Arshad Mahmood Awan
Whenever Pakistan and India have faced military or border tensions, the nation has displayed an inspiring and unified resolve. From government institutions to the armed forces, political leadership to social media voices, Pakistan has consistently stood as one — projecting a clear national stance and defending its sovereignty with conviction. This unity, both emotional and strategic, has been instrumental in countering India’s propaganda internationally and in bolstering Pakistan’s global diplomatic credibility. Yet, as Pakistan faces escalating tensions on its western frontier with Afghanistan, this same spirit of unity appears to be missing.
In recent weeks, Pakistan’s western border has witnessed violent confrontations and a surge in terrorist attacks originating from Afghan soil. The Pakistani state has raised clear concerns, demanding that the Taliban government act against the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and other militant groups operating freely across the border. However, instead of presenting a united front, Pakistan’s domestic political landscape has grown increasingly fragmented. Social media reflects a disturbing division: while some voices echo the state’s position, others sympathize with the Taliban narrative or criticize Pakistan’s military posture. One major political party has remained conspicuously silent, and the lack of consensus has not gone unnoticed by foreign observers.
Follow Republic Policy on YouTube
This disunity is not merely a political inconvenience — it is a national security vulnerability. The basic principle of strategic defense is that a state can only act decisively when its internal front is consolidated. History demonstrates that unity of command, purpose, and narrative is essential to national survival. During moments of confrontation with India, Pakistan’s public opinion, media, and political leadership have acted in remarkable coordination, helping the country project a coherent and dignified global image. The Afghan front, however, exposes a painful truth: Pakistan has failed to cultivate the same internal cohesion for its western security challenges.
Follow Republic Policy on X (Twitter)
The Afghan question is not new. For over four decades, Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan has been a theater of proxy wars, refugee movements, and militant infiltration. Despite being the first country to host millions of Afghan refugees and to support the Afghan resistance during the Soviet invasion, Pakistan today faces hostility from the very actors it once helped empower. After the Taliban’s return to power in 2021, Pakistan hoped for stability and cooperation. Instead, cross-border terrorism has intensified, and the Taliban’s ideological ties with the TTP have complicated Pakistan’s security calculus.
Yet, the real crisis today is not external — it is domestic. Political polarization has blinded the nation’s leaders and opinion-makers to the strategic realities at play. Instead of formulating a common national stance, Pakistan’s political discourse remains consumed by internal power struggles. Some parties view every security challenge through the lens of domestic rivalry, while others hesitate to support the government’s position out of fear of being seen as aligned with the establishment. Such short-term calculations come at the cost of long-term national security.
Follow Republic Policy on Facebook
National unity on foreign and security policy is not a partisan favor — it is a constitutional duty. Article 5 of Pakistan’s Constitution enshrines loyalty to the state as the fundamental obligation of every citizen. Political parties, therefore, must rise above their differences when the nation’s sovereignty and safety are at stake. The Afghan crisis is not the military’s battle alone; it is a collective national test of leadership, integrity, and foresight. When the state warns of cross-border terrorism and loss of civilian lives, the correct response is solidarity, not skepticism.
Follow Republic Policy on TikTok
Foreign policy, too, cannot succeed without domestic consensus. The world observes how a nation speaks in one voice — or fails to. When Pakistan faces diplomatic challenges, disunity at home translates into weakness abroad. During conflicts with India, the unity of Pakistan’s narrative — across political parties, institutions, and the people — gave strength to its diplomacy. But the fragmented discourse on Afghanistan undermines the country’s credibility. It creates confusion among allies, encourages adversaries, and weakens Pakistan’s ability to assert its legitimate security concerns on global platforms.
Follow Republic Policy on Instagram
It is also vital to recognize that national unity is not about silencing dissent. Constructive debate is essential in a democracy, but it must be anchored in patriotism and responsibility. Criticizing the state’s handling of foreign affairs is legitimate; undermining the national security narrative during an active crisis is not. The difference between democratic discourse and divisive rhetoric lies in intent — one strengthens the nation, the other fractures it. Pakistan’s media, intelligentsia, and civil society must exercise this wisdom, especially when external threats converge with internal political turmoil.
Follow Republic Policy on WhatsApp Channel
The Afghan front demands clarity, coordination, and commitment. Pakistan’s position is clear: it seeks peace, not escalation, and wants Kabul to act against terrorist networks threatening its citizens. But this stance must be backed by a united political and social front. The armed forces alone cannot secure borders if political forces continue to play to their galleries. The government, opposition, and institutions must establish a National Security Consensus Charter — a framework to ensure that regardless of political transitions, Pakistan’s foreign and defense policies remain steady, predictable, and guided by the national interest.
Ultimately, the Afghan crisis is not just a test of diplomacy; it is a test of Pakistan’s collective maturity. The choice is between short-sighted populism and long-term national stability. If Pakistan can rediscover the unity it displayed during crises with India — where every Pakistani, regardless of ideology, became a soldier of the state’s narrative — it can once again project strength and credibility on the world stage. But if divisions deepen, even the most just national cause will lose its moral and strategic power.
Pakistan’s survival as a confident, sovereign, and respected state depends not merely on military might but on the unity of its people and political will. National interest must remain sacred, and partisan divides must yield to patriotic purpose. In the end, it is not the enemy’s strength but our disunity that threatens us the most.
