Frankly Speaking: Afghan scenes of defiance similar to Iran imminent, says former Security Adviser Hamdullah Mohib

Short Url
Updated 10 October 2022
Follow

Frankly Speaking: Afghan scenes of defiance similar to Iran imminent, says former Security Adviser Hamdullah Mohib

  • As public anger grows in Afghanistan, similar protests could spill over from Iran, former Afghanistan National Security Adviser
  • Taliban conned the world and never really intended to change their extremist ways, former National Security Adviser 

RIYADH: More than a year after the Taliban returned to power in Afghanistan following an abrupt US military withdrawal, public frustration with the regime and its oppressive policies is growing, according to the deposed government’s former national security adviser.

“I think with every passing day, the Afghan people’s frustration is growing with the Taliban’s oppression,” said Dr. Hamdullah Mohib, national security adviser of Afghanistan from 2018 to 2021, during an interview with Katie Jensen, host of “Frankly Speaking,” the Arab News talk show on which leading policymakers and business leaders appear.




Dr. Hamdullah Mohib served as national security adviser of Afghanistan from 2018 to 2021. (AN photo)

Mohib’s comments come against the backdrop of mass protests in neighboring Iran, where the killing of a 22-year-old Kurdish woman, Mahsa Amini, by the Islamic Republic’s morality police became a lightning rod for public anger against the oppression of women and ethnic minorities.

“The danger here is even more than I think in Iran, because the Afghan people have changed, have seen many changes in regimes, and know it can happen,” said Mohib, who previously served as deputy chief-of-staff to Afghan President Ashraf Ghani, and ambassador of Afghanistan to the US from 2014 to 2018.

Although Mohib does not expect the protests in Iran to have a direct impact on events in Afghanistan, he believes it is only a matter of time before similar scenes of defiance emerge on the streets of Kabul and other cities.

“There will definitely be some influence, but I don’t know if it will be right now that time where the frustration boils over for mass mobilization in Afghanistan. But if this situation continues, this oppression of the Afghan people continues, I’m certain that there will be mass mobilization in the country. It’s just a matter of when it will be.”

 

 

The US beat a rushed retreat from Afghanistan in August 2021 after reaching a shaky peace deal with the Taliban. Since then, the country has been plunged into economic crisis, poverty and international isolation.

During negotiations in Doha, the Taliban sought to convince the world they had changed since their previous stint in power from 1996 to 2001, when an extreme interpretation of Islam saw women and girls barred from education and public life, and widespread suppression of free expression.

However, on returning to power, the regime reimposed many such restrictions, rolling back two decades of progress on women’s rights and the nation’s institutional development.

“I think the Taliban played the negotiations well,” said Mohib. “They played all parties, including the Qataris, the Pakistanis. I think they used the Americans, they used all parties well in the negotiations part. And then there was this global effort to try to create this space for the Taliban who had been the pariah for so long. So, they used that space and I think many countries were fooled by it.

 

 

“And, then, once the Taliban were in power, they never intended to keep the promises. And we see that they haven’t been able to deliver, or whether willingly not able to deliver or not deliver. We believe that they never had the intention to deliver on any of the promises that they had to the international community and Afghans.”

For Mohib, the US, Qatar and Pakistan all share a portion of blame for the republic’s collapse and the Taliban’s restoration.

“I think there is a lot of blame to be shared,” he said. “Those of us with bigger responsibilities obviously have a bigger share of the blame. And the US negotiating directly with the Taliban and excluding the Afghan government meant the Taliban were not in the mood to make any kind of reconciliation at that point. So I think that’s where a big share of the blame goes.”

Concerning Pakistan, in particular, Mohib said Islamabad badly miscalculated in its support for the Taliban, failing to recognize the threat posed by the group’s Pakistani offshoots.

 

 

“The Pakistani government always denied that there was any presence of the Taliban in their country,” he said. “We knew there was a huge amount of support for the Taliban. They had their families, they were hosted in Pakistan, they mobilized from Pakistan. So there is a big part of blame that goes to Pakistan, and I think they’re suffering as a result of their support to the Taliban.

