23 Feb 2026·Source: The Hindu

4 min

International RelationsPolity & GovernanceNEWS

Pakistan conducts border strikes in Afghanistan, targeting militant hideouts

Pakistan launches strikes on Afghanistan border, claiming 70 militants killed.

Photo by Vitaly Gariev

Pakistan conducted border strikes in Afghanistan, targeting militant hideouts, reportedly killing at least 70 militants. These strikes were aimed at hideouts of Pakistani militants allegedly responsible for recent attacks inside Pakistan. In response, Afghanistan's Defence Ministry condemned the strikes, asserting that civilian areas were hit, resulting in casualties, including women and children. The Afghan government summoned Pakistan's Ambassador to Kabul to lodge a formal protest against the cross-border action.

This event highlights the complex and often fraught relationship between Pakistan and Afghanistan, particularly concerning cross-border militancy. The strikes and subsequent diplomatic protest underscore the challenges in maintaining regional stability and addressing security concerns in the region. For India, this situation is relevant due to its implications for regional security and potential spillover effects. This is relevant for UPSC exams, particularly in GS Paper II (International Relations) and GS Paper III (Security).

Key Facts

Pakistan's military conducted strikes along the border with Afghanistan.

Pakistan claimed to have killed at least 70 militants in the strikes.

Afghanistan's Defence Ministry condemned the strikes, stating that civilian areas were hit.

Afghanistan reported casualties, including women and children.

The Afghan government summoned Pakistan's Ambassador to Kabul to protest the strikes.

UPSC Exam Angles

GS Paper II (International Relations): Bilateral relations, regional security, impact on India

GS Paper III (Security): Cross-border terrorism, internal security challenges

Prelims: Concepts of state sovereignty, international law, counter-terrorism strategies

Mains: Analyzing the ethical and legal dimensions of counter-terrorism operations, the role of international law in regulating state behavior

In Simple Words

Pakistan attacked areas in Afghanistan, saying they were targeting militants who caused trouble in Pakistan. They claim to have killed many militants. However, Afghanistan says the attacks hit civilian areas and killed innocent people, including women and children.

India Angle

This situation is similar to how India deals with cross-border terrorism concerns with Pakistan. India has also conducted surgical strikes in the past, citing similar reasons of targeting terrorists operating from across the border.

For Instance

It's like when your neighbor suspects someone is hiding in your house and decides to barge in without your permission, causing damage and potentially harming your family in the process.

It's important because such actions can escalate tensions between countries and affect regional stability. It also raises questions about the safety of civilians in conflict zones.

Cross-border strikes can have serious consequences, impacting international relations and civilian lives.

Pakistan's military conducted strikes along the border with Afghanistan, claiming to have killed at least 70 militants. The strikes targeted hideouts of Pakistani militants allegedly responsible for recent attacks inside Pakistan. Afghanistan's Defence Ministry condemned the strikes, stating that civilian areas were hit, resulting in casualties including women and children. The Afghan government summoned Pakistan's Ambassador to Kabul to protest the strikes.

Expert Analysis

The recent border strikes by Pakistan in Afghanistan and the subsequent reactions highlight several key concepts in international relations and security.

The concept of State Sovereignty is central to understanding this event. State sovereignty, established by the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, asserts that each state has exclusive control over its territory and domestic affairs. Pakistan's strikes, conducted without Afghanistan's consent, can be viewed as a violation of Afghan sovereignty, regardless of Pakistan's justification of targeting militants. Afghanistan's strong condemnation and summoning of the Pakistani ambassador underscore its assertion of sovereignty and its right to protect its citizens and territory from external aggression.

Another relevant concept is Cross-Border Terrorism. This refers to terrorist activities that originate in one country and target another, often exploiting porous borders and weak governance. Pakistan's justification for the strikes is rooted in its claim that Pakistani militants, operating from Afghan soil, are responsible for attacks within Pakistan. This highlights the challenge of controlling cross-border movements of militants and the difficulties in attributing responsibility for terrorist acts to specific actors or states. The United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, adopted in 2006, emphasizes international cooperation in combating terrorism, but implementation remains a challenge, particularly in regions with complex geopolitical dynamics.

