Analysis warns that contradictions between rhetoric and action are damaging Islamabad’s credibility…reports Asian Lite News
Pakistan continues to project itself as a supporter of peace and diplomacy while simultaneously pursuing coercive policies towards Afghanistan, according to a report that argues Islamabad’s contradictory approach has created a growing credibility crisis in the region.
In an article published by Eurasia Review, former senior economic adviser to ex Afghan President Ashraf Ghani, Zarif Aminyar, said Pakistan’s strategy increasingly reflects a pattern of “talking peace while waging war”.
The report argues that Islamabad has sought to portray itself internationally as a diplomatic actor committed to dialogue and regional stability by participating in formal and informal negotiations, backing Track 1.5 initiatives in Istanbul and signalling willingness for de escalation with Afghanistan.
However, Aminyar contended that Pakistan’s actions on the ground reflect continued reliance on coercion, pressure tactics and the use of non state actors to retain influence in Afghanistan.
“In geopolitics, credibility is considered as currency,” Aminyar wrote.
“States may pursue complex, even contradictory policies, but when the gap between rhetoric and behaviour becomes structural, it ceases to be strategy and becomes doctrine.”
According to the analysis, the contradiction between Pakistan’s diplomatic messaging and its regional conduct has weakened trust and damaged its standing among regional and international partners.
“At one level, Islamabad presents itself as a diplomatic actor committed to dialogue,” Aminyar noted.
“At another level, however, its behaviour reflects a continued reliance on coercion and pressure as primary instruments of influence in Afghanistan. These two tracks do not reinforce each other, they cancel each other out.”
The report linked this dual approach to Pakistan’s long standing pursuit of what it describes as “strategic depth” in Afghanistan, a doctrine under which Islamabad has historically viewed influence in Afghanistan as essential to securing its position within the broader regional power balance.
According to the article, this strategy has often resulted in Pakistan tolerating or supporting non state actors as instruments of foreign policy, contributing to decades of instability in Afghanistan.
Aminyar argued that the consequences of these policies have not only undermined Afghanistan’s stability but have also fuelled insecurity across the wider region.
The report further stated that Pakistan’s contradictory diplomacy is not limited to Afghanistan alone. It cited Islamabad’s attempts to position itself as a mediator during tensions involving the United States and Iran while simultaneously facing accusations of destabilising conduct elsewhere.
According to the analysis, such positioning allows Pakistan to enhance its international relevance and maintain geopolitical importance, even as questions persist over its regional policies.
The article also revisited Pakistan’s complicated relationship with the United States, particularly during the global war on terror. Although formally aligned with Washington in counter terrorism operations, Pakistan faced repeated allegations of harbouring militant networks.
Aminyar pointed to the discovery of Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad in 2011 as a defining moment that deepened international concerns regarding Pakistan’s dual policies.
The report argued that while maintaining multiple strategic channels can sometimes be viewed as geopolitical hedging, such policies carry long term risks when they contribute to regional instability.
“In Pakistan’s case, the persistence of instability in Afghanistan has not produced durable strategic advantage,” Aminyar wrote.
“It has entrenched insecurity across borders and eroded trust with partners.”
The analysis also cautioned Washington against relying too heavily on Pakistan as a regional intermediary without addressing what it described as fundamental inconsistencies in Islamabad’s approach towards regional security and diplomacy.
