Russia officially recognizes Afghan Taliban government
"We believe that the official recognition of the Government of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan will give an impetus to the development of productive bilateral cooperation between our countries in various areas," the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a media release accompanied by a photo of Deputy Foreign Minister Andrey Rudenko meeting Afghan ambassador Gul Hassan Hassan in Moscow this week.
"We see considerable prospects for interaction in trade and the economy with a focus on projects in energy, transport, agriculture, and infrastructure. We will continue to assist Kabul in strengthening regional security and fighting terrorist threats and drug crime."
Afghanistan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs also confirmed the recognition on X, with photos.
"During this meeting, the Russian Ambassador officially conveyed the Russian government's decision to recognize the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan by the Russian Federation," the ministry said in the post.
"The Ambassador highlighted the importance of this decision."
The meeting between the two dignitaries took place at the new Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan embassy in Moscow.
Last October, Russia formally ended its designation of the Taliban as a terrorist organization but did not at the time officially recognize the Islamic regime.
Moscow first added the Taliban to its list of designated terrorist groups in 2003 while the regime supported separatist groups in the Caucasus region governed by Russia.
After being chased from power following the U.S. military occupation of Afghanistan in 2001, the Taliban returned to governance in 2021 when President Joe Biden ordered the withdrawal of American troops on the ground.
The Taliban quickly regained its hold on the country and began rounding up dissidents and in some cases executing them.
Copyright 2025 UPI News Corporation. All Rights Reserved.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
2 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
What if killing Canada's digital services tax is just the beginning for Donald Trump?
OTTAWA—Call it a prudent climbdown, a show of weakness, or an unavoidable concession. There are several ways to look at Prime Minister Mark Carney's 11th-hour decision to cancel the federal government's Digital Services Tax last weekend. But what if it's also a tangible example of exactly what Carney warned would happen? The Liberal leader won a minority government on April 28 with a pitch that no one was better placed than himself to protect Canada from Donald Trump. The U.S. president has mused about using 'economic force' to annex Canada. As if taunting or teasing this country, he questions why it exists, and keeps floating the prospect of it becoming the '51st state' of the U.S. Two days before the election, Carney spelled out how he understood all of this. 'The U.S. is trying to put economic pressure on us to gain major concessions, to the extreme of a level of integration of our countries that would impinge our sovereignty,' Carney said that day in King City, north of Toronto. Carney, in his final campaign conference, ruled out any prospect the U.S. would use military Flash forward to last week. There was Trump, posting on social media that Canada's incoming Digital Services Tax — a policy that would force American tech giants and other firms, including Canadian ones, to pay up — was nothing short of a 'blatant attack' on the United States. Trump declared he had cut off all negotiations to resolve the trade war that started earlier this year with his wave of tariffs on Canadian goods. In other words, Canada's most important commercial and military partner, the destination for 76 per cent of all exports last year , was willing to ditch talks and dictate terms that could jeopardize thousands of jobs and hundreds of billions of dollars in economic activity. All over a domestic policy the Americans didn't like. Barely 48 hours later, shortly before midnight on a Sunday, the government announced the tax was dead. Not only would Canada not implement the policy as planned, it would repeal the 2024 law that created it. Is this Trump using economic pressure to force Canada's hand? 'It is exactly that,' said Lawrence Herman, a veteran trade lawyer and special counsel with the firm, Cassidy Levy Kent. 'It's an example of, on a particular issue, how much pressure can be brought to bear to force Canada to abandon not only a policy, but a law that has been in force for 18 months.' In Herman's view, the decision looks like a 'significant retreat' by the government, which shows 'how dependent we are on a reasonable relationship' with Canada's largest trading partner. Other policies that Trump has complained about, such as the supply management system for dairy and poultry, could be next, he said. Pete Hoekstra, the U.S. ambassador to Canada, told the CBC this week that he has a 'strong belief' Canada could water down that system by changing a law designed to protect it if that becomes part of a new trade deal. 