Category Archives: Government Oppression

The movement has the potential to build a stronger GOP as once-uninvolved conservative candidates flood local government and party races, seeking a platform to fight critical race theory, student mask requirements and other culture war issues centered on kids. While such elections are often nonpartisan, the Republican Party sees a rich opportunity to build a pipeline of new political candidates.

"The interest, the enthusiasm, is extraordinary, said Pam Kirby, who runs "school board boot camps for the Arizona GOP.

Even though most Arizona school board races are not for at least a year, shes already started offering a new round of her classes because of demand. More than 200 people have completed the program, and 80 more are on the waitlist. Conservatives from Oregon, Texas, New York, Indiana and other states have asked her to run similar programs for them, she said.

About 25 percent of people from the classes actually go on to run, while others will instead join their local GOP operations, often as precinct committee members. Kirby estimates more than 1,500 committee members have been appointed in Maricopa County since February.

"It's unheard of, Kirby said. It's off the charts.

Ben Frazier, the founder of the Northside Coalition of Jacksonville chants "Allow teachers to teach the truth" at the end of his public comments opposing the state of Florida's plans to ban the teaching of critical race theory in public schools during the Department of Education in Jacksonville, Fla. | Bob Self/The Florida Times-Union via AP

Critical race theory is a framework for analysis developed by legal scholars in the 1980s that examines how race and racism have been ingrained in American law and institutions since slavery and Jim Crow. The study is essentially nonexistent in K-12 schools, but this year, the term has been used to describe diversity trainings and a cadre of classroom lessons on slavery, sexism and other acts of discrimination.

Many conservative candidates stand against critical race theory, but also concede that the graduate-level legal framework isn't being taught in K-12 schools. Still, the concern that similar philosophies are influencing public schools is widespread, and candidates use opposition to critical race theory to signal their animus to curriculum that further focuses on racism or oppression.

In Ohio, where most school board seats are up in November, conservative parents are organizing candidates to run in school district races across the state. In Texas, several newly elected school board members ran on platforms advocating for less talk about racism and oppression, both historic and recent. Virginia, Arizona, Indiana, Georgia, Oregon, Texas, Florida, California and Wisconsin are starting to see campaign organizing among conservative parents.

"We have had a very big upswing of individuals calling us, saying, 'How do I run?'" said Terry Dittrich, the GOP chairman in Waukesha County, Wis., who has worked in state politics for more than 20 years. "These are really truly organic organizations that have popped up from moms and dads."

Dittrich and his colleagues have watched these races to scout potential candidates for local and state office, and the conservative zeitgeist around critical race theory has triggered a boom time.

"I don't know that I've ever seen anything like this," he said in an interview.

Parents in many places have organized Facebook groups calling for schools to expunge specific diversity-oriented curricula or any elected official backing it. Some of those groups have spawned new candidates sometimes long before a race. In Arizonas Chandler Unified School District, for example, at least 12 people have already shown interest in entering races still 15 months away.

Others have organized on social media to coordinate protests or raised huge sums of money to launch recall elections against school board incumbents. All of them are looking for the same result: a cleaner version of U.S. history that puts racism firmly in the past.

In this May 25, 2021, photo, a man holds up a sign against Critical Race Theory during a protest in Reno, Nev. | Andy Barron/Reno Gazette-Journal via AP

The notion that critical race theory is being taught in schools is almost always false, said Chip Slaven, the National School Boards Association's interim executive director & CEO. Even in districts where education officials have made clear the theory isnt part of the curriculum, conservative parents and politicians have continued to protest or campaign against it.

"It goes back to: What can we make stick on the wall? Ah, it must be critical race theory," Slaven said.

While some school board members have been energized by the challenges of the pandemic and battles over curriculum, many are burned out and some are leaving their positions, Slaven said. These moves could open up opportunities for those running primarily to stop race-related curricula to win seats.

Historically, school boards have been largely nonpartisan. But as interest in the races spiked this year, some candidates began to sound more like Fox News commentators than school board members of the past.

Some candidates are already seeing energized support when railing against critical race theory, even when officials deny its existence in local schools. Slaven worries that some candidates may have little experience in education and few ideas on how to successfully lead a school system, instead taking a single-minded approach focusing on Covid-19 restrictions and how the history of racism is taught.

"If you're only running on one issue, you're doing a disservice, he said.

At the start of a new school year already polarized over mask-wearing, school leaders are sparring with parents over race- and ethnicity-focused lessons, with activists threatening to take their jobs. The pandemic and the debate about race are blurring together. Some conservative parents already frustrated by mask mandates have joined the fight against how systemic racism is taught because of the lessons they heard during remote learning. The issues are increasingly intertwined, creating a furor thats turned mundane school board meetings into volatile affairs.

In many districts, members of Facebook groups that formed to advocate for opening schools are now advocating for changes in curriculum and a change in leadership to accomplish both.

School board members are now on the front lines of two culture wars.

The Proud Boys, a far-right extremist group known for encouraging political violence, showed up twice to school board meetings in Nashua, N.H. to object to how racism is discussed in schools. The Nashua School Board like others across the country now has police attending meetings as threats of violence intensify.

In Williamson County, Tenn., where the fight over critical race theory had been brewing for months, anti-masked protesters followed masked attendees of a school board meeting last week to their cars, shouting "we will find you."

"I certainly anticipated heated disagreement on issues coming before me as a board member, I did not anticipate getting Facebook messages telling me to kill myself," Kimberly Cavill, a school board member in Illinois, wrote in a letter to the editor of a local newspaper. "I did not anticipate emails littered with curse words and hateful slurs. I did not anticipate people posting satellite images of my home on social media alongside dangerous, evidence-free accusations too disgusting to summarize."

Some school board members are ending their terms early, citing the threats of violence and newfound difficulty of approving curriculum and implementing health and safety policies.

Others see it as a reason to continue fighting for a seat.

"I had intended to not run for reelection, but darn it, if it means keeping a three-vote majority of people on that board with any sanity, I might run again," said Eileen Robinson, a school board member in Californias Chico Unified School District who will soon turn 75.

Robinson is one of four people on her school board facing recall efforts from conservative parents. She said in an interview the issues activists rally around over the past year whether masks, remote learning or curriculum about racism in America have shifted in recent months and weeks, but the chaos that has come with it has not.

"I have never, never seen what we've been through in the last 18 months politically, not the pandemic," she said. "The depth of the misinformation that people have consumed and believed is frightening."

The patchwork nature of local government also gives Republicans opportunities to test drive their rhetoric on the issue before fully deploying it in their efforts to retake the House in next years midterm elections.

Most Americans have no opinion about critical race theory, according to a POLITICO/Morning Consult poll but most Republicans do, and 42 percent see it very unfavorably. A quarter of independents felt the same way, while only 5 percent of Democrats shared that viewpoint. Some Republicans hope denouncing race-focused curricula and promoting Donald Trumps vision for a patriotic education will remain key wedge issues that foster new interest in the GOP.

Democrat have mostly avoided addressing critical race theory in in a significant away, aside from a Senate vote opposing the efforts to ban the teachings. One effort to do so backfired when Bidens Education Department walked back a plan to incentivize teaching about systemic racism, bowing to Republican pressure.

Education Secretary Miguel Cardona has repeatedly emphasized local control over curriculum, sometimes making general assertions that students should learn parts of American history were not proud of alongside the progress that has been made. And many Democrats in the states fearful of dividing their suburban coalitions have taken the approach of Terry McAuliffe, the former Virginia governor whos running for another term: dismiss furor against critical race theory as another right-wing conspiracy and pivot to talk about school infrastructure and teacher pay.

"Democrats are, rightfully, focused on real things that have an actual impact on people's lives like lowering the cost of living or raising wages, said Jesse Ferguson, a Democratic strategist. Republicans seem to think they've found a new wedge issue to divide us, but, in reality, the GOP is on dangerous ground when voters see they're trying to censor what's taught in schools and putting politicians in charge of classrooms.

Still, the conservative push against critical race theory is upending local politics in town after town. Between race-based study and pandemic policies, 2021 has seen more recalls of school board members than any year on record, according to tracking from Ballotpedia. More than twice as many officials have been the target of those efforts so far this year compared to all of last year.

Some parents see the fight against critical race theory as the most important political issue at the moment. They say they will keep running for office, collecting signatures for recalls and raising money for campaigns until they win.

In some places, running against critical race theory is already paying off. In one Houston-area school board race, every candidate who opposed critical race theory in schools won a seat in May. Two such candidates won with over 70 percent of the vote in another Texas race.

In Arizonas Maricopa County, parents are rallying to recall two school board members in the Peoria Unified School District. The concern started with mask and quarantine policies in the district, but critical race theory and other curricula issues like sex education and social emotional learning have become even bigger points of debate, said Wendy Van Wie, who applied for the recall petitions.

Two people are ready to run to fill the vacancies in Maricopa County, should the recall there succeed. Van Wie, who is not interested in running, said she voted in the past but was otherwise relatively inactive in politics before pushing for a recall. The more she looked, though, the less she trusted the education system and government as a whole, she said.

"I cant just sit back and be a keyboard warrior, she said.

