Three years after the departure of the final US troops from Afghanistan, the situation in the country is bleak, with the Taliban tightening its grip as it introduces increasingly oppressive laws that restrict political freedoms and suppress the rights of women.
Most Afghans have had to acquiesce to the Taliban not because they embrace their misogynistic ideology but because they have all the guns. Still, there is a nascent resistance movement. I spoke to its leader, Ahmad Massoud, who said he’s engaged in “a fight for the soul and future of our nation, and we are determined to win, no matter the odds.”
He is the son of Ahmad Shah Massoud, who led the Afghan resistance to the Taliban more than two and half decades ago when the Taliban first seized power in Afghanistan in 1996.
Massoud is now 35, and he leads the National Resistance Front to the Taliban. In our interview, he asserted that his group has carried out 207 military operations around Afghanistan this year and that he has 5,000 soldiers under his control. Verifying this kind of information independently is nearly impossible as there are relatively few international journalists covering Afghanistan, while the Taliban have closed hundreds of Afghan media outlets. The UN put out a report in June that documented a surge of anti-Taliban attacks during the first six months of this year but put the number at 29 operations carried out by the National Resistance Front, while on the group’s X feed, there are claims of far more operations.
Massoud told me that “the Taliban’s true victory wasn’t on the battlefield; it was at the negotiating table,” a withdrawal agreement that was negotiated by then-President Donald Trump’s team and carried out by President Joe Biden.
Massoud lives in an undisclosed location in Central Asia directing military operations in Afghanistan from outside the country. We conducted our interview over email, and it has been edited for clarity.
BERGEN: The Taliban last week banned the sound of women’s voices outside of the home. This seems crazy, but the Taliban can do it with impunity. What does this say about their hold on power?
MASSOUD: This is a blatant display of ignorance and arrogance. The Taliban believe they can punish the people of Afghanistan, especially women, and yet they can also still gain international recognition. [Today, no government officially recognizes the Taliban, though several governments do have diplomatic relations with them.] This impunity is a direct result of the international community’s policy of appeasement of the Taliban over the past three years. If we hope to see a change in the Taliban’s behavior, we must alter our approach towards them. It’s that simple.
Within Afghanistan, our strategy for resistance is clear. The Taliban only respond to power and force. Diplomatic engagement with the Taliban has only emboldened them.
BERGEN: This is the third anniversary of the withdrawal of all US troops from Afghanistan. What are your feelings on this anniversary after two decades of a US military and diplomatic presence in Afghanistan? Was this a betrayal of America’s Afghan allies?
MASSOUD: The hasty US withdrawal in 2021 caused us to lose many achievements that we had gained in the last 20 years. Afghanistan had started experiencing social and political transformations that it never had before. We had rights like freedom of speech, and a new generation, both women and men, was on the rise. Yet we lost all of this when the agreement with the Taliban was signed in 2020 and when the withdrawal abruptly happened in 2021. Now we are the only country fully controlled by terrorists.
BERGEN: What kind of military operations are you carrying out in Afghanistan?
MASSOUD: The National Resistance Front’s military activities started in August 2021 when the Taliban attacked us in the Panjshir Valley [in northern Afghanistan]. Since then, we have been resisting them. We started from two provinces in the north, yet now we have networks and operations in almost 20 provinces after three years of expansion. [There are 34 provinces in Afghanistan.] Our operations at the moment are unconventional and mostly guerrilla operations. Yet, the military wing of the National Resistance Front is based inside Afghanistan, our bases, and our commando units are all in the country, and as every day passes, we are increasing our recruitment and operational capacity.
BERGEN: Can you give us a sense of the strengths of your National Resistance Front?
MASSOUD: The National Resistance Front’s military wing is solely made up of the remnants of Afghanistan’s former armed forces. These forces joined us instead of abandoning the fight for democracy on August 15, 2021 [when the Taliban captured Kabul, the capital]. Today, we have more than 5,000 permanent forces scattered in some 20 provinces. We have been able to increase their capabilities even though we aren’t receiving any external support. To give you a sense of our strength, since January 2024, we have launched 207 operations around the country.
