Pakistan Press On Far-Right Movements, Struggle For Women, Inequalities And Afghan Taliban: New Age Islam's Selection, 17 March 2021
By New Age Islam Edit
Desk
17 March
2021
• Muslims Targeted: Far-Right Movements Have
Gained Ground Across The Globe
The Dawn Editorial
• The Forever Struggle For Women
By Rafia Zakaria
• Questioning Inequalities
By Abdul Sattar
• Core Concepts Of Taliban’s Islamic Emirate
Has Not Changed
By Manish Rai
• Taliban Realised Even Back Then That They Had
Time On Their Side
By Mahir Ali
• Will Biden’s Afghan Policy Succeed?
By Abdul Basit
•
Palestinian Rights
By James Zogby
-----
Muslims Targeted: Far-Right Movements Have
Gained Ground Across The Globe
The Dawn Editorial
March 17,
2021
The rise of global far-right
movements
-----
FAR-right
movements have gained ground across the globe, blaming ethnic and religious
‘others’ for all of society’s failings. In some countries, groups that were
once labelled extremists are now controlling the levers of power, making life
difficult for minorities. Amongst the xenophobic trends spreading across the
world is Islamophobia, as Muslims are targeted for their faith.
In this
regard, the OIC’s decision to observe the International Day to Combat
Islamophobia is a welcome initiative to raise awareness about anti-Muslim hate
and come up with solid strategies to counter bigotry. As the Foreign Office has
observed in a statement to mark the day, Islamophobia takes many forms, such as
negative profiling, mob attacks by cow vigilantes and harassment of women
wearing hijab.
The fact is
that in a number of states Islamophobic policies are being supported at the
government level. In Sri Lanka, a minister recently announced that the burqa
would be banned, along with the closure of 1,000 Islamic schools, though that
country’s foreign ministry said on Tuesday that the ban was “merely a
proposal”. Over the past few years, there has been a rise in xenophobic
Buddhist nationalism in Sri Lanka and following the 2019 Easter bombing carried
out by IS militants in the country, Muslims have faced problems as they are not
able to practise their faith freely.
For
example, the government was forcing Muslim families to cremate their loved ones
who had died of Covid-19 until the decision was reversed last month. Elsewhere,
voters in Switzerland recently banned the burqa and niqab in that country,
although very few people in the alpine state wear them. And in India, the Hindu
chauvinist BJP has apparently adopted Islamophobia as a central plank of its
state policy, passing laws that discriminate against Muslims while looking away
when acts of violence target the community. In a recent incident, a Muslim boy
was beaten for drinking water in a Hindu temple in UP.
The OIC
should emphasise that discrimination against Muslims will not be tolerated, and
that those who indulge in hate crimes must face the law. While terrorists
acting in the name of Islam must be brought to justice, their misguided acts
cannot be used as a cover to tar all Muslims with the same brush. Moreover, the
civil rights of Muslims must be ensured, and they must be allowed to practise
their faith freely.
Perhaps
rulers — Muslim and non-Muslim — can learn a thing or two about compassion and
communal harmony from New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern. When mosques
were attacked in the city of Christchurch by a far-right terrorist in 2019, Ms
Ardern led from the front and embraced her country’s wounded Muslim community.
On the second anniversary of the attacks, she again empathised with the
victims, showing that if the state is determined, it can heal wounds instead of
widening the communal gulf.
https://www.dawn.com/news/1612990/muslims-targeted
------
The Forever Struggle For Women
By Rafia Zakaria
March 17,
2021
ANYWHERE
one casts a glance, women are in turmoil. Even in the year 2021, where DNA is
revealing the secrets of human illness, where internet connections can allow
people to communicate over thousands of miles, where we can see live images
from Mars, women’s lives are as endangered, as misunderstood and as constrained
as ever.
Indeed,
where the lives of women, their choices, their welfare, their health are
concerned, a kind of worldwide primitivism prevails. The world may be virtual
but women’s physical bodies suffer in ways that men’s never do. The experience
of the world, of walking down a street, of going to a shop, of enjoying the
weather, of meeting a friend, all of it, each and every moment of existence is
rendered somehow dangerous by the very fact of being a woman.