A teacher, center, and her third grade students wear face masks and are seated at proper social distancing spacing during as she conducts her class in Rye, N.Y. | (Mary Altaffer, File/AP Photo)

In other districts, local party organizations are getting involved in the fight. The Tustin Democratic Club in Tustin, Calif., called on members to promote inclusive curriculum at a board meeting in May after a Facebook group of conservative parents planned to oppose it. Parents obtained emails from school administrators in which a board member suggested the elective ethnic studies curriculum is aligned with critical race theory and the superintendent supported a White Savior Assignment for the course. The emails and opposition to critical race theory led to an outcry for new leadership.

Then theres Ohio. This spring, the conservative education group EmpowerU Ohio created a website StopCriticalRaceTheory.com and launched a petition opposing critical race theory. The group collected more than 2,000 signatures and pledges of support with the help of 34 other conservative groups, from the Ohio Republican PAC to Bikers for Trump.

Then EmpowerU held an event on critical race theory in May, attracting 350 attendees a record in the organization's 11-year history, said Dan Regenold, the groups leader.

And this summer, it hosted a political training session offering detailed instructions about filing, fundraising and campaigning for school boards in Ohio. Speakers presented a "Contract With The District," an homage to Newt Gingrichs Contract with America, in the form of a 10-point document candidates running in nonpartisan local school board races can use to signal their opposition to critical race theory.

National Republican candidates and politicians in Ohio are noticing voters' energy behind the issue, too. Candidates running to be senators, representatives and governors are also calling for a change in curriculum.

"Many [school board candidates] are first-time candidates and [critical race theory] is the number one issue that has pulled them into the fray, said Jonah Schulz, a Republican who is running for Congress in Ohio.

And for voters, Schulz said, "when it comes to their kids, that's when people really feel the urge and the need to get involved."

The grassroots power that comes from invoking children in the debate over race and other issues has been obvious from record-breaking involvement in local elections and party organizations to rage-filled school board meetings and even threats of violence. It doesnt look like thats going to end soon.

Loudoun County in Virginia saw furious protests lead to new organizations calling for the replacement of sitting board members. The organization, Fight For Schools, says it is nonpartisan and is not aimed at changing any single policy, though critical race theory and Covid-19 have been at the center of the conversations about recalling six of the nine board members. The organization has raised over $130,000, hosts events with the likes of Ben Carson and sells its own line of merchandise, which at one point included t-shirts with the faces of board members up for recall.

Not all of the local movements get so much traction. In Oregon, four conservative parents ran together for their school board, trying to win the majority in an effort to end critical race theory teachings which the district said is not in its curriculum and Covid-19 precautions. They lost the election, but some parents have said winning isnt the only goal. Its really about flexing a newfound political muscle.

I 100 percent believe this has sent a message, said Van Wie, a leader in Maricopa Countys uphill recall effort. "At the end of the day, when you mess with a momma bear and her kid, we are a force to be reckoned with."

Bianca Quilantan contributed to this report.

Go here to read the rest:

Fears of critical race theory unleash army of school board candidates - POLITICO

Dealing with a global crisis like Afghanistan allows China to tell the world that it has the political ambition to work with the Taliban and also tame the Taliban to its terms.

Taliban has found a new friend in need. Only time will tell whether it is a friend indeed.

In a recent press conference, Taliban spokesperson, Zabihullah Mujahid, said, China is our most important partner. He further stated that the Taliban support Chinas One Belt, One Road initiative that seeks to link China with Africa, Asia and Europe through an enormous network of ports, railways, roads and industrial parks. Mujahid said, China is our most important partner and represents a fundamental and extraordinary opportunity for us because it is ready to invest and rebuild our country.

Interestingly, the Taliban spokesperson also elucidated that it is looking at China to rebuild Afghanistan and exploit its rich copper deposits. There are rich copper mines in the country, thanks to the Chinese, can be put into operation and modernized. In addition, China is our pass to markets all over the world.

Even as early as July, Taliban spokesperson Suhail Shaheen noted, We care about the oppression of Muslims, be it in Palestine, in Myanmar, or in China, and we care about the oppression of non-Muslims anywhere in the world. But what we are not going to do is interfere in Chinas internal affairs. During their first-ever press conference on 16 August after seizing power, the Taliban spokesperson said, We want to reassure that Afghanistan will not be used against anybody.

China too has been warming up to the Taliban, stating that China respects Afghanistans sovereignty and will not interfere and follow the friendship with entire Afghan people; Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said that facts show that in realising economic development we need an open inclusive political structure, implementation of moderate foreign and domestic policies and clean break from terrorist groups in all forms.

On 16 August, one day after Kabul fell, Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spokesperson Hua Chunying was asked about potential recognition. She said, We hope the Afghan Taliban can form solidarity with all factions and ethnic groups in Afghanistan and build a broad-based and inclusive political structure.

On the same day, Chinese United Nations envoy Geng Shuang echoed the statement but also noted, Afghanistan must never again become a haven for terrorists. We hope that the Taliban in Afghanistan will earnestly deliver on their commitments and make a clean break with the terrorist organizations.

Two days later, on August 18, there came the strongest hint yet at official recognition of the Taliban by China. It is a customary international practice that the recognition of a government comes after its formation, MFA spokesperson Zhao Lijian said. Most recently, on 25 August, an MFA spokesperson, when asked about a reported meeting the previous day between the Taliban representatives and the Chinese ambassador to Afghanistan, said Beijing stands ready to continue to develop good-neighbourliness, friendship, and cooperation with Afghanistan and play a constructive role in Afghanistans peace and reconstruction.

According to Centre of Foreign Relations in the article by CFR expert, Ian Johnson, it stated, The relationship with the Taliban will be twofold. First, it will be mercantilistic. China will seek to revive business ventures inside Afghanistan, which the Taliban is likely to support because investment will provide badly needed revenues. The Afghan economy is fragile and highly dependent on Western donors foreign aid, which will almost certainly be cut off. So any sort of investment, especially if it is not accompanied by lectures on human rights, will be welcome.

Second, the relationship will depend on each side not interfering in the others internal affairs. For Beijing, that means the Taliban cannot export extremism into Chinas troubled Xinjiang region, which shares a tiny border with Afghanistan, or condemn the Chinese governments abuses against Uyghur Muslims in that region. For the Taliban, it means China will not question the groups human rights abuses unless Chinese citizens are involved.

Derek Grossman, a senior defence analyst at the RAND Corporation in his article on China and the Taliban stated: This new transportation infrastructure, including planned thoroughfares through the narrow Wakhan Corridor that links the two countries, would significantly enhance Beijings ability to access Afghanistans natural resources. According to a 2014 report, Afghanistan may possess nearly $1 trillion worth of extractable rare-earth metals locked within its mountains.

Beijing further has its eye on projects that languished under the previous Afghan government due to a combination of obstacles including archaeological discoveries, security issues, and social impact. Under the Taliban, the future of these projects may be brighter. For example, in 2016, the Taliban offered protection for Chinese workers at the Mes Aynak Copper Mine near Kabul. If Afghanistans new masters are so inclined, Beijing may finally get long-sought-after benefits from a major oil project in northern Afghanistans Amu Darya basin.

Developments since the fall of Kabul strongly suggest China and the Taliban have started off on the right foot. This week, the Taliban spokesperson confirmed the two sides are actively discussing their bilateral relationship, including Chinese humanitarian assistance.

China, has positioned itself as a new great power in competition with the United States, and it will want to demonstrate its way of handling world crisis.

Perhaps most importantly, recognizing Taliban-run Afghanistan would contribute to the perception that it is Beijingand no longer Washingtonthat is now setting the agenda and shaping the future regional order according to Derek Grossman in his analysis on China and the Taliban relationship.

The Taliban takeover of Afghanistan and the pathetic manner in which the United States handled the Afghan crisis give China a point to rub into the US government, that when push comes to shove, the United States is unreliable and that it fails to walk the talk when it matters most.

China, recognizing the Taliban makes for strange optics: fighting Islamists at home but embracing them abroad. But it shows that China could be the ultimate politics playing nation.

As, Derek Grossman expressed, its still the early days under Taliban rule, so China is understandably cautious. Beijing is concerned the Taliban may reengage in illegal narcotics trafficking to fund their government and return to supporting terrorist attacks outside Afghanistan. Beijing worries the Talibans spectacular success might embolden alleged members of the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement, which Chinese authorities have controversially designated as a separatist and terrorist threat in the northwestern Xinjiang province. To date, China has predominantly relied on its ironclad brother Pakistan to do the heavy lifting to prevent fighters from entering Xinjiang or otherwise supporting the outlawed group.

China and the Taliban make strange bedfellows according to most defence analysts, but I do not see it as strange bedfellows. It is merely a relationship of bare necessities.

China wants to establish itself as a global power centre. Dealing with a global crisis like Afghanistan allows for China to tell the world that it has the political ambition to work with the Taliban and also tame the Taliban to its terms. China will play the friend of the Taliban till such time Taliban and its government benefits China. Having Pakistan on its one-side and Afghanistan on the other, with the Taliban gives it a strong and indisputable leverage not only in the region but the world but most all over India.

With the United States being an eagle with its wings clipped by the Taliban, the dragon will roar in Afghanistan while it will let the hyenas enjoy their prey.

Savio Rodrigues is the founder and editor-in-chief of Goa Chronicle.

