Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Wahidullah Noorzai | NIDA's avatar

The most interesting question here is not whether Tehran and the Taliban are becoming allies.

It is why two actors with such different histories, ideologies, and strategic interests can nevertheless find reasons to move closer when the regional environment changes.

This is better understood as a convergence of interests than an alliance.

For Tehran, engagement with Kabul can reduce uncertainty on its eastern frontier, protect economic and border interests, and create another channel of regional leverage. For the Taliban, relations with Iran offer access to trade, transit, energy, diplomacy, and a powerful neighbor at a time when Afghanistan remains internationally isolated.

But interests are not the same as trust.

The history between Iran and the Taliban—including serious tensions before 2001, as well as continuing disputes over water, borders, security, and Afghanistan’s internal politics—reminds us that pragmatic cooperation can coexist with deep strategic mistrust.

That distinction matters.

In regional politics, states and movements do not always choose partners because they share values. Sometimes they simply discover that, for a certain period, their interests overlap.

The real test will come when those interests stop overlapping.

— Wahidullah Noorzai

Former Afghan National Police Officer | Strategic & Security Analyst

PS Vikas's avatar

In the high-stakes poker of Middle Eastern geopolitics, the "boom" may be the loudest card, but "containment" remains the winning hand.

Read HERE why US may not attack Iran

https://open.substack.com/pub/moderated8d2614d334ec4e16bfcc061/p/trumps-boombastic-fallacy-why-strategic?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=6gfvdi

No posts

Ready for more?