Written by Jackson Gall-Davis, Legal Intern, and Livleen Dhaliwal, Political Communications at the Afghanistan and Central Asian Association (ACAA)
On Friday the 14th of August 2026 we from ACAA gathered in Stewart House for a conversation allowing us to reflect on 5 years of the fall of Kabul: the Taliban’s recapturing of Afghanistan after decades of hiding. On the panel, the ACAA invited the speakers: Nabila, Councillors David Chalmers Patrick Stillman, Shah Miah and Dr Ayesha Ahmad, as well as the ACAA’s own Dr Nooralhaq Nasimi and Darius Nasimi. Shabnam Nasimi acted as moderator for the discussion.
We’ve divided the blog article into two categories that encompass the topics spoken about on the panel. Beginning with background before discussing treatment of women and the west’s response. Then, we’ll go on to expand the panelist’s ideas with further background, figures and analysis.
Dr Nasimi began the talk, opening a discussion on the recent history of Afghanistan, focusing on how the events of the 1979 Soviet invasion was a key turning point in Afghanistan’s international treatment as a buffer state which has since been subject to the power struggles of neighbouring and western nations (Afghanistan Analysts Network, 2019) . The power vacuum left by the American withdrawal of troops in 2021 is a key example of this imposition of foreign power, leaving Afghanistan now in a state of vulnerability to rapid regime change and radical Islam (UK Parliament, 2022). The following talk was oriented around the current concerns surrounding growing isolationism and how this underpins worsening treatment of women, changing western policy and growing humanitarian crisis. The post-panel discussion followed a compelling format of facilitating members of the Afghan diaspora to interact with figures of the UK political scene. Dwindling levels of female education alongside an increasingly isolationist and oppressive regime has made open dialogue with Afghanistan’s women and broader diaspora more challenging (UN Women, 2026). The bilingualism of this Q+A was also a contributing factor, highlighting the importance of diaspora led discussions and events.
The connective tissue across the range of topics addressed by the speakers was what ‘The Economist’ called a ‘grim stability’, a phrase repeated by Cllr David Chalmers (The Economist, 2026). The phrase emphasises this idea that while Afghanistan is in crisis, it is not at war. This is key. Afghanistan imposes no immediate threat on the rest of the world, it imposes no threat on the global economy and it imposes no threat of regime change. In the eyes of the west this is stability and this perspective allows the situation within the country to worsen without threat of intervention (UN General Assembly Security Council, 2023). As western media turns its attention to Gaza, Ukraine or Russia; the Taliban intensifies its restrictions on all aspects of women’s lives, intensifies its humanitarian crisis and intensifies the disturbing mental health decline among its population that remains under-reported (UN Women, 2025). It’s a snake eating itself, western aid recedes as oppression intensifies which worsens material conditions already strained by western sanctions (UK Visas and Immigration, 2026). It’s not hard to see how this hopeless cycle makes developing strategies to mitigate harm in Afghan lives harder and harder.
The panel discussed the current experience of women in Afghanistan, highlighting the educational and medical legislation that bars them from pursuing freedom. Since the fall of Kabul in 2021, the number of oppressive laws passed by the Taliban over the years has resulted in the violation of human rights, especially for women (UN, 2025). Nabila, the first speaker – a young teenage girl from Afghanistan – sets out this grim reality, highlighting how girls are no longer able to access education post primary school level. Hearing Nabila’s words and story immediately set a sobering emotional tone to the discussion, reminding us of how the crisis has a human toll that is beyond statistics and bureaucratic discussion beyond western boardrooms. Furthermore, Shabnam Nasimi’s comments on the age of consent and the stark issue of child marriage are all part of a broader campaign by the Taliban to systematically reduce the presence of women in public society, and visibly eradicate them from the public eye (DI, 2024).
