiny for taking steps to register, regulate, or repatriate individuals who pose legitimate security risks.
What other state would allow its hospitality to be weaponized against it?
A Hostile Border in Place of Gratitude
Instead of acting as a buffer for peace, the Afghan border has become a launchpad for chaos. The Durand Line, internationally recognised and legally binding, is routinely violated, not just by militants, but by Afghan security forces themselves.
Pakistan has invested heavily in fencing the border, establishing crossing regulations, and attempting coordinated patrols. The Taliban, however, refuse to even acknowledge the legitimacy of the border, a dangerous position that signals territorial ambitions and geopolitical recklessness.
Rather than curbing extremist flows, the Taliban have allowed TTP elements to regroup, rearm, and relaunch attacks. This is not neglect. It is complicity.
No More One-Sided Restraint
For years, Pakistan exercised restraint in the face of provocations from across the Afghan border. It issued diplomatic warnings, filed intelligence dossiers, and sought joint mechanisms. Each time, it was met with denials, delay, or deflection.
But every sovereign state has a breaking point. And Pakistan has reached its own.
Cross-border strikes against TTP targets are not reckless. They are calibrated, intelligence-driven actions aimed at degrading militant capabilities. Civilian casualties are deeply regretted, but the greater injustice is to let terrorists murder Pakistani civilians with impunity.
Pakistan’s message is now clear: zero tolerance for safe havens, no matter where they lie.
Islamabad’s Firm Line: Dialogue, Not Deception
Pakistan is not opposed to dialogue with Afghanistan, but dialogue cannot mean silence in the face of bloodshed. It cannot mean appeasement of groups that glorify terrorism, target minorities, and undermine regional peace.
Islamabad has sent envoys, opened its borders for aid, and advocated for inclusive governance in Kabul. But it will not accept lectures from those who cannot govern their own territory or control their own militias.
Any hope for stability in the region depends on honesty. And that begins with Kabul recognising its responsibility.
Regional Stability Requires Regional Honesty
Stability in South Asia cannot be achieved by isolating Pakistan or treating it as a scapegoat. True peace demands that all actors, especially those in Kabul and Delhi, acknowledge their own roles in regional instability.
India must stop exploiting Afghan soil for covert operations against Pakistan. The Taliban must choose between being a responsible government or a safe house for jihadists. And the West must stop treating Pakistan like a hired gun, useful only when convenient.
Pakistan has been at the receiving end of everyone’s war. It has earned the right to set its own red lines.
No More Apologies for Survival
Pakistan does not need to apologise for defending its people, its territory, or its sovereignty. It has shown more patience, more sacrifice, and more goodwill than any other country involved in the Afghan conflict.
But patience is not weakness. Sacrifice is not consent. And goodwill is not a blank cheque.
As a neighbour, a regional stakeholder, and a frontline state in the fight against terrorism, Pakistan has every right, and every obligation, to protect its citizens from cross-border violence.
The days of silence and scapegoating are over. The world may forget Pakistan’s sacrifices. But Pakistan will no longer forget its own strength.