“Now everything we had warned them against is happening. The Taliban support to the Pakistani Taliban and other groups is now materializing as we had anticipated.”

Mohib also believes Qatar miscalculated when it allowed the militants to open an office in Doha in 2013 and agreed to mediate in peace negotiations. In Mohib’s view, Qatar was exploiting the role of mediator to further its own diplomatic ends.

“Countries like Qatar which hosted the negotiations used the Afghan peace process as a leverage in its own conflict with the GCC countries,” he said.

“Countries across the world wanted to play the mediator role. This is something that has been an aspiration for many. Even European nations wanted to do that. And Qatar playing that role meant it had an oversized role for itself in international diplomacy.

 

 

“Negotiation with the Taliban and the US presence in Afghanistan was the key topic during that period when it (Qatar) had its own tensions with the other GCC countries — the UAE, Saudi Arabia. And so for Qatar to be able to play host to these negotiations meant they had some leverage with the Americans to use for their own sake in this tension that they had in this region.”

As national security adviser at the time of the republic’s collapse, surely Mohib and the deposed government itself must also share in the blame?

“It’s all of us,” Mohib said. “I started off by saying that we are all to blame. Myself included. I obviously spent a lot of time, and have this past year, reflecting on what could have been done that would’ve been different.

“I think the problem is that most leaders in Afghanistan, whether in government or outside of government, did not anticipate what would happen. I think everybody tried to do their best, but the directions were so different. There was never cohesion.

“We were all to blame. I take my share of that, and I feel we could have done a better job. Could we have prevented the Taliban takeover? I still believe we couldn’t have once the negotiations began, and the decision by the chief negotiator was to engage the Taliban directly behind the government’s back and have secret annexes in the negotiations that the government and the Afghan people are still not aware of. And once that was, the Taliban had more leverage than the Afghan government did.”

 


When the republic collapsed in August 2021, President Ashraf Ghani was widely reproached for fleeing to the UAE rather than remaining in Kabul to fight, leaving 40 million of his countrymen at the mercy of the Taliban.

 

More recently, unflattering parallels have been drawn between Ghani and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, whose decision to remain in Kyiv in the face of Russia’s invasion made him a popular icon of resistance — a move that likely changed the course of the war.

Could things have played out differently for Afghanistan had Ghani and other top officials chosen to stay?

“I commend what Zelensky is doing,” said Mohib. “Afghanistan had that kind of a moment where we needed to stand. When the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979, my family included, we fought the Soviet Union for 10 years and lost a million Afghans as a result. And then, as a leader, you make decisions based on what happens and what is best for your people.

“There is a moment to stay, and then there is a moment to leave. And, yes, it’s not a popular decision among some of our allies who would’ve expected a different outcome right now. But once the emotions are cleared, 10 years down the line, or 20, when people can reflect back without emotions included, I think people will start to see why a decision like that was made.”

 

 

Many critics of the US withdrawal bemoaned what they saw as the squandering of lives and wealth on trying to transform Afghanistan, only for the Taliban to undo 20 years of sacrifice overnight.

Does Mohib think the US investment in Afghanistan was worth it?

“The US had a huge investment in Afghanistan. Not just military presence. There was a lot of civilian presence in Afghanistan. The Afghans looked up to American democracy as an example that could be replicated in Afghanistan,” he said.

“I think there are two discussions here. One is, was the investment in Afghanistan a total waste? And, it’s a different discussion to what is happening right now. I agree the situation in Afghanistan is dire right now. And we all owe our responsibility to that situation, and we must do everything we can to change that. That’s an undeniable fact.

“When it comes to the investment in education, the investment in Afghan society, the reason you see so many voices outside that are able to articulate what they want, is an achievement of that investment. People are more worldly. They have seen what is possible, and they know they have rights.

“Even if there is an oppressive regime trying to silence their voices, they know they have a voice. We see brave women still protesting. We see Afghans, even if they’re in the diaspora, voicing their concerns about what is happening in Afghanistan.”

