Pakistan

Suicide car bomber strikes in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa amid unconfirmed reports that Qatar has offered to host peace talks.

Tensions are mounting between Pakistan and Afghanistan amid reports of a brutal border attack on the former’s troops as a fragile truce between the neighbours, and once allies, nears its expiry.

A 48-hour ceasefire between the two sides, which came into effect this week after days of bloody cross-border attacks, is set to expire at 13:00 GMT on Friday.

As the end of the truce approached, Pakistani police official Irfan Ali said a suicide car bomber backed by Pakistan Taliban, known by the acronym TTP, attacked a military compound in Mir Ali, a city in North Waziristan district, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province.

Accounts of losses suffered during the attack varied.

The official, quoted by news agency The Associated Press, said three fighters were killed in an intense shootout and did not report any troop casualties.

News agency Reuters quoted Pakistani security officials as saying seven Pakistani soldiers were killed in an attack by a fighter who rammed an explosive-laden vehicle into the wall of a Pakistani military camp in North Waziristan.

The anonymous officials said two other fighters were shot dead as they tried to get into the facility. At least 13 were left injured.

Pakistan’s Geo News reported that four assailants from TTP were killed in a suicide attack on a military camp in North Waziristan, with security sources saying security forces had suffered no losses.

Pakistan’s army did not immediately comment.

Deadly clashes

The truce, imposed on Wednesday, brought a temporary halt to the deadliest clashes between the neighbours since 2021, when the Taliban seized power in Afghanistan after the withdrawal of United States and NATO forces.

The conflict, which threatens to destabilise a region where groups like ISIL (ISIS) and al-Qaeda are trying to resurface, was triggered after Islamabad demanded that Kabul rein in fighters who had stepped up attacks in Pakistan, saying they operated from havens in Afghanistan.

The Taliban denies the charge and accuses the Pakistani military of spreading misinformation about Afghanistan, provoking border tensions, and sheltering fighters to undermine its stability and sovereignty.

Media reported that Qatar has offered to host peace talks between the two countries in Doha, though neither government has confirmed the offer.

Reporting from Peshawar, Al Jazeera’s Kamal Hyder said there had been “some talk of a meeting in Doha … Friendly countries are trying to make efforts in order to ensure that the ceasefire is extended,” he said.

He described the situation on the border as “tense”, adding that Pakistan had stated that unless the Afghan side addressed its concerns, the situation would be “precarious and can escalate at any moment”.

Afghanistan’s Taliban government said on Thursday that Pakistan had carried out two drone attacks on Kabul the previous day, just before the ceasefire came into effect. Doctors told AP that five people were killed and dozens were injured.

The United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan said on Thursday that 37 civilians were killed and 425 were wounded in Afghanistan as a result of cross-border clashes with Pakistan this week.

Pakistan has not provided figures for civilian casualties suffered on its side of the border.

On Thursday, Dawn cited Pakistan’s Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), the media wing of the military, as saying 34 “India-backed terrorists” from “Fitna-al-Khawarij” – the government’s term for TTP – had been killed during multiple operations across Khyber Pakhtunkhwa during the week.

After days of cross-border fighting, Pakistan and Afghan Taliban authorities agreed a temporary ceasefire. The clashes have left dozens dead and injured. So, what’s behind the worst violence between the countries in years?

The recent downward spiral in Afghanistan-Pakistan relations would have been hard to imagine when Pakistani military and civilian leaders welcomed the Taliban’s return to power in Kabul in August 2021.

A Taliban government, Islamabad believed, would be friendly to Pakistan and would become a bulwark against any security threats to the country. After all, Pakistan’s military and intelligence services had for more than two decades supported the Afghan Taliban movement.

Between 2001 and 2021, this meant a contradictory foreign policy. On the one hand, by supporting the United States’ military intervention in Afghanistan, Pakistan recognised the US-backed governments that ruled the country. At the same time, Pakistan covertly tolerated – and even enabled – the resurgence of the Taliban inside Pakistani territory, which also included co-habitation with other Pakistani militant groups.

Yet, that relationship has now collapsed as Pakistani airforce struck targets in Kabul for the first time ever this week.

An apparent disconnect in their mutual expectations, and disrespect for each other’s capabilities, makes it harder for them to resurrect what they once had.

What is at stake for both countries?

The Pakistani security establishment, comprised of the army and the country’s powerful military intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), is responsible for devising and driving the nation’s Afghan policy.

Historically, the army has also exercised significant power over the civilian administrations, even when Pakistan has not been under military rule.

Pakistan has faced a surge of unprecedented attacks against its security forces since 2021, coinciding with the Taliban’s return to power in Afghanistan. More than 2,400 deaths were recorded for the first three quarters of 2025, towering over last year’s figure of approximately 2,500 people killed in attacks across Pakistan.

Pakistan has blamed a majority of attacks on the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), the so-called Pakistan Taliban, whose leaders are now based in Afghanistan. TTP members hail largely from the tribal areas of Pakistan, along the Afghan border.

Pakistan had hoped that TTP leaders would leave Afghanistan once the Pakistan-friendly Taliban government was established in Kabul. Some TTP fighters reportedly did return home, but this did not translate into a decline in violence. The TTP demands a localised implementation of Islamic law and the reinstatement of the former semi-autonomous status of tribal areas bordering Afghanistan.

For Pakistan, confronting a deadly and persistent uprising at home has become a national security crisis. Pakistan is, meanwhile, also reeling from several other intersecting crises: a stunted economy, geopolitical tensions with archrival India – marked by the recent conflict in May – as well as a growing domestic political discontent, and natural disasters.

Taliban leaders in Afghanistan insist that the TTP is a domestic challenge for Pakistan to address. In 2022, shortly after forming an interim administration, the Taliban government mediated talks between TTP leaders and the Pakistani army in Kabul. After initial indications of progress, underpinned by a temporary ceasefire, the talks collapsed.

For the Taliban government, which is heavily sanctioned and isolated from international financial institutions, the realities of ruling a vastly underdeveloped and economically poor country are stark. Over four years since taking power, Russia is the only country that has formally recognised the Taliban administration, though a growing number of countries – China, India and Iran among them – have, in effect, acknowledged the group as Afghanistan’s rulers and are hosting their diplomatic representatives.

Afghans are suffering from the near-collapse of the economy, and public sector institutions – such as health and education services – are on the brink of a complete breakdown. Faced with severe food insecurity and humanitarian challenges, common Afghans suffer as United Nations-led aid agencies face funding cuts. A prolonged conflict with Pakistan is likely to further deepen these challenges.

Can both sides return to their past friendship?

Both sides appear, at the moment, to be digging their heels in. Though they have agreed to temporary ceasefires, neither side wants to look weak by admitting it needs to back down.

