Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Is afghanistan ban chess ? And what was the reason ?real reason in conclusion please
Executive Summary
Afghanistan’s de facto authorities under the Taliban have suspended or banned organized chess activities, citing religious concerns and worries that chess can be linked to gambling, and they have dissolved the national chess federation or ordered a review of the game’s permissibility [1] [2] [3]. Reporting across multiple outlets in May–June 2025 shows a consistent official rationale framed in Islamic legal terms, while players and outside observers argue the move reflects broader social control and has practical harms for Afghan competitors, especially women [4] [5].
1. What officials said — a morality framing that labels chess risky and impermissible
Taliban religious and morality officials publicly described chess as potentially “haram” because of associations with gambling and therefore outside permitted leisure activities; this framing was used to justify an immediate suspension of organized play and the dissolution of the national federation in mid‑May 2025 [1] [2]. Governmental communications emphasized adherence to a strict interpretation of Islamic law and the mandate of the Ministry for the Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice to remove practices it deems un-Islamic, presenting the chess measures as a consistency of policy following bans on other activities. Official statements cast the action as a legal and religious corrective rather than a cultural or political targeting, and multiple contemporaneous reports documented the same core justification in slightly different language across outlets [6] [7].
2. What players and chess bodies say — protest, secrecy, and international worry
Afghan chess players, coaches, and international chess bodies reported the move as disruptive and disproportionate, arguing chess is a skill‑based intellectual pursuit with no intrinsic link to gambling and with benefits for education and critical thinking [4] [8]. Reports describe players, particularly women who had previously been encouraged or supported to play, being forced to practice clandestinely or consider leaving the country to continue their careers. International chess organizations have expressed concern and started quiet advocacy, framing the ban as an impediment to sport development and as part of a larger pattern of restrictions on cultural and sporting life under the Taliban [4] [9].
3. Independent analysis — religion, governance, and wider patterns of restriction
Analysts and some outlets interpret the chess suspension as less about the game itself and more about the authorities’ wider effort to control public life and leisure, pointing to a pattern of prohibitions that target perceived sources of independent social activity and “joy.” Multiple reports situate the chess decision alongside bans on other cultural or mixed‑gender activities, suggesting a governance logic that privileges an austere public order and minimizes spaces for autonomous civic engagement. These analyses caution that labeling activities “gambling” or “un-Islamic” becomes a flexible tool for broader social regulation, a point emphasized in coverage that highlights inconsistencies with practices in other Muslim-majority countries where chess remains accepted [5] [7].
4. Conflicting reports and the question of permanence — suspension vs. permanent ban
Contemporaneous reporting contains ambiguous language about whether the measures are a temporary suspension pending religious adjudication or a de facto permanent ban, with some officials described as calling for reviews while other actions—like dissolving the national federation—functionally end organized chess. Sources in May and June 2025 reflect both framings: initial statements described suspensions and reviews, while administrative steps taken by the authorities created a practical halt to competitive play and institutional support [9] [1]. This ambiguity matters because a formally temporary review could, in theory, reverse the decision; however the administrative dismantling of structures amounts to long‑term disruption regardless of eventual legal determinations [6] [3].
5. Real reasons in conclusion — stated justification and the broader, documented drivers
Officially, the stated reason is religious: concerns that chess may facilitate gambling and thus violates the regime’s interpretation of Islamic law, and this is the justification advanced in government statements and used to enact immediate suspensions and institutional dissolutions [2] [7]. Reporting across outlets and testimony from players and analysts indicate the practical and political reality is broader: the measure fits a pattern of the Taliban restricting activities they view as insufficiently aligned with their austere social vision, consolidating control over public life and curtailing spaces for independent social and cultural activity, with acute negative impacts on Afghan players, especially women, and on the country’s engagement with international sport [5] [4].