The National Resistance Front of Afghanistan (NRF), under the leadership of Ahmad Massoud, swiftly emerged as the foremost front after the Taliban’s resurgence, temporarily gaining control over a small part of the country’s geography. Subsequently, several fronts were established. While some faded away soon after their announcement, others persistently and resolutely continued their armed struggle against the Taliban regime. With the recent formation of a new organization named the United Front by young generals from the former army, the crucial question arises: will this front act as a cohesive force for other fronts, or will it further fragment the anti-Taliban efforts?
This new front was founded under the leadership of former Afghan Army General Sami Sadat, in collaboration with former Afghan Deputy Interior Minister for Security General Khoshal Sadat and Abdul Qayyum Rahimi. Each of these leaders had a significant presence in the realms of politics and warfare during the republic period, accumulating substantial experience. General Sami Sadat stands out as one of the few generals from the Republic Army with a commendable track record on the battlefield against the Taliban, at least at some point in time. Abdul Qayyum Rahimi, in addition to his political role, actively participated in combat against the Taliban, both as the governor of Herat and later as the governor of Logar. Unlike some other governors of Ashraf Ghani’s government, such as Mohammad Dawood Laghmani, Rahimi did not shy away from the battlefield. However, General Khoshal Sadat’s record was tarnished by a court case. Although he was eventually released and promoted to significant military positions, including senior security deputy of the Ministry of Interior, his negative record continued to haunt him. Nevertheless, he ostensibly stands among the anti-Taliban soldiers determined to fight alongside this group.
In a situation where most ethnic and party leaders have abandoned the field to the Taliban, taking no effective action for over two years, the formation of another organization and the fight against the Taliban demand attention. Any action undertaken by the people of Afghanistan against the Taliban, who have held tens of millions of Afghans hostage, is commendable. However, these actions must be deliberate and precise. The former military forces, now increasingly being imprisoned and targeted by the Taliban, are likely the ones military front leaders expect to form combat forces against the Taliban on the ground. The leadership members of the newly formed United Front are currently residing in the US, distancing themselves practically from the battlefield. In this scenario, discussing armed struggle implies investing in the blood of soldiers, some of whom fought for years under the command of these leaders and their comrades. During that time, these soldiers were the primary victims in the war against the Taliban and other terrorists. Now, it seems the military front leaders expect the same from them. Leading a war from a distance is arduous. If these generals were to enter Afghanistan’s territory, lead, and manage the hot war front against the Taliban, some former forces and new recruits might trust them and join the battlefield.
One of the most pressing issues at hand is trust. The political landscape in Afghanistan is marred by corruption, where deceit and hypocrisy are unfortunately seen as victories. Hypocrisy was intertwined with politics during the Republic era, and the Taliban have continued down the same path. This culture of hypocrisy and falsehood has eroded trust, the most significant social asset. The leaders of military fronts, such as the Freedom Front and the United Front, were once generals and high-ranking soldiers of the republican government. They were the ones who lost valuable ground and equipment worth billions of dollars to the Taliban, along with all the infrastructure and geography they possessed. A fundamental question that arises is, if these individuals couldn’t or didn’t stand against the Taliban despite having the resources, expertise, strength, and territory, how can they now fight and win from a distance, without even a square meter of land and limited resources? This skepticism is shared among the young forces of Afghanistan, who are expected to be the backbone of these fronts. Rebuilding this eroded trust is paramount.
Ethnic and party leaders, leaders of new military fronts, other political activists, and even the media must collectively work to rebuild this trust. These efforts can be effective when accompanied by a clear vision for the future, a vision shaped by a consensus on the post-Taliban political system.
Up to this point, few movements have openly discussed Afghanistan’s political future. The party established by former Afghan Vice President Sarwar Danish in exile is one of the new political entities that has openly addressed this issue. Among older political factions, the National Congress party has consistently advocated for a federal government. Recently, the party’s leader announced plans to conduct an online survey regarding the country’s future political structure. The Supreme Council of National Resistance for the Salvation of Afghanistan, the most populous front in terms of party leaders’ membership, advocates for a decentralized government in its declaration, although it does not specify the exact model of this decentralized system. In the same declaration, it is mentioned that the Islamic Dawa Party led by Abdul Rasul Sayyaf, and the Islamic Party led by Abdul Hadi Arghandiwal do not agree with this front’s proposed political structure.
During the republic regime, considerable discourse among politicians and practitioners focused on the nature of the political system. Some political activists regarded the centralized presidential system as a failure, while others defended it. Ultimately, except for a small circle close to Ashraf Ghani, the former president, most people, analysts, and politicians agreed that one of the factors contributing to the government’s downfall was the concentration of power in Kabul, particularly in the hands of a select few. Now, with numerous political and military fronts emerging against the Taliban, there is an urgent need to discuss the nature of the future system. It should not be considered taboo to debate the system’s nature, which is undeniably one of the unresolved and intricate issues facing the Afghan people. The time has come to deliberate on the post-Taliban structure. If the anti-Taliban political and military factions do not reach a consensus with the Afghan people regarding the future political system, they will struggle to craft a meaningful narrative. Without a robust and meaningful narrative, uniting the anti-Taliban forces appears challenging.
The proliferation of anti-Taliban political and military fronts has prevented the creation of a unified framework that can bring everyone together for more than two years. Each political organization has its distinct program. These groups not only disagree on methods to combat the Taliban but also lack consensus on the post-Taliban system. The same holds true for military fronts. Disagreements over tactics against the Taliban are likely the primary reason for the emergence of numerous small organizations, none of which can pose a significant challenge to the Taliban in the field. In this context, establishing yet another military front against the Taliban may not yield substantial results. If this front engages in active combat, it might resort to guerrilla warfare, similar to other fronts. Although this type of warfare wears down the Taliban and could eventually contribute to the downfall of their regime, it demands significant time, determination, and energy from the people and the fronts involved.
The people of Afghanistan suffer daily, enduring mental and physical torture at the hands of the Taliban. Forced displacement, property seizures, formal disputes favoring specific groups, extortion, arbitrary detentions, torture of men and women in Taliban prisons, and tragic shootings have placed unbearable pressure on the Afghan populace. In such dire circumstances, people anticipate more urgent and decisive political actions, possibly even military interventions. However, in a situation where numerous small military fronts are formed without agreement on fighting methods or the nature of the post-Taliban system, the creation of additional military and political groups is likely to further fragment the anti-Taliban effort.
It is evident that the unity of the anti-Taliban front hinges on a collective agreement regarding the future system. When a consensus is reached on the fundamental aspects of the post-Taliban political structure, diverse methods of struggle will not splinter this front. In such a scenario, military and non-violent political efforts will align, reinforcing a singular narrative centered on the post-Taliban system. Without this agreement, the formation of multiple military fronts and distinct political parties could lead to a situation akin to the 1970s. Even if they manage to overcome the Taliban, internal discord concerning the system’s structure and other critical issues may ensue.