Category: Afghanistan

  • RT ran a headline: “Putin must be ‘adult in the room’ on Ukraine conflict.” This is according to left-leaning comedian and political commentator Jimmy Dore.

    “Joe Biden and the neo-cons in his administration have been constantly escalating war… What they’re trying to do is start a war that Donald Trump can’t stop,” warns Dore about a potential WWIII.

    The only hope we have is that Putin shows restraint, that he is the only adult in the room and that he can hold off somehow until Donald Trump becomes president, Dore opined in an interview with Going Underground host Afshin Rattansi.

    Is that the only hope? One can certainly come up with many other hopes. For example, a mass mobilization by US citizenry in Washington, DC. A general strike carried out by Americans, Canadians, and Europeans repulsed by their neocon-affiliated politicians. Or that Pentagon generals speak out vociferously and publicly against such dangerous provocations against Russia. Or that people charged with inputting the coordinates for missiles targeting Russia refuse to do so.

    Far-fetched? Maybe so, but isn’t that what a hope is — something far outside of the realm of a certainty?

    Or is Trump the only feasible hope? And can Trump be trusted? How many promises did he fail to come through on during his first term as president?

    Dore asserts that “Trump is not a warmonger” and that he “got elected on ending our foreign regime-change interventionist wars.”

    Trump may very well have been elected on the basis of ending foreign interventions by the US. However, that does not excuse him from being a warmonger.

    Early in the first Trump presidency, he sent in US fighters who killed dozens of Yemeni civilians, including children. Trump was now a war criminal.

    Did Trump end the US war on Afghanistan? No, he sent more American troops to Afghanistan.

    Did Trump end the US war on Syria? No. In fact, Trump said the troops would remain because “We’re keeping the [Syrian] oil.”

    Did Trump seek peaceful relations with Iran? No. In fact, Trump pulled the US out of the JCPOA which was designed to halt Iran’s potential for becoming a nuclear-armed state. Trump’s strategy has set the stage for further nuclear proliferation. And if that was not enough, Trump ordered the assassination of Iranian general Qasem Soleimani.

    However woeful the Biden presidency has been, one ought not to forget the first Trump presidency. Trump has a track record. It seems prudent to remove the rose-colored glasses and take into consideration that track record.

    But Trump was pressured by those around him. Trump had mistakenly saddled himself with warmongering neocons in his previous administration like Nikki Haley, John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, etc. But is he different now?

    Trump’s new for Director of national security policy in the White House, Sebastian Gorka, exhibited his diplomatic decorum by referring to Russian president Vladimir Putin as a “murderous former KGB colonel, that thug.” According to Gorka, Trump is going to threaten Putin by telling him: “You will negotiate now or the aid that we have given to Ukraine thus far will look like peanuts.” Which serious-minded observers believe that Putin is now shaking in his pants?

    Does this inspire hope in Trump?

    Finally, does anyone have an iota of hope that Trump will do right in the Middle East when it comes to Israel?

    The post Is Trump “the only hope we have”? first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Two outstanding human rights defenders who have made it their life mission to protect human rights in Afghanistan and in Tajikistan will receive the Martin Ennals Award 2024 on November 21th, 2024, in Geneva, Switzerland, on the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the Martin Ennals Award.

    The Jury of ten of the world’s leading human rights NGOs – Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, FIDH, HURIDOCS, Bread for the World, Human Rights First, World Organisation Against Torture, International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), International Service for Human Rights (ISHR), and Front Line Defenders – has selected, after much deliberation, the two human rights defenders whom it strongly believes deserve to be recognized and honored in 2024, on the 30th anniversary of the Martin Ennals Award. [see also: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/awards/043F9D13-640A-412C-90E8-99952CA56DCE]

    The two 2024 Laureates, Zholia Parsi (Afghanistan) and Manuchehr Kholiqnazarov (Tadjikistan) have shown exceptional courage and determination to bring human rights at the forefront despite evolving in deeply repressive environments.

