It all starts with feeling for Afghanistan

I asked a colleague to fix a broken window, without a second thought he grabbed a very delicate meeting chair to climb on, I stopped him before be broke that chair.

This reminded me of the public buses which has damaged passenger seats because people who sit in these seats start pulling out the cover of the seat. This also reminded me of the plenty of garbage that are lying out of every residential home or office in Kabul and no one bothers to pick them up apart from the old, weak and unpaid labor workers of the Municipality. My colleague action also reminded me of the young boys who were getting out of Kardan University last night and throwing the peels of banana and wraps of chocolate biscuits at the door of their own University. This also reminded me of the meeting I had last week in one of the ministries that had flowing toilets inside the ministry building, and the list goes on.

A glance into our media programs on daily basis is all about politics, politicial deals, political talks, huge claims of 'national pride' and some declaring Jihad for 'national interests' but I hardly see any leader, any politician, anyone to care how can we as Afghans become responsible citizens before becoming politicians of all kinds. Before declaring ourselves as visionary leaders for the 'national interest' why cant we start educating, reminding and encouraging our youth to become responsible citizens.

Pathway to a better Afghanistan is not a rocket science nor impossible. It all starts with feeling for Afghanistan. With feeling for every tiny and big thing that can build this country. It starts with taking responsibility for our own garbage, not to throw them outside of our homes with a blind eye.

It starts with the belief that every drop makes up the ocean. Building a better Afghanistan is not a rocket science, its only when we as Afghans stop expecting and start acting.

I know for many of us all these words sound as cliche and rhetoric. But imagine, if we continue detaching oursevles from feeling for Afghanistan, who would be affected if all the seats in the passenger buses are damaged. Who would be affected if the capital of this country turns into a garbage drum. Who will be affected if the lesson that university students are sharing with the younger ones is about throwing the banana peels and wraps of your chocoloate biscuite at the doorsteps of your university. The American public or the people of Afghanistan?

An Opportunity in Afghanistan: PBS and Huffington Post

Today was the first of the official three-day period of national mourning following the death of the Burhanuddin Rabbani, the former President of Afghanistan and, until meeting his untimely end, chairman of the country’s High Peace Council. While there was no war or fighting going on the streets, there was nothing that could be described as peace either.

Leaving my home in Kabul this morning, the streets were not as crowded as usual, but were full of armed men. They were shouting at each other and at every pedestrian who ventured near the black- windowed bullet-proof vehicles carrying high-ranking officials to Rabbani’s funeral. On one of the main roads in the Qalai Fatullah section of Kabul, a group of armed uniformed soldiers beat a taxi driver who subsequently caused an accident while running away in panic.

In the wake of Rabbani’s assassination, almost every political voice in Afghanistan has claimed that peace is no longer possible. I, however, as a young Afghan woman who is tired of the patriarchy and power struggles in this country, believe that peace is always possible — but we need to move from political deal-making towards a citizen-led national dialogue for peace building.

That dialogue needs to begin with healing the open wounds resulting from years of civil war and Taliban oppression. The grievances caused by the enormous suffering of so many Afghans during those years were never adequately addressed. Leaving the wounds to fester throughout the last decade has contributed to deepening distrust and added fresh wounds alongside these open sores. Until Afghans come together, from all walks of life, from every province and village to admit their responsibility in creating injustice and seek forgiveness, Afghanistan will not be peaceful. Our wounds will continue to fester while our neighbors turn us against each other and against our country.

Afghan women are the untapped and unexplored power that can facilitate this healing process. Afghan women have not waged civil wars or oppressed their people. Instead, they became widows of a war they never wanted, took responsibility for the family and children, and used the Afghan custom of Nanawati to end animosity between tribes. If Afghan women were provided the opportunity to lead a national dialogue, they could bring people together in a way that men haven’t done. My experience in working and dealing with Afghan women is that we have better access and dialog even among disputing tribes, better information on the causes of conflict. Afghan women are more willing to end the violence because we have more to lose in wars than anyone else.

Women in Afghanistan had to fight to have representation in the High Peace Council. They have been able to make headway where the men could not. For example, some of the women at High Peace Council were able to make contacts with some of the families of one of the armed opposition groups and were welcomed in their homes. Not one of the men in the High Peace Council has been able to enter the house of an armed opposition group commander.

I am sure the world remembers how South African women went around the country uniting every South African in favor of their new Constitution at the end of apartheid. It was actually the South African women who prevented a blood bath by giving everyone a voice during the Constitution-making process.

An opportunity for Afghan women could mean an opportunity for peace.

VIEW: There is no endgame in Afghanistan, yet- Daily Times

Afghanistan still needs to prove that it is capable enough to choose its strategic partners and at the same time not be harmful to its neighbours. Just as Pakistan is free to choose its friends and enemies, Afghanistan too should have the right and opportunity to do so

Recently, the Jinnah Institute and the United States Institute of Peace (USIP) launched their joint research called ‘Pakistan, the United States and the End Game in Afghanistan: Perceptions of Pakistan’s Foreign Policy Elite’, which discusses the viewpoints of Pakistani foreign policy shapers around Afghan matters. One should appreciate the initiative because unless and until Afghanistan and Pakistan resolve their challenges in non-military and non-ISI ways, the people of both countries will continue suffering at the hands of extremism and insurgency bred by the flawed political and military structures.

Undoubtedly, the report and the process that it has entailed in gathering the viewpoints and perspectives from a handpicked foreign policy elite keeps Pakistan’s national interest supreme over all other concerns while analysing the current processes in Afghanistan. Moreover, for more credibility, there was a strong need for a counter-balance and some level of Afghan experts’ inputs, who could have also brought the focus on what the perceptions are about Pakistan amongst the Afghan elite and the Afghan people. It seems that for the Pakistani foreign policy elite, the whole perspective revolves around the 2014 deadline, which takes precedence over the complicated dynamics of the region, while the realities on the ground are telling a different tale. The year 2014 might be a deadline for an endgame for the US and NATO in Afghanistan, but not the endgame of conflict in the AfPak region.

