The Taliban Case (Afganisthan)

 Introduction: The Taliban Case Study

The Taliban's complex history in Afghanistan serves as a critical case study exploring the intersection of insurgency, governance, and organized crime. Originating in the 1990s as a militant group aiming to enforce a strict interpretation of Sharia law, and initial seizure of power in 1996, through their strict first rule and subsequent overthrow linked to Al-Qaeda in 2001, their path has been tumultuous. The Taliban’s first regime (1996-2001) was characterized by extreme human rights violations, particularly against women and minorities.

A nearly twenty-year insurgency followed, marked by reliance on criminal funding streams like narcotics and extortion, culminating in their rapid return to control in August 2021. This resurgence brought renewed focus on their governance capacity amid devastating economic and humanitarian crises, continued international non-recognition, and profound concerns over human rights violations and accountability. This analysis dissects the Taliban phenomenon, examining its criminal dimensions, the legal and ethical implications, the effectiveness of responses, and systemic failures highlighted by their enduring presence.

Taliban Case Overview
- Emergence and Ideological Roots: The Taliban, meaning “students” in Pashto, emerged in the early 1990s during the Afghan civil war. Composed mostly of Pashtun students from Islamic religious schools (madrasas) in Pakistan, the group sought to impose a strict interpretation of Islamic law (Sharia) across Afghanistan. The Taliban movement originated in southern Afghanistan around 1994, primarily drawing from Pashtun religious students and former anti-Soviet fighters during the post-Soviet civil war.

- Initial Rise to Power: They captured the capital, Kabul, in 1996 and declared the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, controlling most of the country by 1998.

- First Period of Rule (1996-2001): This era was marked by the enforcement of a strict interpretation of Islamic law, leading to severe restrictions on women's rights (education, employment, public movement), public executions and amputations, and the prohibition of various media and cultural activities.

- Al-Qaeda Affiliation: The Taliban regime provided safe haven to Osama bin Laden and the Al-Qaeda terrorist network before and after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the US.

- US-Led Intervention (2001): Following the 9/11 attacks, a US-led coalition invaded Afghanistan in October 2001 after the Taliban refused demands to extradite bin Laden, leading to the swift collapse of their regime.

- Protracted Insurgency (c. 2002-2021): After being ousted, the Taliban regrouped and conducted a nearly two-decade-long insurgency against the new Afghan government and international (primarily US/NATO) forces present in the country.
-  Insurgency and Criminal Operations (2002–2021): Following their fall, the Taliban re-emerged as an insurgent group. They funded their operations through a variety of criminal enterprises, including the narcotics trade-Afghanistan accounted for over 80% of global opium production-and illegal mining and taxation in controlled areas. By 2020, they controlled or contested over 50% of Afghan districts.
- Funding Sources: During the insurgency, documented Taliban revenue streams included taxes on opium production and trade, extortion rackets presented as local taxation, control over some mining operations, and external donations.

- Doha Agreement (February 2020): The United States and the Taliban signed an agreement setting a timeline for the withdrawal of US troops in return for Taliban counter-terrorism commitments and an agreement to enter negotiations with the Afghan government.

- Rapid Takeover (2021): Concurrent with the final withdrawal of US and NATO forces, the Taliban launched a nationwide offensive in the summer of 2021, resulting in the rapid collapse of the Afghan National Security Forces and the fall of Kabul on August 15, 2021.

- Current De Facto Governance: Since August 15, 2021, the Taliban exercise effective control over Afghanistan, again proclaiming the Islamic Emirate.

- Post-2021 Governance and Human Rights Violations: Since regaining power, the Taliban have reinstated many of their previous policies, especially targeting women’s rights. Secondary education for girls has been banned, women are restricted from working in most sectors, and public punishments have resumed. The humanitarian crisis has worsened, with over 28 million Afghans in need of aid, yet international recognition remains withheld due to rights violations.

- International Terrorism Designation: The Taliban is designated as a terrorist organization by several countries, including Russia, Canada, and Kazakhstan. While the United States designates the affiliated Haqqani Network as a terrorist organization, it does not currently classify the Taliban as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO), instead engaging with them diplomatically on limited matters.

