by Maryam Noureen Janjua
The Pashtun Tahafuz Movement (PTM) has steadily risen to prominence, advocating for the rights of the Pashtun community impacted by decades of violence, military operations, and political marginalization. The most recent PTM Jirga held in Khyber Agency was a reflection of this growing discontent among Pashtuns. This event, like many before it, raises critical questions about the future of Pakistan’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK) region and the cross-border dynamics with Afghanistan. The fragile security situation on both sides of the border, compounded by the rise in terrorist activities by the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and the lack of security arrangements in post-Taliban Afghanistan, has led to a volatile environment, where ethnic tensions and nationalism are on the rise.
Amid this scenario, PTM Jirga in Khyber Agency has the potential to disrupt trans-border security and it can polarize the political future of both Pakistan and Afghanistan. The War on Terror, initiated after the 9/11 attacks, has had a devastating effect on Pashtun communities in both Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Pashtun belt, stretching across both sides of the border, has been a battleground for decades, with Pashtun families bearing the brunt of military operations, drone strikes, and terrorist activities. As these communities live at the epicenter of conflict, their daily lives have been drastically altered, marked by displacement, poverty, and a loss of trust in state institutions.
In Pakistan, the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), now merged with KPK, have been the focus of military operations against the TTP and other militant groups. While these operations, such as Zarb-e-Azb and Radd-ul-Fasaad, have achieved significant gains in weakening terrorist networks, they have come at a steep cost. Pashtun communities, in particular, feel that their sacrifices have been ignored or downplayed by the state. The PTM’s rise can be directly attributed to this feeling of neglect. However, on the other hand, the state has a different opinion where it has tagged PTM as an ethnocentric movement funded and supported by anti-state lobbies inside Pakistan and abroad.
The fall of Kabul to the Taliban in 2021 marked a significant shift in the regional security dynamic. Afghanistan, which had been under the protection of U.S. and NATO forces, is now under the control of a regime that shares complex, albeit strained, relations with Pakistan. The withdrawal of foreign troops has led to a security vacuum in Afghanistan, where terrorist groups like the TTP have found space to regroup and operate. For Pakistan, the return of the Taliban has posed new challenges, particularly in managing the resurgence of the TTP. Despite the Afghan Taliban’s assurances that they would not allow Afghan soil to be used for attacks against Pakistan, cross-border infiltration by militants has increased.
As a result, Pakistan has had to bolster its border security, including fencing the Durand Line to prevent the flow of militants. However, this security arrangement has exacerbated tensions among the Pashtun communities living along the border. The Pakistan-Afghanistan border, also known as Durand Line, drawn by the British in 1893, remains a contentious issue, with many Pashtuns viewing it as an artificial divide that separates families and tribes. The PTM, among other nationalist groups, has capitalized on this sentiment, framing the fencing as an infringement on Pashtun rights. The rise of such movements presents a serious challenge to Pakistan’s efforts to secure its borders and maintain internal stability.
The rise of ethnocentric movements like the PTM is not merely a political phenomenon; it has significant implications for security in the region. The PTM’s core message is one of Pashtun identity and resistance against perceived state oppression. While their demands for justice and accountability are legitimate, the ethnocentric nature of their platform risks deepening divisions between the Pashtun population and the Pakistani state. The PTM’s opposition to military deployments in KPK and the former FATA region, for instance, has led to confrontations with security forces. The movement’s rhetoric often portrays the military as an occupying force, which resonates with many Pashtuns who have suffered due to years of military operations in their regions.
Moreover, the PTM’s rise coincides with a broader trend of Pashtun nationalism, which has cross-border implications. In Afghanistan, Pashtuns make up a significant portion of the population, and any movement that galvanizes Pashtun identity in Pakistan could have a spillover effect across the border. The notion of a united Pashtun identity, transcending the Durand Line, could embolden separatist sentiments and destabilize the already fragile relationship between Pakistan and Afghanistan.
The PTM Jirga in Khyber Agency is a microcosm of the larger security and political challenges facing the Pashtun belt. While the movement’s calls for justice are grounded in genuine grievances, its potential to disrupt trans-border security cannot be ignored. The rise of ethnocentric movements could create a dangerous power vacuum that terrorists and insurgents could exploit. The TTP, in particular, has been quick to capitalize on the disillusionment of Pashtun youth, many of whom feel alienated from the state. Militants could exploit the ethnic fault lines to fuel anti-state sentiment and recruit fighters for their cause.
Pakistan’s efforts to secure its borders through fencing and military deployments, while necessary, must be complemented by political solutions that address the grievances of the Pashtun population. The state cannot afford to ignore the rising tide of ethnocentric nationalism, which, if left unchecked, could jeopardize both national and regional security. The PTM Jirga in Khyber Agency is a manifestation of the broader challenges facing the Pashtun belt in the wake of the War on Terror. As Pakistan grapples with the resurgence of the TTP and the fallout from Afghanistan’s political instability, it must find a way to balance security concerns with the legitimate demands of its Pashtun citizens.