bcci – Chasing Tales

One day, a young Talib beat Laila with a radio antenna. When he was done, he gave a final whack to the back of her neck and said, “I see you again, I’ll beat you until your mother’s milk leaks out of your bones.” – A passage from the novel A Thousand Splendid Suns by Khaled Hosseini, which describes the lives of two fictional Afghan women.¹

While the above quote is said to a fictional woman in a novel, the reality is that in just the past 12 months, Afghanistan’s Taliban government has:
1. Codified 35 restrictive articles banning women’s voices in public, requiring full Arabic-style hijab, and prohibiting depiction of humans or animals in media. Women may not travel, study, or appear in public spaces without a male guardian (mahram).²
2. Mandated that women adopt “Arabic hijab style” within five days, with imprisonment for violators. Families are held responsible for non-compliance.³
3. Prohibited women from entering three district parks, extending the preexisting national ban.³
4. Criminalised women speaking or singing audibly in public, across broadcast and real-life settings.⁴
5. Prohibited women from afternoon medical visits without male accompaniment, severely restricting access to care in provinces like Badakhshan.⁵
6. Authorised arrests of women and men for “moral corruption”; 38 arrests reported in nine provinces.⁶
7. Expelled all female medical students from health training colleges nationwide.⁷
8. Prohibited shopkeepers from talking to female customers in Takhar and Nangarhar provinces to “protect modesty”.⁸
9. Ordered women to block home windows to avoid being seen by neighbors.⁹
10. Blocked Hazara-led religious ceremonies in Bamyan and Daykundi Provinces ahead of Ashura.¹⁰
11. Facilitated dispossession of Hazara farmlands for Kuchi nomads under “historic restitution” justifications; over 25,000 displaced in 2024–25.¹¹
12. Diverted international rations away from Hazara-majority central highlands to Pashtun-controlled areas.¹¹
13. Marginalised Shia observances by defining “permissible Islamic behavior” under Sunni Hanafi doctrines.¹²

In all, in the past few months, Afghanistan’s Taliban government has entrenched a dual system of apartheid– gender and sectarian- now recognised by experts as constituting crimes against humanity and genocide risk indicators according to the UN and Human Rights Watch.

And yet, cricket remains nearly entirely silent.

ICC’s policy on political intervention in cricket
The International Cricket Council (ICC) is cricket’s international governing body. It claims to uphold the autonomy of cricket via its official policy, which prohibits political appointments and undue government interference in the administration of national cricket boards, favouring free elections and board independence,¹³ and they can suspend a country’s membership for government meddling, with bans or warnings applied until compliance is restored.¹⁴

Here are some recent examples of this policy in action:

Zimbabwe (2019): The ICC suspended Zimbabwe Cricket for failing to ensure no government interference in its cricket administration, barring their teams from ICC events until the suspension was lifted.¹⁵
Sri Lanka (2024): Sri Lanka Cricket was suspended by the ICC due to evidence of government interference, including the sacking of board officials and attempts at regulatory control.¹⁶

The South Africa Precedent
One does wonder what the difference is between apartheid South Africa, and present-day Afghanistan in ICC’s eyes.

In 1970, the ICC banned South Africa from international cricket due to racial apartheid policies that prevented non-white players from representing the national team and subjected touring players of color to discriminatory treatment.¹⁷ ¹⁸ This ban remained in effect for 21 years, until Nelson Mandela’s release and the dismantling of apartheid in 1991.¹⁷ ¹⁸

The ICC maintained the ban despite South Africa’s 1976 attempt to desegregate cricket through the formation of a non-racial governing body, the South African Cricket Union.¹⁷ ¹⁸ Only after apartheid’s complete dismantling and at the personal request of Nelson Mandela was South Africa readmitted to the ICC and Test cricket in 1991.¹⁷

Here’s a comparison of the actions of the Taliban government in Afghanistan with those of some other comparable governments:

