UK needs to engage with Taliban given ‘new reality in Afghanistan’, says Raab
Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab has highlighted the importance of engaging with the Taliban as he acknowledged the need “to face up to the new reality in Afghanistan”.
While not recognising the militant group as the government in Kabul, the cabinet minister pointed to the necessity of having “a direct line of communication” to discuss a range of pressing issues, including the safe passage of remaining British citizens and Afghan allies.
Speaking during a visit to Pakistan, Mr Raab said it would not have been possible to evacuate some 15,000 people without some degree of cooperation with the Taliban, who seized power after the withdrawal of US forces, ending a 20-year military intervention.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
What weapons were left behind in Afghanistan?
He told a news conference: “We need to face up to the new reality in Afghanistan.”
Pointing to the appointment of a new chargé d’affaires for Afghanistan based in Doha, Qatar, the foreign secretary said: “The approach that we are taking is we don’t recognise the Taliban as a government… but we do see the importance of being able to engage and have a direct line of communication.
“The reason being is clearly there are a whole range of issues that need to be discussed, including first and foremost at the moment the question of safe passage of British nationals and the Afghans who worked for the UK government.
“We need to be able to convey direct messages on these things. We need to be able to have that dialogue.”
He added: “The Taliban has made a series of undertakings. Some of them are positive at the level of words, but we need to test them and see that they translate into deeds. We cannot do that unless we have at least some channel of dialogue.”
Mr Raab said the Taliban need to create a “safe and secure environment” to allow aid to reach people in Afghanistan.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Taliban’s mock funeral for Western nations
He said: “No-one wants to see the economic and social fabric of Afghanistan collapse, I can’t see how that would be in the interest of the Taliban let alone ordinary Afghans, we certainly don’t want to see that happen
“We would be willing not to fund aid via the Taliban, but through the humanitarian organisations that operate inside Afghanistan – for that to happen there needs to be a safe and secure environment, so that’s an early test for the Taliban.
“But we’re willing to make sure we do our bit, along with the national community to fund the humanitarian agencies, the lifeline for ordinary Afghans, but there needs to be a safe environment for that.
“We’ll also support those regional partners, particularly like Pakistan who I can imagine is very concerned about the risk of numbers coming across the border, we want to make sure we can support those partners in the region [to] deal with that.
“That’s the holistic approach, the strategic approach we are taking.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
UK thought Kabul would not fall in 2021
Mr Raab, who has faced criticism over his handling of the Afghanistan crisis, also insisted there was “common widespread surprise”, even among the Taliban, at the speed in which they had taken over Afghanistan.
He said: “The takeover I think it’s fair to say was faster than anyone anticipated, not just the United Kingdom or NATO allies, but I was talking with our friends here.
“And I suspect the Taliban and ordinary Afghans were taken by surprise.
“I think there was a common widespread surprise at the speed with which the consolidation of power happened.”
Mr Raab’s comments came as the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee launched an inquiry into the chaotic retreat from Afghanistan.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Taliban celebrates as last US troops leave Kabul
Committee chairman Tom Tugendhat said: “The fall of Kabul is a catastrophe for the Afghan people and for the reputation of those nations that were committed to its success.
“Our hasty withdrawal leaves a country in an acute humanitarian and human rights crisis.
“The Afghan people, who we worked alongside for many years, have been left at the mercy of the Taliban, a vicious fundamentalist group.”
He said that “big questions remain” and the inquiry aimed to provide “some much-needed clarity”.
“Lessons need to be learnt and the decisions the UK makes in the coming months will be crucial,” he added.
Follow the Daily podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, Spreaker
South Korea is likely to end the year without a framework for locally issued stablecoins, amid ongoing disputes over the role of banks in stablecoin issuance.
The country’s central bank, the Bank of Korea (BOK), and other financial regulators have clashed over the extent of banks’ involvement in issuing Korean won-backed stablecoins, delaying a framework widely expected to arrive in late 2025, the Korea JoongAng Daily reported Tuesday.
According to the BOK, a consortium of banks should own at least 51% of any stablecoin issuer seeking regulatory approval in South Korea, while regulators are more open to the involvement of diverse industry players.
“Banks, which are already under regulatory oversight and have extensive experience handling anti-money laundering protocols, are best positioned to serve as majority shareholders in stablecoin issuers,” a BOK official reportedly said.
Banks should play leading role to curb stablecoin risks, BOK says
The central bank said that giving banks a leading role in stablecoin issuance would help mitigate potential risks to financial and foreign exchange stability.
The BOK also warned that allowing non-bank companies to take the lead in issuing stablecoins could undermine existing regulations that bar industrial firms from owning financial institutions, as stablecoins effectively function like deposit-taking instruments by collecting funds from users.
“Allowing non-bank companies to issue stablecoins is essentially equivalent to permitting them to engage in narrow banking — simultaneously issuing currency and providing payment services,” the BOK reportedly wrote in a recent stablecoin study. It added that stablecoins issued by technology firms could also pose monopoly risks.
