(By: Abdul Qayum khan Kundi, from Fresno California)

I have often stated that Pakistan lacks a coherent foreign policy doctrine. A true foreign policy doctrine requires a deep understanding of regional history, the socio-economic realities of neighboring countries, national needs, and clearly defined long-term priorities. Every nation has its own temperament and time horizon for strategic planning: the Chinese think in centuries, the Americans in decades, and the Europeans in generational spans of roughly sixty years. Pakistan, by contrast, changes direction every two to three years—often with the appointment of a new military chief.
Consider a few examples. General Bajwa sought rapprochement with India and pursued it vigorously. General Asim Munir, however, has taken an opposite approach, adopting a confrontational stance although India is more at fault for recent conflicts. Iran, a “good friend” in 2025, was our missile target just a year earlier—though it was Tehran that fired first. Afghanistan, long treated by our generals—from Zia-ul-Haq onward—as a virtual “fifth province,” is now being threatened with air strikes and bombing by our defense minister. General Bajwa and his politburo aimed for an “ironclad” partnership with China; now, General Munir courts President Trump, undermining those very ties. He even promises to help Washington counter China’s dominance in rare earth minerals. And what did Pakistan gain in return? A selfie at the White House, while the U.S. signed multibillion-dollar deals with Australia, Vietnam, Thailand, and others. The truth is, no one takes Pakistan seriously anymore. Our rulers are seen as willing subordinates—content, like poodles, to lick their masters’ boots while remaining leashed.
This context is crucial to understanding the mindset of the Afghan Taliban (AT). They recognize that Pakistan’s social fabric—especially in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan—has weakened. They know the terrain and the people well, and they are aware that the current government lacks legitimacy and popular support. They also understand that a conventional army, however powerful on paper, is slow, bureaucratic, and ill-suited to unconventional warfare. The Taliban have fought and defeated such armies before.
The Afghan Taliban blame Pakistan for decades of war and chaos in their country. They are primarily a nationalist movement that used Islam to legitimize their guerrilla struggle against foreign occupiers. Today, they view their trade and logistics dependence on Pakistan as a strategic vulnerability that must be overcome. In their calculus, Gwadar offers a way out. They see themselves as heirs to Afghanistan’s ancient role as a toll gate on the Silk Road—collecting revenue from trade routes. Controlling Gwadar, they believe, would allow them to provide port access to landlocked Central Asian states—Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Tajikistan—and earn billions in transit fees. Whether or not this vision is realistic, it shapes their strategic thinking and will inevitably complicate Pakistan’s future. Luring away these central Asian countries from Russian sphere will suit China, India, and America.
The real threat to Pakistan’s survival does not come from outside—it lies within. Incompetent, illegitimate, and short-sighted rulers are the greatest danger to the state. These same forces were responsible for the loss of East Pakistan, and we now face a similar existential crisis. No nation came to our aid in 1971, and none will do so again. History shows that poorly governed states eventually lose their borders: Ukraine lost its eastern provinces to Russia; China is poised to reclaim Taiwan; Indonesia was divided when East Timor broke away; Sudan split into two nations; Armenia lost Nagorno-Karabakh.
The window of opportunity for reform in Pakistan is closing rapidly. I urge the country’s rulers to act—comprehensive reform of governance is the only way to preserve our borders and sovereignty. My Six Points of the Pakistan Dream and Fourteen Points of the Charter of the People provide an ideological roadmap for national renewal. My duty is to guide and offer solutions; if the people and their leaders refuse to listen, history will take its course. That is not a prophecy—it is a lesson of political science and the fate of nations.