Find similar content

Forget about Bagram: the Taliban are not afraid of US threats Kabul will not tolerate the deployment of foreign bases in the country, writes Haqqin, citing Afghan Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaki. This statement was made after negotiations with Russia. Trump had previously expressed interest in returning Americans to Bagram Air Base. The US president even threatened Afghanistan with serious consequences if there was no agreement on this issue. The author of the article recalls the circumstances under which Bagram came under the control of the Taliban in 2021. #Afghanistan#Military 👂More on Trump's Ear ⚠️

🎙 Russia's Permanent Representative to the UN Vassily Nebenzia’sanswers to media questions on the occasion of assuming UNSC Presidency by Russia (July 1, 2024) #Ukraine • President Putin in his recent remarks (of June 14) said that the reality changed, and we are ready anytime not just to interrupt the conflict, but to come to ending it, but the reality should be taken into account. The new reality that emerged during the period between April 22 and July 24. It was rejected by Kiev and by the West. But the problem for them is that the longer this thing continues, the more difficult the situation on the ground for them will be. <...> So, if they don't want to be realistic, let them not be. • We are discouraging all countries from providing arms for Ukraine. The destiny of the weapons that will be eventually exported to Ukraine is clear. They will be destroyed, as the other weapons that the West and the US are supplying Ukraine with. #Afghanistan • The Taliban is de facto the authorities of Afghanistan. <...> You have to recognize this fact and deal with them as such. • The rights of women and girls in Afghanistan should be observed and the government in Afghanistan should be inclusive, inclusive not just by nationalities, but by the political spectrum that exists to represent the country fully. The case today that it is not the fact and we have to accept it for the time being and continue pragmatic dealing with the current Afghan authorities. #Syria • You mentioned foreign presence in Syria. Yes, indeed. There are many foreign armies there; most of them are deployed there illegally. For example, the US that justifies its presence in Syria by Article 51 of the Charter. I wonder how Article 51 of the Charter works for the US in Syria. The Syrian conflict is not ending because the reality on the ground is not changing. The Syrian government is subject to numerous <...> sanctions, unilateral coercive measures, with most of them originating in the West of course. Read in full

🇦🇫🔎🇺🇸🔥🇮🇷Taliban approach to Iran and united states conflicts The evolving confrontation between the United States and Iran has become a defining test for regional actors, and few navigate it as carefully as the Taliban. Since returning to power in Afghanistan in 2021, the movement has adopted a pragmatic and restrained posture—one that reflects both ideological affinities with Iran and strategic caution toward United States ✏️Samyar Rostami Researcher in international relations ➡️The Taliban’s approach is shaped by a convergence of ideological, geographic, and economic factors. On the one hand, its governance model—rooted in the fusion of religion and state—shares certain conceptual overlaps with Iran’s political framework, particularly in its emphasis on religious authority and sovereignty. On the other hand, proximity matters: Iran is not only a neighbor but a critical economic partner, providing transit routes, fuel supplies, and access to international trade corridors. In this context, stability in Iran is not merely desirable but essential for Kabul’s own internal balance. Consequently, the Taliban has consistently criticized U.S. military actions against Iran, opposed sanctions, and emphasized respect for national sovereignty, while avoiding deeper involvement in Iran’s internal political dynamics. It seems that in practice and speech, the Taliban in the future will also have an informal approach towards Iran. But it will never move into an open alliance with Iran ➡️At the same time, the Taliban’s position is far from a formal alliance. Its leadership remains acutely aware of the risks associated with openly aligning against Washington. Relations with the United States are strained but not irrelevant; issues such as sanctions relief, access to frozen assets, and the pursuit of international legitimacy require maintaining at least minimal channels of communication. This duality produces a carefully calibrated policy: rhetorical support for Iran combined with strategic restraint. The Taliban condemns military escalation and signals solidarity with Tehran, yet avoids steps that would trigger direct confrontation with Washington or jeopardize its fragile diplomatic maneuverability. 🟦What emerges is not indecision but a deliberate balancing strategy. The Taliban seeks to preserve functional ties with Iran while insulating itself from the broader geopolitical conflict. Its policy reflects a broader regional logic in which survival depends less on ideological alignment than on managing interdependence. As tensions persist, this informal approach is likely to continue: closer practical cooperation with Iran, paired with limited and cautious engagement with the United States. In an increasingly polarized environment, the Taliban’s stance underscores a key reality of contemporary geopolitics—alignment is no longer binary, but conditional, fluid, and shaped by immediate necessity rather than long-term allegiance. #Afghanistan#Geopolitics#Iran#MiddleEast#USA READ MORE ✅@NewEasternOutlook