Three stablecoin bills under review
The Financial Services Commission (FSC) was expected to introduce a regulatory framework for won-backed stablecoins as part of a government bill in October.
According to a report by the local industry publication Bloomingbit, the National Assembly’s Political Affairs Committee is now reviewing three bills related to stablecoin issuance submitted by ruling and opposition party lawmakers on Monday.
The proposed legislation includes two bills put forward by the ruling Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) and one from the opposition People Power Party (PPP).
While all three proposed bills stipulate a minimum capital of 5 billion won ($3.4 million) for issuers, some of the disputed areas include whether stablecoin issuers should be allowed to offer interest on holdings.
“While Kim Eun-hye’s bill allows interest payments, Kim Hyun-jung’s bill and Ahn Do-geol’s bill seek to prohibit them,” the report states.
As South Korean lawmakers remain divided over a stablecoin framework, local tech giants such as Naver are accelerating stablecoin-related initiatives amid a potential merger with Dunamu, operator of the major exchange Upbit.
Related: Upbit operator Dunamu posts $165M in profit in Q3, up over 300% YoY
According to local reports, Naver Financial is set to launch a stablecoin wallet next month in collaboration with Hashed and the Busan Digital Exchange.
The BOK’s support for giving banks a leading role in stablecoin issuance aligns with its earlier stance, after Deputy Governor Ryoo Sangdai called for banks to serve as the primary issuers of stablecoins in June 2025.
In July, eight major South Korean banks: KB Kookmin, Shinhan, Woori, Nonghyup, Corporate, Suhyup, Citi Korea and SC First Bank, reportedly teamed up to launch a won-pegged stablecoin in 2026.
Magazine: Bitcoin whale Metaplanet ‘underwater’ but eyeing more BTC: Asia Express
A former policy lawyer at crypto exchange Coinbase is running for attorney general of New York. His bid to represent the crypto industry’s interests runs against a strong Democratic bias and concerns over industry influence in policymaking.
Khurram Dara, who also worked as a regulatory and policy principal at Bain Capital Crypto, announced his campaign on Nov. 21. In a video accompanying his post on X, Dara said he wants to stop the supposed “lawfare” that current Attorney General (AG) Letitia James is waging against the crypto industry.
Dara said that the reportedly unfair treatment of the industry drives up costs for New Yorkers. New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani recently won his election with a focus on cost-of-living issues.
Dara’s campaign faces strong headwinds. James won her last two elections by a wide margin, and there are broader concerns over how much the crypto lobby is influencing policymaking.
Former Coinbase lawyer to oppose AG Letitia James
According to Dara, James’ policies hurt New York’s business climate and drive prices higher.
“When you play politics with the law, when you regulate by enforcement. When you use lawsuits to make policy that increases the cost of doing business, that increases legal and insurance costs; that increases prices, which hurts small businesses, new entrepreneurs and working-class New Yorkers the most,” Dara said in his announcement video.
As AG, Dara would curb the powers of the state’s Martin Act. The statute gives the AG’s office broad powers to investigate and prosecute securities and real estate fraud. Critically, it allows the AG to prosecute these activities “detrimental to the public without requiring proof of intentional or negligent conduct.”
Dara and other critics claim that James has used this act for her own political purposes, rather than as a neutral enforcement tool.
Under James, the AG’s office led enforcement actions against several crypto firms, including Bitfinex and Tether’s parent company, iFinex. The AG sued it for commingling client and corporate funds to cover up $850 million that went missing. Her office also secured $50 million for investors who were defrauded in Gemini’s Earn program.
Crucially for the cryptocurrency industry, Dara wants to reexamine the BitLicense, the state’s regulatory regime for companies involved in digital assets. BitLicense holds stricter standards for reporting, licensing and compliance than other states. Dara and other critics claim that these rules have driven crypto companies from the city. In his announcement video, Dara called the BitLicense “unlawful.”
But Dara faces an uphill battle. He’s running as a Republican in a state that hasn’t seen a Republican AG in nearly 30 years. Dennis Vacco, the last Republican to hold the office, lost to Eliot Spitzer in 1998.
In 2018, when James was first elected to the office, she defeated her opponent, Keith Wofford, by almost 20 percentage points. The gap narrowed in 2022, but she still won out over Republican Michael Henry 54.6% to 45.37%.
Historical tendencies aside, overall approval of Republicans has been dropping nationwide, and New York City, a crucial metropolitan area to secure for an AG candidate, just voted for a progressive Democratic mayor, Zohran Mamdani.
Recent: What Mamdani’s mayoral win means for crypto in New York
Dara’s challenge also comes at a time when the interests of the crypto lobby are increasingly represented in politics, with some of its most notable actors becoming overtly political.
Crypto gets more involved in politics
The crypto lobby played a big role in the 2024 federal elections, donating nearly $250 million to campaigns for offices around the country.