The Taliban (Afghanistan) Case: Nexus of Insurgency, Governance, and Criminality

Analyzing the Taliban solely as a political or insurgent group overlooks the deeply integrated nature of criminal enterprise within their operations, both historically and in their current governance role. Their activities blur the lines between political violence, state control, and organized crime.

1. Nature and Scope of Criminal Activities:

The Taliban have long been involved in a wide array of illicit activities, primarily to fund their insurgency and exert control:

- Narcotics Trafficking: This is arguably their most significant historical revenue stream. Afghanistan produces the vast majority of the world's illicit opium. The Taliban profited immensely by taxing opium poppy cultivation, heroin production laboratories, and trafficking routes transiting through Afghanistan. While officially banning poppy cultivation after taking power in 2021, the economic desperation and lack of alternatives make enforcement deeply challenging, and historical involvement suggests a complex, potentially ongoing, relationship with the trade.

- Extortion and Illegal "Taxation": During their insurgency, the Taliban imposed "taxes" (ushr and zakat, often interpreted coercively) on local populations, businesses, transportation, and even development projects within areas they controlled or contested. This system of extortion provided consistent, localized funding.

- Kidnapping for Ransom: Both Afghans and foreigners have been targets of kidnapping by Taliban elements or affiliated groups, generating substantial income.

- Illegal Resource Exploitation: Controlling territory allowed the Taliban to profit from unregulated or illegal mining of resources like lapis lazuli, talc, chromite, and marble, as well as timber smuggling, often in collusion with local commanders and smuggling networks.

- Systematic Violence and Human Rights Abuses: While often framed politically, actions like targeted killings of government officials, security personnel, journalists, activists, and ethnic/religious minorities, as well as widespread suppression (particularly of women's rights), can constitute war crimes and crimes against humanity under international law. Their use of suicide bombings and indiscriminate attacks causing civilian casualties also falls into this category.

2. Involvement of Criminal Organizations:

The Taliban itself functions as the primary organization facilitating these crimes. Its hierarchical structure, while often decentralized at the local level, enabled systematic exploitation. Local commanders often had significant autonomy in managing illicit revenue streams within their territories, sometimes creating friction but ultimately contributing to the movement's overall financial health. There were undeniable overlaps and symbiotic relationships with transnational drug trafficking networks and regional smuggling rings, leveraging established routes and contacts. The Haqqani Network, a powerful faction integrated within the Taliban leadership, has long been designated a terrorist organization and linked to sophisticated criminal and terrorist financing operations.

3. Legal and Political Responses:

- Pre-August 2021:

a. Domestic: The Afghan government, supported by international forces (US/NATO), attempted counter-narcotics operations (poppy eradication, interdictions), counter-terrorism strikes targeting leadership and financiers, and efforts to curb illegal mining and extortion. However, these were hampered by corruption, limited state reach, and the Taliban's resilience.

b. International: Numerous countries and the UN designated the Taliban and associated groups (like the Haqqani Network) as terrorist organizations. Sanctions were imposed on leaders and financiers. International forces directly targeted Taliban operations. The International Criminal Court (ICC) initiated investigations into potential war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by all parties in the conflict, including the Taliban.

- Post-August 2021:

a. Domestic: The Taliban are now the de facto authority. They claim to be cracking down on crime (e.g., the poppy ban, harsh punishments for theft). However, their justice system lacks due process and international recognition, and their own members are implicated in ongoing abuses and potentially illicit activities. There is no independent legal check on their power.

b. International: No country has formally recognized the Taliban government. Existing sanctions largely remain, leading to the freezing of Afghan central bank assets abroad. International aid is severely constrained, channeled primarily through NGOs to avoid legitimizing or directly funding the Taliban regime. The ICC investigation continues, though hampered by access issues. Political engagement is cautious and focused on counter-terrorism assurances, humanitarian access, and human rights concerns.