Category	Taliban Afghanistan (2024–2025)	Apartheid South Africa (1948–1991)	Nazi Germany (1933–1945)	Myanmar Junta vs Rohingya (2016–Present)
Basis of Oppression	Gender, ethnicity, and religion (women, Hazaras, Shia, Tajiks)	Race and ethnicity (Black Africans, Coloureds, Indians)	Race and religion (Jews, Roma, disabled)¹⁸ ¹⁹	Ethnicity and religion (Rohingya Muslims)²³ ²⁶
Right to Education	Total ban on women and girls attending secondary and tertiary institutions	Segregated and inferior “Bantu Education Act” (1953)	Jews banned from universities (1933–1938)²⁰ ²¹	Rohingya schools closed or destroyed²⁷ ²⁸
Employment Restrictions	Women banned from most occupations; Hazara excluded from government posts	Non‑whites restricted to menial labour	Jews removed from public service (1933)²¹	Rohingya barred from public sector roles²⁹ ³⁰
Freedom of Movement	Women require male guardian; Hazaras displaced from ancestral lands	Pass laws required for Black movement across provinces	Jews prohibited from using public transport (1941)²² ²³	Rohingya confined to internment camps³¹ ³²
Legal System	Shia and women excluded; Taliban enforces Hanafi system	Separate, racially biased courts; no franchise for non‑whites	Nuremberg Laws stripped Jews of citizenship (1935)²⁴	No legal recourse for Rohingya abuses³³ ³⁴
Violence and Atrocities	Targeted killings, sexual violence, execution of Hazara protestors	Police brutality, executions, detentions	Holocaust: extermination camps, 6 million Jews killed ²⁴	2017–present killings, over 700,000 displaced³⁵ ³⁶
Cultural Erasure	Destruction of Hazara monuments; ban on female voices and presence	Suppression of African culture and languages	Book burnings, bans on Jewish culture²⁵	Destruction of mosques and Rohingya villages³⁷ ³⁸
International Response	Limited sanctions, ICC charges for gender persecution	UN boycott and sports sanctions, 1970–1991	Nuremberg Trials post‑WWII²⁰	ICC genocide probe, UN sanctions on Myanmar³⁹ ⁴⁰
Classification	Gender apartheid & ethnic persecution	Racial apartheid	Genocide [UN 1948]¹⁹	Genocide [UN Fact‑Finding Mission 2018]³⁹ ⁴¹

Apparently not an apartheid according to the powers that be in Cricket

Negotiating with terrorists
It’s evident that the ICC believes in being gentle with cricket’s resident terrorists. In April 2025, the ICC confirmed it would not cut funding to the Afghanistan Cricket Board and would instead “pursue dialogue and constructive engagement”.⁴² An ICC spokesperson told Sky News: “We are committed to leveraging our influence constructively to support the Afghanistan Cricket Board in fostering cricket development and ensuring playing opportunities for both men and women in Afghanistan”.⁴³

Naturally, this approach has yielded no progress.

The India Connection
I believe India’s geopolitics is directly shaping the ICC’s approach to Afghanistan, a pattern evident across multiple recent ICC decisions.

India is responsible for a large part of the ICC’s global revenue,⁴⁴ primarily through the BCCI and the massive domestic cricket market, and Jay Shah, the son of Indian Home Minister Amit Shah, was elected unopposed as ICC chairman in December 2024, after serving as BCCI secretary and Asian Cricket Council chief.⁴⁵ India has helped build Afghanistan’s cricketing infrastructure, provided technical training, hosted Afghan teams, funded stadiums, and arranged commercial sponsorships.⁴⁶

While India does not formally recognise the Taliban government in Afghanistan,⁴⁷ it (we the citizens, our elected politicians) have adopted a policy of “engagement without recognition.”⁴⁸ ⁴⁹ This means India maintains working diplomatic and economic relations with the Taliban regime, while refraining from granting it official, de jure legitimacy.⁴⁹ We engage with the Taliban government as the de facto authority in Kabul for practical and strategic reasons, therefore granting it legitimacy.

