At the sixth trilateral meeting of the foreign ministers of Afghanistan, Pakistan, and China held in Kabul on August 22, 2025, the three nations underlined the importance of consolidating their efforts to combat cross-border terrorism and regional security threats.

The talks placed particular emphasis on countering the activities of terrorist organisations like Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA), the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM), and other regional or international militant groups that continue to destabilise South and Central Asia.

Pakistan’s special representative for Afghanistan, Mohammad Sadiq, highlighted a consensus that was reached, noting that all three sides had renewed their pledge to intensify coordinated actions against these outfits.

Speaking alongside his Chinese counterpart in Islamabad, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Ishaq Dar reaffirmed this stance, stressing that the trilateral cooperation mechanisms signify a collective resolve to foster peace, stability, and prosperity, while ensuring that the benefits of such collaboration extend through regional friendships and alliances.

The Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi echoed these sentiments but placed additional weight on the economic component of the partnership, particularly the growing role of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) in driving regional development.

He hailed CPEC as a model of practical cooperation under Beijing’s Global Development Initiative, asserting that its benefits now extend not only to Pakistan and China but also to Afghanistan, where enhanced connectivity and economic integration could foster long-term systems of stability.

While the Kabul discussions touched upon counterterrorism, they also delved into political, trade, and transit sector cooperation, although notably, no formal joint communique was issued at the meeting’s conclusion. According to Afghanistan’s Foreign Ministry, the talks revolved around the expansion of inter-state political ties and avenues of collaboration to improve mutual connectivity and trade flows across borders.

However, reactions to the meeting were mixed, and cautionary voices emerged regarding the underlying motives of certain participants. Military affairs analyst Kamran Aman expressed scepticism about Pakistan’s role, accusing Islamabad of playing a "dual game" through its alignment with Beijing.

He suggested that while Pakistan projects itself to the international community as a victim of TTP and Baloch separatist militancy, it simultaneously leverages Afghanistan geopolitically for trade, capital, and strategic influence.

Aman further argued that Afghanistan’s trade volume with Pakistan has suffered significantly, noting a 28% decline compared with last year—a development that fuels Afghan suspicions regarding Islamabad’s intentions.

Political analyst Mohammad Aslam Danishmal offered a more nuanced perspective, observing that while the trilateral dialogue could be a gateway for greater regional engagement and cooperation, it also poses challenges that need careful navigation, given the delicate political environment and overlapping national interests.

The meeting—hosted in Kabul’s Presidential Palace and attended by the foreign ministers of both Pakistan and China—therefore represented both opportunities and ambiguities for the region. While all three governments sought to showcase unity in security matters, and China pushed for an economic framework that includes Afghanistan in broader development schemes, lingering mistrust and competing interests among the players complicate the picture.

For Afghanistan, the talks symbolised a chance to strengthen political recognition and reap potential economic dividends, especially through transit and connectivity projects tied to CPEC. For Pakistan, the priority lay in signalling seriousness about tackling terrorism while securing Afghanistan’s cooperation to counter groups threatening its own security.

For China, safeguarding its Belt and Road-linked investments and curbing extremist movements with anti-Beijing agendas remained central.

Yet the absence of a joint declaration reflects the delicate balance and unresolved differences that continue to overshadow trilateral cooperation, leaving experts divided over whether such meetings will produce lasting results or simply serve as diplomatic showcases.

Based On ANI Report