Is India using Afghanistan to counter Pakistan? Jaishankar's first-ever call to Taliban minister raises BIG questions; What does it mean?
There was a time when the Taliban was completely unreachable for India. When the group returned to power in Afghanistan in August 2021, India quickly shut down its embassy in Kabul. Back then, it seemed like India had lost all access to Afghanistan. But today, things look very different. When Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar recently made a phone call to the Taliban's acting Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi, it surprised many. It was the first time an Indian foreign minister had ever spoken directly to a Taliban leader. What made it even more significant was that the call came at a time when reports suggested a top Taliban official was quietly visiting India.
This wasn't just a routine diplomatic gesture. It was a clear sign that India is thinking in new strategic ways especially when it comes to Pakistan. For years, India kept its distance from the Taliban. But now, with changing global politics and rising tensions with Pakistan, India seems ready to explore new partnerships and also with old adversaries. Why Jaishankar's call was more than just symbolic?
Jaishankar's phone call to the Taliban wasn't just a symbolic gesture it marked a clear shift in India's long-standing foreign policy. For years, India avoided any direct contact with the Taliban, seeing them as puppets of Pakistan. This call breaks that silence. It signals the beginning of direct relations with the Taliban and shows that India is willing to adapt to the new power structure in Afghanistan.
This move tells us three important things: India's first public signal of possible recognition of the Taliban: By talking directly to the Taliban's foreign minister, India is openly showing it's ready to engage with the Taliban regime, something that would have been unthinkable earlier. India may now be open to using Afghanistan as a front against Pakistan: With Taliban-Pakistan ties worsening, India sees a chance to push back against Pakistan by building influence in Afghanistan. India's strategic return to Afghanistan: After the U.S. withdrawal and the Taliban's return to power, China has been active in Afghanistan. Now, with this outreach, India is stepping back into the game possibly to balance China's presence and safeguard its own interests. The Secret visit that says a lot
There are reports, though not officially confirmed, that Mullah Mohammad Ibrahim Sadr, a top Taliban security leader and deputy minister of interior affairs, secretly visited Delhi in early May, just days after the Pahalgam terror attack. He is known to have strong ties with Iran and little affection for Pakistan. According to The Sunday Guardian, he is close to the Taliban's supreme leader and has major influence over their security apparatus.
His possible visit to India sends a strong message especially as tensions between India and Pakistan grow. If this visit did happen, it could mean India is using backdoor diplomacy with the Taliban to send a warning to Islamabad. A wake-up call for Pakistan
Relations between the Taliban and Pakistan are not what they used to be. In fact, they're now quite tense. Ibrahim Sadr is known to be anti-Pakistan, and his growing closeness with India would certainly worry Islamabad. For Pakistan, which has long seen Afghanistan as a strategic asset (its idea of 'strategic depth'), this is a serious concern. India's new approach to Afghanistan
Earlier, India's involvement in Afghanistan focused on building democracy, promoting women's rights, constructing infrastructure like the Afghan Parliament, roads, and dams. But with the Taliban back in power and the US gone, India had to change its approach.
Now, India is choosing realism over idealism. The new strategy is: talk to whoever is in power even if it's the Taliban to ensure that Afghan soil isn't used for anti-India activities and to maintain stability in the region. It's also a move to counter the growing China-Pakistan partnership in the area. Taliban needs India too
The Taliban is desperate for international recognition. So far, very few countries officially engage with them. A relationship with India, would be a big step toward legitimacy for the Taliban.
Afghanistan is also going through a major economic and humanitarian crisis i.e. hunger, unemployment, and lack of infrastructure are everywhere. China is stepping in with money and projects, but many Afghans feel uneasy about becoming too dependent on Beijing.
India, in contrast, has a history of goodwill in Afghanistan. It has built roads, schools, dams, and even the Afghan Parliament. For many Afghans, India is a trusted friend. So if India steps in again, it could be the helping hand Afghanistan really needs.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
31 minutes ago
- Time of India
Are filmmakers being silenced by Arbitrary Censorship?
