CWA # 2064

The World This Quarter 

Afghanistan (Jan–Mar 2026):

Gender Repression, Leadership Rifts, Regional Realignments and Clashes with Pakistan

Afghanistan today is neither in immediate collapse nor on a credible path to stabilisation. Instead, it occupies an uneasy space defined by tactical resilience and structural fragility.

Anwesha Ghosh 7 April 2026

Photo Source:

In the first quarter of 2026, Afghanistan under Taliban rule confronted a volatile mix of internal consolidation and escalating external pressures. Nearly four-and-a-half years after returning to power, the regime retains firm control over state institutions and the security apparatus. Yet this consolidation is increasingly tested by cross-border hostilities, a deepening humanitarian crisis, and the spillover effects of the Iran-Israel-US conflict.

The most consequential development was the sharp political and military re-escalation with Pakistan in late February; by far the most serious flare-up in decades, which overshadowed other trends, including intensified restrictions on women, emerging leadership fissures, and limited diplomatic outreach. The developments during the first quarter highlight a regime attempting to assert sovereignty amid deepening isolation in a region shaped by great-power mediation and proxy rivalries.

1. Escalation of the Afghanistan-Pakistan Border Conflict
The defining development of early 2026 was the direct armed confrontation with Pakistan. Initially viewed as the most serious flare-up since the Bajaur incursion of the early 1960s, the crisis quickly escalated. Hostilities began on 21–22 February with Pakistani airstrikes targeting alleged Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) positions in Nangarhar, Paktika, and Khost. The Taliban retaliated on 26 February with attacks on Pakistani border posts, prompting Islamabad to launch “Operation Ghazab lil Haq,” involving coordinated air and ground strikes deep inside Afghan territory. Within days, the conflict expanded from border skirmishes to strikes on major urban centres, including Kabul and Kandahar. A particularly devastating episode occurred on 16 March, when Pakistani forces struck a drug rehabilitation centre in Kabul. Taliban sources reported over 400 fatalities, while UN estimates placed civilian casualties at approximately 143 in that single strike. Overall, UNAMA documented at least 289 civilian casualties between late February and mid-March, with women and children accounting for a majority. The violence displaced over 115,000 people and severely disrupted cross-border trade and mobility. India, notably, condemned the strikes as an attempt to “externalise its internal failures,” reiterating its position at the United Nations.

A temporary pause in hostilities brokered by Gulf states ahead of Eid al-Fitr proved short-lived. As these mediators became preoccupied with the Iran crisis, China stepped in as a more assertive diplomatic broker. Beijing’s convening of talks in Urumqi and subsequent engagement in early April underscores its growing strategic stake in Afghan stability. The episode exposes enduring structural tensions, Pakistan’s demand that Kabul curb TTP activity and Afghanistan’s rejection of the Durand Line, and, more broadly, reveals the limits of the Taliban’s sovereignty narrative.

2. New Criminal Code and Intensified Gender Repression
Despite external pressures, the Taliban advanced their domestic ideological project. In early January, the regime quietly implemented the “Criminal Procedure Code for Courts,” a 119-article framework signed by Supreme Leader Hibatullah Akhundzada. The code further institutionalises restrictions on women and raises serious concerns about the codification of discriminatory practices. Its provisions reinforce bans on girls’ secondary and higher education and further restrict women’s participation in public life, including employment in NGOs. Particularly contentious is Article 9, which divides Afghan society into hierarchical strata (religious scholars, elites, middle classes, and lower classes) and permits differential punishments based on social status rather than the nature of the offence. In effect, the code formalises inequality and risks embedding systemic injustice within the judicial framework.

During her January visit to Kabul, UN Under-Secretary-General Rosemary DiCarlo raised these concerns directly with the Taliban. Yet the regime has shown little inclination to recalibrate. These measures reflect a broader ideological commitment to a rigid theocratic order, even at the cost of international legitimacy and economic recovery. The continued repression of women remains one of the greatest obstacles to Afghanistan’s reintegration into the global system.

3. Kandahar vs Kabul: Alleged Contestations within the Taliban Leadership
Despite consistent messaging around unity, the first quarter of 2026 revealed signs of internal divergence within the Taliban leadership. A mid-January BBC investigation highlighted growing tensions between the Kandahar-based leadership circle around Akhundzada (committed to strict ideological governance) and a more pragmatic Kabul-based faction associated with figures such as Sirajuddin Haqqani and Abdul Ghani Baradar (who favour economic engagement and limited diplomatic outreach). Differences reportedly surfaced over issues such as women’s education, internet restrictions, and foreign policy direction. While the Taliban official spokespersons dismissed these as routine internal discussions, the persistence of such reports doesn’t rule out underlying fissures in governance priorities.

These internal dynamics may have implications for regime coherence, particularly amid rising external pressures. The deterioration in relations with Pakistan has further complicated the situation, with reports of Islamabad exploring indirect engagement with anti-Taliban groups such as the National Resistance Front (NRF) and the Afghanistan Freedom Front (AFF). Although insurgent activity remains limited, such developments indicate the possibility of external actors exploiting internal vulnerabilities. Overall, while the Taliban leadership remains intact, the quarter suggests that the regime is not monolithic. The balance between ideological rigidity and pragmatic adaptation may become more contested as pressures intensify.

4. Taliban’s alignment with Iran amid Regional Conflict
The widening Iran-Israel-US confrontation has also shaped Afghanistan’s external posture. During the quarter, the Taliban adopted a vocal stance in support of Iran, framing the conflict within a broader narrative of resistance to Western intervention. Official statements emphasised solidarity, accompanied by formal condemnations of US and Israeli actions. While this alignment has not translated into direct military involvement, it signals a clear ideological positioning that further distances Kabul from Western actors. It also reflects an attempt to situate Afghanistan within a broader regional axis of resistance. Yet, this posture risks deepening diplomatic isolation and complicating any future normalisation with the West, even as it underscores how external conflicts increasingly shape Afghanistan’s strategic environment.

5. Limited UN Engagement, Humanitarian Crisis, and Economic Pressures
Engagement between the Taliban and the international community has continued through limited, functional channels, particularly within the Doha Process. Working groups on counter-narcotics and economic stabilisation met in early February, reflecting cautious, issue-based dialogue. However, these efforts are overshadowed by a deepening humanitarian crisis. Reductions in foreign assistance have left the UN’s appeal severely underfunded, with millions facing acute food insecurity. These pressures have been compounded by disruptions linked to the Pakistan conflict and regional instability stemming from Iran, including trade constraints and rising commodity prices. Sporadic ISKP attacks and expanding media restrictions have reinforced a climate of insecurity and repression. Limited gestures, such as the release of a US citizen, remain insufficient to alter the broader trajectory of isolation.

To Conclude: Afghanistan in the first Quarter (Jan-March 2026)
The first quarter of 2026 underscores a central paradox in Afghanistan’s trajectory. The Taliban have consolidated control and asserted sovereignty, yet remain unwilling to undertake the reforms necessary for broader legitimacy and long-term stability. The escalation with Pakistan, deepening gender repression, leadership contestations, and shifting regional alignments point to a regime operating under sustained strain. Afghanistan today is neither in immediate collapse nor on a credible path to stabilisation. Instead, it occupies an uneasy space defined by tactical resilience and structural fragility; where short-term control masks deeper vulnerabilities likely to shape its trajectory in the months ahead.

About the author

Dr Anwesha Ghosh is a Research Fellow at ICWA, New Delhi. She is the author of Identity and Marginality in India (Routledge, 2020) and Afghanistan Under the Taliban: Pasts and Anticipations (KW Publishers, 2026).