Kabul investigates deaths of three Afghans in Iran attack

The incident could add to rising tensions between the two countries. (Twitter)
Short Url
Updated 07 June 2020
Follow

Kabul investigates deaths of three Afghans in Iran attack

  • Wednesday’s incident could add to rising tensions between the two countries following Kabul’s recent allegation that 13 Afghan migrants had drowned on May 1

KABUL: Kabul sent its envoy to Tehran, Ghafoor Liwal, to Iran’s Yazd province on Saturday after reports that at least three Afghan refugees died in a car which was allegedly fired at by Iranian police in the area, officials told Arab News.
“Our ambassador has traveled to Yazd province to probe this incident in the face of reports that Iranian police fired at a car carrying these Afghans,” said Gran Hewad, chief spokesman for the Afghan Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Wednesday’s incident could add to rising tensions between the two countries following Kabul’s recent allegation that 13 Afghan migrants had drowned on May 1 when Iranian border guards forced the group into a river at gunpoint.
In a video message posted on the ministry’s website on Friday evening, Liwal said that at least 13 people were in the car when the latest incident took place.
The envoy said he was “seriously working” to determine the circumstances of the incident and also would investigate the drowning claim.
Liwal said Ahmad Tarahumi Bahabadi, deputy governor of Yazd, had confirmed that Iranian police had opened fire on the vehicle after it failed to stop when asked.
“Apparently, this car was used by a human trafficker and was carrying a number of our countrymen. They were confronted by the police, who instructed them to stop, but they did not stop. Police fired on the car and as a result of the shooting a tire was hit,” Liwal said, adding that the vehicle continued to be driven at full speed until the “tire burst and the car caught fire.”
A statement said that the Afghan delegation, led by Liwal, would identify the victims and the wounded. “Survivors in the hospital told us that they had informed the driver about the fire, but unfortunately he did not stop and continued to drive until the car crashed, killing three and severely wounding others,” Liwal said.
The Iranian Embassy in Kabul could not be reached for comment when contacted by Arab News.
Meanwhile, a spokesman for Afghanistan’s Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC), Zabihullah Farhang, told Arab News that the agency had heard about the incident but could not investigate because it had taken place in Iran.

AIHRC chief Sharzad Akbar called for the public release of Iran’s investigation into the drowning of the Afghan migrants and demanded a probe of the latest case.
“The incident in Yazd that led to the burning of passengers in a car needs to be investigated and perpetrators need to be held accountable,” she said in a tweet on Saturday. “Human lives matter. Refugees rights are human rights,” she added. Iran is home to nearly 3 million Afghans, both legal refugees and illegal immigrants. Afghans often use illegal smuggling routes along the 900 km border to travel to Iran in search of work.
However, since the coronavirus outbreak in Iran, where more than 8,000 people have died from the disease, tens of thousands of Afghans have returned home.
Several videos of Wednesday’s incident – shared on social media platforms and viewed by hundreds – show a car ablaze, with a burning body in its boot.
The video received widespread condemnation in Afghanistan, with the hashtag “bring me water I am burning” trending on Saturday.
It follows a video showing a young boy near the vehicle begging for water.
“This is becoming more ugly... complete violation of too many laws & rules... shameful,” Orzala Nimat, a researcher, tweeted on Friday night.
Jalal Barakzay, a 21-year-old university student, wrote on Facebook that Kabul “should hold Iran accountable” for the incident and “other abuses committed by Iran against Afghan refugees.”
In recent years, Iran and Afghanistan have had an uneasy relationship, with Kabul accusing Tehran of using Afghan Shiite migrants to fight proxy wars in the Middle East, as well as providing cash and arms to Taliban insurgents fighting the Afghan government and US-led troops in Afghanistan.
“I do not know what sort of steps Kabul will take if it is proven that Iranian police had deliberately carried this out, but relations will become more abnormal than in the past,” said Taj Mohammad, an analyst, adding that public anger was growing over the number of incidents.
“People are angry, the government in Kabul is under pressure from the public because this is the second reported incident against Afghans in Iran in just over a month,” he added.


US House of Representatives passes war powers resolution backing Trump’s attacks on Iran

Updated 2 min 30 sec ago
Follow

US House of Representatives passes war powers resolution backing Trump’s attacks on Iran

