
Afghan women, trapped between recognition & repression
|
Abdur Razzaq is a Peshawar-based radio and print journalist. He tweets @TheAbdurRazzaq All facts and information are the sole responsibility of the writer
whatsup
linkded
Zarghuna Safai*, a 20-year-old resident of Kabul, was a second-semester student at a local medical institute when the Taliban barred women and girls from studying in medical training centres across Afghanistan.
She had enrolled to pursue a diploma in midwifery, a profession she chose with a clear goal: to serve Afghan communities, particularly women and children, who are increasingly vulnerable in a country grappling with a deteriorating healthcare system. 'The rates of maternal and infant mortality are alarmingly high,' she said, 'and without skilled female medical professionals, those numbers will only continue to rise.'
But her ambitions were abruptly cut short when the Taliban's Ministry of Health ordered all medical institutions to shut their doors to female students. Safai recalls the day the news broke and how quickly her dreams unravelled. 'When the institute closed to women, I and many of my classmates felt hopeless. Some of us are now struggling with mental health issues, constantly worried about our future, which feels more uncertain than ever,' she said.
This ban was formalised in December 2024, when the Taliban government officially prohibited women's enrolment in medical training programs such as midwifery, nursing, dentistry and medical laboratory sciences. The move added another layer to a string of systematic restrictions aimed at erasing women from public life in Afghanistan.
These developments come at a time when the Taliban are seeking international legitimacy. In a controversial diplomatic move, Russia became the first country to officially recognise the Taliban government.
Breaking the diplomatic ranks
On July 3, 2025, the Russian state-owned news agency TASS reported that Moscow had formally recognised the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan — the name the Taliban use for their regime. That same day, Deputy Foreign Minister Andrey Rudenko accepted the diplomatic credentials of Gul Hassan, the Taliban's newly appointed ambassador to Russia.
The decision sparked widespread outrage among Afghan women both inside the country and in the diaspora. Many view it as a betrayal of justice and a step that could embolden the Taliban to further tighten their grip on Afghan society, especially its women.
Talking about the diplomatic development, Shinkai Karokhail, a veteran Afghan women's rights activist currently based in Canada, expressed deep concern over the consequences of Russia's recognition.
'The Taliban are already politically isolated on the global stage. For them, this recognition is a major diplomatic victory,' she said. 'But for Afghan women, who are already living under extreme restrictions, it is a devastating blow.'
Karokhail believes Russia's move could have a ripple effect across the region. 'After Moscow, other regional powers might be tempted to follow suit and establish formal diplomatic relations with the Taliban, ignoring the regime's repressive policies and human rights violations,' she warned.
She also pointed out the potential economic fallout. 'Many Western countries that provide humanitarian assistance to Afghanistan — including aid for education, health, agriculture, and food security — may now reconsider or reduce their support,' she said. 'Russia and China, even if they increase their engagement, do not have the capacity to replace this aid. The Afghan people will suffer, especially women and children.'
The international community has so far withheld recognition of the Taliban regime due to its failure to form an inclusive government, its systematic repression of women, and its continued violation of international human rights obligations. Russia's move has broken the international consensus and weakened the leverage the global community had in pressuring the Taliban to change.
The Taliban regime remains unrecognised by the [wider] international community because of its non-inclusive governance, severe restrictions on women's rights and the ban on girls' education,' Karokhail emphasised. 'By officially legitimising the Taliban, Russia has broken that global consensus, posing yet another threat to the future of Afghan women,' the veteran women's rights activist lamented.
Seeds of a long-term crisis
Since the Taliban's return to power on August 15, 2021, following the withdrawal of United States and NATO forces, the regime has steadily rolled back women's rights. In September 2021, girls were barred from attending school beyond the sixth grade. Later, universities were declared off-limits to women, followed by a ban on female employment in both public institutions and NGOs. The Taliban have justified these bans by citing their interpretation of Islamic law, a claim widely disputed by Islamic scholars across the Muslim world.
