Connect with us

World

Syria’s new president takes center stage at UNGA as concerns linger over terrorist past

Published

on

Syria’s new president takes center stage at UNGA as concerns linger over terrorist past

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Once a member of al Qaeda and the Islamic State and now leading Syria’s fragile transition since toppling the Bashar Assad regime, Ahmed al-Sharaa is ready to take to the global center stage at the United Nations General Assembly Wednesday and make his case for a new path forward for his war-torn nation.

“This marks the first participation in high-level meetings of a Syrian president at the United Nations General Assembly since 1967, so this is a very big deal,” Natasha Hall, senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told Fox News Digital.

“On such a historic occasion, what he will try to emphasize and underline is that this is a new day for Syria. They have overthrown the brutal dictatorship of the Assad regime. He will talk about the progress that’s been made and what more progress needs to happen in terms of recognition and the lifting of U.N. sanctions to help Syria move forward,” Hall added.

TRUMP’S MIDDLE EAST TOUR BEGINS WITH SYRIA LOOMING AS STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY

Advertisement

Interim Syria President Ahmed al-Sharaa speaks during the Concordia Annual Summit in New York, Monday, Sept. 22, 2025.  (Photo/Andres Kudacki)

A high-ranking Syrian government official confirmed to Fox News Digital that al-Sharaa will use the opportunity at the U.N. to present Syria’s vision for stability, reconstruction, and reconciliation.

“The most important issues he will raise include the need to lift all forms of unilateral sanctions that continue to hinder Syria’s recovery, the importance of combating terrorism in all its forms, the return of displaced Syrians and refugees, and the advancement of a genuinely inclusive political process rooted in the will of the Syrian people,” the Syrian official said.

Al-Sharaa, who led the Islamist rebel group Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) to victory over Assad, ditched his military fatigues for a Western-style suit and has been on a charm offensive, hosting European and Western diplomats and politicians in hopes of bringing Syria out from its international pariah status.

The new Syrian leader received an unprecedented endorsement from President Donald Trump when the two met in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, in May. 

Advertisement

Trump called al-Sharaa a “young, attractive, tough guy,” announcing that the U.S. would lift sanctions in place since the Assad era and even discussed normalizing relations. 

People welcome the leader of Syria’s Islamist Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) group that headed a lightning rebel offensive snatching Damascus from government control, Ahmed al-Sharaa (C), before his address at the capital’s landmark Umayyad Mosque on December 8, 2024. Al-Sharaa gave a speech as the crowd chanted “Allahu akbar (God is greatest),” in a video shared by the rebels on their Telegram channel showed. (Aref Tammawi/AFP via Getty Images)

Hall noted that al-Sharaa might be looking to secure a security pact between Israel and Syria along the UNGA sidelines, emphasizing that he seeks a Syria that is at peace with its neighbors and doesn’t want to position Syria to be a threat to any outside forces, particularly Israel. 

He will also be looking to secure much-needed reconstruction aid to rebuild a country ravaged by 13 years of civil war. The cost for reconstruction is estimated to be between $250 and $400 billion, and 16.7 million people, or 75% of the population, are in dire need of humanitarian assistance, according to the U.N.

Since seizing Damascus, he has publicly said all the right things. He promised an inclusive government that would represent all religious and ethnic factions in Syria, uphold women’s rights and protect minority rights.

Advertisement

ISLAMIST GROUP RUNNING SYRIA HAS MIXED RECORD OVER GOVERNANCE IN PROVINCE, RULED WITH ‘IRON FIST’

Al-Sharaa also fulfilled promises to target ISIS and other terrorist groups operating in Syria. One month after taking power, Syrian security forces seized a shipment of heavy ammunition destined for Hezbollah in Lebanon, once a key ally of the Assad regime and Iran’s Axis of Resistance.

While optimism for a new Syria remains high, some caution it’s still too soon to judge al-Sharaa as a Western ally given his terrorist past.

“Al-Sharaa is not a democrat. He ruled Idlib without power-sharing. So far, in terms of control of vital government functions like security, foreign affairs, intelligence and justice, he has put loyalists in place,” former U.S. Ambassador to Syria Robert Ford told Fox News Digital.