Official Pakistani government statements now refer to the Taliban government – whose return to power in Kabul was once celebrated – as a “regime”, calling for a more “inclusive” administration in Afghanistan. They warn of continuing attacks within Afghan territories if the Taliban fail to act against the TTP.

To be sure, Pakistan possesses a substantially more powerful military, technologically advanced weaponry, and considerable geopolitical leverage against the Taliban government. There is also a renewed sense of self-confidence as Pakistan considers it successfully fought the recent war with India in May 2025, including by downing multiple Indian jets.

Since the 1980s, it has hosted millions of Afghan refugees, a generation of whom were educated and have built livelihoods in Pakistani cities. This, according to Pakistani leaders and some public opinion, should mean that Afghans must bear goodwill towards Pakistan. Forcing out Afghan refugees will be a key leverage Pakistan would want to use against the Taliban government.

Fundamentally, Pakistani leaders view their country as a serious and powerful entity with strong global alliances – one that any Afghan government, especially one led by a group supported by Pakistan, should respect and cooperate with.

The Taliban, on the other hand, view themselves as victorious, battle-hardened fighters who waged a long and successful war against foreign occupation by a global superpower. Hence, a potential conflict imposed by a neighbour would be a lesser mission.

Taliban spokesmen are pushing back against Pakistani officials’ recent narrative, underlining the significance of the ongoing information war on both sides. They have alleged, for instance, that Pakistan’s tribal border areas shelter ISIS/ISIL fighters with tacit backing from elements of the Pakistani army.

Nonetheless, as a landlocked country, Afghanistan is heavily dependent on trade routes via Pakistan, which remain shut due to ongoing tensions, resulting in major losses for traders on both sides. The Taliban government lacks air defence systems, radars or modern weaponry to counter any further incursions by Pakistani drones and jets.

The path to de-escalation

The Pakistani army continues to frame its fight against TTP as part of the wider confrontation with India. It has alleged, without evidence, that the armed group is backed by New Delhi. Pakistan also expects the Taliban to disown and distance themselves from the TTP and instead align themselves with Islamabad.

However, the TTP and Taliban share long-term camaraderie, ideological compatibility and social bonds that go beyond stringent organisational peculiarities. For the Taliban, a conflict with the TTP could also risk creating space for minacious actors such as the ISIL-Khorasan armed group.

And while Pakistan is stronger militarily, the Taliban have their own tools that could hurt Islamabad.

What if the Taliban’s Kandahar-based supreme leader, Mullah Haibatullah Akhunzada, were to issue a fatwa for jihad against Pakistan’s security establishment? The TTP leadership had already pledged allegiance to Akhunzada in 2021. But the Taliban’s top leader is also held in high religious regard by a large segment of Pakistani religious school students and religious leaders, and a call against Islamabad from Akhunzada could lead to serious internal security challenges for Pakistan.

Islamist political groups in Pakistan would also not support an all-out war with the Taliban. Meanwhile, any sustained Pakistani attacks against Afghanistan will likely bolster domestic support for the incumbent Taliban administration, even when there is palpable resentment among Afghans against the Taliban.

To prevent further escalation and seek meaningful political dialogue, there is an urgent need for a trusted mediation actor capable of sustainable engagement. This role is best suited for Middle Eastern and Muslim nations trusted by both sides, such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

There is evidence that this is a fruitful pathway. Taliban Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi confirmed in a news conference in New Delhi last week that the Taliban ceased retaliatory attacks against Pakistan after Qatar and Saudi Arabia mediated.

But first, there needs to be a real desire for peace from the leaders in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Even as Afghan and Pakistani officials hurl warnings at each other, and their forces engage in repeated bouts of cross-border fire, both countries are acutely aware that war will cost them heavily.

However, this does not mean that relations will return to the erstwhile bilateral warmth anytime soon or that miscalculations cannot happen.

Geography and history bind Afghans and Pakistanis into interdependence, which needs to be capitalised upon.

Governments need to stop hoping in vain for the success of failed approaches that have been tried for decades. Afghan leaders must work at developing amicability with Pakistan. Pakistani leaders need to reciprocate by conceiving a wholesome foreign policy towards Afghanistan, which is not coloured by rivalry with India.

The world does not need yet another war in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region. It can never bear better dividends than peace.

Skardu, Pakistan – When Wasiyat Khan was woken up by a loud explosion in the middle of the night, he thought “the mountains had burst” and a landslide was on its way.

Accompanied by his family, Wasiyat, a shepherd from Roshan valley of Ghizer, in northern Pakistan’s mountainous Gilgit-Baltistan region, had taken his livestock to elevated land for grazing on a sojourn during the warmer months.

Soon enough, as the family sought immediate safety, he realised the explosion was the sound of a glacier bursting. As their temporary accommodation was being swept away by the floodwaters, Wasiyat thought of the villages which lay in the water’s path.

At more than 3,000 metres in the darkness of the night, outside help was impossible to get. He immediately jumped across boulders and reached a designated spot where he could get mobile phone signals and alerted the villagers, who numbered about 300.

“Within 30 minutes, we got a call back saying the villagers had evacuated safely and no lives were lost,” Wasiyat told local media. “While they were safe, we were left with nothing, not even a matchstick to keep us warm near the glaciers. It was very cold and we were suffering.

“When we were rescued hours later and taken back to the village, we found out that all our houses and land were covered by mud, but no lives were lost.”

The glacial lake outburst flood (GLOF) is a common occurrence in northern Pakistan, home to an estimated 13,000 glaciers. As global warming worsens, the effect of more glaciers melting is “likely to be significant” this year, Pakistan’s disaster management authority, NDMA, had said in March.

In its latest assessment, the NDMA says snowfall across Pakistan in the coming months is projected to be less than average, particularly in areas like Gilgit-Baltistan, reducing overall snow accumulation. A reduced snow cover, it fears, would accelerate glacier retreat by exposing ice earlier in the season, making high-altitude regions more vulnerable to GLOFs.

To prevent such occurrences, the government mainly relies on its early warning systems (EWS), which help in reducing loss of life and injury, economic losses, protecting critical infrastructure, and enhancing climate resilience. 

An EWS functions through an interconnected process made up of sensors and gauges that collect real-time data monitored by meteorologists and experts to not only warn of a current hazard, but also predict a disaster. Dozens of EWS sites across the most climate-vulnerable valleys in Gilgit-Baltistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa are currently transmitting real-time data to the Pakistan Meteorological Department.

‘Human EWS’

But residents in northern Pakistan say they are more reliant on Indigenous human knowledge instead of the EWS technology.

Mohammad Hussain, a shepherd in Gilgit-Baltistan’s Skardu Valley, told Al Jazeera about an incident when he was inside his stone hut during the summer. After nearly an hour of rainfall, he witnessed strong lightning followed by an unusual roaring sound.

