Pakistan's Security and Diplomatic Crisis

In 1949, Afghanistan's Loya Jirga decided to annul all treaties with British India. This structural difference in border perception continues to prevent the establishment of normal relations between the two countries.

However, Taliban 2.0 refused to recognize the Durand Line and only offered mediation on the TTP issue. Contrary to Pakistan's intention to expel India from Kabul, the Taliban requested India to resume projects, leading to the failure of all Pakistani policies. Even though Pakistan pressured the Taliban by forcibly expelling Afghan refugees, the Taliban did not change their stance.

After the Taliban came to power, the TTP's strength increased with prisoner releases and force consolidation. The TTP acquired weapons left behind by the US in Afghanistan and is now carrying out deadly attacks within Pakistan.

Despite the majority of TTP members being from Pakistan's FATA, Pakistan has failed to resolve this issue internally, instead deflecting blame onto Afghanistan or India.

Some of the approximately $7 billion worth of weapons left by the US military in Afghanistan flowed through the Taliban to Baloch armed groups.

As a result, the TTP is expanding its influence by establishing new strongholds in northern Balochistan and Makran regions.

The Pashtun Tahafuz Movement (PTM) is raising awareness that the Pakistani government and military use them as 'cannon fodder.' The collapse of human intelligence gathering systems has severely reduced the military's operational efficiency.

The DG ISPR announced that the Pakistani military conducted over 4,000 operations (more than 200 per day) in six months. They claim to have killed 2,000 terrorists, but a significant number are believed to be civilians.

According to official announcements, 300 military and police personnel died over six months, but the actual number of casualties is expected to be much higher.

This shows the severe state of domestic security and raises questions about the effectiveness and transparency of military operations.

Despite the uncontrollable domestic security situation, the Pakistani military focuses on external activities, such as attempting to mediate peace talks between the US and Iran.

This situation leads to increased public distrust and ridicule towards the government. People criticize the military for meddling in external affairs without resolving internal issues.

Fearing a recurrence of uncontrollable results, the military has manipulated all elections since then.

Furthermore, suppressing demands for local autonomy by force has become an established military strategy. The military deeply intervenes in the political process to maintain centralization.

However, the Sindhi people strongly oppose territorial division, considering the Sindh region their motherland. Such attempts at administrative division are highly likely to exacerbate the national crisis.

Experts warn that this plan will cause serious problems.

The relationship between India and Afghanistan is based on religious and civilizational ties. Power in medieval India was so closely linked to the control of Kabul that the relationship was historically intimate.

As long as geopolitical conditions do not change, the restoration of relations between the two countries is a natural progression.

This demonstrates the failure of Pakistan's attempts to control Afghanistan.

The Taliban's suppression of women's rights conflicts with India's democratic values. Nevertheless, India is pursuing a policy of gradual change through dialogue rather than isolating the Taliban government.

There are instances where the Taliban government shows flexibility, such as allowing female journalists to cover events. India believes that engagement, not isolation, can lead to positive change.

All of Pakistan's foreign policy strategies, including its Afghanistan policy, are completely dominated by the General Headquarters (GHQ).

The civilian government acts merely as a stooge of the military, often due to familial ties. This undermines the independence and flexibility of Pakistan's foreign policy.

Due to the military's pride, it is difficult to change the existing course, and even if the situation worsens, policy changes are unlikely.

These structural limitations make it even harder for Pakistan to resolve the diplomatic problems it faces.

Despite failing to renegotiate the 1948 agreement after its expiration, Pakistan makes distorted claims blaming India.

In 1952, Zafarullah Khan falsely claimed in a UN speech that India had cut off Pakistan's water supply. This shows Pakistan's consistent practice of using falsehoods to manipulate public opinion regarding water issues.

Despite securing 80% of the Indus River's water resources, Pakistan wastes a significant amount due to poor management. The entire water of the Chenab River flows into the sea without being stored.

Due to leaks in the canal system, only 36% of agricultural water is actually used, with the remaining 64% lost. The Pakistani government actively uses the framework of blaming India to conceal its internal mismanagement.

All the problems Pakistan faces stem from the incompetence of its leadership, spanning both military and civilian spheres. The leadership completely lacks problem recognition, vision, and the courage to solve these issues.

From founding father Muhammad Ali Jinnah to Nawaz Sharif, Pakistan's history has been a continuous series of leadership failures.

Analysts who have been raising this issue for the past decade are convinced that Pakistan's leadership is incapable of resolving the current crisis.

Currently, Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif appears to merely read from a paper during speeches without sincerity. This is a factor that fails to inspire public trust.

Chief of Army Staff Asim Munir is so fearful that he sits behind bulletproof glass even in front of his subordinates. Next-generation politicians like Bilawal Bhutto and Maryam Nawaz also fail to gain the public's trust.