Dr Ayesha Ahmed steers this problem into discussion by addressing how new legislation in Afghanistan is preventing women from not only accessing the healthcare system, but also denies them from training to be in the medical profession. Furthermore, there is a lack of provisions and dignity for women to see a female practitioner, as a result of the law putting in place that a male escort is required in public places. Therefore, a woman is not allowed to access healthcare, and cannot be treated by male doctors, but they cannot receive the education to become a doctor (WHO, 2023). Through the Taliban implementing this contradictory and crushing law, it creates the cycle of hopelessness for women in the country. Worsening maternal health has been a core focus to this critical issue, with Afghanistan already having the world’s worst maternal mortality rates. Research on this conducted by WHO unveils alarming figures, where around 638/100,000 Afghan mothers die in childbirth, which is about 5 times higher compared to the global average of 121/100,000. In this light, the law is undeniably a premature death sentence to women (WHO, 2023) .
Therefore, women are unable to lead a healthy, sustainable life, physically, but also mentally, as Ahmad discusses in the talk. Mental health is just as of a challenge as physical health. The endless list of the lack of dignity during medical consultations, no contraception, and the lack of knowledge regarding sexual health and consent places women in danger and strips them of bodily autonomy. According to the UN, three quarters of women describe their mental health as ‘bad’ or ‘very bad’ (UN, 2026).
Although in pursuit of recognition, the Taliban remains unwilling to change its oppressive domestic policy. The foreign office has decreased international aid spending and adjusted the UK’s visa policy to make it harder for Afghans to leave (ICAI, 2023). As Darius Nasimi mentioned, the current government’s concerns around limiting illegal immigration have taken precedence over sanctuary routes for those escaping oppressive regimes. The UK has no embassy in Afghanistan, no formal diplomatic relations, no consulate and very limited trade (House of Commons, 2024). This feeds the cycle of poverty, silence and increasingly oppressive domestic policy. As mentioned in the talk, poverty worsens female oppression as daughters are sold off to allow families to eat. New (albeit sporadically implemented) Taliban decrees have removed the age of consent, creating a culture of desperation and disposability where economic deprivation merges and worsens tyrannical legislation which further isolates Afghanistan from international influence (UN Women 2024).
Cllr Chalmers mentions that 22 million Afghans require humanitarian aid but establishing the means of delivering aid of such large quantities to such a vast region is an immense practical and financial challenge. This is worsened by lack of international recognition and western sanctions (UN, 2026). Recognition would allow access to major financial institutions such as the world bank and also permits the unfreezing of assets held abroad. Cllr Stillman spoke about sanctions extensively. He mentioned asset freezes, prohibitions, travel bans, arms embargoes and trade restrictions imposed by the UK alone. This all seeks to place pressure on changing the brutal regime (CSIS, 2024).
With this we return to this ‘grim stability’ concept that ran through the talk; stagnating economically, worsening oppression, in no immediate state of conflict and a blind eye from the rest of the world (The Economist, 2026).
If one question could sum up the consensus of the Afghan audience it was: so, now what? A question that appears endlessly difficult to answer.
Western and regional intervention in Afghanistan has a history of failure and the American mismanagement of their own withdrawal was instrumental in creating the conditions for the Taliban’s return (SIGAR, 2023). That’s not to mention international law and the ethics of invasion, intervention and occupation even in the context of preventing an even more brutal regime. That being said, can Afghans be expected to rise up and resist their regime? In the context of worsening poverty and brutal religious oppression, where is the breathing room for an opposition? Shabnam Nasimi lamented the overuse of the word ‘resilience’, why is this an expectation and how does it actually obscure the realities of life as an Afghan woman? (UN Women, 2024).
The panel arrived at consensus surrounding a movement of international education to push change from our governments. It’s a good start but do we need to be more ambitious? ‘The Economist’ recently suggested that the Taliban must be brought to the negotiation table. Although potentially painful to treat such a regime as legitimate, shouldn’t we prioritise marginal improvement in material conditions over seemingly irreconcilable ideological disputes (The Economist, 2026). The reluctance to engage again with such an oppressive regime therefore creates this cycle of hopelessness, preventing us from attempting to improve the oppressive circumstances faced by Afghans, leaving their futures uncertain.