The Taliban's 2021 takeover of Afghanistan forced states to confront a diplomatic dilemma: how to engage with an unrecognized regime that governs through coercion and violates international norms. This paper examines the phenomenon of engagement without recognition, asking why states interact with the Taliban despite its human rights record and lack of formal acknowledgment. Using qualitative document analysis of policy statements and diplomatic developments from 2020 to 2026, the study analyzes the approaches of China, Russia, India, Pakistan, Iran, and Western states. Realism serves as the primary theoretical lens, explaining why states prioritize strategic interests over normative concerns, supplemented by legitimacy theory, which accounts for the justifications states offer for engagement. The findings show that states have pursued pragmatic engagement humanitarian aid and security cooperation while withholding formal recognition. The paper concludes that the Afghan case reflects a broader pattern in international relations: strategic interests consistently outweigh normative commitments, and engagement without recognition has become a preferred diplomatic tool.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vani Gautam (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: