Deepening Regional Instability

The military conflict between Afghanistan and Pakistan does not seem to be ending. Amid recent developments, Afghanistan has alleged that the Pakistan military launched (March 16) a deadly airstrike on a hospital for drug addicts in Kabul, claiming 400 lives. However, Pakistan dismissed the claim as false and aimed at misleading public opinion, stating that it only targeted military installations in Kabul. In reality, the attack on Kabul’s Omar Addiction Treatment Hospital did take place, according to Hamdullah Fitrat, the Deputy Spokesman for Afghanistan’s Taliban government. Local television stations posted footage showing firefighters extinguishing flames in the ruins of the building.

The attack came hours after Afghan officials said the two sides had exchanged fire along their common border, with four people killed in Afghanistan, as the deadliest fighting between the neighbours in years entered a third week. Zabihullah Mujahid, another spokesman for the Afghan government, condemned the hospital strike on social media, alleging that Pakistan had once again violated Afghanistan’s airspace and targeted a drug rehabilitation hospital in Kabul. He further stated that the Afghan government considers such an act to be against all accepted principles and a crime against humanity.

Against this backdrop, analysts assess that South Asia is now undergoing a new phase of instability after military confrontation erupted between Pakistan and Afghanistan in February this year. What began as cross-border strikes against militant groups has quickly snowballed into open hostilities, affecting regional security, creating humanitarian crises, and threatening diplomatic cooperation in South Asia. Earlier, Pakistan carried out airstrikes on February 21, targeting seven militant camps in Afghanistan’s Nangarhar, Paktika, and Khost provinces. These strikes were in response to terror attacks in Islamabad, Bajaur, and Bannu, which Pakistan attributed to Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and Islamic State-Khorasan (ISIS-K) operating from Afghan soil. Afghanistan’s Taliban condemned the action, alleging that civilian sites, including a religious school, were hit, resulting in the deaths of 18 civilians.

Ongoing ground clashes have involved artillery, drones, and territorial captures, with Pakistan playing a central role. There is no clear objective, and no visible end to the crisis, as the conflict remains rooted in mutual accusations of harbouring militants, which Kabul consistently denies. Calls for restraint from the international community have come from the UN, China, the EU, and the US, with some backing Pakistan’s claim of self-defence. As casualties steadily rise, with reports of several deaths, the conflict has now evolved into a serious humanitarian crisis. The clashes between the two neighbouring countries, once considered allies, have strained the fragile crisis management structures along the Pakistan–Afghanistan frontier. Border closures have shut trade links, especially major crossings that once facilitated commerce and movement. Ground realities indicate significant dysfunction across multiple sectors.

In the meantime, for South Asia, this disturbing development increases the chances of cross-border terrorism, organised insurgency, and transnational security threats that challenge state control and regional cooperation. The conflict intensifies existing diplomatic fractures, complicates SAARC-level integration efforts, and risks deepening divergent strategic alignments. It also places smaller countries in South Asia in a delicate balancing act among competing strategic narratives. According to Mohd Nahiyan Shajid Khan, a researcher at the Bangladesh Institute of International and Strategic Studies (BIISS), Bangladesh’s internal and external security environment could also be affected by this conflict. While direct military escalation appears unlikely, ideological contagion among militant networks poses hidden risks and hampers Bangladesh’s plans to revive and operationalise SAARC for regional integration. The expansion of recruitment pipelines by transnational terrorist groups underscores the need for vigilance against extremist mobilisation within Bangladesh. This appears to be a realistic warning that requires close monitoring. Bangladesh’s Foreign Minister Khalilur Rahman has described the war as “unfortunate,” favouring “quiet diplomacy” for stability. He has urged restraint without taking sides in the conflict. Bangladesh has echoed the SAARC principles of sovereignty and non-interference.

Further assessment by the researcher suggests that the war could bolster Pakistan-Bangladesh rapprochement efforts. Pre-election pacts on trade and defence signal deeper ties, with many viewing the “reopening” of relations through the lens of transactional diplomacy. For Bangladesh, subtle support for Pakistan may advance a “Bangladesh First” approach by fostering a South Asian balance of power. It navigates turbulent geopolitical waters amid India-Pakistan tensions and the China-India rivalry, alongside issues such as the Teesta dispute and Sheikh Hasina’s extradition demands. War-related instability could drive up energy prices, push the Rohingya crisis into neglect, and increase risks of radicalisation and terrorism in Bangladesh and beyond.

Significantly, experts predict incremental policy shifts rather than major ruptures. Rohingya repatriation remains linked to broader Muslim solidarity narratives, indirectly connecting to Afghan instability, which could complicate crisis management in the coming days. There are concerns that a prolonged conflict could draw Bangladesh into deeper anti-terror cooperation with Pakistan, strengthening bilateral defence ties. The 2026 Pakistan–Afghanistan conflict also highlights the delicate security architecture of South Asia. Beyond the military theatre, its consequences are likely to ripple through regional trade, diplomacy, and counterterrorism cooperation. For Bangladesh, the challenge will be to maintain strategic neutrality while safeguarding its economic interests and domestic security.

As the conflict escalates further, ongoing Iran-Israel-US military tensions have the potential to add fuel to the fire, making the region even more volatile. Iran’s proximity to both Pakistan and Afghanistan raises the likelihood of increased religious radicalisation, potential lone-wolf attacks, and expanded recruitment into extremist networks. ISIS-K is already active in Afghanistan, with many adherents continuing to operate in Pakistan. These developments are highly sensitive and carry the risk of ideological spillover and cascading effects across other parts of South Asia.

Views expressed are personal. The writer is a retired IPS officer, Adviser NatStrat, and a former National Security Advisor in Mauritius