When Taliban minister Muhammad Khalid Al-Hanafi declared that personal appearance including the obligation to keep a beard must conform to state-defined Sharia, he was not issuing a religious reminder. He was articulating a governing doctrine. Delivered at a university ceremony, his remarks revealed the deeper architecture of Taliban rule: religion not as moral guidance, but as an enforceable instrument of authority, backed by surveillance, coercion, and fear.
This distinction matters. Across Islamic history, faith has functioned as an ethical framework, interpreted through scholarship, debate, and social consensus. Under the Taliban, however, Islam is increasingly deployed as a regulatory mechanism stripped of pluralism, insulated from critique, and enforced through the coercive machinery of the state.
From Belief to Compliance
Al-Hanafi’s assertion that dissent reflects weak faith rather than legitimate disagreement exemplifies how religious authority is weaponised. By framing criticism as anti-Islamic propaganda, the Taliban collapse the space between belief and obedience. Faith becomes a test of loyalty, not conscience.
The Ministry for the Propagation of Virtue and Prevention of Vice revived from the Taliban’s first regime sits at the heart of this system. Its mandate goes far beyond moral exhortation. It polices dress, movement, speech, education, and social interaction, intruding directly into private life while claiming to preserve religious values. The contradiction is stark: privacy is rhetorically defended even as it is institutionally dismantled.
Such enforcement blurs the line between guidance (nasihat) and compulsion (jabr), a distinction central to Islamic jurisprudence. Classical scholars consistently warned that coercion corrupts faith. The Taliban’s approach reverses this logic, treating compulsion as proof of piety.
Centralised Theology, Absolute Authority
This religious governance model is neither decentralised nor consultative. Ultimate interpretive authority rests with Taliban supreme leader Hibatullah Akhundzada, whose decrees function as law. Kandahar has effectively become Afghanistan’s ideological command centre, bypassing ministries, courts, and representative mechanisms.
Provincial councils of ulema, rather than serving as independent scholars, operate as extensions of this hierarchy, reporting upwards rather than engaging communities. Diversity of interpretation a hallmark of Islamic civilisation is systematically erased.Internal disagreement is not treated as scholarly difference but as insubordination. This transforms theology into ideology and clerics into instruments of governance.
Education as Indoctrination
Nowhere is this more evident than in Afghanistan’s education system. Schools and universities have been placed under direct clerical oversight, reshaped to prioritise doctrinal conformity over critical inquiry. Curriculum reform has narrowed intellectual horizons, replacing scientific and pluralist learning with ideological instruction.
Historically, Muslim societies flourished when madrasas coexisted with philosophy, science, and debate. The Taliban’s model instead hollows education into a mechanism of obedience, undermining the very intellectual traditions they claim to defend.The long-term cost is profound. A generation educated under coercive theology risks inheriting not faith, but fear and governance systems built on fear rarely endure without escalating repression.
Religion as Governance, Not Guidance
The Taliban’s use of religion follows a recognisable pattern seen in other authoritarian systems: moral language legitimises control, while dissent is recast as deviance. By framing cultural diversity as foreign corruption, the regime positions itself as guardian against imagined moral decay, justifying intrusive enforcement.
Yet Islam’s ethical core emphasises justice (adl), mercy (rahma), and human dignity (karamah). Governance that relies on surveillance and punishment, rather than consent and accountability, contradicts these principles. When religion becomes indistinguishable from state power, it loses its moral authority and becomes vulnerable to political abuse.
Structural Fragility Beneath Moral Certainty
While the Taliban project certainty, their governance structure reveals fragility. Rule by decree, absence of institutional checks, and reliance on ideological enforcement produce opacity rather than stability. Administrative arbitrariness undermines trust, while fear replaces legitimacy.
This model also isolates Afghanistan internationally. Humanitarian engagement, development assistance, and diplomatic recognition depend on predictable governance and respect for basic rights. The conflation of faith with coercion narrows these pathways, deepening Afghanistan’s isolation.
Beyond Afghanistan
The implications extend beyond Afghan borders. The Taliban’s approach offers a cautionary lesson about the dangers of collapsing religion into state power. Faith thrives through conviction, not compulsion; governance gains legitimacy through consent, not fear.
Afghanistan’s future stability will depend not on stricter enforcement of moral codes, but on restoring the distinction between belief and authority. Without that separation, religion risks becoming a tool of submission rather than a source of justice and societies governed this way rarely find peace.
Faith as Power: How the Taliban Turn Religion into an Instrument of Control
When Taliban minister Muhammad Khalid Al-Hanafi declared that personal appearance including the obligation to keep a beard must conform to state-defined Sharia, he was not issuing a religious reminder. He was articulating a governing doctrine. Delivered at a university ceremony, his remarks revealed the deeper architecture of Taliban rule: religion not as moral guidance, but as an enforceable instrument of authority, backed by surveillance, coercion, and fear.
This distinction matters. Across Islamic history, faith has functioned as an ethical framework, interpreted through scholarship, debate, and social consensus. Under the Taliban, however, Islam is increasingly deployed as a regulatory mechanism stripped of pluralism, insulated from critique, and enforced through the coercive machinery of the state.
From Belief to Compliance
Al-Hanafi’s assertion that dissent reflects weak faith rather than legitimate disagreement exemplifies how religious authority is weaponised. By framing criticism as anti-Islamic propaganda, the Taliban collapse the space between belief and obedience. Faith becomes a test of loyalty, not conscience.
The Ministry for the Propagation of Virtue and Prevention of Vice revived from the Taliban’s first regime sits at the heart of this system. Its mandate goes far beyond moral exhortation. It polices dress, movement, speech, education, and social interaction, intruding directly into private life while claiming to preserve religious values. The contradiction is stark: privacy is rhetorically defended even as it is institutionally dismantled.
Such enforcement blurs the line between guidance (nasihat) and compulsion (jabr), a distinction central to Islamic jurisprudence. Classical scholars consistently warned that coercion corrupts faith. The Taliban’s approach reverses this logic, treating compulsion as proof of piety.
Centralised Theology, Absolute Authority
This religious governance model is neither decentralised nor consultative. Ultimate interpretive authority rests with Taliban supreme leader Hibatullah Akhundzada, whose decrees function as law. Kandahar has effectively become Afghanistan’s ideological command centre, bypassing ministries, courts, and representative mechanisms.
Provincial councils of ulema, rather than serving as independent scholars, operate as extensions of this hierarchy, reporting upwards rather than engaging communities. Diversity of interpretation a hallmark of Islamic civilisation is systematically erased.Internal disagreement is not treated as scholarly difference but as insubordination. This transforms theology into ideology and clerics into instruments of governance.
Education as Indoctrination
Nowhere is this more evident than in Afghanistan’s education system. Schools and universities have been placed under direct clerical oversight, reshaped to prioritise doctrinal conformity over critical inquiry. Curriculum reform has narrowed intellectual horizons, replacing scientific and pluralist learning with ideological instruction.
Historically, Muslim societies flourished when madrasas coexisted with philosophy, science, and debate. The Taliban’s model instead hollows education into a mechanism of obedience, undermining the very intellectual traditions they claim to defend.The long-term cost is profound. A generation educated under coercive theology risks inheriting not faith, but fear and governance systems built on fear rarely endure without escalating repression.
Religion as Governance, Not Guidance
The Taliban’s use of religion follows a recognisable pattern seen in other authoritarian systems: moral language legitimises control, while dissent is recast as deviance. By framing cultural diversity as foreign corruption, the regime positions itself as guardian against imagined moral decay, justifying intrusive enforcement.
Yet Islam’s ethical core emphasises justice (adl), mercy (rahma), and human dignity (karamah). Governance that relies on surveillance and punishment, rather than consent and accountability, contradicts these principles. When religion becomes indistinguishable from state power, it loses its moral authority and becomes vulnerable to political abuse.
Structural Fragility Beneath Moral Certainty
While the Taliban project certainty, their governance structure reveals fragility. Rule by decree, absence of institutional checks, and reliance on ideological enforcement produce opacity rather than stability. Administrative arbitrariness undermines trust, while fear replaces legitimacy.
This model also isolates Afghanistan internationally. Humanitarian engagement, development assistance, and diplomatic recognition depend on predictable governance and respect for basic rights. The conflation of faith with coercion narrows these pathways, deepening Afghanistan’s isolation.
Beyond Afghanistan
The implications extend beyond Afghan borders. The Taliban’s approach offers a cautionary lesson about the dangers of collapsing religion into state power. Faith thrives through conviction, not compulsion; governance gains legitimacy through consent, not fear.
Afghanistan’s future stability will depend not on stricter enforcement of moral codes, but on restoring the distinction between belief and authority. Without that separation, religion risks becoming a tool of submission rather than a source of justice and societies governed this way rarely find peace.
Get free tips and resources right in your inbox, along with 10,000+ others
Categories
Latest Post