The Taliban Promise to Protect Women. Here's Why Women Don't Believe Them

“A Talib is a Talib,” said Zainab Fayez, a prosecutor who received a death threat signed by the Taliban. “They have proven what type of people they are, what their ideology is.”CreditYousur Al-Hlou/The New York Times
“A Talib is a Talib,” said Zainab Fayez, a prosecutor who received a death threat signed by the Taliban. “They have proven what type of people they are, what their ideology is.”CreditYousur Al-Hlou/The New York Times
TT

The Taliban Promise to Protect Women. Here's Why Women Don't Believe Them

“A Talib is a Talib,” said Zainab Fayez, a prosecutor who received a death threat signed by the Taliban. “They have proven what type of people they are, what their ideology is.”CreditYousur Al-Hlou/The New York Times
“A Talib is a Talib,” said Zainab Fayez, a prosecutor who received a death threat signed by the Taliban. “They have proven what type of people they are, what their ideology is.”CreditYousur Al-Hlou/The New York Times

At just 29, Zainab Fayez made herself into one of Afghanistan’s foremost defenders of women.

As the first and only female prosecutor in Kandahar Province, deep in the conservative south of the country, she sent 21 men to jail for beating and abusing their wives or fiancées.

I thought I should speak with her. I had gone to Afghanistan to ask women one of the most urgent questions hanging over the peace talks now unfolding between Taliban leaders, the Afghanistan government and American diplomats: After 18 years of gains for Afghanistan’s women, what are these women thinking now that the Americans might leave, and the Taliban might return?

But as I prepared to travel to Kandahar to meet Ms. Fayez, I discovered that she had fled the city.

She had received a warning she could not ignore: a handwritten note, tacked to the windshield of her family car, folded over a bullet.

“From now on, you are our target,” the letter said, “and we will treat you like other Western slaves.” It was signed “The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan,” the formal name the Taliban use for themselves.

Many Afghan women seized on the freedoms that emerged after the American invasion and collapse of the Taliban government in 2001. They do not want to go back to the terms of Taliban rule — to the floggings and banishment from public life.

But as some sort of agreement between the Taliban and American officials appears likely, many women do not believe the insurgents’ promises to respect the rights of women this time around.

Take Ms. Fayez, the prosecutor.

I found her in Kabul, the Afghan capital, holed up with her two children in her relative’s house. Her husband, Fakhruddin, had just driven from Kandahar with the bullet and threatening letter.

Ms. Fayez has seen enough of the Taliban to know that their promises to treat women fairly are as empty as the desert outside of town.

“I have never been so terrified,” she said.

Born in the remote province of Ghor in 1990, at the height of the Afghan civil war, she grew up seeing the bottom line of Taliban rule: No school for girls, no jobs for women. Transgressors were stoned and flogged.

After the Taliban’s ouster, she enrolled in Kabul University and became a lawyer. In 2016, she signed up to prosecute men who abused women in Kandahar Province, where the Taliban movement was born.

One after another, Ms. Fayez sent the abusers to jail. Two of the men she convicted were police officers. Last year, the government recognized her as one of the five bravest women in the country, and put her portrait on a billboard in downtown Kandahar: “Heroes for women’s rights.”

Most important, her dogged reputation empowered more women to come forward with stories of abuse.

“My caseload grew as more women began trusting the rule of law,” she said. “Then the threats began.”

On the floor of her living room she displayed printouts and recordings of previous death threats: emails and messages over WhatsApp, text and voice mail, commanding her to quit working. For months, she waved off the warnings as part of her job.

Then in February, her colleague Azam Ahmad, with whom she had worked on many of her domestic violence cases, was shot and killed by unidentified gunmen on his way to the office.

“He was a very brave man, and a friend,” she said. “These incidents and threats affect us mentally and emotionally. But we try our best to keep working.”

A few weeks later, the Taliban letter — and the bullet — showed up on her windshield.

“A Talib is a Talib,” Ms. Fayez said. “They have proven what type of people they are, what their ideology is. And if they return with the same ideology, everything will be the same again.”

