Middle East Press on Clemency for the Taliban and Western Hypocrisy in Belarus: New Age Islam's Selection, 1 October 2020
By New Age Islam Edit
Bureau
1 October
2020
• Clemency for the Taliban Will Not Lead To
Peace in Afghanistan
By Rustam Ali Seerat
• Sheikh Sabah Made Kuwait an Oasis for
Reconciliation
By Dr. Dania Koleilat Khatib
• Lebanon Is Teetering Close To the Edge
By Fawaz Turki
• Western Hypocrisy in Belarus and Rising
Euroscepticism in Eastern Europe
By Serkan Aydin
------
Clemency for the Taliban Will Not Lead To Peace
in Afghanistan
By Rustam Ali Seerat
30 Sep 2020
Relatives
gather at a graveyard of the victims who were killed in a suicide attack in an
educational centre two years ago, as Afghan government officials and the
Taliban hold talks in Doha aimed at ending 19 years of war in the country, in
Kabul, Afghanistan September 14, 2020 [Mohammad Ismail/Reuters]
-----
When given
a choice between security and freedom, people always choose security. That is
why so many dictators and demagogues survive by creating a false sense of
threat and then presenting themselves as the saviours.
The same
logic applies when people are given a choice between safety and justice. They
would choose safety over justice. In the case of Afghanistan, this has fed a
continuous cycle of violence over the past few decades.
The absence
of any legal consequences for violence and war crimes has only further
emboldened armed groups. The release of Taliban fighters as part of an
agreement between the United States and the Taliban and the continuing
negotiations between the armed group and the Afghan government will not lead to
peace. Only a thorough transitional justice process will.
A Repeat of History
The
decision to sideline justice to supposedly maintain security and peace is not
without precedent in recent Afghan history.
During the
Soviet invasion of Afghanistan (1979-1987), more than 800,000 people lost their
lives. The United States and several Muslim countries supported the
mujahideen’s fight against Soviet forces.
Both sides regularly committed serious human rights abuses and
violations of international humanitarian law throughout the conflict. While the
atrocities committed by Soviet forces were widely reported on, war crimes
committed by the mujahideen during the same period were largely undocumented.
After the
withdrawal of Soviet troops, infighting broke out between various mujahideen
groups which led to more war crimes being committed. In February 1993, for
example, the infighting between mujahideen factions resulted in the Afshar
massacre, in which up to 1000 Hazara men, women and children were brutally
murdered. Intra-mujahideen fighting lasted from 1992 to 1994 costing up to
50,000 civilian lives. It is this violence and upheaval that gave birth to the
Taliban, which took over Kabul in 1996 and established an Islamic emirate. In
August 1998, the Taliban executed between 2000 to 5000 civilians from the
Hazara ethnic group in the northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif.
The 9/11
attacks on the US turned the odds in favour of the same Mujahideen as the
US-led coalition which invaded Afghanistan in October 2001 allied with them
against the Taliban. In 2007, after a US-backed government was installed in Kabul,
Mujahideen leaders involved in the 1990s civil wars passed legislation in
parliament granting them amnesty for their war crimes. The justification given
for these laws was simple: if the international community and the government of
Afghanistan tried to bring them to justice, the Mujahideen would provoke more
chaos and insecurity.
Hence, no
transitional justice measures were carried out, thereby sacrificing
accountability to maintain an illusory post-2001 peace. Suffering for more than
two decades, the people of Afghanistan who were the primary victims of the Mujahideen’s
war crimes let go of justice in the hope of security.
The absence
of a transitional justice process against the Mujahideen emboldened the Taliban
and reassured its members that there would be no consequences for their actions
and they continued to commit ever more gruesome violence against the Afghan
people. In other words, the impunity the Mujahideen enjoyed did not really
bring peace to Afghanistan.
This
approach to war ethics is problematic, not only because it denies justice to
the victims of the Taliban atrocities but also because it strengthens the
Taliban’s capacity to prolong the war to achieve its goal of establishing a
theocracy.
Transitional Justice in Afghanistan
The release
of thousands of Taliban fighters after the armed group concluded an agreement
with the US on February 29 this year has been justified as necessary to
jump-start peace negotiations. However, the odds are against any permanent
peace in the country.
The Taliban
will not give up violence because it knows that it is only through violent
means that it can have any political power. Even with its enormous corruption
scandals and its own track record of violence against civilians, the government
in Kabul is still preferred by 92 percent of Afghans, according to a 2015 poll.
Any impunity the Taliban enjoys will also motivate other groups to continue
committing crimes against the Afghan people.
Because of
this, calls are growing for the leaders of the Taliban to be tried at the
International Criminal Court (ICC). Nevertheless, Taliban leaders are unlikely
to face the court soon. Not only the Afghan government and its international
backers would be happy to give the members of the group amnesty should they
agree to make peace, the US itself is not willing to allow the ICC to
investigate the crimes its troops allegedly committed in the country.
Moreover,
an ICC investigation at this critical junction risks undermining the ongoing
Doha peace talks, as it may discourage the Taliban from agreeing to make
peace. But there are ways to achieve
some transitional justice without insisting on an ICC investigation.
The war
crimes committed in Afghanistan in the last four decades by all parties can and
should be officially documented. This would put an end to widespread attempts
to whitewash history and force the perpetrators of these crimes to face some
accountability. Following the documentation of these crimes, all political
parties, including the communists, the mujahideen factions and the Taliban,
should officially apologise to the people of Afghanistan in general and the
victims of violence in particular, to officially acknowledge and atone for
their past crimes.
A public
apology by leaders involved in war crimes has a precedent. During his 2013
election campaign, President Ashraf Ghani’s running mate, Abdul Rashid Dostum,
issued an apology for being a part of the 1990s civil wars. Dostum’s apology
and pledge to never repeat his past mistakes was welcomed by many Afghans.
The people
of Afghanistan are once again being asked to choose between justice and
security. While an acknowledgement of war crimes and a promise by perpetrators
to not repeat them would not heal the victims of these crimes, it can be an
important step towards healing Afghanistan. If these steps are backed by a
commitment by the international community to prevent further human rights
violations in the country, Afghanistan can finally leave its painful past
behind and turn its face towards the future.
-----
Rustam Ali Seerat is Research scholar at the
Department of International Relations, South Asian University, New Delhi.
https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2020/9/30/clemency-for-the-taliban-will-not-lead-to-peace-in-afghanistan/
----
Sheikh Sabah Made Kuwait an Oasis for
Reconciliation
By Dr. Dania Koleilat
Khatib
September
30, 2020
Sheikh
Sabah Al-Ahmad Al-Jabir Al-Sabah in Makkah, Saudi Arabia, May 31, 2019.
(Reuters)
-----
On Tuesday,
I saw some breaking news on my phone: The TV broadcast in Kuwait had been
disrupted to air verses from the Holy Qur’an. News started spreading that the
emir, Sheikh Sabah Al-Ahmad Al-Sabah, had passed away. This was confirmed later
on by Kuwait’s official source, the Emiri Diwan.
The
91-year-old monarch left a rich legacy. He witnessed the independence of his
country in 1961, the birth of the Gulf Cooperation Council 20 years later, and
the invasion of his country and its liberation, among many other turbulences
and events that rocked the region during the course of his long life. He was
hailed by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres as “a distinguished statesman
and an outstanding humanitarian.” He was the last of the Gulf state builders’
generation to leave us — a titan who will be remembered every time Kuwait or
the Arab Gulf is mentioned.