'It's not a particularly good start to this so-called new economic and security relationship,' Herman said. He was referring to Carney's stated goal of talks that are now continuing under an agreement struck at the Group of 7 summit in the Alberta Rockies last month to strive for a deal to redefine the relationship by July 21. Others have been harsher in their judgment. Lloyd Axworthy, a former Liberal foreign affairs minister, posted online that Carney was acquiescing to Trump in a way that contradicts his 'elbows up' mantra on the campaign trail. 'Forget any dreams of a more sovereign, self-directed Canada. We're doubling down on the corporate cosiness and U.S. dependency that's defined our last half-century,' he wrote on Substack. Axworthy did not respond to an interview request Thursday. For Jean Charest, a former Quebec premier who sits on the government's Canada-U.S. advisory council, the situation illustrates the 'chaos' of dealing with Trump, whose administration is grappling with trade talks and tariffs threats against most countries on the planet. This meant that Carney's government was operating 'in a world of very bad choices,' Charest said. Deciding to scrap the Digital Services Tax, in that context, was 'certainly a legitimate choice,' he said. 'We are not in an ordinary world of negotiations,' Charest added. 'It would be nice to think, 'You give, I give ... we compromise.' It doesn't work that way with Donald Trump, and we're making our way through this by trying to protect essentially what's the most important for us in the short term, and that's a negotiation that has some legs.' Charest noted that there was opposition inside Canada to the Digital Services Tax, which would have applied back to 2022 with a three per cent tax on Canadian revenues from digital services companies with more than $1.1 billion in global earnings and $20 million inside Canada. The U.S. also pushed back against the policy when Joe Biden was in power. David Pierce, vice-president of government relations with the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, said his business lobby group felt the Digital Services Tax should be paused. He also said it would have been wrong to proceed with it after the U.S. dropped a controversial provision from Trump's major budget bill last week: the so-called 'revenge tax' that would have hit the U.S. assets of foreign businesses and individuals. That decision came as the G7 agreed to exempt American firms from a co-ordinated effort to ensure corporations pay a minimum tax, which was 'absolutely a win' for the U.S. Even so, Pierce said Canada likely had no choice but to drop the policy, given Trump's exploitation of Canada's 'weakness' — its major economic reliance on trade with the U.S. 'We just hope that this now paves the way for a good renewed deal,' said Pierce. The ultimate goal of the federal government in that deal, at least publicly, has been to return to the terms of the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA), which Trump signed in 2018 during his first term, after disparaging North American free trade as unfair to his country. That would mean lifting the rounds of tariffs Trump has imposed since the winter, with import duties tied to concerns about drugs and migration over the border, and others that Trump slapped on Canadian autos, steel and aluminum in a bid to promote those sectors in the U.S. Canada has responded with countertariffs on its own that the government says hit more than $80 billion worth of American imports to Canada. Canada's lead trade negotiator with the Trump administration, Ambassador Kirsten Hillman, was not available for an interview this week, the embassy in Washington told the Star. Charest, however, said he believes it is possible that Canada could accept some level of tariffs in a July 21 deal, so long as they have no material effect. Such 'zero-effect' tariffs could only kick in at levels of trade that Canada doesn't or likely won't achieve, for example. Yet there's a question of how much any deal can be relied upon, so long as Trump is in the White House, unilaterally imposing tariffs that Canada views as 'illegal' violations of the 2018 trade deal. 'Trump is arguing about supply management and the (Digital Services Tax), but it's the U.S. that is in flagrant breach of its trade obligations. It's abandoned the CUSMA, virtually behaving as if it did not exist and the U.S. signature has no meaning,' Herman said. 'So we are in a world where rules and the rules-based system, and the stability that that treaty was supposed to provide, have gone by the board.' That means, at least for now, the Carney government is operating in a world where Canada's foremost ally, the colossus to the south, will use economic force to get what it wants.
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
How $45 billion in ‘big, beautiful bill' funding aids ICE detention
More than $45 billion in the 'big, beautiful bill' that President Trump signed Friday is earmarked for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention space, which officials say will add up tens of thousands of beds for migrants being held in federal custody. An estimated $170 billion of the bill has been designated for immigration enforcement as the Trump administration has promised to orchestrate the largest mass deportation effort in American history. But the funding that has been devoted to ICE detention space in the final bill. passed by the House on Thursday, is more than the government spent on housing migrants during the Obama, Biden and first Trump administrations combined, The Washington Post reported. Federal officials estimate the $45 billion will provide an additional 100,000 beds in ICE facilities at a time when ICE has nearly 56,400 migrants in its detention centers nationwide as of mid-June, according to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse. The number of detainees increased by more than 5,000 during the first two weeks of June. Data showed that of those detained, 28 percent have a prior criminal conviction, while 25 percent have pending criminal charges. The funding bump in the bill was approved after Trump and Department of Homeland Security Secretary (DHS) Kristi Noem toured a new detention facility that administration officials have called 'Alligator Alcatraz.' White House Border Czar Tom Homan told NewsNation's 'CUOMO' this week that the facility in the Florida Everglades will cost an estimated $450 million to operate each year. But officials said the facility could be a blueprint for more ICE detention centers that the government plans to open now that funding has been approved. President Donald Trump, Gov. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and others, tour 'Alligator Alcatraz,' a new migrant detention facility at Dade-Collier Training and Transition facility, Tuesday, July 1, 2025, in Ochopee, Fla. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci) 'Everybody we arrest, we need a bed, because they're going to be in detention from several days to several months, depending on the case,' Homan said. 'So, this will give us a little breathing room, give us extra beds so we can target more criminals throughout the country.' The border czar had previously called on Congress to provide more funding for detention that would allow ICE to detain migrants taken into federal custody. In June, the agency published a list of more than 40 contractors that could assist with the 'emergency acquisition' of space for migrant detainees, the Post reported. In addition to the $45 billion set aside for ICE detention and agents, the funding bill that was approved by Congress this week allocates another $46 billion for continued construction of the border wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. Real Clear Politics reported this week that the $45 billion that will be devoted to ICE represents a 265 percent increase in its current detention budget, which will be higher than that of the American prison system. The current load of detainees is the highest since that data has been compiled by ICE since the first time Trump was in office. In addition to providing more beds, DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in an emailed statement to the Post that the funding for ICE in the bill will allow the agency to hire an additional 10,000 federal agents. Officials announced earlier this year that the agency's migrant detention centers were at capacity. The government contracts with private prison companies to operate detention facilities. The two main companies, CoreCivic and the GEO Group, have been awarded nine contracts by ICE for expanded detention, per the Post. Contracts have also been awarded to companies to produce temporary tent structures, which would be used to house migrants, the report said. Last year, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) determined through a Freedom of Information Act request that private companies were looking to enter into government contracts in states like Michigan, California, Kansas, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas and Washington state. The Post's report indicated that CoreCivic and the Geo Group already own prisons that are sitting empty in several states, including Kansas (Leavenworth), Colorado, Minnesota, North Carolina, and Oklahoma. The ACLU also reported that in 2022, the GEO Group made $1.05 billion in revenue from ICE contracts alone, while CoreCivic made $552.2 million during the same year. 'Never in our 42-year company history have we had so much activity and demand for our services as we are seeing right now,' said CoreCivic CEO Damon Hininger during an earnings call in May with shareholders, according to The Associated Press. The expansion of detention space comes at a time when more than a dozen people have died in ICE facilities since October, including 10 during 2025. In 2024, an ACLU report indicated that 95 percent of deaths that took place in ICE facilities between 2017 and 2021 could have been prevented or possibly prevented. That investigation, which was conducted by the ACLU, American Oversight and Physicians for Human Rights, analyzed the deaths of the 52 people who died in ICE custody during that time frame.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Russia recognises the Taliban: Which other countries may follow?
