That is how the United Nations Security Council justified its vote earlier this week to impose new sanctions against the government of Afghanistan. Voting 13-0, with two abstentions, the Security Council has demanded that the Taliban, the Islamic fundamentalist regime in Kabul, close "terrorist" training camps and surrender Mr. Osama bin Laden, the man accused of masterminding terrorist attacks against U.S. facilities around the world. The Taliban denies the charges, claiming they are an attack on Islam. Religion is not the issue; terrorism is. The sanctions are an attempt to restore the rule of law and eliminate a haven for criminals.

The U.N. resolution gives the Kabul government one month to close the camps and hand over Mr. bin Laden before sanctions kick in. If it fails to do so, the U.N. will impose an arms embargo against the Taliban, close Taliban offices outside the country and freeze foreign assets, ban international travel by Taliban officials and restrict international flights. The resolution also bans the export of acetic anhydride, which is used to make heroin, to Taliban areas.

The Afghan government protested the vote, arguing that it was unfair, anti-Islamic and would hurt ordinary citizens. The arms embargo is one-sided, since it does not affect shipments to rebels that control the 10 percent of the country that is not in the Taliban's hands. The embargo would seem to strengthen the opposition. In response, the Taliban has said it will boycott U.N.-sponsored peace talks with the rebels.