11 October 2025, Indian Express Editorial Analysis

Express View on engaging with Taliban: A necessity

It is an acknowledgement that, in a competitive neighbourhood, maintaining ties with Kabul is a geostrategic necessity

Ever since the Taliban seized Kabul in August 2021, India has engaged with it gradually and incrementally. A big breakthrough came in January 2025, when Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri met Afghanistan’s Foreign Minister, Amir Khan Muttaqi, in Dubai. Now on his first official visit to India, Muttaqi on Friday met External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, who announced that India will upgrade ties and reopen its embassy in Kabul. This follows their positive conversation in May, days after the India-Pakistan ceasefire following the Pahalgam terror attack, which was unequivocally condemned by the Taliban. The series of engagements confirms that New Delhi recognises the ground reality that the Taliban is the only force, for now, that appears capable of controlling all of Afghanistan. It is also an acknowledgement that, in a highly competitive neighbourhood, maintaining ties with the Taliban is a geostrategic necessity.

Relations between the Taliban and Pakistan have deteriorated sharply in the recent past. Islamabad has accused the Taliban of sheltering the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan and has carried out airstrikes inside Afghan territory targeting alleged hideouts. As recently as Thursday, the Taliban blamed Pakistan for explosions in Kabul and Paktika province. Meanwhile, Pakistan’s mass expulsion of Afghan nationals has further strained ties. In this fraught context, India’s position was evident in Jaishankar’s remarks to Muttaqi on Friday, where he stressed that India and Afghanistan have a “common commitment towards growth and prosperity”, which are “endangered by the shared threat of cross-border terrorism” and that there must be “coordinated efforts” to “combat terrorism in all its forms and manifestations”. New Delhi should use its growing ties with the Taliban to help prevent Afghanistan from turning into a launchpad for anti-India terror groups.

Beyond food, healthcare, disaster relief, and infrastructure projects, India has shown support for the Taliban on the global stage recently by joining Pakistan, China, and Russia in opposing US President Donald Trump’s bid to take over Bagram airbase in Afghanistan. The Jaishankar-Muttaqi meeting makes it clear that the Taliban wants India to engage more with Afghanistan, citing “long civilisational and people-to-people ties for centuries.” To be sure, this growing entente coexists with a disquieting reality: The Taliban remains an autocratic regime with scant regard for human rights, particularly those of women. As recently as Monday, the UN Human Rights Council agreed to establish an “ongoing, independent investigative mechanism” to probe abuses in Afghanistan. This is also why, despite greater engagement, India still refrains from formally recognising the Taliban government. To not talk, however, carries its own risks. Beijing has already signed major investment and security agreements with the Taliban, and India cannot afford to let Afghanistan, a country of immense regional importance, drift entirely into China’s orbit. New Delhi must therefore maintain a cautious engagement with Kabul, balancing pragmatic interests with its commitment to the well-being of Afghanistan’s people.

Overall Analysis

The editorial argues that India’s recent decision to deepen engagement with the Taliban is not a matter of choice but of geopolitical necessity. The narrative unfolds in a measured, analytical tone, combining diplomatic realism with ethical caution. It acknowledges that while the Taliban’s regime remains deeply problematic—especially regarding human rights—ignoring Afghanistan altogether would leave India strategically disadvantaged in a region where China and Pakistan are active players.

The first paragraph outlines the evolution of India’s approach toward the Taliban — from cautious observation to formal engagement. By mentioning key diplomatic meetings and the reopening of the Indian embassy in Kabul, the editorial presents India’s shift as a pragmatic adaptation to ground realities. The language is factual, underscoring incremental engagement as a deliberate, calculated move rather than a sudden policy change.

The second paragraph moves into the broader regional context. Through the lens of India-Pakistan-Afghanistan dynamics, the author highlights the deterioration of Pakistan-Taliban relations, using this as a backdrop for India’s opportunity to expand influence. The editorial uses terms like “fraught context” and “coordinated efforts to combat terrorism” to emphasize both volatility and strategic cooperation. The author suggests that engagement with the Taliban can serve India’s counterterrorism interests and help prevent Afghanistan from becoming a haven for anti-India groups.

In the final section, the tone becomes more cautious and evaluative. The writer recognizes India’s developmental and humanitarian contributions to Afghanistan while also warning of the moral dilemma in dealing with an autocratic regime. References to the UN Human Rights Council and the Taliban’s record on women’s rights bring balance to the argument. The editorial concludes by endorsing a middle path — pragmatic engagement without formal recognition — as the best way to secure regional stability while upholding democratic and humanitarian principles.

Overall, the piece blends strategic realism with moral restraint, advocating diplomacy grounded in national interest but aware of ethical complexities.

Important Vocabulary (5)

1. Geostrategic – relating to politics and strategy influenced by geography.
2. Fraught – filled with tension or likely to result in something undesirable.
3. Entente – friendly understanding or informal alliance between states.
4. Autocratic – relating to a ruler with absolute power and little regard for public opinion.
5. Pragmatic – dealing with situations realistically rather than idealistically.

Conclusion & Tone

The editorial concludes that India’s engagement with the Taliban is a strategic necessity shaped by evolving regional realities. While India must remain wary of legitimizing an undemocratic regime, complete disengagement would be counterproductive. The writer thus advocates a cautious, interest-driven diplomacy that protects national security while maintaining humanitarian credibitility.

Tone: Analytical, pragmatic, and cautiously optimistic – balancing realism with moral awareness.