 


India grants citizenship to first batch of immigrants from Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh

Updated 15 May 2024
Follow

India grants citizenship to first batch of immigrants from Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh

  • Citizenship Amendment Act grants citizenship to Hindus, Parsis, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains and Christians who fled to India 
  • Controversial citizenship law has been criticized by rights activists as being discriminatory toward country’s Muslims 

NEW DELHI: India granted citizenship on Wednesday to a first batch of 14 people under a controversial law that has been criticized for discriminating against Muslims, midway through general elections in which religious divisions have taken center stage.
The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) grants citizenship to Hindus, Parsis, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, and Christians who fled to India from Muslim-majority Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan before Dec. 31, 2014 because of religious persecution.
Enacted in 2019, the law was not immediately implemented due to strong protests and sectarian violence in New Delhi and other places that resulted in the death of scores of people.
India implemented the act in March, weeks before the ongoing elections in which Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) are seeking a rare third consecutive term. Both deny CAA is anti-Muslim.
Four phases of the seven-phase election have concluded and votes will be counted on June 4.
On Wednesday, the recipients were administered the oath of allegiance and granted citizenship after their documents were verified, the home ministry said in a statement, without elaborating on their identities.
Hindu majority India has the world’s third-largest Muslim population with 200 million people. Rights and opposition groups have criticized Modi’s government and BJP saying they target the minority community and systematically discriminate against them to further the party’s core, Hindu revivalist ideology.
Modi and BJP deny the accusation and say they work for the welfare of all communities.
They have also said that the citizenship law only makes it easy for non-Muslim refugees to get a dignified life and is meant to grant citizenship, not take it away from anyone. Muslim refugees, they said, can apply under regular rules governing citizenship.
“This is like being reborn,” Harish Kumar, a Hindu refugee from Pakistan living in Delhi for over a decade, told news agency ANI after getting his citizenship on Wednesday. “If a person doesn’t have rights then what is the point, (now) we can go forward in education, jobs.”
India began voting on April 19 in the seven-phase election for which Modi launched his campaign by showcasing his economic record, governance and popularity. But he changed tack after the first phase to accuse the main opposition Congress party of being pro-Muslim and the issue has gained prominence since.
Analysts say this is likely aimed at firing up BJP’s Hindu nationalist base after a low turnout in the first phase sparked doubts that BJP and its allies could win the landslide that the party sought.


Slovakia PM Robert Fico wounded in shooting

Updated 15 May 2024
Follow

Slovakia PM Robert Fico wounded in shooting

  • Robert Fico, 59, was hit in the stomach after four shots were fired outside the House of Culture in the town of Handlova
  • European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen condemned what she described as a ‘vile attack’

BRATISLAVA, Slovakia: Slovakia’s populist Prime Minister Robert Fico was wounded in a shooting Wednesday afternoon and taken to hospital.
Reports on TA3, a Slovakian TV station, said that Fico, 59, was hit in the stomach after four shots were fired outside the House of Culture in the town of Handlova, some 150 kilometers northeast of the capital, where the leader was meeting with supporters. A suspect has been detained, it said.
Police sealed off the scene, and Fico was taken to a hospital in Banska Bystrica.
The shooting in Slovakia comes three weeks ahead of crucial European Union Parliament elections, in which populist and hard-right parties in the 27-nation bloc appear poised to make gains.
Deputy speaker of parliament Lubos Blaha confirmed the incident during a session of Parliament and adjourned it until further notice, the Slovak TASR news agency said.
Slovakia’s major opposition parties, Progressive Slovakia and Freedom and Solidarity, canceled a planned protest against a controversial government plan to overhaul public broadcasting that they say would give the government full control of public radio and television.
“We absolutely and strongly condemn violence and today’s shooting of Premier Robert Fico” said Progressive Slovakia leader Michal Simecka. “At the same time we call on all politicians to refrain from any expressions and steps which could contribute to further increasing the tension.”
President Zuzana Caputova condemned “a brutal and ruthless” attack on the premier.
“I’m shocked,” Caputova said. “I wish Robert Fico a lot of strength in this critical moment and a quick recovery from this attack.”
Fico, a third-time premier, and his leftist Smer, or Direction, party, won Slovakia’s Sept. 30 parliamentary elections, staging a political comeback after campaigning on a pro-Russian and anti-American message.
Critics worried Slovakia under Fico would abandon the country’s pro-Western course and follow the direction of Hungary under populist Prime Minister Viktor Orbán.
Thousands have repeatedly rallied in the capital and across Slovakia to protest Fico’s policies.
Condemnations of political violence came from leaders across Europe.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen condemned what she described as a “vile attack.”
“Such acts of violence have no place in our society and undermine democracy, our most precious common good,” von der Leyen said in a post on X.
Leaders in Latvia and Estonia also quickly condemned political violence.
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk wrote on the social media network X: “Shocking news from Slovakia. Robert, my thoughts are with you in this very difficult moment.”


