Return of the Taliban

 

The fall of the US-propelled government in Afghanistan along with the swift and dramatic capture of power by the Taliban in Kabul, is nothing short of a geopolitical earthquake in international affairs in our times. For one, it marks a defining moment in the unravelling history of American excesses abroad in the name of “war on terror” and attempts to impose their perception of democracy on other nations and peoples.  Likewise, for the region and the world, the larger question is this: can the Taliban- now, the de facto government in Kabul- live down its dreadful legacy, turn a new page in political pragmatism, and usher in a period of peace, security and development for the people of Afghanistan? 

A Legacy of Excesses on All Sides

Afghanistan’s modern destiny is marred by much internal political strife and blood-letting, especially in the last four decades. Illegal interventions and invasions by foreign powers- [the Soviet Union (1979-1989), and the United States (2001-2021) followed by counter-mobilization by militant groups armed and aided by interested foreign governments, and the consequent internecine warfare destabilized the land for long years. The emergence of Taliban in the Afghan refugee camps of Pakistan, and its militant extremism- blurring the line between political resistance and support for indiscriminate and unrestrained violence in the name of ideology/religion against hostile foreign powers as well as defenceless civilians cannot be divorced from this complex political and regional backdrop- including the lucrative profits from mass cultivation of, and trade in, opium and other narcotic substances across borders with colluding elements in Pakistan. 

Domestically, when the Taliban was in power in the land during 1996-2001, its policies were starkly marked by denial of educational opportunities to girl children; curtailment of women’s rights; cruel and degrading treatment of minorities; institutionalization of vengeance in the form of medieval punishments on opponents and enemies of the regime- all in service of a narrow-minded, extremist and simplistic understanding of the Islamic Shari’ah, bringing disrepute to the very Faith they claimed to serve- with hardly any country in the world recognizing the Mullah Muhammad Omar regime in Kabul in those years.

 

The Politics of 'War on Terror'

Moreover, the presence of Osama bin Laden and the Al Qaeda network in Afghanistan made the Taliban regime apparently complicit in the crossroads of international terrorism, or in any case provided enough excuses for American invasion in the name of “global war on terror”.  Indeed, International law proscribes recourse to the use of force in settling inter-State disputes.  Yet,  in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks on American symbols of economic and military power by a band of terrorists, the Bush administration in the US- against the norms of international law- considered vengeance and excesses against all perceived enemies- eventually invading Afghanistan (and subsequently, Iraq in March 2003). Speaking about the American neoconservative political agenda of this period, Imam- Jamaat Ul Sahih Al Islam Hazrat Khalifatullah Munir Ahmad Azim Saheb (aba) recently noted:

“When we look at what happened on 11 September 2001, we can say that their time had come with this great uproar, but their plan was not new. It was a plan hatched since a long time! Their reactions were extremely rapid after these attacks. As a result, Bill [William] Bennett [former Secretary of Education of the United States] told CNN on 12 September 2001 that they [i.e. the United States] had to attack Lebanon, Libya, Syria, Iraq, Iran and China. He didn’t mention Afghanistan. 

The same day, the Wall Street Journal gave us a list of their targets: terrorist camps in Syria, Sudan, Libya, Algeria etc. and if one reads what Bob Woodward [an American journalist] wrote in his book “Bush at War”, he noted the fact that Afghanistan was not a target but that they immediately wanted to attack Iraq.

On 20 September, forty neoconservatives demanded that the President [Bush] attack the Hezbollah and the countries that supported them. Hezbollah had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks, but they [Hezbollah] wanted to humiliate Israel because it had forced them out of Lebanon. These examples show that the neoconservatives used the attacks of September 11 to have the United States attack countries that did not harm them.” [Friday Sermon of 02 July 2021: The Plans of the Enemies of Islam].

 

In the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, the international community largely acquiesced in the manifestly unlawful American invasion of Afghanistan resulting in the toppling of the Taliban regime in October 2001: no one shed any tears for the blatant illegality of a superpower violating the rule-based international order in pursuit of a moral exceptionalism and dangerous unilateralism.