This year
too many in Pakistan pounced on the women who dared participate in the Aurat
March 2021. In a country where women are kidnapped and raped and killed without
anyone batting an eyelid, this one act by women wanting to celebrate themselves
was, yet again, labelled as vulgar. The organisers of the march, sadly used to
getting threats every year, faced their detractors yet again. This year, the
critics increased in number and became even more vicious and venomous. Photos
from the march were photoshopped and circulated, and videos were dubbed to
underscore the thinking that women have no right to occupy public space or to
make their own choices and tell their own stories.
For its
part, the government has chosen to speak out of both sides of the mouth. On the
one hand it has launched an investigation into the march, suggesting some
illicit involvement, while on the other, it says it is looking at the origin of
the doctored video clips and photoshopped pictures (that tried to link the
march with blasphemy) whose creators may also face punishment. The TTP too
threatened the marchers and women. In sum, they all came together to tell those
Pakistani women who want a different future that their goal was simply
impossible. If Pakistani women are angry these days, they have good reason to
be.
It is not
just Pakistani women though. In the United Kingdom, thousands of women across
the country defied the lockdown to protest against the killing of a young woman
named Sarah Everard. Last week, Everard had been walking home from her friend’s
house after the two had dinner together, when she disappeared. Her remains were
found in another part of the country and were in such a condition that she
could not be immediately identified.
A police
officer from the Metropolitan Police, a man who guarded diplomatic properties
in London, has been arrested as a suspect. So it is that the very police that
is supposed to ensure that the streets of London are safe for women, had one of
its own arrested as a suspect in the murder of a young and innocent woman who
was simply walking home.
In the
aftermath, thousands of women from around the world have been sharing
information about just how unsafe they feel in public spaces, how they are
followed, harassed, stalked and subjected to catcalls just because they dare to
exist. The streets are not safe for them when there is a pandemic and the
streets are not safe for them when there is none.
Over in the
United States, the governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo, is alleged to have
sexually harassed young women in his employ. The allegations range from
forcible kisses to inappropriate comments, many made in a professional venue.
Even as the number of allegations increases and more and more women emerge as
having suffered harassment allegedly at the hands of the most powerful man in New
York, the governor has refused to resign. He could be removed by impeachment
but current counts of the votes do not show enough support to remove him from
office. The lesson is simple: women suffer and men survive.
These are
just some cases. The pandemic has affected men and women unequally, and the
latter’s poor access to health, their inordinate burden of childcare and all
sorts of other factors combine to make them even more vulnerable than they were
before. At one point in time, transnational bodies like the United Nations
could have been counted on as a platform where a united agenda for the safety
of women could have been urged. The UN that exists sold itself long ago to the
misogynistic whims of countries that have thrown money at the organisation in
exchange for international leverage. The radical potential of female solidarity
is no longer something that the UN seems to be interested in.
So women
everywhere are on their own, fighting alone but together. In their favour is
the promise of emerging generations who bring with them new ideas about
connectivity and collaboration. Technology can help, even though it cannot be
counted on as the magic solution to the victimisation of women. In addition to
public marches, which are unavailable to some women owing to their family
situation or their work situation, consumer boycotts can be added to the
activist arsenal.
When male
money is threatened, male behaviour is likely to change. Finally, some
attention can also be paid to change among women. It is women who are the
bosses of millions of domestic workers in the country. Perhaps they can sign
charters that protect the dignity of those women. These sorts of actions will
not solve the problems that face Pakistani women, who are made to bear the
brunt of all the insecurities and inferiorities that are faced by Pakistani
men, but they will make a difference. In the meantime, whether it is in
Pakistan or the UK or some other place, the struggle goes on, at least for one
half of the world.
https://www.dawn.com/news/1612993/the-forever-struggle
------
Questioning Inequalities
By Abdul Sattar
March 17,
2021
The
question of inequality in human society has always attracted the attention of
many thinkers. The recent pandemic has triggered this debate again, with many critics
bemoaning the fate of the Global South where vaccines are likely to benefit the
mass majority of the people much later than people of the advanced world.
One of the
reasons for this phenomenon lies, according to some, in the advancement of the
West. It is argued that since industrialized countries are brimming with
wealth, they would be the first to take advantage of this cure for the
contagion.
Ancient
philosophers have justified these inequalities on the basis of natural laws.
For them, these inequalities are important to run society. From Sumerians to
Egyptians and from the Greeks to the Indians, all agreed that it was an
integral part of human society. Even the biggest champions of freedom and
equality in the European continent and North America justified these
differences on the basis of natural laws and human nature. The ruthless
colonization of Asia, the massacre of the indigenous people in the Americas and
the plundering of the colonies was also based on this unjust concept of
inequality. Even today, there are a number of thinkers and social scientists
who come up with arguments in support of this myopic idea of Western
superiority.
