From Progress to Persecution: WPS Gains and Feminist Resistance in Afghanistan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research examines how the Taliban’s return to power has reshaped the lives of Afghan women and girls, with a particular focus on the systematic erosion of rights and opportunities since August 2021. Drawing on policy reports, secondary literature, and qualitative analysis of published accounts, the article documents restrictions on education, employment, mobility, and political participation. It highlights how these measures dismantle two decades of progress achieved under international support for Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) initiatives. The study situates the rollback of women’s rights within broader questions of peace and security, emphasizing how the exclusion of women from public life undermines both social stability and international commitments to gender equality. By analyzing responses from international organizations, donor governments, and feminist advocacy networks, the research illustrates the gap between rhetorical support for Afghan women and the limited policy tools available to influence conditions under Taliban rule. Findings underscore that the erasure of Afghan women from education and governance is not only a humanitarian crisis but also a strategic security issue, as a durable peace cannot be achieved without inclusive participation. The article calls attention to the resilience of Afghan women’s networks and diaspora activism, which continue to advocate for rights despite repression and limited international engagement. This work contributes to feminist security studies by documenting the lived impacts of authoritarian gender policies and by reinforcing the centrality of women’s inclusion to global peacebuilding. Aligned with UN Sustainable Development Goals 5 (Gender Equality) and 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions), the research demonstrates that supporting Afghan women remains an urgent test for the credibility of WPS commitments worldwide.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".