BERGEN: Your soldiers claimed an attack at Kabul Airport last month. Can you describe what happened?
MASSOUD: Operational security prevents me from disclosing specifics, but I can assure you that this operation and many others demonstrate the significant military and intelligence capabilities we’ve developed since 2021. Despite the risks and complexities, our forces, supported by our deep intelligence network within the enemy’s ranks, executed the operation precisely.
Also, I would like to make something clear. All our targets are and will be military targets. We only target where the Taliban and other terror groups reside and avoid civilian casualties.
BERGEN: Tell us about how you became the leader of the anti-Taliban resistance, and are there other resistance groups you work with?
MASSOUD: I started my political efforts back in 2018 by consulting Afghanistan’s people. I went to the furthest villages and valleys of Afghanistan, engaging directly with my people to formulate a strategic response to the imminent US-Taliban deal and withdrawal. On September 5, 2019, I received a clear mandate from our citizens, gathered at my father’s mausoleum, to lead a solution to this coming crisis. The critical moment arrived on August 15, 2021, when my people and some of the former armed forces of Afghanistan established the National Resistance Front of Afghanistan, entrusting me with its leadership. This was not a choice but a call to duty that I answered without any hesitation.
BERGEN: You attended Sandhurst, the British equivalent of West Point, and studied in the War Studies department of Kings College, London. Was that helpful training for what you are doing now?
MASSOUD: My training at Sandhurst and education at King’s College provided me with a solid foundation. However, the burden of real-world conflict has been my true academy. The lessons I’ve learned leading our resistance these past few years far surpass any classroom instruction.
BERGEN: You won’t recall this, but I met you when you were only around 4 years old when CNN was interviewing your father, Ahmad Shah Massoud, in the Panjshir Valley in Afghanistan in 1993 during the Afghan civil war. I was very impressed by your father, his extraordinary charisma and his intelligence.
It must have been very difficult for you, aged 11 when he was assassinated by al Qaeda assassins two days before 9/11. How has your father’s assassination affected what you are doing today?
MASSOUD: The video of our first encounter, when you met my father during that CNN interview in the Panjshir Valley in 1993, is indeed part of our historical record. While I wish I had been older to fully grasp the gravity of those moments and learn more directly from my father, his legacy has become the cornerstone of my mission. My father’s assassination by al Qaeda, just days before 9/11, was a moment that shaped not just my family but the course of our nation. As I’ve detailed in my memoir “In the Name of My Father,” the impact was profound. However, it also ignited an unshakeable determination within me. At that moment, I vowed to continue his vision for a free and peaceful Afghanistan. His sacrifice wasn’t in vain – it’s the foundation upon which we’re building Afghanistan’s future. [Disclosure: I wrote the foreword to Massoud’s memoir, which I do not benefit from financially in any manner.]
BERGEN: When the Americans left Afghanistan three years ago, they left behind $8.5 billion dollars worth of military equipment, according to an estimate by the UN. That’s more than the defense budget of some European nations. Does this make your task of resisting the Taliban more difficult?
MASSOUD: The $8.5 billion worth of military equipment abandoned by the Americans has of course altered the battlefield dynamics, but it hasn’t dampened our determination and commitment. Yes, the Taliban are now better armed than ever before. However, military history is full of examples where determination and strategy overcame material advantages. The Taliban may have the weapons, but we have the will of the people – and history shows that’s a far more powerful force.
What’s more concerning is the Taliban’s transformation of Afghanistan into a black market for these weapons. We know that they are not just arming themselves; they’re fueling global terror networks. This isn’t just about our resistance; it’s about preventing Afghanistan from becoming a nexus of international terrorism.
BERGEN: When your father, Ahmad Shah Massoud, was fighting the Taliban before 9/11, he controlled some territory inside Afghanistan and could be resupplied from neighboring Tajikistan. You are not in Afghanistan, and it’s hard for you to supply your forces inside Afghanistan as you control no territory in Afghanistan. You do have a political office in Tajikistan, but no other countries support you; how does this lack of support affect your ability to fight the Taliban?
