The performance of the United Nations representation in Afghanistan during the two years following the fall of the republic failed to meet the expectations of most Afghan people and garnered numerous criticisms. These critiques asserted that the office in Kabul had singularly prioritized normalizing relations with the Taliban, overlooking critical issues. According to detractors, the UN office in Kabul turned a blind eye to the realities of Afghanistan, neglecting political participation, failing to address ethnic divides, not bridging the growing gap between the government and the people, and disregarding public involvement in determining their fate, among other prevailing dysfunctions. In the eyes of many political observers, this office appeared to serve the interests of the Taliban and failed to alleviate the suffering of the Afghan people. In practice, it played no role in improving the situation for the benefit of the Afghan people, contributing to increasing despair across various spectrums and becoming one of the factors behind the rising waves of migration towards neighboring countries and even Europe.
With the United Nations Security Council’s approval to appoint a Special Representative for Afghanistan, a new step has been taken toward revitalizing the organization’s mission in Afghanistan. This development has sparked hope among many political forces, excluding the Taliban. These hopes stem from the understanding that, despite Faridun Sunirli-Oghlu’s cautious analysis and report on the situation in Afghanistan, they at least reflect some aspects of the reality in the country and underscore the imperative of overcoming the prevailing political impasse. Without addressing these issues, unrest is likely to escalate, paving the way for even greater crises.
The most evident and challenging aspect of Afghanistan’s reality is that an armed group has seized control of the country’s destiny. Whether this dominance is the consequence of two decades of relentless war and massacres or the result of the shortcomings of the Doha agreement and the negligence of its consequences, the entanglement of the people in the grip of an armed group presents difficulties that everyone easily understands. An armed group, especially of a religious nature, disregards the need for a constitution, and governance according to the law becomes subjective, as they consider Sharia as sufficient and can interpret and reinterpret it at their discretion. When the law is subject to such a tragic fate, other vital areas such as human rights, essential services, transparency, responsiveness to the people, civic activities, elimination of discrimination, and the like become much more chaotic and terrifying.
In the report of the Special Representative, certain aspects of this grim and opaque situation have been underscored. To maintain an open door for negotiations with the Taliban, the report adopts the softest possible tone. Although many political and civil forces in Afghanistan anticipated that the Afghan people would not become victims of others’ political considerations and that their fundamental problems would be openly discussed while defending their rights, the limited points and references in this report hold special importance. It has managed to kindle sparks of hope in Afghanistan’s politics. From the perspective of numerous Afghan political activists, this step has the potential to break the current deadlock and gradually bring about transformation, freeing Afghanistan’s politics from the current impassable bottleneck.
The significance of appointing a Special Representative lies in indicating that the current governance in Kabul, in its present form and appearance, is unacceptable not only to the people of Afghanistan but also to the global community. Countries worldwide are reluctant to legitimize the control of an armed extremist group, fearing that it could set a precedent encouraging similar groups in neighboring countries and even across the entire region, extending to the Middle East and Africa. Recognizing and legitimizing a power that does not adhere to international conventions or globally accepted norms for governance and does not prioritize the satisfaction of its citizens can normalize similar groups in neighboring countries and potentially trigger waves of unrest. Deviating from international norms and agreements, especially in the face of an armed and extremist group, will establish a dangerous precedent in global politics with unpleasant consequences for many. Overcoming such governance is a crucial step, in any form possible, towards normalizing conditions acceptable to Afghanistan.
Furthermore, in Faridun Sunirli-Oghlu’s proposal, the importance of a constitution is highlighted as the initiation of a process indicating a roadmap for the country’s future. Emphasizing the constitution, restraining the powers through legal mechanisms, defining the government’s obligations to the people, delineating the fundamental rights of citizens, emphasizing the separation of powers to prevent tyranny, and addressing the foundations of a nation’s political and social life can be the first fundamental step towards overcoming the crisis. If the Taliban do not value this aspect of the matter, all other political forces consider it important, and its significance in the eyes of the global community is evident. The absence of a constitution and the lack of mechanisms to curb the boundless powers of the current rulers, especially the leader of this group, are significant concerns associated with the governance structure in Afghanistan.
There is no doubt that unraveling the complexities of a dilemma like Afghanistan is not an easy task, and one cannot expect rapid and extensive transformations solely through the appointment of a Special Representative and the initiation of a series of consultations. What matters is breaking the current deadlock, initiating dialogues between opposing parties, and, through extensive discussions among political and civil forces, outlining a path towards a better future. Naturally, the Taliban will not welcome any action aiming to change the current situation, and they will exert all efforts to obstruct change and reform, especially considering their historical refusal to accept any other force in Afghanistan and their unwillingness to engage with any faction. This group seeks everything for itself and is unwilling to share any stake in the country with others. Authoritarianism and exclusivity are fundamental characteristics of the Taliban and, undoubtedly, crucial factors contributing to the crisis in Afghanistan.
The immense bloodshed over the past three decades has been, in part, a result of the Taliban’s exclusivity and their reluctance to reach agreements with the rest of the Afghan people. To compel the Taliban to accommodate the desires of the people and the global community, more significant actions are required, and the UN Special Representative must be realistic in this regard. In his roadmap, he should consider that if the Taliban do not yield to the desires of the people and the international community, what effective measures will follow? Putting an end to the current frustration and despair of the Afghan people should be a priority.