As he stepped out of the hut to gather his cattle, he saw a powerful flash flood, carrying enormous boulders and uprooting large trees. Acting quickly, he alerted the villagers, which ensured safe evacuation before the floodwaters reached.

He recounted stories shared by his grandfather, who said people relied on large signal fires, gunfire or specific sound patterns to alert others. Natural signs such as sudden heavy rainfall, cloud formations, unusual animal behaviour, and distinct roaring sounds are still being used to predict flash floods in the absence of the EWS.

In one incident, he attempted to light a fire to alert villagers below, but, due to daylight and heavy rain, it was ineffective. He then fired his gun three times, a pre-agreed signal indicating danger. Villagers who heard the gunfire raised alarms through the mosque’s loudspeaker, initiating a rapid evacuation.

Although there were significant economic losses, there were no casualties, demonstrating the effectiveness of this “human EWS”.

Pakistan ranks among the top 10 most climate-vulnerable nations, even though it contributes less than 1 percent of global emissions. The World Bank said in 2023 that the mean temperature in Pakistan since the 1950s has risen by 1.3 degrees Celsius (2.34 degrees Fahrenheit), which is twice as fast as the global mean change.

The country’s climate change minister, Musadiq Malik, recently told Al Jazeera that “when these [glacial] floods hit, they cause immense mortality, morbidity and widespread displacement,” adding that “it’s a harsh reality we face.” Pakistan faced nearly 90 such floods between 2019 and 2022.

‘Technology alone won’t save lives’

Despite spending millions on EWS and its implementation, there has been widespread lack of trust placed in it by a number of communities, due to frequent reports of malfunctioning of equipment and lack of follow-ups by the concerned agencies.

A report in Pakistan’s Friday Times in June this year said “despite launching the $37m GLOF-II project in 2017, with new gauges, sirens, and local training, no real-time link connects human sensors in villages to official rescue teams.”

The report warned that “technology alone won’t save lives if SOPs sit buried, rescue checklists gather dust, and trust is missing on the ground.”

Some villagers Al Jazeera spoke to in Gilgit-Baltistan echoed that sentiment, speaking of their lack of trust in the equipment, questioning its effectiveness, and sharing concerns that these systems have not worked. They also slammed officials for falsely taking credit for the system’s effectiveness in saving lives.

“Residents say the EWS in Gilgit-Baltistan have been installed without taking the local authorities and communities into confidence, which was the reason they could not play an effective role,” Zaki Abbas, an Islamabad-based journalist who writes on climate change, told Al Jazeera.

“Last year, I was told by a local activist that up to 20 systems had been installed at various spots, but they had not been operational for different reasons. This controversy surrounding this issue had also echoed in the GB legislative assembly, with the opposition leaders in the region most recently demanding an investigation into the failure of these systems. However, no such probe was ordered.

“Their ineffectiveness can be gauged by the fact that warnings about GLOFs have come from people, most recently a shepherd whose timely call saved an entire village, instead of these systems on which billions of rupees have been spent.”

Addressing the challenges remains a task for the government and partners involved in the implementation of EWS. The UNDP said in February this year that “limited financial resources, technical capacity, data gaps and uncertainties, communication barriers, weak institutional capacities, and complex and evolving climate risks” are just some of the issues facing EWS globally.

When Wasiyat and two other shepherds from Ghizer were given $28,000 each in August by Pakistan’s prime minister as rewards for saving hundreds of lives, they were told that “this act of courage and responsibility will be written in golden words.”

As unpredictable rains, snow patterns and melting glaciers continue to affect Pakistan, especially the northern areas, it seems residents are more likely to rely on these “heroes” in the absence of widespread EWS and the community’s trust in them.

This story was produced in partnership with the Pulitzer Center.

From deadly antigovernment protests in Madagascar to military parades celebrating the 80th founding anniversary of the Workers’ Party of Korea in Pyongyang, here is a look at the week in photos.

Deadly clashes erupted overnight between the Taliban and Pakistani forces across the Afghanistan border, with each side claiming to have captured or destroyed outposts. The fighting follows an alleged Pakistani air strike on Kabul on Thursday, which the Taliban called a violation of their sovereignty.

Heavy fighting has broken out between Pakistani and Afghan forces at multiple locations on their border, and the rival sides claim to have captured and destroyed border posts in one of the worst border clashes in recent years.

The Taliban administration’s spokesman, Zabihullah Mujahid, said at least 58 Pakistani soldiers were killed in “retaliatory” attacks on Saturday night, two days after blasts were reported in the capital, Kabul, and the southeastern province of Paktika.

The Pakistani military admitted 23 of its soldiers were ‘martyred’ while claiming to kill 200 Taliban and affiliated “terrorists”. Earlier, Pakistan’s interior minister called the Afghan attacks “unprovoked firing”.

The Taliban government has accused Pakistan of carrying out the recent bombings. Pakistan has neither confirmed nor denied the allegations.

Pakistan is said to have backed Taliban fighters during their rebellion against the United States-led occupation of Afghanistan and was one of only three countries that recognised the first Taliban government from 1996 to 2001.

But the rise of attacks inside Pakistan since the return of the Taliban to power in 2021 has strained their ties as Islamabad has accused the Taliban administration of providing safe haven to fighters from the Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan (TTP), or Pakistan Taliban. Kabul has denied the allegations.

So what’s the latest on the fighting? What triggered the clashes? And is the situation expected to escalate further?

What’s the latest?

The Taliban attack on Pakistan border areas began about 10pm (17:00 GMT) on Saturday, and the exchange of fire took place at multiple locations.

Pakistani officials and state-run radio noted that those locations included Angoor Adda, Bajaur, Kurram, Dir and Chitral – all in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province – and Bahram Chah in Balochistan.

Mujahid said Afghan forces killed 58 Pakistani soldiers, captured 25 army posts and wounded 30 soldiers in their attacks.

“The situation on all official borders and de facto lines of Afghanistan is under complete control, and illegal activities have been largely prevented,” Mujahid said at a news conference in Kabul.

Afghanistan’s TOLOnews channel reported on Sunday that the Ministry of Defence is deploying tanks and heavy weapons in several areas of Kunar province on the 2,640km (1,640-mile) border, also referred to as the colonial-era Durand Line.

The Pakistani military on Sunday condemned what it called “the cowardly action” aimed at destabilising the border areas to facilitate terrorism”.

“Exercising the right of self-defence, the alert Armed Forces of Pakistan repelled the assault decisively,” the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), the military’s media wing, said in a statement.

“Last night’s episode vindicates Pakistan’s long-standing position that the Taliban government is actively facilitating the terrorists,” ISPR said.

At least 29 soldiers were injured during the overnight skirmishes, it added.

The Pakistani military claimed that multiple Taliban locations were destroyed along the border and “21 hostile positions on the Afghan side of border were also briefly physically captured and multiple terrorist training camps, used to plan and facilitate attacks against Pakistan, were rendered inoperative”.

