One would be hard pressed to find someone as diametrically opposed
to the Taliban’s ideology as Mahbouba Seraj.
A distinguished human rights advocate and
Nobel Peace Prize nominee, Seraj, 75, resides in
Afghanistan and is executive director of the Afghan Women Skills Development
Center and manages domestic violence shelters for women and children.
اضافة اعلان
Time to hear their side of the storyAnd yet, she
has called for dialogue with the regime as her country is mired in a humanitarian
crisis. “After 18 months of brutality, it is time to hear their side of the
story, too. We really have to come up with some agreement. Talks have to start
with the Taliban.”
Not engaging might make it worse
Her call for engagement with the Taliban is not despite its odious
treatment of women, but because of it. Seraj is among a growing chorus of
voices that have said not engaging with the Taliban is going to make life much
worse for those segments of Afghan society that are suffering the most.
Such an engagement could provide an opportunity for the international community to influence the regime’s policies. As some reports have pointed out, the Taliban’s oppression of women may be born of a political choice rather than ideology, or could be due to internal power struggles.
Earlier this year, Deborah Lyons, the then Head of the UN Mission
in Afghanistan (UNAMA) called for the international
community to work directly with the Taliban. Hinting at US sanctions that have
shut Afghanistan off from the global financial system, Lyons said Afghan
businesses are closing, unemployment is increasing and poverty is rising.
Afghanistan continues to face unprecedented humanitarian, economic
and climate change-related challenges. The UN Office for the Coordination of
Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA) has reported that 28.8 million people, out of the
38 million population,
urgently need humanitarian assistance, 17 million face acute hunger, and 60 percent of the population
faces difficulty in accessing water. Of an estimated $3.2 billion required to fund humanitarian
assistance in 2023, UNOCHA has received just $742.3 million.
The road goes through Washington
The road to mitigating the Afghan people’s suffering, however,
goes through Washington.
A retired CIA official
recently suggested the US maintain a presence in Kabul for counterterrorism
purposes against ISIS. As one-dimensional as this suggestion is, the Taliban
might welcome it, as it considers ISIS’s Afghan franchise, ISIS – Khorasan
Province (ISKP), its mortal enemy.
International community to influences the regime’s policies
Such an engagement could provide an opportunity for the
international community to influence the regime’s policies. As some reports
have pointed out, the Taliban’s oppression of women may be born of a political
choice rather
than ideology, or could be due to
internal power struggles. Through strategic engagement and incentives, the international
community could exploit the regime’s internal divisions to benefit ordinary
Afghans.
Following the Taliban’s takeover in 2021, civilian casualties have
continued due to violence by non-state actors, with 1,095 killed and 2,679
wounded, the UN has said. This is, however, a decrease from 2020, when there
were
8,820 civilian casualties, including 3,035 deaths. The latest UN report accuses
ISKP of
most attacks.
In December, ISKP claimed
responsibility for an attack on a Chinese-owned hotel in Kabul, prompting
China to advise its citizens to leave Afghanistan. The group has openly threatened
to assassinate the leaders of Uzbekistan and Tajikistan and has
increased recruitment propaganda in the region’s languages. This perhaps explains why
Afghanistan’s neighbors are ready to maintain working
relationships with the Taliban.
Why is the US dithering? This could be a matter of imperial
hubris. Historically, the US has not reacted well to strategic defeats that
hinder its global influence. Three strategic defeats of the 20th century come
to mind – Vietnam, where a guerrilla army defeated a superpower, Cuba – where a
communist regime in America’s backyard defeated a CIA-backed “regime change” operation, and Iran –
where a popular uprising toppled a pro-US regime that upheld Iran as one of
the twin
pillars of Washington’s Middle East policy.
“After 18 months of brutality, it is time to hear their side of the story, too. We really have to come up with some agreement. Talks have to start with the Taliban.”
By contrast, the US has mostly showcased the Taliban’s coming to
power as a tactical defeat –
poorly designed reconstruction strategies and, as US President Joe Biden put
it,
Afghanistan’s pre-Taliban leadership are to blame. This cynical political
packaging of the fiasco ought to insulate the Biden administration from
political blowback should it decide to engage with the Taliban.
Russia to pursue engagement
Even Russia is gradually pursuing
engagement with the Taliban, despite the fact that many in the Taliban
leadership
fought alongside the Afghan Mujahideen in the 1980s against the Soviet occupation, a catastrophic
defeat for the USSR which catalyzed its eventual disintegration.
Despite the US withdrawal, the fate of Afghans remains tied to
Washington’s decisions. The Biden administration’s Afghanistan policy remains
undecided, with a preference thus far for piecemeal humanitarian interventions.
Some experts have called for the US
to distinguish between the Taliban regime and the Afghan state, i.e., continue
targeted sanctions on Taliban leaders while funding specific functions of the
Afghan state, knowing fully well that a Taliban-ruled Afghanistan is not going
to win awards for democracy or women’s rights anytime soon.
With Washington focused on Ukraine and China, one hopes that if
not for humanitarian reasons, then at least the
mounds of mineral resources in Afghanistan may make US policymakers consider engaging with
the regime. If this improves the lives of Afghan people, particularly women and
minorities, that would be a fortunate and welcome byproduct. And true to form,
a future American president may just find it politically convenient to claim
they did it all for the women of Afghanistan.
Dnyanesh Kamat is a political analyst who focuses on
the Middle East and South Asia. He also consults on
socio-economic development for government and private-sector entities.
Read more Opinion and Analysis
Jordan News
.jpg)
.jpg)