The consequences of these policies extend far beyond gender discrimination. A United Nations report estimates that the economic cost of excluding women from the workforce is approximately $1 billion annually, nearly five per cent of Afghanistan's total GDP. The country now ranks 177th out of 177 on the Georgetown Institute's Women, Peace and Security Index, making it the worst place in the world to be a woman.
For Afghan women like Shamla Niazai, a journalist now living in exile, Russia's decision is especially heartbreaking. 'By refusing to recognise their government, the international community was applying pressure on the Taliban to safeguard the rights of women and to allow them access to education and employment,' she said. 'That pressure gave hope to Afghan women. A hope that has now been shattered by Russia's decision.'
Niazai warned that the long-term effects of bans on girls' and women's education would be catastrophic for public health. 'If these bans continue, Afghanistan will not have enough trained female doctors, nurses, or paramedics. That means more women and children will die from preventable causes,' she said.
She also raised concerns about forced migration. 'Many families, even those with limited means, will try to leave the country so their daughters can get an education. If the Taliban will not change their policies, people will leave — not just for opportunity, but for survival.'
Silenced, unemployed
The media landscape in Afghanistan has also been deeply impacted. After the fall of Kabul, many independent news outlets either shut down or drastically scaled back their operations. Female journalists have been among the worst hit.
Mujda Azizi, a Kabul-based reporter, lost her job soon after the Taliban takeover due to funding cuts and the regime's repressive media policies.
'It wasn't just a job for me. It was how I supported my entire family,' she said. 'Now, only a handful of women remain in media organisations, and most of us cannot find work.'
Her experience is echoed by others. Kashmala Ahmadzai*, another journalist still living in Afghanistan, said women's mobility has been severely curtailed.
'Under the previous government, we could go shopping, visit tourist spots or go to beauty salons. That's all gone now,' she said. 'We're confined to our homes. Our public existence is vanishing.'
According to the Afghan Independent Journalists Union (AIJU), 255 of the country's 665 media outlets have closed since August 2021. This has left over 7,000 media professionals unemployed, including more than 2,000 women. A 2024 survey by the AIJU found that around 4,808 media professionals are still working in Afghanistan — including 744 women — but under increasingly difficult conditions. Despite the emergence of 40 new media outlets under the Taliban, most are subject to intense censorship, financial limitations and restrictive cultural policies.
Ahmadzai also noted that since the Taliban banned girls' education, cases of early-age marriages have risen across the country. 'These are girls who should be in school, developing their minds and dreams. Instead, they're being married off — and that will have a lasting impact on their mental health and their future.'
A wider shift in the making?
On July 4, just one day after Russia announced its recognition of the Taliban, the Chinese government publicly welcomed the decision. Observers believe this may be the start of a broader shift in regional diplomacy.
Sher Hasan, a Moscow-based Afghan political analyst, said that Russia has maintained informal relations with the Taliban for years. 'Even when United States and NATO troops were stationed in Afghanistan, Russia kept its channels open,' he said. 'Moscow viewed Western presence in the region as a security threat — one that could escalate drug trafficking and militant activity in its neighbouring states.'
Now, as both Russia and the Taliban face international sanctions, Hasan believes they are seeking to strengthen bilateral ties as a strategy to mitigate shared vulnerabilities. 'They see mutual benefit, especially in combating drug trade and cross-border militancy,' he said.
The elusiveness of wider acceptance
However, recognition by a few regional powers is unlikely to prompt widespread acceptance. 'Unless Western nations — particularly the United States — change their stance, Pakistan and many others are unlikely to move toward recognition,' Hasan added.
Karokhail echoed this point, urging regional actors to remember their international responsibilities. 'Yes, countries have national interests,' she said. 'But they have also signed human rights conventions and treaties. They have a legal and moral obligation to ensure that Afghanistan doesn't become a black hole for human dignity.'
