Connect with us

World

The $2.8 Billion Hole in U.S. Sanctions on Iran

Published

on

The .8 Billion Hole in U.S. Sanctions on Iran

Tugboats maneuvered the tanker Eternal Fortune into a berth at the Kharg Island oil terminal on Oct. 28, 2023, while it was falsely broadcasting its location as in the Gulf of Oman. The vessel was insured by an American company.

Maxar Technologies

Tug boats maneuvered the tanker Eternal Fortune into a berth at the Kharg Island oil terminal on Oct. 28, 2023 while it was falsely broadcasting its location as in the Gulf of Oman. The vessel was insured by an American company.

Maxar Technologies

Advertisement

For months, as Iran-backed groups attacked U.S. forces and allies in the Middle East, the Biden administration hailed its efforts to restrict Iran’s oil revenue — and the country’s ability to fund proxy militias. The Treasury secretary told Congress that her teams were “doing everything that they possibly can to crack down” on illegal shipments, and a senior White House adviser said that “extreme sanctions” had effectively stalled Iran’s energy sector.

But the sanctions failed to stop oil worth billions of dollars from leaving Iran over the past year, a New York Times investigation has found, revealing a significant gap in U.S. oversight.

The oil was transported aboard 27 tankers, using liability insurance obtained from an American company. That meant that the U.S. authorities could have disrupted the oil’s transport by advising the insurer, the New York-based American Club, to revoke the coverage, which is often a requirement for tankers to do business.

Instead, the 27 tankers were able to transport shipments across at least 59 trips since 2023, The Times found, with half the vessels carrying oil on multiple journeys.

Advertisement

The Treasury Department did not respond to a question about whether it was aware the ships had transported Iranian oil while insured by the American Club.

The tankers exhibited warning signs that industry experts, and the Treasury, have said collectively warrant greater scrutiny. Among other red flags, the ships are: owned by shell companies, older than average vessels and use a tactic called “spoofing” to hide their true locations.

The Times found 27 ships picking up Iranian oil on at least 59 trips since 2023

Satellite imagery, much of it freely accessible to the public, captured the tankers during their oil transports.

fortune galaxy

Advertisement

Feb. 25, 2023

galaxy star

Mar. 10, 2023

Advertisement

cathay kirin

Mar. 12, 2023

duplic dynamic

Jun. 11, 2023

Advertisement

fortune galaxy

Jun. 24, 2023

fortune galaxy

Advertisement

Jul. 13, 2023

cathay kirin

Aug. 8, 2023

Advertisement

fortune galaxy

Aug. 18, 2023

fortune galaxy

Sept. 4, 2023

Advertisement

galaxy star

Sept. 19, 2023

fortune galaxy

Advertisement

Oct. 4, 2023

eternal fortune

Oct. 29, 2023

Advertisement

eternal success

Nov. 23, 2023

fortune galaxy

Nov. 24, 2023

Advertisement

Sources: Copernicus Sentinel-2, Planet Labs, Maxar Technologies, TankerTrackers.com, Spire Global, MarineTraffic

Satellite images on display represent one of several methods that The Times relied on to locate each tanker.

It is unclear who the U.S. government considers primarily responsible for identifying suspicious tankers. The Treasury is tasked with administering sanctions by investigating and blacklisting individuals or companies participating in illicit activities. But it places some of the burden on insurers to monitor for suspicious behavior through the regular release of advisories and alerts.

Advertisement

To identify the shipments of Iranian oil, The Times built a database of thousands of tankers and their whereabouts using maritime data and satellite imagery. Vessels whose voyage paths showed irregularities were cross-referenced with information provided by Samir Madani, co-founder of TankerTrackers.com, a company that monitors oil shipping.

SynMax and Pole Star, two other companies that monitor shipping, provided additional data.

In late-January, several weeks after the American Club was mentioned at a Congressional hearing titled “Restricting Rogue-State Revenue”, coverage for many of the tankers identified by The Times abruptly ended. The company said that the stoppages were the result of its own internal investigations. Five of the vessels are still insured by the company, according to data listed on its website; the American Club said it is still investigating those ships.

The Times’s findings come as the Biden administration is under increasing scrutiny from lawmakers and advocacy groups for its handling of sanctions on Iran.

“It is very concerning,” said Senator Maggie Hassan, a Democrat of New Hampshire, who has filed a bill to strengthen the enforcement of sanctions on deceptive ships.

Advertisement

“The United States must use every tool at its disposal to identify, stop and sanction these bad actors,” she said. “These new revelations highlight the stakes.”

In response to Times findings, a Treasury spokesperson said in a statement: “Treasury remains focused on targeting Iran’s sources of illicit funding, including exposing evasion networks and disrupting billions of dollars in revenue.”

The spokesperson added that this month the department had taken action against what it called a Hong Kong-based front company, which U.S. officials said had funded Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps.

Kharg Island, pictured in 2017, is one of Iran’s main oil terminals where many of the American Club-insured tankers loaded oil.

