Islamabad sees the Taliban and other insurgent groups operating from its soil as valuable assets in its regional geopolitical game.
President Donald Trump had harsh words for Pakistan in announcing his new strategy for Afghanistan and South Asia. The President has rightly identified the problem by mentioning Pakistani support for the Taliban, which has served as a strategic impediment to winning the longest American war. Moreover, an effective policy in order to win the Afghan war demands addressing the sanctuaries that Pakistan has continued to provide in pursuit of its objectives in the region.
Pakistan is an important neighbor to Afghanistan whose role has been viewed as crucial for prolonging the conflict in the war-stricken country, due to its strategic involvement in Afghan affairs over the years and its provision of support for extremist groups to threaten the security and prosperity of Afghanistan. Consequently, relations between the two countries have remained tense in the course of history. Since Pakistan’s inception in 1947 as a sovereign and independent nation, the political and security relations between Kabul and Islamabad have been frosty and unfriendly.
There have been times that Afghanistan has been a major military and political irritant for Pakistan by backing the cause of an independent Pashtonistan and threatening the sovereignty of Pakistan. Furthermore, the Afghan moral and political support for the people of Baluchistan to gain autonomy has posed another challenge in the bilateral relations between the two states. Despite causing problems for Pakistan, these efforts have been mostly manageable by Islamabad and its powerful military establishment due to the fact that Afghanistan has been lacking the economic, military, and political capacity to match Pakistan, as well as due to the ongoing instability and conflict in Afghanistan.
Since the Soviet Union’s occupation of Afghanistan in 1979, Pakistan has been pursuing an active foreign policy based on exporting extremism and weakening state structures in Afghanistan. For instance, in the 1980s, Pakistani policies were directed at strengthening its favorite Mujahedeen in hopes that they would become the dominant force to control Afghanistan. In the aftermath decade when Islamabad’s interests were unmet, the country’s support quickly shifted to aiding the Taliban movement. In fact, the Taliban were able to conquer vast swaths of Afghanistan by the advice and assist of Pakistani military institutions. In this vein, since 2001, Pakistan has stayed the course by not only allowing the Taliban freedom of movement and operation, but also supporting the group to preserve its lost influence in the neighboring country.
The reality is that Pakistan sees the Taliban as an actual force to hedge against the Indian domination in Afghanistan. In fact, Islamabad has not only actively supported militancy to pursue its interests in Afghanistan, but also in India and the Kashmir region, with the rationale that these strategic weapons would serve as a deterrent. More importantly, in the aftermath of 9/11 attacks, the Pakistani military has adopted a security paradox by countering and fomenting insurgencies. The policy has been strategically calculated by differentiating various terrorist groups as good versus bad terrorists. From the Pakistani military and intelligence view, those insurgencies that are attacking the country’s interests must be crushed and neutralized with full force and robust response. These are the groups such as the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and Jammat-ul-Ahrar, which have attacked soft and hard targets inside Pakistan.
On the other hand, the Afghan- and Indian-focused groups like the Afghan Taliban, Haqqani Network, and Lashker-e-Taiba are instead aided and abetted to pursue Pakistan’s malign objectives in India and Afghanistan. While Pakistan has also suffered from terrorism by the instability brought about from its border regions, there are forces within its deep state that think the approach is in line with the country’s national interest.
Since Pakistan is pursuing a geopolitical game due to its rivalry with India in Afghanistan, it will never back away from using the Taliban and other extremists as instruments of its foreign policy. As noted, these groups are considered ‘strategic assets’ to preserve its influence and shape the future developments in neighboring states. But the continuation of this course of action is not sustainable and thus would not serve the long-term Pakistani interest for many reasons.
First, during the last decade and a half, Afghanistan, despite the presence of insecurity, has acquired plenty of soft and hard power that is able to counter Pakistani incursions. Second, Pakistani covert support for extremist groups have become known and clear that it has tarnished its prestige and reputation among the international community. Third, the Taliban long considered as effective lethal proxies in shaping the future developments of Afghanistan have lost legitimacy and become widely unpopular among the Afghan people. Thus, even in case of a political settlement, it’s highly unlikely that the group can maintain a positive influence in forthcoming Afghan governments in order to preserve Islamabad’s interests. Finally, the international community, particularly the United States, will never allow Afghanistan to be ruled by extremist groups, such as the Taliban, and to become a safe haven for other terrorist organizations.
For all these reasons, Pakistan needs to change its approach and modify its security policies and to break any links with terror groups that poses threat to regional stability. The past policies have isolated the country, bankrupted its economy, and have diverted the resources from its development and prosperity. Therefore, it’s in the national interest of Pakistan to opt for peace and security in the region and to become a reliable partner in the fight against terrorism and extremism. Pakistan has much to lose by harboring terrorist groups and much to gain from partnering with US/NATO efforts in Afghanistan and the broader region.
A very distorted image of the conflict in Afghanistan has been painted. his opinion resembles with the Americans who only wants to prolong the conflict in Afghanistan to counter the possible influence of Russia and china in the region. the Author completely forgot that the mujaheddin were made and supported by Americans in the first place to carry their proxy war against the former soviet union. yes pakistan was part of it because americans and pakistanis were allies. second the author says taliban has lost popularity in Afghanistan. yes they did but he didnot mention how can taliban control more than 40% of Afghanistan without any local support. pakistan has been the immensly effected by cross boarder terrorism since 2001. it has affected the economy, the infrastucture and taken thousands of lives of forces and civilians. no one in international community recognizes the sacrifices pakistan gave in being an ally of U.S in the so called war on terror. Afghanistan should be stabilized. the afghan people have the right to govern their country. Taliban is a terrorist organisation but the strategy americans want to implement in the region will only prolong the conflict. they have given a millitary solution where as a political solution can be implemented.
Since the author is an afghan so he cannot be blamed for scapegoating Pakistan for all their faults and misdeeds. Take it with a pinch of salt that no one in Afghanistan wants a solution to the present crisis. All factions which also include talIban, have amassed riches as a result of war economy. American companies are have become conglomerates due to this conflict. War economy has worked for all. Why author did not comment that the power sharing arrangement in their government is the most lopsided, one has yet to come across. Is it Pakistan”s act? Is rampant corruption and poppy growing pakistan”s act? Why could ISAF troops which numbered 100000 at their peak could not stop taliban from exanding despie their cutting edge in technology? This means pakistan is number one army in the world capable of out matching USA and a combined army of 30 countries. Has pakistan ordered afghans to not send their girls to school and women to work?. Why don’t three million afghan refugees return to their country and prefer living in Pakistan? Since afghans and their patrons are deeply embroiled in their own act and don’t find solution, best way is to keep blaming pakistan and no wonder, the author is just repeating the same mantra. If pakistan was economically so strong as to field such strong proxies, it would not be so heavily debt ridden. Please think before you write. And if you can’t think rational then don’t waste our time.