related_image_(1)

As western media and experts painted a horrifying picture of Afghanistan after the withdrawal of US and NATO troops following the Doha Agreement signed on February 29, 2019, between the Taliban and the US, stakeholders carefully crafted a scenario that would bring peace and stability, not only in Afghanistan but the entire region. Perhaps, this was the first time in over four decades of War in Afghanistan that regional countries including China, Russia, Pakistan and Iran, joined ranks to determine an all-inclusive and peaceful Afghanistan for sustainable peace and regional development.

On the other hand, the Taliban leadership is moving cautiously – not repeating the mistakes of the past – reassuring the international community of respecting women rights and according them their well-deserved status in a Muslim society. However, the western, as well as Indian media, are not willing to give the Taliban any space to prove their stated stance. They keep targeting their record of extreme ideas about women and human rights.

In my opinion, Afghanistan may be a changed place in the coming years, primarily due to the active participation of regional players, which was missing before. A brief look into the recent history of Afghanistan reveals that stakeholders abandoned the war-torn country when the erstwhile Soviet Union withdrew its forces in February 1989. The Soviet-supported government of Najibullah, which lasted for over four years until April 1992, miserably failed to effectively govern and unite various Mujahedeen groups. The civil war continued in Afghanistan during the short tenure of President Sibghatullah Mojaddedi, which lasted only 61 days in 1992. Similarly, the tenure of President Burhanuddin Rabbani, though it lasted officially for over nine years until 9/11, was overshadowed by Mullah Omer’s Taliban government that controlled over 90 per cent of Afghan territory between 1996-2001. However, it was only recognised by three states: Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates.
Unfortunately, Afghanistan was always treated as a battlefield by regional and extra-regional actors. The people of Afghanistan were forced to flee their homeland, and take refuge in the neighbouring countries: mostly in Iran and Pakistan. Iran kept them in refugee camps, but Pakistan opened its doors across the country. At present, their third generation is living in Pakistan. However, Pakistan has now proposed setting up special camps near the Afghan borders to accommodate the displaced people, should the situation so arise, in the aftermath of the US withdrawal. Pakistan has also called upon the international community to fulfil their obligations of hosting legitimate Afghan refugees. It is already hosting over four million of them for the last forty years.

However, the Taliban leadership has so far proved everybody wrong. As I keep reminding the biased western media analysts that the Taliban are Afghans, not the occupiers of the land. They have had the full support of their people in their struggle against external powers because no guerilla movement can succeed without the active and full support of the local populace. Moreover, the Taliban moved in to take control of Kabul in a very organised and controlled manner. They faced limited resistance in Herat, Kandahar and, of late, in Panjsher Valley, where Indian media tried to project Ahmed Shah Masood as a potential game-changer. However, Panjsher was also taken over by the Taliban without much resistance.

The Taliban leadership showed no urgency in announcing the formation of their government in Kabul and took nearly three weeks to announce an interim setup. The Taliban leadership is concentrating more on garnering support from regional powers, mainly China and Russia, whereas the Taliban are well aware that Pakistan supports the cause of peace and stability in Afghanistan. Once the Taliban Administration is recognised by regional powers, it will be relatively easier to get recognition from other countries and achieve the much-needed legitimacy to govern their state. Therefore, this time, an effort is being made to concentrate on getting regional recognition, and Pakistan is leading the way. Pakistan’s involvement was a given because there remains no other country (except Afghanistan) that is more affected by the continuing instability due to conflicts in Afghanistan.

The writer is a published author and presently working as Director in Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS). This article was first published in Daily Times. He can be reached at [email protected].

Image Source: Etfa Khurshid Mirza


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 »