4. Impact:

- Individuals: Countless Afghans have suffered direct harm through violence, displacement, extortion, and the loss of livelihoods linked to conflict and instability fueled by illicit economies. The post-takeover era has seen devastating impacts, particularly on women and girls (loss of education, employment, freedom of movement), ethnic and religious minorities (persecution, violence), and those associated with the former government (reprisals, fear).

- Society: Decades of conflict and the pervasive illicit economy have eroded social trust, undermined the rule of law, normalized violence, and entrenched corruption. The Taliban's return solidified deep societal divisions and led to a significant brain drain as educated professionals fled. The current humanitarian crisis is exacerbated by the regime's international isolation and internal policies.

- Economy: The Afghan economy, already fragile, has been devastated. The reliance on the illicit drug trade distorted development for decades. Post-takeover, the freezing of assets, cessation of most international aid (which previously propped up the government budget), banking sector collapse, and sanctions have triggered widespread poverty, food insecurity, and economic contraction. While the Taliban attempt to generate revenue through customs and taxation, the formal economy is crippled, pushing many towards negative coping mechanisms, potentially including the illicit economy despite official bans.

Legal & Ethical Dimensions
- Legal Dimensions
1. International Humanitarian Law (IHL) Violations

IHL, also known as the laws of armed conflict, applies during situations of armed conflict. While the intensity of large-scale conflict decreased after the August 2021 takeover, situations of non-international armed conflict (NIAC) persist, and IHL rules governing conduct in NIAC and occupation remain relevant, particularly concerning treatment of persons and conduct of any ongoing hostilities.

Key IHL principles allegedly violated include:

a. Principle of Distinction and Prohibition of Attacks on Civilians: IHL requires parties to a conflict to distinguish between combatants and civilians, and between military objectives and civilian objects. Attacks directed against civilians are prohibited.

- Violation Example: Reports emerged following the takeover of targeted killings and enforced disappearances of former members of the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces (ANDSF) and government officials, who are considered civilians or persons hors de combat (out of combat) once they cease resistance. Such actions constitute direct attacks on civilians or violence against persons taking no active part in hostilities.

- Specific Laws Violated: Common Article 3 to the four Geneva Conventions (which applies to NIACs and is considered customary international law), Additional Protocol II (where applicable), and customary IHL rules prohibiting attacks on civilians and murder of persons hors de combat.

b. Prohibition of Torture and Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment: Common Article 3  the Geneva Conventions explicitly prohibits violence to life and person, murder, mutilation, cruel treatment, and torture against those not actively participating in hostilities.

- Violation Example: Numerous accounts detail arbitrary detentions, beatings, and torture of individuals perceived as opponents, including journalists, activists, and former officials, in Taliban custody .

- Specific Laws Violated: Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, customary IHL.

c. Prohibition of Collective Punishments: IHL forbids punishing individuals or groups for acts they did not personally commit.

- Violation Example: There have been reports of communities, particularly ethnic minorities like the Hazara, facing reprisals or punitive actions based on perceived affiliation with opposition groups or past government structures. This can include forced displacement or restrictions amounting to collective punishment.

- Specific Laws Violated: Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, Additional Protocol II (Art. 4(2)(b)), customary IHL.

2. International Human Rights Law (IHRL) Violations

IHRL applies at all times, including during armed conflict (complementing IHL) and peacetime. As the de facto authority, the Taliban are expected to uphold the human rights obligations stemming from treaties Afghanistan has ratified and customary international law. Their actions demonstrate widespread violations:

a. Right to Non-Discrimination (especially Gender Discrimination): IHRL guarantees equality and prohibits discrimination on grounds such as sex.

- Violation Example: The Taliban have implemented systematic discrimination against women and girls, severely restricting their rights to education (banning secondary and university education for girls), work (barring women from most jobs, including NGO work), freedom of movement (requiring a mahram or male guardian for travel), and participation in public life (Amnesty International, 2023; UN Women, 2023). These policies represent a clear violation of fundamental non-discrimination principles.

