March 25, 2026
By Islam Gul Afridi
PESHAWAR
For the past five months, Pakistan and the Afghan Taliban have been locked in a standoff – officially even being called a ‘war’ – that has shut down five border crossings to trade and civilian movement, with active hostilities now stretching beyond a month. Analysts and locals describe it as the most prolonged period of tensions between Islamabad and Kabul in decades, leaving communities on both sides of the border struggling to survive.
In the past, such crises were managed through traditional jirgahs, councils of local elders, social activists, traders, and political leaders from both sides of the border, who played an effective role in defusing tensions before they spiraled out of control. Today, that mechanism lies dormant, and its absence, many argue, is making a difficult situation dramatically worse.
“In the past, local leadership on both sides of the border played an extremely important role in reducing tensions between Pakistan and Afghanistan through jirgahs,” says Sattar Khan Shinwari, a local leader of the Awami National Party (ANP) from Landi Kotal. “But for several years now, these people have not been given the opportunity to work for peace, which is why not only is violence increasing, but relations are becoming far more complicated.”
Shinwari adds that the closure of the Torkham border crossing over the past five months has affected the livelihoods of 90 percent of the people in Landi Kotal tehsil — a staggering toll on a community whose economy depends almost entirely on cross-border trade and movement.
How it came to this
Tensions between Pakistan and the Afghan Taliban began escalating last October, when five border crossings were sealed completely for trade and civilian passage. The situation took a sharp turn for the worse on February 22, when Pakistan launched airstrikes targeting suspected Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) hideouts in various parts of Afghanistan. In swift retaliation, the Afghan Taliban struck multiple locations inside Pakistani territory with heavy weaponry on February 26, intensifying the conflict and forcing residents of Khyber district and Arandu in Chitral to abandon their homes and flee to safer areas.
Thousands displaced
For residents living in the shadow of the border, the consequences have been devastating. Saddam Hussain, a Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) worker and resident of the border village of Bachamina — one of the worst-affected areas — described the scale of displacement. “The areas of Bachamina, Pasidkhel, Awal Khan Killi, and Charbagh have been hit the hardest,” he said. “Twenty thousand people have been displaced from Bachamina alone, and another twenty-five thousand from Pasidkhel.”
When asked about the government’s response, Hussain was blunt: “The provincial government has done nothing to ease the suffering of these people.”
The scale of human displacement is visible across the region. More than two hundred and fifty people — among them women and children — have taken shelter in a century-old railway tunnel near the Torkham border. In Arandu, Chitral, around five families have also been uprooted. Further compounding the crisis, schools in Bajaur, Mohmand, Khyber, Kurram, and North Waziristan have been shut indefinitely.
A fragile ceasefire
Rahmanullah, a former local government representative from the affected area, described the fear gripping his community. “The ceasefire expired at midnight, and now there is a sense of dread among the local people,” he said. “Both sides need to talk to resolve these issues — war will not solve anything, it will only make things worse.”
A temporary ceasefire brokered at the request of Muslim-majority countries held until March 24 out of respect for Eid ul-Fitr. However, whether it will translate into lasting peace remains an open question. Pakistani Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar has made Islamabad’s position clear in a video statement, reiterating that Pakistan expects the Kabul administration to take concrete action against armed groups operating from Afghan soil.
The case for local leadership
Amid the diplomatic deadlock, voices from the ground are growing louder in their demand for a different approach. Shinwari noted that the region’s political and social leadership had already held two peaceful protest demonstrations, with a clear message: resolve disputes through dialogue, not warfare.
“The responsibility for resolving these issues should be handed over to local leadership on both sides of the border,” he said, “and I am hopeful that, as in the past, positive results will follow.”
It is a view echoed by many in the region who have watched formal diplomacy fail to produce results while communities on both sides bear the heaviest cost. The traditional jirga system, they argue, is not a relic of the past but a proven, practical tool — one that has repeatedly succeeded where state-level negotiations have stalled.
As the ceasefire holds tenuously and both governments harden their public positions, the question is not whether local leadership can help bridge the divide. History suggests it can. The real question is whether those in power will finally step aside long enough to let it.