Russia has become the first country to accept the Taliban government in Afghanistan since the group took power in 2021, building on years of quieter engagement and marking a dramatic about-turn from the deep hostilities that marked their ties during the group's first stint in power. Since the Taliban stormed Kabul in August four years ago, taking over from the government of then-President Ashraf Ghani, several nations – including some that have historically viewed the group as enemies – have reached out to them. Yet until Thursday, no one has formally recognised the Taliban. So what exactly did Russia do, and will Moscow's move pave the way for others to also start full-fledged diplomatic relations with the Taliban? The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs released a statement saying that Moscow's recognition of the Taliban government will pave the way for bilateral cooperation with Afghanistan. 'We believe that the act of official recognition of the government of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan will give impetus to the development of productive bilateral cooperation between our countries in various fields,' the statement said. The Foreign Ministry said it would seek cooperation in energy, transport, agriculture and infrastructure. Afghanistan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs wrote in an X post on Thursday that Russian ambassador to Kabul Dmitry Zhirnov met Afghan Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi and conveyed the Kremlin's decision to recognise the Taliban government in Afghanistan. Muttaqi said in a video posted on X: 'We value this courageous step taken by Russia, and, God willing, it will serve as an example for others as well.' In 1979, troops from the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan to establish a communist government. This triggered a 10-year war with the Afghan mujahideen fighters backed by US forces. About 15,000 Soviet soldiers died in this war. In 1992, after rockets launched by rebel groups hit the Russian embassy in Kabul, Moscow closed its diplomatic mission to Afghanistan. The Russian-backed former president, Mohammad Najibullah, who had been seeking refuge in a United Nations compound in Kabul since 1992, was killed by the Taliban in 1996, when the group first came to power. During the late 1990s, Russia backed anti-Taliban forces in Afghanistan, including the Northern Alliance led by former mujahideen commander Ahmad Shah Massoud. Then, on September 11, 2001, suicide attackers, affiliated with the armed group al-Qaeda, seized United States passenger planes and crashed into two skyscrapers in New York City, killing nearly 3,000 people. This triggered the so-called 'war on terror' by then-US President George W Bush. In the aftermath of the attack, Russian President Vladimir Putin was one of the first foreign leaders to call Bush and express his sympathy and pledge support. Putin provided the US with assistance to attack Afghanistan. Russia cooperated with the US by sharing intelligence, opening Russian airspace for US flights and collaborating with Russia's Central Asian allies to establish bases and provide airspace access to flights from the US. In 2003, after the Taliban had been ousted from power by the US-led coalition, Russia designated the group as a terrorist movement. But in recent years, as Russia has increasingly grown concerned about the rise of the ISIS-Khorasan (ISIS-K) group – a regional branch of the ISIS/ISIL armed group – it has warmed to the Taliban. The Taliban view ISIS-K as a rival and enemy. Since the Taliban's return to power in 2021, accompanied by the withdrawal of US forces supporting the Ghani government, Russia's relations with the group have become more open. A Taliban delegation attended Russia's flagship economic forum in Saint Petersburg in 2022 and 2024. With the ISIS-K's threat growing (the group claimed a March 2024 attack at a concert hall in Moscow in which gunmen killed 149 people), Russia has grown only closer to the Taliban. In July 2024, Russian President Putin called the Taliban 'allies in the fight against terrorism'. Muttaqi met Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in Moscow in October 2024. In April 2025, Russia lifted the 'terrorist' designation from the Taliban. Lavrov said at the time that 'the new authorities in Kabul are a reality,' adding Moscow should adopt a 'pragmatic, not ideologised policy' towards the Taliban. The international community does not officially recognise the Taliban. The United Nations refers to the administration as the 'Taliban de facto authorities'. Despite not officially recognising the Taliban as the government of Afghanistan, several countries have recently engaged diplomatically with the group. China: Even before the US pulled out of Afghanistan, Beijing was building its