The two-day meeting, hosted by the UN secretary general, was due to discuss increasing engagement with Afghanistan and a more coordinated response to the Central Asian nation.
In the aftermath of the Taliban’s return to power in Afghanistan in 2021, the international community has wrestled with its approach to the country’s new rulers.
On the first day of the convention in gas-rich Qatar, which hosted the Taliban during years of peace talks with the United States, the Kabul government’s participation remained unclear.
Though the Afghan foreign ministry did not immediately respond to requests for comment on plans to attend, the secretary general of the Norwegian Refugee Council wrote on X, formerly Twitter, that it was “disappointing that the Taliban declined to attend the special envoy meeting”.
“We urge all sides to do more to hammer out deals that can benefit the long-suffering Afghan people,” Jan Egeland said.The UN had extended an invitation to the Taliban authorities to participate, following their exclusion from the first meeting in May.
Organisers pushed to include voices from civil society inside and outside Afghanistan including women and from the media and businesses at the Doha convention.
A senior diplomatic source told AFP ahead of the meeting the Taliban government had said it would only attend as the sole representative of Afghanistan at the convention — excluding civil society representatives.
A second demand was that the Taliban government delegation meet with the UN secretary general and be given an opportunity to present its position, the source said on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of discussions.
On Saturday, Taliban authorities said they had reiterated their conditions to the United Nations, emphasising that their participation in the UN-convened talks would be “unbeneficial” if those conditions were not met.
The Taliban’s government in Kabul has not been officially recognised by any other government since it took power and the administration has imposed a strict interpretation of Islam, with women subjected to laws characterised by the UN as “gender apartheid”.
Many governments, international organisations and aid agencies cut off or severely scaled back their funding for Afghanistan in response — causing a serious knock to the already struggling economy.
‘Inclusive meetings’
The meeting in Qatar will also consider the recommendations of a UN independent assessment of Afghanistan, which has suggested recognition of the Taliban authorities be tied to the removal of restraints on women’s rights and access to education.
The assessment, backed by Western nations, also recommends the appointment of a UN special envoy, which the Taliban government has also rejected.
UN special rapporteur on human rights in Afghanistan Richard Bennett said he hoped the meeting in Doha “leads to a series of meaningful and inclusive meetings among key stakeholders” that would “prioritise discussions about human rights, particularly women’s rights”.
Ahead of the gathering in Doha, EU special envoy for Afghanistan, said the meeting offered a “significant opportunity […] to hold meaningful discussions” and “engage on a way forward […] in a UN-led process”.
The UN’s Working Group on Women, Peace and Security said the meeting in Doha “offers an important opportunity for the UN, the Security Council and the international community to reaffirm that the rights of Afghan women are not negotiable”.
“Respect for women’s rights must be a core objective of the international community’s engagement on Afghanistan, and a priority agenda item for discussions in Doha,” it added in a statement.
On February 18, UN Secretary-General António Guterres will host a meeting of special envoys for Afghanistan in Doha, Qatar. The Taliban had earlier confirmed it will be sending a delegation to the event, which will also be attended by other Afghan political stakeholders and representatives of the Afghan civil society.
This gathering is being held to accommodate one of the recommendations presented by the UN Special Coordinator for Afghanistan Feridun Sinirlioğlu in his November report (PDF) on the state of affairs in the country.
Although the report highlighted the need to focus on confidence-building measures between the international community and Afghan stakeholders, which would imply identifying areas of possible cooperation that are not politically sensitive, some difficult issues are bound to be brought up at the meeting. Prime among them would be the matter of the formation of an inclusive government in Afghanistan. This demand has been reiterated by regional and international actors as one of the key preconditions for the recognition of the Taliban government.
Seeking inclusive governance after a conflict is a routine diplomatic intervention. The idea is that inclusion is vital in peace-building, as it can resolve grievances produced by exclusion and prevent the re-emergence of violence.
However, the term evokes unpleasant memories for the Afghan people because it reminds them of the Bonn Conference that followed the US invasion of Afghanistan where the exiled and reviled warlords of the country were given a clean slate and an opportunity to participate in the subsequent power-sharing arrangement.
This inclusion of the warlords effectively meant impunity for crimes and played a vital role in the failure of the subsequent attempts at state-building in Afghanistan. The warlords were also spoilers of the peace process with the Taliban, the failure of which led to the eventual fall of Kabul to Taliban forces in August 2021.
The Taliban has used the negative sentiment the term invokes in the population to its advantage, refusing to succumb to international pressure to include other Afghan political forces in its government. It has made clear that it considers such pressure an attempt to repeat the experience of the Bonn Conference. This is not an unpopular move, as the Afghan people dread the return of warlordism to Afghanistan.
Some of these exiled warlords who still have eyes on power include Abdul Rashid Dostum who has been accused of sexually assaulting political opponents and of committing war crimes during the US invasion and Abdul Rasul Sayyaf who was one of the warlords responsible for the Afshar massacre of 1993 in which up to 1,000 people were butchered in a western district of Kabul.
Ahmad Massoud, the son of the late Ahmad Shah Massoud, who was also involved in the Afshar massacre and the Afghan civil war, has also recently emerged as a political player. He is currently attempting to rally exiled warlords and allies of his father to fight against the Taliban while seeking funding from foreign governments.
Apart from the warlords, there is a great number of former Afghan officials of the previous government who have expressed a desire to come back to power. Many of them are being included in conversations on the future of Afghanistan despite standing accused of large-scale corruption and even drug trafficking.
It is not clear if any of the warlords or other problematic political players will participate in the meeting in Doha. The invitation process has not been transparent and it seems attempts were made to include some controversial figures, as the Taliban warned it would not attend if the selection of the Afghan participants was not agreeable to its leadership.
If the meeting in Doha is meant to find ways to build bridges with the Taliban, then it should not be a venue where the inclusion of warlords and former Afghan officials of ill repute is pushed. Such a move would be counterproductive as it would make the Taliban more reluctant to engage. The issue of larger participation in the Taliban government can be brought up when enough trust has been built and momentum generated.
While it is clear who should not be part of a future government, finding qualified and trusted figures from non-Taliban political forces can be a challenge. That is because, between 2001 and 2021, the elections in the country were repeatedly rigged, making it unclear who represents the will of the Afghan people.
Ultimately, the Taliban should be allowed to choose who beyond its movement to include in government. This is not an ideal outcome but it would be an improvement on the current status quo.
The demand for the Taliban to break its current monopoly on power should be framed differently if it is ever to be realised. The term inclusivity not only is a non-starter for the Taliban but also evokes bad memories in Afghanistan’s general population.
