After the failure of the Istanbul negotiations, Pakistan and Afghanistan are now at each other’s throats. Afghans are being called “Namak Haram” (ungrateful/traitor to the salt) and unthankful by Pakistan, while the Afghans are calling Pakistan a hypocrite and a traitor.

In such a scenario, several senior former officials, the architects of a failed Afghan policy spanning decades, are seen presenting new narratives to hide their shame. I was watching a clip on social media where the former ISI Chief, General Ehsan ul Haq, in a seminar, was giving the palatable name of “Strategic Patience” to Pakistan’s past silence against all sorts of adventurism by Afghanistan on the Durand Line.

He was essentially confessing to a strategy of national destruction that can only be described as nothing more than folly. This was the deception that was presented as a national narrative by calling it wisdom and caution.

This was, in fact, the story of a dangerous, calculated gamble that tore apart the country’s social and national fabric, causing billions of dollars in losses to the economy and market. This was the era when the nation was always taught to not only patiently accept this passive and complacent policy but also to remain silent on the temporary internal and moral structural damages and compromises, so that a big, and seemingly “rational,” plan for national security could succeed.

This was the historical “Strategic Folly” due to which our state, economy, and society have not yet recovered. It was an incomplete dream of a so-called Islamic brotherhood, hidden within a deep contradiction under the guise of national security. This was the contradiction that repeatedly blurred the line between the imaginary Ummah and the real nation. This fundamental mistake turned Islamabad’s Afghan strategy into a nightmare. General Zia wrapped a global war in a religious cloak and mortgaged national sovereignty in the name of a proxy policy.

Pakistan’s Promise Of Renewal: Rebuilding Gaza With Strength And Solidarity

The “Mujahideen Industry,” created in collaboration with America, Europe, and Saudi Arabia, certainly caused the Soviet retreat temporarily, but after that, it was imposed upon the nation as a complete parallel security paradigm, resulting in the growth of the military power of non-state groups. The dollars, weapons, and global attention Pakistan received from the Afghan war were considered a panacea, and thus the entire society was handed over to religious extremism, the illegal flow of weapons, and drug networks.

“Jihad” was made a part of the state’s policy, and a harvest of extremism was sown in madrasahs. As a result, new warrior commanders were prepared from these religious schools instead of scholars and jurists. Power was given to groups that are now standing with arms against the state.

Although General Musharraf, after Zia ul Haq, gave the impression of withdrawing support for these so-called militants, after 9/11, Pakistan again appeared to be standing in two contradictory directions. General Pervez Musharraf joined the war against terrorism alongside America, but there were circles within the state that sympathised with the Taliban.

Thus, Pakistan was again accused of playing a double game: on one side, American pressure and financial aid, and on the other, silent cooperation with the Afghan Taliban. Unfortunately, this very contradiction became ingrained in the roots of Pakistan’s policy.

The United States called Pakistan a “Frontline Ally” but continued the refrain of “Do More.” Accusations of providing safe havens to the Taliban escalated, and Pakistan’s credibility across the world became suspect.

The storm of domestic terrorism took thousands of lives. The economy shrank, investment stopped, and fear enveloped the cities. Pakistan had become a participant in a war with no moral logic and no political endpoint.

In 2021, when the Taliban entered Kabul, a wave of joy swept through Islamabad.

Rebuilding Political Trust: Reviving Democracy Through Party Reform In Pakistan

Pakistan is confronting this terrifying reality for the first time. Jawans of the armed forces, police, and FC personnel are sacrificing their lives daily

In the final years of the Cold War, these masterminds saw a golden but misleading opportunity, dreaming of regional dominance by using Islamic militants as a proxy tool. This temporary victory actually became the foundation of a long-lasting and systemic destruction—a dangerous “double game” that ate the state from within like a termite and initiated three devastating phases of national suicide.

First, non-state armed groups were given a semi-state status, which forever erased the delicate strategic line between state policy and violent extremism, and the state handed over a part of its sovereignty to non-state actors.

The second phase was the systematic silencing of liberal and critical voices by labelling them traitors—the voices of journalists, intellectuals, enlightened circles, and artists were suppressed so that no questions could be raised about the moral and strategic justification of proxy wars.

The third and most devastating phase was that the warlords and their patrons gained immense wealth and influence, which led to the replacement of argument and dialogue with bullets and military force in the border areas, and then in the mainstream too, thus strengthening a warrior economy within the state.

As a result of these policies, Pakistan’s liberal and academic institutions suffered severe, deep, and long-lasting damage because the state protected militant networks on one hand while marginalising its own intellectuals, journalists, and artists by making them suspects and enemies of the state on the........

© The Friday Times