When the Istanbul talks between Pakistan and Afghanistan broke down, it was tempting for outside observers to blame “diplomatic failure.” But the truth runs deeper and darker. The negotiations collapsed not because of Pakistan’s diplomacy, but because of the fractures, financial motives, and external manipulation festering inside the Afghan Taliban regime.
From the opening session, it became evident that the Afghan delegation was anything but united. Instead of speaking for the Afghan people, it spoke in three conflicting voices Kandahar, Kabul, and Khost each taking instructions from its own power centre. What should have been a focused security dialogue soon turned into a theatre of divided loyalties
The turning point came when talks advanced to the sensitive issue of dismantling Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) sanctuaries. Pakistani negotiators, supported by Qatari and Turkish mediators, pressed for written guarantees ensuring that Afghan soil would not be used for terrorism against Pakistan.
The Kandahar bloc appeared quietly willing to proceed. But then, during a brief recess, the Kabul faction intervened with a sudden, absurd condition: “No agreement can be signed unless the United States joins as a formal guarantor.”
This was never part of the agenda. It was not even mentioned in any of the previous rounds. Afghan social media accounts, echoing narratives about U.S. drones and external involvement, hinted at what was really going on the Kabul faction was attempting to reopen financial channels by dragging Washington into a purely regional matter. It was no longer about terrorism; it was about money.
Behind closed doors, the talks descended into chaos. Witnesses recall Afghan delegates consulting handwritten chits from handlers outside the room and stepping out repeatedly to make phone calls to Kabul. Each time a call ended, previously settled clauses were reopened, finalized points were “placed under review,” and deadlines were intentionally stretched. The aim was obvious stall the talks long enough to bring in external players, particularly India and the United States.
The Taliban regime, instead of confronting the TTP menace, was trying to monetise it. By keeping the group alive, they preserved leverage a tool to extract international recognition, donor sympathy, and cash.The demand for a U.S. “guarantor” was not about sovereignty. It was a strategic ploy.
If Washington joined, the Taliban could claim international cooperation. If cooperation began, aid discussions could resume. And with the return of dollar inflows, the internal tensions between Kabul and Kandahar would ease. In essence, the Taliban sought to turn counterterrorism into a business model a transactional industry of instability, where militancy is not dismantled but managed for financial dividends. Diplomatic sources confirm that both Qatari and Turkish facilitators privately acknowledged three crucial realities:
1. Pakistan’s concerns and conditions were legitimate, transparent, and consistent with international norms. 2. The Afghan delegation was obstructed not by issues of substance, but by its fractured leadership. 3. The Kabul bloc was intentionally steering the talks toward Washington to secure financial leverage. These admissions expose what Islamabad had maintained all along the deadlock was engineered, not accidental.
So, why did the Istanbul talks collapse? Because Kabul never came to negotiate peace. It came to negotiate profit. The Taliban government, deeply divided and dominated by competing power centres, has turned security into a currency and terrorism into insurance. The TTP is not their liability it is their last bargaining chip and their link to Indian patronage and external funding. Pakistan, on the other hand, entered the talks with clarity, restraint, and regional responsibility. Its position was simple: Afghan soil must not be used for terrorism.
The Istanbul talks collapsed not due to a failure of diplomacy, but due to the failure of credibility in Kabul. Until the Taliban regime resolves its internal chaos and abandons the strategy of trading terror for dollars, no peace process can succeed.
Pakistan remains committed to dialogue, stability, and responsible engagement. But diplomacy cannot survive deceit and in Istanbul, it was not Pakistan that walked away from peace; it was Kabul that sold it.
