RASC News Agency: Washington has reached a breaking point with the Taliban’s deliberate disregard for international norms, particularly in the areas of human rights, political freedoms, and hostage releases. In a detailed report, Reuters underscored that the continued detention and uncertain fate of Afghanistani citizen Mahmoud Habibi has become a primary obstacle in even considering the expansion of diplomatic engagement with the Taliban. The case, emblematic of a broader pattern of hostage diplomacy, has cast a heavy shadow over any potential improvement in U.S.–Taliban relations.
Former Afghanistan’s Vice President Amrullah Saleh provided sharp context, noting that the Taliban’s approach to negotiations has always been inseparably linked to violence and repression. Writing on his official X account on Sunday, September 14, Saleh stated:
“Every dialogue with the Taliban has revolved around kidnapping, terrorism, and mass killings. Added to these have been their bans on modern education, their crushing of women’s most basic rights, and their refusal to allow access to political prisoners.”
His words point to a grim reality: the Taliban’s pattern of weaponizing repression to extract concessions is not new but is deeply rooted in their operational DNA. At the same time, the unannounced visit of Adam Boehler, U.S. Special Envoy for Hostage Affairs under Donald Trump, accompanied by Zalmay Khalilzad, former U.S. envoy for the Doha peace talks, to Kabul has exposed the level of Washington’s concern. The Taliban attempted to frame the discussions as constructive, claiming the agenda included “prisoner exchanges, bilateral cooperation, citizen affairs, investment, and other economic opportunities.” Yet analysts dismiss such rhetoric as a hollow smokescreen an attempt by the Taliban to conceal their unrelenting authoritarianism behind promises of economic development that rarely materialize.
Political experts stress that these discussions should not be misread as steps toward normalization. Instead, they function as a litmus test of the Taliban’s willingness or inability to conform to international law. Early signs suggest that the group is once again using diplomatic theater to gain time, resources, and legitimacy, while continuing to suppress dissent at home and impose severe restrictions on Afghanistani women and minorities.
If the Taliban persist in stonewalling on core issues such as human rights, political inclusion, and the release of detainees, Washington is expected not only to halt any further engagement but also to lead a push for expanded sanctions, targeted travel bans, and increased diplomatic isolation. Far from the economic openings the Taliban claim, such consequences will likely deepen Afghanistan’s isolation and exacerbate the suffering of ordinary citizens already trapped under the weight of Taliban misrule.
What these developments make abundantly clear is that hostage diplomacy and rights abuses remain central to the Taliban’s political strategy. Their attempts to whitewash repression with talk of investment and trade cannot disguise the reality: Afghanistan remains governed by a movement that thrives on fear, silences women, crushes education, and holds citizens as bargaining chips in negotiations with the world. Until these fundamental issues are resolved, talk of economic opportunity will remain a facade, while the Afghanistani people continue to endure the costs of Taliban obstinacy.
