Blasts Heard in Kabul as Pakistan-Afghanistan Conflict Continues

Lead

Explosions were reported in Kabul on Sunday as fighting between Pakistani forces and Afghan Taliban elements entered a fourth consecutive day. The Taliban said it engaged Pakistani aircraft with anti-aircraft and missile-defence systems after jets crossed into Afghan airspace early on Sunday, and it reported repelling an attempted strike on Bagram airbase north of Kabul. Islamabad has declared an “open war” and Pakistani officials say their forces hold a 32-square-kilometre area in the Zhob sector. Both sides have reported civilian deaths; independent verification of many claims remains incomplete.

Key Takeaways

• Fighting entered its fourth day on Sunday, with explosions heard in Kabul and engagements reported along the border.
• The Taliban says it fired on Pakistani jets and used air-defence systems to stop an attempted strike on Bagram, a former US base north of Kabul.
• Pakistan has declared the situation an “open war” and Pakistani officials reported control of about 32 sq km in the southern Zhob sector.
• Afghan officials, citing Anadolu, said Pakistani strikes killed 55 civilians across several provinces since Thursday.
• Independent verification of casualty figures and territorial control is lacking; Al Jazeera and other outlets have not corroborated all claims.
• Longstanding dispute centers on the Pakistan Taliban (TTP), which Islamabad accuses Kabul of harbouring; violence inside Pakistan surged, with reported deaths reaching 3,413 after a 75 percent rise from 2024.
• International actors including the EU, UN, Iran, Russia, and Gulf states urged restraint, warning of wider regional instability.

Background

Tensions flared after Pakistani air strikes in late February, prompting Kabul to say it launched retaliatory operations along the border. The immediate trigger is a long-running dispute over the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), an armed group blamed by Islamabad for mounting attacks inside Pakistan. Pakistan says parts of Afghan territory are used as safe havens for TTP fighters; Kabul denies any state-sanctioned shelter for militants.

The security environment in the region has deteriorated over the past year. Pakistani analysts and the Pakistan Institute for Conflict and Security Studies report that deaths in Pakistan rose sharply, with 3,413 fatalities representing a 75 percent increase from 2024, and violent incidents up 29 percent. That surge has intensified pressure on Islamabad to act against cross-border militant threats.

Militarily, the two states are mismatched in conventional capabilities: Pakistan has more aircraft, tanks and integrated defence systems. The Afghan Taliban, however, has adapted guerrilla and drone tactics honed over decades of conflict, employing inexpensive unmanned systems against fixed targets and camps across the border.

Main Event

On Sunday morning, residents in Kabul reported hearing multiple explosions. The Taliban public statements said anti-aircraft batteries and missile-defence systems targeted Pakistani jets that entered Afghan airspace, and that the movement repelled an attempted strike on Bagram airbase, a site of continued strategic interest. Al Jazeera and other international outlets have not independently verified the Taliban’s account of the Bagram incident.

Pakistani officials, including a spokesman for the prime minister, have taken a hard line, publicly rejecting dialogue. Mosharraf Zaidi said there would be no talks and reiterated Islamabad’s demand for an end to what it calls Afghanistan-based terrorism. Pakistani security officials also reported holding some Afghan territory in the southern Zhob sector, estimating that held area at roughly 32 square kilometres.

Afghan deputy government spokesman Hamdullah Fitrat, citing Anadolu, said that strikes by Pakistani forces had killed 55 civilians in multiple provinces since hostilities intensified on Thursday. Reported civilian casualties include a woman and a child killed in a drone strike in Nangarhar and a civilian hit by mortar fire in Paktia. Local accounts gathered by AFP described personal losses, such as a man in Kunar who said his brother was killed near a mosque while trying to leave his home.

Both sides continue to exchange claims and limited battlefield actions along the porous border. Pakistan has said it targeted TTP hideouts in Nangarhar and Paktika on February 21, and the UN reported credible information that 13 Afghan civilians were killed in that earlier strike. Kabul strongly denies using its territory to threaten neighbours and characterises Pakistan’s strikes as unprovoked.