Fatemeh Bahrami/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

Advertisement

The insurance provided by companies like the American Club is a key factor in the tankers’ ability to move oil; industry insiders call it a vessel’s “ticket to trade.” Most major ports insist that ships have proof of liability coverage, among other requirements, before they can enter and do business.

The American Club is one of only 12 major insurers of its kind, and the only one based in the United States. Specifically, the company says, its policies cover third parties affected during an accident caused by a ship’s negligence.

Because of these insurers’ importance to shipping, they have been consulted by the U.S. government when developing sanctions on Russian oil sales.

Daniel Tadros, the American Club’s chief operating officer, said his company has one of the most stringent compliance programs in the industry. But he said that the company’s six-person compliance team was overwhelmed each month with hundreds of inquiries about potentially suspicious vessels, and that investigating even a single case takes time.

Advertisement

“It’s impossible for us to know on a daily basis exactly what every ship is doing, where it’s going, what it’s carrying, who its owners are,” Mr. Tadros said. “I would like to think that governments have a lot more capability, manpower, resources to follow that.”

He added that the U.S. government had only recently suggested the use of satellite imagery for maritime-related businesses looking for sanctions evasion. Satellite imagery has been used as a ship-tracking tool in the industry for at least a decade.

Shipowners willing to skirt trade restrictions can make more than their normal commissions. But to maintain business connections with the West, including with insurers, they may resort to using deceptive tactics.

Since the start of 2023, the 27 vessels moved roughly 59 million barrels of oil, according to a Times analysis. The calculation is based on a tanker’s depth in the water before and after the oil was loaded, a measurement used by industry analysts.

There is no official source detailing the amount of oil that leaves Iran. According to estimates from Kpler, a company that monitors global trade, the oil carried by the tankers would amount to roughly 9 percent of Iran’s oil exports over that period.

Advertisement

Iranian oil pickups by American Club-insured tankers since January 2023

Sources: Copernicus Sentinel-2, Planet Labs, Maxar Technologies, Spire Global, MarineTraffic, TankerTrackers.com

Note: Pickups include those made at Iranian ports as well as via transfer at sea from other ships to American Club-insured ships. The map does not represent all oil pickups The Times found.

Many of the tankers ultimately ended up in China, which has tripled its imports of Iranian oil over the past two years.

Advertisement

Some of the shipments continued into the fall, as one Iran-backed group, Hamas, led the Oct. 7 assault on Israel, and other Iran-aligned militants, like the Houthis in Yemen, launched attacks on shipping routes and U.S. forces in the region.

By then, the tankers had transported at least $2.8 billion in crude oil, based on the lowest reported prices of Iranian oil in 2023.

That dollar amount could be higher. The Times found eleven more tankers, anchored off Iranian oil ports last year, that used deceptive practices and carried American Club insurance. Although there is little other reason for the ships to hide their presence, The Times could not verify whether they loaded oil.

Where contact information was available, The Times sought comment from more than 40 entities linked to the tankers involved in moving Iranian oil. None replied.

Some experts expressed doubt that the American Club was doing everything it could to identify deceptive ships.

Advertisement

“Responsible, reputable insurers waste no time in confronting their clients or club members,” Mr. Madani of TankerTrackers.com said.

David Tannenbaum, a former sanctions compliance officer for the Treasury Department who now works as a consultant for a compliance advisory company, said his research showed that the American Club covers a large proportion of deceptive vessels when compared with similar insurers.

“While we’ve seen spoofers infiltrate almost all of the major protection and indemnity clubs, they are definitely a leader,” he said.

Last week, Bloomberg reported that the American Club had insured more ships suspected of violating sanctions than other comparable insurers, according to data from United Against Nuclear Iran, a privately funded group advocating stronger sanctions on Iran.

(Many of the vessels noted by the group were also identified by The Times. Mr. Tadros, the American Club executive, said his company had removed insurance for the claims it could corroborate. He said in some cases United Against Nuclear Iran presented flawed evidence, which The Times also concluded for one of the accused tankers.)

Advertisement

The Times was able to use satellite imagery and information available to the shipping industry, such as signals that ships transmit to report their purported locations, to identify the tankers.

The tankers’ deception mainly involved a practice known as “spoofing” in which vessels broadcast fake route information to hide their true locations. Last August, for example, the tanker Glory broadcast that it was off the coast of the United Arab Emirates when it was really loading oil in Asaluyeh, Iran.

A spoofed location near Dubai obscures an oil pickup over 200 miles away in Iran

Sources: Copernicus Sentinel-2, Spire Global, MarineTraffic, TankerTrackers.com, SynMax

Note: Locations relative to each other are approximate in time.

Advertisement

In some cases, tankers also conducted ship-to-ship transfers, exchanging goods with another vessel at sea. The practice is common, but can be used to conceal a cargo’s origin, especially when used with spoofing. Ship-to-ship transfers near Iran frequently occurred just off the coast, such as when the tanker Shalimar took on oil in October. For each transfer, The Times traced the cargo back to Iranian oil terminals.

