RASC News Agency: In a development that underscores deepening ethnic rifts and authoritarian tendencies within the Taliban’s inner apparatus, at least ten Tajik members of the group have been detained in Bamiyan Province and transferred to Kabul under orders from the Taliban-controlled Ministry of Justice. Among those arrested are notable figures such as Dr. Abdul Jalil Hakimi, the Deputy for Academic Affairs at Bamiyan University, and Abdul Muta’al Tawanah, a senior official within the provincial police command. These individuals were formerly considered among the most trusted local supporters of the Taliban figures who lent ethnic legitimacy and administrative capacity to the group’s fragile rule in non-Pashtun regions.
According to sources familiar with the matter, the arrests were carried out following direct instructions from the Taliban’s provincial governor in Bamiyan. The detainees had reportedly traveled to Kabul in response to a formal summons, only to be arrested upon arrival without explanation, due process, or any official statement from the authorities. The opaque nature of these arrests has raised profound concerns among political observers and human rights advocates, who warn of a silent but deliberate campaign to purge non-Pashtun elements from the Taliban’s ranks.
While the Taliban have presented a façade of ethnic inclusivity since their return to power in August 2021, these recent detentions expose the hollowness of such claims. The arrests do not appear to be isolated or incidental they carry the unmistakable imprint of a coordinated purge, one that signals an emerging strategy to systematically eliminate non-Pashtun actors, particularly Tajiks, from influential roles in governance, security, and civil administration. The Taliban’s return to power was, in part, facilitated by a calculated inclusion of non-Pashtun collaborators in various provinces. Tajik figures were appointed to local offices, placed in command positions, and deployed to bolster the group’s legitimacy in regions with ethnically diverse populations. Their presence served as a critical tool to temper opposition and create the illusion of broad-based support. But that illusion is rapidly unraveling.
Observers now believe that the Taliban’s initial reliance on non-Pashtun support was merely tactical a short-term compromise to stabilize their hold on power. With the group having consolidated authority through coercive means, it appears increasingly unwilling to tolerate ethnic plurality, even within its own structures. In Bamiyan, reports have emerged over recent months of deliberate efforts by the Taliban governor to weaken and sideline influential Tajik figures from the provincial administration. These moves have included forced reassignments, surveillance, intimidation, and now, arrests part of a broader effort to reassert absolute Pashtun dominance in a historically marginalized but symbolically critical province.
Taliban spokespeople and internal factions have attempted to frame these arrests as internal disciplinary measures or the outcome of bureaucratic disagreements. Yet such justifications ring hollow against the backdrop of a mounting pattern of ethnic exclusion. Analysts increasingly view these detentions as part of a larger, ideologically-driven campaign to homogenize the Taliban’s governance structure along rigid ethno-sectarian lines. This strategy is not merely discriminatory it is dangerously shortsighted. The Taliban’s deliberate marginalization of non-Pashtun actors risks reigniting the very ethnic hostilities that have historically destabilized Afghanistan. Far from achieving cohesion, such tactics may fracture the already fragile regime from within.
The message to non-Pashtun communities Tajiks, Hazaras, Uzbeks is now painfully clear: their loyalty, service, and collaboration with the Taliban are not enough to shield them from repression. This erosion of trust threatens to deepen ethnic polarization and could catalyze a wider backlash against Taliban rule in provinces where ethnic plurality is a fact of life. The consequences may be far-reaching. Alienated ethnic groups may reassess their engagement with the regime, withdraw from governance roles, or even mobilize resistance whether overt or covert. Such developments would not only further delegitimize the Taliban domestically but could also destabilize the tenuous security balance the group has sought to project to regional and international audiences.
The arrests in Bamiyan are not merely a legal or administrative matter; they are a barometer of the Taliban’s true intentions. Despite their rhetoric of unity and amnesty, the group appears increasingly unwilling to tolerate internal diversity resorting instead to coercion, ethnic profiling, and silent purges. By turning on the very figures who once helped solidify their presence in non-Pashtun territories, the Taliban are undermining their own foundations. This calculated exclusion of ethnic minorities may ultimately prove to be a strategic error one that deepens internal fractures and sows the seeds of renewed resistance in a country that has never accepted tyranny in silence.