- Specific Laws Violated: International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR, Art. 2, 3, 26), International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR, Art. 2, 3), Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. Although the Taliban may reject these treaties, Afghanistan is a state party, and many provisions reflect customary international law.

b. Right to Education: IHRL recognizes the right of everyone to education.

- Violation Example: The ongoing ban preventing girls from attending secondary school and university directly contravenes this right.

- Specific Laws Violated: ICESCR (Art. 13), Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC, Art. 28).

c. Freedom of Expression, Assembly, and Association: IHRL protects the rights to hold opinions without interference, express them freely, gather peacefully, and associate with others.

- Violation Example: The Taliban have violently suppressed peaceful protests (especially those led by women), arbitrarily detained journalists and critics, shut down numerous media outlets, and dismantled civil society organizations.
- Specific Laws Violated: ICCPR (Art. 19, 21, 22).

d. Right to Life and Prohibition of Arbitrary Detention: IHRL protects the inherent right to life and prohibits arbitrary arrest and detention.

- Violation Example: Reports of extrajudicial killings, summary executions (as mentioned under IHL), and widespread arbitrary arrests and detentions without due process target perceived opponents, former officials, and activists
- Specific Laws Violated: ICCPR (Art. 6, 9).

Ethical Dimensions

Beyond specific legal breaches, the Taliban's actions represent profound ethical failings:

1. Violation of Human Dignity: The systematic oppression of women and girls, restrictions on basic freedoms, and violent repression fundamentally violate the inherent dignity and worth of individuals. Denying education and work based solely on gender is an ethical affront to equality and human potential.

2. Abdication of Responsibility: Entities exercising governmental power have an ethical responsibility to protect the populations under their control, ensure basic welfare, and uphold justice. The Taliban's actions often prioritize ideological rigidity over the well-being and rights of Afghan citizens, particularly vulnerable groups.

3. Erosion of Justice and Rule of Law: The disregard for due process, prevalence of arbitrary detentions, extrajudicial killings, and lack of accountability mechanisms undermine the very concept of justice, creating a climate of fear and impunity.

4. Betrayal of Trust and Basic Governance: By reneging on initial promises (e.g., regarding women's rights and amnesty for former officials) and imposing harsh rule, the Taliban have ethically failed to establish governance based on consent, fairness, or respect for fundamental human values
5.  Exploitation of Religion for Political Control

The Taliban’s interpretation of Islamic law has been criticized as a tool for political dominance rather than genuine religious observance. This raises questions about the ethical misuse of religious authority for oppressive governance, violating the ethical tenets of Islam itself, which advocates justice (‘Adl) and compassion (Rahmah).

Evaluation of Legal and Law Enforcement Responses to the Taliban Case
1. Pre-August 2021 - Afghan National Efforts:

- Despite substantial international aid, Afghan National Defense and Security Forces (ANDSF) demonstrated limited effectiveness against the Taliban insurgency, hampered by systemic corruption, capacity constraints, and political interference.

- Domestic law enforcement and counter-narcotics strategies failed to establish widespread rule of law or significantly disrupt Taliban revenue streams.

2. Pre-August 2021 - International Military Intervention (US/NATO):

- Achieved initial tactical success by removing the Taliban regime in 2001 but ultimately failed in the strategic goal of fostering a stable, self-reliant Afghan state capable of ensuring its own security.

- The prolonged counter-insurgency did not prevent the Taliban's eventual return to power.

3. Pre-August 2021 - International Legal Mechanisms:

- United Nations sanctions targeting Taliban leaders caused operational difficulties but did not fundamentally weaken the group or compel significant behavioral changes.

- The International Criminal Court's (ICC) investigation into atrocities faced considerable political barriers and practical challenges, resulting in limited progress on accountability for alleged Taliban crimes during this phase.

4. Post-August 2021 - Taliban De Facto "Law Enforcement":

- The Taliban effectively assert control and have reduced certain types of crime in some areas, often employing harsh public punishments and suppressing dissent.

- This system operates without due process, transparency, or adherence to international human rights law, particularly infringing upon the rights of women, girls, and minority groups.