A faked location hides a pickup from another vessel at sea

Sources: Copernicus Sentinel-2, Spire Global, MarineTraffic, TankerTrackers.com

Note: Locations relative to each other are approximate in time.

Advertisement

The Times also found some tanker crews altering the physical appearance of their ships. On one spoofing vessel, a red tarp was spread over its green deck in an apparent effort to disguise itself from satellites.

How a spoofing tanker used a tarp to change its appearance

A month after leaving China, the American Club-insured tanker Irises reaches the Gulf of Oman for at least the fourth time in 2023.

Advertisement

Red tarps appear partially covering the deck of the Irises. The ship begins spoofing its location as it approaches the Persian Gulf.

Elsewhere, a ship owned by the National Iranian Tanker Company loads oil from Kharg Island.

The two ships meet in the Persian Gulf, with more red tarp visible on the Irises’ deck. The Iranian ship transfers oil to the Irises.

Advertisement

Sources: Planet Labs, Copernicus Sentinel-2, Spire Global, MarineTraffic, TankerTrackers.com

Even though the tankers used deceptive tactics, their spoofing had identifiable patterns. Many pretended to anchor off Oman or in the Persian Gulf for days, while satellite imagery showed they were not there. Some ships even broadcasted signals showing them on land and moving at high speeds, a physical impossibility.

Several of the tankers had a history of picking up oil in other countries under U.S. sanctions. Before they moved the Iranian oil, a Times analysis found, eight of the tankers spoofed their locations while carrying Venezuelan oil that was subject to sanctions. It’s unclear if they were insured by the American Club at the time.

Advertisement

One of the tankers did carry American Club insurance when The Times found it likely evading Russian sanctions last year.

The American Club’s role in insuring the 27 tankers could put the company in potential violation of sanctions, industry experts said.

Mr. Tadros disagreed. He said the company includes a clause in its contracts, based on Treasury guidance, that nullifies coverage if a ship violates sanctions. He argued this protects the insurer from being complicit in potential violations.

“The American Club takes its obligations seriously and works diligently to comply with sanctions regulations,” Mr. Tadros said.

The Treasury office has publicly enforced sanctions on the American Club only once in the past 20 years. In 2013, the office announced that it found the insurer had processed dozens of claims for ships that violated sanctions on Cuba, Sudan and Iran. Treasury officials calculated the penalty for the apparent violations totaled more than $1.7 million.

Advertisement

Ultimately, the office said the American Club did “not appear to have been willful or reckless” and the case was settled. The company agreed to pay a reduced fine of $348,000.

Sources and Methodology

Times reporters built a database of nearly 20,000 tankers and their owners, operators, managers and insurers by combining information from Equasis; the International Maritime Organization; and Pole Star, a maritime intelligence company. Times reporters cross-referenced this information with the websites of the major insurance companies, which all maintain freely accessible databases of ships they insure.

The publicly available location data of the ships, known as their automatic identification system or AIS, was obtained through MarineTraffic and Spire Global. The platforms show live ship locations around the world and keep records of past voyages.

To detect any irregularities in the AIS paths that may be signs of deceptive practices, The Times used data on spoofing ships provided by TankersTrackers.com, as well as from SynMax, a satellite data analytics company, and Spire Global; and information collected through The Times’s own reporting. Reporters then crossed-referenced the sources with satellite imagery.

Advertisement

The satellite imagery used to search for the ships’ reported and actual locations came from Planet Labs, Maxar Technologies and the European Space Agency’s Copernicus Sentinel-2 satellite, which is publicly available. A large share of the spoofing tankers had already been spotted in Iranian waters by TankerTrackers.com.

To estimate the amount of oil carried in each shipment, The Times looked at how deep a ship’s hull dropped below the waterline after taking cargo. This number, known as draught depth, is publicly reported by each ship. The Times verified the changes in draught depth with Samir Madani at TankerTrackers.com.

The barrels’ worth was determined by taking the lowest reported price of Iranian crude oil in 2023, which stood at approximately $70 per barrel, and applying a commonly cited discount price of $10 per barrel for Chinese buyers. China was the most common destination for crude oil tracked by The Times. The Times used data obtained from Kpler, a company that monitors global trade, to estimate Iran’s total oil exports.

These are the 27 ships that The Times identified as using deceptive tactics to transport Iranian oil products. The ships are listed with their names, which can change frequently, and their International Maritime Organization numbers, which are permanent identification numbers.

I.M.O.

Advertisement
Ship Name
9208473 azza
9294240 cathay kirin
9247780 datura
9337195 duplic dynamic
9230907 eternal fortune
9307633 eternal success
9257010 fortune galaxy
9247792 gabrielle
9237632 galaxy star
9247077 glory
9237618 gulf knot
9254082 irises
9315654 kapok

I.M.O.

Ship Name
9174397 lisa
9245794 marianne
9133082 muland
9232931 narcissus
9408798 penna
9174220 selene
9296810 serendi
9295593 shalimar
9226011 sincere 02
9263693 sino star
9252436 starry
9224570 tabark
9245782 toyomi
9007386 venus 7

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