While the exchange of fire is mostly over, residents of Pakistan’s Kurram area reported intermittent gunfire.

What triggered the clashes?

On Thursday, Kabul was rocked by the sound of two explosions, and another took place in a civilian market in the border province of Paktika, the Taliban Defence Ministry said on Friday.

The Taliban government accused Pakistan of violating Afghanistan’s “sovereign territory”. Islamabad did not outright deny the blasts but asked the Taliban to curb the activities of the Pakistan Taliban.

A Pakistani security official told the Reuters news agency air strikes were carried out and their intended target in Kabul was the leader of the TTP, who was travelling in a vehicle.

Al Jazeera could not independently verify if the leader, Noor Wali Mehsud, had survived.

Pakistan and the Taliban, once allies over shared security interests, have grown increasingly hostile over Islamabad’s claim that the Taliban is giving refuge to the TTP, an armed group accused of carrying out years of attacks inside Pakistan.

At least 2,414 fatalities have been recorded in the first three quarters of this year, according to the Centre for Research and Security Studies (CRSS), an Islamabad-based think tank.

In its latest report issued last month, CRSS said that if the current trend continues, 2025 could be one of the deadliest years in Pakistan. Last year, at least 2,546 people were killed in attacks.

The armed attacks have risen following the ouster of former Prime Minister Imran Khan in April 2022. Khan’s government had involved the Taliban to get the TTP to agree to ceasefire deal. Though the ceasefire deal unraveled during Khan’s tenure, the frequency of attacks remained lower.

Ties have deteriorated as Islamabad has increased its use of air strikes inside Afghanistan to target hideouts it says are used by TTP fighters.

Relations have also soured over Pakistan’s decision to deport tens of thousands of Afghan refugees. At least 3 million Afghan refugees have taken shelter in Pakistan after fleeing decades of conflict.

What have both sides said?

Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif condemned the Afghan attacks late on Saturday, adding that the country’s army “not only gave a befitting reply to Afghanistan’s provocations but also destroyed several of their posts, forcing them to retreat”.

Mohsin Naqvi, the interior minister, said the Afghan attacks were “unprovoked” and civilians were fired at. Strongly condemning the Taliban’s attacks, he said: “The firing by Afghan forces on civilian populations is a blatant violation of international laws.”

“Afghanistan is playing a game of fire and blood,” he said in a post on X.

Enayatullah Khowarazmi, spokesperson for Afghanistan’s Ministry of Defence, said its attacks on the Pakistan border posts were a retaliatory operation, adding that they concluded at midnight.

“If the opposing side again violates Afghanistan’s airspace, our armed forces are prepared to defend their airspace and will deliver a strong response,” Khowarazmi said.

What has been the international response to the clashes?

The escalating tensions have prompted regional concern as they come amid rapidly changing security dynamics and relations in South Asia.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi called on his country’s two neighbours “to exercise restraint”.

“Our position is that both sides must exercise restraint,” Araghchi said during a live interview with state television, adding that “stability” between the countries “contributes to regional stability”.

Qatar’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs also urged “both sides to prioritise dialogue and diplomacy, exercise restraint, and work to contain the disputes in a way that helps reduce tension, avoids escalation, and contributes to regional peace and stability”.

Expressing concern, the Saudi Ministry of Foreign Affairs said: “The kingdom calls for restraint, avoiding escalation, and embracing dialogue and wisdom to contribute to reducing tensions and maintaining security and stability in the region.”

“The kingdom affirms its support for all regional and international efforts aimed at promoting peace and stability and its continued commitment to ensuring security, which will achieve stability and prosperity for the brotherly Pakistani and Afghan peoples,” it added.

India, which is currently hosting Afghan Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi on his first visit there, has yet to comment on the border clashes. Islamabad has viewed New Delhi’s engagement with the Taliban with suspicion.

Could these clashes escalate?

Asif Durrani, a former Pakistani ambassador and special representative to Afghanistan, told Al Jazeera he believes “the chances of this clash [spilling over] to something bigger and more serious [are] minimal.”

“Afghanistan does not have any conventional military capacity when compared to Pakistan,” Durrani said, adding, “Guerrilla warfare is not the same as conventional warfare, which is a whole different beast and something where Pakistan is considerably ahead of Afghanistan.”

Underlining that “diplomacy should always be given a chance, regardless of how dire the situation is,” Durrani noted that the TTP remains the central issue in the countries’ fraught relations.

“The Afghan government refuses to acknowledge their [the TTP’s] existence on their soil, and as long as that irritant remains present, the situation will remain tense,” he added.

Abid Hussain reported from Islamabad

Taliban officials say overnight cross-border attacks resulted in killing of 58 Pakistani soldiers; Islamabad says 19 border posts captured.

Islamabad, Pakistan – A series of explosions and bursts of gunfire rattled Afghanistan’s capital late Thursday evening, according to local media. The cause of the blasts and the extent of casualties remain unclear.

Taliban government spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid confirmed that an explosion had been heard in Kabul, saying the cause was under investigation.

“An explosion was heard in Kabul city,” he posted on social media platform X in Pashto. “But don’t worry, it’s all good and well. The accident is under investigation, and no injuries have been reported yet. So far there is no report of any harm done.”

The incident came amid worsening relations between Afghanistan and its western neighbour Pakistan, which has accused the Taliban government – in power since August 2021 – of providing safe havens to armed groups, particularly the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), which Islamabad blames for a surge in attacks on its security forces.

The explosions also coincided with the arrival of the Taliban administration’s foreign minister, Amir Khan Muttaqi, in India for a six-day visit, the first such trip since the Taliban’s return to power.

Following the Kabul explosions, speculation swirled on social media that Pakistan was behind the attack, allegedly targeting senior TTP leaders, including its chief, Noor Wali Mehsud.

However, the Taliban have not levelled any accusations yet. Pakistani security officials, speaking on condition of anonymity as they were not authorised to talk to the media, neither confirmed nor denied involvement in the Kabul explosions. “We have seen the media reports and statements from Afghan officials about explosions in Kabul. However, we have no further details on this,” one official told Al Jazeera.

Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs also did not respond to Al Jazeera’s queries.

While neither the Taliban nor the TTP has commented on Mehsud and whether he is safe, Mujahid’s comments suggest that no one was killed in the explosions.

Once seen as heavily backed by Pakistan, the Afghan Taliban have been trying to recalibrate their foreign policy, engaging regional powers such as India, their former adversary, in a bid to secure eventual diplomatic recognition.

Pakistan, meanwhile, has accused India of supporting armed groups operating on its soil, a charge New Delhi denies.

Fragile thaw between Kabul and Islamabad

After a bloody 2024, one of Pakistan’s deadliest years in nearly a decade, with more than 2,500 people killed in violence, both countries tried to reset their relationship.

