WASHINGTON: Pakistan told the UN Security Council on Wednesday that it would respond to terrorist threats emanating from Afghanistan in self-defence as and when needed and in accordance with international law.

The assertion by Pakistan’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations Asim Iftikhar Ahmad came during a Security Council meeting on the situation in Afghanistan five years after the Taliban’s takeover of Kabul.

“Pakistan cannot sit idle in the face of this terrorist onslaught,” Ahmad told the UNSC. “We will respond in self-defence, as and when needed and in accordance with international law. We will defend ourselves against whosoever attempts to harm our citizens and our national security.”

He said that more than 4,700 Pakistanis had lost their lives to terrorism emanating from Afghanistan over the past three years and added that Kabul had failed to take concrete and verifiable action against terrorist groups operating from Afghan soil.

Afghanistan had again become a safe haven for terrorist groups including the banned Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan, Baloch Liberation Army and its Majeed Brigade, Islamic State-Khorasan and the East Turkestan Islamic Movement, as well as their affiliates, Pakistan’s envoy said.

“The situation [is] made worse by external actors, the spoilers who support proxies inside Afghanistan to target Pakistan and other neighbouring countries,” he added.

A recent report by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres says terrorist groups remain present in Afghanistan, while restrictions on women and girls, exclusionary governance, economic pressures, declining capacity to provide basic services and large-scale returns and migration continue to threaten the country’s longer-term stability.

Armed groups opposed to the Taliban also remain active. According to the report, such groups claimed responsibility for 88 attacks across 21 Afghan provinces between May 1 and the end of July.

The report identifies the institutionalised denial of the rights of women and girls and the authoritarian nature of the Afghan Taliban’s political system among the most serious concerns. It says these policies affect Afghan society and remain obstacles to the country’s reintegration into the international system.

Against this backdrop, Ahmad said Islamabad had supported Afghanistan’s stabilisation through engagement, humanitarian assistance and regional cooperation.

“Despite reservations with regard to certain policies of the Afghan Taliban, Pakistan abided by its international commitments to allow unhindered humanitarian aid to Afghanistan. As noted in the secretary general’s report, at least 687 humanitarian cargo trucks entered Afghanistan from Pakistan during the reporting period,” he said.

But, “unfortunately, the hopes and expectations of the international community at that critical juncture five years ago did not materialise and in fact gradually turned into despair and disappointment”.

“The extent of challenges in Afghanistan is evident … and the secretary general’s report highlights that the semblance of relative stability that the Taliban seek to display ‘masks the accumulating risks that could impact the country’s stability over the short and long term’“, he said.

Ahmad said terrorism had been at the “core of Afghanistan’s problems”.

“This finds its roots in the deep nexus between the Taliban and terrorist groups,” he said, adding that the Afghan Taliban had failed to act against the terrorist groups. He further warned about weapons left behind in Afghanistan by international forces and illegal arms trafficking.

The United States took a similarly critical position on the Afghan Taliban, with Ambassador Mike Waltz focusing on the detention of American citizens, terrorism and restrictions on women and girls.

“The United States will not tolerate the Taliban taking American citizens hostage. Period,” Waltz said, accusing the Afghan Taliban of using American citizens as bargaining chips.

He called on the Security Council to condemn the detention of US citizens by the Afghan Taliban and demand their release.

Waltz also criticised the Taliban’s sheltering of terrorist groups and cited UN reporting on arbitrary arrests and detention, torture, ill-treatment and extrajudicial killings.

He highlighted the continuing ban on girls’ education beyond sixth grade and restrictions preventing Afghan women working for the United Nations from entering UN compounds.

The envoy questioned how long the international community could continue relying on engagement without seeing concrete changes.

“How many UN reports documenting abuse? How many Council resolutions demanding change? How many years of ‘engagement’ can we pass before we see measurable results?” he asked.

“This Council must demand results from the Taliban,” Waltz said. “We need to see action, not words.”

Russia, on the other hand, argued that engagement rather than pressure remained essential in Afghanistan’s case.

Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia said there was “no alternative” to genuine, pragmatic engagement with Afghanistan. Recalling the withdrawal of foreign forces five years ago, he said predictions that Afghanistan would collapse or become a “black hole” had not materialised.

Nebenzia attributed the country’s relative stability to the Taliban’s focus on development, regional cooperation and building a self-reliant state.

He called for trust-based dialogue with the Afghan authorities, “fully free from the language of pressure and blackmail”.

China also argued for continued engagement while acknowledging concerns over the treatment of women.

Deputy Ambassador Sun Lei urged all parties to “cherish the outcomes of engagement and dialogue with the Afghan government, show good faith and stay patient”.

But he said restrictions imposed on Afghan women and girls affected their physical and mental health and undermined social stability and development prospects, making it harder for Afghanistan to gain greater international support.

China called on the Afghan rulers to guarantee the fundamental rights and interests of all Afghans, including women.

Seemingly referring to the US, it called on a “relevant country” to “bear its historical responsibilities” by resuming aid to Afghanistan, lifting unilateral sanctions, returning the overseas assets of the Central Bank of Afghanistan and providing resources for the country’s reconstruction and development.

The debate highlighted the central disagreement over how the international community should deal with Afghanistan five years after the Taliban takeover.