Taliban-Pakistan Tensions Reflect a Crisis of Legitimacy, Says Former Afghan Diplomat
Nasir Ahmad Andisha, a former Afghan diplomat, has reacted to the failed third round of talks between the Taliban administration and Pakistan, warning that this deadlock represents not just a regular diplomatic conflict, but a profound crisis of identity, political legitimacy, and a reevaluation of history.
In a message on social media platform X, he stated that the root cause of the issue lies in the fundamental differences between the governance structures of the Taliban and the state of Pakistan. Under Taliban rule, Afghanistan operates as a religious emirate without a constitution and popular institutions, whereas Pakistan is a constitutionally defined republic with established borders and international commitments.
According to Andisha, the Taliban leader, who refers to himself as the “Amir al-Mu’minin” (Commander of the Faithful), claims religious leadership not only over the inhabitants of Afghanistan but also over all Muslims who have pledged allegiance to him—including groups such as Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, the East Turkestan Party, Ansarullah, and al-Qaeda. This transnational approach may lead to similar tensions with Central Asian countries in the future, especially with Uzbekistan as the historical heir to the Bukhara Emirate.
Andisha emphasizes that Islamabad’s demand for the Taliban to officially oppose the TTP is not just a security request; it is also a demand for the ideological denial of one of their closest allied groups. For the Taliban leaders, this would challenge their own legitimacy.
In another part of his analysis, he refers to the relationship between the Taliban and the TTP, which is shaped by a sense of “allegiance.” Many members of the TTP come from Pashtun areas of Pakistan, and some Pashtun nationalist elites view this group as part of a larger cultural and ethnic continuum between Afghanistan and Pashtuns in Pakistan, rather than merely as a foreign terrorist organization.
Andisha also notes a noticeable shift in the attitudes of some inhabitants of Afghanistan and Pashtun intellectuals in Pakistan. He writes that now, several of these groups perceive the violence by Afghan and Pakistani Taliban groups not as a struggle for freedom, but as a betrayal of Afghanistan’s national interests, Pashtun dignity, and a threat to regional stability.
He describes this shift as a “significant transformation” and believes that such a perspective could pave the way for a redefinition of Pashtun identity: moving from military insurrection and religious extremism toward civil resistance, responsible citizenship, and democratic nationalism.