Pakistan’s deputy prime minister Ishaq Dar visited Kabul in April, with senior leadership on both sides holding a series of meetings, often mediated by China. That process led to upgraded diplomatic ties and a brief lull in violence over the summer.

Yet, according to the Pakistan Institute of Conflict and Security Studies (PICSS), an Islamabad-based think tank, violence in the first three quarters of 2025 nearly matched the entire toll of 2024.

TTP remains the singular cause for the increasing attacks since 2021, according to US-based Armed Conflict Location & Event Data (ACLED).

“Our data show that the TTP engaged in at least 600 attacks against, or clashes with, security forces in the past year alone. Its activity in 2025 so far already exceeds that seen in all of 2024,” a recent report by the ACLED pointed out.

And in recent days, Pakistan has witnessed a further escalation in violence. A string of assaults has killed dozens of soldiers, mostly in the northwestern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, which shares a long and porous border with Afghanistan. The Pakistani military on Friday said it killed more than 30 fighters involved in a recent attack in the tribal district of Orakzai.

In September alone, at least 135 people were killed and 173 injured. After visiting wounded soldiers following raids that killed 19 personnel, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif issued a stark warning to Afghanistan.

“Choose one of two paths. If they wish to establish relations with Pakistan with genuine goodwill, sincerity and honesty, we are ready for that. But if they choose to side with terrorists and support them, then we will have nothing to do with the Afghan interim government,” Sharif said on September 13.

On Thursday, Defence Minister Khwaja Asif also accused Afghanistan of enabling violence in Pakistan while speaking on the floor of the parliament

“Despite years of negotiations with the Afghan government and delegations coming and going to Kabul, the bloodshed in Pakistan has not stopped. Daily funerals of military personnel are being held. We are paying the price of 60 years of hospitality to 6 million Afghan refugees with our blood,” he said.

Pakistan has hosted millions of Afghan refugees since the 1980s, first after the Soviet invasion, then during the Taliban’s initial rule in the 1990s, and again after their 2021 takeover.

Since November 2023, Islamabad has been carrying out a mass expulsion campaign, forcing Afghans – many of whom have lived in Pakistan for decades – to return home. Government figures say nearly a million have been sent back so far.

Deepening mistrust

The tensions between Pakistan and the Taliban in recent years have also escalated into military clashes.

The Pakistani military has previously conducted airstrikes inside Afghan territory, the most recent one in December 2024.

Analysts say that if the latest explosions were indeed linked to Pakistan, the implications could be serious.

Tameem Bahiss, a security analyst based in Kabul, said the Taliban have consistently denied harbouring TTP fighters, and any formal acknowledgement of strikes inside the capital could inflame tensions.

“We’ve seen before those previous Pakistani airstrikes inside Afghanistan yielded no concrete results. Instead, they only deepened mistrust and made cooperation on countering the TTP more difficult. This latest incident will likely harden positions further, making dialogue and coordination even more complicated,” he told Al Jazeera.

The last major targeted strike in Kabul took place in 2022, when al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri was killed in a US drone attack.

Ihsanullah Tipu Mehsud, an Islamabad-based security analyst, said that if Pakistan was involved in the attacks, they may have been intended as a warning following recent attacks on Pakistani soil.

Mehsud, who co-founded The Khorasan Diary, a security-focused news outlet, said the explosions could signal Pakistan’s intent to pursue high-value targets across the border.

“Pakistan could try and target individuals in Kabul, which is the political capital, as well as those in Kandahar, which is seen as the spiritual capital of Taliban, in case security situation in Pakistan remains dire and Afghan Taliban don’t rein in the TTP,” he cautioned.

Bahiss, however, warned that any cross-border strikes could backfire.

“If Pakistan continues to expand its strikes inside Afghanistan, more Afghans may begin to sympathise with the TTP. This sympathy could translate into new recruits, funding, and possibly even quiet support from some segments within the Afghan Taliban,” he said.

He added that if Pakistan indeed was targeting TTP leaders inside Afghanistan, that could provoke the group into escalating attacks inside Pakistan.

“If TTP leaders have indeed been targeted or killed inside Kabul, that would also serve as a warning to the group, showing that they are not safe even in the capital,” Bahiss said. “The TTP will likely adapt by tightening its security measures, relocating its leadership, and possibly retaliating through more aggressive attacks in Pakistan.” 

Islamabad, Pakistan – Seated next to British Prime Minister Keir Starmer during a visit to the United Kingdom in September, United States President Donald Trump made clear he was eyeing a plot of land his country’s military once controlled nearly 8,000km (4,970 miles) away: Bagram airbase in Afghanistan.

“We gave it to [the Taliban] for nothing. We want that base back,” he said. Two days later, this time opting to express his views on social media, Trump wrote: “If Afghanistan doesn’t give Bagram air base back to those that built it, the United States of America, bad things are going to happen!”

The Taliban, predictably, bristled at the demand and stressed that under “no circumstances” will Afghans hand over the base to any third country.

On Tuesday, the Taliban, who have ruled Afghanistan since their takeover of Kabul in August 2021, won a remarkable show of support for their opposition to any US military return to the country, from a broad swath of neighbours who otherwise rarely see eye-to-eye geopolitically.

At a meeting in Moscow, officials from Russia, India, Pakistan, China, Iran, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan joined their Taliban counterparts in coming down hard on any attempt to set up foreign military bases in Afghanistan. They did not name the US, but the target was clear, say experts.

“They called unacceptable the attempts by countries to deploy their military infrastructure in Afghanistan and neighbouring states, since this does not serve the interests of regional peace and stability,” said the joint statement (PDF) published by the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs on October 7 at the conclusion of the seventh edition of what are known as the Moscow Format Consultations between Afghanistan’s neighbours.

Pakistan, China, Russia and Iran had opposed “the reestablishment of military bases” in a similar declaration last month on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly. But the Moscow communique brought together a much wider range of nations – some with competing interests – on a single page.

India and Pakistan have long vied for influence over Afghanistan. India also worries about China’s growing investments in that country. Iran has often viewed any Pakistani presence in Afghanistan with suspicion. Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan have long feared violence in Afghanistan spilling over into their territory. And in recent years, Pakistan has had tense relations with the Taliban – a group that it supported and sheltered for decades previously.

The confluence of these countries, despite these differences, into a unanimous position to keep the US out of the region reflects a shared regional view that Afghan affairs are a “regional responsibility”, not a matter to be externally managed, said Taimur Khan, a researcher at the Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad (ISSI).

“Despite their differences, regional countries share a common position that Afghanistan should not once again host a foreign military presence,” Khan told Al Jazeera.

That shared position, articulated in Moscow, also strengthens the Taliban’s hands as it seeks to push back against pressure from Trump over Bagram, while giving Afghanistan’s rulers regional legitimacy. Most of their neighbours are deepening engagements with them, even though Russia is the only country that has formally recognised them diplomatically as the Afghan government.

