Pakistan has one expectation from Taliban regime, no use of Afghan soil for terrorism, says FM Dar at SCO

Pakistan’s central expectation is security: Taliban authorities must stop armed groups from using Afghan soil to plan or launch attacks. This matters because violence linked to Afghanistan can threaten Pakistan directly and undermine wider regional stability. The supplied headlines identify this demand as Dar’s message at the SCO.

The key mechanism is territorial responsibility. A government is expected to control activity within its borders, deny safe haven to militant groups, and prevent attacks from being organised there. Pakistan is therefore asking Kabul for practical action, not only diplomatic assurances. That could include stronger border controls, arrests, intelligence cooperation, and action against attack planners.

The headlines also connect the dispute with Russia’s possible diplomatic role and Afghanistan’s importance for regional peace. They do not provide details of Taliban commitments or specific incidents. The forward issue is whether dialogue can produce verifiable security steps and reduce tensions between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The Taliban regime is the political authority formed by the Taliban after its forces captured Kabul and returned to power in August 2021. It runs Afghanistan’s central government, security structures, courts, and provincial administration. “Regime” describes the governing system, while “Taliban” names the movement controlling it. The supplied headlines refer to this authority but do not explain its origins.

The Taliban governs because it defeated or displaced the previous Afghan government and established effective control across most of the country. In practice, that control lets it make laws, administer services, collect revenue, and manage security. However, governing in practice is different from broad diplomatic recognition. Many countries maintain contact without fully recognising the Taliban as Afghanistan’s legitimate government.

This distinction matters in the Pakistan dispute. Pakistan addresses the Taliban authorities because they control Afghan territory and can act against armed groups there. The central question is whether that authority can prevent attacks and deliver stability. The headlines present Afghan stability as important for regional peace, but give no further detail about recognition or domestic policy.

The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, or SCO, is a Eurasian grouping focused on security, political cooperation, economic links, and regional coordination. It includes countries directly affected by developments in Afghanistan. The supplied headline places Dar’s statement at an SCO meeting, showing that Pakistan presented the issue as a regional concern rather than only a bilateral quarrel.

The mechanism is collective attention. When a member raises terrorism at an organisation containing neighbouring and influential states, it can seek shared pressure, diplomatic support, intelligence cooperation, and coordinated security policies. Afghanistan is not an SCO member, but instability there can affect members through cross-border militancy, refugees, trade disruption, and strained relations. These are established regional-security concerns, while the headlines specifically mention terrorism and stability.

The SCO setting also creates space for diplomacy. The supplied headlines mention Russia’s possible role in easing the Pakistan-Afghanistan standoff and offering a diplomatic off-ramp. That suggests the issue was raised both to state Pakistan’s demand and to encourage broader regional engagement, though the source gives no details of an agreement.

The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation currently has 10 full members: China, India, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Russia, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Belarus. Together, they span about 80% of Eurasia and represent roughly 40% of the world’s population. These figures come from established background knowledge; the supplied headlines do not state them.

Its scale matters because Afghanistan sits beside several members, while others have major diplomatic, economic, or security interests in the region. A security problem discussed in the SCO can therefore receive attention from countries with different relationships with Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Russia. The organisation can provide a forum for consultation, although it cannot automatically enforce a member’s demands on a non-member.

That makes Dar’s message significant but not decisive. Pakistan can use the forum to underline that attacks from Afghan territory threaten regional peace. The practical outcome would depend on diplomacy, cooperation by Taliban authorities, and whether participating states can support measures that reduce militant activity. The headlines identify the concern, but not any final SCO decision.

If armed groups use Afghan territory as a base, Pakistan could face attacks on civilians, soldiers, and infrastructure. Afghanistan could suffer retaliation, diplomatic isolation, and further economic hardship. The wider region could see terrorism, refugee movements, disrupted trade, and deeper rivalry among neighbouring states. The supplied headlines warn that Afghan stability is essential for regional peace.

The key mechanism is safe haven. A group that can recruit, train, plan, or store weapons without effective interference gains time and protection. It may then cross borders to attack targets and return to relative safety. This makes prevention harder and encourages repeated violence. Pakistan’s demand focuses on removing that operating space by requiring Taliban authorities to control Afghan territory.

The current dispute could therefore intensify if attacks continue or accusations remain unresolved. Border closures, military operations, diplomatic pressure, or retaliatory actions could follow, although the supplied text does not report specific measures. The headlines also point to Russia and dialogue as possible ways to ease tensions and prevent escalation.

Pakistan historically maintained close ties with the Taliban and was one of the few countries to recognise its earlier government. When the Taliban returned to power in 2021, Islamabad initially hoped the new authorities would improve border security and help address militant threats. The supplied headlines do not provide this history, so this context comes from established background knowledge.

Relations later deteriorated over accusations that the Pakistani Taliban, or TTP, operates from Afghanistan and attacks Pakistan. Kabul has rejected or disputed some Pakistani allegations. Other sources of tension have included border disagreements, refugee policy, and Pakistan’s pressure for stronger action against militants. The core mechanism is a mismatch between Pakistan’s security demands and the Taliban’s willingness or ability to meet them.

The headlines capture the present strain through phrases such as “standoff,” “state of denial,” and “diplomatic off-ramp.” They also show that Pakistan is still seeking engagement, not only confrontation. Future relations will depend on whether the Taliban authorities prevent attacks, whether Pakistan accepts their actions as credible, and whether Russia or other regional actors can support dialogue.

A government controls its territory when its institutions can enforce law and order across borders, cities, rural areas, and remote regions. It must be able to monitor activity, protect people, regulate armed forces, and punish serious violations. Preventing non-state groups from using the country as a terrorist base is a central part of that responsibility.

The practical mechanism is denial of safe haven. Authorities must identify militant networks, restrict their movement, seize weapons, disrupt recruitment and financing, and stop planning for attacks. They may also share intelligence with neighbours and secure border crossings. Effective control does not mean preventing every crime, but it does mean refusing to knowingly allow organised violence to operate from national territory.

This principle explains Pakistan’s expectation from the Taliban authorities. Pakistan argues that Afghan soil should not be used for terrorism, while the headlines frame the issue as a regional peace concern. Whether the requirement is being met depends on evidence, enforcement, and cooperation. The supplied text does not report specific Taliban measures or verify particular allegations.