Five years after the Taliban returned to Kabul, the Islamic Emirate has achieved what it sought militarily but not politically: control without broad-based consent. The regime has consolidated its authority across most of Afghanistan and reduced the scale of the nationwide war that preceded its takeover.
Yet territorial control has not translated into legitimacy. Instead, growing restrictions on Afghan society, continued international isolation and renewed armed resistance raise a central question: can a regime sustain stability when it governs through coercion rather than inclusion?
The Taliban’s strongest claim to legitimacy has been security. Compared with the years of insurgency and international military intervention, many Afghans now experience fewer conventional battlefield confrontations.
The United Nations has also acknowledged that the Taliban has strengthened its control over the country. However, security alone cannot substitute for political legitimacy.
Afghanistan’s current governance structure excludes meaningful political participation, rejects electoral competition and concentrates authority around the Taliban’s leadership. The regime’s closed political system has left few institutional channels through which citizens can influence decisions or challenge authority.
The legitimacy deficit is particularly visible in the treatment of women and girls. Afghanistan remains the only country where girls are barred from secondary education and women from universities.
UNESCO estimates that approximately 2.4 million Afghan girls have been excluded from secondary education since 2021. The restrictions have also carried economic consequences, limiting women’s participation in the workforce and weakening the country’s human-capital base.
The Taliban’s governance model has also failed to resolve Afghanistan’s broader economic and humanitarian vulnerabilities. Poverty, unemployment, food insecurity and dependence on humanitarian assistance continue to constrain the country’s recovery.
International isolation compounds these problems. Although some states maintain diplomatic engagement with Kabul, the Taliban has not achieved broad international recognition, while UN sanctions on designated Taliban-associated individuals and entities remain in place.
More significantly, the perception of Taliban military dominance is being challenged by renewed resistance. Anti-Taliban groups remain fragmented and do not yet constitute a nationwide alternative government. Nevertheless, attacks have increased in several northern provinces.
The National Resistance Front has claimed a rocket attack against a Taliban army corps in Kunduz, while opposition fighters have reportedly targeted Taliban positions in Andarab and Badakhshan. Recent attacks and the killing of senior local officials demonstrate that the regime’s security control is not absolute.
Yet the expansion of resistance should not be interpreted as an imminent Taliban collapse. The opposition remains divided, lacks a unified political and military command, and has limited capacity to challenge the Taliban nationally.
A recent UN assessment similarly described resistance groups as fragmented and unable, at that stage, to pose a major threat to regime stability.
The more consequential development is therefore not the immediate prospect of regime overthrow, but the emergence of a persistent security challenge that could gradually undermine the Taliban’s claim that it has delivered lasting national stability.
The next phase of Afghanistan’s political trajectory will depend on whether the Taliban can move from coercive consolidation toward inclusive governance.
Five years of rule have demonstrated that military victory can establish authority, but authority alone does not create legitimacy.
Unless the regime addresses political exclusion, restores fundamental rights and creates meaningful avenues for representation, resistance ,armed and civil war will continue to find space.
Afghanistan may therefore remain stable enough to avoid state collapse, yet too repressive and contested to achieve genuine political stability.
Five years on, the Taliban has secured the state it captured in 2021. It has yet to secure the consent required to make that control durable.
Five Years of Taliban Rule: Governance Without Legitimacy and Resistance Expanding
Five years after the Taliban returned to Kabul, the Islamic Emirate has achieved what it sought militarily but not politically: control without broad-based consent. The regime has consolidated its authority across most of Afghanistan and reduced the scale of the nationwide war that preceded its takeover.
Yet territorial control has not translated into legitimacy. Instead, growing restrictions on Afghan society, continued international isolation and renewed armed resistance raise a central question: can a regime sustain stability when it governs through coercion rather than inclusion?
The Taliban’s strongest claim to legitimacy has been security. Compared with the years of insurgency and international military intervention, many Afghans now experience fewer conventional battlefield confrontations.