    We are very proud to honor these two exceptional Laureates. They have paid too big a price for justice and equality to be respected in Afghanistan and Tajikistan and the international community must support their efforts instead of battling geostrategic interests in the region“.
    – Hans Thoolen, Chair of the Martin Ennals Award Jury

    The two Laureates 2024:

    Zholia Parsi: is a teacher from Kabul, Afghanistan. Having lost her career and seeing her daughters deprived of their education with Taliban takeover in August 2021, she founded the Spontaneous Movement of Afghan Women (SMAW) to protest the return of policies and practices against women rights and fundamental freedoms. She displayed remarkable leadership and resilience in organizing numerous public protests despite the risks involved. The grassroots movement that is the SMAW quickly grew momentum in Kabul and other provinces, now counting 180 members and having mobilized communities to resist the Taliban’s policies and practices.
    She was arrested in the street by armed Taliban in September 2023, and detained along with her son. She was released after three months of torture and ill-treatment under their custody, which further strengthened her resolve to resist Taliban oppression and repression.

    Manuchehr Kholiqnazarov: is a Pamiri human rights lawyer from the Gorno-Badakhshan Autonomous Oblast (GBAO), Tajikistan. He is serving a 16 year-long prison sentence after what is widely considered an unfair trial in retaliation for his human rights work.
    As Director of the Lawyers’ Association of Pamir (LAP), he led strategic advocacy efforts in the GBAO, a region marked by its ethnic minority and historical tensions with the central government, including by lobbying for the incorporation of international human rights standards into domestic law and practice, and by providing legal support to residents of the GBAO.
    Through the human rights initiatives Commission 44 and Group 6, he played a key role in investigating the death of youth leader Gulbiddin Ziyobekov in November 2021, and the violent repression of subsequent mass protest in the regional capital Khorog. The investigation resulted in critical evidence of an unlawful killing, possibly an extrajudicial execution of the young man, and the unlawful use of force of security forces against protesters, resulting in two deaths, seventeen injured and hundreds detained.
    He was arrested on 28 May 2022 together with two other members of Commission 44 amid a widespread crackdown on local informal leadership and residents of the GBAO.

    The Martin Ennals Award (MEA): 30 years alongside human rights defenders

    The Martin Ennals Award (MEA) was given for the first time in 1994 to recognize, promote and protect human rights defenders at risk or from under-reported contexts. Over the years, the MEA has offered defenders a platform to issues that are of global concern and the means to steer the movement for human rights and larger freedoms.
    The MEA culminates every year in a public ceremony in Geneva, co-hosted with the City of Geneva (Ville de Genève). The 2024 MEA Ceremony will take place on November 21th, 2024 at the Salle communale de Plainpalais. The Ceremony, which is also livestreamed, draws many local and international human rights supporters to an inspiring event which celebrates the achievements and commitment of exceptional human rights defenders.
    “Geneva has a long tradition of hosting international diplomacy and promoting human rights and fundamental freedoms. The City of Geneva is proud to co-host the Martin Ennals Award and shed light, on this 30th anniversary, on the impressive resilience of two human rights defenders and the hope they bring for peace and equality” concludes Alfonso Gomez, Administrative Counselor of the City of Geneva.

    https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/en/statement-report/martin-ennals-award-2024-laureates-announced

    https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/martin-ennals-award-to-reward-rights-activists-from-afghanistan-tajiskitan-on-its-30th-edition/

    This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.

  • In August 2021, following the withdrawal of major U.S./NATO military forces from Afghanistan after two decades of occupation, Taliban forces took effective control over the country. In response, the United States seized the assets of Afghanistan’s central bank totaling around $7 billion. Half of that amount was transferred to the misleadingly named “Afghan Fund” in September 2022, a Swiss-based “charitable foundation” whose only role thus far has been to privately conceal and invest the funds without any concrete plans to return them, as confirmed by U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan Thomas West. This runs contrary to popular demands by experts and humanitarian organizations who argue that a return of the funds is desperately needed now more than ever to help everyday Afghans.

