At least 13 civilians, including 11 children, were killed and several others injured in airstrikes that struck eastern Afghanistan on the night of June 9–10, according to the Taliban administration and the United Nations. The incident has significantly heightened tensions between Afghanistan and Pakistan while also sparking controversy over how the United Nations initially described the attacks in its public communications.
According to Taliban authorities, the strikes hit residential areas in the eastern Afghan provinces of Khost, Kunar, and Paktika. Taliban spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid stated that civilian homes were targeted, resulting in the deaths of 11 children, one woman, and one elderly man. He further said that 14 additional women and children suffered injuries during the attacks.
The United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan also confirmed civilian casualties. In a statement, UNAMA said it had documented 13 civilian deaths and 10 injuries resulting from airstrikes in eastern Afghanistan. According to the mission, the majority of those killed or injured were women and children. However, while documenting the casualties, the UN statement did not initially identify the country responsible for carrying out the strikes.
This omission quickly became a source of criticism and debate. Many Afghan activists, journalists, and commentators questioned why the statement avoided explicitly naming Pakistan despite public accusations from Kabul and Pakistan's own acknowledgement that military operations had taken place across the border.
The Taliban government directly blamed Pakistan for the attacks, accusing Islamabad of violating Afghan sovereignty and targeting civilian populations. According to Taliban officials, the strikes represented another instance of cross-border military action that endangered innocent lives and destabilised the region.
Images and reports emerging from the affected provinces showed damaged homes, grieving families, and large funeral gatherings. Reports indicated that hundreds of people attended funeral ceremonies for those killed, underscoring the anger and sorrow generated by the incident across local communities.
Pakistan did not deny conducting military operations in the region. Instead, officials maintained that the strikes were directed against militant targets rather than civilians. Attaullah Tarar stated that the operation was launched following a series of militant attacks inside Pakistan and described the strikes as precise and carefully calibrated military actions.
According to Tarar, Pakistani forces targeted hideouts and safe havens allegedly used by members of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan. He claimed that the operation was based on credible intelligence and resulted in the deaths of 26 militants. Pakistan further stated that four separate targets were destroyed, including a training facility, an ammunition storage site, and locations associated with militant commanders.
Islamabad has repeatedly accused the Afghan Taliban government of allowing TTP militants to operate from Afghan territory and launch attacks into Pakistan. The Taliban administration has consistently denied these allegations and insists that Afghanistan is not being used as a base for attacks against neighbouring countries.
The latest airstrikes represent the third major Pakistani military action inside Afghanistan since October 2025. Each incident has contributed to growing mistrust between the two neighbours and increased concerns about the possibility of wider cross-border conflict.
A significant part of the controversy surrounding the incident relates to the wording used by the United Nations. On June 11, UNAMA issued a brief statement confirming civilian casualties but referred only to "airstrikes carried out" in eastern Afghanistan. The statement documented the deaths and injuries but did not specify who conducted the operation.
UNAMA also issued a separate appeal calling for de-escalation, protection of civilians, the reopening of border crossings for humanitarian assistance, and dialogue to resolve differences. However, this statement likewise avoided naming any specific country or party responsible for the strikes.
The decision not to identify Pakistan immediately drew criticism on social media. Many commentators argued that the wording obscured responsibility and failed to acknowledge publicly available information regarding the source of the attacks.
Among those criticising the statement was California-based Afghan activist Khalid Wardak, who accused the UN of using passive language that removed accountability from the narrative. He argued that civilians had not simply died in unspecified airstrikes but had been killed during a military operation carried out by Pakistani forces.
Other commentators and journalists raised similar concerns, asking why the organisation chose not to name Pakistan despite widespread reporting and official statements from both governments. Critics argued that failing to identify the party responsible weakened the impact of the condemnation and diminished accountability for civilian casualties.
At the same time, some observers defended the United Nations, noting that international organisations often employ cautious language during the early stages of investigations. Supporters of the mission argued that such wording is commonly used until facts are independently verified and official reporting processes are completed.
Subsequently, Farhan Haq, Deputy Spokesperson for the UN Secretary-General, reportedly referred to the incident as Pakistani military airstrikes during a media briefing, according to Afghan media reports. This later clarification partially addressed concerns raised by critics, although debate over the original statement continued.
The broader tensions between Pakistan and Afghanistan continue to be driven by security concerns, border disputes, and competing narratives regarding militant activity. Pakistan maintains that armed groups continue to use Afghan territory to plan and execute attacks against Pakistani targets. Afghanistan rejects these accusations and argues that Pakistan's repeated military actions violate its sovereignty and contribute to regional instability.
Relations between the two countries have deteriorated significantly over the past year. In February, Pakistan declared that it was effectively in an "open war" with militant groups operating from Afghan territory following a series of attacks. Although both sides later announced a temporary reduction in hostilities before Eid al-Fitr, the underlying disputes remained unresolved.
The two countries share the 2,611-kilometre-long Durand Line, one of the most contested and sensitive borders in the region. Afghanistan has never formally recognised the border as an international boundary, while Pakistan considers it a settled frontier. Combined with ongoing security concerns, this dispute has transformed the border region into a recurring flashpoint for military confrontations.
The latest airstrikes and the resulting civilian casualties have once again highlighted the fragile nature of relations between Kabul and Islamabad. With both governments maintaining sharply different accounts of what occurred and public anger growing on both sides of the border, the incident has further complicated an already tense relationship and raised fears of additional escalation in the months ahead.