  • It’s the second vote in as many days, after the Senate defeated a similar measure
  • Republicans largely back Trump, and most Democrats oppose the war
WASHINGTON: The House narrowly rejected a war powers resolution Thursday to halt President Donald Trump’s attacks on Iran, an early sign of unease in Congress over the rapidly widening conflict that is reordering US priorities at home and abroad.
It’s the second vote in as many days, after the Senate defeated a similar measure. Lawmakers are confronting the sudden reality of representing wary Americans in wartime and all that entails — with lives lost, dollars spent and alliances tested by a president’s unilateral decision to go to war with Iran.
While the tally in the House, 212-219, was expected to be tight, the outcome provided a clarifying snapshot of political support for, and opposition to, the US-Israel military operation and Trump’s rationale for bypassing Congress, which alone has the power to declare war. At the Capitol, the conflict has quickly carried echoes of the long wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and many Sept. 11-era veterans now serve in Congress.
“Donald Trump is not a king, and if he believes the war with Iran is in our national interest, then he must come to Congress and make the case,” said Rep. Gregory Meeks, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
House Speaker Mike Johnson warned that it would be “dangerous” to limit the president’s authority while the US military is already in conflict.
“We are not at war,” said Johnson, R-Louisiana, a close ally of Trump, contradicting others. He said the operation is limited in scope and duration, and the “mission is nearly accomplished.”
Republicans largely back Trump, and most Democrats oppose the war
Trump’s Republican Party, which narrowly controls the House and Senate, largely sees the conflict with Iran not as the start of a new war, but the end of a government that has long menaced the West. The operation has killed Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, which some view as an opportunity for regime change, though others warn of a chaotic power vacuum.
Republican Rep. Brian Mast of Florida, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, publicly thanked Trump for taking action against Iran, saying the president is using his own constitutional authority to defend the US against the “imminent threat” the country posed.
Mast, an Army veteran who worked as a bomb disposal expert in Afghanistan, said the war powers resolution was effectively asking “that the president do nothing.”
For Democrats, Trump’s attack on Iran, influenced by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is a war of choice that is testing the balance of powers in the Constitution.
“The framers weren’t fooling around,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., arguing that the Constitution is clear that only Congress can decide matters of war. “It’s up to us.”
Crossover coalitions emerged among those in Congress. Two Republicans joined most Democrats in voting for the war powers resolution, while four Democrats joined Republicans to reject it.
The war powers resolution, if signed into law, would have immediately halted Trump’s ability to conduct the war unless Congress approved the military action. The president would likely veto it.
Trump officials provide shifting rationale for war
Trump has scrambled to win support for the nearly week-old conflict as Americans of all political persuasions take stock. Administration officials spent hours behind closed doors on Capitol Hill this week trying to reassure lawmakers that they have the situation under control.
Six US military members were killed over the weekend in a drone strike in Kuwait, and Trump has said more Americans could die. Thousands of Americans abroad have scrambled for flights, many lighting up phone lines at congressional offices as they sought help trying to flee the Middle East.
Trump said Thursday he must be involved in choosing Iran’s new leader. Yet Johnson, R-Louisiana, said this week that America has enough problems at home and is not about to be in the “nation-building business.”
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said that the war could extend eight weeks, twice as long as the president first estimated. Trump has left open the possibility of sending US troops into what has largely been a bombing campaign. More than 1,230 people in Iran have died.
The administration said the goal is to destroy Iran’s ballistic missiles that it believes are shielding its nuclear program. It has also said Israel was ready to act, and American bases would face retaliation if the US did not strike Iran first. The US said Wednesday it torpedoed an Iranian warship near Sri Lanka.
“This administration can’t even give us a straight answer of as to why we launched this preemptive war,” said Rep. Thomas Massie, the Republican from Kentucky, an outlier in his party.
Massie and Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., who had teamed up to force the release the Jeffrey Epstein files, also pushed the war powers resolution to the floor, past objections from Johnson’s GOP leadership. Republican Rep. Warren Davidson of Ohio, a former Army Ranger, also voted for it. Democratic Reps. Henry Cuellar of Texas, Jared Golden of Maine, Greg Landsman of Ohio and Juan Vargas of California voted against.
“Congress must stand with the president to finally close, once and for all, this dark chapter of history,” said Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas.
Rep. Yassamin Ansari, D-Arizona, said that as the daughter of Iranian immigrants who fled their homeland, she opposes the regime but is concerned that a democratic transition for the people of Iran never seems to a priority for Trump or the officials who briefed Congress.
“War carries profound and deadly consequences for our troops, for the American people and for the entire world,” she said. “It’s the most serious decision that a nation can make.”
Other Democrats have proposed an alternative resolution that would allow the president to continue the war for 30 days before he must seek congressional approval. The House also approved a separate measure affirming that Iran is the largest state sponsor of terrorism.
Senators sit in their desks for solemn vote
In the Senate, Republican leaders have successfully, though narrowly, defeated a series of war powers resolutions pertaining to several other conflicts during Trump’s second term. This one, however, was different.
Underscoring the gravity Wednesday, Democratic senators sat at their desks as the voting got underway.
Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said that every senator will pick a side. “Do you stand with the American people who are exhausted with forever wars in the Middle East?” he asked. Or with Trump and Hegseth “as they bumble us headfirst into another war?”
Sen. John Barrasso, second in Senate Republican leadership, said, “Democrats would rather obstruct Donald Trump than obliterate Iran’s national nuclear program.”
The legislation failed on a 47-53 tally mostly along party lines, with Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, in favor and Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pennsylvania, against.