Tensions between Pakistan and Afghanistan have surged in recent weeks following a series of terrorist attacks inside Pakistan, including the capital, Islamabad. In response, Islamabad conducted cross-border strikes, claiming to have dismantled infrastructure belonging to the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) in Afghan provinces such as Kabul, Paktika and Kandahar.

The Afghan Taliban regime has condemned these operations as a blatant violation of Afghan sovereignty, alleging civilian casualties, a claim denied by Pakistani officials. Matters escalated further when Afghan forces reportedly opened fire on multiple Pakistani border posts. Islamabad responded with strong rhetoric, describing its stance as an "open war” posture and claiming territorial gains along parts of the disputed frontier.

The bone of contention between the two neighbours is TTP, an internationally recognized terrorist organization, that has been responsible for hundreds of terrorist attacks in Pakistan and recently intensified the terrorist wave within Pakistan.

Islamabad accuses Kabul of providing safe havens to TTP fighters operating from Afghan soil. Kabul, however, rejects these allegations, arguing that Pakistan’s internal security failures cannot be externalized. Yet, recent United Nations reporting has pointed to operational linkages between the TTP and elements within Afghanistan, complicating Kabul’s denials and reinforcing Pakistan’s security concerns.

Additionally, the evolving crisis has drawn international attention. A spokesperson from the U.S. Department of State stated that the United States supports Pakistan’s right to defend itself against attacks from the TTP. Similarly, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, reiterated that Afghan territory must not be used to threaten or attack other states and urged the de facto authorities in Kabul to take effective action against terrorist groups.

While most Western actors have framed their responses in the language of counterterrorism and self-defense, regional diplomacy is taking a different tone. Türkiye and Qatar have reportedly sought to mediate and prevent further deterioration, recognizing that sustained conflict would destabilize the broader region.

It is pertinent to mention that Pakistan’s security concerns are neither fabricated nor trivial. The TTP’s resurgence presents a tangible threat to Pakistani civilians, state institutions and military personnel. No sovereign state can indefinitely tolerate cross-border militancy.

However, cross-border airstrikes inside Afghanistan are perceived by the Afghan population as a question of territorial sovereignty. Such actions risk embedding long-term resentment among the Afghan population.

Afghanistan’s modern history is deeply shaped by memories of foreign intervention. Perceptions of violation, regardless of legal justification, can harden attitudes across generations. Pakistan must take into consideration that it has hosted nearly 4 million Afghan refugees for over four decades, creating deep social, cultural and economic interconnections between the two societies. This shared history should act as a stabilizing force rather than a prelude to hostility.

Moreover, post U.S. withdrawal in 2021, Pakistan extended goodwill gestures to the Afghan regime and has tried several times to constructively engage with the Afghan regime. Unfortunately, despite all the efforts, no significant breakthrough has been achieved.

Now, Islamabad maintains that dialogue with Kabul is futile unless prior commitments, particularly those associated with the Doha Agreement, are fulfilled. Pakistan argues that the Afghan Taliban pledged to prevent Afghan soil from being used against other states. Kabul counters that the TTP issue is Pakistan’s internal matter.

The deadlock reflects not only a dispute over facts but a breakdown of trust. Without credible verification mechanisms, accusations and denials will continue to dominate the narrative, so the regional countries, specifically Türkiye and Qatar, need to upgrade their efforts to broker a peace agreement between the two neighbours. The hostilities have impacted the regional connectivity projects, border trade and refugee management, all of which stand jeopardized. Escalation benefits no actor, except extremist groups that thrive in chaos.

Afghanistan’s de facto authorities must acknowledge that dismantling TTP networks is essential, not only for Pakistan’s security but for Afghanistan’s own international legitimacy. Failure to act risks further isolation and military confrontation.

At the same time, Pakistan must calibrate its responses with strategic foresight. Tactical gains achieved through force may generate strategic losses if Afghan public opinion solidifies against Islamabad. The path forward is structured negotiation. Confidence-building measures, joint border monitoring mechanisms, intelligence-sharing frameworks and third-party facilitation by actors such as Türkiye or Qatar could provide a starting point.

Two neighbouring Muslim states, bound by geography, history and people-to-people ties, cannot afford perpetual confrontation. Dialogue may be given another chance.