By Neelapu Shanti

The orchestrated power struggle within the former Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan in New Delhi in 2023—now conveniently forgotten- was a calculated process designed to facilitate the Taliban’s entry into Afghanistan’s diplomatic space. Through sustained political engagement devoid of ethical or moral grounding, India has enabled the Taliban to occupy the Afghan Embassy, culminating this week in the appointment of Mufti Noor Ahmad Noor, a Taliban member, as Chargé d’Affaires. This appointment has taken place under the flag of the former Islamic Republic of Afghanistan—a flag the Taliban neither represent nor recognise.

Paradoxically, while the emblem of the Islamic Republic still flies, the writ of the Taliban’s de facto authorities now runs the embassy, without the consent of the legitimate Afghan state. This arrangement reflects neither the triumph of ideals nor pragmatic diplomacy; rather, it represents a moral failure and a politics of convenience. India has chosen to accommodate a group once kept at arm’s length for its record of terrorism, even as the Afghan population continues to endure repression, poverty, and political exclusion under Taliban rule since 2021,

India’s decision to hand over the Afghan Embassy in New Delhi is the revelation of how pragmatism functions:

• It signals engagement with the Taliban without demanding reform, the abandonment of the Afghan people’s cause in pursuit of strategic interests.
• A conspicuous failure to take a consistent or principled stand—particularly on the Taliban’s ban on education for women and girls and the absence of an inclusive government in Afghanistan.
• Unethical closure of former legitimate Republic of Afghan mission. 

It is no secret that the former Embassy of the Islamic Republic faced relentless pressure from both the Taliban and the Indian government to relinquish control. Confronted with an untenable situation, the embassy was permanently shut down in November 2023, coinciding with India’s policy shift toward direct engagement with the Taliban in 2022.

Notwithstanding this development, India’s engagement with a group that has shown no interest in reconciliation, the Taliban precisely what they want: international legitimacy without reform. The Taliban’s sole objective is to rule Afghanistan. They have dismantled democratic institutions, replaced the republic with an emirate, rejected Afghanistan’s Constitution, and imposed their rigid interpretation of Sharia law. Widespread violence and systematic brutality have been integral to their strategy of instilling fear and subjugating the Afghan people- a generational trauma compounded by hopelessness-not just from war but from abandonment.

In a recent interaction with university students in India, responding to a question from an Afghan student, India’s External Affairs Minister, S. Jaishankar, stated that “India’s current Afghanistan policy is firmly rooted in a people-centric and community-focused approach.” What remains unsaid, however, is India’s reluctance to assert a clear moral position at the United Nations Security Council by unequivocally declaring “No to Gender Apartheid.” Afghan women and girls—who constitute at least half of Afghanistan’s population—have been excluded from civil, political, and social life for nearly five years under Taliban rule. This reality stands in sharp contrast to the notion of a people-centric policy which India have been touting all along for their engagement with the Taliban.

India’s current stance also contradicts its own historical precedent. India was the first country to withdraw recognition from South Africa’s apartheid regime, despite South Africa fulfilling the formal criteria of statehood, precisely because of its exclusion of minorities, including Black Africans and Indians, from political and civil rights. Today, India’s selective diplomacy and its silence on gender apartheid in Afghanistan undermines its moral credibility.

Illegality of the Taliban’s Presence at the Afghan Embassy

Article 13 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations stipulates that a head of mission assumes functions upon presenting credentials to the competent authority of the receiving state. Established diplomatic practice—dating back to 1815—requires that even chargés d’affaires receive accreditation and consent from the receiving state, which can only be granted to representatives of a recognised sending state. This raises fundamental questions: can a regime that lacks legal legitimacy nominate an envoy? If not, can a receiving state, India, unilaterally accept or facilitate such Taliban nomination?

Under the Vienna Convention of 1961, the prerogative to appoint ambassadors rests with the sending state, not the receiving one. In this case, the legitimate government of Afghanistan was overthrown by force in 2021 by the Taliban, a group internationally designated as a terrorist organisation. Amir Khan Muttaqi, the Taliban’s de facto “Foreign Minister,” remains sanctioned under UN Security Council Resolution 1988. Despite exercising de facto control, the Taliban do not meet the requirements of statehood under Articles 17 and 18 of the Rome Statute.

UN Security Council Resolution 2593—adopted during India’s presidency in 2021 and 2022—reaffirmed Afghanistan’s sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity, and national unity, and called for an inclusive political settlement with the full, equal, and meaningful participation of women. India’s current policy stands in stark asymmetry to these commitments and represents a flagrant violation of the very resolutions it helped adopt. For many Afghans, this shift has been perceived as a deeper betrayal than the Taliban’s actions themselves, driven by India’s pursuit of geopolitical advantage amid strained Taliban–Pakistan relations.

The United Nations General Assembly has not recognised the Taliban as Afghanistan’s legitimate government. The Permanent Representative of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan remains accredited, and the UN Credentials Committee has rejected Taliban claims to representation. No state—except Russia—has formally recognised the Taliban regime.

Women, who constitute at least half of Afghanistan’s population, remain entirely excluded from public life. This systematic exclusion renders the regime incapable of representing the Afghan people and amounts to institutionalised gender apartheid. As long as the Taliban remain under UN sanctions pursuant to Resolutions 1267 (1999) and 1988, (2001), they cannot be regarded as legitimate representatives of Afghanistan or as capable of entering lawful diplomatic relations. The freezing of approximately USD 9.5 billion in Afghan state assets further reinforces this position. The 2020 Doha Accords, entered into between the Taliban and the United States, explicitly rule out recognition of the Taliban as a state party.

Recognition under international law requires a regime to assume the obligations of the state, including respect for international treaties, human rights norms, and the principle of state continuity. The Taliban have dismantled constitutional governance, abolished judicial independence, and shown no commitment to Afghanistan’s international obligations. Their diplomatic standing therefore remains legally indefensible. India’s engagement with the Taliban terming it as people centric itself is questionable.

In a post on X dated 10 January 2025, journalist Bilal Sarwary observed:

“It also buries treaty commitments. The India–Afghanistan Strategic Partnership Agreement (2011) was signed with the Afghan Republic, not its destroyers. Replacing lawful diplomats of a recognised state with representatives of an unrecognised regime is a betrayal in practice, whatever the rhetoric.”

India Lost Afghanistan

India’s response to Afghanistan reflects a profound failure to act in accordance with enlightened self-interest. Afghans will judge their partners by the choices they make, and history will remember those who prioritised expediency over principle during a moment of extraordinary crisis. As Afghanistan endures institutionalised gender apartheid and one of the world’s gravest humanitarian emergencies, India’s engagement with the Taliban has sent a stark and unsettling message. For Afghan women and girls, this engagement signifies not pragmatism but abandonment—eroding India’s long-claimed moral leadership and regional responsibility. 

Journalist Bilal Sarwary further stated, “the expulsion and sidelining of the Republic’s diplomats on November 23 violated core diplomatic custom and the spirit of the Vienna Convention. States may recalibrate policy but not erase legality quietly”.

India has betrayed the people of Afghanistan and owes them an apology.

India lost Afghanistan!