relations with the Taliban, hosting its leaders in 2019 for peace negotiations. But relations have picked up further since the group returned to power, including through major investments. In 2023, a subsidiary of the state-owned China National Petroleum Company (CNPC) signed a 25-year contract with the Taliban to extract oil from the basin of the Amu Darya river, which spans Central Asian countries and Afghanistan. This marked the first major foreign investment since the Taliban's takeover. In 2024, Beijing recognised former Taliban spokesperson Bilal Karim as an official envoy to China during an official ceremony, though it made clear that it was not recognising the Taliban government itself. And in May this year, China hosted the foreign ministers of Pakistan and the Taliban for a trilateral conclave. Pakistan: Once the Taliban's chief international supporter, Pakistan's relations with the group have frayed significantly since 2021. Islamabad now accuses the Taliban government of allowing armed groups sheltering on Afghan soil, in particular the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), to target Pakistan. TTP, also called the Pakistani Taliban, operates on the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan, and is responsible for many of the deadliest attacks in Pakistan in recent years. Afghanistan denies Pakistan's allegation. In December 2024, the Pakistani military launched air strikes in Afghanistan's Paktia province, which borders Pakistan's tribal district of South Waziristan. While Pakistan said it had targeted sites where TTP fighters had sought refuge, the Taliban government said that 46 civilians in Afghanistan were killed in the air strikes. This year, Pakistan also ramped up the deportation of Afghan refugees, further stressing ties. Early this year, Pakistan said it wants three million Afghans to leave the country. Tensions over armed fighters from Afghanistan in Pakistan continue. On Friday, the Pakistani military said it killed 30 fighters who tried to cross the border from Afghanistan. The Pakistani military said all the fighters killed belonged to the TTP or its affiliates. Still, Pakistan has tried to manage its complex relationship with Afghanistan. In April this year, Pakistan's Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar met Muttaqi and other Afghan officials in Kabul. Dar and Muttaqi spoke again in May. India: New Delhi had shut its Kabul embassy in 1996 after the Taliban took over. India refused to recognise the group, which it viewed as a proxy of Pakistan's intelligence agencies. New Delhi reopened its embassy in Kabul after the Taliban was removed from power in 2001. But the embassy and India's consulates came under repeated attacks in the subsequent years from the Taliban and its allies, including the Haqqani group. Yet since the Taliban's return to Kabul, and amid mounting tensions between Pakistan and the group, India's approach has changed. It reopened its embassy, shut temporarily in 2021, and sent diplomats to meet Taliban officials. Then, in January 2025, Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri flew to Dubai for a meeting with Muttaqi. And in May, India's Foreign Minister S Jaishankar spoke to Muttaqi over the phone, their first publicly acknowledged conversation. Iran: As with Russia and India, Iran viewed the Taliban with antagonism during the group's rule in the late 1990s. In 1998, Taliban fighters killed Iranian diplomats in Mazar-i-Sharif, further damaging relations. But it views ISIS-K as a much bigger threat. Since the Taliban's return to Kabul, and behind closed doors, even earlier, Tehran has been engaging with the group. On May 17, Muttaqi visited Iran to attend the Tehran Dialogue Forum. He also met with Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and President Massoud Pezeshkian. While each country will likely decide when and if to formally recognise the Taliban government, many already work with the group in a capacity that amounts, almost, to recognition. 'Afghanistan's neighbouring countries don't necessarily have much of an option but to engage with the Taliban for both strategic and security purposes,' Kabir Taneja, a deputy director at the New Delhi-based Observer Research Foundation, told Al Jazeera. 'Most would not be doing so out of choice, but enforced realities that the Taliban will be in Afghanistan for some time to come at least.' Taneja said that other countries which could follow suit after Russia's recognition of the Taliban include some countries in Central Asia, as well as China. 'Russia's recognition of the Taliban is a geopolitical play,' Taneja said. 'It solidifies Moscow's position in Kabul, but more importantly, gives the Taliban itself a big win. For the Taliban, international recognition has been a core aim for their outreach regionally and beyond.'
