Could a new U.N. envoy move the needle on Afghanistan?

The first United Nations-led meeting of diplomatic representatives for Afghanistan — including from the United States, China and Russia — together with the Taliban was held in Doha in May. The initiative showed the U.N.'s renewed focus on addressing the crisis in the Taliban-controlled country.

The representatives convened again in Qatar on Feb. 18 and 19, hosted by U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres — though in this occasion, the Taliban boycotted the meeting, primarily because a small group of Afghan civil society representatives were also invited.

This, in my eyes, reveals the Taliban’s deep-rooted insecurity, which stems from their lack of domestic legitimacy. The group has twice resorted to extreme violence to seize power and its members are so isolated as to largely shy away from engaging with other Afghans, especially women.

In late December, a U.N. Security Council resolution tasked Guterres with appointing a special envoy for engaging with Afghan stakeholders, including female ones. Unlike past U.N. representatives who were tasked with executing existing policies, the envoy would have a narrow but well-defined mission, that of bringing all sides together to reach a political solution.

Therefore, when diplomatic representatives met in February, Afghans were expecting such a figure to be announced — but this did not happen. While recognizing the need for an appointee, participants could not agree on the role’s criteria, seniority, authority and terms of reference.

It is now up to the U.N. secretary-general and, especially, Under-Secretary-General for Political and Peacebuilding Affairs Rosemary DiCarlo to get member states to agree on a pick.

Once announced, this appointee would be in the best position to engage regional and international stakeholders and focus high-level attention on Afghanistan. The envoy would need to engage both Taliban and non-Taliban Afghans to initiate a long-overdue multistakeholder, intraAfghan dialogue — or, as Afghans call it, intraAfghan negotiations.

Speaking to several Afghan politicians, I have so far heard three names being floated as possible envoy candidates: Japanese diplomat Tadamichi Yamamoto, who was the secretary-general’s special representative for Afghanistan between 2016 and 2020, former British ambassador to Afghanistan Nicholas Kay and Turkey’s current Ambassador to Kabul, Cihad Erginay. Irrespective of who is appointed, a policy change is, fortunately, on the horizon.

Since the Taliban seized back control on Aug. 15, 2021, Afghanistan has plunged into a humanitarian emergency and basic freedoms, especially for women, have been severely restricted. But the international response to the crisis has been slow and inadequate, failing to meet the population's urgent needs.

So far, the Taliban interim government has not been recognized or considered legitimate internationally, but engagement with the Taliban has been the main policy employed to varying degrees by U.N. states.

However, Afghans I have spoken to both inside and outside of the country have mixed views about this approach, which does not appear to be shifting the status quo. In fact, a change in direction by further empowering non-Taliban Afghans would represent a breakthrough.

Broadly speaking, many Afghans have been critical of the policy of engagement with the Taliban from the start. In their view, the Taliban — some of whose leaders are still under sanctions and who, in my view, should once again be designated as a terrorist group by the U.N. — must face further sanctions still. Other Afghans are hopeful that diplomatic engagement could bring about positive change — but this hope is based on diplomats' opinions, rather than facts on the ground.

Some, instead, expect the international community to back armed resistance against the Taliban. In fact, most of those who were initially supportive of engagement are having second thoughts — and some are even talking to militants about joining or supporting the resistance to force the Taliban to the negotiating table.

Those who are already part of the armed resistance are counting the days until the international community loses hope that engaging with the Taliban will yield any results.

All U.N. members have emphasized the need for an intra-Afghan dialogue to establish an inclusive Islamic government, as was envisioned in the 2020 U.S.-Taliban deal, known as the Doha Agreement, that ended America’s two-decade-long war in Afghanistan.

However, extremist Taliban elements who are currently in charge of the group are opposed to such dialogue.

At the same time, the Taliban are welcoming and even encouraging engagement with international stakeholders as they profit from millions of dollars in aid, as a U.S. government authority has warned, while ordinary people are only minimally served.

To maintain this kind of engagement, the Taliban are establishing connections with diplomats and representatives of international organizations based in Kabul, Doha and beyond. These personal overtures have worked insofar as they have kept the international community hopeful that a positive change will come from within the Taliban.

However, that hope is fading quickly as over two and half years have gone by without a single significant sign of change, especially in the area of women’s rights. Instead, things are getting worse. The Taliban’s boycotting of the U.N. representatives’ meeting was a diplomatic slap in the face to all regional and international stakeholders, especially the secretary-general’s office, as well as the U.N. itself.

The appointment of a U.N. special envoy for Afghanistan offers an opportunity to overcome the impasse. The international community should use its leverage to push the Taliban to reverse repressive policies toward women and engage in negotiations with other Afghans. This cannot be done only with the kind of incentive-driven engagement policy pursued so far.

The U.N. should empower non-Taliban Afghans, especially women, by establishing an office designated to them — located outside of Afghanistan, given the current circumstances — like the one the Taliban were offered by Qatar in 2013. Such an office could serve as a mechanism to counterbalance the Taliban, laying the necessary groundwork for dialogue.

The office could also facilitate consultation and even collaboration between non-Taliban Afghans and the U.N. on issues such as the humanitarian crisis, work and education for women and girls, the economy, contrasting the drug trade and counterterrorism.

In the absence of a legitimate and internationally recognized Afghan government, such an office, preferably led by Afghan women, could provide a critical voice, guiding and collaborating with the international community on Afghans’ behalf. This could be a crucial first step toward building a more stable and representative future for the country.

Moreover, this effort could bring about the necessary political pressure on the Taliban to start compromising their hard-line, especially inhumane and un-Islamic policies targeting women. It could make the Taliban realize that an active Afghan alternative capable of challenging their authority is indeed out there.

And if the Taliban refuse to isolate their extremists, reform themselves as a group or accept dialogue, then this mechanism could even be elevated to the status of an Afghan government in exile.