Afghanistan continues to face questions over political legitimacy, armed resistance, terrorism and regional security.
Former vice-president and intelligence chief Amrullah Saleh declared himself “legitimate caretaker president” after Kabul fell in August 2021.
Saleh joined Ahmad Massoud in the Panjshir resistance and remains associated with the Afghanistan Green Trend.
Ex- Afghan Intelligence Chief Amrullah Saleh On Taliban: ‘Afghanistan Was Handed Over To Them For A Purpose’
Amrullah Saleh tells Outlook that Afghanistan is already witnessing a low-intensity civil war, accuses the Taliban of maintaining links with militant groups, and says the country was “handed over to them for a purpose.”
Summary
Five years after the Taliban returned to power in Afghanistan, the country continues to grapple with questions surrounding political legitimacy, armed resistance, terrorism and regional security.
Amrullah Saleh, a former Afghan vice-president and intelligence chief, was among the most prominent figures to oppose the Taliban as the group swept across Afghanistan in August 2021.
As Kabul fell and President Ashraf Ghani left the country, Saleh declared himself the “legitimate caretaker president” and relocated to the Panjshir Valley, where he joined Ahmad Massoud in resisting the Taliban. He later became one of the key figures associated with the anti-Taliban resistance and continues to lead the Afghanistan Green Trend. This opposition movement has called for resistance against Taliban rule.
At a time when anti-Taliban groups have claimed a series of attacks and concerns persist over militant groups operating from Afghan soil, former Afghan Vice President and Intelligence Chief Amrullah Saleh speaks to Outlook about the evolving resistance against the Taliban, the group’s internal dynamics, its links with militant organisations, India’s engagement with Kabul and the international community’s approach to Afghanistan.
Anti-Taliban fronts such as the NRF, Afghanistan United Front and Afghanistan Green Trend (headed by you) have recently claimed to have attacked Taliban personnel. What do these developments signify? Is this the beginning of a more sustained armed resistance against the Taliban?
The most significant matter and the issue that has kept the people of Afghanistan divided is the illegitimate rule of the Taliban. People oppose their rule in various ways and taking arms against them is of course the most visible aspect. Afghanistan under the Taliban is a country which lacks national sovereignty and a legitimate state system This has brought massive agony and disaster at the national level but the impact is more severe in the northern communities, Kabul and other major cities which the Taliban treat as their booty of conquest.
Do you believe Afghanistan is heading towards another civil war, or are these still isolated pockets of resistance?
Advertisement
It is already in a state of civil war but the violence is mild and not advanced. Without a mechanism to legitimise the state system and allow people to participate in politics and have a say in their own destiny a more violent and destructive civil war is on the horizon.
Why do you see the recent attacks as a strategic threat to the Taliban rather than sporadic violence? How much foreign support and funding are anti-Taliban groups receiving?
All dictatorships and illegitimate systems underestimate their opponents, the public anger and the opposition forces. The Taliban aren’t an exception. The challenge liberation forces as you call them the anti-Taliban, have created is real but the bombs they have used so far are not loud enough.
There have been reports of growing tensions between the Afghan Taliban and the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). How big are these differences?
We have an extensive network of informants across the country and within the Taliban system. We have not observed such. The Afghan Taliban are indebted to the TTP. You may see the reciprocation as a compulsion not as a favour. If you see it this way, then a lot of ambiguities evaporate.
Advertisement
A recent report, pointed to the continued presence of Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. How significant is Al-Qaeda’s presence today?
We spend our resources against the Taliban which hosts foreign terrorist groups. I do not have a fresh or updated report on Al-Qaeda. It isn’t our priority. Powerful countries are watching their activities. Our people suffer at the hands of the Taliban and we are fighting against them.
Is the Taliban genuinely willing or capable of preventing Afghan territory from being used by terrorist organisations against neighbouring countries and the wider world?
Let me answer your question with a question, a scorpion without venom is not a scorpion. The Taliban are keeping their links to regional anti-state groups and they have the blessing of certain global powers for this purpose. Things will be clearer if the secret annexes to the Doha deal are made public. We can decode the Taliban's conduct more easily. Afghanistan was handed over to them for a purpose. What is it?
Advertisement
Given your past interactions with NSA Ajit Doval, how do you view India’s current Taliban policy?
India seems to have resorted more towards pragmatism and strategic security aspects in the projection of its foreign policy and takes less interest in values and principles. Everything India and the Afghan Republic government did is now history. I am not interested in discussing history.
There have long been reports of differences between the Kandahar leadership and the Kabul-based Taliban establishment. How deep are these divisions?
What our people face and experience is brutality, exclusion and oppression. They have not seen a Taliban treating them otherwise. We prefer to discard the theoretical and abstract analysis that the vested powers created in selling the idea of a changed Taliban, a reformed Taliban or a Taliban which is not one. As far as the daily conduct of the Taliban is concerned, they have one DNA which is anti-national, anti-civilisation, anti-inclusivity, misogynistic. They believe they are mandated to torture others to submission.
Advertisement
Five years after the Taliban takeover, what is your assessment of the international community’s Afghanistan policy?
I no longer see an entity called the international community. Various security and strategic blocs have their own policies tailored in a certain way which cater to their interest and at times hurt others. Those who supported the Doha deal have one type of policy, the neighbours of Afghanistan have another type of policy and the regional countries have another type of policy. There is no single consensus. To date, the consensus was to give a chance to the Taliban to show their civilised face. Clearly, that doesn’t exist. So the consensus doesn’t exist. There is multipolarity and we hope this will give the anti Taliban a window to achieve more recognition and gain access to meaningful resources.
Published At: