Skip to content 
Afghanistan today stands at a critical juncture in its history, where a form of authority has been imposed under the guise of religion that bears no resemblance to the model of governance found in early Islamic history or the principles of the Rashidun Caliphate. In Islam, governance is based on “wa amruhum shura baynahum” (their affairs are conducted through mutual consultation), yet in the current Taliban system, consultation and public consent have been replaced by unilateral orders issued from Kandahar, beyond any form of accountability.
Question of Sharia Legitimacy and Forced Control
The most fundamental question is the religious legitimacy of a system established through force. After the takeover of Kabul on 15 August 2021, promises were made to convene a Loya Jirga and form an inclusive government, yet three years later no such consultative process has been implemented. Instead, power remains centralized without public participation. According to leading Islamic jurists and scholars of Islamic history, any rule imposed without public consent is not considered legitimate Islamic governance but rather a form of usurpation. Scholars such as Imam Ibn Taymiyyah and Imam Al-Nawawi have emphasized that authority without consultation contradicts the spirit of Islam.
Ethnic Bias and Political Exclusion
One of the most troubling aspects of the system is its ethnic imbalance. Afghanistan is a multi-ethnic country comprising Tajiks, Uzbeks, Hazaras, and Turkmens. However, more than 85 percent of key positions in the 49-member cabinet are held by Pashtuns, while the Hazara community has been completely excluded from the political structure. This clear ethnic dominance is not only a political injustice but also a potential trigger for long-term instability and internal conflict.
Religious Coercion and Ideological Control
Contrary to the Qur’anic principle of “there is no compulsion in religion,” the current system has been accused of enforcing a specific interpretation of Islam through state power. Reports from Badakhshan suggest that Ismaili Muslims have faced pressure to change their sect in exchange for state benefits, while Shia students in universities have allegedly been threatened with exclusion unless they adopt the Hanafi school. Using religion as a political tool rather than a matter of faith contradicts the essence of Islam, which emphasizes justice and guidance rather than coercion.
Internal Divisions and Social Crisis
Growing internal divisions within the Taliban structure are now becoming visible, including the exile of moderate figures such as Abbas Stanikzai, who advocated for girls’ education and institutional governance. Restrictions on women’s education and employment have isolated Afghan society from the modern world, effectively confining half the population to domestic life. This approach represents stagnation rather than Islamic progress.
Conclusion
The international community and the broader Muslim world must recognize that the silence prevailing in Afghanistan is not peace, but a fragile state of suppression that could erupt at any moment. A system built on coercion rather than consent cannot represent true Islamic governance. Sharia is rooted in justice, equality, and consultation; if it is used as a tool for personal power, it risks damaging not only Afghanistan but also the global perception of Islamic governance. It is time for Afghanistan’s leadership to move away from coercion and toward a representative system based on justice and consultation in accordance with the true spirit of Islam.
