Latest news with #ISIL-K
Express Tribune
10 hours ago
- Politics
- Express Tribune
The current situation in Afghanistan
The writer is an academic and researcher. He is also the author of Development, Poverty, and Power in Pakistan, available from Routledge Listen to article Although the international community is preoccupied with the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, and the lingering crisis triggered by Israeli aggressions in the Middle East, the situation further afield in the South Asian region remains tenuous as well. Besides the potential risk of another Indo-Pak flare-up, Pakistan's relations with Afghanistan are tense. The possibility of cross-border proxies engaging in terrorist attacks within Pakistan is a major threat. In addition to trying to secure the long and porous Af-Pak border, around 800,000 Afghans seeking refuge in Pakistan have been expelled since 2023. The latest UN report on Afghanistan describes the troubled state of our northwesterly neighbour. It points out how the security situation in Afghanistan has not stabilised despite the end of major military conflict between the US-led NATO forces and the Taliban. The Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant-Khorasan (ISIL-K) continues to defy the domination of the Taliban regime. Besides attacking 'soft targets' such as religious minorities, ISIL-K continues high-profile attacks, for example, at the Ministry of Urban Development and Housing earlier this year. Other opposition groups such as the National Resistance Front led by Ahmad Masood, and the Afghanistan Freedom Front, comprised of former government and military officials, are still operational. However, neither the ISIL-K nor these other opposition groups have the capability to threaten the Taliban's vice-like hold on the war-ravaged country. The above-mentioned UN assessment further notes how the new school year, which started in spring, has again barred girls and women from going to secondary schools or from pursuing higher education. Humanitarian needs in the country remain dire too. Yet, the UN's own humanitarian response plan for the current year, which aspired to support nearly 17 million Afghans barely managed to secure over 15 per cent of its proposed $2.42 billion budget. International funding, on which nearly half the Afghan population remains so dependent, has been shrinking, and it seems unlikely to rise again under present circumstances. Global US aid cuts have severely undermined UN affiliated efforts by the World Food Program, for instance, as well as the work of many major non-profits, such as the International Red Cross. Other rich western countries are not stepping up their commitments to compensate for the loss of American aid. Conversely, China's influence in Afghanistan has grown. China is currently trying to mediate the resumption of bilateral ties between Islamabad and Kabul, which had been suspended for nearly four years. Earlier this month, Pakistan announced that its charge d'affaires stationed in Kabul would be elevated to the rank of ambassador, and Kabul followed suit by announcing that its representative in Islamabad would also be upgraded to the same rank. Only a handful of countries — including China and Russia — have yet agreed to host Taliban-appointed ambassadors since their return to power in 2021. However, none of these countries, including Pakistan, has yet formally recognised the Taliban rulers. The Taliban have been in power for nearly four years now, so they have had ample time to make a transition from an insurgency movement to a more functional government. Their hardline and iron-fisted stance was initially explained as being motivated by their fear of losing the support of hardline elements who may have joined even more extreme outfits such as the ISIL-K. However, the Taliban regime now has no excuse. It must broaden its myopic approach, and make a genuine effort to deliver responsible governance, via incremental representation rather than continued repression. Otherwise, Afghanistan will remain a pariah state.
Express Tribune
16-02-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
The folly of trusting Taliban 2.0
Listen to article When the Taliban returned to power in Afghanistan in August 2021, there was optimism that the Taliban 2.0 would be different from their first term. When the Taliban government was overthrown by the US-led coalition after the 9/11 attacks, Afghanistan was known as a hub of different transnational terrorist groups including Al-Qaeda. Given the Taliban's close ties with such groups, the international community's main demand of the "reformed Taliban" was not to allow Afghan soil to become a sanctuary for terrorist organisations. The conduct of the Kabul regime during the last three and half years suggests there is no major difference between Taliban 1.0 and Taliban 2.0. Pakistan, once known as the main backer of the Taliban, was not happy with Kabul. Pakistan's concerns with regard to Afghanistan becoming a terrorist haven once again were not without merits. The latest report by the UNSC monitoring team prepared by independent experts sheds light on how the Afghan Taliban are still hand in glove with terrorist outfits. The report reveals that with over two dozen terrorist groups operating in Afghanistan, Member States assessed the security threat emanating from the country as a continuing driver of instability in the region and beyond. Despite the loss of territory and attrition among senior and mid-tier leadership figures, the presence of terrorist groups in Afghanistan posed a serious challenge to the stability of the country, as well as to the security of Central Asian and other neighboring states. Notwithstanding the measures taken by the Taliban to counter ISIL-K, the group represented the most serious threat to the de facto authorities, ethnic and religious minorities, the UN, foreign nationals and international representatives in Afghanistan. The sustained presence of ISIL-K and its activity in the country reflected the group's ideological commitment to its own brand, portraying itself as advancing the wider Khorasan, its ability to leverage relationships with particular communities and the Taliban's ineffective efforts to eliminate it. ISIL-K benefited from the Taliban's inability to protect itself against infiltration and corruption among its own ranks, despite raids conducted to arrest disloyal officials. The UN report also busted Afghan Taliban's narrative that Pakistan was using Daesh as a proxy. In its findings, the UN said ISIL-K suffered a significant setback in the summer, when Pakistani security forces foiled an attempt by its external operations branch to establish itself inside Pakistan, resulting in the arrest of high-profile operatives. The status and strength of Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan remained unchanged. The group sought to strengthen cooperation with regional terrorist organisations of non-Afghan origin (TTP, IMU, ETIM/TIP and Jamaat Ansarullah) operating in the country to expand its presence in neighbouring countries. According to the report, the Taliban maintained a permissive environment allowing Al-Qaeda to consolidate, with the presence of safe houses and training camps scattered across Afghanistan. The most significant part of the UN findings was about the banned TTP. The status and strength of TTP in Afghanistan had not changed. The ambition and scale of its attacks on Pakistan, though, had significantly increased, with over 600 attacks during the reporting period, including from Afghan territory. The Taliban continued to provide TTP with logistical and operational space and financial support, with one Member State noting that the family of Noor Wali Masoud received a monthly payment of 3 million Afghanis (roughly $43,000). TTP established new training centres in Kunar, Nangarhar, Khost and Paktika (Barmal) provinces while enhancing recruitment within TTP cadres, including from the Afghan Taliban. There was increased collaboration between TTP, the Afghan Taliban and Al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent, conducting attacks under the banner of Tehrik-e Jihad Pakistan. These startling revelations merit a legitimate question: was it a mistake by the international community to trust the Taliban?
