The real question here is why WoT impacted Pakistan and not these other two countries.
it may be on a smaller scale compared to WoT but India has had an insurgency in Kashmir for two decades or more now. Why has it not impacted the national economy or exploded into something much bigger? On the contrary, the last two decades have seen a vast positive economic transformation in India.
Blaming WoT for Pakistan’s woes is only a quarter of the story.
Because the scope of the Kashmir conflict is limited to the freedom of Kashmir (a small, isolated territory relative to India) and implementation of UN resolutions.
On the other hand, TTP seeks to overthrow the entire country of Pakistan, BLA wants to break half the country off.
Here are other factors:
1. Kashmiris are disarmed unlike Pashtuns/Baloch.
2.Kashmiris are less conservative than Pashtuns, less likely to join religious militia, and also more tolerant towards Indian mistakes.
3.Kashmiris have no ethnic/tribal affiliation with Afghanistan. Some Pashtuns joined TTP because they thought Pakistani democratic govt was an American puppet aiding a crusade against Afghan Muslims. Thus, they believed the Pakistani govt should be replaced with their version of Sharia.
4.Kashmiris do not enjoy the level of arms and logistical support that Taliban or BLA does. Kashmiris are using crappy old weapons or captured Type 56 (INSAS is not even used because it is so bad). TTP and BLA have latest US weapons, and roam openly in Iran and Afghanistan. Meanwhile, Kashmiri fighters live in caves in the forest, and people like Bajwa and Imran Khan have shut down their infiltration routes.
5. LoC is shorter than Durrand Line
6. India has 600,000-700,000 troops in Kashmir, Pakistan only 200,000 at the Durrand Line.
7. Pakistan does not commit the level of suppression and human rights abuses that India does. Partly because Baloch and Pashtun militants are indigenous to Pakistan, while Kashmiris are foreign to India and it is easier to abuse foreigners than your own misguided people