Several movements opposing the Taliban have recently accelerated their activities, as evidenced by the convention of many international meetings. Moscow, which was not expected to embrace these trends immediately, hosted them on two occasions, ultimately resulting in a harsh reaction from the Taliban spokesperson: “Some countries want to revive the burnt beads.” At the same time, a picture of the meeting between Taliban Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi and Russia’s Ambassador to Afghanistan, Dmitri Zhirnov, spread out in the media, which was likely aimed at conveying concern to Moscow.
Ismail Khan’s reappearance on the scene and his participation in the 11th round of Herat Security Dialogue in Tajikistan and a surge in guerrilla attacks in some provinces, which are mainly claimed by the National Resistance Front of Afghanistan (NRF) and the Freedom Front increased the Taliban’s concern. In reaction to this, the Taliban Acting Ministry of Defense stated, “To those who hold gatherings to destroy the security of the country or to create disorder in the country, our message is that the Taliban leadership has exempted you, and the security forces are open to you.” Additionally, holding the third round of the Vienna meeting in Austria has slightly disturbed the comfort of the Taliban, resulting in eliciting reactions from Sher Mohammad Abbas Stanikzai, the group’s Political Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, “You have passed your test, your history has passed.”
Regarding the recent movements of the opposition fronts of the Taliban, it is important to pay attention to four important points:
1- Although the opposing forces of the Taliban have recently aroused the concern of their rivals, they should not be too proud. This is because considering their time, this is fleeting and they have not done anything special that can be counted on. The reference of some countries to these currents is not the outcome of their mobility and activity, but because the Taliban have not paid attention to the world’s demands. The stubbornness and inflexibility of the Taliban have caused some countries to host the opposing forces of this group, not that their cohesion and mobility have necessarily dazzled the hosts. For example, Rangin Dadfar Spanta, former National Security Advisor of Afghanistan, remarked in his speech at the Vienna meeting that the tyranny and totalitarianism of the Taliban compelled people to carry weapons. Even now, ignoring the demands of the world by the Taliban has obliged countries to host the opposition forces of the Taliban. The fact is that the world wants to deal with the Taliban who show flexibility, but this group is not even ready to fulfill this minimum expectation. The unintentional consequence of this situation is the attention of some countries to the opposing forces of this group.
2- Bargaining with the world and organizing international meetings is an important and effective matter. Equivalently, it improves the position of the forces opposing the Taliban and increases the Taliban’s worries. The Taliban are worried because they understand the importance of bargaining with the world. This group came to power not by force of arms but as a result of a political deal. Unless countries such as Russia, Iran, China, and some Central Asian republics had warmly welcomed the Taliban, it would have been unlikely that this group would come to power. Unless some members of the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council had made a political address for the Taliban and had given them money, it would not have been possible for them to take over the administration of Afghanistan.
Finally, unless the United States had signed a peace agreement with the Taliban and stopped supporting the previous government, this group would not call itself the undisputed ruler of Afghanistan. The fact that the republic system collapsed at once and was replaced by the Taliban regime was the result of the politics of the supporters and lobbyists of this group with the world. However, the role of the armed war of the Taliban also had its effect which cannot be denied.
Now, the turning point in the position of some countries and the darkening of the perspective of Taliban officialdom is a rare opportunity for the Taliban opposition forces to make optimal use of it. The consecutive meetings of the last few months evoke the viewer of the meetings held by some countries in the region in support of the Taliban before mid-August 2021, ultimately accelerating the process of the fall of the republic.
3- The thing that can lead to the desired result of these meetings is maintaining the unity of opinion and action among the opposing forces of the Taliban. There is unity of opinion among the opposing currents of the Taliban, but not unity of action. The opposition faction of the Taliban believes in saving Afghanistan from the Taliban, but they are in disagreement with the way to achieve this goal. For example, the NRF considers war against the Taliban to be more effective than dialogue, but the National Movement for Peace and Justice, led by Haneef Atmar and Masoom Stanikzai, completely denies the necessity of war against the Taliban. In the second part of the manifesto of this movement, it is stated: “A sustainable solution to the country’s current crises is not possible through military means, but only through intra-Afghan constructive dialogues based on the binding commitments of the Doha Peace Agreement between the US and the Taliban, which was signed in February 2020.” Additionally, the Supreme Council of National Resistance to Save Afghanistan, which consists of seemingly prominent Afghan politicians, has repeatedly emphasized dialogue with the Taliban. This is an emphasis that has not been answered.
Having quarrels and leadership disputes is another factor that has kept the Taliban’s opposition field scattered. Nonetheless, some political leaders are not satisfied with less and want to maintain the position they had in the past and not let new figures make space for them. A fragment of what Ahmad Massoud, the leader of the National Resistance Front, said in the third round of the Vienna meeting seems to state that the opposing forces of the Taliban must put aside differences, distances, and formalities. The term “ceremonies” refers to the arrangements that traditional leaders generally want to be considered in all circumstances.
Persistence of differences and not filling gaps will cause the meetings in Moscow, Dushanbe, Vienna, and others not to achieve the desired result. The rest of the countries are not ready to deal with the Taliban in the absence of a strong and democratic opposition. The only factor that can divert the world’s attention from the Taliban is the strength and cohesion of the opposing forces of this group.
4- The activities of the opposition forces of the Taliban should not be limited to attending international meetings and more efficient options should be in the spotlight. The change in the position of some countries is one issue, and the departure and stay of the Taliban is another issue. The fact is that the Taliban do not value dialogue with a force weaker than themselves. The more bitter reality is that the Taliban will not leave the field effortlessly. Bargaining with the world is indeed important in its place, but it cannot simply force the Taliban to change its position unless it considers a more effective option. What highlights the necessity of this is the totalitarianism of the Taliban and its disregard for dialogue.
It can be inferred from Stanikzai’s statements that the Taliban do not simply agree to dialogue with their opponents. This is even though some people refer to him as a pragmatic figure. In response to the Vienna meeting, he called the meeting of the opposition illegal. This statement shows that the Taliban not only do not allow the political activities of their opponents inside but also want to prevent them in the free world. He further added: “You have passed your exam; your date has expired.” The Taliban repeatedly refer to Afghan politicians as burnt nuts who, according to this group, have fallen from the eyes of the people and are not worthy of dialogue and participation in power. This Taliban official also noted that these meetings cannot destroy the morale of our fighters. In this warning statement, the necessity of dialogue is denied with the political forces of Afghanistan being called to challenge and cooperate in the armed battlefield. This so-called pragmatic figure of the Taliban ultimately invited everyone to follow their regime unquestionably, concluding, “Come to your homeland and die with honor under your flag.” Stanikzai wanted to tell his opposition forces that the Taliban are the ruler of Afghanistan forever and that they should not think of opposing it and not lose the opportunity to live under the flag of the so-called Islamic system. What he means by “honorable death” is dying under the Taliban flag. In other words, if the opposition figures of the Taliban die in other countries, in his opinion, they do not deserve to be honored.
The statements of this Taliban official reveal that sticking to mere dialogue with this group may not be very helpful. Therefore, it demands a focus on optimal options rather than dialogue. Having territory and a strong presence in the country, along with attending international meetings and lobbying, can be more effective than acting as a single option.
