The Taliban’s claim of “stability” collapses under international evidence. Since the Taliban’s 2021 return to power, Afghanistan has not moved toward responsible statehood, but it has become an ideological project that shelters militant networks, deepens isolation, weakens trade and shifts the cost onto ordinary households.
The regime wants stability measured by the absence of a conventional civil war. Afghans measure it by whether they can work, trade, study, travel and feed their families.
By that standard, Taliban rule is a triple failure which are legitimacy failure, security failure and welfare failure. The UN Security Council Monitoring Team reports challenge the regime’s claim that Afghan territory is not used by terrorist groups. Recent reporting on UN findings says this claim is “not credible,” citing evidence on TTP presence and facilitation inside Afghanistan.
In Security Council debates on Afghanistan, the issue is no longer Taliban ideology alone, but it is the regional insecurity produced by Taliban power.
Read More: Afghanistan Risks Losing 25,000 Female Health Workers and Teachers, UN Warns
TTP sanctuary is not only Pakistan’s security concern, but it is an Afghan national-interest issue. When militants operate from Afghan soil, the consequences return to Afghanistan through closed crossings, lost exports, higher prices, fewer jobs and deeper diplomatic isolation.
Reuters reported that Pakistan-Afghanistan border closures stranded around 5,000 containers and caused about $1 million in daily trade losses. Every TTP attack launched from Afghan territory becomes an economic sanction imposed by the Taliban on Afghan people.
This is the contradiction at the heart of Taliban policy. The regime claims sovereignty while tolerating forces that make Afghan sovereignty unusable. The CFR Global Conflict Tracker now treats Afghanistan’s instability as a live regional risk.
Taliban fraternity with TTP has produced border clashes, civilian fear, disrupted commerce and diplomatic quarantine. That is strategic self-harm.
A Regime Without Consent
The legitimacy deficit is structural. The Taliban is not merely unpopular, but it rejects the idea that popular consent is necessary. Afghan reporting on the UN assessment says the Taliban disregard public will and host extremist groups.
Power is concentrated around Hibatullah Akhundzada in Kandahar, framed in religious rather than civic terms, and enforced through obedience instead of accountability. A government that does not seek consent cannot claim national legitimacy.
This also explains why moderation fails inside the Taliban before it reaches society. Figures who question bans on girls’ education or women’s employment face pressure, dismissal, exile or detention.
Even the 2026 UNAMA mandate resolution links Afghanistan’s future to human rights, counterterrorism and inclusive governance. The Taliban rejects these foundations while demanding recognition.
Read More: Pakistan Backs UNAMA Renewal, Warns of Growing Terrorism from Afghanistan
The economy exposes the same failure. The World Bank’s Afghanistan Development Update projects 4.3 percent GDP growth in FY2025, but also warns that population growth of 8.6 percent, driven by mass returns, will reduce GDP per capita by 4 percent. The World Bank’s December 2025 release makes the headline look positive that the household reality is negative.
Returnees, drought, aid cuts and border tensions have overwhelmed jobs and services. IOM warned of mass returns to Afghanistan, adding pressure to communities already short of housing and income. UNDP’s 2025 Multidimensional Poverty Index profile estimates that 64.9 percent of Afghans, about 26.9 million people, were multidimensionally poor in 2023.
UNDP’s Afghanistan Socio-Economic Review found 75 percent subsistence-insecure in 2024. OCHA’s 2025 humanitarian plan assessed 22.9 million people in need, while Humanitarian Action’s 2026 plan estimates 21.9 million.
IPC food-security analysis projects 17.4 million facing crisis-level hunger or worse, and WFP’s Afghanistan emergency page shows how aid remains central to survival.
Gender Exclusion Is Economic Sabotage
The Taliban has removed half the country from public life, then blames the world for poverty. UNICEF warns that restrictions on girls’ education and women’s employment could cost Afghanistan tens of thousands of female teachers and health workers by 2030.
UN Women’s Afghanistan Gender Alert documents how gender restrictions deepen humanitarian harm, while Human Rights Watch records continued bans on secondary and higher education for girls and women.
This is not culture, but it is economic sabotage. A state cannot educate children properly while excluding women teachers, cannot treat women patients without women health workers, and cannot grow while imprisoning female talent at home.
The Taliban’s stability is a façade. A state that shelters violent proxies, rejects consent, shrinks per-capita welfare and excludes women cannot call itself stable. It can only call itself in control. For Afghans, that control has become insecurity, poverty and isolation.
*The views presented in this article are the authors’ own and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Diplomatic Insight.
Dr. Usman
Dr. Usman holds a PhD (Italy) in geopolitics and is currently doing a Postdoctoral Fellowship at Shandong University, China. He is the author of a book titled ‘Different Approaches on Central Asia: Economic, Security, and Energy’, published by Lexington, USA.