Since then, the industry’s interests have become well-represented in Washington. Landmark legislation like the GENIUS Act, which regulates stablecoins, has passed. The industry is also pushing hard for Congress to pass the CLARITY/Responsible Financial Innovation Act by year’s end.
Lobbies are ubiquitous in Washington; crypto is no exception. Crypto lobbying operates with breakneck speed, which has raised concerns over regulatory capture — i.e., when a regulatory body or agency serving the public interest is controlled by the industry that it is supposed to regulate.
US President Donald Trump started his term at the beginning of the year, nominating people with strong ties to the crypto industry to important posts and crucial regulatory agencies. He has also pardoned high-profile crypto executives like former Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao, as well as four BitMEX executives, including Arthur Hayes.
Related: Trump’s crypto pardons raise ethics and corruption concerns
Fundraising has also increased apace. Gemini founders Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss have shelled out tens of millions of dollars this year alone. Their funding has become partisan, with millions going to organizations fighting to keep the Republicans’ slim majority in Congress.
This tendency has some in the industry concerned that, when the partisan pendulum eventually swings back in the Democratic direction, a Republican-aligned crypto industry could find itself in a precarious political situation.
Crypto-friendly Democratic Representative Sam Liccardo told Politico in early October, “I don’t think anybody in this town would recommend that an industry put their eggs in one party’s basket.”
How the crypto connection, complete with its growing political connections, will affect Dara’s campaign remains to be seen. His campaign is still in its early days; it doesn’t appear to have a website, just a donation link with a campaign logo, which resembles the logo Mamdani used in his mayoral race.
Mamdani’s lack of position on crypto didn’t appear to affect his popularity with voters. Nor did ex-Governor Andrew Cuomo’s last-minute crypto Hail Mary help him secure the lead. There’s a good chance New Yorkers’ choice will boil down to other pressing issues.
Magazine: Ethereum’s Fusaka fork explained for dummies: What the hell is PeerDAS?
Banking giant JPMorgan Chase’s decision to cut ties with the CEO of Bitcoin payments company Strike is reigniting concerns about a renewed wave of US “debanking,” an issue that haunted the crypto industry during the 2023 banking turmoil.
Jack Mallers, CEO of the Bitcoin (BTC) Lightning Network payments company Strike, said Sunday on X that JPMorgan closed his personal accounts without explanation.
“Last month, J.P. Morgan Chase threw me out of the bank,” Mallers wrote. “Every time I asked them why, they said the same thing: We aren’t allowed to tell you.”
Cointelegraph has contacted JPMorgan Chase for comment.
The decision has stirred fears of Operation Chokepoint 2.0, a term critics use to describe alleged government pressure on banks to sever relationships with crypto companies.
“Operation Chokepoint 2.0 regrettably lives on,” said US Senator Cynthia Lummis in a Monday X post. Actions like JP Morgan’s “undermine the confidence in traditional banking” while sending the digital asset industry overseas, she said, adding:
“It’s past time we put Operation Chokepoint 2.0 to rest to make America the digital asset capital of the world.”
Other crypto founders, including Caitlin Long of Custodia Bank, said the debanking efforts targeting crypto may persist until January 2026, pending the appointment of a new Federal Reserve governor.
Related: Fed mulls ‘skinny’ payment accounts to open rails for fintech, crypto companies
“Trump won’t have the ability to appoint a new Fed governor until January. So, therefore, you can see the breadcrumbs leading up to a potentially big fight,” Long said during Cointelegraph’s Chainreaction daily X show on March 21.
Long’s Custodia Bank was repeatedly targeted by US debanking efforts, which cost the company months of work and “a couple of million dollars,” she said.
The collapse of crypto-friendly banks in early 2023 sparked the first allegations of Operation Chokepoint 2.0, during which at least 30 technology and cryptocurrency founders were reportedly denied access to banking services under the administration of former President Joe Biden.
In August 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order related to debanking, aiming to prevent banks from cutting off services to politically unfavorable industries, including the cryptocurrency sector.
Related: $1.9B exodus and flicker of hope hits crypto investment funds: CoinShares
Lummis accuses FDIC of destroying records
Debanking concerns took another turn in January, when Lummis’s office was contacted by an anonymous whistleblower, alleging that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) was “destroying material” related to Operation Chokepoint 2.0.
“The FDIC’s alleged efforts to destroy and conceal materials from the U.S. Senate related to Operation Chokepoint 2.0 is not only unacceptable, it is illegal,” said Lummis in a letter published on Jan. 16, threatening “swift criminal referrals” if the wrongdoing was uncovered.
Traditional financial institutions have long criticized crypto firms for enabling illicit finance. But US banks have themselves paid more than $200 billion in fines over the past two decades for compliance failures, according to data compiled by Better Markets and the Financial Times.
Bank of America reportedly accounted for about $82.9 billion of those penalties, while JPMorgan Chase paid more than $40 billion.
Magazine: Crypto wanted to overthrow banks, now it’s becoming them in stablecoin fight
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment3 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024