[Obviously, while the fall of the Ghani regime - post the US/NATO "withdrawal" under a "deal" with the Taliban, was very much pre-scripted, the lightening speed at which it'd just melt away was completely unanticipated.
The major fault lines in the Afghan socio-polity run not only along multitude of tribal identities and fierce loyalties, there obtains also a huge gulf between the (small) minority of "modernist" urban elite and the vast hinterland. And the elite cannot pick up rifles and fight. Need external props - of whatever colour, to keep them in place and make their worldview count in the way the land is to be administered. Quite unfortunately, much of this category is quite often pretty rotten. That has its consequences.] I/IV. *An exceptional(?) view from the Left*. <<Biden wanted to get out of Afghanistan in 2009, but lost that battle inside the Obama White House. He finally has his way, and unlike smarmy pundits or the former guy he actually has reasoned arguments for what he does. Biden told the nation, “Last night in Kabul, the United States ended 20 years of war in Afghanistan — the longest war in American history.” He pointed to the airlift of more than 120,000 people, the biggest airlift in American history, which far exceeded estimates of what would be possible. Unlike Trump, who appears to have viewed soldiers who put their lives in harm’s way as losers, Biden gave the credit for the evacuation to US service personnel, 13 of whom lost their lives doing good. He also praised State Department diplomats and intelligence field officers, also government employees for whom Trump had ill-disguised contempt. Biden admitted that he and his team were thrown for a loop when the 300,000 Afghan National Security Forces and the Afghan government abruptly melted away. ... Biden’s Republican critics can’t make up their minds whether they don’t want any more brown people coming to America or whether they are shocked that a couple hundred Afghan-Americans, out of thousands, couldn’t manage to get to the airport. For his part, Biden said, “And for those remaining Americans, there is no deadline. We remain committed to get them out if they want to come out. Secretary of State Blinken is leading the continued diplomatic efforts to ensure a safe passage for any American, Afghan partner, or foreign national who wants to leave Afghanistan. In fact, just yesterday, the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution that sent a clear message about what the international community expects the Taliban to deliver on moving forward, notably freedom of travel, freedom to leave. And together, we are joined by over 100 countries that are determined to make sure the Taliban upholds those commitments. It will include ongoing efforts in Afghanistan to reopen the airport, as well as overland routes, allowing for continued departure to those who want to leave and delivery of humanitarian assistance to the people of Afghanistan.” Biden pointed out that if the Taliban renege, the U.S. has options. These include $9 billion in frozen Afghanistan National Bank funds. Biden tried to explain once again that the alternative to leaving, once Trump had made a deal with the Taliban to depart, was to go to war all over again: “My predecessor, the former President, signed an agreement with the Taliban to remove U.S. troops by May the 1st, just months after I was inaugurated. It included no requirement that the Taliban work out a cooperative governing arrangement with the Afghan government, but it did authorize the release of 5,000 prisoners last year, including some of the Taliban’s top war commanders, among those who just took control of Afghanistan. And by the time I came to office, the Taliban was in its strongest military position since 2001, controlling or contesting nearly half of the country. The previous administration’s agreement said that if we stuck to the May 1st deadline that they had signed on to leave by, the Taliban wouldn’t attack any American forces, but if we stayed, all bets were off. So *we were left with a simple decision: Either follow through on the commitment made by the last administration and leave Afghanistan, or say we weren’t leaving and commit another tens of thousands more troops going back to war* [emphasis added]. That was the choice — the real choice — between leaving or escalating.” Biden was clear: “I was not going to extend this forever war, and I was not extending a forever exit.” With those words, Biden ended the post-9/11 era of George W. Bush’s “war on terror” (as though you could make war on a tactic). That was the take-away of Biden’s speech. This is a pivotal turning point in American foreign policy. The “empire” imagined by Bush’s campaign manager Karl Rove and by Kristol and the warmongers