Senior Taliban official urges leadership to lift education ban on Afghan girls

Afghan primary school girls make their way home, near Shuhada lake, Kabul, Mar. 24, 2024. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 21 January 2025
Follow

Senior Taliban official urges leadership to lift education ban on Afghan girls

  • More than 1.1 million girls have been denied access to formal education since 2021
  • Stanikzai headed the Taliban team in talks that led to complete withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan

KABUL: A senior Taliban official has called on his leadership to scrap education bans on Afghan women and girls, a move that experts said on Tuesday voiced the public’s concerns and marked a new phenomenon for Afghanistan’s current regime.

Sher Mohammad Abbas Stanikzai, Afghanistan’s acting deputy foreign minister, said in a speech over the weekend that the Taliban’s restrictions on girls’ and women’s education were not in line with Islamic Shariah law.

“Our expectation from the leaders of the Islamic Emirate is to open the doors of education. There is no excuse for this, and there never will be one,” Stanikzai said at an event in the Khost province.

Around 1.1 million girls have been denied access to formal education since September 2021, when the Taliban suspended secondary schools for girls.

It is part of a series of curbs that, in the three years since the Taliban took power, have increasingly restricted women’s access to education, the workplace and public spaces.

“In our population of 40 million, we are committing injustice against 20 million … The entire world is opposing us because of this problem. They criticize us for this same matter. The path we are currently following stems from personal attitudes, not Shariah.”

Stanikzai was the leader of a team of negotiators at the Taliban’s political office in Doha for talks that led to the complete withdrawal of US-led forces from Afghanistan in 2021.

His latest remarks were one of the strongest public rebukes of a government policy that has furthered the international isolation of the Taliban.

“In Afghanistan, women’s rights are being taken away in the name of Islam. As Stanikzai … said, the decision to stop girls’ education is a matter of the nature of the Taliban, not a matter of Shariah. This is only a rural and tribal view that they present,” Ziaulhaq Amarkhil, senior advisor to the former president of Afghanistan, told Arab News.

“The issue that Mr. Stanikzai discussed is the voice of every Afghan and every Muslim. Women should be granted their rights. They should be allowed to study and get higher education.”

Amarkhil said if the current education ban were to continue, there would be grave consequences in Afghanistan.

“After 12 years, we will not have a single female doctor in the country because those who are there will not be able to continue working due to their age and the new generation will not be educated, or they will leave the country,” he said.

Stanikzai’s criticism was “significant,” said Kabul-based political expert Tameem Bahiss, as it marked one of the first times that a senior member of the Taliban publicly criticized the supreme leader, Hibatullah Akhundzada.

Similar criticisms have also come from Taliban’s acting Interior Minister Sirajuddin Haqqani, who in 2023 made veiled remarks against Akhundzada on “monopolizing” power and “damaging the government” in Afghanistan.

“Publicly criticizing the leader’s decisions is a new phenomenon within the Taliban. Until now, we haven’t seen criticism of this magnitude,” Bahiss told Arab News.

“If criticism from a Taliban leader of such stature continues to grow, it will undoubtedly put significant pressure on Sheikh Hibatullah.”

Bahiss highlighted how Stanikzai had challenged Akhundzada’s decision by saying that the education policy reflected the leader’s personal sentiment, rather than being based on Islamic law.

“Such voices within the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan are crucial as it transitions from an insurgency to a governing entity. Important decisions regarding the people’s affairs should involve all leaders’ input,” Bahiss said.

“We are seeing that such voices garner significant support, not only from the people of Afghanistan but also from within the Taliban ranks.”

With this new development within the Taliban and given Stanikzai’s status in the group, Bahiss said Akhundzada may tolerate the criticism.

“If this happens, it could encourage other leaders to publicly challenge Hibatullah’s decision to ban schools, potentially putting significant pressure on him and leading to the removal of the ban,” he said.


UK veterans are ‘ticking time bomb’ after Iraq war chemical exposure

Updated 10 sec ago
Follow

UK veterans are ‘ticking time bomb’ after Iraq war chemical exposure

  • Fifteen former RAF personnel were deployed to the Qarmat Ali water plant in 2003, which was contaminated with sodium dichromate
  • Veterans say they were not screened or protected, and are now living with serious health conditions

LONDON: Fifteen British servicemen who worked on a carcinogen-contaminated water treatment site during the Iraq war say they were not offered biological screening despite official guidance saying they should have been.

The former Royal Air Force members, who have suffered from ailments including cancer, tumors and nosebleeds, told Sky News they were offered no medical assistance or subsequent treatment after having been exposed to toxic sodium dichromate at the Qarmat Ali water treatment plant in 2003.

The channel said it had seen a letter from the RAF’s medical authority stating that senior officers knew of the dangers posed by the substance.

Peter Lewis, 53, was one of 88 personnel deployed to guard the site, which was deemed vital for getting Iraq’s oil industry up and running. He told Sky: “I’ve had eight or nine operations to remove cancer.

“I’ve had so many lumps taken out of my neck, one on my face. This is something I’m literally fighting every year now. It’s constant.”

Qarmat Ali, the former troops say, was covered in ripped bags of bright orange sodium dichromate.

“We were never warned what the bags of chemicals were,” Jon Caunt, another former serviceman, said. “We were breathing this stuff in.”

His former comrade Tony Watters added: “I never thought about what it was. We were told the site is safe.”

Several months after deployment to the site, however, the servicemen were joined by two workers wearing protective gear who placed signs around it reading: “Warning. Chemical hazard. Full protective equipment and chemical respirator required. Sodium dichromate exposure.”

Watters said: “When you left the site, your uniform was contaminated, your webbing was contaminated.

“You went in your sleeping bag, and that was contaminated. And you were contaminating other people with it back at camp.”

Andy Tosh, who has led the group of veterans as they sought answers from the Ministry of Defence, said: “Even with the warning signs going up … they kept us there. They knowingly kept us exposed.”

The RAF gave some of the men a leaflet on their return to the UK, warning of the dangers of the substance, but not all were told.

The letter seen by Sky acknowledging the dangers posed to the veterans made a “strong” link to “increased risk of lung and nose cancer” as well as numerous other issues. It suggested personnel sent to Qarmat Ali should have their medical records altered to mention their exposure to sodium dichromate.

“Offer biological screening. This cannot be detailed until the numbers exposed are confirmed,” the letter also said.

An inquiry into US personnel deployed to Qarmat Ali found that 830 people were “unintentionally exposed” to sodium dichromate, giving them access to support from the US Department of Veterans Affairs. This came after the death of Lt. Col. James Gentry from cancer in 2009, which the US Army determined came “in line of duty for exposure to sodium dichromate.”

There has been no such inquiry by UK authorities despite British personnel being deployed at the site for longer than their American counterparts.

Thirteen of them have suffered from cancer and similar symptoms, including one who developed a brain tumor.

Jim Garth told Sky: “My skin cancer will never go away … It’s treatable, but when the treatment is finished, it comes back, so I’ve got that for life really.”

Lewis added: “I’m actually getting to the point now where I don’t care anymore … sooner or later, it’s going to do me.”

Caunt described his former colleagues’ conditions as a “ticking time bomb.”

He added: “We do not know what’s going to happen in the future."

The MoD insists medical screening was offered to personnel at the time, despite the men stating that it was not. In 2024, several met with Labour MPs about the issue. One, John Healey, who is now the UK defence secretary, said at the time the veterans should have “answers to their important questions.”

In a statement, the MoD said: “We take very seriously the concerns raised by veterans who were deployed to guard the Qarmat Ali Water Treatment Plant in 2003.

“As soon as we were alerted to the possible exposure of Sodium Dichromate, an environmental survey was conducted to evaluate typical exposure at Qarmat Ali. Results showed that the levels at the time were significantly below UK government guidance levels.”

A 2004 letter seen by Sky News suggested, however, that the MoD knew the levels of sodium dichromate were higher.

“Anyone who requires medical treatment can receive it through the Defence Medical Services and other appropriate services,” the MoD said.

“Veterans who believe they have suffered ill health due to service can apply for no-fault compensation under the War Pensions Scheme.”

Watters called on the government to hold an investigation into what happened at Qarmat Ali.

“We are the working class, we are ex-soldiers who have put our lives on the line and you’re turning a blind eye to us,” he said.

Garth added: “We felt let down at Qarmat Ali all those years ago, and we still feel let down now.”