As an Afghan reader, I am not convinced that the foreign policy experts, at least those interviewed for this report, were honest enough in tracing the root causes of mistrust and instability in the region, which is: the continued struggle of the Pakistani intelligence and military to create and recreate insurgency for Afghanistan as a matter of Pakistan’s self-defence and as a mechanism of deterrence.

Creation and re-creation of insurgency, terror and fighters for Afghanistan by the Pakistani intelligence, especially the ISI, is the major factor that defines the AfPak relationship, politics and public diplomacy. While Pakistani foreign policy experts call this relationship “interference and non-neutrality”, for an Afghan who witnesses Pakistani nationals blowing themselves up in Afghan cities and taking Afghan lives, it is a matter of invasion and regional terrorism that eventually calls for an Afghan resistance against it.

For the young Afghans, especially those with exposure to the media and who live in urban settings, this ISI-led campaign is more of an enemy than any other force in the world. Similar are the sentiments of the Afghan parents who see their madrassa-going children ready to blow themselves up in Afghanistan and being captured by the Afghan intelligence; they too blame the ISI. Vice versa, the youth on the other side of the border are indoctrinated with the belief that there is a foreign invasion of Afghanistan and to fulfil their religious duty, they have to do jihad inside Afghanistan by blowing themselves up and taking Afghan and coalition members’ lives. This generation of hatred-breeders are going to be very dangerous for the region and will eventually lead both countries into another regional conflict or war, an issue that has not received any attention yet.

I also understand that the Afghan government lacks a proper regional diplomacy, with Pakistan in particular. Considering the history of the complicated relationship between the two countries, the Afghan government should have already come up with a cohesive plan on how to get into a more mutually beneficial and non-threatening relationship with Pakistan through trade, transit routes, water, cultural and linguistic exchange programmes and cooperation. Afghanistan still needs to prove that it is capable enough to choose its strategic partners and at the same time not be harmful to its neighbours. Just as Pakistan is free to choose its friends and enemies, Afghanistan too should have the right and opportunity to do so, however with a clear and transparent line of engagement with its friends that are a matter of concern for Pakistan and the region.

However, many of us Afghans continue to wonder why the Pakistani establishment and intelligence weighs Afghanistan either through the lens of India or the US. Why does the Pakistani government not accept Afghanistan as a sovereign, independent neighbour in itself? Why can Afghanistan not leverage its relationship with India, the US or any other country for its own national interest just as Pakistan takes stock from its relations with China, Saudi Arabia and other countries?

Therefore, it is critical for the people, intellectuals, media, civil society and other non-government entities of both countries to come up with honest, critical but constructive ways of people-to-people engagement and dialogue. As an Afghan who grew up in Pakistan (I am grateful for its people’s support), I believe we need to address the growing mistrust between the two nations if this conflict has to end. We need to move beyond the blame game. The people of the two countries will only come together with a vision for a better future if the miseries of their past are addressed and recognised.

Such a people-to-people platform for dialogue and interaction will become a point of pressure on both governments to change their foreign policy towards each other and move beyond the blame game. While the Pakistani foreign policy experts accept to an extent that the ‘strategic depth’ approach is still an important indicator of success for Pakistan’s foreign policy, we need advocates from both the countries to bring about a change of this approach. In an era of open borders, we do not need intelligence agencies and the military defining our regional identities.

Though late, the only solution seems to be that the two countries start taking each other seriously and honestly begin a constructive dialogue for regional diplomacy by putting forward their younger generation diplomats and technocrats, without any third party initially. Such a regional diplomacy dialogue can best be complemented with a people-to-people platform to redefine the relationship of the two nations. Otherwise, Afghanistan should finally approach the UN Security Council for a possible solution or intervention. Hence, no deadline will play any endgame for Afghanistan and the region will remain in conflict if the approaches and plans being instigated by Pakistan’s security establishment are not changed and averted. Perhaps, the end of these games for Afghanistan can be the beginning of an endgame for the AfPak conflict.

The writer is an Afghan civil society activist

9/11 Decade in Afghanistan- Aljazeera English

At the time, I was working with an international humanitarian aid organisation in Peshawar, Pakistan, that was supporting Afghan refugees. The organisation also carried out emergency support projects for Afghans inside the country. Occasionally, I came to Kabul and visited some provinces, but of course I had to show it as a completely private visit and I had to be accompanied by male family members.

On September 11, 2001 which was a work day, I was at the Zakhail camp in Peshawar. I had a focus-group discussion with women and girls on some of hygiene issues and they were asking for literacy courses, though some of the Jihadi commanders at the camp prevented it.

Myself and another colleague decided to speak with one of those former commanders and try to convince him to allow classes. As we were debating the issue with him, his son came running in and said there was a messenger for him from Jalalabad.

Later on, from the others in the camp, we learned attacks had happened in New York and that he was called to the frontlines as the Afghan opposition fighters against the Taliban wanted to make use of the opportunity.

When we saw and heard about the attacks through international media in Peshawar, my first impression was that it was done by the same people that the US had supported during the Jihad against the Soviets. US dollars and ammunition of the Arab countries during the Soviet war turned our national resistance movement against the Soviets into a proxy war for the advantage of capitalism. Our war commanders won and the Afghan nation lost in a perpetual factional war.

"...the biggest mistake of the aftermath of 9/11 was that Afghanistan was only seen as a war zone with no long term vision for it. The US and its allies did not even bother to correct their past mistake of supporting individual warlords and tribal leaders for their own purposes." Wazhma Frogh

But I also realise that the September 11 attacks opened a new-page in the modern history. Afghanistan never received this much international attention before.

Today, at least the visible activism I do for Afghanistan nationally and internationally can be attributed to the new political regime that came after September 11 in Afghanistan.