of the New American Century has been brought to a close. It wasn’t much of an empire. It wasn’t even done right. A proper empire loots other people. The French Empire even collected 10% of the GDP of desperately poor African colonies like Dahomey and sent them to Paris to pay for ostrich feathers for the mistresses of Third Republic politicians. The US “empire” consisted of ramshackle countries like Afghanistan, Somalia and Iraq, on which we actually had to be the ones spending the money. Our national debt is some $28 trillion, outstripping our annual GDP and threatening the soundness of our economy. If you add up the expenses of the “empire” and add in the interest we paid and will pay on the money we borrowed to create and perpetuate it, my guess is that it accounts for the bulk of the national debt. The interest on the borrowed Afghanistan war costs alone is $6.5 trillion. Biden threw down a challenge: “To those asking for a third decade of war in Afghanistan, I ask: What is the vital national interest? In my view, we only have one: to make sure Afghanistan can never be used again to launch an attack on our homeland. Remember why we went to Afghanistan in the first place? Because we were attacked by Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda on September 11th, 2001, and they were based in Afghanistan. We delivered justice to bin Laden on May 2nd, 2011 — over a decade ago. Al Qaeda was decimated.” ... Biden concluded, “As we turn the page on the foreign policy that has guided our nat- — our nation the last two decades, we’ve got to learn from our mistakes. To me, there are two that are paramount. First, we must set missions with clear, achievable goals — not ones we’ll never reach. And second, we must stay clearly focused on the fundamental national security interest of the United States of America. *This decision about Afghanistan is not just about Afghanistan. It’s about ending an era of major military operations to remake other countries* [emphasis added]." ... *What I* [the writer, Juan Cole]* can’t for the life of me understand is why Biden and the Democrats don’t cut the Pentagon budget if they really aren’t going to fight any more Bush-style wars. If that over $700 billion (and it is really closer to $1 trillion) is corporate welfare, there are more efficient ways to create jobs, and more useful jobs to create. Back after the fall of the Soviet Union there was a peace dividend and a reduction in the war budget. We need to take about $300 billion a year and put it into fighting climate change instead. *[Emphasis added.]>> [Excerpted from: < https://www.juancole.com/2021/09/afghanistan-withdrawal-operations.html>.] II/IV. *Taliban 2.0 and what awaits Afghan Women: A careful look into "1.0" in order to anticipate* <<In 1996, the Taliban formed the dictatorial Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, and Kandahar became the new Afghan capital. At its peak, only three countries, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates recognised the Taliban's authority. After being ousted from power in 2001, the Taliban reorganised as an insurgent force to fight the US-backed Karzai administration and the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan's war. As a result of the war, thousands of civilians were killed, and millions were displaced. After two decades of fighting, the Taliban have raced to victory in Afghanistan. The group took Kabul on August 15, 2021, capping an extremely quick push across the country. All of this occurred as a result of the US-Taliban peace agreement, in which Taliban leaders have sworn to prevent Afghanistan from becoming a safe haven for terrorists posing a threat to the West. However, concerns have already been expressed about how the group plans to govern the country, as well as the implications of their rule for women, human rights, and political liberties. Although the Taliban clearly promised an amnesty shortly after reclaiming control in Afghanistan and stated that women and girls would be permitted to attend school and even work within the framework of "Sharia", they have not provided any additional details. At a news conference, Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said that women will have rights to education, health care, and jobs and that they will be "happy" under the “Sharia Law”. He added saying “The Taliban is dedicated to ensuring women's rights based on Islam. Women can work in the health sector and other fields where they are required. There will be no discrimination against women”. Suhail Shaheen, another Taliban spokesman, says the group will respect women's and minorities' rights "as per Afghan customs and Islamic values." ... Concerns are being raised about how the Taliban would interpret Islamic