Order within any household endures only when an elder or guardian assumes responsibility for its affairs, guiding family members with wisdom, discipline, and authority. When every individual begins to act as the head and makes independent decisions, the household inevitably descends into disorder, for no structure can survive when leadership is scattered. This domestic metaphor aptly mirrors the present state of Afghanistan, where the absence of an uncontested central authority has led each province, tribe, and faction to carve out its own path. It is a land that has long struggled to establish a fixed centre of gravity, rarely succeeding – and today’s era is no exception.
The Taliban government, once confident in its claim of absolute control over Afghanistan, now appears entangled in a web of internal discord and rising resistance. What had been presented as a unified Islamic order has gradually transformed into a fractured administration grappling to retain its authority amid widening rifts. Since their return to power in August 2021, the Taliban strove to project an image of unity and religious legitimacy. Yet beneath this surface lay deep fissures between the religious leadership and various factions, where tribal loyalties often overshadowed ideological cohesion. The depth of these disagreements can be gauged from the growing number of field commanders in the northern and western regions who no longer heed directives from Kabul. The re-emergence of local militias is once again pushing Afghanistan towards a fragmented map, imperilling even the limited order the Taliban had attempted to impose.
India’s strategy appears twofold: to keep Afghanistan unstable enough that Pakistan’s strategic focus remains divided, and simultaneously to rebuild its old influence under the garb of humanitarian engagement.
History offers a vivid example of Afghan disunity: a time when several influential Afghan chieftains gathered in Makkah. Standing before the House of God, they pledged to renounce internecine conflict for the sake of their homeland. Yet, upon returning to Afghanistan, that solemn vow proved no more than a line drawn in sand; old animosities flared anew, and even the sanctity of the sacred precinct could not override tribal attachments. Another historical truth stands alongside it: whenever a foreign power invades Afghanistan, these divided tribes suddenly unite. Relations with Pakistan also assume an unusual warmth during such periods. But the moment the external threat diminishes, old divisions reappear. Chieftains re-establish their own camps, alliances shatter, and order dissolves once more.
For Pakistan, Afghanistan’s internal fissures carry grave strategic implications. Islamabad had hoped that the Taliban’s return would prevent Afghan soil from being used against Pakistan and would open the door to lasting peace between the two neighbours. Yet the persistence of safe havens for anti-Pakistan militants eroded these expectations. Despite repeated assurances from Kabul, cross-border attacks continued, destabilising Pakistan’s western frontier. Pakistan made it unequivocally clear that Afghan territory must not be used for terrorism against it.
However, the Taliban leadership – whether by design or due to lack of capacity – failed to bring all groups under its control. Certain elements, emboldened by the weakness of the central command, continued to maintain links with anti-Pakistan militant outfits, which India covertly aided. After India’s embarrassments in May at the hands of Pakistan, New Delhi expanded its proxy networks in Afghanistan, fanning every tribal discord and exploiting groups that did not even fall under Taliban authority. Pakistan’s repatriation of illegal Afghan residents also became a catalyst for Indian manipulation; it fuelled discontent, became a tool for propaganda, and was used to craft a Pakistan-hostile narrative within Afghanistan.
India’s strategy appears twofold: to keep Afghanistan unstable enough that Pakistan’s strategic focus remains divided, and simultaneously to rebuild its old influence under the garb of humanitarian engagement. Renewed contact with former Northern Alliance elements and the patronage of exiled groups reflect this ambition. For decades, Afghanistan has been a chessboard for major powers, where actors have played their concealed games in the name of stability.
Amid this environment, Pakistan has gradually adopted a more mature approach. Recognising that its own security cannot rest solely on Kabul’s assurances, Islamabad has recalibrated its internal, diplomatic, and strategic policies. Border monitoring has been tightened; fencing and surveillance systems strengthened; and movement regulations made stricter. Civil and military intelligence coordination has improved, enabling timely action against infiltrating elements. On the diplomatic front, Pakistan has sought to develop a regional framework with China, Iran, Russia, and Central Asian states to curb Afghanistan’s fragmentation and restrict India’s unilateral designs.
Politically, Pakistan maintains that Afghanistan’s stability cannot be secured by the dominance of a single faction; it requires dialogue among all ethnic and religious groups. The Taliban’s reluctance in this regard has isolated them at home and abroad, and Pakistan continues to draw their attention to this reality.
A striking contradiction exists in Afghanistan’s responses to its neighbours. Iran, too, repatriated illegal Afghan residents, yet Kabul did not react with the hostility it displayed toward Pakistan. This disparity reveals how external actors deliberately inflame anti-Pakistan sentiment within Afghanistan while preventing similar reactions against Iran. Whenever Pakistan and Afghanistan’s mutual well-wishers attempted to guide the Taliban delegation toward constructive engagement in long negotiations held in Doha and Istanbul, Indian proxies in Kabul sought to sabotage the process. India’s opportunism may cause temporary discomfort, but it also exposes its underlying regional insecurity. Pakistan, by contrast, has learned that enduring peace arises not from volatility, but from restraint, dialogue, and cooperation.
Today, Afghanistan still resembles a household without an active, authoritative head – where every member considers himself the master of decisions. Its instability has never remained confined within its borders. Those who attempt to exploit this chaos often find themselves ensnared by it. For Pakistan, wisdom lies in maintaining firmness with foresight, caution with clarity, and strength through regional cooperation. Only through such a balance can Pakistan safeguard its frontiers and help steer the region toward a safer, more stable future.
History teaches a consistent lesson; until Afghanistan develops a central authority capable of enforcing order across the country, the prospect of lasting peace in the region will remain slim. Until then, Pakistan must navigate this shifting landscape with vigilance, resolve, and continuous diplomacy – in a setting where unity emerges only under external pressure, and dissipates as soon as peace returns.
The writer is Director General Library & Research, National Assembly, Parliament House, Islamabad.