Contemporary assertions that Afghanistan could be treated as a ‘blank slate’ uncomfortably echo 19th- century imperialist assertions that ‘Afghans do not have a history’. These reverberations raise questions about historicity and the need for sociohistorical inquiry, but also whether Western attitudes and discourses towards Afghanistan have significantly changed across three centuries. Overt norms of European imperialism may have formally ended, but the idea that Afghanistan and its people can be stripped of their history has a long afterlife. It is within this context that European Union (EU) policy makers’ assertions that they engaged with Afghanistan as if it were a ‘blank slate’ should not be seen as neutral, but rather as part of an attempt to diffuse EU norms.

Although EU policy makers have openly stated that they proceeded on the basis that Afghanistan is a ‘blank slate’, it is worth unpacking what is meant by this (Hassan 2023). At conceptual level, it has meant proceeding with EU external action on the basis that the tumultuous history that has shaped Afghanistan's present can be overlooked. At a practical level, it has meant prioritizing technical and managerial models embedded in EU external action, which are designed to create more efficient and stable sovereign states. These models exist primarily in the sphere of development and democracy assistance and are perceived as universally applicable even as they emphasize normative commitments to democracy, the rule of law and gender equality. These models are often portrayed as scientific and ahistorical because they are elevated to the status of being ‘universal’ in appeal and application. Yet, multiple studies have outlined that the EU's ‘one size fits all’ approach, and the unreflexive way EU external action has sought to promote its own model, is based on Europe's historical experience and political practices (Bicchi 2006; Börzel et al 2008; Börzel 2022).