Across the crowded streets of Western capitals, protest banners and slogans often appear to represent grassroots struggles from distant regions. Yet behind some demonstrations lies a far more complex story, one shaped by geopolitics, competing narratives, and attempts to influence international perception. The recent protests associated with the Pashtun Tahafuz Movement (PTM) in cities such as London and Washington have sparked precisely such debate. While the demonstrations are presented as a struggle for rights, critics in Pakistan increasingly argue that the reality is more layered: a political campaign driven largely from abroad that attempts to recast Pakistan’s internal security challenges in a misleading light.

At the center of this controversy is the question of representation. PTM presents itself internationally as the voice of Pashtuns in Pakistan. Yet within Pakistan itself, the claim is far from universally accepted. Pashtuns constitute one of the most prominent and integrated communities in the country. They occupy influential positions in the military, government, academia, and business, and have historically played a central role in defending the state against internal and external threats. From the tribal regions that once formed the frontline in the fight against militant groups to the leadership ranks of Pakistan’s armed forces, Pashtuns have repeatedly demonstrated their commitment to the country’s stability and sovereignty.

This reality sits uneasily with the rhetoric often projected at PTM’s overseas protests. A recurring slogan within the movement’s discourse “Lar ao Bar Yaw Afghan,” roughly translating to “Here and There Afghans are one”, has long been associated with cross-border nationalist narratives. However, many Pashtuns in Pakistan view this idea with discomfort, if not outright rejection. For them, the slogan implies a political identity that overrides their citizenship and historical belonging to Pakistan. In fact, numerous Pakistani Pashtuns consider it deeply offensive when they are casually referred to as “Afghans,” even when done unintentionally. Their identity, they argue, is both Pashtun and Pakistani, and attempts to conflate the two with Afghan nationalism ignore decades of political and social integration within Pakistan.

This divergence raises a broader question: if PTM claims to represent Pakistani Pashtuns, why does so much of its activism appear concentrated abroad? The movement’s largest demonstrations have frequently taken place in Western capitals, organized by Afghan diaspora networks rather than communities living in Pakistan’s Pashtun-majority regions. Critics argue that this geographic disconnect suggests that the movement’s international activism is less about local grievances and more about shaping narratives in global political arenas.

These concerns are not emerging in a vacuum. Pakistan’s relationship with its western neighbor has long been complicated by security challenges along the porous border. For more than two decades, the country has fought a relentless campaign against militant groups operating across the region. The cost has been staggering: over 94,000 Pakistanis have lost their lives in terrorism-related violence, including soldiers, police officers, and civilians. Pashtun areas in particular have borne a heavy burden, experiencing bombings, displacement, and prolonged instability during the years of counterterrorism operations.

It is within this context that many Pakistanis view PTM’s messaging with skepticism. Critics argue that while the movement highlights alleged abuses by security forces, it rarely addresses the broader environment of terrorism that forced the state to conduct extensive military operations in the first place. By focusing primarily on state actions while remaining comparatively silent on militant atrocities, they contend, PTM risks presenting an incomplete picture of a conflict that has devastated entire communities.

Another issue that has fueled controversy is Pakistan’s policy toward undocumented Afghan nationals. Over the past four decades, Pakistan has hosted one of the world’s largest refugee populations, providing shelter to millions fleeing successive wars in Afghanistan. According to international estimates, more than four million Afghans have lived in Pakistan at various points since the 1980s. During this period, the country established refugee camps, facilitated humanitarian assistance, and allowed access to health and education services despite its own economic constraints.

In recent years, however, Pakistan has moved to repatriate undocumented foreign nationals under its domestic legal framework, including the Foreigners Act of 1946 and the Passports Act of 1974. Supporters of the policy argue that regulating undocumented migration is a sovereign right exercised by every country. Yet PTM activists have portrayed the process as discriminatory, claiming that it targets specific ethnic groups. Pakistani officials and many analysts reject this characterization, emphasizing that the policy applies broadly to undocumented foreigners regardless of ethnicity.

Ultimately, the debate surrounding PTM reflects a deeper struggle over narrative. In an era where global opinion can be shaped by protests in London or Washington as much as by events on the ground, controlling the story has become a powerful political tool. For Pakistan, a nation that has endured decades of conflict and terrorism, the stakes are particularly high.

What remains clear is that Pashtuns themselves are not a monolithic voice. Within Pakistan, many reject the notion that their identity or grievances can be defined by a movement headquartered largely outside the country. They continue to assert a dual pride in their Pashtun heritage and their Pakistani citizenship, seeing the two not as contradictory but as inseparable.

As the geopolitical landscape of South Asia continues to evolve, competing narratives will likely persist. But amid the noise of international activism and political messaging, the perspectives of the communities most directly affected, the Pashtuns of Pakistan, remain central to understanding the true contours of the issue.

© Eurasia Review