The mandate of the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) has faced serious criticism from various domestic factions as well as member states of the United Nations Security Council since the collapse of the republic. In March 2026, unlike previous practice, the mission’s mandate was extended for only three months to allow for an evaluation of its performance during that period. The UN Security Council is expected to issue a resolution within the next week that will, to some extent, clarify the future of the mission.
Ahead of this important decision, the Afghanistan Dialogue and Vision Project (DVP), an independent initiative based at the Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies, University of Notre Dame, conducted a series of extensive consultations last month with dozens of participants, including political and social activists, private sector experts, women, youth, victims’ groups, religious scholars, and academics both inside and outside the country. These discussions revealed a significant finding: the people of Afghanistan are deeply dissatisfied with UNAMA’s current performance, yet at the same time view its departure as detrimental to their interests.
Why Is There Dissatisfaction with UNAMA?
The reasons behind these criticisms appear to differ among various stakeholders and, in some cases, are even contradictory. Domestically, the Taliban seem to regard UNAMA’s core political mandate as a form of interference in Afghanistan’s internal affairs and prefer that the organization’s activities be limited to technical work and humanitarian assistance. In contrast, other political movements and segments of Afghanistan’s society accuse UNAMA of failing to fulfill its primary mission. According to these groups, UNAMA’s fundamental responsibility is to advance its political mandate and facilitate national dialogues aimed at determining the country’s future.
At the international level, donor countries and members of the Security Council, particularly the United States, tend to view the issue through the lens of cost-effectiveness and efficiency. In their view, the substantial expenses required to sustain UNAMA are not matched by tangible results and achievements. They believe that every mission should eventually come to an end and that this mission should likewise be approaching its conclusion.
Three Scenarios for UNAMA’s Future
What appears clear is that UNAMA is unlikely to remain in its current form. Given the factors outlined above, three possible scenarios can be envisioned for the future of the mission:
First Scenario: UNAMA’s structure and staffing are significantly reduced to lower its high operational costs.
Second Scenario: UNAMA’s mandate is extended for another nine months to one year with certain modifications. During this period, the mission’s effectiveness would undergo a “comprehensive evaluation,” based on which decisions would be made regarding downsizing or some form of closure.
Third Scenario: UNAMA’s mandate ends during the consultations taking place this month, and the organization ceases its activities in 2026.
Among these options, the second scenario, a short-term extension accompanied by reforms, appears to be the most likely path. This approach would provide Security Council members with sufficient time over the coming year to engage in detailed negotiations regarding the mission’s future and operational specifics.
Three Reform Proposals
Participants in the consultations conducted by the Afghanistan Dialogue and Vision Project believe that if UNAMA’s mandate is to be renewed, the current model should not simply be replicated. The reform proposals published by the Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies at the University of Notre Dame can be summarized in three areas:
Ensuring Stability in UNAMA’s Mandate: UNAMA currently serves as the only “independent” body monitoring developments in Afghanistan. For this reason, its continuation remains important in the absence of an alternative mechanism. However, the mission requires sufficient stability to be effective, something that cannot be expected from short-term resolutions. The consultations suggest that mandates lasting at least one year are preferable to three-month extensions. Nevertheless, UNAMA’s success depends on focusing on its core purpose: facilitating political dialogue and providing Good Offices.
Strengthening UNAMA’s Political Role and Appointing a New Representative: Security Council resolutions in recent years have supported emphasizing UNAMA’s political role. For example, the upcoming resolution could formally incorporate the findings of the 2023 Independent Assessment Report and stress progress toward a constitutional order. To advance this sensitive mission, the appointment of a new Special Representative of the Secretary-General (SRSG) with substantial political stature and a deep understanding of Afghanistan’s politics and culture, while remaining independent of neighboring countries with potential conflicts of interest, is considered an urgent necessity. Filling this position, which has remained vacant for the past six months, should be accelerated.
Establishing a Two-Track Engagement Process: Since the Taliban oppose dialogue with other factions, particularly those residing outside the country, the United Nations should establish a two-track engagement mechanism. Under such an arrangement, engagement with groups based abroad could be managed through the UN headquarters in New York or a regional office.
In addition, progress in technical areas such as private sector development and combating drug trafficking should be directly linked to progress in human rights and the political process, preventing these sectors from becoming a pretext for avoiding national dialogue. The full text of these recommendations is available for further reference.
Conclusion
The decision regarding UNAMA’s future represents another test for the international community’s approach toward Afghanistan. The reality is that authority over UNAMA’s mandate rests with the United Nations Security Council, but it is the people of Afghanistan who bear the positive and negative consequences of these decisions in their daily lives. For this reason, participants in the consultations referenced above, while expressing appreciation to member states that listen to the voices of the people of Afghanistan, also declared their readiness to cooperate in developing strategies and implementing these recommendations. This willingness to cooperate demonstrates that the people of Afghanistan want United Nations activities to become a genuine instrument for achieving lasting peace in Afghanistan.
You can read the Persian version of this report here:
چرا افغانستان به ماموریت سازمان ملل معترض، اما به ماندن آن نیازمند است؟
