Pakistan-Afghanistan Talks in Istanbul: Fragile Truce, Strong Words, and Hope for Peace

The second round of peace talks between Pakistan and Afghanistan concluded in Istanbul, Türkiye, with both sides agreeing to maintain a temporary ceasefire and resume discussions on November 6. Mediated by Türkiye and Qatar, the dialogue marks a crucial effort to de-escalate rising tensions along the Durand Line, where frequent clashes and mutual accusations have threatened to spiral into full-scale conflict.

Despite the truce, the atmosphere remains charged, with strong rhetoric from both sides — particularly from the Taliban’s Interior Minister Sirajuddin Haqqani, who issued a stern warning to Pakistan:

“Do not test our patience. Exporting your internal conflicts across the border will cost you dearly.”

Background: The Istanbul Dialogue

The Istanbul peace initiative was launched earlier in October 2025 amid escalating border clashes in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Nangarhar provinces. At least 30 soldiers and militants were killed in recent cross-border attacks, leading to renewed diplomatic intervention from Türkiye and Qatar, both of whom have played neutral roles in regional stability efforts.

The talks initially stalled due to disagreements over border management, refugee deportations, and the presence of Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) fighters inside Afghan territory. However, under Turkish mediation, both delegations agreed to a temporary ceasefire and to continue talks to prevent further escalation.

Statements from Key Stakeholders

Türkiye and Qatar’s Mediation Efforts

According to a joint statement released by the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the discussions focused on:

• Preventing future border clashes.

• Establishing a joint security mechanism.

• Repatriation and humanitarian coordination for refugees.

• Creating channels for intelligence sharing to combat terrorism.

Türkiye called the ceasefire “a ray of light” in an otherwise fragile situation, emphasizing that both nations must pursue “diplomacy over aggression.”

Pakistan’s Response

Pakistan’s Defence Minister Khawaja Asif described the Istanbul talks as a “turning point,” but warned that Islamabad would “not hesitate to act decisively” if provoked by cross-border attacks.

“We will go deep into Afghanistan if needed to hunt the TTP,” Asif told reporters before the talks.

However, after the meeting, he softened his tone, stating,

“We welcome the truce. Peace with Afghanistan is in Pakistan’s interest — but peace must be based on mutual respect.”

Afghanistan’s Stance

The Taliban-led Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (IEA), represented by senior officials and Interior Minister Sirajuddin Haqqani, accused Pakistan of violating Afghan sovereignty and “exporting its internal turmoil.”

Haqqani warned,

“If our sovereignty is tested again, the response will be crushing. Empires have fallen here — Afghans never have.”

The IEA reiterated its commitment to diplomacy but insisted Pakistan must “stop using terrorism as leverage.”

Underlying Tensions: The TTP Factor

A central issue remains Pakistan’s accusation that the Afghan Taliban shelters TTP militants, who continue to target Pakistani forces. Kabul, however, denies direct involvement and has repeatedly asked Islamabad to handle “its domestic insurgency internally.”

Analysts point out that Pakistan’s decades-old policy of supporting the Taliban to gain “strategic depth” in Afghanistan has now backfired. As The Economic Times noted, Islamabad is now “paying a high price for its own Taliban strategy.”

Border Flashpoints and Drone Controversy

In a surprising admission, Pakistan recently claimed that U.S. drones operating near the Afghan border had disrupted peace efforts. Reports from Times of India and Times Now revealed that Islamabad privately acknowledged “foreign drone strikes” targeting suspected TTP camps inside Afghanistan — a move that infuriated Kabul.

Afghan officials viewed this as “a violation of sovereignty,” accusing Pakistan of greenlighting external military operations without coordination.

India’s Role and Regional Context

Pakistan’s government has accused Kabul of “acting as New Delhi’s tool,” suggesting India may be leveraging Afghanistan to counter Pakistan’s influence in the region. Afghan diplomats dismissed the claim, calling it a “diversionary tactic.”

India has maintained official silence but continues to emphasize regional stability and anti-terror cooperation.

Reactions on X (Twitter)

• Turkish MFA (@MFATurkiye): Posted the joint statement confirming a truce and upcoming talks on November 6.

• Zabihullah Mujahid (@Zabehulah_M33): Reiterated that Afghanistan seeks resolution “through diplomacy and understanding.”

• Aditya Raj Kaul (@AdityaRajKaul): Reported on Haqqani’s fiery remarks and Pakistan’s attempts to downplay tensions.

What Lies Ahead: November 6 and Beyond

The next round of talks, scheduled for November 6, will likely address:

• Establishing a formal ceasefire mechanism.

• Border demarcation and surveillance protocols.

• The fate of TTP militants and potential extradition arrangements.

• Humanitarian and refugee coordination, especially concerning deported Afghans from Pakistan.

Observers warn that the peace is tenuous and could collapse if either side faces domestic pressure or renewed border violence.

Expert Opinions

• Reuters: “The truce offers breathing room but no breakthrough.”

• The Diplomat: “China’s growing concern over instability could push Beijing to engage more actively.”

• Business Standard: “The Durand Line remains a wound that neither diplomacy nor deterrence has healed.”

Conclusion: A Fragile Peace in a Volatile Region

While the Istanbul talks mark progress, trust remains scarce. Both Pakistan and Afghanistan appear caught between strategic necessity and deep-rooted mistrust. The ceasefire, extended for one week, may prevent immediate escalation — but sustainable peace will require more than rhetoric.

The coming weeks will test whether Islamabad and Kabul can move beyond accusations to cooperation — or if the region will once again slide into the familiar pattern of hostility.