MASSOUD: Our current position differs strategically from my father’s era, but our determination remains unshaken. Since 2021, we’ve not only survived but expanded our influence, despite minimal external support. It is important to emphasize that we are not just fighting the Taliban; we’re engaged in a broader conflict against a coalition of regional and global terror groups. When al Qaeda and the Pakistani Taliban supply fighters to the Taliban, it’s clear that our struggle is an extension of the global war on terror.
However, let me be clear: to defeat these 20 terrorist organizations in Afghanistan threatening global security, we require international backing. It’s unrealistic to expect us to single-handedly neutralize this threat without resources. Our fight isn’t just for Afghanistan; it’s for global security. Any nation that perceives terrorism as a threat must recognize the strategic necessity of supporting our cause and efforts.
BERGEN: What support do you need?
MASSOUD: We need any kind of support that will allow us to defeat this group. We believe we have capable forces who were trained for 20 years to pursue counterterrorism. For this reason, we are asking for resources instead of foreign forces to liberate our country.
BERGEN: What do you say to those who say your resistance movement doesn’t have much of a chance against the well-armed Taliban and without financial and military support from other countries?
MASSOUD: Those who underestimate our resistance fail to grasp the lessons of Afghanistan’s history. Despite our current lack of external support, we’ve consistently grown in strength and numbers. The Taliban may control territory and possess billions in arms, but they lack the most crucial asset – the support of the people of Afghanistan. Our history proves that popular legitimacy, not weaponry, determines ultimate victory. Even the communist regime [which controlled Afghanistan from 1979 to 1992], which was far stronger than today’s Taliban, fell due to lack of popular support. Our resistance is expanding because we represent and embody the will of the people.
BERGEN: Will the Taliban still be in charge in Afghanistan a decade from now? If not, why not?
MASSOUD: The Taliban’s grip on Afghanistan is already slipping. Their lack of discipline, competence, legitimacy, and internal disunity makes their long-term rule ineffective. We don’t just hope for their downfall – we’re working to ensure it.
In Vienna, Austria, this year we initiated a political process, uniting Afghanistan’s diverse political and civil groups. This isn’t only opposition – it’s the foundation of a democratic alternative for Afghanistan’s future. We’re not waiting for the Taliban to fail; we’re building the system that will replace them.
The fractures within the Taliban are widening. Their implosion is not a matter of if, but when. When that moment comes – and it will come sooner than many expect – we’ll be ready. The democratic government we’re preparing will fill the void, representing all citizens and bringing stability to our nation.
A decade from now, Afghanistan won’t just be free of Taliban rule – it will be on the path to becoming a beacon of democracy in the region. That’s not wishful thinking – it’s our objective.
BERGEN: Has the Taliban created an “inclusive” government as they promised?
MASSOUD: The Taliban’s promise of an inclusive government has proven to be nothing but propaganda. The fundamentally reject the core democratic principle that political legitimacy stems from the will of the people and free elections. Their current power structure is a sham, with various factions of their terrorist organization vying for control and systematically marginalizing each other.
The very notion that this group could create an inclusive government is absurd when they can’t even maintain unity within their own ranks. Their internal power struggles and ideological inflexibility make any form of genuine inclusivity impossible. They’ve demonstrated time and again that their only interest is in consolidating power for their extremist vision.
BERGEN: Flawed presidential elections produced flawed Afghan governments. How culpable were Afghanistan’s leaders like President Ashraf Ghani for what transpired in Afghanistan?
MASSOUD: The government of Afghanistan was corrupt and flawed. The flaws in Afghanistan’s previous governments were systemic and deep-rooted. I consistently opposed these administrations precisely because of their corruption and ineffectiveness.
The root of the problem lies in the political system adopted after 2004, which was fundamentally unsuited to Afghanistan’s diverse demographic reality. Afghanistan is a highly diverse country without an ethnic majority. Its constitution concentrated excessive power in Kabul, essentially creating a presidential monarchy. This centralization was a primary factor in the government’s weakness and the marginalization of numerous communities.