Also on the positive side, I think some of the Afghans were able to use the opportunities and create a space for civil society development. The freedom of media (somehow), women's organisations, activism, and of course private sector development can also be attributed to the aftermath of September 11, 2001 in Afghanistan. Though very fragile, some foundation has been laid out.

But we still need to find more legitimacy in Afghan society because since our projects are supported internationally, our activism is also seen as a 'foreign project' even though we're putting our lives and risking our lives.

However, the bombing of Afghan villages within the Operation Enduring Freedom was for the purpose of Osama Bin Laden and his supporters. As a result of the US bombing, the Taliban regime fell and a new power structure enabled women's political and social participation. But women's progress can only be indirectly accredited to the aftermath of September 11.

I believe the biggest mistake of the aftermath of 9/11 was that Afghanistan was that they did not have a long term vision for the country. The US and its allies did not even bother to correct their past mistakes of supporting individual warlords and tribal leaders for their own purposes. Today Afghanistan is suffering in the hands of the same warlords that actively destroyed the country during 1990s factional war. The reason that people have lost faith in the government and going towards the Taliban are these warlords, now in suit and tie, holding very important positions.

Who is setting the agenda for another International Conference on Afghanistan in Bonn?

Bonn II Paper Series One: ToloNews

These days the hot topic in the ‘elite and expatriate bubble' of Kabul is the Bonn II Conference. Analysts, experts and diplomats come up with different perspectives and predictions about whether this event will change Afghanistan's roadmap or just be one more international conference on Afghanistan.

However, the recent news is that the conference is no more Bonn II because of the speculations it has created following the example of Bonn I, therefore, it's now called another international conference on Afghanistan in Bonn. The conference is expected to take place during the first week of December with participation of over 80 Foreign ministers and foreign delegations under the chairmanship of the Afghan President.

Timing has always mattered in politics about Afghanistan, although it has not often been with the best interests of Afghanistan in mind. The London Conference in early 2010 was organised at a time when the public opinion polls in Europe showed the lowest support for the Afghanistan project in ten years. Therefore, the London Conference pioneered the Peace and Reintegration Program that earned millions in one day.

Many continue criticising the London Conference for only setting an agenda for an exit strategy for Nato and others from Afghanistan, rather than planning for an inclusive process towards building peace in the country. Of course, that was a high time for the elections in the UK and the Brown administration was looking for success stories.

Questions asked by many Afghans whose voices do not make the news are:

Will the Bonn II Conference now planned for December this year be another step in speeding up the withdrawal and Inteqal (transition) process? Or, can it bring some meaningful stability for Afghanistan's future?

What we have today in Afghanistan can in large parts be credited to the process started with the first Bonn Conference that was held in December 2001. There have been a number of achievements. For example, first time power-transfer through elections, 27 percent women in the parliament, eight million children in schools, 80 percent of Basic Health Package access to rural communities, thousand of miles of roads constructed and reconstructed and the flourishing telecommunication business in the country are the direct or indirect outcomes of the Bonn Conference plan. Therefore, similar expectations can be attached to Bonn II.

However, there was an important negative outcome of the Bonn I which was the power sharing that took place and many Afghans believe that it was a historical mistake as it supported promotion of warlords and faction leaders in the political arenas. Or in simple terms, it created grounds for the revival of the Taliban movement.

There is an interesting rhetoric taking shape with the leadership of many international community representatives when it comes to Afghanistan. They have a default response to every query. " Well, this is an Afghan process, and the Bonn Conference is going to be chaired by the President of Afghanistan and we as the international community don't have anything to do with it". This is what I would call selective respect for sovereignty, particularly when I learnt more about the Conference in meetings in Europe than from many discussions with the relevant officials of the Afghan government. Especially when the Bonn Conference is being led by the International Contact Group chaired by the German representatives.

Only if that "Afghan leadership" listens to the voices of millions of ordinary Afghans in setting the agenda of the Conference. That is, will it be the voices of those who continue losing family members in the weekly suicide attacks, the clerk who has his/her salary pending for the 4th month in a government ministry, the farmer whose daughter was gang-raped by the police forces? Or, will it be the voices of those who sit in secured compounds miles away from the society and who only hear about the situation through the news?

Meanwhile, there are growing ‘Khabar Haye Sare Chawk' (unofficial version of the news spread in people's circles) that the international community leaders and the Afghan President have decided to bring in some of the Taliban leaders and their representatives to the Bonn II in order to make up for their exclusion in the first Bonn Conference.

If the leaders and politicians of the international community and some of the out-of-touch government officials are the only voices from Afghanistan, then who will represent the opposition, or in the words of ‘the anti-Taliban constituency'?

Anti-Taliban not in the sense of being against Talibs as the human beings fighting a violent war in Afghanistan but being against their political missions as we experienced prior to 2001.Who are these ‘anti-Taliban constituencies?

It is the 12.9 million female population[1] of the country that are not regarded as a human being by the Taliban standards, it is the 30,000 Helmandis who cheered at a female concert in Lashkargah for the first time in the history negating Taliban's ban on music -or the 27% women politicians who struggle everyday to change their realities in the Afghan parliament- it is the thousands of local civil society organizations that are losing lives at the fore fronts of fights for media freedom and democratic values.

Will they get a chance to envisage their version of Afghanistan's vision?

More importantly, how will the Bonn II create a roadmap to end the ongoing violence that has taken thousands of Afghan lives so far, through a political settlement between the Palace and some of the ranks of the Taliban?

Interview on PBS newshour : Afghan Women and Peace Talks

Amid Push for Talks With Taliban, Where Do Rights of Afghan Women Fit In?

SUMMARY

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/world/jan-june11/afghanwomen_06-20.html

Three Afghan women, influential figures in politics, business and non-governmental organizations, were in Washington last week meeting with senior members of the Obama administration and Congress on the topic of negotiating peace with the Taliban. Margaret Warner gets their views on the situation in their country.