Authors
like Niall Ferguson believe that the West ruled the rest because of democracy,
free market, competition, scientific research and concepts like rule of law.
His famous book 'The Empire', according to many critics, seems to justify
Western imperialism, giving an impression that empire was not all bad as is
widely believed in the Global South. But there are many who challenge this
notion of Ferguson and other historians like him. They also criticize those who
believe that the West managed to rule the rest because of its democratic
culture, competition, research and concepts like rule of law.
Some of the
critics believe that it was geography that in fact paved the way for European
advancement. They contest the idea that European people are more developed
because they may have been smarter than people living in other parts of the
world. One such author is Jared Diamond, who spent more than twenty years
investigating inequalities between parts of the world. Diamond visited Papua
Guinea, New Guinea, South America, Central America, Spain and other parts of
the world to find out the answer of the question that was asked by a local of
New Guinea more than 30 years ago.
A
geographer by profession, Diamond has vast knowledge of anthropology,
evolutionary biology, history and human societies. He says that people from New
Guinea to England and Papua Guinea to America are all the same when it comes to
their intellect and skills but it is geography where the roots of inequalities
lie. According to him, agriculture surfaced in the Fertile Crescent of the
Middle East 13,000 years ago. At that time, people in New Guinea and Papua Guinea
were living in jungles hunting animals or acquiring food from trees. The people
in the Fertile Crescent domesticated goats, cows, sheep and other animals that
helped them increase agriculture production besides enriching their diet. This
surplus production enabled the people of the Fertile Crescent to engage in
other activities that paved the way to civilization while people living in the
jungle spent most of their time working to arrange their food.
From the
Middle East, agriculture and domesticated animals spread to Eurasia and some
other parts of the world. Again this spread was possible because of geography.
Unlike Eurasia, the people of Central and South America were living in rough
terrains and in a climate where animals could not be domesticated. Barley,
wheat and other crops that were grown in the Fertile Crescent reached Europe.
It was Europeans who brought these crops and animals to North America. Out of
over a dozen animals that helped the West increase agriculture productivity,
none existed in South and Central America.
Even the
creation of language was easier in Eurasia than in South and Central America
because the rugged mountains and tough terrain made it impossible for people to
interact easily, putting an end to the possibilities of communication. While
people in Central America had some sort of written language before the
Europeans arrived, the same was not the case in the South. So in case of an
emergency they could not have sought the help of Central American people.
Some
historians however say that claiming the decimation of indigenous people is
also linked to geographical factors does not mean that the rapaciousness of the
white settlers should be overlooked. Repeated plagues and the spread of other
infectious diseases over the centuries had created immunity in European people
against infections while no such community existed in South and Central America
where according to some estimates 95 percent of the population perished in such
infectious diseases.
Some
historians assert that surplus production in the Fertile Crescent also enabled
the people there to develop steel which reached Europe over the centuries. The
development of steel was instrumental in improving the fighting skills of the
Europeans. European conflicts before the 15th centuries prompted the ruling
elite to master in arms manufacturing. Such weapons and the use of horses,
which were alien to the people of Central and South America, played an
important role in subjugating those nations. It is quite clear that these natural
factors played an important role in the conquest of Central and South America.
When Francisco Pizarro arrived in South America, he had only over 100 soldiers
but the Spaniard had also brought with him an invisible enemy in the form of
germs that annihilated the locals.
The concept
that Europeans were somehow unique human beings created the way for
colonization and that colonisation led to the ruthless exploitation and
plundering of today's developing countries. This inhuman theory emerged as a
great threat to mankind because it prompted certain sections of the ruling
elites in the Western states to claim racial superiority, which proved to be
catastrophic not only for these Western countries but for the world as well.
Therefore, it is important to debunk this myth of Western superiority on the
basis of their political and economic ideas.
In reality,
it was geography that created conditions for European conquests. The ruling
elite of the West exploited geographical conditions to ruthlessly exploit the
people in the Global South and plunder their wealth. Around 20 tons gold and
silver was looted by the Spaniards from a few parts of the Americas. The UK is
believed to have snatched away around $45 trillion from India. The black
community has been demanding five billion dollars in reparations for the
slavery that enriched the modern capitalist world.