The situation worsened dramatically during Ashraf Ghani’s presidency. His further centralization of power, limiting decision-making to only himself and a small circle of advisors, exacerbated the alienation of large segments of our population.
Recognizing this flaw, I advocated for the decentralization of power in a 2020 New York Times article. I firmly believe that Afghanistan’s path to peace and stability lies in the distribution of power. It is a strategic requirement for building a stable, resilient nation that can withstand internal divisions and external threats.
BERGEN: In all the discussions about the mistakes made in Afghanistan, sometimes it’s easy to lose sight of what went right. In addition to the rise of independent media and the provision of education to girls and jobs for women, what else worked? Programs like the National Solidarity Programme, which offered small grants for public works to local communities in consultation with those communities?
MASSOUD: Yes, despite challenges and setbacks in Afghanistan, it’s important to acknowledge the significant progress made during the two decades after 9/11. The rise of independent media was a cornerstone of this progress, giving voice to diverse perspectives and creating a more informed population. The expansion of education for girls and employment opportunities for women were transformative. Programs like the National Solidarity Programme were particularly effective.
BERGEN: What was the effect of the Trump administration’s 2020 Doha peace agreement with the Taliban and President Joe Biden announcing in April 2021 that he was going to go through with the total US withdrawal?
MASSOUD: The Trump administration’s 2020 Doha deal with the Taliban and President Biden’s later announcement of a total US withdrawal in April 2021 had detrimental effects on Afghanistan’s stability. These decisions legitimized the Taliban on the international stage while signaling the end of substantial Western support for the government of Afghanistan at the same time.
The Doha agreement, in particular, undermined the morale of our security forces and government officials. It created a sense of certainty about the Taliban’s return to power. Biden’s withdrawal announcement made it worse. It triggered a rapid loss of confidence in the government’s ability to stand independently. These policy decisions, which sought to end America’s longest war, sacrificed the hard-won progress of two decades and betrayed the trust of millions of our people.
BERGEN: Did the Taliban win at the negotiating table with the United States, what they couldn’t win on the battlefield from them?
MASSOUD: The Taliban’s true victory wasn’t on the battlefield; it was at the negotiating table. Prior to the negotiations, their territorial control was limited. The negotiation process itself became their launch pad to power. This diplomatic engagement legitimized a terrorist group. It turned them from insurgents to political actors. Had the US simply withdrawn without these negotiations, the Taliban wouldn’t be in power today.
The consequences were devastating – it demoralized Afghanistan’s armed forces, normalized relations with terrorists, facilitated the release of thousands of extremists from our prisons, and paved the way for the fall of our government.
This colossal mistake handed the Taliban a victory they couldn’t achieve through force of arms.
BERGEN: This year, you published a book, “In the Name of My Father: Struggling For Freedom In Afghanistan.” What was the main message of the book?
MASSOUD: My book is more than a memoir – it’s a manifesto for Afghanistan’s future and a testament to our ongoing struggle. I lay out my convictions on democracy, women’s rights and the role of Islam in our society. These are the foundational principles upon which we’re building our resistance.
BERGEN: What is your vision of the future? The Taliban control more of the country than they did before 9/11. They’re better armed. They’ve been fighting for 20 years. So, what’s the end goal here for you?
MASSOUD: Let me be very clear about our vision and end goal. We are fighting for a democratic, decentralized and pluralistic Afghanistan where every citizen, regardless of gender, ethnicity or religious belief, enjoys equal rights. This is our non-negotiable objective.
Yes, the Taliban currently control more territory and are better armed than before 9/11. But control of land and possession of weapons does not mean legitimate governance or popular support.
We’re not just resisting the Taliban; we’re building the foundation for a new Afghanistan. We’re creating a system that’s resilient against extremism and responsive to the diverse needs of all our citizens.
Make no mistake – we are prepared for a long struggle. This isn’t just a fight against the Taliban; it’s a fight for the soul and future of our nation, and we are determined to win, no matter the odds.