Original post:

The Taliban get a Chinese friend - The Sunday Guardian Live - The Sunday Guardian

Afghan women are not just victims of conflict but also of rhetoric.Ruhi Khan, ESRC Researcher at LSEs Media & Communication department, argues that we need to break away from binary viewpoints on Afghanistan, probe deeper into coloniality and the history of feminism in the global south and include it into the larger geo-political feminist epistemology.

A young woman just 27 years old was beaten to death in the centre of Kabul by a mob. Her crime? She called out a religious vendor (mullah) selling holy verses on paper which he promised were powerful spells promising the hearts desires. The mullah was agitated that a woman had challenged him and falsely accused her of desecrating the Holy Quran. Soon a mob joined the chorus and started pelting her with stones and sticks, kicking her and hitting her. They tied the badly beaten woman to a car and drove it around until she succumbed to her injuries. Her broken body was thrown along the riverbank and torched.

This was not a witch hunt in the remote hamlets of Afghanistan. Nor did this happen under the Taliban rule. This crime happened in March 2015 in the liberalised Afghanistan under the watch of the allied forces and close to the palace of a progressive President.

Farkhunda Malikzadas story is important to understand the perils of the binary viewpoint that the world has of Afghanistan. When America sold the justification for the war in 2001, women became the central focus. How the Afghan women were subjugated and oppressed by the Taliban made global headlines. Their only savour, we were told, were the Western forces that would set them free by establishing a government that looked out for the women and a rule of law that protected them. We were given only two choices oppression by the Taliban or freedom by the Western invasion. There was no room for an alternative.

Farkhunda was a student of Islamic law and wore the veil, but she was also brave enough to stand up to a man against what she believed were un-Islamic practices. The barbaric actions of the mob captured on video, the incompetence of the Afghan police who stood by and watched the attack, the indifference of the hundreds who cheered or mutely witnessed the atrocities unfold, the sheer brutality of this gendered violence shows that little had changed in Afghanistan when it is not looked at through the rose-tinted glasses of the Western aid agencies.

When America sold the justification for the war in 2001, women became the central focus.

Farkhundas killers were not the Taliban, but city folks from the custodian of a religious shrine to street vendors, from the Afghan police to a 16-year-old boy who was part of the bloodthirsty mob. Many did not don religious attire or sport turbans and long beards, but were clean shaven and wore jeans and tee shirts, some were educated and some grew up in a US-occupied Afghanistan with its liberal dose of womens rights. Yet they were culpable of committing a murder over a rumour. The new Afghan legal system failed to give Farkhunda justice.

However, in an unprecedented display of feminist solidarity, Farkhundas burial saw women carrying her coffin chanting We are all Farkhunda and over 1000 people both men and women attended the funeral. But the spectacle of her murder, the re-enactment of the crime, the twist and turns of the narratives around it, the global outrage (however meagre) propelled this story to be exploited by many for their own socio-political gains, with little focus on structural changes that could prevent another Farkhunda.

If Farkhundas murder teaches us one thing, it is that there are no binaries in Afghanistan: The West is not the saviour of Afghan women. And the Taliban is not the only monster.

If Farkhundas murder teaches us one thing, it is that there are no binaries in Afghanistan: The West is not the saviour of Afghan women. And the Taliban is not the only monster.

The binary thinking of the saviour and the monster can be traced to colonial discourses dominated by what is often termed the white saviour complex. This sentiment was clearly evident in the American First Lady Laura Bushs radio address to her country in November 2001: Because of our recent military gains in much of Afghanistan, women are no longer imprisoned in their homes. They can listen to music and teach their daughters without fear of punishment. The fight against terrorism is also a fight for the rights and dignity of women.

By terming the American military attack as heroic and a much-needed intervention to protect the women of Afghanistan from the men within their fold, the First Lady affirmed the subjectivity of the White western male saviour by exploiting the psychological subjugation of the Brown Afghans. Indeed, here the subjects of the Global South the Afghan women and girls are simply used as objects to confirm the White subjectivity through a sense of gratefulness to the White Saviour.

This also exemplifies a clash of civilisations discourse, which is aided by creating a visual palette in the form of photographs and videos that juxtapose the self with the Other. Womens oppression served as an excellent marker to constitute this visual binary. Images began floating in newsprint and television of Afghan women in short skirts alongside those now in full burqa, or of Western women enjoying a music concert with veiled young girls huddled together outside a closed school.

The struggles of the white, heterosexual, elite, western woman have gained currency as the only history of feminism setting itself up as a role model for the rest of the world. Any woman who does not fit this image is deemed oppressed and in need of saving, making her a white mans burden and the white feminists cause clbre. Hence it is important to deconstruct the normative western feminist notions of gender and bring into focus indigenous understandings of gender from the global south and include it into the larger geo-political feminist epistemology.

The struggles of the white, heterosexual, elite, western woman have gained currency as the only history of feminism setting itself up as a role model for the rest of the world

The image of the Afghan woman draped in the head-to-foot burqa became the justification of a military action. The idea that Afghan (read Muslim) women needed saving became the central focus. The identity of global south women is constructed through the western lens and their agency disavowed within a global discourse. This is highly problematic if not understood in a historical and contextual framework. It also reinforces a sense of Western arrogance that their way of life is superior and unchallenged. This binary of the West and global south is simplistic in its construction as it fails to consider that the West is also shrouded in intersectional structural inequalities and gendered violence.

Few understand the country of Afghanistan its demography, politics or culture. The US and the Taliban were not always pitched on opposite sides. The Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in 1979 got American presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan supporting and arming the resistance fighters (mujahideen) who have now become the Taliban. In fact one of the USs closest ally was mujahideen leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, infamous for throwing acid on the faces of women who did not wear the burqa, while the US turned a blind eye.

Many of the Afghan population live in villages and hamlets where the tribal leaders hold a huge sway. Occupation by one foreign force after another British, Russians, US and its allies has only fuelled a revival of extreme religious bigotry as a mode of what they term self-preservation. The foreign occupying army has been equated with liberal thought and the resistance against both has been building. The global discourse (or lack of) on Afghanistans economy and politics coupled with corruption and disregard for the rural poor has left a gaping hole that the militant Taliban filled.

To many women living in the remote mountainous hamlets of the ravaged country, food and healthcare are priorities over education and employment. Mini-skirts and music concerts are not the aspirational goals for many Afghan women. And not all women who wear the veil are subjugated. Making it the central focus of liberation of the Afghan women alienates those who find comfort behind the layers of the garment. Issues around womens education and employment opportunities were largely focussed on select cities while corruption and unfair practices in the government were widespread.

It is impossible to isolate gender from the many cultural and political intersections through which it is constituted and maintained, and it is therefore important to understand and include the complexities of compoundness to explore the diverse experiences of differently positioned women and to make visible the collaboration that exists between systemic gender violence and the power equations that exist between individuals and groups for or against feminist causes and their intersectional differences.

The binary of the white men saving brown women from brown men (as scholar Gayatri Spivak eloquently puts it) is a narrative that needs to be challenged as it erases the history of feminisms within the global south.

Independence belongs to all of us that that is why we celebrate it. Do you think, however, that our nation from the outset needs only men to serve it? Women should also take their part as women did in the early years of our nation and Islam. From their examples we must learn that we must all contribute toward the development of our nation and that this cannot be done without being equipped with knowledge. So, we should all attempt to acquire as much knowledge as possible, in order that we may render our services to society in the manner of the women of early IslamAfghan Queen Soraya Tarzi, 1926

These words of Soraya Tarzi (1899-1968), Queen consort to King Amanullah Khan but better known as the Human Rights Queen of Afghanistan, paved the way for a new Afghanistan in the 1920s. She was born in the Ottoman-controlled Syria to exiled parents Asma and Mahmud Beg Tarzi, who in the early 20th century returned to Afghanistan at the behest of King Habibullah and started the first modern newspaper- Seraj-ul-Akbhar. It gave voice to women under the banner Celebrating Women of the World, edited by Asma. Ideas of womens education and liberty were often discussed. King Habibullahs son Amanullah fell in love and married Soraya in 1913.

After Habibullahs assassination in 1918, Amanullah took to the throne and successfully defeated the British in the third Anglo-Afghan war in 1919. The newly liberated Afghanistan saw a new constitution one that also saw women being liberated from the regressive traditional cultural norms. Amanullah treated Soraya as a partner in his endeavours to modernise the country.

In a dramatic public event, the royal couple introduced the idea of popular feminism. King Amanullah made a powerful speech stressing that Islam did not ask women to wear the veil, at the end of which Queen Soraya publicly tore her veil. Many other women then followed suit. New reforms made wearing the veil optional in Afghanistan.

Reforms by Amanullahs government included abolishment of slavery and the banning of child marriage, polygamy, revenge killing and bride prices. Soraya was the first woman minister for education, started a school for girls and sent her two daughters to it. She also began the first womens magazine in Afghanistan called Ershad-I-Niswan (Guidance for Women). She founded a grievance centre for women suffering from domestic violence and created a special task force a kind of an all-women secret service- to monitor men who abused women. One of Amanullahs sisters founded a hospital and another started an organisation that supported women suffering from oppression. In the 1920s, none other than the Royal family of Afghanistan sowed ideas of feminism by leading from the front.