Ford, who was the last U.S. ambassador in Damascus in 2011, said the crucial question is whether, over time, individual political and civil liberties will be respected and that people maintain, as they have now, the freedom to organize and protest.

Advertisement

Secretary of State Marco Rubio shakes hands with Syrian interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa at the Lotte New York Palace Hotel, on the sidelines of the 80th United Nations General Assembly at the United Nations headquarters, Monday, Sept. 22, 2025. (Bing Guan/Pool Photo via AP)

“Al-Sharaa’s heavy hand ruling Idlib prior to Assad’s fall has been lighter in Damascus, Aleppo and elsewhere. But so far, there is more political freedom to speak and protest in Syria than in many other countries in the region, such as Egypt, Algeria and some Gulf states,” Ford added.

Ambassador Barbara Leaf, who served as assistant secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, visited Damascus and met with Shara in December, becoming the highest-ranking official to meet with Syrian leadership since the outbreak of the Syrian civil war in 2011. 

Leaf, a distinguished diplomatic fellow with the Middle East Institute, told Fox News Digital about her initial contact with Shara right after HTS overthrew Assad. Her mission was to get eyes on him, to assess him and to send a clear signal on U.S. expectations if he was going to lead a new Syria.

“My takeaway from the meeting was that he came across as somebody who was very well-prepared for the discussion. He had clearly anticipated all of the topics that I raised and he had pretty thoughtful responses with a readiness to engage,” she said.

Advertisement

Syrian security forces walk together along a street, after clashes between Syrian government troops and local Druze fighters resumed in the southern Druze city of Sweida early on Wednesday, collapsing a ceasefire announced just hours earlier that aimed to put an end to days of deadly sectarian bloodshed, in Sweida, Syria, July 16, 2025.  (Karam al-Masri/Reuters)

Al-Sharaa made a point several times to say that Syria would no longer be a threat or a staging point for threats against its neighbors, including Israel, and that he would not allow the Iranians, Hezbollah or Palestinian groups, to use Syrian territory to conduct terrorist activities, the ambassador said.

“I came to the sense that he was already making a shift from being a military commander to being a politician, to being a political leader,” Ambassador Leaf noted.

While Ambassador Leaf highlighted his pragmatism, his true intentions as the new leader of Syria remain murky.

The ambassador said that it appears al-Sharaa has traveled a trajectory away from his jihadist terrorist past, but it remains a question how far he is willing to go to effectuate what she believes is an intention to form an Islamist style of governance.

Advertisement

CHRISTIAN WATCH GROUP RISES UP TO PROTECT COMMUNITY AMID GROWING VIOLENCE IN SYRIA

“Does he want to formulate a kind of Islamist governance, conservative governance and social order that, frankly, Syria has not seen? And would he be willing to use force to get there? That’s an unknown,” the ambassador cautioned.

What’s concerning for Ambassador Leaf and others is that many of the people serving in key roles in the transitional government are close associates of al-Sharaa and others affiliated with HTS and other allied armed rebel groups. 

“Al-Sharaa is still engaged in a careful balancing act within his own government between liberal opposition voices, former regime bureaucrats and more Islamist proponents aligned still with HTS’ mission and principles,” Caroline Rose, director of The New Lines Institute, told Fox News Digital.

Ahmed al-Sharaa, once known by his nom de guerre Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, is seen in Syria Feb. 7, 2023. Since becoming the country’s president, he has gone back to his given name. (Omar Haj Kadour/AFP via Getty Images)

Advertisement

EVANGELICAL LEADER SAYS US MUST PROTECT SYRIAN CHRISTIANS FROM ATTACKS BY JIHADI TERRORISTS

Rose, who traveled to Syria earlier this year, said that Syria’s complex political dynamics have led not only to gridlock, but even incapacity in times of crisis, “such as failure to rein in radical Sunni fighters during violent outbreaks in Latakia and Suwayda, but also policies appeasing more conservative elements of al-Sharaa’s support network, such as the ruling requiring full-body swimwear at Syrian pools and beaches.”

While Syria’s new government has looked to consolidate control over a restive society, Shara’s forces had to manage a fragile society divided along ethnic and religious lines.