🗺🇵🇰🔥🇦🇫A New Flashpoint in South Asia: Pakistan, Afghanistan, and the Growing Security Crisis While global attention remains fixed on the war involving Iran, a dangerous escalation between Pakistan and Afghanistan is rapidly unfolding in South Asia ✏️Abbas Hashemite is a political observer and research analyst for regional and global geopolitical issues. ➡️The immediate driver of escalation has been the growing activity of militant groups such as Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, ISIS, and the Baloch Liberation Army, which Islamabad accuses of operating from Afghan territory. Since the return of the Taliban to power, Pakistan has experienced a sharp rise in cross-border attacks and has repeatedly demanded action from Kabul. The lack of decisive measures has led to a cycle of retaliation, including Pakistani airstrikes on suspected militant infrastructure and Afghan drone responses, transforming a long-standing security problem into an open military confrontation. The ongoing Pak-Afghan escalation, along with the US-Israel-Iran war, has detrimental implications for the whole world ➡️Beyond the battlefield, the conflict carries significant economic and geopolitical implications. Instability threatens projects such as the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, a key component of the Belt and Road Initiative, undermining regional connectivity and investor confidence. Pakistan’s strategic location makes the crisis particularly sensitive, as disruptions could affect trade routes linking South Asia with the Middle East and beyond, while also impacting the interests of external actors like China. 🟦At a deeper level, structural and historical tensions continue to drive instability. The unresolved dispute over the Durand Line fuels mutual distrust, while ideological ties between the Taliban and militant networks complicate security dynamics. Combined with shifting regional alignments and parallel crises elsewhere in Asia, the confrontation risks evolving into a prolonged conflict, highlighting the urgent need for diplomatic efforts to prevent further escalation. #Afghanistan#Militaryconflict#Pakistan READ MORE ✅@NewEasternOutlook

🇵🇰 🔥🇦🇫How the Ongoing Pak-Afghan War and the Regional Security Situation Threaten Pakistan’s Cohesion The armed escalation between Pakistan and Afghanistan in early 2026 is rapidly becoming a driver of wider regional instability, raising urgent questions about Pakistan’s internal security, diplomatic positioning, and long-term cohesion ✍️Abbas Hashemite is a political observer and research analyst for regional and global geopolitical issues. He is currently working as an independent researcher and journalist ➡️On 27 February 2026, Afghan forces reportedly launched a major offensive against Pakistani positions, describing it as retaliation for earlier Pakistani airstrikes in Nangarhar and Paktika. Islamabad maintains that its strikes targeted hideouts of Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA), and ISIS-K, groups it accuses of orchestrating deadly attacks inside Pakistan, including assaults in Islamabad, Bannu, and Bajaur. Pakistani officials argue that the Taliban authorities in Kabul have failed to prevent these organizations from operating from Afghan soil, despite repeated diplomatic engagements. The renewed clashes shattered a fragile ceasefire and triggered further cross-border strikes, with Pakistan asserting that it hit Afghan military installations and repelled skirmishes in Khyber and Chitral. While Pakistan retains conventional military superiority, the persistence of militant safe havens and retaliatory cycles has entrenched a volatile security dynamic along the frontier. A weak and unstable Pakistan best serves the regional and global ambitions of the United States and Israel ➡️Beyond the battlefield, the conflict exposes deeper structural vulnerabilities. Pakistan’s 2,640-kilometer border with Afghanistan—known as the Durand Line—remains disputed by Afghan nationalists, complicating counterterrorism coordination and border management. The ideological and tribal linkages between Afghan communities and Pakistan’s Pashtun population further blur the line between external and internal security. Since Pakistan’s 2014 “Zarb-e-Azb” operation drove many TTP leaders into Afghanistan, Islamabad has accused the group of directing attacks through networks that straddle the border. A prolonged war risks energizing sleeper cells and aggravating sectarian and separatist currents, particularly in Balochistan. At the same time, deteriorating ties between Kabul and Islamabad have coincided with Afghanistan’s renewed outreach to India, intensifying Pakistan’s longstanding rivalry with India and raising fears of a two-front strategic challenge. 🟦The broader regional environment compounds these pressures. Pakistan’s complex relations with the United States, its deepening partnerships with China and Russia, and heightened tensions surrounding Iran all intersect with the Afghan conflict. Some analysts warn that instability in Iran’s border regions, particularly Baloch-populated areas, could have spillover effects on Pakistan’s own Balochistan province. Meanwhile, Washington’s evolving South Asia policy under President Donald Trump has signaled limited appetite for mediating between Islamabad and Kabul. In this environment, sustained confrontation with Afghanistan risks stretching Pakistan’s military, inflaming domestic fault lines, and constraining its economic ambitions, including access to Central Asian markets. Whether Islamabad can prevent external conflict from translating into internal fragmentation will depend on its ability to combine calibrated security measures with diplomatic de-escalation and regional engagement. #Afghanistan#Conflictescalation#Militaryconflict#Pakistan READ MORE ✅@NewEasternOutlook