It is little wonder that women in Afghanistan earned the right to vote after the country won independence from Britain in 1919,one year before women in the United States were allowed at the polls and almost a decade before women in the UK gained the same voting rights as men. Amanullah also introduced a social insurance to provide pensions linked to old age and disability, sickness and maternity benefits and workers compensation (a decade before the US).

To encourage womens education, the royal couple helped facilitate 15 women to go to Turkey to study in 1928. In fact, the King and Queen received honorary degrees from University of Oxford during their tour of Europe in 1927-1928. However, this tour also backfired. It was widely suspected that the British leaked photographs of the tour to the traditionalists in Afghan villages, who used them to instigate the rural masses against the royal couple.

More reforms on the return and in particular a separation of the state and church (mosque in this case) and a Western judiciary (instead of the Shariah law) led to more angst against the monarchy by the traditionalists. Amanullah soon faced a coup by the tribal leaders and the royal family had to flee to Europe in 1929. Soon all their reforms were reversed and the new patriarchal ruler stripped women of their hard-earned rights.

Soraya and Amanullahs story and those of others like them are often lost in grand Western narrative of feminism that has always only visualised global south women as subjugated and oppressed, and men as tyrants and barbaric.

In 2020, Time magazine posthumously put Soraya Tarzi on the cover of the 1927 edition calling her a progressive royal acknowledging her contributions to the womens cause in Afghanistan. But Soraya and Amanullahs story and those of others like them are often lost in grand Western narrative of feminism that has always only visualised global south women as subjugated and oppressed, and men as tyrants and barbaric. The two Afghan Royals were forging a path of progress for women in Afghanistan, yet it was a journey cut short, not just by the religious bigots but also by the British whose political interests superseded women reforms.

It is heart-breaking to know that the generation of girls that grew up believing that they were free to pursue their dreams and realise their potential will now have to hide their degrees and give up their professions as their futures remain uncertain.

By occupying Afghanistan for two decades, the US, UK and allies are duty bound to save the Afghans. A deal has been struck between the Taliban and the US that benefits their political and economic interests, but does this include safeguarding the rights of women and the vulnerable not just on paper but in practice? What would be the consequences should the Taliban renege on its promises? Who will be held accountable?

The Western leaders who once rallied support for the invasion of Afghanistan on the womens liberation card, now seem to have abandoned those very women who were promised safety and security as they enrolled in education institutions, joined the workforce and took up political positions. Today as the expats flee, many natives are left behind, waiting to be killed.

As Taliban establishes its rule in Afghanistan, the future of the country is unpredictable and the situation for women is frightening. Many are expecting to be at the end of a barrel of a patriarchal gun both figuratively and literally. Remember Malala Yousufzai? The next one may not be a survivor.

We, as global citizens, need to rally our support, pressure our governments and the international agencies to protect the Afghan women and other vulnerable citizens. We need to open our borders and our minds to break through the binaries of rhetoric thrusted on us and demand a better outcome an outcome that enables an orderly transition, safeguards the vulnerable and does not turn back the clock on gender reforms.

Women in Afghanistan are counting on our support. We cannot abandon them now.

This article givesthe views of the author and does not represent the position of theMedia@LSE blog, nor of the London School of Economics and Political Science.

Image credit

Image 1: Ehimetalor Akhere Unuabona via Unsplash

Image 2: Andre Klimke via Unsplash

Image 3: Isaak Alexandre Karslian via Unsplash

Read more:

Afghanistan and the colonial project of feminism: dismantling the binary lens - EUROPP - European Politics and Policy

We continue our coverage from last night when we reported that former Government Minister, Rene Jaime Montero, is now wanted by Police for the crime of willful oppression. Sources have since contacted us saying that 74-year-old retired politician was seen trying to cross the border into Guatemala on Saturday, upon getting intel of his imminent arrest. The reports went further to say that Montero was in the company of another man traveling in a grey Toyota Hilux. It turns out that we were not the only ones who got that tip.

Chester Williams, Commissioner of Police: Thats the information we receive as well and thats the reason why I dont even believe that hes out of the country but youre saying that his attorney says that he is then his attorney can bring him in to us.

And while both our newsroom and the Police Commissioner got the same tip on Monteros attempt to leave the country, UDP Chairman, Senator Michael Peyrefitte has declared that the former UDP Minister, Rene Montero is in the United States. Peyrefittte says the wanted poster issued for Montero is meant to cause embarrassment and that the charge being levied against Montero is bogus. Peyrefitte says that Montero will hand himself over to police when he returns to the country.

Michael Peyrefitte, UDP Chairman: I see an arrest warrant which was done clearly to just try and cause embarrassment and try to belittle the Honorable Rene Montero. I see they put up an arrest warrant with a description of the minister, you dont know what Rene Montero looks like ? You dont know where to find Minister Montero? I mean come on man. Even for a journalist you know that that is absolute nonsense and foolishness. Rene Montero called me from the United States yesterday and said that hes there for medical purposes and as soon as hes done with that hes going to come right back and face some wilful oppression, some obscure charge in the criminal code that says that some time between 2016 and 2020 he committed willful oppression. They are so bogus, they are so silly that they cannot even specify what he has done. They cannot even specify what time he supposedly committed this willful oppression and youre telling me that they must have evidence ? I am telling you they have no evidence. I am telling you that what this is about is for a reporter like you to be distracted and to ask me foolishness about a foolish situation. Lets talk about the fact that Santa Familia is burning. Lets talk about the fact that they still dont have a handle on COVID. Lets talk about the fact that we still dont have a $5 minimum wage. 10% cut of peoples salaries an absolute mal administration that Johnny Briceno is presiding over so what they do every now and again is something like this to hopefully distract the public but the public will not be distracted because the public sees this for exactly what it is. If they wanted to charge Rene Montero from last week they could have simply called me as the Chairman of the Party they could have called Mr.Montero, they could have called anybody to say we have an arrest warrant for you we want you to come in and Mr.Montero would have gladly gone in but they chose to do it like this in the hopes that they could cause embarrassment and win some cheap political points but I can tell you something the Belizean people are looking right through this for what it is.

Reporter: Did Mr. Montero Indicate that when he returns from the US hell hand himself over to police ?

Michael Peyrefitte, UDP Chairman: What you mean ? He has to. He wants to. Hes dying to but he said hes already there. Had he known then that there was an arrest warrant for him or a charge out for him then he would have immediately cancelled his trip and I would have taken him to the court and we would have looked at these charges, see what evidence they have, laugh at them, get bail and then prepare for trial.

Reporter: So he had no idea that the warrant would be issued before leaving to the US.

Michael Peyrefitte, UDP Chairman: We dont hide from nothing. We dont have any reason to hide. We gladly face it and Minister Montero cannot wait to come back to Belize to face these bogus charges and be done with them.

As we noted in last nights newscast, Montero has lawyered up with Attorney Orson Elrington. A statement from Elringtons law office came in late last night indicating that this move to arrest Montero is merely a distraction from bigger national issues.

Orson OJ Elrington: My client maintains that obviously the action to issue this warrant is malicious, it is unwarranted and it stinks of political mischief. In fact I believe multiple news outlets, multiple organizations will confirm and maybe Love FM too can confirm that in fact how the warrant was received is not through the Belize Police Department but it was through political operatives of the PUP they are the ones who started to disseminate this warrant. Furthermore to show you how unprecedented it is, how unwarranted it is and how much it stinks of political mischief we have seen way too many murders in Belize, way too many murders, way too many rapes and I have not on one instance seen a wanted poster for any of the accused in any of those offences and you can correct me if Im wrong but I personally have never ever seen one. So you have a offence of course which my client treats with tremendous seriousness because it goes to the heart of his integrity. This is a man who is a three time area representative, a man who has been a public servant for decades. A man who holds his integrity to the highest possible standards and therefore he takes the allegations very seriously and he totally denies the allegations against him and he will defend those allegations against him.

Montero was a government minister for 12 years under the Dean Barrow administration. His latter years in government saw him running the Ministry of Works.

See the original post here:

Commissioner Police Says Wanted Former Minister Rene Montero Attempted to Leave the Country Via the Western Border Love FM | Belize News and Music...

The Native Womens Association of Canada launched an aggressive campaign which aims to activate Indigenous women from coast to coast to coast to get to the polls and have their voices heard"

To vote or not to vote? That is the question Indigenous people face every federal and provincial election.

On Aug. 31, when the Assembly of First Nations released its five-priority platform for the federal election, National Chief RoseAnne Archibald weighed in. Like her predecessor Perry Bellegarde, Archibald encouraged people to vote.

First Nations voters can and will make a large impact on the results on election night, said Archibald.

The Native Womens Association of Canada launched an aggressive campaign entitled Were done asking, were voting, which aims to activate Indigenous women from coast to coast to coast to get to the polls and have their voices heard, said the news release.

Both the Manitoba Metis Federation and the Mtis Nation of Ontario are encouraging all of our citizens to vote.

Despite these pushes by Indigenous organizations to get people to mark their ballots, Courtney Skye, research fellow with the Indigenous think-tank the Yellowhead Institute, says voting is a contentious issue.

Some Indigenous people believe that Canada has long had policies of assimilation and voting is another step along that way of assimilation and indoctrination, said Skye.

The issue is, do you vote for your own oppression? Because Canada is a state that is invested and continues to be invested in the oppression of Indigenous peoples, the suppression of Indigenous rights and the denial of those rights in every aspect of the country, said Niigaan Sinclair, an assistant professor in Native Studies at the University of Manitoba.

