THROUGH the efforts of foreign interlocutors, the failed parleys between Afghanistan and Pakistan in Istanbul have been salvaged, yielding an extension in the ceasefire, and a promise from both sides to meet again in Turkiye next week to firm up the details.
As reported, Pakistani representatives were at the airport on Thursday when they were called back by the hosts to give diplomacy with the Afghan Taliban another shot. On Wednesday, Pakistani officials had said the talks had collapsed, mainly due to the Afghan side’s refusal to give explicit guarantees that their soil would not be used by anti-Pakistan militants such as the TTP.
The development is welcome, and the tone of officials indicates that a breakthrough may be possible. For example, the FO spokesman said on Friday that Pakistan hopes for a “positive outcome” from the Nov 6 talks. A mechanism to verify the ceasefire and ensure peace at the border has been agreed to, and this can be the starting point for a more formal peace plan.
The key problem remains Pakistan’s legitimate concern that terrorist groups in Afghanistan are not being prevented from staging attacks against this country, and Kabul’s ambiguous stance on the issue. According to reports, the Taliban negotiators said they could not fully control the TTP, particularly their attacks inside Pakistan. While internal security is indeed Pakistan’s own responsibility, it is the Taliban’s duty — as the de facto government in Kabul — to stop terrorist groups from crossing over into Pakistan. If they cannot stop cross-border terrorism, how can the Taliban be expected to be taken seriously as Afghanistan’s legitimate administration?
However, the Pakistani side’s reported demand that the Taliban declare the TTP a fitna may be unrealistic. The Taliban and the TTP are cut from the same ideological cloth, hence, we should not expect any such edicts from Kabul or Kandahar.
Much will depend on what the Taliban bring to the table in Istanbul next week. Hopefully they will realise that without a verifiable mechanism and commitment to stop cross-border terrorism, long-term peace with Pakistan will be difficult. Meanwhile both sides, including high officials in Pakistan, should shun intemperate language that could imperil the parleys. While Pakistan’s stance against terrorist groups like the TTP should be clear, aggressive commentary should be avoided.
And as this paper has stated, with cooperation from Muslim states, such as Qatar and Turkiye, which have been instrumental in hosting the talks, as well as regional allies, Kabul should be pressed further on terrorism. For example, along with the TTP, the Taliban also host Al Qaeda, ETIM and IS-K. These groups have staged attacks on regional states, which is why a coordinated, transnational counterterrorism policy is needed to address the problem of militants based in Afghanistan.
Published in Dawn, November 1st, 2025
