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 US-Israel War on Iran: Objectives, Strategy, and Escalation Management

Zahra Niazi
‘States tend to overestimate themselves or the benefits and swiftness of war, and to underestimate their opponents’ capabilities, intentions, or the costs and duration of war.’ If anything, the 2026 war initiated by the United States and Israel against Iran shall be remembered in the annals of warfare among the most visible manifestations of this dynamic.
The war, immediately preceded by the January mass protests in Iran, did not represent a sudden rupture but rather the continuation of a 47-year-long confrontation and a more intense phase of the June 2025 war.
The US Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, defined the war’s objectives as being laser-focused: to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities and its security infrastructure, while ensuring that it could never develop nuclear weapons. Beyond these stated objectives, among the priorities on the continuum also lay the objective of regime change, with both President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu explicitly calling on the Iranian population to take over the government at the outset of the war.

Read More »

Marka-e-Haq to the Peace Talks: Pakistan’s Middle Power Status

On 7th May 2025, Pakistan’s military forces took the international security community by surprise when it demonstrated operational superiority against its larger belligerent adversary India with its rapid and coordinated response. The Four-Day conflict proved to be a watershed moment for Pakistan, marking its rapid emergence as an important player in the region. In recent years, amidst the ongoing global competition between the United States and China, Islamabad has adopted a position of ’Strategic Balancing,’ where it maintains ties of cooperation with both Beijing and Washington. Deft diplomacy, emphasis on geo-economics, and credible conventional and strategic deterrence have remained the foundational pillars for Pakistan’s ambition as a rising middle power

Read More »

Debunking the S-400 Shield: Lessons from the India-Pakistan Conflict

Air defense has always been a central aspect of warfare. In South Asia, the phenomenon carries immense significance due to compressed reaction times. In this context, one of the most-hyped systems is the Russian-made S-400, touted by New Delhi as a one-stop solution to counter aerial threats from both Pakistan and China.
The 2025 conflict between India and Pakistan marked an important chapter in testing the S-400 technology. The conflict began on May 7, when India attacked what it alleged were terrorist targets in both Pakistani-held Kashmir and Pakistan proper, using drone and missile strikes. The conflict lasted for four days, culminating in a U.S-facilitated ceasefire. However, the brief conflict debunked a lot of the myths regarding the S-400 technology.
First, India claimed that the mobile S-400 would be able to control Pakistan’s airspace. In contrast, Pakistani aircraft continued to operate freely, according to official briefings by the Pakistani military. Although the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) aircraft were in their own airspace, they were still within the air defense range.

Read More »