by Irshad Ahmad Mughal & Dr. Quratal Ain Rana
The relationship between Pakistan and Afghanistan is rooted not merely in contemporary politics but in centuries of shared history, shifting frontiers, and layered memories. Geography has bound the two societies together through mountain passes and tribal continuities, yet it has also exposed them to recurring cycles of invasion, rivalry, and great-power competition.
For centuries, the northwestern corridor of the subcontinent served as a historic gateway. Dynasties such as the Lodi dynasty and the Durrani dynasty emerged from the Afghan regions before extending authority into South Asia. Political movement through the Khyber Pass was a structural feature of pre-modern history. The arrival of the British Empire transformed that pattern, replacing fluid frontiers with fixed borders and formal treaties—most notably the Durand Line of 1893, whose legacy continues to shape bilateral tensions.
In Pakistan’s intellectual and cultural imagination, Afghanistan has often been romanticized. The national poet Allama Iqbal admired Afghan resilience and spiritual steadfastness, writing:
“Afghanī bāqī, kohsār bāqī,
Mujhē hai ḥukm-e-azān: Lā ilāha illā Allāh.”
In Iqbal’s vision, Afghanistan symbolized endurance—the mountains standing firm against domination. This poetic admiration influenced political thought, reinforcing the idea of Afghanistan as a bastion of independence and faith.
Yet romanticism has often collided with historical reality. During the Khilafat Movement, thousands of Indian Muslims migrated to Afghanistan, imagining it as a sanctuary of Islamic solidarity. Many instead faced hardship and economic dislocation. The episode underscored the risks of idealizing political spaces without considering structural limitations.
The Soviet invasion of 1979 marked another turning point. Afghanistan became a frontline state in the Cold War, supported by external actors, including the Central Intelligence Agency, to counter communist expansion. While the anti-Soviet objective was achieved, the long-term consequences included militarization, ideological radicalization, and regional destabilization. After the Soviet withdrawal, Afghanistan lacked sustained reconstruction, paving the way for internal conflict and the eventual rise of the Taliban.
Post-2001 dynamics added further complexity. Afghanistan once again became a theatre of international intervention. Regional rivalries intensified as neighboring states sought influence within Afghan political factions. In this environment, allegations and counter-allegations emerged regarding proxy engagement. Pakistani security circles have long argued that elements hostile to Pakistan have found space in Afghan territory, and that regional competitors—including India—have sought to cultivate relationships with certain Afghan groups to counterbalance Pakistan’s strategic depth and military posture.
From Islamabad’s perspective, such involvement is viewed through a security lens: instability in Afghanistan can translate into asymmetric pressure on Pakistan’s western frontier, complicating internal security and strategic planning. Indian policymakers, on the other hand, frame their Afghan engagement as development-oriented and diplomatic. The reality likely lies within a complex matrix of overlapping interests, where infrastructure investment, intelligence competition, and regional influence coexist.
What is clear, however, is that Afghanistan has repeatedly been drawn into broader strategic contests. During the Cold War, it was a battleground against communism. In the post-9/11 era, it became central to counterterrorism campaigns. In contemporary geopolitics, instability in Afghanistan intersects with debates surrounding regional connectivity projects such as the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. Each phase reveals how Afghanistan’s internal divisions can become entangled in external agendas.
The tragic pattern is that Afghanistan is often treated less as a sovereign partner and more as a strategic arena. Competing powers—global and regional—have, at various times, supported different Afghan factions to secure leverage. This has deepened fragmentation within Afghan society and perpetuated cycles of violence that spill across borders.
Pakistan–Afghanistan relations, therefore, cannot be reduced to bilateral misunderstandings alone. They are embedded in a broader regional security architecture marked by mistrust, proxy competition, and unresolved historical grievances. Militancy, cross-border attacks, and ideological rigidity are not isolated phenomena but consequences of decades of militarized policy choices and geopolitical instrumentalization.
Iqbal’s poetic vision of Afghan permanence—of mountains that endure—remains symbolically powerful. Yet endurance has too often meant survival amid conflict rather than stability through cooperation. If Afghanistan continues to function as a proxy arena for regional rivalry, both it and its neighbors will remain trapped in insecurity.
A sustainable future requires a fundamental shift: from competitive intervention to cooperative engagement; from using Afghan territory as leverage to recognizing it as a shared destiny. Geography has made Pakistan and Afghanistan neighbors. History has made them intertwined. Regional peace will depend on whether external competition yields to collective responsibility.
The mountains remain. The question is whether they will continue to echo with rivalry—or finally witness reconciliation.
About the authors:
Irshad Ahmad Mughal
Dr. Qurat-Ul-Ain Rana
Irshad Ahmad Mughal and Dr. Qurat-ul-Ain Rana form a formidable intellectual partnership in contemporary Pakistani scholarship. Prof. Mughal, renowned for his Urdu translations of Paulo Freire’s revolutionary works and decades of teaching political philosophy at Punjab University, joins forces with Dr. Rana, an accomplished sociologist and social commentator whose razor-sharp analyses regularly grace Pakistan’s premier journals. Together, their collaborative writings for Pressenza weave rigorous academic insight with urgent social critique—bridging Western critical theory with South Asian realities to illuminate pathways for transformative change.”