teachings this time about women’s rights. The last time they were in power from 1996 to 2001, repression was a component of the Taliban's reign. They moved quickly to impose several restrictions on women. Women were unable to attend school, have employment, or leave their houses without the presence of a male relative. Those who disobeyed the Taliban's orders and their interpretation of Islam were subjected to floggings or beatings, which were often cruel and against Islam, according to several other interpretations of Islam. ... Taliban restrictions and mistreatment of women during its reign from 1996 to 2001, according to RAWA’s report, include the: 1- Complete ban on women's work outside the home, which also applies to female teachers, engineers, and most professionals. Only a few female doctors and nurses are allowed to work in some hospitals in Kabul. 2- Complete ban on women's activity outside the home unless accompanied by a mahram (close male relative such as a father, brother, or husband). 3- Ban on women dealing with male shopkeepers. 4- Ban on women being treated by male doctors. 5- Ban on women studying at schools, universities, or any other educational institution. (Taliban have converted girls' schools into religious seminaries.) 6- Requirement that women wear a long veil (Burqa), which covers them from head to toe. 7- Whipping, beating, and verbal abuse of women not clothed in accordance with Taliban rules, or of women unaccompanied by a mahram. 8- Whipping of women in public for having non-covered ankles. 9- Public stoning of women accused of having sex outside marriage. (A number of lovers are stoned to death under this rule). 10- Ban on the use of cosmetics. (Many women with painted nails have had fingers cut off). 11- Ban on women talking or shaking hands with non-mahram males. 12- Ban on women laughing loudly. (No stranger should hear a woman's voice). 13- Ban on women wearing high heel shoes, which would produce sound while walking. (A man must not hear a woman's footsteps.) 14- Ban on women riding in a taxi without a mahram. 15- Ban on women's presence in radio, television, or public gatherings of any kind. 16- Ban on women playing sports or entering a sports center or club. 17- Ban on women riding bicycles or motorcycles, even with their mahrams. 18- Ban on women wearing brightly coloured clothes. In Taliban terms, these are "sexually attracting colours." 19- Ban on women gathering for festive occasions such as the Eids, or for any recreational purpose. 20- Ban on women washing clothes next to rivers or in a public place. 21- Modification of all place names including the word "women." For example, "women's garden" has been renamed "spring garden". 22- Ban on women appearing on the balconies of their apartments or houses. 23- Compulsory painting of all windows, so women can’t be seen from outside their homes. 24- Ban on male tailors taking women's measurements or sewing women's clothes. 25- Ban on female public baths. 26- Ban on males and females travelling on the same bus. Public buses have now been designated "males only" (or "females only"). 27- Ban on flared (wide) pant-legs, even under a burqa. 28- Ban on the photographing or filming of women. 29- Ban on women's pictures printed in newspapers and books, or hung on the walls of houses and shops.” It further says, “Apart from the above restrictions on women, the Taliban has: - Banned listening to music, not only for women but men as well. - Banned the watching of movies, television, and videos, for everyone. - Banned celebrating the traditional New Year (Nowroz) on March 21. The Taliban has proclaimed the holiday un-Islamic. - Disavowed Labour Day (May 1st) because it is deemed a "communist" holiday. - Ordered that all people with non-Islamic names change them to Islamic ones. - Forced haircuts upon Afghan youth. - Ordered that men wear Islamic clothes and a cap. - Ordered that men not shave or trim their beards, which should grow long enough to protrude from a fist clasped at the point of the chin. - Ordered that all people attend prayers in mosques five times daily. - Banned the keeping of pigeons and playing with the birds, describing it as un-Islamic. The violators will be imprisoned and the birds shall be killed. The kite flying has also been stopped. - Ordered all onlookers, while encouraging the sportsmen, to chant Allah-o-Akbar (God is great) and refrain from clapping. - Ban on certain games including kite flying which is "un-Islamic" according to Taliban. - Anyone who carries objectionable literature will be executed. - Anyone who converts from Islam to any other religion will be executed. - All boy students must wear turbans. They say "No turban, no education". - Non-Muslim minorities must distinct badge or stitch a yellow cloth onto their dress to be differentiated from the majority Muslim population. Just like what did Nazis with Jews. - Banned the use of the internet by both ordinary Afghans and foreigners. And so on...”