5. Post-August 2021 - International Legal & Political Responses:

- Measures like non-recognition, targeted sanctions, and freezing central bank assets have successfully isolated the Taliban regime internationally and contributed to a severe economic crisis .

- However, this economic and political pressure has shown limited effectiveness in persuading the Taliban de facto authorities to reverse major policy decisions violating human rights, such as the bans on women's education and employment.

- Prospects for international legal accountability (e.g., via the ICC) face even greater obstacles under the current regime.

Legal and law enforcement responses, whether originating domestically within Afghanistan or internationally, have consistently fallen short of achieving lasting stability, justice, and comprehensive human rights protection in relation to the Taliban.

Systemic Failures and Loopholes in Legal Systems Relevant to the Taliban Case
- Weak Domestic Rule of Law (Pre-2021 Afghanistan): The formal legal system established under the previous Afghan Republic suffered from systemic corruption, lack of capacity, political interference, and limited reach, particularly in rural areas. This created a vacuum often filled by traditional justice or Taliban shadow courts, undermining state legitimacy and effectiveness.

- Enforcement Gaps in International Humanitarian Law (IHL): IHL relies heavily on parties to the conflict for implementation and enforcement. Holding non-state actors like the Taliban accountable for IHL violations during the insurgency faced significant challenges, primarily limited to potential future war crimes prosecutions rather than immediate enforcement mechanisms. Monitoring and verification were also consistently hampered by access constraints.

- Challenges in Applying International Human Rights Law (IHRL) to De Facto Authorities: While customary IHRL obligations apply regardless of recognition, the lack of formal recognition of the Taliban government creates loopholes in utilizing treaty-based monitoring and accountability mechanisms (e.g., reporting to treaty bodies), which depend on state cooperation. Enforcement relies heavily on political pressure and sanctions rather than established legal procedures applicable to recognized states.

- Limitations of International Criminal Justice (ICC): The ICC faces practical and political hurdles. Jurisdiction can be contested, and securing custody of high-level suspects within Afghanistan for prosecution remains a significant obstacle. Furthermore, the principle of complementarity (ICC acts only when national systems are unwilling or unable) is complicated when the national system itself is under the control of the group implicated in alleged crimes. Political pressures from powerful states have also historically influenced the scope and pace of investigations.

- Ineffectiveness and Unintended Consequences of Sanctions: International sanctions regimes, while intended to pressure targeted entities, often suffer from loopholes allowing circumvention (e.g., through illicit economies or support networks). They can also lead to severe, unintended humanitarian consequences for the general population, creating ethical dilemmas and potentially hindering essential aid delivery without necessarily achieving the desired political changes.

- Sovereignty as a Barrier to Intervention: The principle of state sovereignty is frequently invoked to resist international scrutiny or intervention, even in cases of severe human rights violations, limiting the effectiveness of international legal norms intended to protect populations.

- Conflict Between Counter-Terrorism Measures and Humanitarian Action: National and international counter-terrorism legal frameworks, particularly those involving material support prohibitions, can inadvertently create legal risks or operational barriers for humanitarian organizations seeking to provide impartial aid in areas controlled by listed groups like the Taliban, potentially creating legal loopholes that impede assistance.

Policy Brief: Preventing State Collapse and Insurgency Recurrence – Lessons from Afghanistan

To: International Policymakers, National Governments, Development Agencies

From: Concerned Analysts

Date: October 26, 2023

Subject: Strengthening Legal Frameworks and Law Enforcement to Prevent Crises Akin to the Taliban's Resurgence

Executive Summary:

The trajectory of the Taliban in Afghanistan underscores critical failures in national governance, international intervention strategies, and the application of legal/enforcement frameworks. Preventing similar occurrences requires a paradigm shift towards proactive, integrated strategies focused on strengthening state legitimacy, addressing root causes of conflict including illicit economies, and ensuring meaningful accountability. This brief recommends prioritizing anti-corruption, accessible justice, targeted counter-criminal financing, context-specific capacity building, and robust international cooperation on accountability.

