After years of broken promises and cross-border terror, Pakistan finally said enough.
As of February 28, 2026, smoke continues to rise from targeted military installations deep inside Afghanistan while the world watches a familiar but decisive chapter unfold along the Pakistan-Afghanistan International border. For years Pakistan showed extraordinary restraint. We hosted millions of Afghan refugees, extended diplomatic hand after hand, and sought every possible assurance that Afghan soil would never again become a launchpad for terrorism against us. Those assurances were repeatedly given, in multiple rounds of talks mediated by Qatar and Turkey, most recently in October and November 2025, and just as repeatedly broken.
The sequence that led to the present moment is now clear.
Recent weeks saw a fresh wave of devastating terrorist attacks inside Pakistan, suicide bombings in Islamabad, Bajaur, and Bannu, all traced directly to Fitna-al-Khawarij (FAK) operatives enjoying full protection on Afghan soil. On 21-22 February, the Pakistan Air Force carried out precise, intelligence-based strikes on verified FAK camps in Nangarhar, Paktika, and Khost provinces. The targets were terrorist infrastructure, not civilians.
Instead of acting against these camps, the Afghan Taliban regime responded by launching a large-scale offensive late on the night of 26 February. Their forces attacked Pakistani military posts across multiple border sectors, deploying whatever heavy equipment they could muster, including Soviet-era T-62 tanks inherited from decades past. Pakistani forces destroyed several of these armoured vehicles in the fighting.
Pakistan’s response was swift, professional, and proportionate. On the morning of 27 February, the Pakistan Armed Forces launched Operation Ghazab Lil Haq “Righteous Fury” or “Wrath for Justice”, a name that perfectly captures the moral clarity of a nation that has exhausted every peaceful option. Under this operation, the Pakistan Air Force and ground forces struck Taliban military targets in Kabul, Kandahar (the spiritual and power centre of the Taliban), Paktia, and numerous border regions. Strikes continued through the night and into 28 February on additional locations including Aala Jirga Thana and Rahim Thana in the Qila Saifullah sector, Shaga Post in Azam Warsak, as well as positions in Khyber, Omari, Noshki, Laghman, and Paktika’s Zouba sector. Checkposts, brigade and corps headquarters, ammunition depots, logistics bases, petroleum reserves, and heavy equipment have been systematically destroyed. The operation, military sources confirm, remains ongoing until all objectives are achieved.
Casualty figures, as always in the fog of conflict, vary sharply. According to DG ISPR Lt Gen Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry, in his February 27 media briefing on Operation Ghazab Lil Haq, Pakistan’s forces have eliminated 274 Taliban regime personnel and terrorists (described as conservative estimates), with more than 400 injured. He added that 73 Afghan posts were completely destroyed, 18 captured, and significant military infrastructure targeted, while emphasizing no civilian damage occurred and great care was taken to protect non-combatants. Pakistan has consistently emphasized that strikes are directed solely at military and terrorist targets; any civilian suffering is regretted, but the ultimate responsibility lies with those who locate their military assets amid civilian populations and refuse to act against the terrorists they shelter.
United Nations monitoring reports from 2025, still the most authoritative open-source assessment, put FAK strength inside Afghanistan at 6,000 to 6,500 fighters. These are not phantom figures. They have translated into more than 600 attacks inside Pakistan in 2025 alone, killing hundreds of soldiers and civilians, primarily in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan. The Taliban regime has provided these militants with safe houses, training camps, movement passes, weapon permits, and complete immunity. This is not neighbourly friction; it is state-enabled proxy warfare.
The external dimension adds a troubling strategic layer. India’s Union Budget 2026–27 increased development assistance to Afghanistan by 27 percent to Rs 150 crore (approximately $18 million), alongside renewed diplomatic engagement and the acceptance of a Taliban-appointed Chargé d’Affaires in New Delhi. At a moment when terrorist violence traced to Afghan soil continues to destabilise Pakistan, this expanded engagement inevitably raises concerns in Islamabad about whether Afghanistan is once again becoming an arena for regional power competition. Pakistani officials and analysts have long warned and provided evidence that hostile actors could exploit instability in Afghanistan to destabilize Pakistan. India rejects such accusations, maintaining that its involvement is purely developmental. Yet the timing and depth of New Delhi’s renewed outreach invite scrutiny amid heightened regional tensions
The most telling development, however, is the Taliban’s abrupt pivot toward talks. On 27-28 February, after their installations in Kabul and Kandahar came under direct fire, spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid stated that the Islamic Emirate has “always tried to resolve issues through dialogue” and now seeks the same. This is the same leadership that ignored every previous commitment, allowed the October 2025 ceasefire to collapse, and continued sheltering FAK despite multiple Qatar- and Turkey-mediated undertakings.
The timing is not coincidence, it is cause and effect. Only after Pakistan demonstrated both the will and the capability to strike at the sources of terror did Kabul rediscover the virtues of dialogue. Strength compelled what years of appeals could not.
International voices are now calling for de-escalation, and these calls are welcome. UN Secretary-General António Guterres has expressed deep concern over civilian impacts and urged immediate dialogue. Iran’s Foreign Ministry voiced “deep concern” and offered mediation, calling for “immediate” talks. The European Union’s foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas demanded an end to hostilities to prevent wider regional fallout. Russia and others have echoed the need for restraint. Yet these appeals must not obscure the root: terrorism emanating from Afghan territory.
Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has made Pakistan’s position crystal clear. In statements from GHQ and public briefings on 27 February, he declared zero tolerance for any collusion between the FAK (Fitna al-Khawarij) and the Afghan Taliban regime. “Our forces have the full capability to crush any aggressive ambitions,” he said, adding that “Pakistan knows how to defend itself against any aggression” and that the armed forces, under the leadership of the Field Marshal, stand ready. The entire nation stands shoulder to shoulder with its defenders.
Pakistan does not seek conquest, occupation, or the destabilisation of a neighbour already scarred by decades of conflict. We have no desire for a prolonged war. What we demand is straightforward and non-negotiable: the Taliban must dismantle FAK camps and safe havens, halt cross-border infiltration, recognise the sanctity of the international border, and end the export of terrorism once and for all. Empty promises and photo-op ceasefires will no longer be accepted. Verifiable, sustained action is required.
Our brave soldiers, holding the line under Operation Ghazab Lil Haq, have shown the world that Pakistan prefers peace but will never beg for its security. The blood of our martyrs, from the latest border clashes to the suicide bombings that preceded them, demands accountability.
The ball is now in Kabul’s court. If the Taliban genuinely want dialogue, let them prove it by delivering what they failed to deliver for years. Only then can the guns fall silent and the long-suffering people on both sides of the border finally breathe in peace.
Pakistan stands ready for honourable, dignified peace. But we will never again mistake silence for surrender. The message from Islamabad today, delivered by our forces on the ground and in the air, is the same: enough is enough.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views, policies, or position of this website. The website does not endorse or oppose any opinion presented herein.