11 Comments and 94 Reactions

Who Should Define Afghanistan's National Security?- ToloNews

The key to lasting peace and reconciliation in Afghanistan is not in encouraging the culture of rewarding the insurgency through political deals, but in providing justice to the common Afghan and so winning public support.

Gone are the days that government's strength was manifested in its political and military powers. Today the concept of ‘national security' is not about world wars or invasions alone, how are the common people being treated in their communities by their local governments, is the reality that is shaping the national security of any country or can cause national havoc, as we witness in the Middle East and parts of Africa.

Afghanistan is no more an exception. The common Afghans living circumstances are the most important indicators of the country's security, if the Kabul-based government can understand and realize.

While suicide attacks in the hospital, military bases, bazaars, highways make their ways into the national and international headlines about Afghanistan, the monstrous culture of impunity creating human miseries go unnoticed.

Mina, 12- year old girl child was brutally gang raped in Taloqan, Takhar early last month. While recalling that nightmare, Mina's mother claims that 6 of the 8 men who were alleged in the gang rape were in the national army uniform and the other 2 were the locals. Mina was raped one by one by the 8 men who had broken into their home at 1 am late night, and they were successful in escaping afterwards.

For many, who heard the story as a piece of news, expressed their regret and continued with their lives. The first reaction is oh, another case of child rape in Afghanistan and the story vanishes into the more demanding news and events around transition, withdrawal, politics of Afghan government, Washington's reactions and now Bonn2.

I would not even get into the debates around our own political hypocrisy. How can any Afghan, any Muslim can be this cruel to a child? Would not even argue that it was indeed us Afghan Muslims who killed ourselves in the riots against the burning of the holy Quran by Florida pastor. Nor would mention that it was the same Takhar'is that killed 12 and injured as many as 70 in apost Nato raid riot that had allegedly killed 4 civilians, two of them women.

According to one of the family's neighbors, the men who are accused of breaking into Mina's home had been seen in another robbery incident in the city of Taloqan. There are reports that the 8 armed men belonged to one of the experimental projects of ‘self-defense' orchestrated through arming local militias and arming local warlords against the Taleb militants. Local armed militias and local police forces are also accused of similar crimes in other provinces of Afghanistan.

While exploring the story further, a female teacher who teaches in girls high school in Taloqan told me: "Whenever the men in my family started remembering the times of the Taleban government, I was the one who was fighting against because I had lost all my rights under that regime. But today after having seen a corrupt, shameless authority that is supposed to bring rule of law but only deals with rule of dollars, I am the one who supports the Taleb government". If such an incident had happened during that time, she says, " They wouldn't even let this happen, nor would allow the perpetrators to escape because they were very strong in implementing strict laws".

Media reports, local radio accounts that only in the first two months of the year 1390, they had almost 5 unreported incidents of child rapes in Takhar province with the youngest victim as one year old, and there has been several gang rape incident of children in Takhar so far. Many of the perpetrators escaped and while responding to media, the local governor's office and Police Chief has a by default response: Cases are under investigation.

And no one knows when and how these investigations will be completed and how will the perpetrators be brought to justice.

I don't want this piece to contribute towards the ongoing propaganda machinery for the Taleban era government popularity, but it is important to highlight that its not only the regional geopolitics and ‘external infiltration by Pakistan' that insurgency is expanding its geographic coverage, but IT IS the local dissent, social multiplication of fear and revenge that drives thousands of Afghans to join militants and fight against the Kabul regime.

No political settlements aimed at peace can unite Afghans against their enemies, but real action on rule of law and justice for the common Afghan can give them some hopes that the Kabul government doesn't only send corrupt governors and Police Chiefs but fulfils its responsibility towards the ones who have risked their lives voting for the current leadership.

Women groups were lobbying for police effectiveness at one of the parliamentary Commissions that had called in the Deputy Minister of Interior and head of MOI Intelligence, some of the women activists demanded the removal of Police Chief to set an example for other incompetent officers in other provinces. The Deputy Minister smiled in sarcasm, nodded his head and left the room in silence.

Set as favourite

An Afghan Reflection on OBL Saga

As an Afghan who grew up and lived a whole life in armed conflict and violence inflicted on my country and people, the OBL saga is just another indication on how external forces and powers have played with our lives. This is also because Afghanistan always lacked a strong goverment with a clear definition and defence policy, but the infiltration of terror from outside also became a reason that Afghanistan never reaches to a state level.

US administration used OBL in the Cold War era against Soviets, provided militants and Pakistani intelligence and military unlimited weaponry and support to revolt against the Soviet-backed Kabul regime and the consequences of availability of weaponry and hatred amongst different war factions, resulted in civil war in Kabul and the creation of Taleban and their further manipulation for the Pakistani interests by the ISI and Pakistani military. Therefore, I neither feel good nor bad about the death of OBL as an Afghan. However, as an activist I do support accountability measure against anyone who committs crimes against humanity if its OBL or the Special Forces that are complicit in civilian attacks or excessive use of force against civilian targets.

OBL's presence in Afghanistan and having a sanctuary before September 2001, caused him use the place and opportunities of extremist Taleban to wage war against West and United States, thousands lost their lives and the lives of their families as a result. His death however, reveals an important conviction claimed by Afghanistan all these years that is about Pakistan's support to militants and terrorists and OBL's life in a military suburb around Islamabad proves our claims that Pakistan continues to play with our lives for its own political interests defined by a dictator military and intelligence.

While Pakistani ISI nurtures terror and hosts OBL, US kills him in operations, its Afghans who pay the price of avenge by the Taleban with their lives. In the unrest of Kandahar this week, I lost a close relative who was an ordinary shopkeeper. It is actually the ordinary Afghans and ordinary Pakistanis that are being harmed for the wrong international and regional policies.

The Word on Women - Does the threat to the women of Afghanistan only come from the Taliban’s insurgency? Not, exactly.