We continue to have a country in which Indigenous peoples are seen as second tier, are seen as lesser than, are deemed as not as important or an option for political parties to decide to deal with at some point. In that environment the fact is that it is very difficult to justify voting because if all the parties suck, why would you participate in any of it? he said.

Skye also brings attention to the existence of pre-Confederation treaties with the British Crown, including those held by her Haudenosaunee people.

If we expect the Crown to respect our nationhood and our autonomy over our affairs then we have to extend that back out of mutual respect, and so, for a lot of Indigenous people who consider themselves treaty people and expect the Crown to honour these treaties, then they follow through with that in their own conduct and they dont vote in elections, she said.

For those who do choose to vote, Sinclair says its a matter of making a choice between lessen(ing) the damage of voting in the party that will do the least amount of damage or you choose the party that will be complicit in your own oppression.

Skye isnt as cynical as Sinclair. She says those who choose to vote are often driven by frustration of the status quo and not necessarily (by) being indoctrinated into another system and want to have Indigenous voices in the House of Commons.

Indigenous people make that choice for themselves, informed by their own history, their own treaty agreements, their own view, what riding theyre in, whether or not theres a (good) candidate in their riding, whether they view their riding as close or not. Theres a lot of different things I think that go into Indigenous people making the choice of whether or not theyre going to vote in the upcoming election, said Skye.

She also points to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples which entrenches the human rights of Indigenous peoples and collective groups to participate in elections of the state without losing any of their rights and entitlements of Indigenous peoples.

Skye says it makes sense that the AFN would encourage its members to vote as the AFN itself is a colonial construct Its a representative body of Indian Act band councils. They dont represent nations; they represent First Nations as creations of the federal government. They are people who are trying to affect change within the system. I get where theyre coming from.

Getting out the vote is a standard practise of all national chiefs, said Sinclair, adding he believes that push goes back as far as Phil Fontaine who served as national chief from 1997 to 2000 and again from 2003 to 2009.

The AFN has to deal with the federal government and so if theres a brown face in that government, naturally, they think that will evoke change, he said.

Skye observes that Inuit have a much different relationship with Canada than do the Haudenosaunee people. That difference became clear with the positive reaction from Inuit organizations when Inuk woman Mary Simon was appointed the new Governor General, the first Indigenous person to hold that position.

In an earlier interview with Windspeaker.com, Aluki Kotierk, president of Nunavut Tunngavik Inc., said that having an Indigenous person representing the Queen was not a conflict, especially an Inuk, as the experiences that we have had are quite different from First Nations and Mtis.

As for the Mtis, Sinclair says they are pleased with Trudeaus Liberal government. While the Mtis do have longstanding issues the fact is the Mtis have been able to justify many of the policies that the Liberals addressed and theyve found a very willing dance partner.

While we believe that Justin Trudeaus government has developed the strongest relationship with the Indigenous community in Canadian history, we are willing to work with any party that wins the election, said Manitoba Metis Federation President David Chartrand in a news release. He also said the Red River Mtis would be actively participating in the election.

Skye believes the number of Indigenous voters has slowly increased over the years, but she is not counted among those numbers. Skye has never voted nor will she be this time around.

For me I make the personal choice to invest in our own communities, participate in our own governance structures and revitalize our traditional systems over leveraging power from the state to affect change, said Skye.

Sinclair, who is Anishinaabe, has voted in the past although not often. Hes more inclined to vote in provincial elections, he says, because that can influence policies that pertain to his career as a teacher. He is uncertain whether hell be voting federally this month.

Often for me its a determination of will my vote matter? Frankly, my vote never matters in the area Ive lived, said Sinclair.

The federal election is Sept. 20.

- Shari Narine, Local Journalism Initiative, Windspeaker.com

Read more:

Many eligible Indigenous voters struggle with whether or not they will go to the polls - MidlandToday

Native Womens Association of Canada launched an aggressive campaign that aims to activate Indigenous women from coast to coast to coast to get to the polls and have their voices heard

To vote or not to vote? That is the question Indigenous people face every federal and provincial election.

On Aug. 31, when the Assembly of First Nations released its five-priority platform for the federal election, National Chief RoseAnne Archibald weighed in. Like her predecessor Perry Bellegarde, Archibald encouraged people to vote.

First Nations voters can and will make a large impact on the results on election night, said Archibald.

The Native Womens Association of Canada launched an aggressive campaign entitled Were done asking, were voting, which aims to activate Indigenous women from coast to coast to coast to get to the polls and have their voices heard, said the news release.

Both the Manitoba Metis Federation and the Mtis Nation of Ontario are encouraging all of our citizens to vote.

Despite these pushes by Indigenous organizations to get people to mark their ballots, Courtney Skye, research fellow with the Indigenous think-tank the Yellowhead Institute, says voting is a contentious issue.

Some Indigenous people believe that Canada has long had policies of assimilation and voting is another step along that way of assimilation and indoctrination, said Skye.

The issue is, do you vote for your own oppression? Because Canada is a state that is invested and continues to be invested in the oppression of Indigenous peoples, the suppression of Indigenous rights and the denial of those rights in every aspect of the country, said Niigaan Sinclair, an assistant professor in Native Studies at the University of Manitoba.

We continue to have a country in which Indigenous peoples are seen as second tier, are seen as lesser than, are deemed as not as important or an option for political parties to decide to deal with at some point. In that environment the fact is that it is very difficult to justify voting because if all the parties suck, why would you participate in any of it? he said.

Skye also brings attention to the existence of pre-Confederation treaties with the British Crown, including those held by her Haudenosaunee people.

If we expect the Crown to respect our nationhood and our autonomy over our affairs then we have to extend that back out of mutual respect, and so, for a lot of Indigenous people who consider themselves treaty people and expect the Crown to honour these treaties, then they follow through with that in their own conduct and they dont vote in elections, she said.

For those who do choose to vote, Sinclair says its a matter of making a choice between lessen(ing) the damage of voting in the party that will do the least amount of damage or you choose the party that will be complicit in your own oppression.

Skye isnt as cynical as Sinclair. She says those who choose to vote are often driven by frustration of the status quo and not necessarily (by) being indoctrinated into another system and want to have Indigenous voices in the House of Commons.

Indigenous people make that choice for themselves, informed by their own history, their own treaty agreements, their own view, what riding theyre in, whether or not theres a (good) candidate in their riding, whether they view their riding as close or not. Theres a lot of different things I think that go into Indigenous people making the choice of whether or not theyre going to vote in the upcoming election, said Skye.

She also points to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples which entrenches the human rights of Indigenous peoples and collective groups to participate in elections of the state without losing any of their rights and entitlements of Indigenous peoples.

Skye says it makes sense that the AFN would encourage its members to vote as the AFN itself is a colonial construct Its a representative body of Indian Act band councils. They dont represent nations; they represent First Nations as creations of the federal government. They are people who are trying to affect change within the system. I get where theyre coming from.

Getting out the vote is a standard practise of all national chiefs, said Sinclair, adding he believes that push goes back as far as Phil Fontaine who served as national chief from 1997 to 2000 and again from 2003 to 2009.

The AFN has to deal with the federal government and so if theres a brown face in that government, naturally, they think that will evoke change, he said.

Skye observes that Inuit have a much different relationship with Canada than do the Haudenosaunee people. That difference became clear with the positive reaction from Inuit organizations when Inuk woman Mary Simon was appointed the new Governor General, the first Indigenous person to hold that position.

In an earlier interview with Windspeaker.com, Aluki Kotierk, president of Nunavut Tunngavik Inc., said that having an Indigenous person representing the Queen was not a conflict, especially an Inuk, as the experiences that we have had are quite different from First Nations and Mtis.

As for the Mtis, Sinclair says they are pleased with Trudeaus Liberal government. While the Mtis do have longstanding issues the fact is the Mtis have been able to justify many of the policies that the Liberals addressed and theyve found a very willing dance partner.

While we believe that Justin Trudeaus government has developed the strongest relationship with the Indigenous community in Canadian history, we are willing to work with any party that wins the election, said Manitoba Metis Federation President David Chartrand in a news release. He also said the Red River Mtis would be actively participating in the election.

Skye believes the number of Indigenous voters has slowly increased over the years, but she is not counted among those numbers. Skye has never voted nor will she be this time around.

For me I make the personal choice to invest in our own communities, participate in our own governance structures and revitalize our traditional systems over leveraging power from the state to affect change, said Skye.

Sinclair, who is Anishinaabe, has voted in the past although not often. Hes more inclined to vote in provincial elections, he says, because that can influence policies that pertain to his career as a teacher. He is uncertain whether hell be voting federally this month.

Often for me its a determination of will my vote matter? Frankly, my vote never matters in the area Ive lived, said Sinclair.

The federal election is Sept. 20.

- Shari Narine, Local Journalism Initiative, Windspeaker.com

Read more from the original source:

Many Indigenous voters struggle with whether to vote - OrilliaMatters

About 50 people gatheredaround the Market House in downtown Fayetteville on Saturday afternoon to rallyfor fair voting laws both locally and across the country.

The demonstration took place on the 58th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.'smarch on Washington where he delivered his famous "I Have a Dream" speech.