Syria has experienced a wave of sectarian violence since the revolution to overthrow Assad. Government security forces retaliated after forces loyal to the Assad regime launched an attack in the coastal city of Latakia, Assad’s hometown. In total, around 1,400 people, mostly civilians, were massacred, according to the U.N. Most of the victims from the Alawites, a minority group in Syria, which the Assad family belonged to, as well as from the Druze community.

It was the worst episode of violence since the overthrow of Assad in December 2024.

Advertisement

In this photo released by the Syrian official news agency SANA, a Civil Defense worker inspects the damage inside Mar Elias church where a suicide bomber detonated himself in Dweil’a on the outskirts of Damascus, Syria, Sunday, June 22, 2025. (SANA via AP)

Clashes between Bedouin tribes, Druze militias and government forces in Suweida led to hundreds of deaths and drew in Israeli military intervention — to protect Syria’s Druze minority. A ceasefire was eventually agreed to but the spiraling ethnic violence highlights Syria’s rocky transition. 

The country’s dwindling Christian community has also felt the brunt of extremist violence. In June, the Islamic State was suspected of carrying out a deadly suicide bombing at a Greek Orthodox church in Syria, which killed 22 worshipers and injured 63 others. Christians have also been attacked and, in some cases, killed, allegedly by forces tied to the al-Sharaa government. 

The new authorities will also have to incorporate Kurdish forces operating in Northeast Syria, where the Syrian Democratic Forces have been crucial to the U.S.-led counter-ISIS campaign. Any disruptions in the merging of the SDF into the Syrian state raises the risk of an ISIS resurgence.

Advertisement

World

Video: Pakistan Launches Airstrikes on Afghanistan

Published

on

Video: Pakistan Launches Airstrikes on Afghanistan

new video loaded: Pakistan Launches Airstrikes on Afghanistan

Tensions between Afghanistan and Pakistan escalated on Friday as the two countries clashed.
Advertisement

By Monika Cvorak

February 27, 2026

    Denmark’s Prime Minister Calls For a Snap Parliamentary Election

    1:36

    Marco Rubio Says U.S. Is Probing Deadly Cuban Shooting

    0:45

    Amid Chaos in Mexico, False Images Stoked Fears

    2:45

    Advertisement
    Violence in Mexico After Cartel Boss Is Killed

    1:40

    Violence Erupts Across Mexico After Cartel Boss Killed

    0:58

    The Japanese Airport That Doesn’t Lose Bags

    2:59

Video ›

Today’s Videos

Advertisement

U.S.

Politics

Immigration

NY Region

Science

Advertisement

Business

Culture

Books

Wellness

World

Advertisement

Africa

Americas

Asia

South Asia

Donald Trump

Advertisement

Middle East Crisis

Russia-Ukraine Crisis

Visual Investigations

Opinion Video

Advertisement

Advertisement

SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

Continue Reading

World

State Dept authorizes non-essential US Embassy personnel in Jerusalem to depart ahead of possible Iran strikes

Published

on

State Dept authorizes non-essential US Embassy personnel in Jerusalem to depart ahead of possible Iran strikes

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

The State Department is allowing non-essential personnel working at the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem to leave Israel ahead of possible strikes on Iran. The embassy announced the decision early Friday morning and said that “in response to security incidents and without advance notice” it could place further restrictions on where U.S. government employees can travel within Israel.

Advertisement

The decision came after meetings and phone calls through the night Thursday into Friday, according to The New York Times, which reviewed a copy of an email that U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee sent to embassy workers.

The Times reported that the ambassador said in his email that the move was a result of “an abundance of caution” and that those wishing to leave “should do so TODAY.” He reportedly urged them to look for flights out of Ben Gurion Airport to any destination, cautioning that the embassy’s move “will likely result in high demand for airline seats today.”

The U.S. has authorized non-essential embassy personnel to leave Israel amid escalating tensions with Iran. (Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images; Iranian Leader Press Office/Anadolu via Getty Images)

In the email, Huckabee also said that there was “no need to panic,” but he underscored that those looking to leave should “make plans to depart sooner rather than later,” the Times reported.

“Focus on getting a seat to anyplace from which you can then continue travel to D.C., but the first priority will be getting expeditiously out of country,” Huckabee said in the email, according to the Times.

Advertisement

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, U.S. President Donald Trump’s nominee to be ambassador to Israel, arrives to testify during his Senate Foreign Relations Committee confirmation hearing at the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Mar. 25, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

TRUMP MEETS NETANYAHU, SAYS HE WANTS IRAN DEAL BUT REMINDS TEHRAN OF ‘MIDNIGHT HAMMER’ OPERATION

The embassy reiterated the State Department’s advisory for U.S. citizens to reconsider traveling to Israel and the West Bank “due to terrorism and civil unrest.” Additionally, the department advised that U.S. citizens not travel to Gaza because of terrorism and armed conflict, as well as northern Israel, particularly within 2.5 miles of the Lebanese and Syrian borders because of “continued military presence and activity.” 

It also recommended that U.S. citizens not travel within 1.5 miles of the Egyptian border, with the exception of the Taba crossing, which remains open.

“Terrorist groups, lone-actor terrorists and other violent extremists continue plotting possible attacks in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza. Terrorists and violent extremists may attack with little or no warning, targeting tourist locations, transportation hubs, markets/shopping malls, and local government facilities,” the embassy said in its warning. “The security environment is complex and can change quickly, and violence can occur in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza without warning.”

Advertisement

Israeli and U.S. flags are placed on the road leading to the U.S. consulate in the Jewish neighborhood of Arnona, on the East-West Jerusalem line in Jerusalem, May 9, 2018. (Corinna Kern/picture alliance via Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

While the embassy did not specifically mention Iran in its warning, it referenced “increased regional tensions” that could “cause airlines to cancel and/or curtail flights into and out of Israel.”

Fox News Digital reached out to the State Department and the White House for comment on this matter.

Advertisement

Related Article

Iran’s shadowy chemical weapons program draws scrutiny as reports allege use against protesters
Continue Reading

World

Has India’s influence in Afghanistan grown under the Taliban?

Published

on

Has India’s influence in Afghanistan grown under the Taliban?

Pakistan has accused Afghanistan’s Taliban of serving as a “proxy” for India, amid escalating hostilities between Islamabad and Kabul.

Just hours after Pakistan bombed locations in Kabul early on Friday, Pakistan’s Minister of Defence Khawaja Asif wrote on X that after NATO forces withdrew from Afghanistan in July 2021, “it was expected that peace would prevail in Afghanistan and that the Taliban would focus on the interests of the Afghan people and regional stability”.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

“However, the Taliban turned Afghanistan into a colony of India,” he wrote and accused the Taliban of “exporting terrorism”.

“Pakistan made every effort, both directly and through friendly countries, to keep the situation stable. It carried out extensive diplomacy. However, the Taliban became a proxy of India,” he alleged as he declared an “open war” with Afghanistan.

This is not the first time that Asif has brought India into tensions with Afghanistan.

Advertisement

Last October, he alleged: “India wants to engage in a low-intensity war with Pakistan. To achieve this, they are using Kabul.”

So far, Asif has presented no evidence to back his claims and the Taliban has rejected accusations that it is being influenced by India.

But India has condemned the Pakistani military’s recent actions in Afghanistan, adding to Islamabad’s growing discernment that its nuclear rival and the Taliban are edging closer.

Earlier this week, after the Pakistani military carried out air raids inside Afghanistan on Sunday, India’s Ministry of External Affairs said in a statement that New Delhi “strongly condemns Pakistan’s airstrikes on Afghan territory that have resulted in civilian casualties, including women and children, during the holy month of Ramadan”.

After Friday morning’s flare-up between Pakistan and Afghanistan, India’s foreign ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal again said New Delhi “strongly” condemned Pakistan’s air strikes and also noted that they took place on a Friday during the holy month of Ramadan.

Advertisement

“It is another attempt by Pakistan to externalise its internal failures,” Jaiswal said in a statement on X.

Has India’s influence in Afghanistan grown under the Taliban and what is India’s endgame with Afghanistan?

Here’s what we know:

How have relations between India and the Taliban evolved?

When the Taliban first rose to power in Afghanistan in 1996, India adopted a hostile policy towards the group and did not recognise its assumption of power. India also shunned all diplomatic relations with the Taliban.