For the past two years, the Afghan government has been making repeated statements that no reconciliation or negotiations aimed at bringing peace through talks with the Taliban will impact women’s rights and other civil rights guaranteed in the Afghan Constitution. But, does the threat to the women of Afghanistan only come from the Taliban’s insurgency? Not, exactly.

The failure of governance—with the accompanying impunity perpetuated through a corrupt and incompetent system--is the first predator of women’s rights in Afghanistan, especially in the rural villages. Moreover, interventions aimed at bringing security and defense, like arming militias, result in the oppression of Afghans ,particularly women, in different parts of the country.

While the national and international attention on Afghanistan is shrouded in stories of the withdrawal and transition of international forces, many realities on the ground go unnoticed. For many of us in Afghanistan, it is now routine to hear about incidents that involve severe beating or murder of women, at least once or twice a week, in various parts of the country.

Last week was no exception.. While many women’s groups are struggling to verify the brutal murder of a female NGO worker in Zurmat, Paktya, we also were shocked to hear about a woman in Nimroz whose husband tried to take out her eyes with a knife..She is in the hospital and her doctors say they don’t have the adequate technology to treat her brain damage.. The Institute for War and Peace Reporting recently released a report from Ghor province in which the Afghan Local Police and the local militias created and armed during the experiments with ‘Counterinsurgency’ are accused of kidnapping, raping and murdering women in many villages and districts. In the same report, Anjila Shafi, secretary of the Provincial Council of Ghor, said that in the past year 50 cases of violence against women by militia commanders had been recorded, including assault and coerced marriages.

Mohammad Sharif, a tribal elder in the Dawlatyar district of Ghor, recalled a case where a man was killed last spring and his wife was abducted by a local commander and murdered a month later. No action had been taken on either killing, he said.

Many of the women’s groups and civil society organizations engaged in human rights work in Afghanistan believe that the continued silence of the Afghan government and its international supporters on women’s rights violations and oppression has a lot to do with appeasing the militants and conservatives in the country so that they will join the government’s peace and reintegration processes. These women’s organizations and civil society groups are mobilizing themselves around the question of why initiatives aimed at peace and security are resulting in injury and loss of life, especially among Afghan women.

A male journalist covering the southeastern region of the country said, “We don’t see the peace process making much of a difference in Kabul and other urban centers, but the impact is so visible in the rural areas. The local warlords, power brokers, militias , militants, and criminals all turn into Taliban and, claiming they want to be part of the peace process, they either get arms through local policing initiatives, or get tribal powers and then they are the ones who oppress locals, kidnap, rape and kill women when they want. They are even sent to more remote areas to fight militants and then they do whatever they want with no responsibility”.

Daily Afghanistan Outlook, a leading independent newspaper writes in a recent editorial that President Karzai has been selling Afghans’ rights to appease militants. The editorial analyzes the context around which Abdul Satar Mirzakwal, deputy governor of Helmand province, was sacked because he arranged a concert by a female singer that attracted 30,000 residents of Lashkargah, with children cheering the music. The editor writes, “But this event and a “female” singer’s performance was not something to be “acceptable” for the radical Mullahs and Ulemas of the province. They all complained to Karzai about Mirzakwal…”Karzai bowed in front the religious radicals and took action quickly on their demand, sacking Mirzakwal without even consulting the Independent Directorate for Local Governance (IDLG), the body responsible for appointing and dismissal of governors, district chiefs and other officials.

It is very obvious that the 30,000 people celebrating at the concert did not object to the performance, but some religious clerics did and only they are the ones that matter to the government, not the masses of citizens.

However, when it comes to condemning, investigating and prosecuting those responsible for murder, kidnap and rape of women and girls, we witness a poisonous silence from the Afghan government and its international supporters. Do they understand that what this silent impunity means for the stability of Afghanistan?

As the government and its international supporters remain silent over the brutalities committed against women and citizens of Afghanistan, the culture of impunity persists. Fighting insurgency threats through military means will take us nowhere unless and until there is a principled stance against brutalities, and inhumane treatment of Afghans by the same very system that they are expected to support. If the international community doesn’t clarify its stance against such atrocities, the resistance of Afghans will grow against them, not because they are reluctant to support foreign presence but because they don’t see the difference between the enemy and an apparent friend.

Who is America talking to on Afghanistan?

Sunday, 03 April 2011 12:49

The talks on the abilities of transition and transfer of security responsibilities on Afghan forces is a long time dream for every sensible Afghan who want their government and its institutions to realise and take on their own responsibilities.

But with the purpose of protection and safety of its citizens, not for the sake of a political cover up for deals with the insurgents, or for a superficial sovereignty that does not exist in Afghanistan anymore."There are problems in military back-up and air defence. We have no reconnaissance at all. Our classes on anti-aircraft missiles haven't been started. We have a bunch of other problems in ground forces in terms of heavy weaponry, back-up fire and so on," said Defence Ministry Spokesperson General Zaher Azimi a day before the transition announcement.

On the eve of Afghanistan's new year, President Karzai announced the areas which can now be secured by the national forces. While the other provinces are not worrisome in terms of security, hand-over of Lashkargah is a reall challenge. Just the same week, the Spokesperson for Ministry of Defence spoke to TOLOnews that Afghanistan National Army (ANA) is facing some serious shortfalls and incompetencies that halt their abilities to take security responsibilities as part of the transition process. He detailed out the lack of air forces, tanks, radar back up, reactive forces and that the patrol forces lack clear signs of abilities and equipment. In short, he said Afghanistan is not ready for a security take over with its current defence (in)abilities.

But is he the one that America is talking to for making a transition or withdrawal decision? Of course, not. Another Afghan official from Ministry of Defence in the same report of TOLOnews who remained anonymous to keep his job said , "The international community hasn't even agreed on tanks and it is also reluctant about missiles and long-range rockets. There are also a lot of ambiguities about the air force. "I'm certain that even the defence ministry wouldn't be able to provide details on how they will find a plane this year."But it is not the Generals of Ministry of Defence and Interior that America is talking to while deciding its strategies for Afghanistan.

