“Can go to Afghanistan even without passport if PTI founder orders”

PTI Founder’s Directive on Afghanistan Travel Ignites Political and Legal Debate
ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN – Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan’s recent directive for Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Ali Amin Gandapur to visit Kabul for peace talks has sparked controversy, with critics questioning the legality and practicality of such travel amid stringent visa and passport requirements for Afghanistan. Khan’s statement, issued via his social media account while he remains incarcerated, implied that Gandapur should be allowed to travel to Afghanistan despite existing regulations, drawing parallels to Punjab Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz’s international visits .

🔍 Context of Imran Khan’s Directive

1. Peace Talks Initiative:

   • Khan directed Gandapur to engage with the Taliban interim government to address rising terrorism in Pakistan’s border regions, arguing that dialogue is essential to prevent further deterioration of security. He criticized the federal government and military for “short-sighted policies” undermining peace efforts .

2. Afghan Refugee Controversy:

   • Khan condemned the deportation of Afghan refugees, urging compassion given Afghanistan’s recent earthquake and economic crisis. He stated, “Where there should be a strong relationship, things are being made worse” .

🛂 Legal and Practical Travel Constraints

1. Visa and Passport Requirements:

   • Afghanistan’s Policy: All travelers, including Pakistanis, require a valid visa and passport to enter Afghanistan. Exceptions are limited to individuals born in Afghanistan or those with Afghan parentage .

   • Pakistan’s Regulations: Pakistani citizens must comply with international travel protocols, including valid documentation. Recent enforcement at the Torkham border has banned Afghan truckers without visas and passports, reflecting stricter adherence to these rules .

2. Political Implications:

   • Khan’s directive challenges federal authority, as foreign policy and international travel protocols fall under the federal government’s jurisdiction. The statement implies that provincial officials could bypass standard procedures if “ordered” by a political leader, raising constitutional concerns .

⚠️ Security and Diplomatic Challenges

1. Security Risks:

   • Afghanistan remains under Taliban control, with the U.S. State Department advising against travel due to terrorism, kidnapping, and wrongful detention risks. The U.S. Embassy in Kabul suspended operations in 2021, limiting consular support .

2. Diplomatic Protocols:

   • Official visits require coordination between governments. The Taliban regime’s recognition remains limited internationally, complicating diplomatic engagements. Pakistan’s federal government typically facilitates such dialogues .

📜 Historical and Contextual Factors

1. PTI’s Stance on Afghanistan:

   • Khan has consistently advocated for dialogue with the Taliban, citing his government’s earlier success in fostering regional peace. He attributes current security issues to the federal government’s approach .

2. Refugee and Humanitarian Concerns:

   • Khan’s criticism of Afghan deportations aligns with his broader humanitarian rhetoric. However, Pakistan’s recent enforcement of visa requirements aims to address security concerns linked to cross-border terrorism .

💎 Conclusion

Imran Khan’s directive underscores deep political divisions and his ongoing influence despite incarceration. While his call for peace talks reflects a consistent policy stance, the practical and legal hurdles for Gandapur’s proposed travel remain significant. The federal government’s control over foreign policy and existing security protocols likely preclude any unauthorized travel, highlighting the tension between political rhetoric and administrative realities. The situation also emphasizes the complex interplay between humanitarian concerns, security priorities, and diplomatic norms in Pakistan-Afghanistan relations.