    Afghan women do not have any representation on the board of the “Afghan Fund,” nor do they have any official say over whether the assets should be returned. The board of trustees includes: two men selected by the U.S. State Department, Anwar ul-Haq Ahady and Shah Mehrabi, the U.S. Under Secretary of the Treasury for International Affairs Jay Shambaugh, and Swiss government official Ambassador Alexandra Baumann.

    According to a July 2024 press statement from the board of the “Afghan Fund,” some of the stolen assets may also be disbursed to the Asian Development Bank, an institution controlled by the United States, Japan, and Australia via majority shareholder status. While the funds are not returning to the Afghan people, this move shows that a process to return the funds to Afghanistan can begin immediately if the board members agree to do so. Regardless of whether the funds are in fact disbursed elsewhere over time, board members Ahady, Mehrabi, Shambaugh, and Baumann are all culpable in the forced starvation and impoverishment of tens of millions of Afghans – tantamount to the collective punishment of the Afghan people.

    According to a January 2024 written testimony by the U.S. Congress-established Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), the remaining $3.5 billion in sovereign funds held in the United States may eventually be transferred to the “Afghan Fund” depending on litigation filed by the families of 9/11 victims and other plaintiffs, while other funds held in Europe and the United Arab Emirates may also be added to the “Afghan Fund.” SIGAR found that none of the funds in the “Afghan Fund” as of early 2024 have been spent, are planned to be spent, or will ever be used to provide humanitarian or development assistance. Notably, while no disbursements have been made for the benefit of the Afghan people, portions of the over $340 million in interest that have been accrued from the stolen assets are being used to pay for the “Afghan Funds” operational and administrative costs.

    The sudden deprivation of access to its sovereign assets led to a sharp economic and financial crisis in Afghanistan in 2021, which a recent United Nations Development Program (UNDP) study found is disproportionately affecting women and children. The seizure of assets combined with both U.S. and UN sanctions – ostensibly only targeting the Taliban – have hurt ordinary Afghans and aid organizations, affirmed by US-aligned rights groups and media outlets. The same UNDP report found that 69% of Afghans “do not have adequate resources for basic subsistence living,” while an estimated 15.8 million Afghans – including nearly 8 million children – are expected to experience “acute food insecurity” throughout 2024.

    Clearly, the “Afghan Fund” – controlled by Western officials and Afghan compradors – has deliberately withheld billions from the suffering Afghan populace. It should be reiterated that a process to return these stolen funds, and in turn mitigate the U.S.-enabled humanitarian and economic crises plaguing Afghanistan, can and must begin right away. The following individuals have full power or influence over the release of the illegally stolen assets back to its rightful owners: the Afghan people.

    Jay Shambaugh

    Under Secretary of the U.S. Treasury for International Affairs

    • Visiting Associate Professor at the McDonough School of Business at Georgetown University
    • Former Consultant to the International Monetary Fund (2005, 2008, 2011-2013)
    • Former Director of the Hamilton Project at the Brookings Institution (2017-2020)
    • Former Member of the White House Council of Economic Advisors (2015-2017)
    • Former Chief Economist at the White House Council of Economic Advisers (2009-2011)

    Alexandra Baumann

    Head of the Prosperity and Sustainability Division at the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs

    • Former Diplomatic Advisor of the Head of the Swiss Federal
    • Department of Finance
    • Previously worked in the Swiss Embassies in Chile and
    • Germany, and the Swiss Mission to the UN in New York

    Anwar ul-Haq Ahady

    Former government official, economic advisor and central banker to the U.S./NATO occupied Afghanistan

    • Former Minister of Commerce and Industry (2010-2013) and Minister of Agriculture (2020-2021)
    • Former Minister of Finance and Advisor of National Economy to the U.S./NATO-backed President of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai (2004-2009)
    • Previously responsible for overseeing Afghanistan’s central bank, Da Afghanistan Bank (2002-2004)

    Shah Mehrabi

    Member of the Supreme Council of Da Afghanistan Bank

    • Professor of Economics at Montgomery College in Maryland
    • Former Senior Economic Advisor to previous Ministers of Finance under U.S./NATO occupied Afghanistan

    Thomas West

    U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan and Deputy Assistant Secretary