EU agrees on a new migration pact, as mainstream parties hope it will deprive the far right of votes

Updated 15 May 2024
Follow

EU agrees on a new migration pact, as mainstream parties hope it will deprive the far right of votes

  • EU government ministers approved 10 legislative parts of The New Pact on Migration and Asylum
  • Mainstream political parties believe the pact resolves the issues that have divided member nations since migrants swept into Europe in 2015, most fleeing war in Syria and Iraq

BRUSSELS: European Union nations endorsed sweeping reforms to the bloc’s failed asylum system on Tuesday as campaigning for Europe-wide elections next month gathers pace, with migration expected to be an important issue.
EU government ministers approved 10 legislative parts of The New Pact on Migration and Asylum. It lays out rules for the 27 member countries to handle people trying to enter without authorization, from how to screen them to establish whether they qualify for protection to deporting them if they’re not allowed to stay.
Hungary and Poland, which have long opposed any obligation for countries to host migrants or pay for their upkeep, voted against the package but were unable to block it.
Mainstream political parties believe the pact resolves the issues that have divided member nations since well over 1 million migrants swept into Europe in 2015, most fleeing war in Syria and Iraq. They hope the system will starve the far right of vote-winning oxygen in the June 6-9 elections.
However, the vast reform package will only enter force in 2026, bringing no immediate fix to an issue that has fueled one of the EU’s biggest political crises, dividing nations over who should take responsibility for migrants when they arrive and whether other countries should be obligated to help.
Critics say the pact will let nations detain migrants at borders and fingerprint children. They say it’s aimed at keeping people out and infringes on their right to claim asylum. Many fear it will result in more unscrupulous deals with poorer countries that people leave or cross to get to Europe.
WHY ARE THE NEW RULES NEEDED?
Europe’s asylum laws have not been updated for about two decades. The system frayed and then fell apart in 2015. It was based on the premise that migrants should be processed, given asylum or deported in the country they first enter. Greece, Italy and Malta were left to shoulder most of the financial burden and deal with public discontent. Since then, the ID-check-free zone known as the Schengen Area has expanded to 27 countries, 23 of them EU members. It means that more than 400 million Europeans and visitors, including refugees, are able to move without showing travel documents.
WHO DO THE RULES APPLY TO?
Some 3.5 million migrants arrived legally in Europe in 2023. Around 1 million others were on EU territory without permission. Of the latter, most were people who entered normally via airports and ports with visas but didn’t go home when they expired. The pact applies to the remaining minority, estimated at around 300,000 migrants last year. They are people caught crossing an external EU border without permission, such as those reaching the shores of Greece, Italy or Spain via the Mediterranean Sea or Atlantic Ocean on boats provided by smugglers.
HOW DOES THE SYSTEM WORK?
The country on whose territory people land will screen them at or near the border. This involves identity and other checks -– including on children as young as 6. The information will be stored on a massive new database, Eurodac. This screening should determine whether a person might pose a health or security risk and their chances of being permitted to stay. Generally, people fleeing conflict, persecution or violence qualify for asylum. Those looking for jobs are likely to be refused entry. Screening is mandatory and should take no longer than seven days. It should lead to one of two things: an application for international protection, like asylum, or deportation to their home country.
WHAT DOES THE ASYLUM PROCEDURE INVOLVE?
People seeking asylum must apply in the EU nation they first enter and stay until the authorities there work out what country should handle their application. It could be that they have family, cultural or other links somewhere else, making it more logical for them to be moved. The border procedure should be done in 12 weeks, including time for one legal appeal if their application is rejected. It could be extended by eight weeks in times of mass movements of people. Procedures could be faster for applicants from countries whose citizens are not often granted asylum. Critics say this undermines asylum law because applicants should be assessed individually, not based on nationality. People would stay in “reception centers” while it happens, with access to health care and education. Those rejected would receive a deportation order.
WHAT DOES DEPORTATION INVOLVE?
To speed things up, a deportation order is supposed to be issued automatically when an asylum request is refused. A new 12-week period is foreseen to complete this process. The authorities may detain people throughout. The EU’s border and coast guard agency would help organize joint deportation flights. Currently, less than one in three people issued with an order to leave are deported. This is often due to a lack of cooperation from the countries these people come from.
HOW HAS THE ISSUE OF RESPONSIBILITIES VS OBLIGATIONS BEEN RESOLVED?
The new rules oblige countries to help an EU partner under migratory pressure. Support is mandatory, but flexible. Nations can relocate asylum applicants to their territory or choose some other form of assistance. This could be financial -– a relocation is evaluated at 20,000 euros ($21,462) per person -– technical or logistical. Members can also assume responsibility for deporting people from the partner country in trouble.
WHAT CHALLENGES LIE AHEAD?
Two issues stand out: Will member countries ever fully enact the plan, and will the EU’s executive branch, the European Commission, enforce the new rules when it has chosen not to apply the ones already in place? The commission is due to present a Common Implementation Plan by June. It charts a path and timeline to get the pact working over the next two years, with targets that the EU and member countries should reach. Things could get off to a rocky start. Hungary, which has vehemently opposed the reforms, takes over the EU’s agenda-setting presidency for six months on July 1.