Problem Statement:

The return of the Taliban highlights the catastrophic consequences when weak governance, endemic corruption, inaccessible justice systems, and insurgency funded by vast illicit economies converge. International and national legal and law enforcement responses were ultimately insufficient to foster a resilient state, establish the rule of law, or prevent the resurgence of an entity violating fundamental human rights. Future interventions must avoid repeating these failures by addressing systemic weaknesses proactively.

Analysis of Systemic Weaknesses:

- National Level: Pervasive corruption eroded state legitimacy and diverted resources. Formal justice systems were often inaccessible, slow, or perceived as biased, creating space for alternative (insurgent) systems. Law enforcement lacked capacity, reach, and often, public trust. Counter-narcotics strategies failed to curb production or address the underlying economic drivers.

- International Level: Interventions often prioritized short-term security over long-term, sustainable institution-building. Support sometimes inadvertently fueled corruption. Sanctions and legal actions lacked consistent enforcement or failed to cripple insurgent financing networks effectively. Accountability mechanisms (like the ICC) faced significant practical and political barriers.

Policy Recommendations:

1. Prioritize Good Governance and Anti-Corruption:

- Condition significant aid on demonstrable progress in tackling high-level corruption within partner governments.

- Support transparent public financial management systems and independent oversight bodies.

Invest in strengthening sub-national governance structures to improve service delivery and state reach.

2. Strengthen Rule of Law and Access to Justice:

- Focus on building independent, accessible, and trusted judicial systems, potentially integrating or appropriately linking formal and customary justice mechanisms where applicable.

- Invest in long-term police reform centered on professionalization, accountability, and community engagement, not just tactical training.

- Support legal aid services to enhance access for marginalized populations.

3. Combat Illicit Economies Holistically:

- Move beyond crop eradication/interdiction to address the full illicit economy value chain, including financial networks, money laundering, and precursor chemical control.

- Integrate counter-narcotics/crime efforts with sustainable alternative livelihood programs and rural development initiatives.

- Enhance international intelligence sharing and cooperation specifically targeting the financial nodes of insurgent and criminal networks.

4. Promote Context-Specific and Locally-Owned Solutions:

- Shift from externally imposed models to supporting locally driven initiatives for governance, justice, and security sector reform, respecting local context while upholding international standards.

- Ensure interventions address, rather than exacerbate, local grievances and power dynamics.

Reinforce International Accountability Mechanisms:

- Provide robust political and financial support to international courts (like the ICC) investigating atrocities in fragile states.

- Support universal jurisdiction principles for prosecuting international crimes domestically where appropriate.

- Invest in early and systematic documentation of human rights violations and war crimes to facilitate future accountability processes.

Preventing future crises requires a long-term commitment to building legitimate, accountable states resilient to corruption and insurgency. This involves a fundamental shift towards integrated strategies that prioritize good governance, accessible justice, tackling illicit economies at their roots, and ensuring that impunity for grave crimes does not prevail. Implementing these recommendations offers a pathway towards greater stability and respect for human rights in fragile contexts.

Conclusion

The Taliban's enduring presence in Afghanistan exemplifies the complex interplay between insurgency, governance, and organized crime. Analysis reveals persistent violations of international humanitarian and human rights law, alongside profound ethical failings in their exercise of power. Critically, both pre- and post-2021 legal and law enforcement responses—spanning domestic efforts, international military intervention, sanctions, and criminal justice mechanisms—proved largely ineffective in fostering sustainable peace, ensuring accountability, or protecting fundamental rights. This case exposes deep systemic failures in national rule of law structures and significant loopholes and enforcement gaps within international legal frameworks. Preventing similar outcomes necessitates a fundamental shift towards integrated, long-term strategies focused on legitimate governance, addressing illicit economies at their source, and reinforcing mechanisms for meaningful accountability for grave violations.