According toKimberly Hardy, rally organizer and president of the Democratic Women of Cumberland County, the demonstration was intended to bring together people from all political backgrounds to demand an end to restrictive voter laws in the United States such as gerrymandering the act of manipulating voting districts unfairly to gain an advantage, or to disadvantage opponents.

More: What do the Fayetteville and Cumberland County mask mandates mean for you?

"The issue of disenfranchisement, oppression and gerrymandering, these things are huge for us," Hardy said. "And just as a black woman, my community is always hampered by these kinds of things."

The demonstration also aimed to push for congressionalapproval of the For the People Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, both of which are intended to expand fair access to voting and end restrictive voter laws, Hardy said.

According to theFor the People Act, if passed it would assist in making voting more accessible and equitableto the public by instituting policies that end partisan gerrymandering, expand access to voting by streamlining voter registration and mail-in voting, restore voting rights for people who have been in prison, strengthen ethical voting procedures, and update outdated voter infrastructure like old voting machines.

Similarly, the John Lewis Voting Rights Act seeks to embolden the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by restoring parts of the act like requiring state voting laws be authorized by the federal government.

Hardy, along with several other groups and activists, organized Saturday's event to highlight the importance of comprehensive voter legislation and advocate for the end of voter suppression, she said.

"You control what happens in this country," Hardy said. "We can hire and fire so many people with one piece of paper every two to four years, and so let's hire the people that believe in the values that are important to us."

She said the issue of voter suppression is not a partisan problem, and it affects people at all points inthe political spectrum.

More: 'We're paying the price': How Spring Lake's mishandled finances could lead to state takeover

Also in attendance at the event was Democratic N.C. State Sen. Kirk deViere, who represents Cumberland County. He said he was glad to see so many people out fighting against voter suppression.

"We need to make sure that we expand the access to the ballot and not decrease it," he said.

He referenced a recent order from several state trial judges that restores the right to vote to around 56,000 felons in N.C. whose sentences do not include prison time.

"Look at the recent ruling we saw across the state where over 50,000 felons are now able to vote," deViere said. "That's huge. That's how it's supposed to be.

Several people at the event helped people register to vote, emphasizing the need to bring in new voters rather than rely on those who would vote no matter what.

Gerard Falls, a Fayetteville educator and member of activism organization Cape Fear Indivisible in Fayetteville, spoke to the crowd about the need for more people to get involved in voting rights discussions.

He said that despite anyone's political affiliations, key issues unite us all.

"Access to affordable healthcare is a struggle for the vast majority of people in this community, access to affordable housing is a struggle for the vast majority of people in this community, and living wages that people can support their families on is a challenge for most of the people in this community," Falls said. "It doesn't matter whose door you're knocking on, whether they're Republican or Democrat, these are experiences that people share."

According to Falls, fair access to voting and voter registration turnout is a key factor in remedying the issues of affordable healthcare, housing and fair wages.

As demonstrators chanted mantras illustrating their goal to give people access to the right to vote, passing motorists honked their horns in solidarity.

"All of us," one activist called out.

"Or none of us," the crowd answered.

Reporter Jack Boden can be reached at jboden@gannett.com.

Support local journalism with a subscription to The Fayetteville Observer. Click the "subscribe'' link at the top of this article.

Read the original here:

Activists gather in downtown Fayetteville to rally for voting rights - The Fayetteville Observer

Ali A. Olomi| Guest column

The rapid takeover of Afghanistan by the Taliban left many surprised. To Ali Olomi, ahistorian of the Middle East and Islamat Penn State University, a key to understanding what is happening now and what might take place next is looking at the past and how the Taliban came to prominence. Below is an edited version of a conversation he had with editor Gemma Warefor the podcast, The Conversation Weekly. To find a link to the podcast, click here.

How far back do you trace the Talibans origins?

While the Talibanemerged as a force in the 1990sAfghan civil war, you have to go back to theSaur Revolution of 1978to truly understand the group, and what theyre trying to achieve.

The Saur Revolution was a turning point in the history of Afghanistan. By the mid-1970s, Afghanistan had beenmodernizing for decades. The two countries that were most eager to get involved in building up Afghan infrastructure were the United States and the Soviet Union both of which hoped to have a foothold in Afghanistan to exert power over central and south Asia. As a result of theinflux of foreign aid, the Afghan government became the primary employer of the country and that led to endemic corruption, setting the stage for the revolution.

By that time, differing ideologies were fighting for ascendancy in the nation. On one end you had a group of mainly young activists, journalists, professors and military commanders influenced by Marxism. On the other end, you had Islamists beginning to emerge, who wanted to put in place a type of a Muslim Brotherhood-style Islamic state.

Daud Khan, the then-president of Afghanistan, originally allied himself with the young military commanders. But concerned over the threat of a revolutionary coup, he started to suppress certain groups. In April 1978,a coup deposed Khan. This led to the establishment of the Peoples Republic of Afghanistan, headed by a Marxist-Leninist government.

How did a leftist government help ferment the Taliban?

After an initial purge of the ruling Communist Party members, the new government turned toward suppressing Islamist and other opposition groups, which led to a nascent resistance movement.

The United States saw this as an opportunity andstarted to funnel money to Pakistans intelligence services, which were allied with Islamists in Afghanistan.

At first, the United States funneled only limited funds and just gave symbolic gestures of support. But it ended up allying with an Islamist group that formed part of the growing resistance movement known as the mujahedeen, which was a loose coalition more than a unified group. Alongside the Islamist factions, there were groups led by leftists purged by the ruling government. The only thing they all had in common was opposition to the increasingly oppressive government.

This opposition intensified in 1979, when then-Afghan leaderNur Mohammad Taraki was assassinatedby his second-in-command Hafizullah Amin, who took over and turned out to be a wildly repressive leader. Sovietfears of the U.S. capitalizing on the growing instabilitycontributed to the Soviet Union invasion in 1979. This resulted in theU.S. funneling further money to the mujahedeen, who were now fighting a foreign enemy on their land.

And the Taliban emerged from this resistance movement?

The mujahedeen waged a guerrilla-style war against Soviet forces for several years, until exhausting the invaders militarily and politically. That and international pressure brought the Soviet Union to the negotiating table.

After theSoviet withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1989, chaos reigned. Within three years, the new government collapsed and the old mujahedeen commanders turned into warlords with different factions in different regions, increasingly turning on one another.

Amid this chaos, one former Islamist mujahedeen commander,Mullah Mohammad Omar, looked to Pakistan where a generation of young Afghans had grown up in refugee camps, going to various madrassas where they were trained in a brand of strict Islamic ideology, known asDeobandi.

From these camps he drew support for what became the Taliban taliban means students. The bulk of Taliban members are not from the mujahedeen; they are the next generation and they actually ended up fighting the mujahedeen.

The Taliban continued to draw members from the refugee camps into the 1990s. Mullah Omar, from a stronghold in Kandahar, slowly took over more land in Afghanistan until theTaliban conquered Kabul in 1996and established the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. But they never took full control of all of Afghanistan the north remained in the hands of other groups.

What was behind the Talibans success in the 1990s?

One of the keys to the Taliban success was they offered an alternative. They said, Look, the mujahedeen fought heroically to liberate your country but have now turned it into a war zone. We offer security, we will end the drug trade, we will end the human trafficking trade. We will end the corruption.

What people forget is that the Taliban were seen as welcome relief for some Afghan villagers. The Talibans initial message of security and stability was an alternative to the chaos. And it took a year before theystarted to institute repressive measuressuch as restrictions on women and the banning of music.

The other thing that cemented their position in the 1990s was theyrecruited local people through force sometimes, or bribery. In every village they entered, the Taliban added to their ranks with local people. It was really a decentralized network. Mullah Omar was ostensibly their leader, but herelied on local commanderswho tapped into other factions aligned with their ideology such as theHaqqani network, a family-based Islamist group that became crucial to the Taliban in the 2000s, when it become the de facto diplomatic arm of the Taliban by leveraging old tribal alliances in order to convince more people to join the cause.

How crucial is this history to understand what is happening now?

An understanding of what was going in the Saur Revolution, or how it led to the chaos of the 1990s and the emergence of the Taliban, is crucial to today.

Many were surprised by thequick takeover of Afghanistanby the Taliban after President Biden announced a withdrawal of U.S. troops. But if you look at how the Taliban came to be a force in the 1990s, you realize they are doing the same thing now. They are saying to Afghans, Look at the corruption, look at the violence, look at the drones that are falling from U.S. planes. And again the Taliban are offering what they say is an alternative based on stability and security just as they did in the 1990s. And again they are leveraging localism as a strategy.

When you understand the history of the Taliban, you can recognize these patterns and what might happen next. At the moment, the Taliban are telling the world they will allow women to have an education and rights. They said the exact same thing in the 1990s. But like in the 1990s, their promises always have qualifiers. The last time they were in power, those promises were replaced by brutal oppression.

History isnt just a set of dates or facts. Its a lens of analysis that can help us understand the present and what will happen next.

Ali A. Olomi is anassistant professor of history atPenn State. This column was originally published by The Conversation.

Continue reading here:

Understanding Taliban's start, and what could come next - Kitsap Sun

Afghanistan, after the Taliban takeover, is a waiting game. And for Afghan women, the waiting game is agonizing.

