Taliban assassination in Iran shows a new geography of repression

On December 24 in Tehran, an unknown assailant killed General Ikramuddin Saree, a former senior police commander of Afghanistan’s republican government and a prominent figure in the National Resistance Front (Jabha-ye Moqawemat-e Milli).

Saree, who had sought refuge in Iran following the Taliban’s return to power, was killed alongside fellow former officer Commander Almas Kohistani, sending shockwaves through Afghan opposition circles in exile.

The killing was more than an isolated act of violence; it sends a clear message to Afghan dissidents that exile no longer guarantees safety. Saree, a seasoned military commander and outspoken critic of the Taliban, had publicly warned only days earlier that his name was on a Taliban assassination list. His death underscores a disturbing shift toward cross-border targeting of dissenters, raising urgent questions about transnational oppression measures, regional security and the protection of political refugees.

Available evidence and credible indicators suggest that the assassination was a coordinated, intelligence-led operation rather than an isolated criminal act. Sources point to the Taliban’s intelligence units, particularly the Directorates 376 and 091, operating through the cross-border networks and raising serious concerns about host-state oversight. The operational profile-extended surveillance, precise execution and extraction indicates meticulous planning and external logistical support.

Multiple reports indicate that the assassination occurred roughly six weeks after four Taliban crossed into Iran from Afghanistan. The group conducted reconnaissance, finalized operational plans, executed the attack and returned to Afghanistan immediately afterward. This sequence highlights the Taliban’s intelligence apparatus’s growing transnational capabilities and its ability to operate with relative freedom beyond Afghanistan’s borders.

The incident is particularly troubling because Saree had publicly sounded the alarm days before his death. It was in a media interview that he said his name – along with those of several other former Afghan military personnel residing in Iran – had been placed on a Taliban assassination list. He warned of imminent danger and appealed to Iranian authorities for protection. Despite these warnings, no effective preventive measures were implemented, leaving known Taliban opponents vulnerable to lethal targeting.

The assassination reflects a broader Taliban strategy: the deliberate silencing of opposition regardless of geography. By targeting exile figures, the Taliban aims to instill fear, disrupt communication among opposition networks, and project power beyond Afghanistan border. This shift from domestic repression to extraterritorial political violence marks a concerning evolution in transnational terrorism.

Equally concerning is the narrative management following the assassination. In initial days, responsibility was obscured, and the killing was portrayed as isolated or unclear incident. Such information management, increasingly common in cases of international repression, serves to deflect scrutiny, reduce accountability and obscure patterns of targeted violence against political opponents.

Credible indications suggest that both Taliban-linked networks and elements within Iran’s security environment may have interest in downplaying the operational realities of the case. Acknowledging the Taliban’s responsibility would raise questions about their intelligence operatives, freedom of movement and the safety of Afghan refugees in Iran. For the Taliban, denial is a way to protect their very limited international contacts and at the same time conduct operations outside of the country at a very low expense.

The manipulation of facts has a direct consequence for Afghan refugees. Conflicting or inaccurate accounts obscure real dangers, discourage reporting and create a false sense of security. When combined with inadequate protective measures, such narrative ambiguity becomes an extension of repression itself.

The assassination also reflects a shift in regional dynamics. Amid rising tensions between Islamabad and the Taliban, Tehran has visibly expanded political and security engagement with the group, at times describing it as a “close friend” and “strategic partner.” Credible reports suggest that Taliban diplomatic missions – including the embassy in Tehran and the consulate in Mashhad – may have been involved in operations against opposition figures. If left unaddressed, such practices risk transforming diplomatic platforms into instruments of transnational coercion.

A comparison with Pakistan is instructive. Former Afghan military and political figures residing there – including those who previously held positions critical of Islamabad – enjoy reliable security. To date, no credible reports of targeted assassinations or systematic threats have emerged. The contrast underscores how host-state policies, enforcement practices and geopolitical calculations directly shape the safety of political exiles.

The situation for Afghan opposition figures in Iran has, however, deteriorated. Reports of intimidation, coercion to cooperate with the Taliban, and lack of protection indicate a precarious environment. Afghan refugees are now compelled to reassess their security situation and consider relocation to safer locations where feasible.

The implications extend far beyond Iran. Taliban targeting of opponents abroad constitutes a form of international terrorism, threatening Afghan dissidents who await asylum in Pakistan, opposition figures in Europe and democratic forces attempting to organize in exile. If left unchecked, such operations risk normalizing extraterritorial political violence and undermining international norms designed to protect refugees and political dissidents.

The international community cannot remain silent. Democratic Afghan voices should not be left at the mercy of a regime that has demonstrated both the intent and capacity to pursue opponents across borders. Host states bear responsibility under international law to ensure their territory is not used for political assassinations, while international mechanisms must provide scrutiny, accountability and protection for those at risk.

The killing of General Ikramuddin Saree was not merely an assassination – it was a warning. How the world responds will shape the future safety of Afghan opposition figures and the credibility of global commitments against transnational repression.