    • Former Vice President at a private global strategic advisory firm, the Cohen Group (2016-2021)
    • Former Special Advisor at the UN National Security Council to the U.S. Vice President for South Asia and the U.S. Director for Afghanistan and Pakistan (2012-2015)
    • Former U.S. State Department senior diplomat in Kunar Province, Afghanistan (2011-2012)
    • Former Special Assistant for South and Central Asia to the U.S. Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs (2008-2010)
    The post Who Control’s Afghanistan’s Stolen Assets: A Factsheet first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • The journalist Mélissa Cornet and the photographer Kiana Hayeri met more than 100 Afghan girls and women in seven provinces, and found resistance and defiance but also despair

    Earlier this year, I spent 10 weeks travelling with the photographer Kiana Hayeri across seven provinces of Afghanistan, speaking to more than 100 Afghan women and girls about how their lives had changed since the Taliban swept back to power three years ago.

    Hayeri and I both lived in Afghanistan for years, and remained here after the Taliban took control in August 2021. In the past few years, we have seen women’s rights and freedoms, already severely curtailed, swept away as Taliban edicts have fallen like hammer blows.

    Mitra plays with children in Yamit district, near the Wakhan mountains. Her daughter and her cousin, who were both grade 11 pupils aged about 17, took their own lives in these pools last year

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • New York, October 28, 2024On October 13, the Taliban banned television operations and the filming and photographing of people in public spaces in northeast Takhar province according to a local journalist who spoke to the Committee to Protect Journalists under the condition of anonymity, fearing reprisal from the Taliban, and media reports.

    “The Taliban’s latest ban on television and filming and photography in Takhar should trouble anyone who cares about media freedom worldwide” said CPJ’s program director, Carlos Martínez de la Serna, in New York. “The citizens of Afghanistan deserve fundamental rights, and the international community must cease its passive observation of the country’s rapid regression.” 

    The ban was approved by senior officials from the Taliban’s provincial General Directorate of Intelligence (GDI), directorates of Information and Culture, and the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, as well as the governor’s office of Takhar province.

    Takhar is the second province in Afghanistan to institute such a ban. Previously, the Taliban implemented a similar ban in Kandahar province, its unofficial capital and the residence of the group’s leader, Mullah Hibatullah Akhundzada, according to a Kandahar-based journalist who also spoke to CPJ under the condition of anonymity for fear of Taliban retaliation.

    Saif ul Islam Khyber, a spokesman for the Ministry for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, confirmed to the Associated Press that media outlets in the provinces of Takhar, Maidan Wardak, and Kandahar had been “advised not to broadcast or display images of anything possessing a soul—meaning humans and animals,” according to the AP. Khyber said the directive is part of the implementation of a recently ratified morality law. 

    Taliban leader Hibatullah Akhundzada signed the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice bill into law on July 31, though the news was not made public until August 21, when it was published on the Ministry of Justice’s website.

    Article 17 of the law details the restrictions on the media, including a ban on publishing or broadcasting images of living people and animals, which the Taliban regards as un-Islamic. Other sections order women to cover their bodies and faces and travel with a male guardian, while men are not allowed to shave their beards. The punishment for breaking the law is up to three days in prison or a penalty “considered appropriate by the public prosecutor.”

    On October 14, Qari Yousuf Ahmadi, the director of Taliban-controlled Radio Television Afghanistan (RTA), informed senior management of Kabul’s national TV station that a phased strategy to implement the new law had already begun. TV stations across Afghanistan’s provinces will be gradually closed and converted to radio stations, with plans to eventually extend the ban to Kabul, where RTA and other major national broadcasters operate, according to two journalists familiar with the meeting and a report by the London-based independent outlet, Afghanistan International. 

    On October 19, during a visit to Sheikh Zahid University in Khost province, Neda Mohammad Nadim, the Taliban’s Minister of Higher Education, barred the filming of the event, according to the London-based Afghanistan International.

    On October 23, the Taliban’s Ministry of Defense launched the broadcast of Radio Sada-e-Khalid, which is managed by the ministry and operates from the 201st Corps of the Taliban army.

