Afghanistan

Model answer

Area A was controlled by the Northern Alliance, which was led by Ahmad Shah Massoud.

Model answer

Source A suggests that the Taliban had become a much greater threat because British deaths rose sharply. Between 2001 and 2005 only 5 British personnel were killed in total, but in 2006 the figure jumped to 39, and by 2009 it had reached 108, more than twenty times the total for 2001-2005. This reflects the resurgence of the Taliban. After their defeat in 2001 they had regrouped in Pakistan, and from about 2003 their attacks grew in the Pashtun south. In 2006 Britain sent about 3,300 troops to Helmand province, a Taliban stronghold, where small British garrisons in 'platoon houses' at places such as Sangin and Musa Qala were surrounded and attacked for weeks. The Taliban increasingly used roadside bombs and suicide attacks, which caused many of the British deaths, and in 2009 Operation Panther's Claw made it the deadliest year for British forces in Afghanistan. As these are official Ministry of Defence figures, they are accurate, although the rise also partly reflects the fact that there were many more British troops by 2009, operating in the most dangerous areas.

Model answer

Source B is useful because it shows how the Taliban themselves justified their treatment of women. The deputy minister claims they are not against education but that security, separate buildings and Islamic teachers must come first, and he presents the burqa as protection, saying that women had been 'dishonoured' under the communists and warlords. There is some truth in this, as there were real abuses of women by militias during the civil war of 1992-96, and it helps an historian to understand why some Afghans accepted Taliban rule. The provenance makes it valuable as the regime's official view, since it comes from a government minister. However, it was given to a western journalist in 1997, when the Taliban wanted international recognition and aid, so it was designed to make their policies sound reasonable. Its claim that girls would be educated once there was security is undermined by what actually happened: girls' schools remained closed until the Taliban fell in 2001, so the source is more useful as evidence of propaganda than of reality.

Source C is useful because it shows the effects of Taliban policies on ordinary women. The teacher's secret school confirms that girls were banned from education, and her fear of the religious police reflects the work of the Ministry for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, whose officers beat women in the street for breaking the rules. Her comment that her pupils' mothers had been doctors and teachers shows how many educated women in Kabul lost their jobs, and her reference to begging reflects the plight of the city's many war widows, who were forbidden to work. It also shows that women resisted, which official sources do not reveal. The provenance gives it value as a first-hand account over several years. However, it was written in 2002, after the Taliban had fallen, for a book about life under their rule, so it may have been written to emphasise suffering and courage. It is also one woman's experience in a city, and conditions in the countryside, where women's lives had always been more restricted, may have been different.

Overall, the two sources are very useful together. Source B shows the reasons the Taliban gave for their policies, while Source C shows the reality of those policies for women and girls. Source C is more useful for studying how women were actually treated, because it describes the consequences directly, while Source B is useful mainly for understanding the regime's thinking and propaganda. Neither, though, mentions other aspects such as the restrictions on women's health care or the harsh public punishments for women accused of adultery.

Model answer

The Taliban ruled most of Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001. Compared with the chaos of the civil war that came before, their rule brought some real benefits, especially in security. However, I will argue that the problems their rule caused - repression, human rights abuses, economic collapse, continuing war and international isolation - were far greater.

The main benefit of Taliban rule was order. Between 1992 and 1996 rival mujahideen factions had fought a civil war that destroyed much of Kabul, and warlords had robbed travellers and abused civilians. The Taliban removed the checkpoints, disarmed many militias and made the roads safe for trade, which is why many traders and rural Pashtuns welcomed them. Crime fell sharply because of their harsh punishments, and by 2001 about 90 per cent of the country was under one government. Some Afghans, especially in conservative rural areas, approved of strict Islamic rule and the quick justice of the religious courts. In 2000 Mullah Omar's ban on opium also cut production by over 90 per cent in a single year.

However, these benefits came at a terrible price. The Taliban banned women from most work and girls from school, forced women to wear the burqa and used religious police to beat those who broke the rules. Music, television and kite flying were banned, and thieves had their hands cut off and adulterers were executed in public. Ethnic and religious minorities suffered especially: at least 2,000 people, mostly Hazara civilians, were massacred at Mazar-i-Sharif in 1998, and Taliban forces burned villages and drove thousands of Tajiks from their homes north of Kabul. Even the security the Taliban brought was incomplete, as the war with the Northern Alliance continued every year.

Taliban rule also brought economic and international problems. Educated people fled, health and education services collapsed, and when a severe drought struck in 2000-01, millions of Afghans faced hunger while millions more remained refugees abroad. The opium ban, though welcomed abroad, ruined many poor farmers. The Taliban's decision to protect Osama bin Laden made Afghanistan an international outcast: only three countries recognised the regime, the UN imposed sanctions in 1999 and 2000, and aid agencies found it increasingly hard to work. The destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas in 2001 deepened this isolation. Finally, their refusal to hand over bin Laden after 11 September 2001 brought the US-led invasion and the end of their regime.

In conclusion, I disagree with the statement. The Taliban did bring some benefits, especially security and an end to the warlords' abuses, and these were real for many rural Pashtun men. However, half the population - women - lost almost all their rights, minorities were persecuted, the economy collapsed, the war never ended, and the Taliban's protection of al-Qaeda led to international isolation and invasion. The problems of Taliban rule far outweighed its benefits.