Afghanistan remains a deeply patriarchal society, but the overwhelming majority of women I met are unwilling to go back to the way things were. I had a hard time finding any who believed the Taliban had grown more tolerant in their years out of power.

I traveled to Kunduz, capital of the northern province of the same name, to speak with Sediqa Sherzai, a fearless and embattled advocate of women’s empowerment who directs an all-female radio station on the outskirts of town.

The province is controlled mostly by the Taliban, and the city itself has fallen to the insurgents twice for short periods.

“Imagine a house surrounded by Taliban,” Ms. Sherzai said. “You would not be able to live, eat or do work with even momentary peace. People here live in constant fear that the Taliban will retake the city at any minute.”

Since 2008, she has run Radio Roshani, a small shortwave station that educates women about their rights and encourages them to share their difficulties and stories. It has an audience across northern Afghanistan.

The day I visited, Ms. Sherzai’s producers were recording a segment with young graduates about their challenges finding work in the city. In a room next door, she sat with a number of women from around the city to discuss the peace negotiations for an upcoming segment.

“We reach people who cannot read and write,” Ms. Sherzai said. She emphasized how important it is for women to hear the voices of other women, especially in areas where literacy rates are so low.

“Listeners trust that the woman speaking is practicing the advice she preaches, in her own life and on her own children,” she said. “It disarms them.”

In 2015, when the Taliban briefly captured Kunduz, they occupied Radio Roshani’s studio for five hours, set it on fire and stole the equipment. They seized the phone numbers and addresses of staff members. Ms. Sherzai’s husband, Obaidullah Qazizadha, who helped found the station, received ominous telephone calls at their home.

“Your wife is changing other women,” the voice on the phone said. “We do not agree with the ways she is changing their mind-set.”

She and her husband fled to Kabul, and the station went off the air. But in April, Ms. Sherzai decided to restart Radio Roshani. The station’s employees try to keep their involvement clandestine. Her husband keeps a shotgun in the control room.

She is willing to risk her life to continue, she said, and she has no intention of making things easy for her enemies.

“The Taliban were right,” she said. “We were changing the mind-set of women.”

But not all the Afghan women I spoke to had lost hope.

As a young mother under Taliban rule in the late 1990s, Hawa Nuristani helped run a secret school for girls, who were otherwise banned from attending class.

After the Taliban’s fall, Ms. Nuristani emerged as one of the most influential women in the new Afghan state, becoming a prominent television news anchor and then moving into politics. She now heads a commission that adjudicates electoral disputes.

At various times, the Taliban imprisoned her husband, kidnapped her son and tried to kill her: One attack left a bullet in her leg and gave her a limp. Another attempt on her life, a bomb, demolished her car.

In February, Ms. Nuristani was part of the Afghan delegation that traveled to Moscow to meet with a group of Taliban leaders — one of only two women in the group. The other was Fawzia Koofi, a member of Parliament.

In her Kabul office, Ms. Nuristani recalled the meeting with a defiant look in her eyes. But her tone was hopeful.

“I do not think anyone else has ever been as troubled in the Afghan government as much as I have,” she told me. “But I went to this meeting because I feel like you cannot wash blood with blood. How long will this war go on?”

For days, she listened to the Taliban leaders promise, among other things, to honor the rights of women. But when the talk turned to specifics, they froze up.

She recalled them saying that women were too “sympathetic and delicate” for jobs like commissioner or mayor, where “a woman’s emotions might get in the way.”

Still, Ms. Nuristani said she was choosing to give the insurgents a chance, if only because she sensed a war-weariness in the negotiators that appeared to match her own.

“People on both sides of the war want peace, and are tired of the fighting — certainly the Taliban,” she said. “I have heard this from them directly.”

