For decades, Pakistan has been a haven for Afghans who have been forced to flee the country due to war, instability and political tensions. For many, Pakistan was not just an adjacent country but the place where they settled their homes, businesses and communities. But that is changing now. Pakistan is transitioning from a refugee-centric policy to one that focuses primarily on documentation of registration, regulation and repatriation of Afghan refugees. The quandary is not just about the return or otherwise of Afghan refugees, but rather the question is whether their return is necessary and advisable considering Pakistan’s legitimate security and border-management concerns. The real question is, “how are they to be brought back?” A policy of mass repatriation may end up aggravating rather than solving humanitarian issues. The decision for Pakistan to move towards repatriation has logical justifications.
The government has been concerned about undocumented migration, national security, overburdening of public resources and border management. A state has complete authority over its border and territory. Pakistan has been a host country for Afghans for decades without facing any serious problems in its own economic and security issues. These concerns are not just to be overlooked. The way repatriation process is carried out holds too much importance. Returning refugees over a border is not just an administrative process. Families should have time to arrange housing, employment, documentation and education for their children. Those refugees who have been staying in Pakistan for many years or decades may have very little to come back to Afghanistan. This can therefore create significant challenges, especially for vulnerable families, if they return too quickly.
Between 15 September 2023 and 30 June 2026, 2,546,180 Afghans returned from Pakistan, as per the data provided by the International Organization for Migration (IOM). Over the past 1 April 2025, over 1.69 million Afghan nationals had returned, of whom 213,748 had been deported. In the second half of June 2026, IOM monitoring also revealed that the primary reason for individuals returning was fear of arrest, with 95 percent of respondents indicating this was the case.
Afghan women and girls’ situation is even worse when the humanitarian issues are considered. In Afghanistan, women and girls are severely restricted in different areas of life, including in their education, employment, and mobility, and in their ability to participate in public life under the current de facto authorities. Afghan women and girls are still excluded from secondary schools and universities, as well as most employment, and almost three-quarters of young Afghan women are not in education, employment or training, according to UN Women.
In some cases, the opportunities available to Afghan women and girls that they have gained in Pakistan may, therefore, be at risk upon their return. UNHCR’s current assistance framework clearly targets single women, persons with disabilities, unaccompanied children, families with pregnant women and women-headed households as requiring special consideration following return. An important international law aspect of the issue is also present. The principle of non-refoulement is one of the core values of refugee protection which states: no one shall be forcibly returned to a situation in which their life or freedom is gravely at risk. UNHCR recommends that anyone contemplating returning verify the security situation, job prospects and the services available and says they should return only if they choose to do so. Pakistan therefore does not need to abandon repatriation. It needs to rethink how repatriation is carried out.
The first is that Pakistan needs to have a phased and well-managed process for repatriation instead of the general timelines. Families should be given sufficient time to plan to return, and vulnerable cases assessed individually.
Second, there is a need to improve documentation and categorization. Registered refugees, Afghan citizens’ card holders, undocumented migrants, asylum-seekers and other categories must not be perceived as one group.
Thirdly, there is a need for improved bilateral coordination on returns in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Both sides are encouraged to work together regarding documentation, border crossings and family reunification and reception of returnees. International institutions may assist this process, but coordination in the long term should be done in concert with both states.
Fourthly, there should be more financial and technical support from the international community. International support can be provided to refugees’ housing, livelihood, education and basic services.
Lastly, security screening and humanitarian protection need to be done in tandem. Vulnerable people should not be perceived as security threats, but if they are, it is through legitimate security measures, not through discriminatory and uncalled-for security measures.
Pakistan’s policy shift toward Afghan refugee shows the complex connection between government authority, security needs, economic demands and humanitarian issues. Pakistan justified its policy by mentioning Afghan refugees as terrorists, economic burden and threat to national security. Many Afghan refugees faced poverty, loss of identity, unemployment and psychological stress due to this forced deportation. They also faced hardships after returning to Afghanistan. Afghan Taliban strict government made it difficult for them to live peacefully in Afghanistan. Overall, Looking at it from a state-centric perspective, it’s understandable. But this policy was not justified from humanitarian or long term-strategic point of view. A much more effective response would be gradual, well-prepared, coordinated repatriation with UN agencies and other relevant organizations along with strong support systems for refugees.