Analysis & Implications

The escalation carries several immediate and medium-term implications. First, the risk to civilians is acute: cross-border strikes, drone attacks and artillery fire in populated border provinces multiply the chances of non-combatant casualties and displacement. Reported civilian deaths heighten humanitarian concerns and complicate any diplomatic path forward.

Second, the conflict risks entrenching a security dilemma. Pakistan’s conventional advantages give it capacity for deeper incursions, but ground and asymmetric responses from Taliban forces — including drone strikes on military targets — can impose political and operational costs. That interaction may harden positions on both sides and raise the bar for de-escalation.

Third, regional dynamics complicate response options. Global diplomatic attention is stretched by major developments elsewhere in the Middle East, and key regional actors have issued calls for restraint. Without sustained international mediation, local incentives may favour tactical strikes over negotiated settlement, increasing the chance of protracted low-intensity war.

Finally, the dispute over the TTP highlights the difficulty of disentangling non-state militant threats from interstate relations. Even if Kabul were to deny harbouring TTP fighters, Pakistan faces domestic pressure to show it acts decisively; conversely, Afghan leaders face the political cost of appearing to surrender sovereignty over border security to Pakistan. Those competing imperatives make compromise more difficult in the near term.

Comparison & Data

The table aggregates publicly reported figures from government statements, international agencies and think-tank reporting. Discrepancies reflect differing verification levels and the fog of war; UN and independent monitoring remain limited in immediate aftermath of strikes.

Reactions & Quotes

There won’t be any talks. There’s no dialogue. There’s no negotiation.

Mosharraf Zaidi, Pakistani prime minister’s spokesman for foreign media

Zaidi’s statement underscores Islamabad’s public posture that military pressure, rather than diplomacy, is the current policy instrument. That stance reduces immediate prospects for a negotiated ceasefire unless third-party mediation gains traction.

Further confrontation risks broader regional instability and must be avoided.

Diplomats Without Borders (NGO)

The NGO’s appeal reflects growing international concern that localized clashes could draw in neighbouring states or disrupt humanitarian access, especially if civilian harm intensifies.

All parties should address their differences through diplomatic means.

Abdul Qahar Balkhi, Afghan government spokesman

Balkhi’s call for diplomacy came even as Kabul reported incoming strikes, highlighting the tension between public appeals for restraint and ongoing military responses on the ground.

Unconfirmed

• Taliban claims of successfully thwarting a Pakistani strike on Bagram airbase have not been independently verified by international reporters.
• The Afghan government figure of 55 civilian deaths since Thursday is reported via Anadolu but lacks independent corroboration from neutral monitors in all affected provinces.
• Exact extent and permanence of Pakistani control of a 32-square-kilometre area in Zhob sector is based on Pakistani security officials’ statements and remains subject to on-the-ground verification.

Bottom Line

The clashes between Pakistan and Afghanistan represent a dangerous escalation of a long-running dispute over militants rather than a sudden bilateral breakdown. Reported civilian casualties and cross-border strikes amplify humanitarian risks and create political pressure in both capitals to respond forcefully.

Without credible third-party mediation and improved monitoring on the ground, the conflict risks becoming a protracted low-intensity war with regional spillover effects. International calls for restraint are widespread but may struggle to alter incentives unless diplomatic attention and mediation are sustained.

Key watch points in the coming days include independent verification of casualty reports, whether Islamabad pursues deeper incursions beyond the Zhob sector, and any concrete mediation offers from regional powers that could open channels for de-escalation.

Sources

• Al Jazeera — international news outlet reporting on the incident
• Anadolu Agency — Turkish state-affiliated news agency (source for Afghan government casualty claims)
• Agence France-Presse (AFP) — international news agency (local eyewitness accounts)
• Pakistan Institute for Conflict and Security Studies — Islamabad-based think tank (security statistics)
• United Nations — international organisation (reported credible reports on earlier civilian deaths)
• Diplomats Without Borders — NGO (regional stability warnings)