The principle of Responsibility to Protect (R2P) is also indirectly implicated. While R2P primarily concerns a state's responsibility to protect its own population from mass atrocities, it also raises questions about when external intervention is justified. Pakistan's actions, framed as self-defense against cross-border terrorism, could be seen as a preemptive measure to protect its citizens. However, Afghanistan's accusations of civilian casualties raise concerns about the proportionality and legality of Pakistan's actions under international law. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the primary judicial organ of the UN for settling disputes between states, but its jurisdiction depends on the consent of the states involved.

For UPSC aspirants, understanding these concepts is crucial for both Prelims and Mains. In Prelims, questions may focus on the definitions and applications of concepts like state sovereignty, cross-border terrorism, and R2P. In Mains, questions may require analyzing the ethical and legal dimensions of counter-terrorism operations, the role of international law in regulating state behavior, and the challenges of maintaining regional stability in the context of cross-border threats.

Visual Insights

Pakistan-Afghanistan Border Region

Map showing the border region where Pakistan conducted strikes, targeting militant hideouts. The strikes reportedly hit civilian areas, leading to casualties.

Loading interactive map...

📍Pakistan📍Afghanistan

More Information

Background

The border region between Pakistan and Afghanistan has historically been a source of tension and conflict. The Durand Line, established in 1893, demarcates the border but has never been fully recognized by Afghanistan, leading to territorial disputes. This area is also characterized by a complex mix of tribal affiliations and a history of weak governance, making it a haven for militant groups. Pakistan has long accused Afghanistan of harboring militants who launch attacks inside Pakistan. Afghanistan, in turn, accuses Pakistan of supporting the Taliban and other insurgent groups operating within Afghanistan. These mutual accusations have fueled a cycle of mistrust and cross-border violence. The current strikes are a manifestation of this long-standing issue, with Pakistan claiming to target militants responsible for recent attacks on its soil. The broader geopolitical context also plays a significant role. The withdrawal of international forces from Afghanistan in 2021 has created a power vacuum, leading to increased instability and a resurgence of militant groups. This has further complicated the already fraught relationship between Pakistan and Afghanistan, making it more difficult to address cross-border security concerns through diplomatic means.

Latest Developments

In recent years, Pakistan has intensified its efforts to secure its border with Afghanistan, including the construction of a fence along the Durand Line. However, this has not completely stopped cross-border movement of militants. The Taliban's takeover of Afghanistan in 2021 has further complicated the situation, with Pakistan expressing concerns about the potential for increased terrorist activity. Pakistan has also been engaging in diplomatic efforts to address its security concerns with Afghanistan. However, these efforts have yielded limited results, with both sides continuing to accuse each other of supporting militant groups. The international community has also been urging both countries to engage in dialogue and cooperation to address the shared threat of terrorism. Looking ahead, the situation remains volatile. The future of Pakistan-Afghanistan relations will depend on the ability of both countries to address their mutual security concerns and build trust. The role of regional and international actors, such as China and the United States, will also be crucial in shaping the trajectory of this relationship.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Why did Pakistan conduct these strikes now, especially after the Taliban takeover in Afghanistan?

Pakistan likely conducted these strikes now due to a perceived increase in cross-border attacks from Pakistani militants allegedly finding safe haven in Afghanistan after the Taliban takeover. Pakistan has long accused Afghanistan of harboring militants, and the recent strikes are a demonstration of their resolve to address these concerns, especially with the Taliban now in power.

2. How might these strikes affect India's relationship with Pakistan and Afghanistan?

These strikes could further complicate India's already strained relationship with Pakistan. Any instability in Afghanistan is a concern for India, and these actions could potentially worsen the security situation. India has maintained a cautious approach to the Taliban regime, and this situation could influence India's future engagement with Afghanistan.

3. What is the significance of the Durand Line in this conflict, and how might UPSC frame a question around it?

The Durand Line is the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan, established in 1893, but never fully recognized by Afghanistan. UPSC could frame a question around the Durand Line focusing on: its historical context, the reasons for its non-recognition by Afghanistan, and its role in cross-border militancy. A potential prelims question could present options asking which countries the Durand Line demarcates, with distractors including combinations of Pakistan, India, Iran, and Afghanistan. Exam tip: Remember the Durand Line is between Pakistan and Afghanistan, a frequently tested fact.

Exam Tip

Remember the Durand Line is between Pakistan and Afghanistan, a frequently tested fact.

4. How does this situation relate to the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, and could this be relevant for Mains Paper 2?