So who is America talking to while deciding its approaches and plans for Afghanistan? The list starts with the President Karzai and ends with some of its cabinet members who are in the cabinet because they are obedient enough and who don't want to suffer the same consequences as Amrullah Saleh or Hanif Atmar.

The main question is how relevant and effective would be the American decisions when they are based on the views and behaviour of President Karzai and those thinking along his lines? Our experience as Afghans living the current instability in the country is that the President has been kept astray from the larger population concerns by a few who have encircled him. The President would meet the victims of a Special Force bombing for the 17th times, but he is not available or ready to meet the civil society and activists groups who want to bring him the concerns of the segments of the population including the frustrated and disillusioned youth of the country. Those youth who are abandoned, and sidelined from the ongoing political set ups and who are getting ready to arm or re-arm themselves in Takhar, Kapisa, Faryab, Kunduz, Bamian, Jawzjan and other provinces.

President Karzai is no more in touch with those who voted for him in 2004 or even with those who voted for him in 2009. He has reduced the government mission into a mediatory role for a one-sided reconciliation and political deal with those who don't have the support of the larger population in Afghanistan. However, the Taliban continue taking advantage of the local population grievances on a government that is not there when needed. In such circumstances, American decisions and policies based on response or attitude of the President are not for the better of the people of Afghanistan. Any common Afghans on the streets of Kabul to Jalalabad to Gardez to Lashkargah want their government forces to be able to take on the responsibilities of their own security and protection but they would also immediately express concerns that our national forces are not yet there.

Why aren't the national forces there yet? Besides the conventional debates on the lack of capacity and low capacity that have been provided to the national forces and that only since 2007, the international community became wary of the need to strengthen the national forces. But there is a bigger fear among Afghans. That fear is that Pakistan continues to be resentful of Afghanistan to have any strong military or defence. The prospect of an Afghanistan facilitating US-India relationships and deals are still the major threat in the eyes of the Pakistani establishment.

There is no doubt that Afghanistan needs a non-military solution, one that is not about making deals with the tools of insurgency but addresses the roots and source of insurgency and unrest. Afghanistan needs a political reform that goes beyond integration and deals with the Taliban. The Afghan government needs to come up with a regional plan of action on how to deal with the threats posed by Iran and Pakistan immediately and promote diplomatic relations with other far neighbours up to China so that eventually Afghanistan gets out of the economic and political hijack of Pakistan and Iran. But why is not such a process being initiated by the Afghan government?

Given doubts that the current leadership in Afghanistan lacks conceptual and strategic objectives of such a political reform for the national interest of Afghanistan, it becomes evident that the international community particularly America should define and address the challenges and solutions in a more cohesive manner. They need to get out of the dichotomy of talk to Taliban or don't talk to Taliban and look at Afghanistan beyond Kandahar and Helmand.

It is very strange to hear the President's talks on the transition and transfer of security responsibilities are without any focus on their abilities and equipment they need. The debate on transition and transfer of security responsibility evolves around politicians of international community and politicians of Afghanistan but has not made its way into the technical areas or no opportunity provided to the ANA and ANP Generals fighting on the ground. It is equally questionable on how can the President so confidently accept the transfer when he, being the Chief of Army, knows that Afghanistan still does not have air forces or in the words of the Defence Generals, does not yet have any tanks.

The threat of Taliban to Afghanistan comes from their strength as a rented insurgent. But the real danger lies in the immediate neighbourhood. Just last month, Isaf announced that they found weapons made in Iran around the areas of Taliban but the Afghan government made no attempt to investigate further or check with Iran. Similarly, the district of Goshta in Nangrahar has been attacked by the Pakistani army for the past 40 days as per the daily media reports, but there is not any official stance of the Afghan government side. This is happening when we still have around 150,000 international troops, how would these two neighbours behave when Afghanistan's national forces struggle for defence with their old and inadequate weapons?

While it is understandable that the Afghan government's failures and arrogance have restrained the relations with America, but it is the people of Afghanistan, who do not matter to their own government anymore, bear the brunt of American decisions and policies towards their government. America needs to broaden its scope of consultations beyond the President and his alikes to the larger population groups to hear the real needs and challenges. Otherwise, if the transfer and transition decisions come from an alien government, it can only result in another Operation Enduring Freedom after 2014 and again for the national security interests of America.

Why not Incentive for Peace in Daikundi?

"It would be the luckiest days of the week, if we have our boiled potatoes, and each of us getting one of them" Amina, 9 year old living in Nilli, Centre of Daikundi.

I have been following Daikundi since 2008 after the deployment of Afghanistan's first female mayor in Nilli. Many of us in civil society and women groups struggled hard to get her required resources to prove her as the right choice, but we failed to receive tangible international support in the form of concrete projects.

I went to Daikundi for the first time in early March 2011. Though, the trip was for work purposes, the realities I witnessed there should be communicated to the society at large and especially to those who are engaged in the ‘community development' and ‘poverty reduction' projects in Afghanistan with millions of dollars.

While planning for the trip, I was advised to take food from Kabul since there are no markets in Nili, nor there are any stocks of food so in case the chopper doesn't come as planned, one should have some food to survive. Initially, I did not trust the advice, and questioned how thousands of Afghans living there survive on daily basis. The response from some of the ‘development practitioners' was very simple. Daikundi is basically a secure place and there is no insurgency and one of the two provinces in the country that does not have any PRTs (Provincial Reconstruction Teams). Therefore, it doesn't get aid as does its border province, Uruzgan for its insurgency and armed conflict ongoing.

After landing in Nilli, the mountain-locked district of Daikundi, I couldn't witness the presence of human beings around so thought maybe it's a very small community of around a hundred people. But as made my way through the snow and mud towards the city, saw small houses on peaks of the hills and spotted human heads around those houses. I don't know if it would be fair to call those mud shells as houses, made of four walls and covered by snow. According to the Provincial Governor's Office and its members of parliament, Daikundi has around 800,000 population.

