Part II (Final)
Author: Walid Wiyar
Has history ever witnessed a national government achieving full sovereignty without the will and support of its people?
Throughout history, no national government has attained full sovereignty without the will and support of its people. The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan’s return to power was not the result of foreign imposition or military opportunism—it was the manifestation of the Afghan people’s collective aspiration. After enduring decades of occupation, corruption, and foreign-aligned leadership under the republic, Afghans turned toward a government rooted in their Islamic faith and national identity.
Today, Afghanistan is governed by those who are native to this land—individuals who pray in its mosques, live among its people, and embody its values. Unlike previous regimes, the current leadership is not composed of passport-holding elites or self-styled experts from abroad, who returned to Afghanistan under the guise of service but instead exploited national resources and undermined local integrity.
Many of today’s governments—despite their proclamations of legitimacy and public support on global platforms—are, in reality, struggling to overcome a foundational lack of genuine historical or popular legitimacy. Often sustained by foreign interests, they operate as external projects rather than sovereign states. It is within this context that international organizations and the UN Security Council harbor distorted perceptions of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (IEA)—perceptions that stand in stark contradiction to the will of the Afghan people and violate the very diplomatic principles these bodies claim to uphold.
The current security, social cohesion, and infrastructure reconstruction in Afghanistan—all financed from the national budget—stand as evidence of a government supported by its citizens. Such accomplishments are not feasible without grassroots legitimacy and public cooperation.
Another important dimension is the stance of the broader Islamic world. The rise of the IEA has exposed the uncomfortable reality that many so-called Muslim governments remain tethered to Western influence. Despite public rhetoric, they have failed to recognize the IEA, fearing political and economic repercussions from powerful global actors. Yet, they cannot deny that Afghanistan today presents a successful model of Islamic governance—marked by internal security, broad national support, and operational sovereignty.
For four decades, the Afghan nation sought an end to war and a path to peace. By the grace of Almighty Allah, their prayers have been answered through the restoration of the IEA. Whether or not the world chooses to uphold its own declared values, or continues to engage in double standards, is no longer decisive. The Afghan people’s aspirations have been fulfilled. If global recognition entails a return to foreign control, erosion of national sovereignty, and the transformation of Afghanistan into a geopolitical testing ground, then such recognition would be a curse, not a blessing.
The tangible benefits of national legitimacy are already visible. Free from foreign interference, Afghanistan enjoys a level of stability and independence unparalleled in recent history. While full diplomatic recognition by certain Islamic and global nations remains pending, meaningful progress has been made. The IEA has established constructive diplomatic channels with more than forty neighboring and regional countries—a foundation that will continue to strengthen.
Over the past three years, these nations have recognized that the IEA’s foreign policy is guided by balance, mutual respect, economic cooperation, and non-interference. Rather than posing a threat, it safeguards both regional and international interests.
It is therefore essential that the IEA remain firmly anchored in the national legitimacy granted by the Afghan people—a legitimacy defended with unwavering courage and conviction. Strengthening internal unity must remain the foremost priority. If the price of international recognition is the loss of national reconciliation, stability, or Sharia-based governance, then no rational observer—especially one familiar with Afghanistan’s modern history and the price of its struggles—could ever accept such a destructive compromise.