🎙 Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks and answers to media questions following the SCO Foreign Ministers Council meeting (Panaji, May 5, 2023) #SCO We have a common vision of problems persisting in the international arena. Our shared desire is to coordinate our actions at the #UN and on the Eurasian continent with such organisations as the #EAEU and #ASEAN, and more globally, to cooperate with the #BRICS countries. Our colleagues from Central Asia are interested in promoting cooperation on information security and the fight against organised crime and drug trafficking in the SCO space. We think it is important to establish relevant divisions and let them be coordinated by the SCO Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure. There is an understanding that the role of national currencies in settlements between SCO members should be increased. Practices currently taking shape within the Eurasian Development Bank, the Asian Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the BRICS New Development Bank could be used for this purpose. #Afghanistan Today, we came to terms on reaffirming the SCO-Afghanistan Contact Group. This group exists, although it has been some time since it met. One of the reasons is the Taliban’s status. Thus far, it is not recognised “de jure.” We are expecting the Taliban leaders to fulfill their promises on forming an inclusive government not only in terms of ethnic groups but also by ensuring the presence of the entire spectrum of Afghanistan’s political forces. This has yet to be done. There is convincing evidence to the effect that the US supports the terrorist groups entrenched in the territory of Afghanistan that are opposed to the Taliban, including the Islamic State, the Islamic Movement of East Turkestan, and Al-Qaeda. The Americans have not abandoned their attempts to reintroduce US military infrastructure in the region surrounding Afghanistan, in Central Asia. Everyone is well aware of the serious threat inherent in these attempts. We will resolutely oppose them. Read in full

🚨🇮🇳💥 - India’s Delhi Police confirmed that Monday’s explosion near the Red Fort Metro Station was a terror attack, with the initial investigation revealing that the handlers of the attack were based in #Turkiye and #Nangarhar in #Afghanistan. - TOI

Starmer vs Trump: the Row Has Upended Years of Cooperation Between the UK and the US Keir Starmer has issued an unprecedented rebuke to Donald Trump for his “insulting and frankly appalling” remarks about British troops in Afghanistanand suggested he should apologise. After a week of fractious relations with the White House, Starmer said he was not surprised that relatives of British soldiers killed in Afghanistan were hurt by Trump claiming they avoided the frontline. Starmer’s critical intervention marks an escalation of tensions with Trump’s administration after the president had earlier in the week criticised the UK for giving up the Chagos Islands to Mauritius. On Friday night, the government was forced to delay its bill on the Chagos Islands in the House of Lords. After a day of mounting outrage around the world over the US president’s claim that British and Nato troops who fought in Afghanistan avoided the frontlines, he paid tribute to the 457 members of the armed services who lost their lives during the conflict. Speaking in Davos on Wednesday, he made similar claims against the 32-member military alliance, saying: “I know them all very well. I’m not sure that they’d be there. I know we’d be there for them. I don’t know that they would be there for us.” A total of 3,486 Nato troops died in the 20-year Afghanistan conflict, of whom 2,461 were US service personnel. Canada recorded 165 deaths, including civilians. Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, accused Trump of “denigrating” British troops and said his comments were “flat-out nonsense”. Posting on X shortly before Starmer’s afternoon broadcast, the Reform UK leader, Nigel Farage, said: “Donald Trump is wrong. For 20 years our armed forces fought bravely alongside America’s in Afghanistan.” The Liberal Democrats urged Starmer to summon the US ambassador “over this insult to our brave troops”, with the Lib Dem leader, Ed Davey, accusing Trump of avoiding military service. “How dare he question their sacrifice. Farage and all the others still fawning over Trump should be ashamed,” he said. It is understood there has not been any call between No 10 and Trump and the UK is not considering admonishing the US ambassador. The former head of the British army Lord Dannatt condemned the comments on TalkTV, saying: “He has got the disrespect and outrageous choice of words to say that we hung back from the frontline. My God, we were certainly on the frontline, as 457 young people died.” Stephen Stewart, a former soldier and an author and journalist, said Trump’s comments were “as offensive as they are inaccurate”, while Richard Streatfeild, a former army major in Afghanistan and now a Liberal Democrat councillor, said: “To be told that your service is not as demanding or as difficult as the Americans’ is untrue and deeply insulting.” The US remains the only country to have invoked article 5 of Nato’s collective security provision, activated after the 11 September terrorist attacks in 2001. #starmer#trump#afghanistan#row#nato 📱American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸

🇦🇫🏴Terrorism and Security in Northern Afghanistan and the Regional Formula for Cooperation Recent deadly attacks along the Tajik-Afghan border, targeting Chinese nationals, underscore the persistent threat from militant groups in northern Afghanistan and highlight the urgent need for effective regional cooperation over external intervention ✍Author:Samyar Rostami Political observer and senior researcher in international relations ➡️The attacks in late November 2025, originating from Afghanistan's Badakhshan province, highlight northern Afghanistan as a volatile security nexus. Groups like ISIS-K (banned in Russia) exploit the region's mountainous terrain, ethnic diversity, and porous borders. While ISIS-K is the primary suspect, some analyses suggest the Taliban's weakening control in the north, internal factional disputes, or even tacit agreements with other Islamist groups may be contributing factors. This complexity is compounded by a severe economic crisis, with poverty, unemployment, and a shift in opium production creating fertile ground for recruitment. The establishment of national and intra-Afghan negotiations, free from foreign interference, with the help of neighbors, is an effort to provide broader stability and reduce the risk of terrorism ➡️The Taliban government, dominated by Pashtuns, struggles to impose security in the ethnically diverse north. Its claims of having neutralized terrorist threats and banned drugs are contradicted by UN reports citing over 20 active terrorist groups. ISIS-K maintains thousands of fighters, using advanced technology and recruiting from Central Asia, while Al-Qaeda and the Pakistani Taliban (TTP) operate training camps. The expulsion of refugees and relocation of militants further destabilizes the border region, risking the infiltration of "sleeper cells" into Central Asia. 🟦Imposed, interventionist approaches have failed. The path to stability lies in enhanced multilateral regional cooperation, such as the Moscow format and Tehran summits, focusing on intelligence sharing, coordinated security measures, and support for an inclusive intra-Afghan political process. Lasting security requires addressing the root causes of instability within Afghanistan through regional consensus, not unilateral demands or foreign interference. #Afghanistan#counterterrorism#Tajikistan#Terrorism READ MORE ✅@NewEasternOutlook

🇵🇰 🔥🇦🇫Why Pakistan-Afghanistan Relations Cannot Afford Further Escalation Renewed air strikes and mounting accusations over cross-border militancy risk dragging both neighbors into a cycle of retaliation neither can afford ✍️Abbas Hashemite is a political observer and research analyst for regional and global geopolitical issues, currently working as an independent researcher and journalist ➡️On February 22, 2026, the Pakistan Air Force carried out strikes in Afghanistan’s Nangarhar and Paktika provinces, targeting what Islamabad described as hideouts of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan and affiliates of the Islamic State. Pakistani officials framed the operation as a response to repeated cross-border attacks allegedly launched from Afghan territory since the Taliban’s return to power in Kabul. Afghan authorities, however, condemned the strikes as violations of sovereignty, reporting civilian casualties and warning of a “measured and appropriate response.” The exchange underscores a persistent trust deficit that has deepened amid recurring violence along the porous frontier. Hostile relations between the two sides are equally detrimental to both sides ➡️The deterioration in ties carries serious security implications for both states. Pakistan has experienced a surge in militant attacks, including assaults on civilian and military targets, which it attributes to groups operating from Afghan soil. Kabul denies harboring such elements but faces mounting pressure to demonstrate effective control over armed factions within its territory. Each round of cross-border action fuels nationalist sentiment and hardens positions, increasing the risk of miscalculation. Beyond the immediate violence, diplomatic strains have already influenced regional alignments, complicating Islamabad’s strategic environment and narrowing space for constructive engagement. 🟦Escalation also threatens critical economic and connectivity projects that depend on stable bilateral relations. Initiatives such as the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India Pipeline and the CASA-1000 are designed to enhance regional energy integration and address Pakistan’s domestic shortages, while Afghanistan stands to benefit from transit revenues and infrastructure development. Prolonged hostility jeopardizes these ventures and undermines broader Central and South Asian connectivity ambitions. Given their intertwined security and economic interests, Islamabad and Kabul have strong incentives to prioritize dialogue, address concerns over militant activity through verifiable mechanisms, and prevent further destabilization of an already fragile region. #Afghanistan#counterterrorism#Militaryconflict#Pakistan#Terrorism READ MORE ✅@NewEasternOutlook