For their part, the Taliban insist that girls' education in Afghanistan is a domestic matter and that human rights are being upheld under 'Sharia and national law'. In public statements, the regime has claimed that the media is free and that women's rights are being protected — assertions widely contradicted by reports from inside the country.
As Afghan women face increasing restrictions, loss of livelihoods, and isolation from the world, many continue to speak out at great personal risk, hoping their voices will still reach those in power.
*Names have been changed to ensure safety of sources
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Business Recorder
3 hours ago
- Business Recorder
New $250 ‘visa integrity fee' to raise cost for visiting USA
Foreign travellers will soon have to pay a new 'visa integrity' fee, which is $250 initially and is likely to increase over the years based on inflation, to visit the United States. The new levy was imposed under a provision of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), a domestic policy bill, which has recently been enacted by the Trump administration. The bill is expected to affect hundreds and thousands of visitors, as the fee applies to nearly all nonimmigrant visa categories, CNN reported. Those visiting as tourists and for business purpose, international students and others visiting temporarily will have to pay this fees. As per the State Department data, the US issued around 11 million nonimmigrant visas last year. Tourists and businessmen belonging to various European countries and Australia as well as other such countries which part of the Visa Waiver Program will not require to obtain visas for stays up to 90 days. As per the bill's provision, fees could be refunded to the travellers who comply with their visa conditions upon completion of their visit. In a recent post regarding the new policy, immigration lawyer Steven A. Brown, a partner at Houston-based Reddy Neumann Brown PC, described the fee as a 'refundable security deposit.' Brown said that the process for getting a refund is still not clear though. In an email to CNN, Brown said in terms of the purpose of the fee, 'it's hard to say.' 'Generally, immigration fees are to cover the expense of adjudication or issuance,' but he stated that the refund provision could mean reimbursing all of the fees submitted. 'In a perfect world, there would be no overstays or visa violations.' Quoting Brown as saying CNBC also reported that the fee has not been implemented as yet. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the agency establishing the new fee, believes it will reduce overstays by travellers, Forbes reported. The DHS has so far not specified about the refund process or any other aspects of the policy's rollout. 'The visa integrity fee requires cross-agency coordination before implementation,' a DHS official told CNN. A State Department spokesperson said the levy was imposed 'to support the administration's priorities of strengthening immigration enforcement, deterring visa overstays, and funding border security.' The provision in the bill says fees that aren't reimbursed will be 'deposited into the general fund of the Treasury'. Meanwhile, the US Travel Association has raised concerns about the potential negative impact on tourism, especially with upcoming international events. The association called the fee 'a giant leap backwards.'


Business Recorder
3 hours ago
- Business Recorder
New $250 ‘visa integrity fee' to raise costs for visiting USA
Foreign travellers will soon have to pay a new 'visa integrity' fee, which is $250 initially and is likely to increase over the years based on inflation, to visit the United States. The new levy was imposed under a provision of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), a domestic policy bill, which has recently been enacted by the Trump administration. The bill is expected to affect hundreds and thousands of visitors, as the fee applies to nearly all nonimmigrant visa categories, CNN reported. Those visiting as tourists and for business purpose, international students and others visiting temporarily will have to pay this fees. As per the State Department data, the US issued around 11 million nonimmigrant visas last year. Tourists and businessmen belonging to various European countries and Australia as well as other such countries which part of the Visa Waiver Program will not require to obtain visas for stays up to 90 days. They will be required to pay while applying for the visas, with no fee waivers offered. As per the bill's provision, fees could be refunded to the travelers who comply with their visa conditions upon completion of their visit. In a recent post regarding the new policy, immigration lawyer Steven A. Brown, a partner at Houston-based Reddy Neumann Brown PC, described the fee as a 'refundable security deposit.' Brown said that the process for getting a refund is still not clear though. In an email to CNN, Brown said in terms of the purpose of the fee, 'it's hard to say.' 'Generally, immigration fees are to cover the expense of adjudication or issuance,' but he stated that the refund provision could mean reimbursing all of the fees submitted. 'In a perfect world, there would be no overstays or visa violations.' Quoting Brown as saying CNBC reported that the fee has not been implemented as yet. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the agency establishing the new fee, believes it will reduce overstays by travellers, Forbes reported. The DHS has so far not specified about the refund process or any other aspects of the policy's rollout. 'The visa integrity fee requires cross-agency coordination before implementation,' a DHS official told CNN. A State Department spokesperson said the levy was imposed 'to support the administration's priorities of strengthening immigration enforcement, deterring visa overstays, and funding border security.' The provision in the bill says fees that aren't reimbursed will be 'deposited into the general fund of the Treasury'. Meanwhile, the US Travel Association has raised concerns about the potential negative impact on tourism, especially with upcoming international events. The association called the fee 'a giant leap backwards.'


