Strategic Resilience Against the Taliban as the Continuation of National Resistance
Author: Razmanda, Analyst, Special for Sangar
Original article: منطق امرالله صالح: بقا و مقاومت
In politics, a political act becomes meaningful only when it aligns with the strategic goals of acquiring, preserving, and expanding power. The smart use of opportunities to draw closer to the center of power is considered a legitimate and common maneuver in political practice.
Mr. Saleh has been widely criticized—even by some within the Resistance movement—for joining the team of Afghanistan’s ousted president, Ashraf Ghani. Yet, the primary aim of any political struggle is to strengthen a politician’s position and draw closer to the power hub to safeguard the nation’s higher interests, preserve and empower one’s organization, maintain a presence in the political arena, and build a chain of power resources—knowledge, wealth, organization, media, and so forth. Such engagement, according to political logic, is legitimate and justifiable.
After years of intelligence work, Mr. Saleh entered politics openly, with policies rooted in national interests. His principled approach, based on accurate information and calculated reasoning, led him to actively engage with the power center to maintain his nationalist stance. He chose this path to strengthen his position within the political structure and to steer national and security policies—policies that ultimately served the country’s interests. Now the question is: if such an opportunity had been available to others, would they not have taken it? Would they not have joined Ghani and stood with the Republic?
Had Mr. Saleh not made this decision, what other option would he have had, given his intelligence background and the deep sensitivity of regional spy agencies toward his presence? Political isolation is a slow death for any politician—especially in a volatile environment with growing security threats and competitive pressure. In such circumstances, proximity to power becomes the only viable way to preserve one’s ideas and national objectives.
The collapse of the 20-year Republic cannot be pinned on one person. Political breakdown began with the assassination of the National Hero, Ahmad Shah Massoud, and the end of the First Resistance—when Panjshir’s arsenals and traditional strongholds of resistance were handed over to intelligence agencies under the so-called “DDR” program. Leaders’ growing distance from the people, lack of planning, dependency, and gradual acceptance of disarmament in exchange for preserving political seats accelerated the fall. Mr. Saleh, as an individual, cannot be held accountable for the strategic neglect and miscalculations of the past two decades in the Resistance sphere.
Since the fall of the Republic, Saleh has maintained a firm, unwavering, and principled stance against the Taliban. While many former Republican and Jihadi leaders have sought accommodation with the Taliban and abandoned armed struggle, he has insisted that the only real solution is targeted, long-term resistance. In his view, a Taliban that refused compromise in its weakest days will never embrace dialogue now that it has consolidated power and resources.
Saleh was among the first leaders to go to Panjshir, bringing with him funds, equipment, and weapons to initiate the fight. He stood against the Taliban to the very end, neither fleeing the country nor abandoning the frontlines. Moreover, his revealing and media-driven campaigns against the Taliban—despite the group’s intense propaganda assaults on him—have had a notable impact on both the political and military fronts.
First, Saleh’s decision to join the power center should be understood within the framework of political survival. In Afghanistan’s political system, where major players are constantly seeking to eliminate rivals, absence from the decision-making core equals complete erasure from the scene. Recognizing this reality, Saleh seized opportunities to guarantee survival and expand his influence.
Second, his strategy was built on the premise that no national or security program could be sustainably implemented without access to power resources. In Afghanistan, these resources include domestic support, foreign alliances, and media capacity. During his tenure in government, Saleh kept all three arenas active so that he could maintain the initiative in critical moments.
Third, his choice was made at a time when both domestic and regional adversaries sought to neutralize his position. Intelligence pressures, security threats, and propaganda attacks could only be managed if he had access to the structures of power and could use them to protect himself and his organization.
Fourth, the continuity of Saleh’s principled stance after the fall of the Republic proves that his past proximity to the power center was not motivated by personal gain, but was part of a long-term strategic plan. Even after the Republic’s collapse, he did not retreat from his principles, continuing resistance as the only realistic option. This consistency in a fluid Afghan political environment is a rare strength that many other leaders have lacked.
These facts show that Amrullah Saleh is a politician with a plan, driven by intelligence-based calculations, and committed to an effective struggle against the Taliban—one founded on political and military mobilization and unity. Therefore, both his past political choices and his current principled stance were not mistakes, but rather correct and necessary actions within the framework of political rationality and strategic calculation.