In a democratic nation where freedom of speech and artistic expression are considered fundamental rights, a string of recent incidents involving the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) has stirred fresh debate around censorship and creative liberty in Indian cinema. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The two most prominent cases—Janaki V/S State of Kerala and Sitaare Zameen Par—highlight a concerning trend: creators are being forced to make politically and religiously motivated changes, often with little or no formal communication, just to get their films cleared for release. A Name That Sparked Controversy The Malayalam courtroom drama Janaki V/S State of Kerala starring and Union Minister was denied censor clearance at the last minute despite being scheduled for release on June 27. The issue? The protagonist's name—Janaki. According to the CBFC, the name, which is another widely accepted form of Goddess Sita, was deemed inappropriate for a female character portrayed as a victim of assault. This sudden decision, lacking any formal written notice or show-cause, drew immediate criticism. FEFKA (Film Employees Federation of Kerala) general secretary B Unnikrishnan during his conversation with The Times Of India asked . 'Many Hindu names are derived from deities—will they all face censorship?' Unnikrishnan, noting that his own telefilm with a character named Janaki had previously passed CBFC approval. This isn't the first time such censorship over character names has occurred. Director M B Padmakumar faced similar pushback over a character named Janaki in his film Token Number. In that case, the CBFC had suggested replacing the name with 'Jayanti' or 'Krishnan'—names that lacked the supposed divine association and only when the name was changed to Jayanti was the film approved for screening. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now CBFC's Micro-Management of Creative Choices If Janaki V/S State of Kerala presents a case of religious sensitivity gone awry, the CBFC's treatment of Sitaare Zameen Par, starring and , showcases an even broader issue—political influence creeping into creative decisions. Bollywood Hungama in its report stated that after being unhappy with the cuts suggested by CBFC's Examining Committee the film was eventually reviewed by the Revising Committee, headed by Vaman Kendre. Their suggestions involved the following changes Replace "Businesswoman" with the gender-neutral "Businessperson." Replace 'Michael Jackson' with the generic term 'Lovebirds.' Remove a visual element tied to the word 'Kamal' (interpreted as a reference to the lotus, the BJP party symbol). Most notably, include a quote by Prime Minister Narendra Modi after the opening disclaimer These demands raise an uncomfortable question: since when did CBFC's role extend to prescribing political messages in fictional narratives? Adding a quote from a sitting prime minister turns it into an ideological imposition. Despite these interventions, Sitaare Zameen Par was eventually granted a U/A 13+ certificate, and the film released on June 20. But at what cost to artistic autonomy? Are Certain Narratives Being Silenced? With growing examples of this kind of interference, one must ask: will upcoming films that delve into sensitive mythological or historical subjects also face similar scrutiny? A case in point is Nitesh Tiwari's Ramayana, starring as Lord Ram and Sai Pallavi as Goddess Sita. The story of Ramayana is inherently complex and filled with emotionally intense sequences—Sita's abduction by Ravana, her Agnipariksha (trial by fire), and her eventual abandonment by Ram despite being pregnant with Luv and Kush. These episodes are not only central to the plot but also deeply embedded in Indian cultural memory. Will the CBFC now raise objections to how Sita's trials are depicted? Will they argue that showing her as a victim undermines her divinity? If using a name like Janaki is already contentious, what of a film that retells her entire journey, including the injustices she faced? This isn't just hypothetical—it's a very real concern in today's political and social climate, where identity, religion, and ideology intersect more than ever before. In the words of the late Satyajit Ray, 'Cinema's job is not to provide answers, but to ask the right questions.' It's time the CBFC remembered that.
Hans India
33 minutes ago
- Hans India
Congress Condemns Trump's Iran Airstrikes, Criticizes Modi Government's Silence
The Indian National Congress has strongly criticized US President Donald Trump's decision to launch airstrikes against Iran's nuclear installations, describing the military action as contradictory to his previous diplomatic overtures toward Tehran. The opposition party has simultaneously condemned the Modi government for its perceived inaction regarding American bombardments and Israeli military operations in the region. Congress General Secretary for Communications Jairam Ramesh expressed his party's disapproval through social media, emphasizing the urgent need for diplomatic engagement with Iran rather than military confrontation. He characterized Trump's use of American air power against Iranian nuclear sites as undermining the President's own public statements advocating for continued negotiations with the Islamic Republic. The senior Congress leader reinforced his party's position calling for immediate diplomatic intervention and meaningful dialogue with Iran to address escalating regional tensions. He argued that military strikes represent a fundamental departure from peaceful conflict resolution mechanisms that should guide international relations in the volatile Middle East landscape. As persources, Ramesh directed sharp criticism toward the Indian government's response to the unfolding crisis, describing the administration's silence as deeply troubling. He accused the Modi government of failing to condemn or even criticize American bombing campaigns and Israeli military aggression, suggesting that India's foreign policy stance lacks moral clarity during this critical period. The Congress spokesperson extended his critique to encompass the broader humanitarian crisis affecting the region, particularly highlighting what he termed India's "deafening silence" regarding the situation in Gaza. He characterized the ongoing conflict as constituting genocide against Palestinian populations, arguing that the Indian government has failed to take a principled stand on this humanitarian catastrophe. These statements emerged following American military strikes targeting three significant Iranian nuclear facilities located at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. The attacks effectively drew the United States directly into the escalating confrontation between Israel and Iran, raising concerns about broader regional destabilization and potential for expanded conflict. Despite the opposition's criticism, Prime Minister Narendra Modi engaged in diplomatic outreach by conducting a telephone conversation with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian on Sunday. During this discussion, the Prime Minister expressed India's profound concern regarding mounting tensions between Iran and Israel, while advocating for immediate de-escalation of hostilities through peaceful means. Modi emphasized the importance of resolving the crisis through diplomatic channels and constructive dialogue rather than military escalation. In his subsequent social media communication, the Prime Minister detailed their comprehensive discussion of current regional developments and reiterated India's commitment to promoting peace, security, and stability throughout the Middle East. The Prime Minister's diplomatic engagement represents India's attempt to maintain balanced relationships with all parties while advocating for peaceful resolution of conflicts. However, the Congress party's criticism suggests ongoing political disagreement regarding the appropriate level of Indian involvement and public positioning on these complex international issues. This controversy reflects broader debates within Indian politics about the country's foreign policy approach toward Middle Eastern conflicts and the balance between strategic interests and moral positioning on international humanitarian concerns.
Hans India
34 minutes ago
- Hans India
Uttarakhand High Court Suspends Panchayat Elections Due To Reservation Confusion
The Uttarakhand High Court has imposed an interim suspension on the state's forthcoming Panchayati Raj elections, expressing concerns over the government's ambiguous approach to reservation protocols in local governance bodies. In a significant judicial intervention on Monday, the court determined that the state administration had not provided sufficient clarity regarding reservation implementation within panchayat institutions. The bench emphasized that this uncertainty necessitated halting the electoral proceedings until proper clarification could be established. The judicial order emerged just one day following the Uttarakhand State Election Commission's official announcement of the three-tier panchayat election timeline. State Election Commissioner Sushil Kumar had previously declared that voting across twelve districts would occur on July 10, with vote counting scheduled for July 19. The electoral machinery had been set in motion with a comprehensive schedule outlining key dates for the democratic process. Candidate nomination submissions were planned to commence on June 25, with the final deadline for filing papers established as June 28. The verification and scrutiny phase was scheduled between June 29 and July 1, followed by the allocation of election symbols on July 3. Following the commission's notification, the Model Code of Conduct had automatically activated and was intended to remain operational throughout the entire election period until final results were announced. This comprehensive framework governs political activities and ensures fair electoral practices during the campaign period. The court's intervention highlights ongoing challenges in implementing reservation policies at the grassroots level of Indian democracy. Panchayati Raj institutions serve as the foundation of local self-governance, making clear reservation guidelines crucial for ensuring equitable representation across different communities and social groups. The suspension creates uncertainty for thousands of potential candidates and voters across the affected districts who were preparing for the democratic exercise. Political parties and local leaders had begun mobilizing their resources and strategies in anticipation of the announced election schedule. The state government will now need to address the court's concerns by providing unambiguous guidelines on reservation implementation before the electoral process can resume. This development underscores the importance of having well-defined policies in place before initiating any democratic process, particularly at the local governance level where community representation is paramount. The High Court's decision reflects the judiciary's commitment to ensuring that electoral processes adhere to constitutional principles and legal clarity, even if it means temporarily disrupting planned democratic activities to safeguard the integrity of the system.