>> (Excerpted from: < https://www.newageislam.com/islam-women-and-feminism/taliban-afghan-women-reform/d/125299 >.) III/IV. *Yet another reasoned view from the Left.* <<In reality, the Afghan government’s fate is but the most recent in a long list of cases of puppet entities created by a foreign occupation that collapse when that occupation ends. Ashraf Ghani was preceded on this same path by Mohammad Najibullah, who had been appointed as president of Afghanistan by the USSR’s rulers in replacement of Babrak Karmal whom they had installed in power when their troops invaded the country, in the same way as Ghani was appointed by Washington in replacement of Hamid Karzai, whom U.S. forces installed in power when they invaded the country. This refers us to the obvious fact that the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks was not a “liberation” of that country, no more than the American occupation of Iraq was less than two years later. It was a seizure of the country for reasons pertaining to U.S. imperial strategy in Central Asia and toward Russia and China, coated in the pretext of liberating the Afghans, the women in particular, from the Taliban’s obscurantist yoke, that same yoke that Washington and its regional allies had played a key role in helping to get hold of the country. Those who hail the Taliban from a standpoint claiming to be on the left or “anti-imperialist” should be reminded that only four governments recognized diplomatically the Taliban’s regime after it took control of Afghanistan in 1996, and those were not Cuba or Vietnam or China or even Iran, but Pakistan, Turkmenistan, the Saudi kingdom and the United Arab Emirates! Add to this that it is well known that behind the Taliban stood, and continue to stand, Pakistan’s military intelligence, which adds to the anxiety of neighboring countries, starting with Iran. The truth is that Washington didn’t entertain much illusions about Afghanistan’s fate, but knew from the USSR’s defeat in that country and from its own Vietnamese experience that controlling Afghanistan is impossible for several reasons, including the country’s geography and the strength of age-old tribal and ethnic bonds that still prevail there. That’s why Washington’s strategy in Afghanistan was from the beginning qualitatively different from its strategy in Iraq: whereas it aimed at exerting full control over Iraq and deployed there forces adequate for that purpose (in Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s belief, despite warnings from the U.S. high brass that his estimate of the adequate number of troops was highly optimistic), Washington only deployed a limited number of troops in Afghanistan, while relying upon the Afghan anti-Taliban Northern Alliance to take control of the country and putting pressure on its NATO allies to send in troops so that the U.S. doesn’t need to deploy more. The strategic goals of the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan, or more accurately of parts of Afghan territory, consisted first of all in building American air bases in this country of highly prised strategic location and in the extension of U.S. influence to Central Asian republics that were previously part of the USSR. With time, Washington came to the conclusion that the cost of its continued presence in Afghanistan was no longer commensurate with these strategic benefits that had lessened over time, especially that the Taliban’s offensive and their ability to control increasingly vast areas of the country indicated that Afghanistan was on its way to confront Washington with a Vietnam-like dilemma between endless escalation and withdrawal. This said, the closest situation to what is occurring in Afghanistan isn’t Vietnam in fact: the South Vietnamese forces were much stronger than the Afghan government’s forces, and they managed to stand up for two years against Communist forces that the U.S. itself had been incapable to defeat and which enjoyed much larger international and regional support than the Taliban ever had. The closest situation to what has occurred in Afghanistan is what happened to the troops of the Iraqi army that Washington had built up and that collapsed disgracefully in front of the offensive launched by the so-called Islamic State (IS) in the summer of 2014 in the same way that the forces of the Kabul government collapsed in front of the Taliban’s offensive. Needless to say, the resemblance between IS and the Taliban is only matched by the huge difference between the two jihadist groups, on the one hand, and the Vietnamese Communist forces on the other.