Even today,
this myopic concept exists in some or another form. The ruling elite in the
advanced capitalist world militarily intervene in third world countries – bombing
and destroying state after state. Therefore, it is important to challenge this
inhuman concept on all platforms. One of the ways to do so could be to
incorporate the books of those authors who question this widely held perception
of Western superiority. Such books should not be discussed in debating clubs
only but included in the syllabus of Western educational institutions. The
pernicious tentacles of fascism are once again rearing their monstrous head in
the advanced capitalist world and other regions. Questioning inequalities would
be one of the ways to deal with them.
https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/805377-questioning-inequalities
-----
Core Concepts Of Taliban’s Islamic Emirate Has
Not Changed
By Manish Rai
MARCH 17,
2021
Islamic
Emirate of Afghanistan, which was the official name of the Taliban regime
before being deposed by the United States in late 2001. The Taliban has always
insisted on calling itself the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. In June 2013,
when its de-facto embassy in Doha, Qatar was founded, the Taliban insisted on
calling it the “the political office” of the “Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.”
The Taliban appeared in the southern city of Kandahar, Afghanistan’s
second-largest, in 1994, two years after the mujahedin seized power in the
country. The Taliban promised to bring order in the country and restore
security. But they also enforced their ultraconservative brand of Islam. They
captured Kabul in 1996 and two years later controlled some 90 percent of the
country. In 1998, Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar assembled some 500
Islamic scholars from across the country to draft a new constitution for the
country. After three days of intense discussion, the scholars drafted a 14-page
document it was the first and only attempt by the Taliban to codify its views
on power and governance. This document put forward the foundation of Taliban’s
Islamic Emirates core concepts.
In the
document, power was centralized in the hands of an “Amir ul-Momineen,” or
leader of the faithful. This supreme leader was the head of state and had
ultimate authority. The constitution did not describe how such a leader would
be selected or for how long he could serve. But it said the supreme leader must
be male and a Sunni Muslim. Under the constitution, Sunni Islam was to be the
official state religion, even though approximately 15 percent of the population
are Shia Muslims. The document stated that no law could be contrary to Islamic
Sharia law. The constitution granted freedom of expression, women’s education,
and the right to a fair trial, but all within the limits of the Taliban’s
strict interpretation of Sharia law. But the whole world witnessed how all
these rights were disregarded during the Taliban rule. Often Taliban in the
name of Sharia law enforces the medieval time Pashtun tribal code of conduct
called “Pashtunwali”. The Taliban negotiators are trying to convince people
that is in many ways they are a different organization from the one that
governed Afghanistan in the 1990s. But the reality is that most of their
leaders are nevertheless committed to an extreme interpretation of Islam that
is not shared by many Afghans. Power is
still centralized in the hands of an all-powerful leader, who oversees a shadow
Taliban government in Afghanistan. The Taliban still enforces its strict
interpretation of Islam in areas under its control.
Regardless
of repeated claims that they support women’s rights, for instance, the Taliban
has continued to attack girls’ schools. Also, women and young people, while
comprising most of the country’s total population, are conspicuously missing
from the Taliban’s negotiating team. Moreover, despite Afghanistan’s rich
pluralism and cultural mosaic. There is extremely little ethnic, religious,
linguistic, cultural, and professional diversity within Taliban ranks. This
absence speaks volumes. It clearly tells us through calibrated action rather
than hollow rhetoric, who is actually welcome in the Taliban’s emirate.
Most
importantly the Taliban have also failed to spell out a specific vision for the
future of Afghanistan, and as usual unable to present a program for governance,
service delivery, or maintenance of rule of law. They continue to resort to
vague and generalized statements, and have neither been able nor seem willing
to clearly spell out their views on education, health, reconstruction, women’s
rights, and beyond. The Taliban’s belief in a military victory, this has made
them more confident of their cause and ideology. The group currently sees
itself as unique within the jihadist world in having defeated a major
superpower the United States and forcing it to negotiate an exit. This has made
them quite popular and a focal point within the jihadi world. At this point in
time, the Taliban do not believe that change is necessary. Hence have no
incentives to acknowledge the realities of the new Afghanistan as they believe
that they have finally prevailed.
It will be
a fantasy to think that the Taliban have changed their ways, despite being out
of power for almost two decades. Taliban’s ultimate objective is to remove the
current Islamic Republic and replace it with their Islamic Emirate implementing
the same regressive policies that they enforced during 1996-2001. Taliban has
made it clear in talks that the Hanafi school of Sunni jurisprudence serves as
the principal source of legislation. Even though a sizeable section of Afghan
society follows other school of thoughts. The policymakers who are eager to
make peace with the Taliban’s Islamic Emirates, should not rely solely on political
statements and positions taken by the Taliban’s diplomats in Qatar and
elsewhere. Rather, they should focus on what the movement has actually done in
the areas under its control. It has to be ensured that Afghan common people’s
hard-won rights are not sacrificed for the sake of a deal with the Islamic
Emirate.
https://dailytimes.com.pk/735128/core-concepts-of-talibans-islamic-emirate-has-not-changed/
------
Taliban Realised Even Back Then That They Had
Time On Their Side
By Mahir Ali
March 17,
2021
IN recent
years, as the negotiations phase in the 21st-century variant of the Great Game
has gathered pace, every cliché in the diplomatic playbook has been trotted out
to illustrate its sporadic progress.
There have
been multiple windows of opportunity, open doors, seats at the table, options
on the table — and inevitably some dealings under the table. ‘Between the devil
and the deep blue sea’ doesn’t figure all that frequently in official
statements, but it pretty much sums up the choices Afghanistan has faced for
the past 40 years.
Among the
latest options is a draft ‘peace’ agreement secretly proposed by the Biden
administration, but much commented on since it was leaked last week. Some
officials in Kabul have poured scorn on the US wish list — which is hardly
surprising, given it effectively consigns the Ashraf Ghani administration to
oblivion. The Taliban have been more reticent in their response so far, saying
they are studying the document.
The entity
that the US and its allies dislodged from power nearly 20 years ago is being
offered substantial representation in every tier of an interim government. A
constituent assembly is envisaged, with elections to be held once it has
completed its task. There are motherhood statements about education, intellectual
freedom and women’s rights.
As
golden-throated philosopher Freddie Mercury once wondered: “Is this the real
life? Is this just fantasy?”
For many
years now, the biggest fear among some Afghans has revolved around their
nation’s prospects once the foreign military forces exited. That apprehension
highlights the crux of Afghanistan’s abiding tragedy: since the late 1970s, its
fortunes have largely been determined by outsiders. Of course, more broadly,
that has been the case for centuries.
The tyranny
of geography is an immutable fact, but what’s particularly remarkable is the
extent to which Afghanistan has resisted being swallowed up by neighbouring
empires. Only time will tell whether that rugged exceptionalism serves it well
in this century.
When the US
invaded in collaboration with the Northern Alliance in 2001, in the wake of the
9/11, the Taliban chose to melt away, reinforcing the impression of a
Western-led cakewalk into Kabul. Once the botched effort to track down Osama
bin Laden failed, the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld administration saw little reason to
expend too much energy or too many resources on Afghanistan. Its attention
shifted to Iraq.
Perhaps the
Taliban realised even back then that they had time on their side — apart from
sanctuaries in Pakistan, where bin Laden also found refuge. Over the years they
steadily re-established their clout across the countryside. The US and its
allies poured in tens of thousands of troops, and tens of thousands of people —
mainly Afghans — have been killed since then. Both sides have committed
innumerable war crimes that will likely go uninvestigated and unpunished.
And where
are we today? The debate is over the exit of the remaining 2,500 US troops in
Afghanistan by May 1. Actually, the figure is closer to 3,500, according to the
New York Times (which notes that the Pentagon routinely understates troop
numbers). Then there are the 8,000 or so ‘contractors’ — unofficial military
personnel, in effect — plus smaller contingents from the usual Western allies,
which wouldn’t stay behind once the Americans pack up.
Joe Biden
is under considerable pressure to postpone the pullout. Should he do so, as
seems likely, the Taliban would have an excuse to renege on their part of the
Doha bargain — whereby they have resisted the temptation to attack foreign
forces. Beyond that, the violence has not significantly diminished in the past
year. Apart from other atrocities, targeted killings of women in particular
occur with brutal regularity. The Taliban deny responsibility, but no one else
claims it.
It’s
reasonable to assume that the security situation would deteriorate in the
immediate aftermath of a Western troop withdrawal, with uncertain consequences.
The alternative, however, is also fairly dire. What could a continued foreign presence
achieve that has not already been attempted in the past two decades, with all
too few worthy results?
