Cape Argus

A d ifferent view on developmen­ts in Afghanista­n

-

DURING the past few days, the world’s eyes were focused on Afghanista­n. On television, they witnessed the Islamic Emirate Mujahidin of Afghanista­n (IEMA), popularly known as the Taliban, who come from traditiona­l/rural homes, returning to power without any major conflict having taken place.

While observers from the Americas and Europe remained sceptical about the IEMA’s (aka Taliban) peaceful takeover of the entire country, others have described the events in positive terms.

Yvonne Ridley, the journalist who was kidnapped in 2001 by members of the old Taliban regime, said in her Radio Islam Internatio­nal interview that “the Taliban have grown and developed in wisdom and stature … we’ll see a more mature movement for the Afghan people”. Compared to the old Taliban, the new Taliban has transforme­d into a different movement.

It should be recalled that landlocked Afghanista­n, like many other Asian and African developing nationstat­es, went through challengin­g changes over the past two decades. This was soon after the old Taliban was forced out of office to be replaced by Hamid Karzai and company. Karzai formed a cabinet that served the interests of the US and its allies. Despite the US’s support for the Karzai government, it did not really assist in the Afghan nation-building project.

The US administra­tion eyed Afghanista­n’s rich resources. These resources amounted to plus $3 trillion and they included gold, copper and lithium. Since it was aware of this developing country’s wealth, it poured into its coffers more than $2.4 trillion. It did so with the hope of benefiting further from these investment­s.

It should be stressed that despite these huge investment­s, it is important to record that the US had no plans, like other countries it invaded, to help rebuild the country after the Soviet Union’s presence in the 1990s.

It was, however, not willing to address the Afghan people’s desperate needs. It being a self-centred state with self-interest as its central (foreign policy) concern, geared itself (a) to counter opposition against its presence within the country, and (b) to combat the interests of powerful states such as China, Russia and Iran.

In fact, after the old Taliban regime collapsed in 2001, the US, using its “War on Terror” campaign, occupied the country. Its intention was not to aid the beleaguere­d Afghan nation but to gain full control of Afghanista­n’s minerals as mentioned earlier. All evidence points to the fact that it had no intention of bringing about national unity and positive transforma­tion.

It may be argued that the US manipulate­d – along with its European allies – the Western media to spread negative reports regarding the Taliban. They do so without reporting that the current Taliban is qualitativ­ely different from their predecesso­rs.

Another fact that they seem to be silent about is that an agreement of withdrawal with the new Taliban was signed under former president Donald Trump’s watch. This took place two years ago in Qatar.

Apart from the media’s silence, it also continues to harp on the Taliban’s toxic attitude towards women and minority groups even though the current leadership have sworn to observe the internatio­nal protocols respecting their status.

Several Muslim groups that reside in secular societies such as South Africa are influenced by the media outlets that obtain their insights from media houses based in Western Europe and North America. Instead of assessing the developmen­ts in that country independen­tly, they seem to mimic the negative views without questionin­g the reports about the struggling Afghan society.

South Africa’s only Muslim political party, Al Jama-ah, that is represente­d in the National Assembly, has called on the government to be among the first nations to recognise the IEMA. In an interview on Radio Jeem, I commended the Taliban for having exercised a peaceful takeover.

My party pledged to play a positive role in creating awareness regarding non-violent diplomatic solutions for unsettled countries such as Afghanista­n. Of particular concern, which Al Jama-ah addressed, is Afghan women’s rights under the new Taliban.

The Islamic Emirate (Mujahidin) of Afghanista­n must form an Afghan Commission on Gender Equality and introduce a Bill of Rights. South Africa was guided by various gender-focus instrument­s such as the 1979 eliminatio­n of all forms of discrimina­tion against women and the 1995 Beijing Plan for Action.

There is now an opportunit­y for the IEMA to show the world that the rights that Islam, as a comprehens­ive system, affords women outstrip the rights the Western world guarantees women. It is now up to the Islamic Emirate (Mujahidin) to govern Afghanista­n with Islamic values and change the current narrative (that) the media and world have of the Taliban.

 ??  ?? GANIEF EBRAHIM HENDRICKS MP and the founder and leader of Al Jama-aha
GANIEF EBRAHIM HENDRICKS MP and the founder and leader of Al Jama-aha

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa