Afghanistan Under Taliban: Centralized Authority with Weak State Framework

DID Press: A recent analysis by Pakistan’s Express Tribune highlights Afghanistan’s current governance under the Taliban, describing it as a country with highly centralized political control but lacking the institutions necessary for an effective state.

It argues that Taliban power is concentrated in Kandahar province rather than capital Kabul, with a core group of clerics close to leader Hibatullah Akhundzada directing key policy decisions. While this centralization has strengthened leadership cohesion in the short term, experts warn it could create structural fragility over time.

Government ministries largely act as implementers, leaving little room for innovation or independent policy solutions. The analysis also points to a dual power structure: Kandahar-based clerics set ideological guidelines, while networks like the Haqqani faction wield considerable security authority. Unclear succession mechanisms for the Taliban leadership remain a major concern for long-term stability.

In the education sector, the Taliban’s direct oversight emphasizes ideology, but the continued exclusion of girls and the removal of civic, legal, and economic subjects may limit Afghanistan’s future human capital. Economically, the country operates under a “cost-control” approach, heavily dependent on international aid and limited domestic revenue. Widespread unemployment and dependence on humanitarian support have weakened the social contract between the state and citizens. Restrictions on women’s participation in aid work have further complicated service delivery.

Security gains include a reduction in widespread violence and partial containment of ISIS-K, largely through informal agreements with independent armed groups and the integration of former fighters into security forces. However, professionalization remains low, increasing the risk of future fissures.

Overall, the analysis portrays Taliban policymaking as unpredictable, citing sudden internet shutdowns and abrupt reversals of regulations as examples of governance that prioritizes control over transparency or public accountability.