By The South Asia Times 

Islamabad — Pakistan on Sunday issued a stern assessment of the third round of Pakistan-Afghanistan talks held in Istanbul on November 6–7, saying the negotiations mediated by Turkiye and Qatar concluded without the verifiable steps Islamabad demands to halt militant attacks emanating from Afghan territory.

In a detailed statement  from the Foreign Office spokesperson, Islamabad said it deeply appreciated the mediation efforts of the “brotherly” states of Turkiye and Qatar but expressed profound disappointment at what it described as the Taliban regime’s failure to translate promises into action. The statement reiterated Pakistan’s long-standing grievance that violent extremist groups — notably the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP/FaK) and Baloch Liberation Army (BLA/FaH) — have been operating from sanctuaries inside Afghanistan and launching a “sharp surge” of attacks on Pakistani soil since the Taliban takeover in August 2021. 

Pakistan’s statement framed the Istanbul session as the latest in a three-stage process that began with a first round in Doha, where both sides agreed on principles of cooperation and a temporary ceasefire. The second round in Istanbul, Islamabad said, was supposed to produce an implementation mechanism and monitoring arrangements, but Taliban representatives “avoided taking any measures on ground” and resorted to “accusatory and provocative media allegations.” According to the Foreign Office, the third round again saw Pakistan pressing for a robust, evidence-based monitoring mechanism — only for Kabul’s representatives to attempt to expand and dilute the agenda by raising “hypothetical allegations and unfounded claims.” 

The Pakistani statement makes clear that Islamabad regards the matter as existential: TTP/FaK and BLA/FaH are “declared enemies of the State of Pakistan and its people,” the document reads, and anyone harbouring, abetting or financing them “is not considered a friend and well-wisher of Pakistan.” While underscoring that Pakistan remains a proponent of diplomacy and that force is “the option of very last resort,” the statement adds that October’s Pakistani military response to cross-border attacks demonstrated Islamabad’s determination to “not leave any stone unturned” to safeguard territory and citizens. International reporting has documented a series of deadly clashes along the frontier and warned that the fragile truce reached in Doha risks unravelling unless a credible verification system is put in place. 

Islamabad also accused the Taliban regime of attempting to recast the presence of Pakistani militants in Afghanistan as a “humanitarian” or “refugee” issue — a characterization Pakistan vehemently rejects. The Foreign Office recalled that many militants fled to Afghanistan after Pakistan’s 2015 Operation Zarb-e-Azb and, it alleges, now enjoy sanctuary and logistical support from elements within the Afghan Taliban. Islamabad insisted it is prepared to receive Pakistani nationals and their families from Afghanistan through official border crossings at Torkham and Chaman — but not to accept armed groups crossing the frontier “fully equipped with sophisticated weapons.” 

The statement further accused certain Taliban factions of using anti-Pakistan rhetoric and foreign funding to stoke tensions and to bind a fractious Kabul leadership together. Islamabad dismissed any suggestion of serious domestic disagreement over its Afghan policy, saying the Pakistani people and the Armed Forces remain united in their support for measures to eliminate the terror threat. The Foreign Office warned that while dialogue remains possible, Pakistan’s “core concern” — the prevention of attacks originating from Afghan soil — must be addressed first and foremost. 

International media coverage and diplomatic accounts from the talks indicate both sides traded blame over the breakdown, with Kabul accusing Islamabad of failing to present actionable proposals and Islamabad accusing Kabul of lacking intent. Turkish and Qatari mediators, Islamabad said, acted in good faith but could not bridge the gap between Pakistan’s demand for concrete, verifiable counter-terror measures and the Afghan side’s reluctance to hand over militants or accept intrusive monitoring arrangements. Reuters and other agencies reported that the ceasefire reached in October has largely held in words but remains fragile on the ground, with sporadic incidents continuing to raise tensions. 

Analysts say the deadlock highlights the structural problem underpinning Pakistan-Afghanistan ties: Islamabad demands a demonstrable break between the Afghan ruling authorities and anti-Pakistan militant networks, while Kabul insists it lacks the capacity — or, Islamabad alleges, the intent — to forcibly remove those networks. That gap in expectations has repeatedly stalled diplomacy and risks turning temporary ceasefires into prolonged, conditional truces that paper over unresolved security risks.

The Foreign Office closing lines reiterated Pakistan’s dual posture: resolute in defending its sovereignty and public safety, yet open to meaningful, results-based dialogue. “Pakistan remains committed to resolution of bilateral differences through dialogue. However, Pakistan’s core concern, i.e. terrorism emanating from Afghanistan needs to be addressed first and foremost,” the statement concluded. As mediators weigh how to salvage a workable monitoring and verification mechanism, both capitals face the hard choice of either accepting intrusive oversight to preserve the truce — or returning to an unstable status quo where ceasefires exist mostly on paper.