References
1. Amnesty International. (2023). Afghanistan: A year of Taliban repression and regression. https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/asa11/5793/2023/en/

2. Amnesty International. (2023). The Taliban’s war on women: The crime against humanity of gender persecution in Afghanistan. Amnesty International Ltd. https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/asa11/6738/2023/en/

3. Esposito, J. L. (2016). Islam: The straight path (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.

4. Human Rights Watch. (2022, July 28). Questions and answers: The International Criminal Court and Afghanistan. https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/07/28/questions-and-answers-international-criminal-court-and-afghanistan

5. International Committee of the Red Cross. (1949). The Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949. https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/war-and-law/treaties-customary-law/geneva-conventions/overview-geneva-conventions.htm

6. International Committee of the Red Cross. (n.d.). IHL implementation and enforcement. Retrieved February 21, 2024, from https://www.icrc.org/en/war-and-law/ihl-implementation-and-enforcement

7. International Crisis Group. (2023, September 14). Afghanistan: Finding the right path for engagement (Briefing 89/Asia). https://www.crisisgroup.org/asia/south-asia/afghanistan/b89-afghanistan-finding-right-path-engagement

8. Norwegian Refugee Council. (2022, February 9). Principle at risk: The impact of counterterrorism measures on humanitarian action. https://www.nrc.no/resources/reports/principle-at-risk--the-impact-of-counterterrorism-measures-on-humanitarian-action/

9. Rashid, A. (2000). Taliban: Militant Islam, oil and fundamentalism in Central Asia. Yale University Press.

10. Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Harvard University Press.

11. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. (2020). Corruption in conflict: Lessons from the U.S. experience in Afghanistan. https://www.sigar.mil/

12. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. (2021, October 30). What we need to learn: Lessons from twenty years of Afghanistan reconstruction (SIGAR-21-46-LL). https://www.sigar.mil/pdf/lessonslearned/SIGAR-21-46-LL.pdf

13. UN Women. (2023, August 14). Gender Alert No. 4: Women’s rights in Afghanistan one year after the Taliban takeover. https://www.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/publications/2023/08/gender-alert-no-4-womens-rights-in-afghanistan-one-year-after-the-taliban-takeover

14. UNAMA (United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan). (2022). Human rights in Afghanistan. https://unama.unmissions.org

15. United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan. (2023, September). Human rights situation in Afghanistan: 1 May - 31 August 2023. https://unama.unmissions.org/human-rights-reports

16. United Nations. (1966a). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Treaty Series, 999, 171). https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx

17. United Nations. (1966b). International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Treaty Series, 993, 3). https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/cescr.aspx

18. United Nations. (1979). Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (Treaty Series, 1249, 13). https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/cedaw.aspx

19. United Nations. (1989). Convention on the Rights of the Child (Treaty Series, 1577, 3). https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx

20. United Nations Human Rights Council. (2023, September 6). Situation of human rights in Afghanistan: Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Afghanistan (A/HRC/54/21). https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G23/197/18/PDF/G2319718.pdf?OpenElement

21. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2021). Drug situation in Afghanistan 2021: Latest findings and emerging threats. UNODC Research. https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/Afghanistan/Afghanistan_brief_Nov_2021.pdf

22. UNHCR. (2023). Afghanistan situation update. https://www.unhcr.org/

23. U.S. Department of State. (2022). Foreign terrorist organizations. Bureau of Counterterrorism. https://www.state.gov/foreign-terrorist-organizations/

24. United States Institute of Peace. (2022, February). Lessons from the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan. USIP Senior Study Group Final Report. https://www.usip.org/publications/2022/02/lessons-us-withdrawal-afghanistan

25. World Bank. (2022, October). Afghanistan development update: Navigating a deepening economic crisis. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/afghanistan/publication/afghanistan-development-update-navigating-a-deepening-economic-crisis

26. World Bank. (2023, October). Afghanistan development update: Uncertainty after fleeting stability. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/afghanistan/publication/afghanistan-development-update-uncertainty-after-fleeting-stability-october-2023

AUTHOR CREDENTIALS

NAME: FARJANA AKTER

COURSE: LL.B

UNIVERSITY: LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY

REGISTRATION NUMBER: 12202691

UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF: DR. HARMANJIT KAUR