Business Recorder
6 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Zelenskiyy says Ukraine, Russia to hold peace talks in Turkey on Wednesday
Peace talks between Ukraine and Russia - the first in seven weeks - are planned for Wednesday in Turkey, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiyy quoted a senior Kyiv official as saying on Monday. Zelenskiyy appealed earlier in the day for greater momentum in negotiations. Russia's state TASS news agency quoted a source in Turkiye as saying the talks would take place on Wednesday. The RIA news agency, also quoting a source, said they would take place over two days, Thursday and Friday. The Kremlin said it was waiting for confirmation of the date of the talks but said the two sides were 'diametrically opposed' in their positions on how to end the war. Zelenskiyy said in his nightly video address that he spoke with Rustem Umerov, secretary of Ukraine's National Security and Defence Council, on Monday in preparation for a prisoner exchange and another meeting with Russia in Turkiye. 'Umerov reported that the meeting is planned for Wednesday. More details will follow tomorrow,' Zelenskiyy said. Umerov, previously defence minister, was appointed to his current role last week and headed the first two rounds of talks with Russia. Ukraine has backed U.S. calls for an immediate ceasefire. Moscow says certain arrangements must be put in place before a ceasefire can be introduced. Russian forces have launched sustained attacks on Ukrainian cities in recent weeks, including missiles and hundreds of drones on Monday night that killed two people and injured 15. Ukraine has also launched long-range drone attacks. Zelenskiyy said: 'The agenda from our side is clear: the return of prisoners of war, the return of children abducted by Russia, and the preparation of a leaders' meeting.' Russian President Vladimir Putin, who is under increasing pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump to show progress towards ending the conflict, turned down a previous challenge from Zelenskiyy to meet him in person. Putin has said he does not see Zelenskiyy as a legitimate leader because Ukraine, which is under martial law, did not hold new elections when his five-year mandate expired last year. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said: 'There is our draft memorandum, there is a draft memorandum that has been handed over by the Ukrainian side. There is to be an exchange of views and talks on these two drafts, which are diametrically opposed so far.' No ceasefire breakthrough Ukraine and Russia have held two rounds of talks in Istanbul, on May 16 and June 2, that led to the exchange of thousands of prisoners of war and the remains of dead soldiers. But the two sides have made no breakthrough towards a ceasefire or a settlement to end almost three and a half years of war. The Kremlin says Ukraine must abandon four regions Moscow says have been incorporated into Russia. Ukraine 'shouldn't target' Moscow: Trump Trump said last week he would impose new sanctions in 50 days on Russia and countries that buy its exports if there is no deal before then to end the conflict. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot, speaking in Kyiv after talks with Zelenskiyy, noted Russia's refusal to implement an immediate ceasefire as well as its 'maximalist' demands. 'Discussions must begin, but on a basis that respects the interests of both parties, because diplomacy is not submission,' he told a news conference. 'And diplomacy begins with meetings at the level of heads of state and government, something Volodymyr Zelenskiyy has repeatedly called for.' Barrot said he favoured devising an even tougher sanctions package if Putin did not agree to a ceasefire.