A YEAR after Islamabad severed commercial ties with Kabul over security concerns, the border trade disruption is taking a growing toll on KP, where livelihoods, businesses, farm markets, and a large number of workers depend on cross-border commerce. Bilateral trade has fallen by more than 72pc, from $1.3bn in FY25 to $358m in FY26 — which means fewer customers for local shops, lower earnings for farmers, idle trucks, and lost jobs.

KP was already struggling to attract investment and create work amid rising terrorism; the loss of an established market makes recovery harder. The damage is not confined to the province. Farmers and factories in Punjab and Sindh, too, have been hit, and Pakistan’s exports to Central Asia have been badly disrupted.

Afghanistan has long been KP’s natural outlet because of its proximity and the long-standing commercial and tribal networks. Traders built their businesses around moving food, cement, pharmaceuticals, and other goods across the border. Medical tourism, hotels, and other services catering to Afghan visitors are suffering as well. When crossings shut, traders cannot send their goods to distant markets without facing higher costs, finding new buyers, and adapting to unfamiliar commercial conditions.

In fact, most services cannot be shifted at all. Rerouting shipments is not an easy fix. Pakistan’s shortest land routes to Central Asia run through Afghanistan. Alternatives mean longer distances, higher freight costs, and thinner margins. Small enterprises with little financial cushion are the most exposed to prolonged border trade closures.

KP needs expanding markets and productive investment to employ a growing workforce; it cannot afford to lose existing ones before alternatives are in place. Islamabad has valid security concerns — the Taliban must prevent Afghan territory from being used for attacks on Pakistan. But border closures also hurt citizens on both sides, who have nothing to do with Kabul’s policies.

Islamabad must find the right balance between its security priorities and the economic strain on KP’s residents. Sustained efforts to obtain genuine security assurances from Kabul and carefully monitored arrangements for legitimate trade may offer a way to protect both. It should also assess the losses of traders, transporters, and farmers, and help businesses find new markets. The government must protect its people from terrorism without restricting their livelihoods.

Published in Dawn, October 20th, 2026

A WEEK after the federal government imposed governor’s rule and emergency in KP, PPP Chairperson Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari invited the opposition to engage ‘positively’ with the centre, saying this could lead to their reversal.

Mr Bhutto-Zardari, addressing reporters at a Sunday memorial for the 2007 Karsaz attack on his late mother Benazir Bhutto’s homecoming procession, spoke about the need for a national effort to address the growing economic crisis, resurgent terrorism, and Pakistan’s increasingly dysfunctional electoral system. But his offer, however well-meaning, stands little chance of leading to a political breakthrough in the current climate. Without concrete confidence-building measures initiated by the ruling parties, the opposition is unlikely to put much faith in mere assurances, given that the centre has crossed a major political red line by deposing an elected provincial government and supplanting it with a setup handpicked by Islamabad.

Mr Bhutto-Zardari seemed to be missing the point when he called the ‘non-functional’ KP chief minister a “coward” who was “not ready to defend his own land”. Whatever his failings, the people of KP had elected him, and the remedy lay with them, not with Islamabad. By forcing him aside, the centre has signalled that it does not need public consensus to do as it pleases. The centre’s dispute with KP, after all, was not about whether terrorism needed confronting, but how. KP had resisted the centre’s approach to fighting terrorism, and the resulting stand-off had stymied any progress. In dismissing the provincial government, the centre had signalled that security policies would be prescribed for the province rather than derived in consultation with it. That bridge has already been burnt.

It is commendable that the PPP chairperson is at least talking about a path back to normalcy, but the PPP is a partner in the very government that imposed governor’s rule. If it wants the decision reversed, it should convince its ally in Islamabad, not ask the opposition to be ‘positive’. It is hoped that the PML-N will also reconsider its position. The latter party would do well to recall that, in 2009, when its government in Punjab was dismissed and governor’s rule imposed, it had itself joined a ‘long march’ on Islamabad to press its demands.

It is unbecoming of that party to have denied its opponents the same right to protest now, when it is in power. It will not be easy to build bridges with the opposition, but the PML-N, more than any other party, has the power to concede some ground to show goodwill. It should take up the National Assembly opposition leader on his offer to engage the jailed PTI chief, and facilitate that effort if it is serious about national reconciliation and a unified response to Pakistan’s crises.

Published in Dawn, October 20th, 2026