>> (Excerpted from: < https://anticapitalistresistance.org/whos-buried-in-the-graveyard-of-empires/ >.) IV. *From a (self-declared) Liberal*. <<Afghanistan is one of the world’s largest tribal societies, and it is impossible to get a grip on the country and its political dynamics without knowing this well — perhaps even if you know it well — as the Americans are discovering. There are some 400 plus tribes, sub-tribes, clans, and sub-clans among its 40 million Pashtuns (or pathans in desi lingo) spread across Afghanistan and Pakistan, and we are not even talking of Hazaras, Tajiks, Uzbeks and other ethnicities who populate the northwestern part of the country. The Pashtun tribal matrix is complex, with ever-shifting dynamics and loyalties that are unfathomable to outsiders, present company included. For instance, the Durranis are part of the Sarbani tribe — one of half dozen major ones — that includes Shinwaris, Yousufzai and other subtribes. These subtitbes in turn throw up kinship groups such as Achakzai, Popalzai, Balarkhel, Tahirkhel etc. The Karlani tribe has subtribes such as Afridis, Khattak, Sherzad, Zadran etc. The Bettanis have Stanikzai, Ahmadzai etc. Basically Zai in Pashto means “descendant,” “khel is “group” or “company” and this is pretty much where loyalties and bloodfeuds begin. I was reminded of this when I saw Ashraf Ghani slip away from Kabul invoking the fate of former President Najibullah who had his cojones pulped and hung from a traffic light when Taliban 1.0 rolled into Kabul in 1996. Both Ghani and Najibullah belong to the Ahmadzai subtribe from the Bettani-Ghilji line. On the flip side, I see Hamid Karzai hosting Talibunny supremo Hibatullah Akhundzada at this plush home in Kabul. Karzai is head of Popalzai subtribe, and Akhundzada is Nurzai, but they are both of the Durrani-Sarbani lineage — and therefore less likely to pull a gun on each other. While tribal loyalties and feuds are deep and enduring in Afghanistan, you get the sense that its cricket team, like the Indian team, transcends ethnic, regional, tribal divisions. I took a quick look at the current Afghanistan team and saw it is largely Pashtun, with a bunch of Zadrans, Zais, and Khels in the mix. Some of them have dropped their tribal suffixes (Rashid Khan and Mohamed Nabi, the most prominent IPL stars, for instance), and you have dig a little deeper to get a fix. The Talibunnies have said they have no problem with cricket and the Afghan team can go ahead with playing (only men; no word yet on women), but I’ll hold my breath to see what happens to Rashid Khan, who was among the first (and few) cricketers to send out an SOS as the Talibunnies rolled into Kabul last week. There is a little background to this. Rashid belongs to the Shinwari (also spelled Shenwari) tribe, and there is no love lost between Shinwaris and Talibunnies — apparently something to do with the spoils of smuggling — to the extent that the whole tribe declared a war on Taliban. If things don’t go well, I hope BCCI can bail out this very gifted cricketer so can make the transition from Sunrisers to Hyderabad Ranji team to perhaps even the Indian XI. The Pashtun element in cricket is also seen in the phonetically phony and cartographically contrived entity that lies between India and Afghanistan (some of my Pakistani friends get mad when I say this). Among their most famous is Shahid Afridi, whose marauding in the cricket field is as much a matter of lore (and gore) as that of his tribe, which led the invasion of Kashmir in 1948. Umar Gul, whose pasting at the hands of Virender Sehwag in the 2011 World Cup effectively ended his career, is also an Afridi, as is, obviously, Shaheen Shah Afridi in the current team. Then of course there is Imran “Im the Dim” Khan. A closet talibunny who seldom uses the name of his tribe (Niazi), he has now come out to embrace the yahoos who have overrun Kabul. If you are one of those who think he is representative of the fearless Pathan who never takes a step back, remember the name Amir Abdullah Khan Niazi or AAK Niazi. He’s the guy who signed the instrument of surrender before Indian generals in Dhaka following the Pakistani rout in the Bangladesh liberation war. Yahya Khan, his boss who presided over the rout, was also a Pashtun. Oh yeah, they surrendered to a country that at time had a woman as prime minister, a dalit defence minister, and military and theater commands led by a Parsi, a Hindu, a Sikh, and a Jew.>> (Excerpted from: < https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/blogs/ruminations/salim-durrani-cricket-and-the-monumental-clusterfuck-in-kabul/ >.) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/greenyouth/CACEsOZgN9H2anxfEMsONxuhNL%3Dz0oTft6JnxaoJwCwrn9obpZw%40mail.gmail.com.
