Pakistan, firm in its resolve to eradicate terrorism and restore peace, stands at a decisive moment in its national journey. It has seen decades of both negotiation and military operations in its tribal and border regions. While operations have brought short-term security, the long-term strategy remains dangerously undefined. The time has come to rethink our posture. It is time to return to the table, not as a sign of weakness, but as a mature nation seeking sustainable peace.
In recent days, former Afghan intelligence chief General Rahmatullah Nabil Sadat made a stark admission: India is funding terrorism in Pakistan via Afghan soil. While the statement is explosive, it is hardly surprising to those of us who have spent years covering militancy, counterinsurgency, and regional geopolitics. The question is not whether these threats exist, they do, but how Pakistan chooses to confront them.
Pakistan has conducted over a dozen large-scale military operations, Zarb-e-Azb, Rah-e-Rast, Rah-e-Nijat, to name a few. These campaigns succeeded in clearing territory, dismantling networks, and killing top terrorists. Yet here we are, once again mourning the loss of soldiers in Waziristan, public officials in Bajaur, and political leaders across Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Daesh is active, the banned TTP remains dangerous, and peace is, at best, fleeting.
Operations offer immediate relief, but they do not build lasting peace. In many cases, they lead to strategic retreats by terrorists, only for these groups to regroup, reorganise, and reemerge months later. Militants know the terrain. They blend into local populations. Airstrikes and artillery alone cannot kill an ideology.
Moreover, these operations come at a cost: resentment among the local population, destruction of livelihoods, displacement, and a growing trust deficit between the people and the state. We’ve seen this in Waziristan and Swat, where people welcomed peace, only to find themselves trapped in a cycle of violence, evacuation, and return.
Critics often equate dialogue with appeasement. This is both simplistic and dangerous. Negotiation, when done with clarity and strength, is not a sign of capitulation, it is a strategy. Previous talks with the Taliban failed not because negotiation is flawed, but because the process was poorly structured, politically driven, and lacked local legitimacy.
Any meaningful negotiation must now involve those who hold real influence in the region, tribal elders, religious scholars, and respected community leaders. These are the people who understand the local dynamics, who can speak with credibility, and who can serve as a bridge between the state and the militant factions.
We must also rethink how we select our negotiating teams. Sending political appointees with little ground understanding has failed us before. Instead, we need a national dialogue framework, supported by the state but rooted in local legitimacy. It must be inclusive, credible, and strategic.
Beyond the guns and grievances lies a powerful motivator for peace: economics. Pakistan has yet to fully explore the economic potential of a peaceful Afghanistan. From Central Asia to Europe, a corridor of trade, transit, and opportunity lies ahead, but only if security can be guaranteed along the way.
Afghanistan’s markets remain largely untapped by Pakistani businesses. With stability, this could change. Access to Central Asian republics, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, is not only desirable, it is necessary for Pakistan’s economic revival. But this vision cannot be realised through barrel-of-the-gun strategies. It requires bridges, literal and diplomatic. China’s interest through its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is proof enough that stability in the region is not a dream. Beijing has shown willingness to mediate between Kabul and Islamabad. If China sees a future of trade, energy, and transit here, why can’t we?
Let’s not be naive. India’s role in destabilizing Pakistan through Afghan proxies is a matter of record, not speculation. General Sadat’s remarks merely confirm what many in Pakistan already believe. However, we must be careful not to let this turn into a license for perpetual militarism.
Yes, India seeks to exploit our western vulnerabilities. But reacting with brute force alone plays into that very strategy. We need to counter this not just with guns but with smart diplomacy, regional alliances, and an airtight internal security mechanism. Perhaps the most glaring weakness today is the complete absence of political ownership in this war. Security forces are conducting daily intelligence-based operations. The military is on the front-line. But where are our politicians? Where is the strategic direction? Where is the unified national policy?
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s leadership is conspicuously absent. Terrorists roam freely across districts, set up roadblocks, and intimidate locals, often in broad daylight. In southern KP, Bannu, DI Khan, Lakki Marwat, the state’s writ is alarmingly thin. Yet, the provincial government appears detached, even indifferent.
This is not just incompetence, it is negligence. The political class must own this war. They must back security efforts with legislation, strategy, and political muscle. Peace is not the job of soldiers alone; it is a national responsibility.
International forums, from the UN to regional alliances, have offered little more than statements and symbolism. Global powers, particularly those humiliated in Afghanistan, have no real appetite for peace in this region. Their failures have left a void, and they are content to let Pakistan shoulder the fallout.
We should not rely on the international community to save us. Diplomacy must continue, but our real focus must be internal coherence, regional trust-building, and clear-eyed national strategy.
Lastly, the bedrock of any long-term solution lies in rebuilding trust with Afghanistan. There is a deep and mutual deficit today. This must be addressed. Both countries share religion, ethnicity, and history. Millions of Afghans have lived peacefully in Pakistan for decades. This foundation should be used to rebuild, not destroy, trust.
It’s also time to ignore the propaganda being pumped out by foreign-based activists who thrive on perpetual hostility. Let the people of both nations speak, not the agendas of overseas actors.
Pakistan is not just fighting terrorists, it is fighting for its future. Military operations may be necessary, but they are not sufficient. We need a bold, principled, and inclusive dialogue process. We need leadership that takes ownership, not shelter. We need diplomacy that is strategic, not symbolic. And we need to build trust, both with Afghanistan and within ourselves.
Only then can we turn the page on a bloody chapter and begin writing a future of peace, prosperity, and power.
