Afghanistan has been in major turmoil for centuries, from British to USSR, from NATO to the United States, Afghanistan has been a warzone since the 1800s. And recent with drawl of US troops from the territory is yet, another episode of repeated history. Many policymakers and defense analysts are writing about its background and reasons for the failure of US troops in this region. For a country with the biggest military and advanced technological weaponry, such defeat is a big slap on the face, especially from a country that has been deprived of any support, education, and high-tech arsenal. But if the analysts take a deep dive in finding the reasons, they might understand. Afghanistan is a primitive tribal society mostly based on Pashtun traditions mingled with religious conservatism and economically, it is mostly based on the agrarian system and farming. Such a kind of society is usually highly resistant to change especially when it comes at a cost of deviance from one’s religious views and cultural norms. The emergence of the Taliban is a well-documented story now that how amid the crisis of civil war a group first went out to rescue an abducted boy from a local warlord under the leadership of Mullah Umar. One incident led to another and these vigilantes started to bring stability which was the most precious commodity for the Afghanis, whose generations after generations were born in war and suffering. It was only natural for them to want a leader who bring stability along with quenching their thirst for religious government or sharia. When one sees the Afghan dialogue closely, the most important aspect where Taliban and other stakeholders were at the loggerheads was a democratic government. The US was insisting on a democratic government while the Taliban were totally against this notion. They had accepted many things like allowing girls to attend schools, higher and non-religious education for the youth, being lenient while punishing the crimes, things which were unacceptable in the country under the previous government. But according to them the western notion of democracy has no standing in Islam, only a theocratic dictatorship is the right and legitimate way of governance. Moreover, the new phenomena of the nation-state which emerged after the treaty of Westphalia and adopted by the whole world are also alien for some of their subsidiaries. If we dig deep into this matter, the reason behind resistance to democracy is based on a specific interpretation of not one but multiple schools of thought in Sunni and Shia sects alike. Iranian and Saudi state structures are models of this kind of interpretation which has an ample tendency of expansionism by taking legitimization from the idea of pan Islamism used by the Islamic militants such as, al Qaeda and ISIS. This interpretation has given legitimacy to many middle eastern and African states to carry on as monarchies or dictatorships ironically accepting the notion of the nation-state but defying the political rights of their citizens and continue to treat them as their subjects. So this autocratic leadership style might be logical insanity or intellectual contagion in their eyes. Meanwhile, the Muslim world is busy countering the menace of Islamophobia. The speech of every Muslim head of the state in the UN general assembly includes this topic. But the regimes which are proclaiming to be the leaders of the Muslim world are not ready to give the basic human rights based on self-expounded Islamic interpretations. ‘Islamophobia’ is generally defined as “an outlook or worldview involving an unfounded dread and dislike of Muslims, which results in practices of exclusion and discrimination”. To counter Islamophobia, certain areas need to be addressed by the Muslim world in which most important are basic human rights. Instead of countering islamophobia most theocratic dictatorships and monarchies are fueling this narrative through their proxy wars. Iran is determined to export her revolution to other capitals like Sanaa, Beirut, Baghdad, and Damascus through its revolutionary guards previously led by major general Qasim Sulemani famously known as shadow commander who was killed in a US drone strike in January 2020. On the other hand, the Saudi regime is exporting her brand by supporting the opponent groups, and all they have been doing under the banner of Islam. Like, Jamal Khashoggi, a renowned and well-connected journalist was killed brutally at the Saudi embassy in Turkey after he started to campaign for DAWN (Democracy in the Arab World now), which exhibited a clear message that such a project will never be tolerated by the Arabs. Although there are multiple variables of islamophobia some are based on prejudice and some are based on the fear of the Islamic structure of state where it is believed that human rights, like freedom of assembly and freedom of expression, are not even considered as basic rights, additionally, the Islamic State has a right to interfere in individual’s life choices. Although many Islamic scholars don’t agree with this kind of statecraft. They believe that democracy is the only legitimate way to rule the Muslim state and any social group or family has no right to rule an Islamic state without the trust of its citizens. The fall of Kabul in the hands of the Taliban is yet another situation where another Muslim state is changing into a theocratic dictatorship where an inclusive setup is usually a utopia and hard to achieve. These developments are certainly driving the narrative of Islamophobia. To counter Islamophobia, Of course, there is a need for a coordinated and concerted effort to counter the anti-Muslim campaign, but it should also be linked to the struggle against all other violent religious ideologies. Sadly, killing in the name of faith is far more prevalent in our region. However, Regional and global players are engaging with the Taliban on the pretext of stability in Afghanistan according to their definitions of stability based on their vested interest and certainly, it’s their responsibility and necessity as well to help stabilize the war-torn country. Nonetheless, Islamic states also have the additional responsibility to counter islamophobia therefore strategic engagement policy should include this element not just for optics or for portraying soft image but to ameliorate the living conditions of their citizens. The writer is a law student and can be reached at syedwaqaramjad@gmail.com