The most
important achievement that will mark his legacy is the moderating role Kuwait
played during his rule. A patriot with a strong attachment to the Arab nation,
he did everything he could to benefit the Arab world. While adopting a policy
of neutrality, the attitude of his country never meant isolation or
disengagement and never meant pursuing the interests of Kuwait in a selfish
manner or from a narrow nationalist perspective. On the contrary, all his
policies had the interests of the Gulf and the Arab nation at their heart,
starting with his position on the Palestine issue. Senior officials in August
declared that Kuwait would be the last country to normalize relations with
Israel, reaffirming the emir’s support for the Palestinians.
Two weeks
before his departure from this world, while he was in the US receiving
treatment, President Donald Trump bestowed a top honor on him for the central
role he played in trying to bring Gulf countries together. A seasoned diplomat
with 40 years’ experience as a foreign affairs secretary for Kuwait, he was a
master of mediation. In fact, standing at an equal distance from all the
different parties, his neutrality gave him credibility as an honest broker.
Under his leadership, Kuwait became an oasis where warring parties could lay
down their arms and enter into constructive discussions under his wise
patronage.
Those who
criticize Kuwait’s neutrality fail to see the benefits it brings to the Gulf
and to the Arab nation, as well as its commitment to Arab solidarity. Despite
its neutrality, Kuwait still sent its military to fight the Houthis. Though its
force was small in size, the emir did not hesitate to send 15 of his jets to
fight as part of the coalition that aims to fend off the threat to the southern
borders of Saudi Arabia. Its contribution to the coalition against the Houthis
shows how much Kuwait was committed to its Arab neighbors’ security under the
leadership of the late emir.
While Arab
Gulf countries were alarmed by the warming of relations between Turkey and
Kuwait, leading to the signing of a military cooperation agreement in 2019,
observers should analyze this rapprochement in the context of the current regional
dynamics. The Kuwaiti-Turkish relations never meant Kuwait was siding with
Ankara against its fellow Arabs; on the contrary, it meant creating the ground
for de-escalation. No one wants a full-blown war, as the various parties know
that direct confrontation would be devastating to everyone and there would be
little likelihood of any axis prevailing. Hence, the existence of a neutral
friend like Kuwait is more important than ever.
Similarly,
the cordial relations Kuwait has kept with Iran allowed it to host negotiations
with the Houthis, who are sponsored by Iran. Though the negotiations that were
initiated in 2016 did not bring an end to the conflict, they created some
common ground that can be nurtured and may ultimately lead to a settlement
between the warring parties.
The
diplomatic windows the late emir opened are much needed in these tense times
that the region is witnessing. Sheikh Sabah had credibility and the different
parties trusted his wisdom, as well the purity of his intentions. Honoring our beloved
titan, those who come after him should preserve his legacy by keeping Kuwait as
an active mediator and an honest broker. In his memory, Kuwait should remain an
oasis for reconciliation, constructive discussions and conflict resolution. The
same way Sheikh Sabah stood tall and firm, held his ground and did not succumb
to pressure, his successors should do the same. They must keep Kuwait’s
positive neutrality while preserving its commitment to Arab principles.
-----
Dr. Dania Koleilat Khatib is a specialist in
US-Arab relations with a focus on lobbying. She is the co-founder of the
Research Center for Cooperation and Peace Building (RCCP), a Lebanese NGO
focused on Track II. She is also an affiliated scholar with the Issam Fares
Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs at the American
University of Beirut.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/1742426
----
Lebanon Is Teetering Close To the Edge
By Fawaz Turki
September
30, 2020
An
anti-government protester chants slogans as she holds up a Lebanese flag
Image
Credit: AP
-----
There was a
time, not long ago, when Lebanese looked down their noses, or at the least
pitied, those wretched refugees from neighbouring Syria who boarded smugglers’
boats from the port cities of Sidon, Beirut and Tripoli for the risky — at
times deadly — crossings to Europe, via Cyprus, the island nation in the
eastern Mediterranean a mere 165 miles away from the Lebanese coast.
