Deep in the mountains of eastern Afghanistan, a miner pours water over a block of jade, revealing a glistening green stone.
The scene is part of the Taliban’s ambitious effort to exploit the country’s vast mineral wealth, seeking foreign and local investment to boost a critical revenue stream.
Touting improved security, Taliban officials have signed roughly 200 mining contracts since taking power in 2021, most of them with local companies, official figures suggest. These deals, worth billions, span a range of resources– including emeralds, rubies, marble, gold, and lithium– buried beneath Afghanistan’s rocky landscape.
US and UN assessments from the past decade estimate the country’s untapped mineral reserves to be worth at least $1 trillion. But despite the potential windfall, experts warn that the rush to extract resources with limited oversight could lead to long-term environmental and economic damage.
Race for investment amid limited expertise
“We want Afghanistan to be self-sufficient but there are obstacles,” said Humayoun Afghan, spokesman for the Ministry of Mines. “We have no experts, no infrastructure, no knowledge.”
Desperate to fill this gap, Taliban officials are aggressively courting investors, particularly those with mining experience. The government has prioritised minerals with immediate commercial value, such as coal, talc, and chromite, while waiting on others like lithium, which could see future price surges.
Mining tenders are regularly published, and the government has been circulating lists of projects to its embassies to attract foreign companies.
The push appears to be paying off. The World Bank noted in a December report that Afghanistan’s industrial sector expanded by 2.6 per cent in 2023-24, with a 6.9 per cent jump in mining and quarrying. But many of the contracts have yet to translate into full-scale operations.
Impact Shorts
More ShortsFor mining sector expert Javed Noorani, authorities are tendering “maybe 10 times more than its own capacity to do things”.
Security brings investors, but risks remain
The Taliban’s takeover in 2021 followed a decades-long insurgency against US and NATO-backed forces. The withdrawal of foreign troops led to the collapse of the previous government, driving most investors away.
Now, with fewer active conflict zones, Afghanistan’s road networks have reopened, making resource-rich areas more accessible. Taliban officials say that despite continued sanctions and international isolation, investor interest is growing.
China leads the charge
According to the Britain-based Centre for Information Resilience, only 14 mining companies operating under the previous government remain active today. The shift suggests that a new set of players, aligned with the Taliban, now dominates the industry.
While Western companies remain largely absent, China has emerged as a key player. The state-owned Metallurgical Corporation of China (MCC) has resumed work at the Mes Aynak copper deposit, one of the world’s largest, under a 2008 contract revived by the Taliban.
Chinese firms have also secured at least three major contracts in gold and copper mining.
Countries with diplomatic ties to the Taliban, including Iran, Turkey, Uzbekistan, and Qatar, have also begun exploring opportunities in Afghanistan’s mining sector.
Environmental risks and oversight challenges
“In countries with strict regulations, you’ll spend billions to start a mine,” said Shir Baz Kaminzada, president of the Afghanistan Chamber of Industries and Mines. But in Afghanistan, where oversight is minimal, “investors see an advantage.”
Experts warn that mining waste poses serious environmental hazards. The majority of extracted material remains unused, and improper disposal of iron sulfide minerals can contaminate groundwater when exposed to rain.
Geophysicist David Chambers, who advises on mining safety, said companies often prioritise profit over safety.
“Every dollar you don’t spend in designing a safe tailings dam (to contain waste) or in cleaning up water, that’s profit,” he said. “But again, that leads to potential longer term costs.”
With inputs from AFP
)