A symbolic, strategic prize

The groundwork for the Afghan Taliban’s return to power was laid in Doha in January 2020, under Trump’s first administration; they ultimately took over the country in August 2021, during the tenure of the administration of former President Joe Biden.

Yet in February this year, a month after taking the oath for his second term, Trump insisted: “We were going to keep Bagram. We were going to keep a small force on Bagram.”

Bagram, 44km (27 miles) north of Kabul, was originally built by the Soviet Union in the 1950s. The base has two concrete runways – one 3.6km long (2.2 miles), the other 3km (1.9 miles) – and is one of the few places in Afghanistan suitable for landing large military planes and weapons carriers.

It became a strategic base for the many powers that have occupied, controlled and fought over Afghanistan over the past half-century. Taken over by US-led NATO forces after the invasion of Afghanistan following the September 11 attacks, Bagram was a central facility in Washington’s so-called “war on terror”.

Afghanistan’s rugged, mountainous terrain means there are limited sites capable of serving as large military logistics hubs. That scarcity is why Bagram retains its strategic significance, four years after the US withdrew from the country.

Kamran Bokhari, senior director at the Washington, DC-based New Lines Institute for Strategy and Policy, said he was sceptical about the US seriously planning any redeployment of forces to Afghanistan, despite Trump’s comments.

“The new US geostrategy is about military retrenchment. There is no appetite in Washington for any such military commitment, which would be a major logistical undertaking,” Bokhari told Al Jazeera. “Even if the Taliban were to agree to allow the Americans to regain Bagram, the cost of maintaining such a facility far outstrips its utility.”

At the same time, Bokhari said that the Moscow meet worked as an opportunity for Russia to show that it retains influence in Central Asia, a region in which its footprint has been eroded by the war in Ukraine and by China’s rising geoeconomic presence.

But the concerns about any renewed US footprint in Afghanistan aren’t limited to Russia, or even China, America’s biggest long-term rival. Amid heightened tensions with the US and Israel, Iran will not want an American military presence in Afghanistan.

Other regional nations – India and Pakistan among them – are also eager to show that the neighbourhood can manage the vacuum created in Afghanistan by the withdrawal of US security forces, Bokhari said. Though a close partner of the US, India’s ties with Washington have frayed during Trump’s second term, with the American president imposing 50 percent tariffs on imports from India, in part because of New Delhi’s continued purchase of oil from Russia.

And then there are the Central Asian countries that share long, porous borders with Afghanistan – and fear their soil might be used by violent groups energised by any return of the US, militarily, to Bagram.

Central Asia’s security calculus

The four Central Asian countries that were part of the Moscow Format – Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan – together with Turkmenistan and Afghanistan, form a bloc of six landlocked nations whose geography gives them a unique vantage point in regional politics, while also compelling them to seek access to warmer waters for trade.

Analysts argue an American presence in the region would be “undesirable” for many of these nations.

“This is not knee-jerk anti-Americanism,” Kuat Akizhanov, a Kazakh analyst and deputy director of the Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation Institute (CAREC) said.

“A US base would put host states on the front line of US-Russia-China rivalry. Moscow and Beijing have both signalled opposition to any renewed US presence, and aligning with that consensus reduces coercive pressure and economic or security retaliation on our much smaller economies,” Akizhanov told Al Jazeera.

He added that regional actors now prefer regional groupings such as the Moscow Format, or even the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) led by Moscow and Beijing, for cooperation on security and the neighbourhood’s stability, to any US presence.

What do the Taliban and Afghanistan’s other neighbours fear?

Many of Afghanistan’s bigger neighbours have their own concerns.

“They fear that a revived US military presence could potentially reintroduce intelligence operations, fuel instability, and once again turn Afghanistan into a proxy battleground,” Khan from the Islamabad-based ISSI said.

“This is the lens from which regional countries now view Afghanistan: a space that must be stabilised through regional cooperation and economic integration, and not through renewed Western intervention or strategic containment efforts,” he added.

For the Taliban, meanwhile, Trump’s Bagram demands pose a dilemma, say experts.

Ibraheem Bahiss, a Kabul-based senior analyst for Crisis Group, said he believed that Trump’s Bagram demand was primarily driven by the US president’s “personal inclination” rather than any consensus within the US strategic establishment. “There might be a sense that Afghanistan remains an unfinished business for him,” the analyst told Al Jazeera.

For the Taliban, surrendering Bagram is unthinkable. “Kabul cannot offer Bagram as it would antagonise their own support base and might lead to resistance against their own government if [the] US comes here,” Bahiss said.

At the same time, Bokhari, of the New Lines Institute, said that the Taliban know international sanctions are a major obstacle to governance and economic recovery, and for that, they will need to engage the West, and especially the US.

“The Taliban are asking for sanctions relief, but the question is, what do they offer? Washington is more interested in Central Asia, to which it does not have easy access to. The region is otherwise blocked by Russia, China and Iran,” he said.

Trump has cited Bagram’s proximity to China and its missile factories as a reason for wanting to take back control of the base. Bagram is about 800km (about 500 miles) from the Chinese border, and about 2,400km (about 1,500 miles) from a missile facility in Xinjiang.

“It is not in the US interest in allowing China to monopolise the region,” Bokhari said.

Against that backdrop, the Bagram demand might be a signal from the US that it is eager to explore new ways to do business with the Taliban, Bokhari and Bahiss agreed.

Washington isn’t the only one reaching out to the group, which until a few years ago was largely a global pariah. In fact, the US is late – the Taliban have already been making major headways, diplomatically, in its neighbourhood.

Engagement, not recognition

Since taking control of a country of more than 40 million people in August 2021, the Taliban have faced international scepticism over their style of governance.

Afghanistan’s rulers have imposed a hardline interpretation of Islam and have placed several restrictions on women, including limits on working and education.

International sanctions have further weakened an already fragile economy, while the presence of multiple armed groups – including Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) and Islamic State Khorasan Province (ISKP) – continues to alarm neighbouring states. The Taliban insist that they do not support the use of Afghan soil to attack neighbours.

Pakistan, once seen as the primary benefactor of the Taliban, says it has grown increasingly frustrated over the past four years at what it sees as the Afghan government’s inability to clamp down on militants.

The year 2024 was one of the deadliest for Pakistan in nearly a decade, with more than 2,500 casualties from violence, many of which Islamabad attributes to groups that it says operate from Afghan soil, allegations rejected by Kabul.

On Wednesday, several soldiers were killed in an ambush by the TTP near the Afghan border in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province.

Still, Pakistan upgraded diplomatic ties with the Taliban in May. That month, Afghanistan’s acting Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi hosted his counterpart from Pakistan, spoke on the phone with India’s foreign minister, and flew to Iran and China for summits.

Muttaqi was in Moscow for the recent regional consultations that produced the criticism of Trump’s Bagram plans, and on Thursday is due to arrive in New Delhi for a historic, weeklong visit to India, a country that viewed the Taliban as a Pakistan proxy – and an enemy – until a few years ago.

Bahiss said the compulsion for regional nations to deal with the Taliban is driven by shared, pragmatic goals, which include keeping borders calm, guaranteeing counterterrorism assurances, and securing trade routes.

Akizhanov, the CAREC analyst, meanwhile, said that the wider regional interaction with Afghan officials “normalise working channels [with the Taliban] and reinforces their narrative that regional futures will be decided locally, not by outside militaries”.

However, “legitimacy remains conditional in capitals of each country, hinging on counterterrorism guarantees, cross-border security, economic connectivity, and basic rights, especially for women and girls,” said the analyst, who is based in Urumqi, China.

ISSI’s Khan agreed.

“What we are witnessing is not formal recognition, but a functional understanding that Afghanistan’s isolation serves no one’s interests,” he said.

A vital century from Beth Mooney helped Australia fight back from an early batting collapse as they recovered from 76-7 to score 221 against Pakistan, before the defending champions bowled their opponents out for just 114 to secure a big victory at the ICC Women’s Cricket World Cup.

MATCH REPORT: Mooney rescues Aussies from shock against Pakistan

Available to UK users only.

Beth Mooney produces a brilliant innings, making 109, to save Australia’s innings against Pakistan as her side recover from 76-7 to 221-9 at the ICC Women’s Cricket World Cup.

FOLLOW LIVE: ICC Women’s Cricket World Cup – Australia v Pakistan

Available to UK users only.

Pakistan Taliban claims responsibility for attack on military convoy, leading to a deadly gunfight.

Eleven military personnel have been killed in a gunfight with armed fighters in the country’s northwest, according to the Pakistani army.

The gun battle erupted early on Wednesday during an intelligence operation in the Orakzai district near the Afghan border, the army said in a news release.

During the intelligence raid, the military said, an “intense” exchange of fire broke out with “Khawarij”, a term it uses for banned groups such as the Pakistan Taliban, which claimed responsibility for the attack.

Among the dead were Lieutenant Colonel Junaid Arif and his deputy, Major Tayyab Rahat, along with nine other soldiers. The army said 19 fighters were also killed.

The Reuters news agency, citing Pakistani security officials, reported that the fighters ambushed a military convoy with a roadside bomb before opening fire.

In a statement, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif lauded security forces for their service and paid tribute to the troops who lost their lives.

In recent months, the Pakistan Taliban, which wants to overthrow the government and replace it with their hardline brand of Islamic governance, has stepped up attacks on Pakistani security forces.

Islamabad says the group uses neighbouring Afghanistan to train and plan attacks against Pakistan, while archrival India funds and backs them, charges denied by both countries.

ADVERTISEMENT

In the midst of negotiating a long-awaited trade deal with India, European Commissioner for Trade Maroš Šefčovič is facing a real headache: how to avoid a clash with Pakistan while resisting pressure from India to recognise the Indian origin of the long-grained, fragrant basmati rice.

“This is of course one of the issues which is on the list,” Šefčovič admitted on 12 September as he was back from a round of negotiation in New Delhi.

New discussions are taking place in Brussels this week, as both India and the European Union have set themselves the goal of reaching a trade deal before the end of the year, with the new tariff policy of the Trump administration putting both partners under pressure to build new trade ties.  

Of course, basmati rice will be among the issues discussed between Šefčovič and his Indian counterparts, as India wants its geographical indication (GI) protected in Europe.

But such recognition would not come easily, since its rival neighbour Pakistan — which has been in conflict with India over the disputed Kashmir region since the partition of the two countries in 1947 — also demands the EU to recognise basmati as of Pakistani origin.

The protection of GIs carries significant economic stakes. Trade talks between the EU and its partners usually include a separate section dedicated to it. Owing to its rich artisanal and culinary heritage, the EU — largely thanks to France, Italy and Spain — holds the largest number of GIs in the world.

In trade negotiations, Brussels seeks to have as many of its products as possible protected by the other party to prevent counterfeiting in that country, with France’s champagne and Italy’s famed Parmigiano Reggiano cheese being the most commonly forged products.

And the other party to the negotiation can accept, provided the agreement also defends its own interests and GIs.

The failure of a joint recognition

If it were up to the EU alone, it would have recognised basmati rice as Indian and Pakistani long ago — but it’s not that simple.

At the beginning, things hadn’t started off so badly. In fact, India and Pakistan had jointly led a fight against a US company RiceTec, which had obtained a patent on basmati rice in the late 1990s. In 2001, the US Patent and Trademark Office revoked that patent.

A few years later, to protect the origin of basmati in the EU, Islamabad and New Delhi collaborated between 2004 and 2008 on a joint application to the European Commission for the recognition of their shared heritage over the rice which comes from the Punjab region, situated on the border between India and Pakistan.

But the 2008 Mumbai attacks, in which 160 people were killed and which India attributed to Pakistani intelligence services, shattered the joint efforts of the two countries and reshuffled the deck.

After years of deadlock and tension, India unilaterally submitted a request for GI registration to the European Commission in 2018.

The application states that the rice, characterised by “an exquisite aroma, sweet taste, soft texture, delicate curvature,” is grown in the Indo-Gangetic plains, a geographic zone divided between India, Pakistan, Cambodia and Nepal, which also includes the Punjab region.

In the months that followed, Pakistan opposed India’s application, perceiving it as an attempt to secure exclusive use of the term “basmati”.

And after unsuccessful exchanges between the lawyers of both parties, Pakistan submitted its own request for GI status in 2023, listing not only the Indo-Gangetic plains but also four districts of the much-disputed Kashmir — Mirpur, Bhimber, Poonch, and Bagh — as places where basmati rice is grown.

Both sides deny requests for exclusive recognition

After several years of attempting to mediate between the two rival brothers, the EU found itself caught in the trap of territorial recognition of Kashmir — the core of the territorial dispute between India and Pakistan.

“The Commission is trying to defuse a geopolitical conflict,” Matteo Mariano, expert in trademarks at Novagraaf law firm said.

“It could have said ‘first come, first served,’ but it chose not to, considering that the territorial issues between India and Pakistan are not its concern.”

Sources from both Pakistan and India that were contacted by Euronews denied that their country was asking for exclusive recognition of the basmati origin. Yet, the path to a common solution does not seem to be emerging.

In the midst of negotiations for a much broader trade agreement — ranging from automotive markets to dairy products to public procurement — the EU finds itself walking a tightrope.

“If the Commission is strong-handed, it can force a joint registration by Pakistan and India”, Mariano said. “This depends on the importance of the trade agreement for India and whether the EU has time to block negotiations on GIs,” he explained.