Will a
planned flurry of diplomatic activity — including talks in Turkey between Kabul
representatives and the Taliban, and UN-sponsored conference of foreign
ministers from Russia, China, the US, Iran, India and Pakistan tentatively
scheduled for next week — achieve very much? Some commitments may be made, but
what will they be worth?
The latest
US plan is informally being referred to as a moonshot. But the original
moonshot was backed by science. This one is riding on unsubstantiated hope. The
Americans will only be postponing the inevitable if they linger. A ‘dignified
departure’ won’t be an option down the track, just as ‘peace with honour’ proved
elusive in Vietnam.
https://www.dawn.com/news/1612991/fight-or-flight
------
Will Biden’s Afghan Policy Succeed?
By Abdul Basit
March 17,
2021
Last week,
in a bid to revive the floundering Afghan peace process, the US Secretary of
State Antony Blinken wrote a letter to Afghan President Ashraf Ghani.
Adjacently,
an eight-page peace plan was also shared with the Afghan government, opposition
parties, civil society and the Taliban. Among other things, the peace plan
calls for the formation of an interim “peace government” for two years, forging
guidelines for talks between Afghan political leaders and the Taliban in
Turkey, a UN-led meeting of India, Pakistan, Iran, Russia, China and the US to
create regional consensus on Afghanistan and a 90-day reduction in violence.
Read
together; the two leaked documents provide critical insights into the Biden
Administration’s mindset and broader aims in Afghanistan. The leaks are
deliberate to garner reactions by regional powers, Kabul and the Taliban,
before finalizing Biden’s official Afghan policy.
The
proposed peace plan is a high-stake political gamble that is fraught with
multiple contradictions and risks. The plan contains a laundry list of items
against an unrealistic and a limited time window. At present, the Biden
Administration is split between political appointees who advocate ending
America’s longest war by declaring success on the 20th anniversary of 9/11 and
military and intelligence careerists who oppose a premature declaration of
victory.
Some
experts are comparing the proposed peace plan with the 2001 Bonn Agreement,
which took place in Germany and put in place the current political order in
Afghanistan. The apparent difference is that the Bonn Agreement 2001 excluded
the Taliban from talks, while the current plan is inviting them to the
negotiation table in Turkey.
From the
two documents, three things become unequivocally clear.
First, by
choosing Turkey as the venue for Afghan peace talks, the Biden Administration
has pulled the plug on the Doha process. Turkey is part of Nato’s mission in
Afghanistan and, unlike Qatar, it can observe ceasefire compliance on the
ground. Furthermore, Turkey can work closely with the US, which is trying to
mend ties with Ankara – which were destroyed by the Trump administration – and
Pakistan. Ankara is planning to host the first meeting of the Afghan peace
talks in April.
Second, the
peace plan exposes the Biden Administration’s policy paralysis and limited
policy options in a highly complex conflict situation. For instance, an
extended stay is a recipe for more conflict. At the same time, an exit without
a political compromise between Kabul and the Taliban will hasten the collapse
of the current political order in Afghanistan.
Third,
Biden is desperately looking for an exit strategy by installing an interim
political setup, no matter how untenable, to provide a semblance of stability
and give the US some face-saving in Afghanistan. Arguably, if the Geneva
(1988), Peshawar (1992) and Mecca (1993) accords are anything to go by, it is
quite evident that it is not difficult to get a deal in Afghanistan. However,
what happened after these deals is more critical – Afghanistan descended into
never-ending chaos.
The tone
and tenor of Blinken’s letter marks a sharp shift in the Biden Administration’s
initial accommodative messaging to Kabul. The language of the letter is
significant as it asks Ghani to “join other Afghan stakeholders” in the efforts
to create an interim government in Turkey. Alongside the Taliban’s rising
violence, the Biden Administration views Ghani’s inflexibility towards forming
an interim government as a major hurdle to peace efforts. In other words, the
US is asking Ghani to show flexibility or step aside. This letter will further
weaken the embattled Ghani and his team.
Notably,
the Biden Administration has not tied the status of the US military presence in
Afghanistan with the peace plan and its outcomes. By not committing its troops
to the peace process, the US is keeping its options open for three potential outcomes.
First, if Kabul and the Taliban reach a peace agreement in the next few weeks,
it will allow the Biden Administration to withdraw the remaining 2,500 forced
by May.
