Ending Sanctions on the Taliban: A Good Idea

Ending Sanctions on the Taliban: A Good Idea

Ending Sanctions on the Taliban: A Good Idea

And drawing a bright line: the Taliban is not Al Qaeda.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

A German diplomat who chairs the UN Security Council’s sanctions committee has spoken out forcefully about the need to remove members of the Taliban from the UN’s sanctions list. More importantly, the diplomat, Peter Wittig, the German ambassador to the United Nations, says that although the list penalizes members of both the Taliban and Al Qaeda, the two groups ought to be treated as separate and distinct. Said Wittig:

“It’s now time to separate these two groups because they have different fields of action and their nature is different. Of course, the political message would be clear.”

This has long been one the Taliban’s chief demands and a precondition for starting peace talks. The Taliban argues, not without reason, that if the sanctions list blocks their funds, limits their ability to travel, and so on, they can’t exactly engage in diplomacy. For nearly two years, the government of Afghanistan, including President Karzai, has strongly backed the removal of the Taliban officials from the list. For most of that time, the United States expressed opposition to the idea, although lately Washington has shown that it’s ready to consider the step, which would require a vote in the UN Security Council. One stumbling block there is Russia, which bitterly opposes lifting sanctions against the Taliban and has hinted that it might veto such a step. But a little diplomacy by the United States, Germany and other countries could undoubtedly get the Russians on board.

But, especially after the killing of Osama bin Laden, it’s especially important to make a clear distinction between the Taliban and Osama’s gang. The Taliban is almost entirely focused on Afghanistan, its membership is made up of Afghans and it’s never conducted terrorism against the United States or other countries outside its region. Al Qaeda, on the other hand, is focused on a worldwide jihad, nearly all of its members are non-Afghans (Arabs, Chechens, Uzbeks and others), and it has engaged in nihilistic terror against random targets around the globe. (In the past, I’ve written about the distinctions between the two organizations, as in this piece: "The Taliban Is Not Al Qaeda.")

The UN blacklist predates 9/11, having been enacted in 1999 against 142 Taliban officials and 350 members of Al Qaeda. Only five Taliban officials have been de-listed, in January 2010.

Diplomats seeking to get peace talks with the Taliban started enthusiastically support the idea of de-listing the Taliban officials. Germany, which has taken the lead in trying to get talks going—with American support—is in the lead, along with UN officials inside and outside Afghanistan.

Meanwhile, a glum Henry Kissinger, writing an op-ed in the Washington Post, reads the handwriting on the wall correctly:

“The quest for an alternative [to war] has taken the form—it is widely reported—of negotiations under German sponsorship between representatives of Mullah Omar, the head of the Taliban, and American officials. Most observers will treat this as the beginning of an inexorable withdrawal.”

Like this blog post? Read it on The Nation’s free iPhone App, NationNow.

Disobey authoritarians, support The Nation

Over the past year you’ve read Nation writers like Elie Mystal, Kaveh Akbar, John Nichols, Joan Walsh, Bryce Covert, Dave Zirin, Jeet Heer, Michael T. Klare, Katha Pollitt, Amy Littlefield, Gregg Gonsalves, and Sasha Abramsky take on the Trump family’s corruption, set the record straight about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s catastrophic Make America Healthy Again movement, survey the fallout and human cost of the DOGE wrecking ball, anticipate the Supreme Court’s dangerous antidemocratic rulings, and amplify successful tactics of resistance on the streets and in Congress.

We publish these stories because when members of our communities are being abducted, household debt is climbing, and AI data centers are causing water and electricity shortages, we have a duty as journalists to do all we can to inform the public.

In 2026, our aim is to do more than ever before—but we need your support to make that happen. 

Through December 31, a generous donor will match all donations up to $75,000. That means that your contribution will be doubled, dollar for dollar. If we hit the full match, we’ll be starting 2026 with $150,000 to invest in the stories that impact real people’s lives—the kinds of stories that billionaire-owned, corporate-backed outlets aren’t covering. 

With your support, our team will publish major stories that the president and his allies won’t want you to read. We’ll cover the emerging military-tech industrial complex and matters of war, peace, and surveillance, as well as the affordability crisis, hunger, housing, healthcare, the environment, attacks on reproductive rights, and much more. At the same time, we’ll imagine alternatives to Trumpian rule and uplift efforts to create a better world, here and now. 

While your gift has twice the impact, I’m asking you to support The Nation with a donation today. You’ll empower the journalists, editors, and fact-checkers best equipped to hold this authoritarian administration to account. 

I hope you won’t miss this moment—donate to The Nation today.

Onward,

Katrina vanden Heuvel 

Editor and publisher, The Nation

Ad Policy
x