At the time, New Delhi viewed the Taliban as a proxy for Pakistan’s intelligence agencies. Pakistan, together with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, were the only three countries to have also recognised the Taliban administration at that point.

Advertisement

Then, in 2001, India supported the US-led invasion of Afghanistan, which toppled the Taliban administration. India then reopened its embassy in Kabul and embraced the new government led by Hamid Karzai. The Taliban, in response, attacked Indian embassies and consulates in Afghanistan. In 2008, at least 58 people were killed when the Taliban bombed India’s embassy in Kabul.

In 2021, after the Taliban returned to power, India closed its embassy in Afghanistan once again and also did not officially recognise the Taliban as the government of the country.

But a year later, as relations between Pakistan and the Taliban deteriorated over armed groups which Pakistan accuses Afghanistan of harbouring, India began engaging with the Taliban.

In 2022, India sent a team of “technical experts” to run its mission in Kabul and officially reopened its embassy in the Afghan capital last October. New Delhi also allowed the Taliban to operate Afghanistan consulates in the Indian cities of Mumbai and Hyderabad.

Over the past two years, officials from New Delhi and Afghanistan have also held meetings abroad, in Kabul and in New Delhi.

Advertisement

In January last year, the Taliban administration’s Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi met India’s Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri in Dubai, the United Arab Emirates.

Then, in October 2025, he visited New Delhi and met Indian foreign minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar.

After this meeting, Muttaqi told journalists that Kabul “has always sought good relations with India” and, in a joint statement, Afghanistan and India pledged to have “close communication and continue regular engagement”.

Taliban Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi arrives at Darul Uloom Deoband, an Islamic seminary, in Deoband in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh, India [File: Anushree Fadnavis/Reuters]

Besides beefing up diplomatic ties, India has also offered humanitarian support to Afghanistan under the Taliban’s rule.

After a magnitude 6.3 earthquake struck northern Afghanistan in November last year, India shipped food, medicine and vaccines, and Jaishankar was also among the first foreign ministers to call Muttaqi and offer his support. Since last December, India has also approved and implemented several healthcare infrastructure projects in Afghanistan, according to a December 2025 report by the country’s press information bureau.

Advertisement

Praveen Donthi, senior analyst at the International Crisis Group, told Al Jazeera that the costs of avoiding engagement with the Taliban in the past have compelled the Indian government to adopt strategic pragmatism towards the Afghan leadership this time.

“New Delhi does not want to disregard this relationship on ideological grounds or create strategic space for India’s main strategic rivals, Pakistan and China, in its neighbourhood,” he said.

Raghav Sharma, professor and director at the Centre for Afghanistan Studies at the OP Jindal Global University in India, added that the current engagement also stems from New Delhi’s pragmatic realisation that the Taliban is now in charge in Afghanistan and that there is no meaningful opposition.

“States engage in order to protect and further their interests. While there is little by way of ideological convergence, there are areas of strategic convergence, which is what has pushed India to engage with the Taliban, some of their unpalatable policies notwithstanding,” he said.

Is this a new stance towards Afghanistan?

No. India’s growing influence and engagement with Afghanistan began well before the Taliban returned to power in August 2021.

Advertisement

Between December 2001 and September 2014, during the US presence in Afghanistan, New Delhi was a strong supporter of the Karzai government, and then of his successor, Ashraf Ghani’s government, which was in power from September 2014 until August 2021, when the US withdrew from the country.

In October 2011, under Karzai, India and Afghanistan renewed ties by signing an agreement to form a strategic partnership. New Delhi also pledged to support Afghanistan in the face of foreign troops in the nation as a part of this agreement.

Under both Karzai and his successor, Ghani, India invested more than $3bn in humanitarian aid and reconstruction work in Afghanistan. This included reconstruction projects like schools and hospitals, and also a new National Assembly building in Kabul, which was inaugurated in December 2015 when Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited Afghanistan for the first time.

India’s Border Road Organisation (BRO) also assisted Afghanistan in the development of infrastructure projects like the 218km Zaranj-Delaram highway in 2009 under Karzai’s government.

Under Ghani, New Delhi undertook building the Salma Dam project to help with irrigating Afghanistan. In June 2016, when Modi visited Afghanistan once again, he inaugurated this $290m dam project. In May 2016, Iran, India and Afghanistan also signed a trilateral trade and transit agreement on the Chabahar port.