They have no water, as the water level is too low and some people with better access use grenades to dig wells for water. It would be interesting to find out how those 'some' get grenades while there is'nt any obvious form of insurgency there. Daikundi is bordered by Uruzgan, and used to be a district of Uruzgan until it was delcared as a province recently.

People almost dream of electricity and a market of 5 shops for thousands of Nilli residents would be lucky if the shopkeepers can travel for days to get to a larger market in surrounding provinces for basic survival stuff.

While on my way to Department of Women's Affairs, saw small children around age of 4 or 5 stuck in the snow and mud while another child of 7 or 8 was pulling him/her out of the mud. This is the main road of the Nilli city, which is the centre. But it shouldn't be called a road, it's only a direction and if any adult can take themselves out of the mud , they should be awarded for courage and dedication- why to even think about small children?

Inside the Department of Women's Affairs, met a young girl around 9, crying so badly that couldn't help but to go to her and ask why. This was Amina, whose mother had passed away a couple of days before while delivering her 8th child. I asked Amina whether her mother died in the clinic. She suddenly stopped crying and stared as if I had asked her a puzzle. The elder girl who had accompanied Amina laughed out of sarcasm and didn't even respond. After asking a couple of other women, found out that there is a clinic but with almost no female staff, forget about female doctor- and they said in this mud and snow, a pregnant woman would anyway die on the way to clinic which takes around 8 hours from her village.

These are some of the very basic miseries, I won't even detail out the lack of access to education and other basic services as they become secondary to the dire need of struggling to remain alive in Daikundi.

The politics of international development aid in Afghanistan becomes clearer when one visits the most remote and most vulnerable communities of the country - aid for insurgency or insurgency for aid. What are the incentives for peace? While millions of dollars are poured into provinces plagued with violence and conflict, why don't provinces like Daikundi get attention to prove itself a real model for development and reducing poverty? And the Afghanistan Peace and Re-integration Programme with millions of dollars from foreign aid provides incentives of war to insurgents, is another certification of a policy that would eventually drive the young men from Daikundi to join insurgents and militants fighting in its surrounding provinces of Uruzgan, Ghazni, Zabul and Helmand.

"If the international aid is another parallel to counter-insurgency, then why to even name it international development aid", said a couple of young graduates who returned to Daikundi after completing their graduation at Kabul University. They said, "When we returned back, we used to encourage young boys and girls to study and get educated. But having been lost in poverty, we forget about education. It's only about a struggle to be able to remain alive each day, what happens tomorrow, we don't know".

Be the Insurgent to Fight Insurgency

Every time some of us Afghans become a bit hopeful about the plight of this country, a series of suicide attacks on civilian centers packed with people, change our hopes to despair. Around six suicide attacks in the past 5 weeks in Kabul, Khost, Jalalabad ,Kunduz and Faryab have taken around 200 lives of ordinary Afghans fighting for survival on daily basis. While these are the official numbers on the national television, the real death toll has risen much more.

A number of Afghan journalists and activists had gathered one evening last week to share the growing tensions of the country, but our focus reversed abruptly as TOLOnews aired the video of the would be suicide bomber in Kabul Bank who shot people with so much joy.

The conversation continued … “ As the Counter –Insurgency takes momentum, and the Taliban get weaker, we get more suicide attacks and that particularly on civilian targets …and its happening as the General in a hurry ( hinting towards Gen. Petraeus) is being applauded for shortening the long war”…said one of the Kabul-based news publishers.

Many of us in that circle came to one conclusion that was already clarified somehow by the President’s Spokesperson earlier this week. Whenever Afghanistan seems to be making progress in terms of its security responsibilities, we have more attacks in the relatively calm regions that destabilize the whole country. The terror and havoc created by the video of the suicide attacker from Kabul Bank in Jalalabad is palpable on the faces of every Afghan you meet on the streets of Kabul.

According to the NDS Spokesperson almost 90 percent of the recent suicide attacks were commissioned in tribal areas of Pakistan but that is not a news anymore. What is more important for Afghanistan to understand and prevent at this level is that latter part of the NDS report which says that all these suicide attacks have been carried out by young emotional kids who have been either brain washed by the insurgent propaganda machinery or those who are forced to blow themselves by warning attacks on their families, in case they refrain. Furthermore, NDS stated that young kids are being kidnapped and forced into suicide terrorism.

These suicide attacks don’t only kill civilians but have more influential messages. Recent attacks on big Shopping Malls in Kabul, Bank in Jalalabad, ID registration office in Kunduz and Buzkashi Friday game in Faryab are attacks on progress and modernization indicators in Afghanistan. The insurgents and their masters are very successful at penetrating into the hearts and minds of Afghans and creating further terror. Something that Afghan government and its allies have badly failed at achieving.

At the same time, Afghans are tired of the blame game. Every now and then a governor, an NDS official or the leadership condemn the neighbors and the story is over and the next day we wake up to another suicide attack or bombing. What is more absurd about these blame games is the failures of the overall structures responsible to protect civilians to prevent these attacks when they know the source of terror. McChrystal has a lesson to share with the decision makers of Afghanistan and that is:

“In bitter, bloody fights in both Afghanistan and Iraq, it became clear to me and to many others that to defeat a networked enemy we had to become a network ourselves. We had to figure out a way to retain our traditional capabilities of professionalism, technology, and, when needed, overwhelming force, while achieving levels of knowledge, speed, precision, and unity of effort that only a network could provide. We needed to orchestrate a nuanced, population-centric campaign that comprised the ability to almost instantaneously swing a devastating hammer blow against an infiltrating insurgent force or wield a deft scalpel to capture or kill an enemy leader…..”