Now the
people of Lebanon, in droves, are doing just that, trusting that their boats
will not get caught in storms or lost at sea — all in an effort to escape the
misery of life in a country that has become a basket case, unable to cope with
multiple social problems, reform its sclerotic government institutions and curb
a political elite too invested in the system to change it, a country now pitied
as much by its own people as by the outside world.
Evidence of
how true that is was presented last Saturday when Prime Minister Designate
Mustafa Adib threw in the towel and stood down following his failure to form a
government after a whole month of negotiations with the feuding political blocs
in Parliament, who appear to put their parochial and narrow agendas ahead of
the national interest.
Failure by
an individual as by a nation is not fatal. We all fail at times. Failure to
change, however, is.
Singling Out Hezbollah for Harsh Criticism
At a news
conference last Sunday devoted to Lebanon, French President Emmanuel Macron —
whose country was the Mandate power in the region in 1943 and carved Lebanon
out of Greater Syria that year — took to task those political blocks for their
failure to work for the collective good, namely to come up with an audacious
plan to form a national unity government, singling out Hizbollah for harsh
criticism.
He said
bluntly that the group, which since the 1980s has played an oversized role on
the political scene, needed to explain, and do so soon, whether “it is a
serious political party committed to implementing a road map for the country’s
future” or a militia operating at the behest of Iran. He wondered additionally
whether Lebanon’s power brokers have “betrayed” their obligations to the
nation, thus committing “collective treason” (in French, “trahison
collective”).
Them are
fighting words, Emmanuel. But given the fact that Lebanon has seen its
unemployment rate rise to 35 per cent and the value of its currency drop by 80
per cent, topped last month by the devastating explosion of close to 3,000 tons
of improperly — very improperly — stored ammonium nitrate that killed 200 people
and ravaged large swaths of the capital, plunging the country into deeper
crisis, fighting words are what is needed to jolt that political elite, whose
divisive, what’s-in-it-for-me view of political culture has torn Lebanon apart.
Heaven
knows when the next prime minister designate will be appointed and tasked with
forming a reform-minded government. Meanwhile, Lebanon will remain in limbo,
unable — with a lame-duck, caretaker government in charge — to negotiate with
the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for much needed funds slated for economic
recovery. If, as seems all but inevitable at this point, these feuding blocs in
parliament abandon efforts to form any government real soon, we’re all in for
the long haul.
Illustrious Modern History
How sad for
Lebanon, once an otherworldly and winsome nation that — at just roughly 4,000
square miles and a population of just under seven million — is not just the
smallest sovereign state in the Arab world but the smallest in mainland Asia, a
state whose illustrious ancient history places it as home to the Phoenicians,
the enterprising maritime culture that flourished for three thousand years, and
whose equally illustrious modern history places it as a cultural hub,
traditionally a gathering place for writers, poets, theoreticians, ideologues,
artists and belle lettrists, whose creative effusions fuelled the Arab struggle
for national independence and self-definition, a country that, additionally,
enjoyed a diversified economy that included tourism, agriculture, commerce and
banking, indeed a country that exuded prosperity, élan and self-confidence.
Today That Country Is, Well, Yes, A Basket
Case.
If at the
end of the day you find yourself, as a political commentator, reflecting on
what to say about the future of this troubled land, don’t take at face value
the stark observation proffered by Michel Aoun, the country’s president.
“Lebanon”, he said last week, “is hell-bound”.
We all
hope, of course, that that prediction will be proven wrong, and the country’s
many failures will in time act as its teacher not its undertaker.
----
Fawaz Turki is a journalist, lecturer and
author based in Washington. He is the author of The Disinherited: Journal of a
Palestinian Exile
https://gulfnews.com/opinion/op-eds/lebanon-is-teetering-close-to-the-edge-1.74221884
----
Western Hypocrisy in Belarus and Rising
Euroscepticism in Eastern Europe
By Serkan Aydin
October 01,
2020
Belarus is
often dubbed the last dictatorship in Europe by the Western axis. The instant
President Alexander Lukashenko declared his landslide victory in the elections,
which many claimed was rigged, violent protests broke out across the country.
