When the Taliban took over Kabul in 2021, many believed they would resume their fundamentalist authoritarian policies of the 1990s. Those forecasts have primarily come true, despite certain Taliban factions’ promises of moderation and change. The interim government appointed early in their tenure is still in place, and the militant group is yet to establish a permanent lasting governance structure. However, they have quickly reestablished many hardline regulations, such as excluding women from public life and going hard against any opposition.

The reaction of Western governments and the international community to the idea of a Taliban government, however, is much more intense than before. At the time of the Doha Talks, the West was keen to ensure that the Taliban would not harbour terrorist organisations. Afghanistan has been in a state of war since the 1970s. From the Soviet invasion in 1979 to the United States invasion in 2001, the country has been engaged in deadly armed conflicts. Full-scale war might be gone from Afghanistan, but uncertainty still looms over Kabul. With the Taliban in power, there have been incidents of armed fighting against other banned outfits, such as the IS-K.

There is the issue of recognition as well, where the international community does not plan to recognise the regime in Kabul as a Dejure government anytime soon. In simple terms, peace has not returned even after the hasty US withdrawal from Afghanistan. The governing track
record of the Afghan Taliban is overwhelmingly tied to war, violence, and militancy.

The Afghan Taliban have led to re-establishing the war-torn country’s political order. From 2001 to 2021, the vast majority of the Afghan population functioned under a quasi-democratic political system, having a marginally democratic outlook with functional political parties and a weak but effective electoral strategy. The transition of the Afghan political system from its quasi-democratic structure to a highly fundamental authoritarian regime has added to the uncertainty among the people of Afghanistan. The Taliban’s governing track record would provide little assurance for the stability and security of the country as their rise to power has resulted in more ethnic disputes because the Taliban are an
overwhelmingly Pashtun-dominated entity.

The Taliban government comprises primarily well-known Taliban figures. The international community has debated the acceptability of the Afghan Taliban government time and again. The discussion, however, is occurring outside the context of the Taliban’s intentions and within the framework of their governing track record. The question remains the same: is an Afghan Taliban government acceptable?

This acceptability of the Afghan Taliban government is a highly complex idea. It highlights the fact that the Taliban have governed Afghanistan before. Thus, they have the experience, knowledge and narrative to govern. The question is whether will the Taliban style of governance be acceptable to the international community and, more importantly, the people of Afghanistan, who somehow got used to the idea of an incomplete but functional democracy.

The interim setup in Kabul would not be able to function for a short time if it does not command the will of the Afghan people and recognition by the international community. Taliban will have to return to their old businesses, constituting narcotics, smuggling, weapons, and sometimes hosting and harbouring internationally proscribed militants if they fail to achieve the consent of the local populace and the international community.

There are many international reactions to the Afghan Taliban government. These reactions can be categorised into two main groups. First, some are concerned with the possibility of the government’s intentions, such as the Taliban’s aims to impose Sharia law and establish an Islamic caliphate. However, these reactions are often coupled with the thought that the government is unlikely to succeed. Secondly, some responses are concerned that the government will become a source of extremism and violence, such as in the case of Pakistan and India. In both cases, the fear is that an Afghan Taliban government could become a source of international terrorism, particularly cross-border attacks.

Pakistan has repeatedly raised concerns over the inaction of the Afghan Taliban against Tehreek e Taliban Pakistan (TTP) hideouts in Afghanistan. Islamabad has also shown its will to conduct cross-border airstrikes and counter-terrorism operations against TTP. The civil and military leadership decided not to pursue talks with the TTP, and the same had been conveyed to the Afghan Taliban. The Afghan Taliban acted as mediators in the earlier peace efforts as the interim government refused to evict the TTP by force. The TTP has emerged as a significant issue between Pakistan and the interim Afghan government. Islamabad was hopeful that Kabul, under the new regime, would deal with the TTP differently than the previous Indian-influenced Ghani administration. However, Pakistan’s support for the Afghan Taliban backfired.

The political implications of the Afghan Taliban attaining power are massive. Firstly, it is a setback for long-term development and peace in the region. Secondly, the government has been viewed as a source of extremism and violence. Thirdly, perhaps most importantly, the international community has not accepted the government. Due to the Taliban’s lack of international recognition, diplomatic ties, and their government’s inability to govern, they would be shunned further from the international community. Ultimately, the question of whether or not an Afghan Taliban government is acceptable cannot be easily answered. However, due to the Taliban’s track record, the lack of international support, and the threat to the people of the country and the region, it is clear that an Afghan Taliban government would not be accepted until they change their character and not just the outlook.