The United Nations has also acknowledged that the Taliban has strengthened its control over the country. However, security alone cannot substitute for political legitimacy.
Afghanistan’s current governance structure excludes meaningful political participation, rejects electoral competition and concentrates authority around the Taliban’s leadership. The regime’s closed political system has left few institutional channels through which citizens can influence decisions or challenge authority.
The legitimacy deficit is particularly visible in the treatment of women and girls. Afghanistan remains the only country where girls are barred from secondary education and women from universities.
UNESCO estimates that approximately 2.4 million Afghan girls have been excluded from secondary education since 2021. The restrictions have also carried economic consequences, limiting women’s participation in the workforce and weakening the country’s human-capital base.
The Taliban’s governance model has also failed to resolve Afghanistan’s broader economic and humanitarian vulnerabilities. Poverty, unemployment, food insecurity and dependence on humanitarian assistance continue to constrain the country’s recovery.
International isolation compounds these problems. Although some states maintain diplomatic engagement with Kabul, the Taliban has not achieved broad international recognition, while UN sanctions on designated Taliban-associated individuals and entities remain in place.
More significantly, the perception of Taliban military dominance is being challenged by renewed resistance. Anti-Taliban groups remain fragmented and do not yet constitute a nationwide alternative government. Nevertheless, attacks have increased in several northern provinces.
The National Resistance Front has claimed a rocket attack against a Taliban army corps in Kunduz, while opposition fighters have reportedly targeted Taliban positions in Andarab and Badakhshan. Recent attacks and the killing of senior local officials demonstrate that the regime’s security control is not absolute.
Yet the expansion of resistance should not be interpreted as an imminent Taliban collapse. The opposition remains divided, lacks a unified political and military command, and has limited capacity to challenge the Taliban nationally.
A recent UN assessment similarly described resistance groups as fragmented and unable, at that stage, to pose a major threat to regime stability.
The more consequential development is therefore not the immediate prospect of regime overthrow, but the emergence of a persistent security challenge that could gradually undermine the Taliban’s claim that it has delivered lasting national stability.
The next phase of Afghanistan’s political trajectory will depend on whether the Taliban can move from coercive consolidation toward inclusive governance.
Five years of rule have demonstrated that military victory can establish authority, but authority alone does not create legitimacy.
Unless the regime addresses political exclusion, restores fundamental rights and creates meaningful avenues for representation, resistance ,armed and civil war will continue to find space.
Afghanistan may therefore remain stable enough to avoid state collapse, yet too repressive and contested to achieve genuine political stability.
Five years on, the Taliban has secured the state it captured in 2021. It has yet to secure the consent required to make that control durable.
SAT Commentary
SAT Commentary
SAT Commentaries, a collection of insightful social media threads on current events and social issues, featuring diverse perspectives from various authors.
Recent
Five Years of Taliban Rule: Governance Without Legitimacy and Resistance Expanding
Five years after the Taliban returned to Kabul, the Islamic Emirate has achieved what it sought militarily but not politically: control without broad-based consent. The
Accountability Without Transparency in Afghanistan: UNAMA’s Assessment of the Taliban Security Sector
A new UNAMA report, published in August 2026, examines whether Afghanistan’s Taliban administration has established meaningful accountability mechanisms for its security forces nearly five years
Pakistan’s Religious Right
Religious ‘Right’ in Pakistan Pakistan has a legacy of religious, political and societal influences from the greater Middle East, Central and South Asia and the
The Unfinished Work of Independence
Tomorrow, Pakistan will mark seventy-nine years of independence.The green and white flag will rise over homes, schools, government buildings and public squares. Patriotic songs will
Five Years On, Afghanistan Is Still in Survival Mode
Five years after the Taliban returned to Kabul, Afghanistan is no longer facing the same nationwide war that defined much of the previous two decades.