According to the lawyer, if India wants to have doors opened for itself, the EU can leverage that to benefit its own companies.

But for that, the Commission will need to be a shrewd strategist, as Delhi is represented by “tough negotiators,” Šefčovič himself conceded in September.

Goud and Sharma star with the ball in Colombo to give the tournament hosts their second win in two games, while Pakistan lose two in two.

India stormed to an 88-run win against Pakistan in their highly anticipated ICC Women’s World Cup 2025 encounter in Colombo, and moved to the top of the points table with four points.

Tournament hosts India posted 247 in their 50 overs, having been bowled out on the last ball of their innings on Sunday in bowler-friendly conditions in the Sri Lankan capital, which is hosting all of Pakistan’s matches as a neutral venue.

Pakistan stuttered and collapsed in reply and were put under pressure right away by young Indian seam bowler Kranti Goud, who took three wickets for 20 runs in her 10 overs.

The team in green struggled with the conditions and the weight of the opposition, who have now beaten them in all 12 of their meetings in one-day internationals.

The match drew more than the usual attention due to the ongoing political tensions between the South Asian neighbours, who were involved in a four-day armed and aerial conflict in May.

Much like the men’s fixtures between the nations at the recent Asia Cup, there were no handshakes at the toss nor at the end of the match between the sides.

The toss went Pakistan’s way and, having been put in, India mostly laboured to their total after a strong bowling performance on a pitch that had spent two days under covers due to the recent rain in Colombo.

There was a fair share of grass still on the top, but it was the amount of moisture, through sweating under the covers and the rainfall, which was the most noticeable aspect of the surface.

India’s batter Jemimah Rodrigues, who hit 32, noted at the interval that the ball was “stopping” in the surface.

Pratika Rawal (23) and Smriti Mandhana (31) gave India a solid, if slow, start in a 48-run partnership that came to an end off the last ball of the ninth over as the former was trapped lbw by Fatima Sana (2-39).

Harleen Deol appeared to be anchoring the innings with a fine 45, but holed out to long-on, handing Rameen Shamim (1-39) her only wicket and perhaps looking for a big shot to reach the milestone.

India’s total was their highest in ODI cricket without a batter reaching fifty. Richa Ghosh’s unbeaten 35 off 20 threatened to prevent that stat, and her strike rate left many baffled as to why the wicketkeeper-batter only came in at eight.

Seamer Diana Baig’s 4-69 was the pick of the bowlers for Pakistan, albeit at a high economy rate.

The innings was also elongated by 20 minutes when the players were asked to leave the field as a fumigator was brought in due to the number of flies affecting the play. To what extent the measure worked was arguable, as players continued to battle the bugs throughout.

The reply couldn’t have gotten off to a worse start for Pakistan, as they were reduced to 26-3 in the 12th over. The swing for Renuka Singh Thakur and Goud was proving near unplayable.

Thakur was unlucky to end her spell wicketless, partly due to dropped catches and the rest due to leg before wicket (LBW) decisions that didn’t go her way or were not reviewed by India’s captain Harmanpreet Kaur.

Sidra Amin and Natalia Pervaiz began the fightback with a partnership of 69 for the fourth wicket coming in 16 overs. The slow start was hurting Pakistan, and when Fatima – in at six – managed only 2 off 14 balls, India’s grip on the game tightened.

The fall of Amin’s wicket in the 40th over proved to be a fatal blow for Pakistan, who were then bowled out in the next three overs.

Pakistan’s captain Sana rued the missed run-out opportunities and misfields as she believed her team should have restricted India to a sub-200 total.

“In the start of the powerplay, we gave away a lot of runs,” she said after the match. “In the death overs, we also gave away some extra runs.”

India’s captain Kaur, meanwhile, was full of praise for her bowling attack.

“Kranti [Goud] was outstanding,” Kaur said in her post-match comments. “The spinners also helped to get breakthroughs. We created so many chances, but we dropped a few. In the end, we are happy.”

India travel back home for the remaining leg of their group matches and face South Africa on Thursday.

Pakistan will play their remaining games in Colombo, where they meet defending champions Australia on Wednesday.

Neither nation has ever won an ICC ODI or T20 World Cup.

A SWARM of flying bugs halted the Women’s Cricket World Cup grudge match between India and Pakistan.

Players from both sides tried to fix the problem by waving towels and spraying bug repellent.

5

5

But organisers called for heavy duty measures when India were 154 for four in the 34th over of the group match.

With the insect invasion in full swing, a man in a gas mask emerged to fumigate the pitch with an industrial grade bug spray cannon.

Both sets of players were forced to leave the field and fans had to sit through a 15-minute delay.

But even that didn’t seem to have the desired effect.

Once play resumed, it wasn’t long before another stoppage was brought on by a bug flying into the eye of Pakistani bowler Rameen Shamim.

Indian batters repeatedly moaned to the umpire about being affected by the insects.

Unsurprisingly, there is nothing written into cricket law to guide umpires when bugs bother the players.

But they are advised to signal a dead ball if a player is “disadvantaged by an animal within the field of play”.

SUN VEGAS WELCOME OFFER: GET £50 BONUS WHEN YOU JOIN

India ended up winning the clash with their geographical neighbours by 88 runs.

The match was played on neutral ground in Colombo, Sri Lanka, due to political tension between the two nations.

And there were no handshakes between the players before the action got underway.

Colombo is proving to be a troublesome venue for cricket matches of late.

On Saturday, the match between Sri Lanka and Australia was washed out without a single ball being bowled due to heavy rain.

5

5

5

Perhaps the biggest talking point came from an incident early in Pakistan’s innings when opener Muneeba Ali was controversially run out.

The left-hander was struck on the pad by Goud and as the India bowler appealed unsuccessfully for lbw, Deepti Sharma collected the loose ball and threw at the stumps.

She hit but replays showed Muneeba had grounded her bat before the ball was even in the picture and a ‘not out’ decision from the third umpire Kerrin Klaaste went up on the big screen in the ground.

However, before the game restarted, the decision was looked at again and it transpired that when the ball hit the stumps and dislodged the bails, Muneeba had lifted her bat and was still stood out of her crease.

While the batter had already grounded her bat and was not trying to sneak a single, the third umpire changed her decision to ‘out’ and despite Pakistan protests, which saw captain Fatima Sana tell her batter not to leave the field for a short time, Muneeba had to go.

In a further twist, had India simply reviewed the lbw decision, the whole controversy would have been avoided because ball-tracking showed Muneeba was plumb lbw.

Watch the moment play is interrupted following a large swarm of files distracting the players in the ICC Women’s Cricket World Cup match between India and Pakistan in Columbo.

FOLLOW LIVE: ICC Women’s Cricket World Cup – India v Pakistan

Available to UK users only.

Follow our live build-up, team news, scores, photos and text commentary stream for the group-stage match in Colombo at 09:30 GMT.