Calls mount on Polish government to expel Israeli envoy

Updated 34 min 56 sec ago
Follow

Calls mount on Polish government to expel Israeli envoy

  • Israel dismissed calls for accountability after killing Polish aid worker in Gaza
  • Ambassador compares peaceful protests in Poland to Nazi rallies

WARSAW: Polish activists on Wednesday submitted a nationwide petition for the government to immediately expel the Israeli ambassador over war crimes in Gaza.

Protests against Israel’s bombardment of the Palestinian enclave have been a regular occurrence in Poland since the beginning of the onslaught in October.

One of the main groups organizing the rallies and meetings to extend political pressure, and bring Poles closer to Palestinian history and culture, is the initiative Wschod — a movement of young activists dedicated to social justice.

Wschod’s petition to expel the Israeli envoy, Yacov Livne, from Poland, was signed by 7,931 people as of Wednesday.

“I believe that the petition is an important signal to the Polish government from the Polish people,” Zofia Hecht, a member of Wschod, told Arab News as the activists submitted the petition to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Warsaw.

“There is a large group of people who really do not agree with what Israel is doing to Palestinians, and that we do not agree to normalize relations with such a terrorist entity that is Israel.”

Poland recognizes Palestinian statehood and has voted in favor of the UN’s recent resolutions to demand an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, and to recognize backing Palestine’s bid for permanent membership status.

A close ally of the US, the Polish government has avoided vocal criticism of Tel Aviv and its war on Gaza, where Israeli forces have over the past seven months killed at least 35,000 people — a large majority women and children — and injured 80,000 more.

UN agencies and experts have repeatedly accused Israel of committing war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza. The International Court of Justice in January also found it plausible that Tel Aviv’s actions in the enclave could amount to genocide.

“We think that the previous actions taken by the Polish government to prevent the Israeli genocide in Gaza were not sufficient,” said Emil Al-Khawaldeh, Wschod’s Palestine campaign coordinator.