When is an
election not thought as free and fair by the Western hegemony? The answer: When
it yields victory to a government that turns down neoliberal orthodoxy and
objects to submitting its foreign policy to Washington or Brussels.
The West is
an ardent discipline of liberal candidates in Central and Eastern Europe, where
there has been an adamant polarization between younger and older voters.
For
instance, Polish President Andrzej Duda utilized a divisive election strategy
in which he promoted Poland's Catholic identity and traditional and religious
family values against the growing neoliberal outlook of the younger generation.
He has been vehemently criticized for lashing out at neoliberal rhetoric, such
as that forwarded by the LGBT+ movement, Antifa and those who trump immigration
and multiculturalism.
Since his
knife-edge election win, the European Union has threatened to sanction Poland
for its restrictions on the judiciary, media and civil society.
The
Guardian soon after published an article titled: "Poland on 'the velvet
road to dictatorship' after Andrzej Duda wins the presidential election,"
showing the West's dissatisfaction with the victory of a conservative candidate
who questions the morals and ethics of the EU's neoliberal agenda.
Euroskepticism,
best defined as "a general term for opposition to the process of European
integration" has been on the rise of late.
Long-term
commitment to values and norms promoted by the EU has become a contentious
issue. Accession countries are forced to fulfill certain demands under pressure
and are unable to backpedal when they became full members of the union.
On the
whole, there is a range of Euroskepticism.?Hard Euroskepticism is an idealistic
opposition to the EU's principles and an aspiration for national withdrawal
from the EU. Soft Euroscepticism, on the other hand, refers to opposition to
certain policies based on perceived threats to the national interest.
For
instance, British Euroskepticism is a soft one that it is based on economics,
tariffs and state power. However, we observe a hard Euroskepticism in Hungary,
Lithuania and Poland, where ethnocentrism and illiberalism have recently
increased, while European cosmopolitanism and moral relativism have been
blacklisted.
According
to a new survey by the Eurobarometer, most Hungarians are fiercely dismissive
of the LBGT+ movement, the size of which has substantially soared over the last
few years. Last year, U.S.-based watchdog, Freedom House, described Hungary as
only "partly free," and the EU has threatened to suspend Hungary's
membership of the bloc until it decides Hungary is in compliance with EU
values. Unsurprisingly, Hungarian President Victor Orban has been proclaimed
the first dictator in the EU.
In 2012,
when Guido Westerwelle, who was Germany's first openly gay minister, called
Lukashenko's government the "last dictatorship in Europe," Lukashenko
retaliated by saying that he "would rather be branded a dictator than be
gay." Similarly, the Western media accused Russian President Vladimir
Putin of using homophobia to gain votes when nearly three-quarters of voters in
Russia opted to support an amended constitution that reinforces a ban on
same-sex marriage in July 2020.
Shadow Within
The EU's
moral identity has been in crisis. While Central and Eastern European
communities strive to promote a more traditional lifestyle and religiosity,
countries like the Netherlands, which has mandated that "Christ" be
spelled with a lowercase "c," and Spain, where birth certificates now
provide for same-sex parents to be referred to as "Progenitor A" and
"Progenitor B," there has been a drift toward a more postmodern,
politically correct society.
A
Hungary-based survey on "Socialism, Capitalism, Democracy and System
Change" found that 50% of respondents in the Central and Eastern European
countries looked at the previous communist regimes positively.?The breakdown of
this statistic in each country showed Slovenia with 68%, Lithuania with 59%,
Hungary with 58%, Estonia with 55%, Poland and Slovakia with 51%, Latvia with
50% and the Czech Republic with 32%.
