ISLAMABAD: While the “temporary” Eid ceasefire between Pakistan and Afghanistan continues to hold, concerns persist over the long-term trajectory of tensions, with analysts warning that immediate expectations of controlling militant groups such as the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) are unrealistic.
In a statement titled “Pakistan and Afghanistan Trade Fire as Conflict Takes a Dangerous Turn,” the International Crisis Group (ICG) noted that both the TTP and the Islamic State Khorasan Province (IS-KP) have survived decades of counter-militancy operations by Afghan and Pakistani forces. It said these groups have repeatedly exploited the porous border to regroup, relocate and sustain operations despite heavy losses.
The report cautioned that Islamabad’s view that Afghanistan is solely responsible for TTP-related violence may underestimate the complexity of controlling such networks, while also overestimating the impact of punitive measures against the Afghan Taliban.
It further highlighted the evolving nature of asymmetric warfare, noting that despite Pakistan’s conventional military advantage, militant groups are increasingly adopting drone-based tactics. It referenced incidents involving drone activity over major Pakistani cities, warning that such developments could intensify if cross-border tensions escalate further.
The ICG warned that continued civilian casualties on either side could fuel retaliatory strikes, creating a dangerous cycle of escalation and “appalling harm to civilians.”
Calling for restraint, the report urged both sides to return to diplomatic engagement and stressed the importance of third-party mediation. It welcomed the temporary Eid ceasefire as a positive sign and encouraged mediators including Qatar, Türkiye, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and China to support a coordinated diplomatic process, cautioning against fragmented or competing mediation efforts that could undermine progress.
The think tank stated that only sustained dialogue and verification mechanisms can prevent further escalation and reduce the risk of prolonged conflict.
An unconditional and immediate crackdown on the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), however, is not a demand that is likely to be met by the Afghan Taliban. The group is too large and loosely structured, and its historical ties with the Afghan Taliban remain deeply entrenched. In addition, segments of the population in border areas reportedly share its hostility toward the Pakistani state. A forceful crackdown could also prove counterproductive, potentially pushing Taliban fighters or TTP factions closer to the Islamic State Khorasan Province (IS-KP) against the Taliban authorities.
The recent surge in hostilities does little to address the security needs of either Pakistan or Afghanistan. Instead, it risks leaving behind destroyed livelihoods, displaced communities and wider economic disruption.
The situation underscores the urgent need for external support to help Islamabad and Kabul rebuild trust and jointly confront the militant threats both countries continue to face. Without a return to dialogue, the risk of further deadly escalation remains high.
The Afghan Taliban, which lacks an air force, has responded to border tensions with ground offensives along the disputed frontier and reported drone strikes. Following vows of retaliation over the 16 March strike in Kabul, the cycle of violence now risks evolving into a prolonged and increasingly destructive conflict.
Overall, the trajectory points toward an intensifying spiral of violence that would involve heavy military expenditure but offer little strategic gain for Pakistan. While Pakistan may be able to absorb and respond to Afghan attacks, the deepening conflict is also unlikely to serve Kabul’s interests. A sustained confrontation with Pakistan could temporarily rally domestic support for the Taliban regime, but it would further deepen Afghanistan’s international isolation.
Both sides, therefore, urgently need to return to diplomatic engagement to avoid further escalation. With trust between Islamabad and Kabul severely eroded, external mediation is essential both to rebuild confidence and to establish verification mechanisms for any eventual agreement. The recent agreement to a temporary Eid ceasefire is a positive development, which should be used as a window to advance toward a more durable settlement.
Mediation efforts by Qatar, Türkiye, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and China are welcome. However, such initiatives must remain coordinated to avoid parallel tracks that could create confusion and undermine progress.
