Istanbul / Islamabad / Kabul — The second round of Pakistan–Afghanistan talks in Istanbul opened under tight diplomatic watch, with Pakistan maintaining what officials described as a “one-point agenda”, a demand for verifiable action against the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) and no compromise on national security.

The Afghan delegation, led by Haji Najib Haqqani, a senior General Directorate of Intelligence (GDI) member operating under Sirajuddin Haqqani, included Suhail Shaheen, Anas Haqqani, and officials from the Foreign and Defence ministries. Kandahari leadership reportedly opted for a smaller team this time, keeping GDI chief Abdul Haq Wasiq out and tasking the Haqqani camp with shaping understandings with Pakistan, an approach said to have the backing of Mullah Yaqoob.

TTP Inclusion Proposal Rejected

According to diplomatic sources in Istanbul, the Afghan side proposed bringing TTP delegates to the table, suggesting that the group’s participation could “help resolve issues.”

Pakistan rejected the idea outright, declaring that any talks would remain strictly state-to-state and that no banned militant group would be engaged directly.

Officials familiar with the discussions said the Pakistani delegation ended the session on that firm note. “There is no question of talking to terrorists,” one senior official told HTN. “All cooperation depends on tangible Afghan action against the TTP and BLA. We will not budge on this.”

Sources add that following the abrupt conclusion of the session, Anas Haqqani contacted Kabul for damage control, after which the Taliban side requested another meeting. The second round resumed today, facilitated by Qatar and Türkiye, with observers describing the development as a test of Kabul’s willingness to move beyond symbolism toward enforceable counter-terrorism commitments.

Parallel Escalation on the Ground

Even as talks were underway, Pakistan’s security forces reported new infiltration attempts across the frontier, incidents that coincided with the diplomatic negotiations.

In a statement from Rawalpindi, the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) said: “On 24–25 October 2025, movements of two large groups of khwarij opposite the general area Ghaki, Kurram District, and Spinwam, North Waziristan District, who were trying to infiltrate through the Pakistan–Afghanistan border, were picked up by the security forces.”

The statement added that “fifteen terrorists, including four suicide bombers belonging to the Indian proxy Fitna al-Khwarij, were sent to hell in Spinwam, while another ten infiltrating terrorists were killed in Ghaki.” 

A cache of weapons and explosives was recovered, but the military also confirmed the loss of five soldiers, describing them as “brave sons of soil who fought gallantly and embraced Shahadat.”

ISPR noted pointedly that these infiltration attempts occurred “at a time when delegations of Pakistan and Afghanistan are engaged in talks in Türkiye, casting doubts on the intentions of the interim Afghan government.” The statement reminded Kabul of its obligation under the Doha Agreement to “deny the use of Afghan soil by terrorists against Pakistan.”

From Doha to Istanbul — a Fragile Truce

The Istanbul meeting follows an earlier Doha round on 18 October, led by Pakistan’s Defence Minister Khawaja Asif and Afghan Defence Minister Mawlawi Mohammad Yaqoob Mujahid, with GDI chief Abdul Haq Wasiq in attendance.

That meeting, brokered by Qatar, came on the heels of the worst border clashes in years, prompting a temporary ceasefire between the two sides.

Pakistan’s Foreign Office had described the Doha agenda as focusing on halting cross-border terrorism and restoring stability along the frontier, stating that Islamabad “expects the Taliban authorities to honour their commitments to the international community by taking verifiable action against terrorist entities, including the TTP and BLA.”

Defence Minister Khawaja Asif, ahead of the talks, reminded that Pakistan had lost nearly 4,000 civilians and security personnel in over 10,000 terrorist incidents since the Taliban’s return to power in 2021, adding that Islamabad’s patience had limits and future engagement would depend on verifiable action.

Speaking recently about the Istanbul talks, Asif warned that if Afghanistan failed to cooperate, “it could lead to open conflict; we are already facing proxy actions against us.” 

He alleged that “India is fighting a proxy war through Afghanistan,” stressing that “Afghanistan should know that Pakistan has already decisively defeated India.”

The minister added that the talks aim to translate the Doha ceasefire into a long-term enforcement mechanism and observed that both sides had so far respected the truce. “We have the option, if no agreement takes place, we have an open war with them,” Asif said in televised remarks. “But I saw that they want peace.”

Narrative Warfare and Repeating Patterns

The Istanbul negotiations come amid a broader information struggle.

Earlier this month, Taliban spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid condemned Pakistan’s precision strikes in Paktika, accusing Islamabad of civilian casualties, a charge Pakistani officials rejected as propaganda “recycling the old victimhood playbook.”

Pakistan’s Information Minister Ataullah Tarar confirmed that those strikes had eliminated 60 to 70 militants from the Hafiz Gul Bahadur group, a faction allied with the TTP, during a period when ceasefire violations had intensified.

Analysts say the Taliban’s current effort to insert the TTP into peace talks fits a longer pattern of blurring lines between insurgents and interlocutors, a tactic that once brought them international leverage but now risks undermining Kabul’s claim to statehood.

Strategic Significance of Istanbul Round

State media in Pakistan reported that Saturday’s talks in Istanbul ran nine hours, focusing on border oversight, sovereignty, and trade coordination. Afghan media later said Kabul had submitted a draft seeking guarantees that Pakistan would not strike TTP or BLA targets inside Afghanistan, while Pakistan’s counter-draft insisted on joint monitoring and verifiable counter-terrorism action.

Diplomatic sources interpret the Taliban’s TTP proposal as an attempt to force de facto recognition of the group, a move Pakistan has firmly resisted since the breakdown of the 2021–22 ceasefire.

“The Taliban must accept the liability of TTP,” a senior Pakistani official told HTN. “They cannot use it as a tool of strategic depth inside Pakistan. That era is over.”

Infiltration and Intentions

For Islamabad, the coincidence of talks in Istanbul and TTP infiltration attempts in Kurram and North Waziristan has further entrenched skepticism about Kabul’s intent.

ISPR underscored that the incidents “cast serious doubts on the interim Afghan government’s seriousness toward tackling terrorism emanating from its soil.”

The military vowed to continue operations under Operation Azm-e-Istehkam, describing it as a “relentless counter-terrorism campaign to wipe out the menace of foreign-sponsored and supported terrorism.”

The Road Ahead

As the Istanbul dialogue continues under Qatari and Turkish facilitation, regional analysts see a moment of reckoning.

Pakistan’s position is clear and singular. Progress depends entirely on concrete Afghan action against TTP and BLA networks. Kabul’s credibility, meanwhile, hinges on whether it can demonstrate control over groups it once sheltered.

Whether the Taliban choose to act as a state accountable for its soil or as a syndicate managing transnational proxies may determine not only the outcome of the Istanbul process but the trajectory of Pakistan-Afghanistan relations for years to come.

Also See: Pakistan-Afghanistan Relations: A Critical Recalibration