    Since taking power in Afghanistan on August 15, 2021, the Taliban has employed a gradual strategy to suppress media activity in the country, with the General Directorate of Intelligence forcing compliance with stringent regulations.  These include bans on music and soap operasbans on women’s voices in the media, the imposition of mask-wearing for female presenters, a ban on live broadcasts of political shows, the closure of television stations, and the jamming or boycotting of independent international networks broadcasting to Afghanistan. To enforce these policies, the Taliban have detained, assaulted, and threatened journalists and media workers throughout the country.


    This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by CPJ Staff.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Afghanistan human rights defenders (HRDs), both within the country and in exile, face significant and myriad challenges. Inside Afghanistan, HRDs are not only restricted from continuing their human rights work, but also live under constant threats to their safety due to the Taliban’s intensified violence and atrocities. In particular, women human rights defenders (WHRDs) grapple with an additional level of the Taliban’s unprecedented misogynistic policies, targeting them with systematic discrimination and persecution, amounting to gender apartheid. Many HRDs have been forced into hiding or have managed to flee the country for their survival. Those who sought refuge in transit countries, mainly Iran and Pakistan, face innumerable risks such as deportation, harassment, and economic constraints to their livelihood. Meanwhile, HRDs settled primarily in western countries with comparatively greater security face their own set of difficulties, including concerns about their overall well-being and the lack of a long-term support system to sustain their human rights work while in exile.

    Against this backdrop, this report explains the circumstances of Afghanistan’s HRDs both inside and outside Afghanistan. It will explore the problems they face, their needs, and provide workable recommendations to various stakeholders who are rightly positioned to fulfill those needs.

    Read the report here

    This post was originally published on FORUM-ASIA.

  • At the 57th Human Rights Council session, civil society organisations share reflections on key outcomes and highlight gaps in addressing crucial issues and situations. Full written version below:

    States continue to fail to meet their obligations under international law to put an end to decades of Israeli crimes committed against the Palestinian people, including the genocide in Gaza, and most recently Israel’s war on Lebanon. States that continue to provide military, economic and political support to Israel, while suppressing fundamental freedoms such as expression and assembly, as well as attacking independent courts and experts, and defunding humanitarian aid (UNRWA), are complicit in the commission of crimes. We urge the Council to address the root causes of the situation as identified by experts and the ICJ, including settler-colonialism and apartheid, and to address the obligations of third States in the context of the ICJ’s provisional measures stressing the plausible risk of genocide in Gaza and the ICJ advisory opinion recognising that ‘Israel’s legislation and measures constitute a breach of Article 3 of CERD’ pertaining to racial segregation and apartheid. The General Assembly adopted the resolution titled “The Crime of Genocide” in December 1946, which articulates that the denial of existence of entire human groups shocks the conscience of mankind. We remind you of our collective duty and moral responsibility to stop genocide.

    States have an obligation to pay UN membership dues in full and in time. The failure of many States to do so, often for politically motivated reasons, is causing a financial liquidity crisis, meaning that resolutions and mandates of the Human Rights Council cannot be implemented. Pay your dues! The visa denials to civil society by host countries is a recurring obstacle to accessing the UN; and acts of intimidation and reprisals are fundamental attacks against the UN system itself. The right to access and communicate with international bodies is firmly grounded in international law and pivotal to the advancement of human rights. In this regard, we welcome the action taken by 11 States to call for investigation and accountability for reprisals against individually named human rights defenders. This sends an important message of solidarity to defenders, many of whom are arbitrarily detained for contributing to the work of the UN, as well as increasing the political costs for perpetrators of such acts. We welcome progress in Indigenous Peoples’ participation in the work of this Council as it is the first time that they could register on their own for specific dialogues.

    We welcome the adoption of the resolution that renews the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights in the context of climate change by consensus. 