Many of Afghans in the bubble of Afghanistan’s ‘middle class elites’ who have greater expertise, understanding and outreach inside the country are somehow forced into corners and they end up being political activists , analysts or commentators in the media. While the government should have been utilizing their grasp of Afghanistan issues in fighting the ongoing insurgency by providing them with the strategic leadership positions. Instead, the Afghan government is getting rid of reformists and technocrats struggling for progressive developments in Afghanistan, as a goodwill gesture to its ‘angry brothers’ who continue slaughtering Afghan nation.

Many of us in that conversation had one solution though coming from contradicting backgrounds. Be the insurgent to fight the insurgency in Afghanistan. Use the same propaganda machinery to weaken the momentum created by the insurgents. Show quick response through prosecution and punishment of the captured bombers in the public eye – condemn suicide terrorism as part of a national campaign declaring suicide terrorism as an act of sedition and anti –Afghan patriotism and invite Afghan nation to fight anti-Afghan patriot elements. That is how we can unite the Afghan nation against terror.

And the conversations were interrupted by our fifty year old cook who came to invite us all for dinner. He had a more interesting message: “We fought world powers, but can’t fight these rented killers? If the leaders today announce that Afghan nation should unite against their enemies to save their motherland, the next day all of us will be at the borders defending this nation…”

Sorry...We misunderstood you!

The recent study entitled ‘Separating The Taliban from Al-Qaida’ of the Center on International Cooperation, New York University, authored by the two editors of “My Life with the Taliban” a memoir of an ex-diplomat of the Taliban government, is apparently an ‘academic /field research’ project. But in essence, this study comes across as propaganda to influence international perceptions (mainly the American audience) about the Taliban to facilitate a quick and hasty withdrawal of the international community from Afghanistan. Quick withdrawals without a cohesive transition have been the root cause of the perpetual cycle of conflict in Afghanistan. The study comes with a message that “Actually, the Taliban are misunderstood, so we need to pack and leave, and let the Afghans deal with the mess that we have created for them since it’s none of our national security business”.

Although, one would not find anything new in this study but this adds to the ongoing propaganda guised in the name of research and study, it is entirely a political drama. While the study can be questioned for its credibility as its seen as a one-sided commentary based on some anonymous interviews of alleged Taliban members, the evidence for such an important claim ‘Separation of Taliban from Al-Qaida’ has come to little in this study.

What is more pathetic about this study is the portrayal that the entire confrontation, insurgency and counter insurgency is merely a clash between the Taliban and the West - mainly the United States of America. The study deliberately overlooks the price that Afghans have paid and continue to pay with their lives fighting extremism and terror. This week, the Afghanistan Rights Monitor reported that only in 2010, Afghanistan lost over 700 children in different incidents and violence. These children were not even active combatants nor their perceptions about enemy had formed, but they lost their lives in their struggle to survive in Afghanistan.

In its key findings based on numerous interviews with anonymous Taliban commanders and members, the authors claim that ‘ Taliban and Al-Qaida remain distinct groups with different goals, ideologies, and sources of recruits; there was considerable friction between then before September 11,2001 , and today that friction persists’.

What difference does this analysis make for the lost lives of 3,000 people in the Twin Towers attack? Or for the lost life of the seven-year old child who was executed in Helmand and remained hung on the tree for the crime of ‘spying for the international forces'? Even though, the two groups might be geographically distinct, they feed each other’s objective to spread terror and extremism. The manifestation of such conviction might defer in the doctrine of Taliban and Al-Qaida so while the former behead the teachers and blow off schools in Afghanistan, the latter explode metros and train stations in Madrid or London. What is the ‘distinction’ being claimed by this study between the two forms of terror?

While the roots of Taliban formation was a product of post- Cold War civil unrest in Afghanistan, the movement turned into a contaminated objective of Pakistani intelligence to insert Pakistan’s ‘strategic depth’ interests in Afghanistan. If the Afghan population has been passive in resisting this exported insurgency, it has to do more with the failures of international forces to protect the civilians and a national government that has lost its definition for national security or threats against national security.

The failure to question the external support for the movement and declaring it as home-grown and only restricted to Afghanistan is a major weakness of this study. The authors realize that the moment they start unpacking the external support on the Taliban movement, they would go against the very essence of what are they claiming , separation of Taliban from Al-Qaida.

The study further misguides the dynamics of peace and reconciliation processes currently ongoing in Afghanistan by highlighting the ‘ core grievances and political inequalities’ that gave birth to the insurgency and ignoring the crimes and atrocities carried by the militants against the people of Afghanistan in all parts of the country. History reveals not only in Afghanistan but throughout the world that if a peace process does not address the issues of justice, the unjust peace perpetuates the status quo and will continue the vicious cycle of violence. The kind of ‘soft approach’ towards insurgency being preached through this study has already created a sense of disillusionment and agony among the security forces in Afghanistan. While thousands of Afghanistan National Army and Police are deployed to ‘secure’ the population centers around the country, the same Army and Police become disenchanted when their arrested militants are freed without a due process through the political interventions, who in turn re-join insurgency and kill more police and army. Not to mention the inconsistency of paradigms and approaches at work in Afghanistan, while a fierce counter-insurgency is taking momentum with body counts as its success indicators, a political reconciliation distracts military gains. Afghan population is confused more than ever on where to place themselves in a tyranny of ‘fight and talk’.

Afghanistan has been the subject of ongoing international experiments and studies, but it is increasingly becoming clear that these forms of analysis only serve the purposes of the powerful fronts. Through such exhibitions, Afghans are told what to expect to happen in their homeland and they continue bearing the brunt of such decisions that are taken miles away.

A relative of Hamida Barmaki who lost her life and five other members of her family in a terrorist attack in Kabul in late January said, “If the international forces are fighting with air bombs, drones and tanks, we are fighting this war with our lives by not compromising and complying to the rules of the extremists and militants who want us to live in the stone age and remain illiterate for generations to come. Hamida Barmaki, the law professor, and a human rights advocate and Commissioner fought extremism through her work and activism, so who is actually fighting this war and who should dictate the rules of the war”?..... A question being asked by many Afghans but they continue being at the receiving end of their life decisions.