History Cannot Be Wished Away or Allowed to Dictate the Future

Afghanistan and Pakistan inherited a long history of dispute over the status and interpretation of the Durand Line, which has remained a central source of tension between the two countries since the creation of Pakistan. Over the decades, this unresolved issue became intertwined with Pakistan’s strategic depth approach toward Afghanistan, including its reliance on political and armed proxies as instruments of strategic influence.

The consequences extended far beyond the original objectives. While several regional and global powers intervened in Afghanistan at different periods in pursuit of their own strategic interests, Pakistan occupied a distinct position as Afghanistan’s immediate neighbour and played a particularly sustained role in cultivating and supporting political and armed actors. Its security calculations, efforts to maintain influence in Afghanistan and long-standing concerns surrounding the Durand Line became closely intertwined with this policy.

Afghanistan paid the heaviest human and material price, with hundreds of thousands of civilians killed and millions displaced over decades of conflict. Prolonged warfare weakened political institutions, eroded national cohesion and the social fabric, deepened political fragmentation, and caused severe damage to infrastructure, the economy and livelihoods. The spread of militant networks, weapons and extremist ideologies further intensified the violence, while repeated displacement and refugee crises imposed an enormous human cost. Pakistan, too, eventually faced serious security consequences from militant violence, including attacks by the TTP, demonstrating how policies intended to advance strategic objectives could ultimately generate consequences beyond their original targets.

The status of the Durand Line has also reportedly been raised repeatedly by Pakistan in closed-door and back-channel engagements with Afghan authorities during the past several decades, yet such discussions have not produced a mutually accepted settlement. This history suggests that pressure and indirect influence cannot resolve a question that requires a political framework capable of managing fundamental differences.

History shows that even profound territorial disputes need not prevent peaceful coexistence. France and Germany, after devastating wars and territorial conflicts, built reconciliation through political dialogue, institutional cooperation and economic interdependence. Afghanistan and Pakistan, despite their longstanding dispute over the Durand Line, also maintained periods of peaceful coexistence and extensive social, economic and cross-Durand Line ties. The deterioration of these ties was therefore not inevitable; it resulted from choices and policies that gradually turned a manageable dispute into a broader source of confrontation and hostility.

The latest Pakistani airstrikes in Kunar and Paktika on September 21 were followed by reports of civilian casualties. UNAMA reported that three civilians, a man, a woman and a girl, were killed and four others injured in apparent airstrikes in Kunar. These reported casualties illustrate the human cost of escalating tensions and underscore the need for direct diplomatic engagement and verifiable mechanisms to address security concerns without militarising the dispute or exposing civilians to additional harm.

A pragmatic approach does not require either side to surrender its position. Afghanistan should not be compelled to recognize the Durand Line as an international border, just as Pakistan should not be expected to adopt Afghanistan’s position on its status on Durand Line. Both can maintain their respective positions while accepting that the unresolved Durand Line issue should not condemn two neighbouring peoples to perpetual confrontation.

Pakistan’s security concerns are more sustainably addressed through direct state-to-state engagement, mutually agreed security arrangements and diplomacy than through airstrikes, proxy-based influence or confrontation. Both countries have a responsibility to prevent their territories from being used against the other and to address genuine security concerns through credible institutional mechanisms. Their responsibilities are not identical, but both are essential to building a sustainable relationship.

The practical priority is to prevent the Durand Line question from determining every other aspect of bilateral relations. Trade and transit should not become instruments of political pressure, while humanitarian movement, family ties and legitimate economic activity should not be repeatedly disrupted by security disputes. Crossing points should not become tools of leverage. Direct institutional channels, sustained diplomatic dialogue, people-to-people contacts and agreed crisis-management mechanisms can provide a framework for handling tensions before they escalate.

The objective should not be to rewrite the past, wish away history or force either side to abandon its position. It should be to ensure that one unresolved question does not determine the future of two neighbouring peoples. Afghanistan and Pakistan can maintain fundamentally different positions on the Durand Line while still living together as peaceful, sovereign and respectful neighbours.

History cannot be wished away, but it need not dictate the future. The way forward lies in moving away from proxy politics toward direct engagement, mutual restraint, non-interference, predictable economic relations and a political framework that allows differences to be managed without turning them into confrontation.

Economic Integration and Regional Security

Our Pashto-Dari Website

  Donate Here