The New York Times



Israel Army Says on ‘Defensive Alert’ Regarding Iran but No Change to Public Guidelines

Israeli air defense system fires to intercept missiles during an Iranian attack over Tel Aviv, Israel, Thursday, June 19, 2025. (AP)
Israeli air defense system fires to intercept missiles during an Iranian attack over Tel Aviv, Israel, Thursday, June 19, 2025. (AP)
TT

Israel Army Says on ‘Defensive Alert’ Regarding Iran but No Change to Public Guidelines

Israeli air defense system fires to intercept missiles during an Iranian attack over Tel Aviv, Israel, Thursday, June 19, 2025. (AP)
Israeli air defense system fires to intercept missiles during an Iranian attack over Tel Aviv, Israel, Thursday, June 19, 2025. (AP)

The Israeli army said it was on "defensive alert" as the United States threatens potential military action against Iran, but insisted there were no changes in its guidelines for the public.

"We are closely monitoring regional developments and are aware of the public discourse concerning Iran. The (Israeli military) is on defensive alert," army spokesman Brigadier General Effie Defrin said in a video statement published Friday.

"Our eyes are wide open in all directions, and our finger is more than ever on the trigger in response to any change in the operational reality," he added, but emphasized "there is no change in the instructions".


Trump Says Weighing Strike on Iran as Tehran Says Draft Deal Coming Soon

US President Donald Trump speaks during a Governors Working Breakfast in the State Dining Room of the White House in Washington, DC, USA, 20 February 2026. (EPA)
US President Donald Trump speaks during a Governors Working Breakfast in the State Dining Room of the White House in Washington, DC, USA, 20 February 2026. (EPA)
TT

Trump Says Weighing Strike on Iran as Tehran Says Draft Deal Coming Soon

US President Donald Trump speaks during a Governors Working Breakfast in the State Dining Room of the White House in Washington, DC, USA, 20 February 2026. (EPA)
US President Donald Trump speaks during a Governors Working Breakfast in the State Dining Room of the White House in Washington, DC, USA, 20 February 2026. (EPA)

US President Donald Trump said he was considering a limited strike on Iran after ordering a major naval buildup in the Middle East aimed at heaping pressure on Tehran to cut a deal to curb its nuclear program.

The latest threat came after Iran's foreign minister said a draft proposal for an agreement with Washington would be ready in a matter of days following negotiations between the two sides in Geneva earlier this week.

Trump had suggesting on Thursday that "bad things" would happen if Tehran did not strike a deal within 10 days, which he subsequently extended to 15.

Asked by a reporter on Friday whether he was contemplating a limited military strike, Trump answered: "The most I can say -- I am considering it."

After the talks in Geneva, Tehran said the two sides had agreed to submit drafts of a potential agreement, which Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told US media would be the "next step".

"I believe that in the next two, three days, that would be ready, and after final confirmation by my superiors, that would be handed over to Steve Witkoff," he said, referring to Trump's main Middle East negotiator.

Araghchi also said US negotiators had not requested that Tehran end its nuclear enrichment program, contradicting statements from American officials.

"We have not offered any suspension, and the US side has not asked for zero enrichment," he said in an interview released Friday by US TV network MS NOW.

"What we are now talking about is how to make sure that Iran's nuclear program, including enrichment, is peaceful and would remain peaceful forever," he added.

His comments stand in contrast to information relayed by high-ranking US officials, including Trump, who has repeatedly said Iran must not be allowed to enrich uranium at any level.

Western countries accuse Tehran of seeking to acquire nuclear weapons, which it denies, though it insists on its right to enrichment for civilian purposes.

Iran, for its part, is seeking to negotiate an end to sanctions that have proven to be a massive drag on its economy.

Economic hardships sparked protests in December that evolved into a nationwide anti-government movement last month, prompting a crackdown from authorities that left thousands dead, rights groups say.

- 'No ultimatum' -

The two foes held an initial round of discussions on February 6 in Oman, the first since previous talks collapsed during the 12-day Iran-Israel war last June, which the US joined by striking Iranian nuclear facilities.

Washington has pursued a major military build-up in the region in tandem with the talks, and both sides have traded threats of military action for weeks.

On Thursday, Trump again suggested the US would attack Iran if it did not make a deal within the timeframe he laid out.

"We have to make a meaningful deal otherwise bad things happen," Trump told the inaugural meeting of the "Board of Peace", his initiative for the post-war Gaza Strip.

Iran's ambassador to the UN, Amir Saeid Iravani, warned that US bases, facilities and assets would be "legitimate targets" if the United States followed through on its threats.

Araghchi, however, insisted that "there is no ultimatum".

"We only talk with each other how we can have a fast deal. And a fast deal is something that both sides are interested about," he said.

"We are under sanctions, (so) obviously any day that sanctions are terminated sooner it would be better for us," he said, adding Iran had "no reason to delay".

Washington has repeatedly called for zero enrichment, but has also sought to address Iran's ballistic missile program and its support for militant groups in the region -- issues which Israel has pushed to include in the talks.

The Israeli army said Friday that it was on "defensive alert" regarding the situation with Iran, but that its guidelines for the public remained unchanged.

Ratcheting up the pressure, Trump has deployed a significant naval force to the region.

After sending the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln and escort battleships to the Gulf in January, he ordered a second carrier, the Gerald Ford, to depart for the Middle East.

Iranian naval forces also conducted military drills this week in the Gulf and around the strategic Strait of Hormuz in their own show of force.


UK Foreign Minister to Meet Rubio amid Tensions over Joint Air Base

British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, president of the United Nations Security Council for February speaks during a press conference before the Security Council meeting, at UN headquarters in New York City, US, February 19, 2026. REUTERS/Jeenah Moon
British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, president of the United Nations Security Council for February speaks during a press conference before the Security Council meeting, at UN headquarters in New York City, US, February 19, 2026. REUTERS/Jeenah Moon
TT

UK Foreign Minister to Meet Rubio amid Tensions over Joint Air Base

British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, president of the United Nations Security Council for February speaks during a press conference before the Security Council meeting, at UN headquarters in New York City, US, February 19, 2026. REUTERS/Jeenah Moon
British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, president of the United Nations Security Council for February speaks during a press conference before the Security Council meeting, at UN headquarters in New York City, US, February 19, 2026. REUTERS/Jeenah Moon

Britain's foreign minister Yvette Cooper ‌will meet with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Friday, after President Donald Trump renewed his criticism of London for ceding sovereignty of ​the Chagos Islands, which is home to a US-UK air base.
Last year, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer agreed a deal to transfer sovereignty of the Indian Ocean islands to Mauritius, while keeping control of one - Diego Garcia - through a 99-year lease that preserved US operations at the base, Reuters said.
Washington last year gave its blessing to the agreement, but Trump has since ‌changed his mind ‌several times. In January, Trump described it ​as ‌an ⁠act ​of "great stupidity", ⁠but earlier this month said he understood the deal was the best Starmer could make, before then renewing his criticism this week.
Cooper is meeting Rubio to discuss defense and security issues in Washington as Trump also toughens his rhetoric on Iran, saying Tehran must make a deal over its nuclear program in the ⁠next 10 to 15 days, or "really bad ‌things" will happen.
The Diego Garcia ‌base has recently been used for ​operations in the Middle East against ‌Yemen's Houthis and in humanitarian aid to Gaza.
Although on Tuesday ‌Rubio's State Department said it backed the Chagos accord, the next day Trump said Britain was making a big mistake.
"DO NOT GIVE AWAY DIEGO GARCIA!" Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social, saying the ‌base could be called upon in any future military operation to "eradicate a potential attack" from ⁠Iran.
Under the ⁠conditions for using the joint base, Britain would need to agree in advance to any operations out of Diego Garcia.
On Thursday, Britain's The Times newspaper reported that Trump's latest criticism of the Chagos deal came because Britain was yet to give permission to use the bases for future strikes against Iran, owing to concerns they may breach international law.
Asked about The Times report, Britain's Ministry of Defence said on Thursday it does not comment on operational matters and that Britain supported ​the ongoing political process between ​the US and Iran.