Advertisement
Modi and Ghani
India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi (L) and Afghan President Ashraf Ghani hold sweets as they inaugurate Afghanistan’s new parliament building in Kabul, Afghanistan [File: Stringer/Reuters]

During this period – 2001-2021 – Pakistan’s unease with New Delhi and Kabul’s new partnership grew.

In October 2011, after signing a strategic agreement with India, Karzai had assured Islamabad that while “India is a great friend, Pakistan is a twin brother”.

But Karzai was critical of Pakistan’s support for the Taliban. In his last speech as president of Afghanistan in Kabul in September 2014, he stated that he believed most of the Taliban leadership lived in Pakistan.

In a 2011 report by a Washington, DC-based think tank, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Amer Latif, former director for South Asian affairs in the US Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, noted that Karzai was walking a “fine line between criticising Pakistan’s activities while also referring to Pakistan as Afghanistan’s ‘twin brother’.”

“It is in this context that Karzai appears to be looking to solidify long-term partnerships with countries that will aid his stabilisation efforts,” he said, referring to Karzai’s visit to India and his efforts to improve relations with the subcontinent.

When Ghani rose to power in September 2014, he tried to reset ties with Pakistan and also visited the country in November that year. But his efforts did not result in improved ties due to border disputes with Pakistan continuing until his administration was overthrown by the Taliban in August 2021.

Advertisement

So why has India maintained ties with Afghanistan under the Taliban?

Initially, when the Taliban returned to power in 2021 following the withdrawal of the US, political analysts largely expected Pakistan to lead the way in recognising the Taliban administration as the official government of Afghanistan, improving bilateral relations which had turned icy under Karzai and Ghani.

But relations turned hostile, with Pakistan repeatedly accusing the Taliban of allowing anti-Pakistan armed groups like the Pakistan Taliban (TTP) to operate from Afghan soil. The Taliban denies this.

Then, the deportation of tens of thousands of Afghan refugees by Pakistan in recent years further strained ties between the two neighbours.

India has ultimately taken a pragmatic approach to the Taliban in order to maintain the good relations it built with Afghanistan from 2001 to 2021, and has somewhat leveraged poor relations between Pakistan and Afghanistan to cement these.

“With Pakistan’s increasingly strained relations with Afghanistan, the logic of ‘enemy’s enemy’ is acting as a glue between Kabul and New Delhi,” International Crisis Group’s Donthi said.

Advertisement

He added that despite the fact that India’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government opposes Islamist organisations, “the strategic necessity to counter Pakistan has led it to engage with the Taliban proactively”.

India and Pakistan are nuclear-armed rivals which engaged in a four-day conflict in May 2025 after armed rebels killed Indian tourists in Pahalgam, a popular tourist spot in Indian-administered Kashmir, last April. New Delhi accused Pakistan of supporting rebel fighters, a charge Pakistan strongly denied.

For its part, Afghanistan took the opportunity to strongly condemn the Pahalgam attack and the Indian Ministry of External Affairs expressed “deep appreciation” to the Taliban for its “strong condemnation of the terrorist attack in Pahalgam … as well as for the sincere condolences”.

India has also condemned Pakistani military action in Afghanistan and has provided aid to thousands of Afghan refugees displaced from Pakistan.

So what is India’s endgame in Afghanistan?

Sharma, the OP Jindal Global University professor, said India wants to ensure that Pakistan and China, whose influence has grown in South Asia in recent years, “do not have a free run”, as “there is a divergence of interest on Afghanistan” with both Pakistan and its ally, China.

Advertisement

“There are security interests New Delhi is keen to further and protect for which engagement [with the Taliban] is the only option,” he added.

Anil Trigunayat, a former Indian diplomat, noted that while Afghanistan and Pakistan relations have their own dynamic, currently the Taliban leadership, even if not a monolith, refuses to play to the tunes of the Pakistan military and its intelligence agency.

“Hence they [Pakistan] accuse Indian complicity in Taliban actions in Pakistan,” he said.

But the Taliban, he said, “understands and appreciates India’s intent, policies and [humanitarian] contributions”, making its leaders keen to continue collaboration with New Delhi.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending