Lead: On 26 February 2026, Taliban authorities said Afghan forces launched cross-border attacks on Pakistani military positions along the Durand Line in retaliation for Pakistani air strikes last week. The Afghan eastern military corps described “heavy clashes” beginning late Thursday in Nangarhar and Paktia provinces, while Pakistan’s authorities said their forces responded and denied that any posts were captured. Both sides reported losses and exchanged sharply different accounts of battlefield gains and civilian impact. The incident sharpens a weeks-long escalation that has disrupted border crossings and raised regional alarm.
Key Takeaways
- Taliban statement said large-scale operations targeted Pakistani positions along the 2,611 km Durand Line on 26 February 2026.
- An Afghan military source told Al Jazeera that 13 outposts were captured and 10 Pakistani soldiers were killed; Pakistan has not confirmed those claims.
- Pakistan’s Ministry of Information said troops delivered an “immediate and effective response” across multiple sectors, citing heavy Afghan casualties and destroyed equipment.
- Pakistan reported air strikes on Sunday it said killed at least 70 fighters; Afghanistan rejected that tally and said civilians, including women and children, were among the dead.
- Border crossings have been largely closed since October, after fighting then killed more than 70 people on both sides.
- Independent verification of battlefield claims is currently limited; both governments continue to release conflicting statements via official channels and social platforms.
Background
Relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan have deteriorated over recent months amid repeated cross-border violence and mutual accusations. Islamabad accuses Afghan territory of sheltering armed groups responsible for attacks inside Pakistan; the Taliban government rejects those accusations and says it lacks capacity or will to act on some armed actors. The Durand Line — a 2,611-kilometre frontier first drawn in 1893 — remains disputed in Kabul, complicating formal border management and security cooperation.
Since deadly clashes in October that left more than 70 people dead combined, most official land crossings have been shut, disrupting trade and movement for communities along the frontier. Pakistan carried out strikes on Sunday and reported significant militant casualties; Afghanistan countered that the strikes killed civilians. Those competing accounts have hardened positions and elevated tensions among local populations and security forces on both sides.
Main Event
The Afghan military media office in the east said heavy clashes began late on Thursday in response to Pakistani air strikes in Nangarhar and Paktia provinces. Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid posted that “large-scale offensive operations have been launched” against Pakistani installations along the Durand Line, framing the action as retaliation for what Kabul called repeated provocations and violations.
An Afghan military source speaking to Al Jazeera reported that 13 Pakistani outposts were captured and that 10 Pakistani soldiers were killed. Pakistan’s Ministry of Information and Broadcasting denied those battlefield gains, saying on X that no posts were captured or damaged and that Pakistani troops had given an “immediate and effective response” in sectors including Chitral, Khyber, Mohmand, Kurram and Bajaur.
Pakistani security sources told Al Jazeera they had “inflicted heavy losses” on Afghan forces and that several Afghan positions were hit in retaliation for incoming fire. One Pakistani security source also reported that Afghan fighters fled three locations targeted by Pakistani return fire. On Sunday, Pakistan said its strikes had killed at least 70 fighters; Afghanistan disputed that and said civilians were among the dead.
Analysis & Implications
The exchange marks an intensification of a pattern in which air strikes and cross-border fire provoke retaliatory operations, raising the risk of prolonged confrontation. For Pakistan, operations are framed as countering militant threats and defending border provinces; for the Taliban authorities, strikes on Afghan soil are presented as violations of sovereignty that warrant forceful countermeasures. This tit-for-tat dynamic reduces space for mediation and increases risks for local civilians who live close to contested sectors.
Economically and socially, continued closures of crossings and repeated shelling or strikes will deepen humanitarian and market disruptions in a region already strained by displacement and limited infrastructure. Trade routes that once moved goods between the two countries remain intermittently blocked, affecting livelihoods on both sides of the border and raising the cost of staple goods for border communities.
Diplomatically, the episode complicates Islamabad’s relations with Kabul and will test international actors’ ability to de-escalate. Neighboring states and global partners may be pressured to mediate, but there is little precedent for neutral arbitration accepted by both governments. If exchanges continue, there is a significant risk they could draw in additional armed groups or prompt wider security measures with long-term consequences for regional stability.
Comparison & Data
| Item | Claimed/Reported Figure |
|---|---|
| Border length (Durand Line) | 2,611 km (1,622 miles) |
| Afghan claim — Pakistani soldiers killed | 10 (Afghan military source to Al Jazeera) |
| Afghan claim — Pakistani outposts captured | 13 outposts (Afghan military source) |
| Pakistan’s reported strike toll (Sunday) | At least 70 fighters (Pakistan) |
| October fighting toll (both sides) | More than 70 people killed |
The table summarizes competing tallies and enduring metrics. Discrepancies in casualty and capture reports are common in active conflict zones, where independent verification is limited and both sides use public messaging to shape narratives. Analysts caution that battlefield claims should be treated as provisional until corroborated by neutral observers or multiple, independent sources.
Reactions & Quotes
Officials on both sides framed their actions as defensive responses. Below are representative statements and their context.
“Large-scale offensive operations have been launched against Pakistani military positions and installations along the Durand Line.”
Zabihullah Mujahid / Taliban government spokesman (posted on X)
The Taliban spokesman presented the operations as retaliation for Pakistani air strikes in Nangarhar and Paktia. His statement was shared on social media channels used by the Taliban to communicate official positions, with no independent battlefield verification attached.
“Taliban regime forces are being delivered punishment … Early reports confirm heavy casualties on Afghan side with multiple posts and equipment destroyed.”
Pakistan Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (official statement on X)
Pakistan’s ministry used X to characterize the military response across multiple border sectors and to deny that any Pakistani posts were captured. The ministry’s post emphasized Pakistani counter-fire and reported Afghan losses; independent confirmation of the claimed destruction was not provided in the ministry message.
Unconfirmed
- The Afghan claim that 13 Pakistani outposts were captured has not been verified by independent observers or by Pakistan.
- The Afghan assertion that 10 Pakistani soldiers were killed has not been independently corroborated; Pakistan has not confirmed those casualties.
- Counts of fatalities from Pakistan’s Sunday strikes — including the Pakistani claim of at least 70 fighters killed and Afghanistan’s claim of civilian deaths — remain disputed and lack independent verification.
Bottom Line
The exchange on 26 February 2026 illustrates how a cycle of strikes and reprisals can rapidly escalate along a poorly demarcated and politically sensitive frontier. With both sides publishing conflicting accounts, independent verification is limited and the risk of further violence remains high. Border communities are most at risk, facing displacement, disrupted trade and the danger of being caught in cross-fire.
International and regional actors may face pressure to press for de-escalation, but historical disputes over the Durand Line and mutual distrust between Islamabad and Kabul complicate mediation. Close monitoring, transparent investigations into reported civilian harm, and channels for confidence-building will be essential to prevent a wider confrontation.
Sources
- Al Jazeera (news reporting; article published 26 February 2026)