The last time the Taliban held power, in the late 90s and early 2000s, repression was a feature of their rule. This was especially true for women. Girls could not attend school; women could not hold jobs or leave their homes without a male relative accompanying them. Those who defied the Talibans directives and their fundamentalist interpretation of Islam were punished, often brutally, with floggings or beatings.

The US invasion of Afghanistan after the 9/11 attacks put the Talibans worldview under scrutiny. The war became about more than terrorism; things like the expansion of womens rights became embedded within the US mission there. In November 2001, first lady Laura Bush said the Talibans retreat meant the people of Afghanistan, especially women, are rejoicing. In 2010, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told a group of female Afghan ministers: We will not abandon you, we will stand with you always.

Twenty years later, the United States is departing, and as it executed those plans, those earlier justifications fell away. President Joe Biden has said, in the military drawdown, that the US objective in Afghanistan was to defeat terrorism there. He said last week, the idea that were able to deal with the rights of women around the world by military force is not rational.

That sentiment comes 20 years late, after the mess of two decades of conflict and the still-unfolding fallout of the USs military intervention. All of it leaves Afghan women facing a precarious future, once again, under Taliban rule and a question of what role, if any, the US has in that future.

The uncertainty facing Afghan women comes after 20 years of US intervention which itself followed decades of foreign intervention by the Soviet Union and others where womens rights were packaged as another justification for the war in Afghanistan. The gains were real, if uneven and often tenuous, undermined by the insecurity that the decades-long conflict brought.

The struggle for gender equality didnt start with the US arrival in 2001: Women in Afghanistan fought for their rights long before the Taliban arrived in the 1990s, and some Afghan womens activists opposed the US intervention.

But womens rights got inserted into the rallying cry for war regardless of whether Afghan women wanted them, and at times, they became a cause clbre. The fight against terrorism is also a fight for the rights and dignity of women, Laura Bush said in November 2001, a few weeks after the US invaded Afghanistan following the 9/11 attacks.

The central goal of the terrorists is the brutal oppression of women and not only the women of Afghanistan, President George W. Bush said in December 2001, around the signing of legislation for Afghan women and children. The terrorists who help rule Afghanistan are found in dozens and dozens of countries around the world. And that is the reason this great nation, with our friends and allies, will not rest until we bring them all to justice.

Saving Afghan women from the Taliban also helped make the case for continued US war, said Saadia Toor, a sociology professor at the CUNY College of Staten Island. Even among lawmakers who generally support the withdrawal, hints of that rhetoric continue today.

The US intervention brought attention and it brought development money, much of it well-meaning but not always suited to success. Afghan women did enter public life in a way that was impossible during the Talibans rule. The most drastic shift with respect to womens rights came formally, legally, constitutionally, and how they manifest within the formal sectors, said Maliha Chishti, former director of the United Nations Hague Appeal for Peace and professor at the University of Chicago. Womens rights were enshrined in Afghanistans 2004 constitution; women held a certain percentage of seats in Parliament and entered sectors like law, government, and media.

International aid severely limited during the Talibans rule improved some social, economic, and health outcomes for women. Girls and women had access to education, though the instability and Taliban resurgence in recent years has threatened that. In 2020, of 9.5 million students, just shy of 40 percent were girls, according to USAID.

Still, when it came to womens rights, they were most tangible in cities like Kabul, which, Chishti pointed out, were also the centers of international funding and foreign militaries that could protect those efforts. Meanwhile, grassroots efforts led by Afghan women sometimes conflicted with what Toor called NGO-ized feminism think conferences on womens empowerment and other kinds of Western-values activism that wasnt sustainable and didnt necessarily fit with Afghanistan.

Mariam Wardak, an advocate and former senior Afghan government official, pointed out that for traditional, religious, and cultural reasons, in many parts of Afghanistan there is a resistance for women to speak out, for women to hold a certain structure in our society.

And as the war ground on, the US commitment to womens rights sometimes visibly waned. Amie Ferris-Rotman, who reported for Reuters from Afghanistan for two years and founded an organization to mentor and train Afghan women journalists, noted for Vanity Fair that there have long been signs of betrayal of Americas stated commitment to womens rights:

There was the time a senior American official described issues of gender as pet rocks in our rucksack taking us down. Then there was the method deployed by the CIA of exchanging Viagra pills for intel on Taliban whereabouts, so that, in the words of an Afghan journalist friend, old men can rape their wives with Americas blessing. Lets not forget the polemic two years ago by academic Cheryl Benard, wife of the Afghan-born American Taliban negotiator, Zalmay Khalilzad, chastising Afghan women for not fighting for their rights, which they are not owed by someone elses army or taxpayer dollars. And when Joe Biden was asked last year by CBS if he bears some responsibility should Afghan women lose their rights under a Taliban takeover, the U.S. president responded to the reporter, Margaret Brennan, with No, I dont!

Ultimately, one of the biggest challenges to womens rights in Afghanistan was years of war. Its hard to get girls to go to school when theyre displaced by airstrikes or their schools are getting blown up. The Talibans advance across the country in the past years meant women in positions of authority were often under threat of kidnapping and violence.

Yet the full return of the Taliban deepens that threat, and threatens to stall or unravel the progress Afghan women have made. Zubaida Akbar, a 31-year-old Afghan activist whos been in the United States for three years, said the lives of Afghan women have improved, even if that improvement has been slow.

Zahra Nader, a journalist and PhD student from Afghanistan whos based in Canada, said the US talked about saving Afghan women from misogynist forces, this gender apartheid.

That did not happen, she said. That did not happen at all.

Yes, she said, she went to school, she went to university in Kabul an opportunity she recognizes that many other Afghan women did not have. But she and other Afghans were working to determine what came next for their country.

We were hoping that were going to build a society, were going to build a better future for Afghanistan, and we will be the ones that decide the future of the country, she said. But she argued that US intervention, whatever the justifications, was always about US interests, and those are what prevailed: What was going on in Afghanistan wasnt really our choice.

And now the women in Afghanistan are left to deal with the consequences of that, collateral in a war outside their control. The international community has failed us, Akbar said, and they have made it clear that our lives dont matter.

The Taliban have sought to rebrand themselves as a bit more moderate, especially with the world watching. The Taliban spokesperson has assured the public that women would be allowed to go to work and school, according to Islamic law. Part of the waiting game is seeing in practice what according to Islamic law really means.

This week, the Taliban spokesperson has made assurances that there will be no violence against women. Few believe him.

We see them as how we know them, Akbar said. The Taliban are who they are.

There are already signs the Taliban are who they always were. One TV news anchor in Afghanistan said she was turned away from work. You are not allowed, go home, she said she was told.

As they began retaking territory, the Taliban reportedly sent home female students and professors in Herat. A female university student in Kabul told the Guardian that she would have to burn everything I achieved in 24 years of my life. Having any ID card or awards from the American University is risky now. There are reports of the Taliban going door to door looking for any unmarried woman between the ages of 14 and 45 to marry off to Taliban soldiers. A few women I reached out to in Afghanistan declined to speak because they said, almost uniformly, that they are afraid.

Women are not even leaving their homes because they dont feel safe, Lida Azim, an organizer with Afghans for a Better Tomorrow, said. They might be allowed to go to work or school, but its a huge intimidation tactic.

Akbars volunteer organization works with children who have lost their parents, often from conflict, and with mothers, including some whove escaped domestic violence. Her group connects people with support services like counseling, medical checkups, and food. The goal, Akbar said, was to create social reform through volunteerism. As the Taliban rushed through Afghanistan, the work stopped. Because of the type of work that we were doing, our volunteers do not feel safe continuing to work in Afghanistan, unfortunately, and their lives are at risk, she said.

Others who work with nonprofit organizations or networks in Afghanistan also do not know what will happen to their female staff and volunteers. They fear that if the humanitarian situation worsens in Afghanistan banks are closed, services are scarce, thousands of people were displaced by the Taliban offensive, the threat of hunger looms those services will be desperately needed. Some said they are still unsure whether or how their ability to deliver aid might be affected and what that means for the families who rely on it.

But defiance accompanies this fear and uncertainty. Afghans, despite the threat of violence, have protested the Taliban takeover. Women are among them, leading them.

Even women who are intimidated are trying to go to work. Wardak, who also founded HerAfghanistan, a network of women in Afghanistan, mentioned one girl in her network who went to her job last week in Kabul. She went terrified. But she went, Wardak said.

Nader said that even if women couldnt go to their jobs, they are leaving their homes, just to go outside. They go with a sense of fear, not knowing what is going to happen or what the reaction of one particular Taliban soldier might be, she said. But they do go out.

Just to tell [them] that we are here, we are not gone, Nader said.

Some Afghan activists told me they see this as an opportunity for women to push back, especially as the world is watching. Right now, because Taliban wants international recognition, we have to push boundaries to see how far we can go, Wardak said.

The Taliban will need foreign money if they want to stay afloat. This could be a place of leverage, as international legitimacy will depend on whether the Taliban meets its commitments on human and womens rights. At the same time, activists worry that sanctions or other policies to put pressure on the government will trickle down and increase the suffering of the Afghan people.

Activists said they still want the Taliban held accountable, but the US and coalition allies have ceded some of their leverage as they depart. Military intervention did not bring lasting peace or democracy or rights. But that does not mean the United States or the rest of the world can wash its hands of it all.

