Why is Beijing trilateral important for Pakistan?

By Tahir Khan

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, and acting Afghan Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi held an informal trilateral meeting in Beijing on May 21.

The sixth formal trilateral forum at the level of foreign ministers is scheduled to be held in Kabul as agreed during a meeting between the special envoys of Pakistan and China with Afghan FM Muttaqi in Kabul on May 11.

The informal meeting in Beijing followed Ishaq Dar’s visit to Kabul on April 19, and was planned as both Pakistani and Afghan foreign ministers were due to make bilateral visits to China this week, according to officials from both countries.

The trilateral meeting also allowed the Pakistani and Afghan foreign ministers to hold a bilateral sitting on the sidelines. This was their second meeting within a month, reflecting the increased diplomatic interaction between the two countries in recent months.

China has actively sought to ease tensions between Pakistan and Afghanistan — both through bilateral engagements and the trilateral framework. Chinese leadership believes that prolonged Pak-Afghan tensions could undermine its regional economic agenda.

A positive development from the meeting was the agreement by all three foreign ministers to deepen Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) cooperation and extend the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) to Afghanistan.

Also read: Afghan Taliban leader’s presence in India generates speculations

Security and counter-terrorism cooperation remain key priorities of the trilateral process. All joint statements issued after previous meetings have consistently highlighted this area.

While Pakistan has more pronounced security concerns, Chinese officials have also raised their own apprehensions with Taliban leaders during visits by their ambassador and special envoy to Afghanistan. Now, China seeks to elevate these discussions to the foreign ministerial level, according to sources familiar with the China-Afghanistan dialogue.

Despite concerns, China has pursued a policy of constructive engagement. Its quiet diplomacy serves as a model for others in dealing with the Taliban leadership.

“The three sides stressed the need to prevent any individual, group or party — including the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM) — from using their territories to harm regional security or carry out terrorist activities,” a joint statement issued after the May 6, 2023 meeting in Islamabad stated.

This underscores the continued concerns of Pakistan and China regarding TTP and ETIM activity, despite the absence of major violence in Xinjiang in recent years.

During his meeting with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Beijing on May 21, Afghan Foreign Minister Muttaqi “emphasized that Afghanistan’s territory will never be used against its neighbors,” according to an Afghan Foreign Ministry spokesman.

The Afghan-Pakistan-China trilateral process was launched at Beijing’s initiative in 2017, amid deteriorating Pak-Afghan relations following the deadly truck bombing in Kabul on May 31, 2017, which killed over 150 people and injured more than 400, mostly civilians.

Chinese FM Wang Yi had traveled to Kabul and Islamabad following Afghan allegations against Pakistan after the attack near the German Embassy. It is a positive sign that the trilateral process continues and is becoming increasingly active.

In addition to security, the forum is crucial for promoting trade, economic cooperation, and connectivity. The recent Beijing meeting reaffirmed commitments to extending CPEC to Afghanistan, a flagship BRI initiative.

“The three foreign ministers reaffirmed trilateral cooperation as a vital platform to promote regional security and economic connectivity. They discussed enhancing diplomatic engagement, strengthening communications, and taking practical steps to boost trade, infrastructure, and development as key drivers of shared prosperity,” a statement from the meeting read.

Media Should Avoid Negativity

The recent visit of Dar to Afghanistan and the growing diplomatic exchanges between the two countries presented a valuable opportunity for dialogue on trade, regional stability, and cooperation.

However, both Pakistani and Afghan media often overlook positive developments, favouring negative and polarizing narratives — a tendency that runs counter to journalistic ethics.

During Dar’s April 19 visit to Kabul, Afghan TV screens were flooded with personal attacks, conspiracy theories, and mockery — far from the standards of professional journalism.

As a journalist who frequently appears on Pak-Afghan affairs talk shows, I have long respected the balanced and respectful tone of most Pakistani counterparts. Pakistani analysts, even when critical of Afghanistan, base their arguments on facts, avoid personal attacks, and adhere to journalistic principles. Many of us have also openly criticized the Pakistani government’s Afghan refugee policy. Sadly, the same level of professionalism is lacking in much of the Afghan commentary, especially during coverage of Dar’s visit.

Predefined Agenda of Negativity

A review of Afghan talk shows following the visit reveals a disturbing pattern.

No Economic Experts, No Trade Discourse

Despite the visit’s economic focus, not a single programme invited economists or discussed trade opportunities. Instead, the debate was dominated by unverified accusations and political mudslinging.

Personal Attacks on DPM Dar

Rather than discussing policy, some Afghan panellists mocked Dar’s professional background, with one calling him “just a Chartered Accountant.” Others, without evidence, claimed that Pakistan’s military controls his policies — a reflection of shallow analysis.

Conspiracy Over Substance

Outlandish claims included accusations of Pakistan “exporting Daesh” to Afghanistan and “stealing refugees’ assets.” Such rhetoric only sours public perception and damages bilateral trust.

What makes this spectacle even more disappointing is the contrast with Pakistani media. Not a single mainstream or digital Pakistani analyst has ever mocked Afghan leaders in such personal terms. Even when critical, Pakistani commentary remains respectful and policy-focused.

The tone adopted by Afghan media doesn’t just reflect poor professionalism — it actively undermines bilateral relations. When commentators make claims such as “Pakistan is disintegrating” or “looting Afghan refugees will create permanent enmity,” they are not offering critique — they are inflaming hostility. Open support by some Afghan voices for groups like the TTP or BLA, while simultaneously claiming a commitment to non-interference, is deeply contradictory.

Missed Opportunity for Constructive Dialogue

If Afghan journalists truly care about their country’s future, they should ask “hy was there no coverage or analysis of the tangible outcomes of Dar’s visit, such as signing of a Pak-Afghan Preferential Trade Agreement within two weeks covering four key items.; removal of the 10 per cent processing fee on more than 5% of items under Afghan Transit Trade (867 out of 1,621 items); finalisation of Afghan-Pakistan Transit Trade Agreements by June 30, 2025; reduction of CESS to 1 per cent (from 2 per cent) in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa; implementation of a Track and Trace system for Afghan transit goods by the end of the current financial year; introduction of an Insurance Guarantee option by an A++ rated company for Afghan transit goods; trial-based cross-stuffing of up to 500 containers through a computerized selection process; reduction of scanning and examination of Afghan transit goods to 10 per cent and 5 per cent, respectively, by June 30, 2025 and exchange of trade delegations and participation in exhibitions.”

So the question is why was there no analysis of how the above-mentioned measures could help Pak-Afghan relations? And why did the Afghan media reduce a high-level diplomatic visit to conspiracies and name-calling?

Call for Responsibility

The Afghan media must recognize that such unprofessionalism does not serve national interests. If narratives are shaped by emotion and misinformation rather than facts, the greatest loss will be suffered by ordinary Afghans who rely on regional cooperation for economic survival.

Afghan media must rise above petty rhetoric and adopt a more balanced, fact-driven approach — something Pakistani journalists have, by and large, demonstrated. The alternative — a media ecosystem built on hostility — will only deepen instability and mistrust in the region.