نسبت امارت اسلامی طالبان و لویاتان

طالبان با سلطه مجدد خود بر افغانستان از اصطلاح امارت‌ اسلامی به‌جای دولت اسلامی استفاده کرده است. پس از تصرف کابل، اعضای دولت موقت خود را به‌طور رسمی معرفی کردند و از سازمان ملل خواستند که نماینده این کشور در این سازمان را بپذیرد. دولت لویاتان‌ طالبان، به مبانی و مفاهیم مشروعیت‌ساز مرسوم در عرف بین‌الملل پایبند نیست و مبانی خویش را برگرفته از« فقه حنفی»، «عرف پشتونوالی» و «سنت لویه جرگه» می‌داند که هیچ‌یک از این موارد مبانی مشروعیت در عرصه بین‌المللی را ندارند، زیرا شاخص‌های امارت‌ اسلامی (قومیت‌گرایی، مردسالاری، تلفیق استبداد سیاسی با استبداد مذهبی) با شاخص‌های دولت مدرن (اقتدار، مشروعیت، حاکمیت، سرزمین، قلمرو، قدرت متمرکز، قانون اساسی) هم‌خوانی ندارد. در این پژوهش، مولفه‌های نسبت امارت اسلامی طالبان و لویاتان، براساس کنش‌های سیاسی (سیاست‌های اعلامی) و شاخص‌های رفتاری (سیاست‌های اعلامی) با روش هرمنوتیک اسکینر بررسی شده است. سوال این پژوهش این است که آیا امارت اسلامی (طالبان) دولت است؟ یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد با توجه به شاخص‌های دولت مدرن، می‌توان امارت اسلامی طالبان را دولت لویاتان قومی- مذهبی یا رژیم ترس و وحشت نام برد.

the relationship between the islamic emirate of the taliban and leviathan

with their resurgence in afghanistan, the taliban has adopted the term islamic emirate instead of islamic state. after capturing kabul, the taliban formally introduced their interim government and requested the united nations to recognize their representation. the taliban regime, which can be described as an ethnic-religious leviathan, does not adhere to the conventional norms of legitimacy in international law. instead, it bases its principles on hanafi jurisprudence, pashtunwali customs, and the loya jirga tradition, none of which align with international standards of legitimacy. these principles, characterized by ethnic nationalism, patriarchy, and the fusion of political and religious despotism, are incompatible with the modern state’s elements, such as authority, legitimacy, sovereignty, territory, centralized power, and a constitution.the concept of leviathan, introduced in thomas hobbes’ political philosophy, is a significant theory concerning sovereignty and political systems. it is based on a social contract where individuals surrender their decision-making rights to a centralized government. according to daron acemoglu and james robinson, the balance of power between the state and society is crucial in determining the type of leviathan. this balance may result in different forms of leviathan: a despotic leviathan where the state is strong, and society is weak; an absent leviathan where both the state and government institutions are weak; a constrained leviathan where the state and society are balanced and interact; and a paper leviathan where both the state and society are weak. in each type of leviathan, norms play a crucial role in shaping government behavior and actions. in comparison to leviathan, the taliban’s islamic emirate can be seen as a blend of a despotic leviathan and a paper leviathan. in this structure, the taliban government is strong and authoritarian, but its inability to resolve conflicts, enforce laws, and provide public services leads to a weakened society. this situation restricts individual and social freedoms and places society under the heavy control of the government, with no opportunity for effective political participation. additionally, exploitative economic institutions in this type of government eliminate incentives for progress and innovation, leading to social instability and weakness. considering these factors, the taliban leviathan can be seen as a combination of both despotic and paper leviathan types. the paper leviathan lacks the ability to resolve conflicts, enforce laws, and provide public services, rendering both the state and society weak. at the same time, it constantly fears mobilization from society, which could threaten the stability of its control. in this type of leviathan, freedom is ultimately thwarted.according to quentin skinner’s perspective, understanding the taliban’s ideology and actions requires reconstructing both their practical and ideological contexts, aiming to clarify what the taliban intends to achieve. a hermeneutic analysis of the taliban’s actions and the political environment in their islamic emirate necessitates examining their ideological foundations, customary norms, their political actions, the development or transformation of their ideology, and finally, the relationship between ideology and political action. the ideological crisis in afghanistan stems from the lack of indigenous forces for national and political independence. as a country with ethnic, linguistic, and religious diversity, afghanistan has long faced identity problems. the state’s, system’s, and nation’s identity in afghanistan have always been ambiguous and unstable. this identity crisis has been exacerbated by the dominance of tribal culture, which conflicts with modernity and inter-ethnic culture. in this context, the taliban, as a group with a specific ideology, has been influenced by hanafi jurisprudence, pashtunwali customs, and the loya jirga tradition. talibanism emerged as a reaction to the inefficiency of the jihadist government and ethnic fragmentation, attempting to strengthen its legitimacy among the afghan people by ensuring security.the taliban’s political actions are based on hanafi jurisprudence, pashtunwali customs, and the loya jirga tradition. after the 2001 us invasion and the subsequent fall of their government, the taliban resorted to guerrilla warfare. through reorganization and alliances with groups like al-qaeda, they managed to regain control over various regions and gradually became a significant political power in afghanistan. however, the taliban’s political actions have consistently been characterized by totalitarianism and exclusivity, which has deepened ethnic and racial divisions in afghanistan. in forming their ideology, the taliban collaborated with fundamentalist and reactionary groups, adopting norms from hanafi culture as their political ideology. over time, this ideology has evolved under the influence of global and regional developments, particularly after the deaths of the taliban’s original leaders and the emergence of new ones. the group has attempted to adapt its ideology to new global and local challenges. global events like the september 11 attacks and the us wars in afghanistan also played a role in these ideological shifts.