A Surge in Radical Governments, the Hope of Democracy
20-01-2025
10:35 AM

Context
- The trajectory of global reactions to Islamic radicalism highlights a stark pattern: legitimacy and engagement appear conditional on power consolidation by these groups.
- The cases of Afghanistan in 2021, Syria in 2024, and the recent developments in Bangladesh exemplify this trend.
- Amid these developments, it is important to examine these scenarios, emphasising the broader implications for regional stability and international relations.
A Case Study in Legitimising Radical Regimes: The Taliban and Afghanistan
- The U.S. and Global Powers’ Response
- The withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan culminated in a chaotic handover, highlighted by the deadly suicide bombing at Kabul airport, killing 13 U.S. troops and many Afghan civilians.
- The logistical mishap of leaving $7.1 billion worth of U.S. military equipment behind further compounded the situation, raising concerns about these resources being used to bolster Taliban control.
- Yet, despite this backdrop, global powers, including the U.S., China, and Russia, moved swiftly to engage with the new regime.
- The Irony of International Cooperation
- The cooperation extended to the Taliban by the Troika Plus (U.S., China, Russia, and Pakistan) starkly contrasted with the preceding efforts to marginalise India’s role in Afghanistan.
- In the weeks leading to the Taliban’s takeover, this coalition sought to exclude India from discussions on Afghanistan’s future.
- For example, a reference to the Heart of Asia Conference on Afghanistan was removed from a United Nations Security Council (UNSC) draft statement due to India’s involvement in the conference.
- However, events took an ironic turn when India assumed the presidency of the UNSC in August 2021, just as the Taliban seized power.
- This position allowed India to influence UNSC Resolution 2593, which emphasised that Afghan soil should not be used for terrorist activities.
- India played a pivotal role in ensuring that the resolution explicitly referenced terrorist organisations, including the Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed, both linked to Pakistan.
- Despite this diplomatic success, global powers exhibited little political will to enforce the resolution, allowing the Taliban to operate without accountability.
The Case of Syria and Bangladesh
- Syria: A Recurrent Pattern
- The toppling of Bashar al-Assad in 2024 by Abu Muhammad al-Jolani, leader of Hay’at Tahrir Al-Sham (HTS), mirrors the Taliban’s ascent.
- Once a figurehead of al Qaeda in Syria, al-Jolani’s transition from terrorist to political leader has not erased his extremist past.
- Yet, the U.S. and the West have rapidly recalibrated their stance, including removing a $10 million bounty on his capture.
- This shift exemplifies how power acquisition can shield leaders of radical groups from accountability, fostering a precedent that may embolden other extremist factions.
- The Bangladesh Conundrum
- The collapse of Sheikh Hasina’s government and the subsequent rise of an interim military-led administration under Muhammad Yunus have reintroduced Islamic radical groups into the political mainstream.
- Organisations like the Ansarullah Bangla Team (ABT) and Jamaat-e-Islami have exploited the instability to promote their extremist agendas, deepening religious tensions and threatening regional stability.
- India’s strategic interests in Bangladesh are at stake. Over the past 16 years, bilateral relations have flourished, driven by Sheikh Hasina’s secular governance.
- However, the resurgence of radicalism risks undoing these gains.
- The anti-India rhetoric adopted by the interim government’s advisors threatens to polarise the region, creating a volatile environment reminiscent of Syria or Afghanistan.
Implications for Global Governance
- Erosion of International Norms
- The normalisation of regimes like the Taliban and Hay’at Tahrir Al-Sham (HTS) undermines the principles of international law and governance.
- These groups often gain recognition despite violating core UN mandates on human rights, terrorism, and inclusivity.
- This selective application of norms creates a dangerous precedent, signalling that the international community is willing to overlook atrocities if political expediency demands it.
- Empowerment of Extremist Groups
- The legitimisation of radical groups following their rise to power sends a clear message to other extremist organisations: achieving control through violence or authoritarianism can yield international acceptance.
- This emboldens groups such as al Qaeda affiliates and IS-inspired factions, particularly in unstable regions like Africa and South Asia, where governments are already grappling with insurgencies.
- Human Rights as a Bargaining Chip
- The sidelining of human rights in favour of diplomatic engagement has left vulnerable populations, women, minorities, and dissenters, at the mercy of oppressive regimes.
- In Afghanistan, the Taliban’s actions have reversed decades of progress on gender equality and education.
- Similarly, the international community’s failure to hold such regimes accountable weakens global advocacy for universal human rights.
The Larger Picture in India-Bangladesh Relations Post the Collapse of Elected Government in Bangladesh
- Avoid Viewing Events through a Religious Lens
- Both India and Bangladesh should avoid interpreting events solely from a religious perspective, whether Islamic or Hindu.
- Such a narrow view has been harmful in the past and will remain counterproductive.
- Islamic radicals and some advisers to Mr. Yunus are intentionally trying to create divisions within their own country by baiting India.
- India's Approach to Bilateral Relations
- India aims to protect its relationship with Bangladesh and has expressed its willingness to work with the interim government.
- Over the past two decades, India has resolved most bilateral issues except for the sharing of Teesta River waters.
- Notably, during the Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) revolt in 2009, India strongly supported Bangladesh’s newly elected government and played a key role in preserving its democracy.
The Way Forward
- Principled Diplomacy over Expediency
- The international community must prioritise long-term stability and human rights over short-term gains.
- This includes refusing to recognise or engage with regimes that come to power through violence or oppression without demanding accountability.
- Diplomatic channels can be used as leverage to enforce compliance with international norms rather than as tools for legitimisation.
- Strengthening Multilateral Mechanisms
- Global organisations like the United Nations need to strengthen their capacity to address the rise of radical regimes.
- This involves better enforcement of existing resolutions, such as UNSC Resolution 2593, and a commitment to upholding international law.
- Multilateral coalitions should work to ensure that economic aid and resources are conditional upon progress in governance, human rights, and counter-terrorism measures.
- Global Attention to Religiophobia
- Religious extremism often thrives in environments of polarisation and prejudice.
- India’s efforts at the UN to highlight religiophobia against non-Abrahamic faiths, Hindus, Sikhs, and Buddhists, are a step in the right direction.
- Expanding this discourse to address all forms of religious hatred can create greater global solidarity in combating extremism.
Conclusion
- The cases of Afghanistan, Syria, and Bangladesh illustrate a troubling global trend: the selective legitimisation of Islamic radical groups based on their grip on power.
- This approach not only undermines efforts to combat extremism but also destabilises regions already fraught with tensions.
- For nations like India, the path forward requires a delicate balance, engaging with current regimes while remaining steadfast in opposing radicalism.
Q) How has the global legitimization of radical regimes like the Taliban affected international norms and stability?
The global acceptance of radical regimes undermines international norms by selectively applying principles of governance, human rights, and anti-terrorism. It signals to extremist groups that seizing power through violence can yield legitimacy, empowering them further. This approach weakens global advocacy for universal human rights, creates security risks for neighboring regions, and destabilizes efforts to uphold multilateral agreements like UNSC resolutions.
Q: What steps can India take to address the rise of radical regimes in its neighborhood?
India can address the rise of radical regimes in its neighborhood through a multi-faceted approach. Diplomatic engagement is key, with India leveraging global and regional alliances to advocate for accountability and human rights in regimes that come to power through violence or oppression. Strengthening counter-terrorism measures is essential to mitigate threats posed by such unstable regimes, ensuring national security and regional stability.
Source:The Hindu