Afghanistan Faring Under Taliban

After being out of power for nearly two decades, Afghan Taliban have been in the country’s driving seat since August 2021 following complete US troops’ withdrawal from Afghanistan. Taliban, at first, assured the world that they would adopt inclusive governance, give right of education to girls, and freedom of media, along with the promise of not letting their soil be used against any other state. This provided the world with the view that the 2021 Afghan Taliban were different from the regressive Taliban of the 1990s and early 2000s.  However, Taliban rule turned into the opposite of the moderate version they initially showed.

Today, an appraisal of Afghanistan’s current situation shows that the country’s state of affairs under the Taliban has deteriorated, whether in terms of humanitarian needs, socioeconomic stability, women’s rights, or physical security.

According to World Food Program (WFP), 20 million people would become acutely food insecure from November 2022 to March 2023. In the midst of this, the risk of disaster, in the form of flash floods, cold weather, and famine is likely to create a severe humanitarian crisis which was on the horizon even before the Taliban took office. However, halting the free flow of global aid under the Taliban has worsened the crisis manifold. Subsequently, whatever relief operations by various international agencies were underway have been impacted by the Taliban’s ban on local female aid workers. A concerted effort is required to address the structural drivers of the humanitarian crises as it does not seem that the Taliban will be able to alleviate those alone.

Meanwhile, The World Bank has given a somewhat optimistic economic round-up for the first nine months of 2022. The report has highlighted high revenue collection, a stable exchange rate, an acceleration in exports, and reduction in the rate of inflation. While this report has obviously been welcomed by the Taliban, the real question is sustainability. According to the economist William Byrd, this window of stability is due to the flow of scattered humanitarian aid. Along with stressing the need to go door-to-door using household surveys for obtaining more grassroots-based input, he has argued that, for Afghanistan, there is no substitute for sustained economic growth driven by the private sector. This reflects the necessity of a long-term economic vision, translating into efficient national development, which the Taliban lack right now.

The suppression of women’s rights and clamp down on freedom of media expression has been the hallmark of the current Afghan regime. Deviating from their earlier commitments to ensure inclusivity for women, the Taliban have restricted women from gaining education, working with NGOs, accessing public health etc. Their marginalisation has also had a negative impact on the national economy. Besides, intolerance towards dissent has been instrumental in forcing many journalists to opt for self-exile in Pakistan in order to protect their life and careers.

On the security front, the Taliban have been unable to rein in the IS-K, regardless of the counter-military raids against them. Growing space for Islamic State Khorasan (IS-K), Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), and other non-state actors in Afghanistan, apart from endangering the lives of Afghanis, can impact the country’s relations with neighbouring China and Pakistan.  The latter remains concerned that Afghan Taliban have not extended the required assistance to contain TTP activities. While on the other hand, China has demanded ‘resolute action’, especially against the East Turkmenistan Movement. It shows that the Taliban are struggling to mitigate the spill-over effect of their internal security lapses on neighbouring countries.

The above-mentioned turbulent dynamics are characterised by the presence of an ‘interim’ government that is non-inclusive in nature. The Taliban did not let other political and ethnic groups become part of the government. Amidst efforts to maintain a united posture, the process of decision-making in the government is becoming more centralised. The top tier of leadership is exclusionary to an extent that, even input from fellow moderate Taliban, Muslim countries, and religious scholars, is turned down. The international community is constantly raising questions about such non-inclusive governance which is a deflection from the Doha commitments. Their non-compliance is derived from the assertive manner in which they assumed government after the fall of Kabul. It emboldened them to not care about international recognition and go ahead with the trajectory of governance, characterised by absolute centralisation of power.

The people of Afghanistan have been under decades of instability owing to various turbulent dynamics, be it foreign invasions or the civil war. Their quest for stability is still intact under the current regime. In light of prevailing domestic issues, the Taliban need to adopt comprehensive inclusivity and flexibility in their mode of governance. Additionally, the world community cannot remain oblivious to its responsibility towards the common Afghans. Afghanistan deserves durable prosperity which depends on multilateral efforts of constant engagements to ensure that human rights and the socioeconomic needs of the people are being met by the de-facto rulers.

Ajwa Hijazi is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad, Pakistan. She can be reached at [email protected] 


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The Cover-up: IAF Narrative of the May 2025 Air Battle

Even after one year since the India-Pakistan May war of 2025, the Indian discourse regarding Operation Sindoor remains uncertain under its pretence of restraint. The Pahalgam attack on 22 April, which killed 26 people, triggered an escalatory spiral. New Delhi quickly accused Pakistan-linked elements, while Islamabad refuted the allegation and demanded an independent investigation. On 7 May, India launched attacks deep inside Pakistan under what it later termed as Operation Sindoor. The political motive was intended to turn the crisis into coercive signalling by shifting the blame onto the enemy and projecting a sense of military superiority.
This episode, however, began to fray immediately as war seldom follows the intended script. Within minutes PAF shot down 7 IAF aircraft including 4 Rafales. On 8 May, Reuters reported that at least two Indian aircraft were shot down by a Pakistani J-10C, while the local government sources reported other aircraft crashes in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir

Read More »

Why the IAF’s Post-Sindoor Spending Surge is a Sign of Panic

After Operation Sindoor, India is spending billions of dollars on new weapons. This is being taken by many people as an indication of military prowess. It is not. This rush to procure weapons is in fact an acknowledgement that the Air Force in India had failed to do what it was meant to do. The costly jets and missiles that India had purchased over the years failed to yield the promised results.

Sindoor was soon followed by India in sealing the gaps which the operation had exposed. It was reported that Indian Air Force (IAF) is looking to speed up its purchases of more than 7 billion USD. This will involve other Rafale fighter jets with India already ordering 26 more Rafales to the Navy in 2024 at an estimated cost of about 3.9 billion USD. India is also seeking long-range standoff missiles, Israeli loitering munitions and increased drone capabilities. Special financial powers of the Indian military were activated to issue emergency procurement orders. The magnitude and rate of these purchases speak volumes.

Indian media and defence analysts have over the years considered the Rafale as a game changer. When India purchased 36 Rafales aircrafts at an approximate cost of 8.7 billion USD, analysts vowed that the aircraft would provide India with air superiority over Pakistan. Operation Sindoor disproved all those allegations. Indian aircraft did not even fly in Pakistani airspace when the fighting started. India solely depended on standoff weapons that were launched at a safe distance. The air defence system of Pakistan, comprising of the HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system and its own fighters, stood its ground.

Read More »

May 2025: Mosaic Warfare and the Myth of Centralised Air Power

Visualise a modern-day Air Force commander sitting in the operations room, miles away from the combat zone, overseeing every friendly and enemy aircraft and all assets involved in the campaign. In a split second, he can task a fighter, reposition a drone, and authorise a strike. In today’s promising technological era, he does not even need an operations room; a laptop on his desktop will suffice. The situation looks promising as it offers efficiency, precision, and control. The term used for such operational control is ‘centralisation’, which has been made possible with advanced networking, integrating space, cyber, surveillance, artificial intelligence, and seamless communication, enabling a single commander to manage an entire campaign from a single node. Centralised command and control, championed by the Western air forces and then adopted by many others, has thus been seen as a pinnacle of modern military power.
The concept of centralisation, enabled by state-of-the-art networking, may seem promising, but it is nothing more than a myth.

Read More »