There is no doubt that the ISIS Khorasan operates in Afghanistan under the control of the Taliban. Although the Taliban deny this issue, occasionally they report attacks on ISIS hideouts in certain provinces, which is a significant contradiction. However, the idea of a country and a group supporting ISIS against the Taliban is at least dubious for now. Countries like Russia and Iran have repeatedly accused the United States of supporting ISIS in Afghanistan over the past two and a half years; a claim that is quite surprising. For example, Sergei Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister, claimed last June that the United States supports ISIS and Al-Qaeda groups in Afghanistan. Lavrov had said that America seeks to keep Afghanistan in a perpetual state of unrest with this action. Following that, Hassan Kazemi Qomi, the Islamic Republic’s ambassador to Afghanistan, claimed in early August of the same year in an interview with Iranian media that Washington uses ISIS as a tool to pressurize the Taliban. He even stated that America has replaced ISIS with its military forces in Afghanistan.
Recently, the Indian newspaper Sunday Guardian, with a report, has alleged that Pakistan is using ISIS as a tool to pressure the Taliban; a claim that Islamabad has not yet responded to. This newspaper has documented the latest clashes between Taliban forces and Pakistani border guards that occurred on January 20 of this year in the Sarkani district of Kunar province. The Sunday Guardian has claimed that Pakistani army forces intended to transfer ISIS fighters to Afghanistan, leading to a reaction from the Taliban forces resulting in a confrontation. The newspaper wrote that Ehsanullah Ehsan, the former spokesman for the Pakistani Taliban (Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan), and some Taliban officials, even the intelligence agencies of this group, have confirmed information indicating Islamabad’s support for ISIS.
However, previously, Zalmay Khalilzad, the former US representative for Afghan peace affairs, also stated in mid-December of last year in his article in the New York Times that the Taliban deny supporting the TTP and accuse Pakistan of supporting ISIS.
If we pay attention, the claims of the Sunday Guardian newspaper are questionable for three reasons:
1- The enmity between India and Pakistan has a long and deep-rooted history that not only seems to have no end but is intensifying day by day. This enmity has broad and deep dimensions that even non-governmental spheres in these two countries have not been immune to. The claim of the Indian media could also be tainted by the bias of this enmity. For example, in the report of this media, it is stated that the Pakistani army uses the method of transferring terrorist forces to Kashmir under Indian control to transfer ISIS forces to Afghanistan: “This trick is copied from the usual method that the Pakistani army employs on its eastern borders with Kashmir under Indian control.”
If countries intend to use the ISIS card, they do so for two reasons: first, to support it against the Taliban because it is claimed that enmity exists between these two groups. Second, some countries try to make their rival less effective against the dangers posed by the Taliban, accusing them of supporting ISIS. As mentioned earlier, Kazemi Qomi claimed that America uses ISIS as a tool to pressure the Taliban. The goal of this Iranian official is to align the Taliban with the United States and gain proximity to the Islamic Republic. Lavrov’s statements mentioned earlier also pursue the same goal. New Delhi, which has long-standing enmity with Islamabad, also tries to distance itself from the Taliban and Pakistan, and accusing this country of supporting ISIS is a simple way to achieve that.
Whether the report of the Indian newspaper is accurate or not, it is profitable for the Taliban because clashes on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border justify the group’s efforts to prevent ISIS forces from entering. The reality is that besides the mentioned countries and this Indian newspaper, other independent institutions have not yet published documented research on Pakistan’s support for ISIS.
2– If Pakistan intends to exert heavy pressure on the Taliban, it has more effective and less risky tools at its disposal that it can employ against the Taliban. For example, supporting anti-Taliban factions can be one of these tools. Indeed, anti-Taliban forces have not achieved real cohesion, but at least they are called democratic forces. Pakistan, with its precise knowledge of anti-Taliban fronts, can easily use them against the Taliban with less cost. If Islamabad does so, it will not only avoid condemnation from any country but may also receive support.
If Pakistan supports ISIS, it is more damaging than beneficial for it, for two reasons: First, ISIS is considered a terrorist group by the world and should be destroyed, not used as a tool against others. The overwhelming majority of countries seemingly agree on this point. In this case, Islamabad would find itself in confrontation with the world by supporting ISIS. Second, instead of causing harm, the Taliban benefit from it; because they would claim to be standing alone against “global terrorism”. Of course, the supporting countries of the Taliban will also amplify this deceitful slogan further.
3- Afghanistan’s neighboring countries, including Iran, China, Russia, and some Middle Eastern republics, are highly sensitive to ISIS, and their short-term interactions with the Taliban are mostly due to this issue. Of course, there are other factors at play as well. Pakistan has recently turned to the side of Afghanistan’s neighbors and extended its hand in cooperation with them. While during America’s presence in Afghanistan, regional cooperation and neighborliness were not highly valued. Pakistan has supported Iran’s initiative to create a regional contact group. Islamabad’s representative attended a regional meeting hosted by the Taliban in Kabul. Recently, the Pakistani newspaper Express Tribune reported that in that meeting, regional countries, especially Pakistan, strongly criticized the Taliban’s inaction against terrorist groups.
Considering these points, if Pakistan supports ISIS, how can it reconcile with the countries mentioned above? Assuming the claim of the Indian media is correct, why have Russia and Iran not expressed concerns in the past two and a half years? Or do they not have information on this matter? If the validity of the Sande Guardian’s claim is proven, Tehran and Moscow have no choice but to stand against Islamabad. In this case, the Taliban may become more valuable, and may even support TTP fighters and leaders.
Considering these three points, it appears that the benefits of supporting ISIS for Pakistan may be less compared to the losses. The nature of the Indian media report may be tainted by the hostility between New Delhi and Islamabad. Even if the claim of the Indian newspaper turns out to be false, it still cannot absolve Pakistan of its support for terrorist groups, as it has been evident to the world that whenever its interests dictate, this country has extensively used terrorism. Of course, in places where supporting terrorism is not beneficial for Pakistan, it naturally refrains from it; a practice not unique to this country as other nations do the same.