After the American invasion in October 2001, with the withering away of the Taliban regime in Kabul, the US in its arrogant dismissal of prudent and pragmatic political advice, refused to negotiate with the Taliban, and went on with its projects to remake the Afghan State with the help of its allies. Hence, in the last two decades, the American-led remaking of the Afghan State project has been going on, with many nations actively participating- India included- in the reconstruction of the war-torn nation. With the ground beneath its feet shifting especially with the rise and rise of China, the United States is increasingly unsure of its place in the world. In the quest for turning inward to address domestic concerns of colossal magnitude, and also under budget constraints to cut costs on foreign wars of occupation as well as to reduce the risks of soldier deaths in hostile lands, the United States eventually agreed to negotiate with the same Taliban it had apparently abhorred all along. The Doha peace talks between the Parties and the subsequent Agreement of 29 February 2020 sought to finally indicate an end to the US military operations in Afghanistan by 01 May 2021 (subsequently extended by four months-till 31 August 2021) in return for a Taliban pledge to prevent the use of Afghanistan soil by any group against the security of the U.S. and its allies. 

It is the Doha Peace Agreement that forced the Joe Biden administration to remove the military forces from Afghanistan by a definite date. Consequentially, the realignment of political equation on the ground slowly but surely took place, emboldening the Taliban to weaken further and further the Abdul Ghani administration, with the help of double-dealing Pakistani military intelligence that all along armed and offered sanctuary for the Afghan Taliban and its Quetta Shura. Despite all calculations by the US and its allied forces, the Taliban quickly engineered defections and turned the tables in the provinces and eventually accomplished a bloodless coup in Kabul, leading to a situation of humiliating end for the 20-year military occupation in that “graveyard of empires”- with many foreign groups biting the dust in their unbridled quest for power and dominance in the land- recalling the images from, and comparisons with, another era and theatre of dismal fortune, of Saigon (Vietnam) in 1975.

The Road Ahead

With the withdrawal of the foreign forces from the country, Afghanistan is by and large, under the military control of the Taliban. Yet, the suicide bombing of the Kabul Airport in the final days of the US evacuation and the consequent killing of a large number of Afghan civilians as well as 13 US soldiers en masse, also point to the emerging challengers on the security front- especially from the Islamic State of Khorasan.

Apart from the security challenges, the heartbreaking images of thousands of people at the Kabul Airport desperately trying to get out of their own country in the last fortnight also point to the fear and insecurity that has engulfed the Afghan nation in the wake of the return of the Taliban from political wilderness into the centre of power and authority. People remember what they had experienced under the Taliban in 1996-2001. Will the Taliban revert to its old ways of being an oppressor of people’s freedoms? Will it host foreign terrorist organizations and insurgent groups in its territory in pursuit of a so-called global Jihad? Or, will the new ruling elite in Kabul prefer to moderate its State-practices to gain political legitimacy and international recognition and support for national development?

Peace and tranquillity are critical for economic development and societal progress. With its mineral deposits and strategic location in the heart of Asia, Afghanistan has huge potential for being an energy transit and transport corridor between Central Asia and South Asia. The political developments are being eyed with interest by China as it seeks to expand its Built and Road Initiative in the region. Indeed, the Taliban has been making the right noises when it comes to its political posturing and handling of social media so far. They have declared a general amnesty for all previous opponents-seeking to reassure the world on the safety of all those who worked in collaboration with the occupying forces in the past. Likewise, they have cooperated with the evacuation of efforts of the foreign forces and are certainly seeking global recognition for turning a new page in Afghanistan in the quest for peace and prosperity. [Inset: On 28 July 2021, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi holding a high-profile official meeting with a delegation of nine Afghan Taliban representatives, including the group’s co-founder and deputy leader Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar]. 

Nations progress when they invest in, and develop institutions of excellence that serve the people well. In the absence of a justice-oriented, rights-based rule of law framework no nation can progress. Political formations operating in the name of Islam have a grave responsibility: to deliver clean, fair and good governance while being mindful of the rights of all fellowmen and women of the country, including the interests of different ethnic groups and religious minorities. Can the Taliban practices usher in a model of Islamic Shari’ah in statecraft that is respectful of the legacy of the just and righteous Caliphs of early Islam? 

Clearly, declaring an “Islamic Emirate” in Afghanistan, with an “Amir-ul-Mu’mineen” as the Head of Government will be the easier part. Beyond the optics of “Islamic Emirate”, the substance of a just order under Shari’ah Law requires a normative and institutional framework of individual responsibility, consultative decision-making, transparency and accountability. The Taliban claims to recognize the supremacy of the Shari’ah Law and promise to accord the rights of all groups under the Islamic normative framework, while so much ambiguity surrounds on what they mean by it, and how they plan to implement it.