On May 30, a bomb explosion killed an Afghan journalist Mir Wahed Shah and a technician Shafiq Amiri who, as employees of Khurshid TV, a local television station in Kabul, were commuting in a white van. The Islamic State (Daesh) claimed responsibility for the bomb explosion. Last year, employees of the same TV channel were also attacked and the attack left two employees dead. Before the US-Taliban peace agreement signed in February this year for bringing peace to Afghanistan after more than 18 years of perpetual conflict, the Taliban were the main perpetrators of terrorism unleashed on journalists belonging to both print and electronic media. In 2018, the Taliban killed 15 journalists on a mere suspicion that the journalists were anti-Taliban. Founded in February 2011, Khurshid TV is a private TV channel located in Kabul. The channel focuses on broadcasting programs expressing Afghan culture and society. This is what makes this TV channel a target of bombs. Another TV channel, which remains a target, is Tolo TV, Afghanistan’s largest private TV channel, launched in 2004. In 2016, a Taliban suicide bomber rammed his car into the van transporting employees of Tolo TV and killed seven journalists. The Taliban alleged that Tolo TV was an instrument to promote the western ideas in Afghan society and that the TV was averse to the Taliban efforts. After the US-Taliban peace agreement, the Islamic State feels to have been left abandoned and disowned. In its desperation to get included, the organization misses no chance of launching attacks on the soft underbelly of society, be it hospitals or TV channels. It is not only the fear of capitulation before a competitive sub-culture that elicits a reaction, tolerance in society is also at a premium Like in other countries, Afghanistan’s electronic media have generated a considerable momentum of shaping ideas of people and influencing the government policies. The key role the Afghan electronic media play and is poised to play in the future makes it a target of coercion, intimidation and assault. For that, there are two main reasons. First, though Afghan society is heterogeneous, as other societies of the region are, wars inflicted upon Afghanistan have promoted varied ideologies affecting the layers of Afghan society. Here, war and ideology are concomitant. No war is a lone visitor: war carries along an ideology necessary to justify the war and mitigate post-war scenarios. Wars have taken their toll on the Afghan psyche. The same is true for the war on terror that engulfed Afghanistan after the fall of twin towers in New York. Currently, driven by different social, political and economic ideologies, every section of society feels vulnerable and hence intends to watch its interests in the emerging broader pro-peace scenario in Afghanistan. The aim is to pull out maximum benefits from any situation that emerges after the US-NATO forces withdraw from Afghanistan. In this way, the Afghan society is a battlefield for interest groups trying to promote their respective sub-cultures to ensure maximum chances of existence and opulence. Nevertheless, over the years, wars have deepened intra-societal rifts to the extent that any talk show or program aired giving an impression of projecting one subculture or a section of society invites the wrath of the respective competitor. Many Afghans tend to assume that a conspirator lurks around amongst the ranks of TV channels to promote one kind of interests at the cost of interests of others. Certainly, the Afghan society is not immune to conspiracy theories. It is not only the fear of capitulation before a competitive sub-culture that elicits a reaction, tolerance in society is also at a premium. The ubiquitous societal intolerance poses an indomitable challenge to TV moderators to devise ways and means to balance any supposed projection and opinion, though within the confines of freedom of thought and expression. The virtues of free speech are also new characteristics fighting for their survival in the face of a sequestered Afghan culture dipped in conservatism and Islamism. Freedom of speech, which otherwise conduces to unity and progress, is a concept considered outlandish to the locals the majority of whom consider it adventitious destined for dissipation the moment western armies leave Afghanistan. The second reason is that militants are relentless in their efforts to outclass the competitive militant groups. Any reporting that goes against a militant group invites the wrath of the group which responds by attacking the journalists. Years of wars have rendered Afghanistan such a difficult place to survive and report. Before the US-Taliban peace agreement, various Taliban groups were vying for ascendancy and attacking journalists, after the agreement militants of the Islamic State have positioned themselves in the same troughs. Now, Journalists in Afghanistan have been bearing the brunt of the attack launched by the Islamic State, which intends to send a message to the international press that they also enjoy a sway in Kabul and hence they should also be heard. In this way, journalists in Afghanistan are not only victims of retaliation (against a supposed act of offence), but they are also victims of collateral damage. Most Afghans think that after the departure of western forces, the Afghan society, whether under the influence of the Kabul regime or the Taliban, would readjust itself. Ethnic groups which are in a minority think that their more presence in cities would offer them a better chance to survive. Nevertheless, the basic contest would be between the imported western culture and the local Afghan culture immersed in various ethnicities. Most Afghans think that with the exclusion of western armies, western thoughts and life-styles would also be jettisoned. It simply means that many Afghans view progress and development incongruous with local needs and that they want to reconstruct Afghanistan as per their own desires and dreams. If true, this is a thought that is bound to induce reconfiguration in Afghanistan, be the level were society, culture, economy or politics. The supposed resistance – which might be in the name of human rights or civil liberties – would come from, inter alia, the media. It simply means that the Afghan media should prepare themselves for facing new challenges of survival once the western armies leave Afghanistan. Dr Tehmina Aslam Ranjha is an Assistant Professor at School of Intergrated Social Sciences at University of Lahore and Research Fellow at UoL Center for Security, Strategy and Policy Research.Currently,She is SDPI’s grantee for a mega project on Countering Violent Extremism. She regularly appears on BBC Urdu as an expert on National Security and Counter-Terrorism. Asad Aslam Ranjha is a lecturer at Faculty of Law,University of Lahore.He tweets at @AA_Ranjha1