The same
polarization is also evident in Belarus. According to Belarus-based Independent
Institute of Socio-Economic and Political Studies (IISEPS) polls conducted
between 2014 and 2016, when Belarusians were asked to choose between being
unified with Russia or joining the EU, 40–50% chose Russia, while 25–35% picked
the EU.
Belarusian
presidential candidate Svetlana Tikhanovskaya, who according to Western media
won the Aug. 9 presidential ballot, has said: "The protest movement is
neither a pro-Russian nor an anti-Russian revolution. It is neither an anti-EU
nor a pro-EU revolution. It is a democratic revolution."
The Western
axis claims not to be in pursuit of a prospective EU membership for Belarus and
there exists no Belarusian interest in NATO. It is repetitiously stated that
the staple objective of the West is to persuade Lukashenko to alleviate
repression, adhere to human rights and allow for a bit more political space.
Western criticism is said to be based on democratic norms and criticism of a
stolen election. There can be no burning desire to pull Belarus into the West
as both the EU and NATO have more than enough on their plates! However, is this
the truth?
The United
States and its European allies have long used the smokescreen of democracy and
human rights to undermine regimes that they do not approve of while turning a
blind eye to undemocratic practices and rights abuses in countries that do
their bidding. Let's remember how pro-Western dictatorships such as Mohammad
Reza Pahlavi's Iran, Gen. Augusto Pinochet's Chile and Suharto's Indonesia have
been generously bankrolled.
The Sheer Replica of the Soviets
I lived in
Belarus for a year and it was stunning to see how the country is a sheer
replica of the Soviet Union in many ways. It is a highly religious and
traditional society deeply embedded in conservatism. In 2018, Belarus slammed
the U.K. embassy in Minsk for flying a rainbow flag on the International Day
Against Homophobia, calling LGBT+ relationships "fake." In a wordy
statement, the Interior Ministry said the U.K. was challenging the country's
"traditional values."
Belarusian
rapprochement with the West began in 2015 and it was driven by pure pragmatism.
The West should note that Belarus is not Ukraine. The Belarusian economy is
dependent on Russia and above all, there is this historical kinship between the
Russian and Belarusian people based on Eastern Orthodoxy in religious terms and
Soviet brotherhood on a political basis.
The Western
media has cast much light on the ongoing protests and violent crackdown, yet
there have been massive pro-Lukashenko rallies in every city as well.
The EU and
the U.S. expect that the Lukashenko regime will lose its legitimacy so they can
add another vassal state to their list. Rather than call for a recount with
international observers, the EU instead called for the creation of an
alternative government. The EU has designated that almost 60 million euros
($70.26 million) to be used to fund alternative (anti-government) media
channels and non-governmental groups in the country. Is another coup d'etat
underway through Western interventionism?
The
solution for Belarus is not siding with the EU. The bloc is politically and
economically capitalist in nature, and capitalism is parasitic. The state
industry of Belarus and its mineral wealth would be enslaved to the post-Lukashenko,
pro-EU world.
Ukraine's
so-called de-Sovietization and EU integration is an ignominious fiasco as it
only deteriorated into corruption and dented the economy overall.
Russian
military intervention would also culminate in havoc therefore nor is this an
optimal solution.
Instead,
Lukashenko should ease up his authoritarianism and restore democracy, human
rights and economy with the people of Belarus peacefully and independently.
----
Serkan Aydin is an independent journalist and a
lecturer at Leeds University
https://www.dailysabah.com/opinion/op-ed/western-hypocrisy-in-belarus-and-rising-euroscepticism-in-eastern-europe
-----
URL: https://newageislam.com/middle-east-press/middle-east-press-clemency-taliban/d/123002
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African
Muslim News, Arab
World News, South
Asia News, Indian
Muslim News, World
Muslim News, Women
in Islam, Islamic
Feminism, Arab
Women, Women
In Arab, Islamophobia
in America, Muslim
Women in West, Islam
Women and Feminism