Leadership or Rule by Force? The Thin Line Between Guidance and Coercion.
Hibatullah Akhundzada, the leader of the Taliban, in his Eid al-Fitr speech at the Eidgah Mosque in Kandahar, declared that he is responsible for guiding Muslims and considers the enforcement of his directives essential for reforming society.
He stated: “I am obliged; I am the leader of these Muslims, and I will certainly guide them to the path of God,” and called on the public to remain united and support the Taliban government.
He also, without naming Pakistan, emphasized that military pressure and airstrikes cannot change the Taliban’s beliefs and faith, and that the group will not be eliminated through military force.
However, this claim faces a serious contradiction at the societal level. Guidance has meaning only when a leader stands alongside the people, listens to their voices, and understands the realities of their lives.
When the gap between the ruling authority and society widens, and signs of coercion, dissatisfaction, or repression emerge, the concept of “guidance” shifts from a conscious and voluntary process to one of imposition and top-down command.
In such a situation, the claim of guidance appears more as a slogan than a reality.
A leader who is distant from the people or indifferent to their demands cannot convincingly claim moral and social leadership. True guidance requires trust, justice, and a living connection with society—not merely an emphasis on obedience. Otherwise, such claims are not only unpersuasive but may deepen the divide between the people and the ruling authority.
Meanwhile, sources from various provinces report that the Taliban have forced people, through pressure and coercion, to attend Eid prayers.
At the same time, in Herat, according to earlier reports, the Taliban have detained and imprisoned a number of Shia clerics for opposing the group’s declaration of Eid al-Fitr.