Akbar spent last week fielding calls, filling out visa forms, writing letters. After one day of this, when she looked at the spreadsheet she uses to record her efforts, she counted more than 100 people, all desperate to leave Afghanistan.

Many of the people she is trying to help are women, though not all. The return of the Taliban has put many lives at risk, including those who worked with the US military or coalition forces or international organizations or the Afghan government. Ethnic and religious minorities also face real threats. Women, of course, cut across all those categories or are associated with those who do. There are also the women who became leaders in the past two decades activists, advocates, and political leaders, who fear they may become direct Taliban targets. They cant, activists say, stay in Afghanistan and be safe.

Which is why many activists say that what many women need most in Afghanistan is a way to exit, as soon as possible. The lives of these women are at risk, Akbar said. They will get killed if they stay in Afghanistan.

Since August 14, the US says it has evacuated more than 37,000 people; the pace has increased in recent days, with about 11,000 or so leaving each day, reports the New York Times. Still, in the past week, the chaotic scenes outside the Kabul airport, and report after report of the difficulty of getting through, have revealed how desperate people are. The United States is now deploying troops to get Americans and their allies who are unable to make it to the airport.

Many Afghans who helped the US military or government may be eligible for Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs), but as the New York Times reports, many of those jobs, like interpreters, were filled by men.

Which is why many activists fear that women may be left out of some of these programs, especially the activists, journalists, and political leaders who are directly at risk now that the US is leaving. Advocacy groups are calling on the Biden administration to prioritize and expedite the evacuation of womens rights activists, journalists, lawmakers, and other public figures, as have some members of Congress.

As a global community, not just United States, we need to talk about how do we let them in, how do we open our doors? Homayra Yusufi, with the Afghan-American Council and the Partnership for the Advancement of New Americans, said.

As many pointed out, the US and its coalition allies have a moral obligation. There is an emergency right now, and whatever happens in the future cant be completely separated from the decades of conflict and intervention. As Azim, of Afghans for a Better Tomorrow, said, for the US and Western allies, the responsibility is on their hands.

Of course, not everyone can or wants to flee Afghanistan. Activists say theres still a role for the international community in helping people who remain in the country: international aid, specifically, to help the coming humanitarian crisis and try to shore up grassroots groups that do provide health and other support services.

International support may depend on what the Taliban might do around womens rights in Afghanistan. But right now, there is an immediate emergency to evacuate women who are being targeted by the Taliban or fear they might be very soon. Those in Afghanistan, desperate to leave, likely believe they have no other choice.

I am getting calls back to back, Yusufi said, as are all of the organizations that work on refugee issues or just getting bombarded from calls from family members, calls coming in from Afghanistan, being like, I need help, I need to get out right now.

Here is the original post:

The uncertain future of womens rights in Afghanistan under the Taliban - Vox.com

More than 80 percent of the population in Afghanistan belongs to rural areas, living under the clutches of regional warlords, lacking basic education for everyone, not to talk of girls. They are accustomed to a meagre and simple life, with a strong belief system.

Rural Afghanistan has no comparison to Kabul, a city of five million people, where the majority of the population has long been introduced to technology, Western politics, media and education. The credit for this does not go to any invading foreign power. The city has preserved the remnants of the golden days of the pre-Russian invasion era.

In the early 1970s, I remember many Afghan students coming to Kashmir to pursue higher degrees in our educational institutions and Kashmiris pursuing degrees in Kabul University.

The political, cultural, and linguistic connections between Afghanistan and Kashmir are centuries old. Abdullah Khan Ishaq was the first Afghan ruler in Kashmir who established his dynasty in the mid-18th century that lasted for almost 66 years. Memories of that period are still fresh in the Pashto-speaking area of Gotli Bagh, which resembles Kandahar, where some people have had to endure the persecution in the late 1990s on suspicion of their resemblance to the Afghan Taliban.

While the international community has expressed concern over the Taliban's second term in power in Afghanistan, India's concern over its impact on [Occupied] Kashmir has taken over prime time debates on media channels. However, India's domestic policies have been called into question in the global media by many political analysts.

According to a senior Indian journalist (name withheld due to security), "The Hindutva policy of the current regime has tarnished India's image across the globe. India seems isolated and alone. Who would dare tell Hindutva how they [can] call [the] Taliban extremists when they are playing fanatic politics to win elections? They have damaged the secular credentials of India".

Indias opposition politicians have expressed the same concerns as expressed in 1996 when the armed movement in Kashmir had reached its peak. The then Congress government was forced to outreach to Kashmir so as to suppress the movement and prevent any possible support for the Taliban. At that time, the government promised former chief minister of Occupied Jammu and Kashmir Farooq Abdullah, who had fled Kashmir and was living in the UK, the restoration of all political rights after state elections. Sky is the limit was the mantra of the government which was never fulfilled.

India now claims the Taliban may rejoin Kashmir's armed movement, although there has been no evidence in the past that any Afghan fighters were captured or killed in the 1990s, nor has any proof been found that Kashmiris have ever sought any help from the Taliban.

George Graham, a professor of South Asian politics and governments, says that "if [a] superpower like the United States signed the Doha agreement with the Taliban, who were branded terrorists, and justify [the] Taliban taking control of Kabul, who can stop Kashmiris from continuing their struggle and achieving their goal of freedom? It could have been stopped by the Indian government like in the early '90s, but Modi at the behest of the RSS has left no option for reconciliation.

There is a perception in India that Kashmiris are happy with the Taliban government in the neighbourhood. It must be borne in mind that most of the Kashmiris did not like the rule of the Taliban in the early 1990s but since Kashmiris have suffered under Hindutva politics and are struggling with the loss of their identity, dignity, and political rights, they certainly derive pleasure at every defeat of Indias Hindutva government.

Raja Aleem of Kashmir (who was jailed many times) says that "Hindutva followers are Hindu terrorists; their crimes against humanity are a hundred times more than the ISIS terrorists".

The political turmoil in the neighbourhood will not leave Jammu and Kashmir unaffected. However, it is not correct to say that Kashmiris are in favour of continuing their struggle at gunpoint or that they seek the favour of any other country. The majority support a peaceful struggle for their political and economic rights.

A few days ago, you may have heard the statement of Mehbooba Mufti in which she urged India in the context of the changing political situation in Afghanistan to find a peaceful solution to Kashmir or it can result in a heavy burden for the country. At the same time, the Gupkar Alliance of Mainstream Parties issued a strong statement warning the Indian government to take immediate steps for the restoration of Articles 370 and 35A of the Indian constitution so that the situation does not get out of hand again. In reaction, the ruling BJP demanded strict action against Mehbooba Mufti.

BJP local chief Ravinder Raina accused Mehbooba Mufti of spreading hatred in the country, saying "Narendra Modi is not Joe Biden of the United States who is withdrawing troops from Afghanistan out of fear of the Taliban although India had already announced the evacuation of thousands of people, including its diplomatic staff, from Kabul and other consulates.

Indian media has claimed that the mainstream and pro-freedom camp in Occupied Kashmir was not only in jubilation over the recent success of the Afghan Taliban, but that the youth were looking for ways to breathe a new life into the independence movement despite the government's tough policies against the population. The irony in this is that Kashmiri leaders did not say anything that most Indian analysts and opposition leaders did not say. Many politicians and political experts have warned the Indian government to refrain from its iron-fist policies and start the process of winning back the Kashmiri people.

Yashwant Sinha, the former finance minister in the BJP government after visiting Kashmir a few weeks ago said that the situation had worsened and the chasm between the Valley and Delhi had widened. Referring to the success of the Taliban, he slammed the Modi government's foreign policy, saying "it is a deviation from reality to call Kashmir normal. People did not take to the streets to protest, but that does not mean that the situation in Kashmir has improved, and the basic issue has been resolved; the distance between Kashmir and Delhi has become too wide to fill".

Commenting on the Taliban's success, former Indian army chief General Shankar Roy Chaudhry said that: "This will have a profound effect on Kashmir and there are fears of a recurrence of the 1990s situation. The government should immediately start the process of reconciliation with Kashmiris and reassure them that India is a secular country. It's the right place for all faiths".

When I mentioned this statement of the former army chief to Raja Hanif, a human rights activist in Kashmir, he laughed for a long time and then said, "General Sahib is advising his government that has taken away everything from Kashmiris based on religion, labelling them as 'terrorists' and has spread venom against them across the country. He is telling Modi to give a lollipop to Kashmiris. My advice would be to reassure the thirty percent minorities of India who are getting lynched every day in the name of religion". He further said, "Whether the Taliban come or not, we have no interest in [that]. Our struggle has started even before the birth of [the] Taliban, which will come to an end only after reaching our destination."

The situation in Jammu and Kashmir has worsened. Indian security forces go to peoples homes and check their phones to see if anyone has written a post or message about the Taliban.

A local editor of a newspaper says the success of the Taliban has certainly boosted public morale, but the real reason for this is the constant oppression inflicted by the Hindutva government. Political observers, including Mehbooba Mufti, have warned about the consequences, but since Mehbooba is a Kashmiri Muslim, she gets branded as being among traitors.

The writer is a Kashmiri activist and former journalist.

See the original post:

Taliban and the Kashmiris - The News International