“We expect the Polish government to at least respond to our petition signed by almost 8,000 people, and to meet our demands to expel the Israeli ambassador.”

The petition was created when Poles began to pay more attention to Gaza after the killing of a Polish national, Damian Sobol, who was one of the seven World Central Kitchen aid workers targeted and killed by Israeli troops in early April.

“In April, when Israel killed a Polish citizen, the Israeli ambassador took to Twitter to publish accusations of antisemitism,” Al-Khawaldeh said, citing Livne’s posts, which included labeling a Polish parliament deputy speaker as an “antisemite” for publicly charging Israel with war crimes.

“Until now, the Israeli ambassador has neither apologized for his own words nor, on behalf of the state of Israel, for murdering a Polish citizen,” he added.

Wschod’s petition to the government says that “there is no place” in Poland for an ambassador of a “state committing genocide” and demands that he be “immediately” expelled.

“It is absurd that in a country historically affected by genocide, hatred and hostility, we allow the holding of office by a person who represents the government of a country committing war crimes against innocent Palestinian civilians,” it reads.

About 6 million Polish citizens, including 3 million Polish Jews, were killed by German forces during the invasion and occupation of Poland in the Second World War. The occupation policies have been recognized in Europe as a genocide.

Eight decades later, as Poles unite and take to the streets to prevent a genocide of another people, Al-Khawaldeh, who is Polish Palestinian, and Hecht, who is Jewish, said that they have faced accusations of antisemitism.

The accusations regularly come from the Israeli ambassador, who, in a radio interview in November, went as far as to compare the Polish peace activists to Nazis.

“We’ve been holding peaceful marches in Warsaw and there’s been no single security incident. But in November, the Israeli ambassador compared the marches to Nazi rallies ... he compared us with the Nazi Germany of the 1930s,” Al-Khawaldeh said.

“Polish Jews are also protesting with us. They are organizing protests in Poland, peaceful protests, they are also having wonderful speeches against Israeli war crimes, against Israeli genocide in Gaza. This accusation is absurd.”


UK announces $175 million humanitarian aid boost for Yemen

Updated 15 May 2024
Follow

UK announces $175 million humanitarian aid boost for Yemen

  • Nearly 200 aid groups called for more humanitarian aid this month to bridge a $2.3-billion shortfall in funds for Yemen

LONDON: The UK will significantly increase aid funding to Yemen aiming to feed more than 850,000 people in the war-torn country, Foreign Secretary David Cameron said on Wednesday.
New aid worth £139 million (around $175 million) to help alleviate the humanitarian crisis in Yemen was announced in a meeting between Cameron and Yemeni Prime Minister Ahmed Awad bin Mubarak in London.
The aid will be delivered through partners such as the World Food Programme and Unicef, a statement read, and hopes to treat 700,000 severely malnourished children.
The move comes a week after the EU announced $125 million for NGOs and UN agencies working in Yemen, where more than half the 34 million population needs aid after nine years of war.
Nearly 200 aid groups called for more humanitarian aid this month to bridge a $2.3-billion shortfall in funds for Yemen.
Houthi rebel attacks on international shipping are also on the agenda in Cameron’s meeting with Bin Mubarak, who is Yemen’s former ambassador to the United States.
Cameron blamed the attacks on Red Sea shipping for aggravating the humanitarian crisis “through blocking aid from reaching those who need it in northern Yemen.”
British and US forces have been carrying out joint strikes since January aimed at curbing the raids.
The attacks, which began in November, were found to affect more than half of British exporters in a British Chambers of Commerce report from February.
Yemen has been gripped by conflict following a 2014 coup by the Iran-backed Houthi rebels, which triggered a Saudi-led military intervention in support of the government the following year.
Hundreds of thousands have died from fighting and other indirect causes such as the lack of food, according to the UN.
While hostilities have remained at a low level since a six-month UN-brokered ceasefire came into force in 2022, threats including food insecurity and cholera remain rampant.