India’s activities in Afghanistan under the Taliban include diplomatic representation, large-scale humanitarian aid, development assistance, and ongoing political dialogue, especially to safeguard its security and regional interests.⁵⁰ This approach mirrors India’s policies towards other regimes like the Myanmar junta and Taiwan: open channels for practical coordination, yet withholding formal recognition, consistent with international law on diplomatic relations.⁵¹ ⁵²

However, In October 2025, following the visit of Taliban Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi to New Delhi, India announced the upgrading of its technical mission in Kabul to a full embassy, a clear sign of deepening engagement, despite the absence of formal recognition.⁵³

At this point, please also note that I do understand that sanctions against Afghanistan would be less effective than those against apartheid South Africa because the Taliban government, unlike South Africa’s white minority regime, does not depend on international legitimacy or economic integration with cricket-playing nations, and yet if India cared about the girls, women and minorities being oppressed in Afghanistan, they would be banned from cricket.

But India needs a counterweight to Pakistani terrorism against India. Afghanistan under the Taliban serves as a strategic buffer and potential ally in India’s regional security calculations,⁵⁴ and the Afghan women and minorities are simply not part of the consideration. And as we know, India’s power has affected ICC’s decisions previously.⁵⁵ ⁵⁶ ⁵⁷

What’s happening right now
Australia remains the only country in cricket that has taken a stand on the matter by refusing to play bilateral matches, citing deep discomfort with the Taliban regime’s escalating crackdown on women’s rights and participation in sport. Since 2021, Cricket Australia has cancelled multiple series, most recently a T20 fixture in 2025.⁵⁸ ⁵⁹

Australia also hosts exiled women cricketers from Afghanistan, such as Benafsha Hashimi and Firooza Amiri, the latter of whom has pleaded that the ICC doesn’t even need to ban the Afghanistan men’s team: “Don’t ban the Afghanistan men’s side from playing international cricket but do expect them to do more for the women and girls who don’t have the same rights they do,” Amiri told ESPN, once again underlining cricket’s silence.⁶⁰

In March 2025, Human Rights Watch addressed an open letter to ICC Chair Jay Shah, urging the council to suspend Afghanistan’s membership until women and girls regain access to education and sport. Minky Worden, HRW’s Director of Global Initiatives, argued that the ICC’s permissiveness “places it on the side of the Taliban, not the women cricketers in exile”.⁶¹

Human Rights Watch and several national cricket boards, including the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB), have pressed the ICC to adopt a formal human rights policy aligned with UN principles, similar to frameworks now required by the International Olympic Committee (IOC).⁶² The IOC previously suspended Afghanistan’s Olympic Committee in 1999 for barring female athletes- an exact parallel to today’s situation.

Publicly, the council maintains support for the displaced Afghan women cricketers in exile but has stopped short of recognition or reallocation of resources to them.⁶³ In April 2025, the ICC announced a separate initiative to support displaced Afghan women cricketers through a task force partnering with Cricket Australia, the England and Wales Cricket Board, and the Board of Control for Cricket in India.⁶⁴ Critically, however, this new funding stream does not reduce or redirect any money from the ACB- the board responsible for excluding women continues to receive full funding.⁶⁵

As of 2025, the ICC continues to provide the Afghanistan Cricket Board (ACB) with approximately $17 million USD (£13 million) in annual funding, exclusively allocated to men’s cricket.⁶⁶ This funding persists even as Afghanistan remains the only ICC full member without a women’s team.

Meanwhile, while the International Cricket Council continues to sleep on their job, 2.2 million girls remain banned from school and university education indefinitely.⁶⁷

NB: I’m not expecting this to make any institutional changes. I’m not expecting any difference in the state of the suffering Afghans. I have no hope of anything getting better. I even understand the geopolitics and the realpolitik behind the Indian Government’s engagement with the terrorists- they’re trying to choose fewer terrorism deaths for Indians over people they are not morally responsible for. I’m writing because I’m exhausted. I’m tired of women paying the price and men absconding responsibility, even traveling the world playing goddamn cricket with impunity while at it. And I’m writing because who else will? The terrorised Afghans certainly cannot. The exiled Afghan cricketers can barely speak out even in a supposedly safe nation like Australia. But perhaps one day this piece may serve as the evidence that people knew what was happening, or even just show those who suffered that we saw them. You were not erased, my sisters.

Sources

Tag: bcci

Bedfellows with the Taliban: cricket beds down with terrorists

Share this: