RASC News Agency: In a politically charged statement that has reignited debate over Pakistan’s troubled relationship with the Taliban regime, Ali Amin Gandapur, the Chief Minister of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, announced that the federal government has accepted his proposal to initiate direct negotiations with the Taliban rulers in Kabul. Gandapur claimed the initiative could open a “new path” toward reducing cross-border insecurity and addressing the escalating crisis surrounding Afghanistani refugees in Pakistan.
Speaking during a session of the National Security and War Course in Peshawar, Gandapur underscored that Afghanistan’s persistent instability continues to spill across the border, eroding security in Pakistan’s frontier provinces. “The chaos and violence under Taliban rule have not remained confined within Afghanistan’s borders,” he remarked. “They have seeped into our own communities fueling terrorism, arms trafficking, and narcotics smuggling that undermine Pakistan’s internal stability.”
Gandapur emphasized that Pakistan’s military and civilians have borne heavy sacrifices over the past two decades in their struggle against extremism. Yet, he acknowledged that military operations alone have failed to achieve lasting peace. “We have spent years waging war against shadows,” he said. “True stability will not come from continued bloodshed, but from direct dialogue with Kabul however difficult that path may be.”
According to the provincial leader, the continuation of punitive and militarized policies serves only to perpetuate the cycle of violence, leaving both Pakistan and Afghanistan trapped in mutual insecurity. He characterized engagement with the Taliban as a pragmatic, if controversial, step toward regional understanding that could influence not only Pakistan’s border security but also Afghanistan’s uncertain political future.
His comments come at a time when Pakistan’s own national discourse over the Taliban has turned increasingly divisive. Former Prime Minister Imran Khan currently imprisoned yet politically influential had previously called on Islamabad to pursue dialogue with the Taliban rather than confrontation. He even proposed that the Taliban could serve as mediators between Pakistan’s government and the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), a militant faction responsible for numerous attacks inside Pakistan. Khan accused senior army officials of deliberately prolonging the conflict in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, claiming that “the military establishment does not want peace to prevail in the province.”
Gandapur’s remarks also touched on the sensitive issue of Afghanistani refugees. He reiterated support for repatriation policies but stressed that the process must be carried out “with dignity and humanity.” He warned that mistreating refugees who have lived in Pakistan for more than four decades could ignite new social fractures between the two nations. “Millions of Afghanistani citizens have contributed to our economy and culture,” he said. “Their return must not be reduced to a political spectacle it must be conducted with respect for human dignity.”
Nevertheless, Gandapur’s proposal has drawn skepticism among political analysts, who view the idea of negotiating with the Taliban as both strategically risky and morally compromising. Observers argue that the Taliban regime, having plunged Afghanistan into political repression and economic despair, lacks both legitimacy and the capacity to deliver meaningful security guarantees.
Diplomatic experts further caution that any attempt to separate the Taliban from the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) is likely futile. The two groups, they note, are bound by shared ideology, militant networks, and deep tribal connections. Even if Taliban leaders in Kabul were to express nominal cooperation with Islamabad, their field commanders and fighters would continue to sympathize with and support the TTP’s anti-Pakistani agenda.
In essence, Gandapur’s initiative exposes the contradictions at the heart of Pakistan’s policy toward the Taliban a policy oscillating between confrontation and accommodation. While Islamabad seeks to secure its borders and prevent further terrorist incursions, its willingness to engage with a regime that has institutionalized gender apartheid, suppressed dissent, and offered sanctuary to extremists reveals the enduring confusion of its regional strategy.
Critics contend that such overtures only serve to normalize the Taliban’s brutality, further entrenching their oppressive rule and weakening international efforts to hold them accountable. The Taliban, now internationally isolated yet regionally emboldened, have proven themselves incapable of genuine diplomacy or governance. By engaging with them on the pretext of “peace,” Pakistan risks not only legitimizing tyranny next door but also importing the same extremist ideology that has already taken root within its own borders.
The emerging dialogue, if pursued, may not bring peace to either country but could instead deepen the tragedy of a region caught between the illusions of negotiation and the realities of militant domination.