This situation directly relates to the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, particularly Pillar I (Addressing the conditions conducive to the spread of terrorism) and Pillar IV (Ensuring respect for human rights for all and the rule of law as the fundamental basis of the fight against terrorism). For Mains Paper 2 (International Relations), you could frame an answer discussing how cross-border strikes impact state sovereignty, violate international norms, and undermine regional stability, referencing the UN strategy as a framework for addressing terrorism while upholding human rights.

5. What are the implications of Pakistan claiming to have killed '70 militants'? How reliable is this number, and what are the potential consequences of inflating such figures?

The claim of killing '70 militants' should be treated with caution. The reliability is questionable due to the difficulty in independently verifying such claims in a conflict zone. Inflating figures can have several consequences: it can escalate tensions between Pakistan and Afghanistan, undermine trust in Pakistan's counter-terrorism efforts, and potentially lead to further instability in the region. For UPSC, remember that official numbers in conflict zones are often contested and require critical evaluation.

6. Given the history of cross-border tensions, what long-term solutions can address the root causes of militancy in the Afghanistan-Pakistan border region?

Addressing the root causes of militancy requires a multi-faceted approach: * Enhanced Border Management: Improved coordination and intelligence sharing between Afghanistan and Pakistan. * Economic Development: Investing in socio-economic development in the border regions to provide alternative livelihoods. * Diplomatic Engagement: Continuous dialogue and confidence-building measures between the two countries. * Regional Cooperation: Involving regional players like India, China, and Iran to foster stability. * Addressing Grievances: Addressing the grievances of tribal communities in the border regions. These steps are crucial for long-term stability.

•Enhanced Border Management: Improved coordination and intelligence sharing between Afghanistan and Pakistan.
•Economic Development: Investing in socio-economic development in the border regions to provide alternative livelihoods.
•Diplomatic Engagement: Continuous dialogue and confidence-building measures between the two countries.
•Regional Cooperation: Involving regional players like India, China, and Iran to foster stability.
•Addressing Grievances: Addressing the grievances of tribal communities in the border regions.

Practice Questions (MCQs)

1. Consider the following statements regarding the Durand Line: 1. It was established in 1893 as the border between British India and Afghanistan. 2. Afghanistan has always formally recognized the Durand Line as the legitimate international border. 3. The Durand Line is currently demarcated by a physical fence constructed by Pakistan. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A.1 and 2 only
B.1 and 3 only
C.2 and 3 only
D.1, 2 and 3

Show Answer

Answer: B

Statement 1 is CORRECT: The Durand Line was indeed established in 1893 as the border between British India and Afghanistan. Statement 2 is INCORRECT: Afghanistan has never formally recognized the Durand Line as the legitimate international border due to territorial disputes. Statement 3 is CORRECT: Pakistan has constructed a physical fence along the Durand Line to manage cross-border movement.

2. In the context of cross-border terrorism, which of the following statements is most accurate regarding the principle of State Sovereignty? A) State Sovereignty allows a nation to conduct military operations in another country without consent if it suspects terrorist activities. B) State Sovereignty is absolute and prevents any international intervention, even in cases of cross-border terrorism. C) State Sovereignty implies that each state has exclusive control over its territory, but this is limited by international laws and norms, including those related to counter-terrorism. D) State Sovereignty is only applicable to economically developed nations and does not apply to countries with weak governance.

Show Answer

Answer: C

Option C is the most accurate. State sovereignty does grant each state exclusive control over its territory, but this is not absolute. It is limited by international laws and norms, including those related to counter-terrorism, human rights, and the prohibition of aggression. Options A, B, and D present inaccurate or incomplete views of state sovereignty.

3. Which of the following statements best describes the principle of Responsibility to Protect (R2P)? A) It is a military doctrine that allows powerful nations to intervene in weaker states to protect their own interests. B) It is a legal framework that mandates all states to contribute troops to UN peacekeeping operations. C) It is a political commitment by states to prevent and react to mass atrocities within their own borders and, if necessary, in other states. D) It is an economic policy that encourages developed nations to provide financial aid to developing countries to prevent conflicts.

Show Answer

Answer: C

Option C accurately describes the principle of Responsibility to Protect (R2P). R2P is a political commitment by states to prevent and react to mass atrocities. It emphasizes a state's responsibility to protect its own population, and the international community's responsibility to assist when a state fails to do so.