Alternatively,
if there is promising progress in peace talks with chances of a genuine
breakthrough, the US could stay beyond May 1, signalling to the Taliban that
the troops would leave as soon as the agreement is reached. On the other hand,
if the peace process flounders and talks breakdown, the US has the room to
retains its troops' presence in Afghanistan indefinitely. Also, by keeping its
withdrawal plan ambiguous, the US hopes to build some leverage with the
Taliban.
The Taliban
have not given an official reaction to the peace plan; they are still reviewing
it. However, the Taliban are unlikely to agree to a ceasefire before the
agreement is finalized. The Taliban are a violent entrepreneur and violence is
their only leverage to stay relevant to the Afghan endgame. So, they will not
give up on violence until they secure a favourable settlement suiting their
interests. Furthermore, before resuming talks, they will exploit Biden’s
desperation to extract more concessions, such as the release of more Taliban
detainees.
Historically,
Afghanistan has been the agent of change in South Asia. So, what happens in
Afghanistan has far-reaching implications on the region, particularly Pakistan.
Given the divergent strategic outlooks, competing interests, and diametrically
opposed positions of India and Pakistan on the Afghan conflict's potential solution,
it is anybody’s guess that Biden’s plan to forge regional consensus in a few
weeks is a non-starter.
Even the
best laid out plans can fail, and the worst ones can succeed. So, the hope for
peace should never be abandoned. However, given the complexity of the ground
situation and fragility of the US’ proposed peace plan, violence is likely to
rise in Afghanistan. The peace proposal is comprehensive, and it has the
potential to deliver peace dividends only if it is not rushed. By focusing on
deadlines instead of ground realities, the US runs the risks of compromising
twenty years of democratic gains in Afghanistan.
https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/805381-will-biden-s-plan-succeed
-----
Palestinian Rights
By James Zogby
March 17,
2021
Over the
years, the approach of most American policymakers toward the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been Israel-centric with near total disregard
for the suffering endured by the Palestinian people. The architects of policy
in successive US administrations have discussed the conflict as if the fate of
only one party (Israel) really mattered. Israelis were treated as full human
beings with hopes and fears, while Palestinians were reduced to a problem that
needed to be solved so that Israelis could live in peace and security.
It is not
just that Israelis and Palestinians haven't been viewed with an equal measure
of concern. It's worse than that. It appears that Palestinians were judged as
less human than Israelis, and were, therefore, not entitled to make demands to
have their rights recognized and protected.
Operating
from this mindset, the US has given Israel carte blanche, while pressure and
punishments have been reserved for the Palestinians. On occasion, policymakers
have timidly raised issue with some Israeli practices, but because they’ve
taken no effective measures to change these behaviors, Israel has seen no
reason to alter its course. As a result, Israel operates with impunity, while
Palestinian actions have been scrutinized and condemned and their protests have
either been ignored or silenced as disruptive or counterproductive.
Recent
actions by the Biden Administration sadly fit this pattern. In just the past
few weeks, they have: condemned the decision of the International Criminal
Court to begin prosecution of Israel for its war crimes in Gaza since 2014 and
its illegal settlement expansion in the West Bank; criticized the UN Human
Rights Council for its condemnation of Israeli abuses of Palestinian human
rights; rejected tying US aid to Israel's human rights behaviors; declared
opposition to Palestinian calls to boycott, divest, and sanction Israel for its
violations of Palestinian rights; and ‘embraced’ the expanded definition of
anti-Semitism that includes some legitimate criticisms of Israel.
Especially
revealing was one of the reasons given for US opposition to Palestinians taking
their complaints to international fora. The US charged that, “Such actions
against Israel...increase tensions and undercut efforts to advance a negotiated
two-state solution.” This appears to suggest that Israel’s aggressive land
confiscation, settlement construction, demolition of Palestinian homes,
detention without charges or trial of hundreds of Palestinians, collective
punishment of the entire population of Gaza, and Israel's mass killing sprees
of Palestinians in 2014 and 2018, did not “increase tensions or undercut
efforts” at peace making. But Palestinians seeking legal remedies against these
Israeli actions is disruptive. In short, Israel can do whatever it wants, with
US backing. But when Palestinians protest – precisely because the US will do
nothing to defend them – then they are at fault.
Excerpted: ‘US Policy Ignores Palestinian Human
Rights’
https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/805378-palestinian-rights
----
URL: https://newageislam.com/pakistan-press/pakistan-press-far-right-movements,/d/124561
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