    We also welcome the adoption of the resolution on biodiversity sending a clear call to take more ambitious commitments at the sixteenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity  and acknowledging the negative impact that the loss of biodiversity can have on the enjoyment of all human rights, including the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment. We welcome that these two resolutions recognize the critical and positive role that Environmental Human Right Defenders play. We also welcome the adoption by consensus of the resolutions on the rights on safe drinking water and sanitation; and the resolution on human rights and Indigenous Peoples. 

    We welcome the adoption of the resolution on equal participation in political and public affairs which for the first time includes language on children and recognises their right to participation as well as the transformative role of civic education in supporting their participation. We also welcome the recognition that hate speech has a restrictive effect on children’s full, meaningful, inclusive and safe participation in political and public affairs.

    We welcome the adoption of the resolution from rhetoric to reality: a global call for concrete action against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. The resolution contains important language on the implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action as well as the proclamation by the General Assembly of a second International Decade for People of African Descent commencing in 2025. We welcome the inclusion of a call to States to dispense reparatory justice, including finding ways to remedy historical racial injustices. This involves ensuring that the structures in society that perpetuate past injustices are transformed, including law enforcement and the administration of justice. 

    We welcome the adoption of a new resolution on human rights on the internet, which recognises that universal and meaningful connectivity is essential for the enjoyment of human rights. The resolution takes a progressive step forward in specifically recommending diverse and human right-based technological solutions to advance connectivity, including through governments creating an enabling and inclusive regulatory environment for small, non-profit and community internet operators. These solutions are particularly essential in ensuring connectivity for remote or rural communities. The resolution also  unequivocally condemns internet shutdowns, online censorship, surveillance, and other measures that impede universal and meaningful connectivity. We now call on all Sates to fully implement the commitments in the resolution and ensure the same rights that people have offline are also protected online. 

    Whilst we welcome the attention in the resolution on the human rights of migrants to dehumanising, harmful and racist narratives about migration, we are disappointed that the resolution falls short of the calls from civil society, supported by the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights of Migrants, for the Human Rights Council to set up an independent and international monitoring mechanism to address deaths, torture and other grave human rights violations at borders. Such a mechanism would not only support prevention and accountability – it would provide a platform for the people at the heart of these human rights violations and abuses to be heard. The study and intersessional mandated in this resolution must be used to enhance independent monitoring and increase access to justice.

    We welcome the adoption of the resolution on Afghanistan renewing and strengthening the mandate of the Special Rapporteur. Crucially, the resolution recognises the need to ensure accountability in Afghanistan through “comprehensive, multidimensional, gender-responsive and victim-centred” processes applying a “comprehensive approach to transitional justice.” However, we are disappointed that the resolution once again failed to establish an independent accountability mechanism that can undertake comprehensive investigations and collect and preserve evidence and information of violations and abuses in line with these principles to assist future and ongoing accountability processes. This not only represents a failure by the Council to respond to the demands of many Afghan and international civil society organisations, but also a failure to fulfil its own mandate to ensure prompt, independent and impartial investigations which this and all previous resolutions have recognised as urgent.

    We welcome the renewal of the Special Rapporteur on Burundi

    We welcome the renewal of the Special Rapporteur’s mandate on the human rights situation in the Russian Federation. The human rights situation in Russia continues to deteriorate, with the alarming expansion of anti-extremism legislation now also targeting LGBT+ and Indigenous organisations being just the latest example of this trend. The Special Rapporteur has highlighted how such repression against civil society within Russia over many years has facilitated its external aggression. The mandate itself remains a vital lifeline for Russian civil society, connecting it with the Human Rights Council and the broader international community, despite the Russian authorities’ efforts to isolate their people.

    We welcome the resolution on promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka renewing for one year the mandate of the OHCHR Sri Lanka Accountability Project and of the High Commissioner to monitor and report on the situation. Its consensual adoption represents the broad recognition by the Council of the crucial need for continued international action to promote accountability and reconciliation in Sri Lanka and keeps the hopes of tens of thousands of victims, their families and survivors who, more than 15 years after the end of the war, continue to wait for justice and accountability. However, the resolution falls short in adequately responding to the calls by civil society. It fails to extend these mandates for two years which would have ensured that the Sri Lanka Accountability Project has the resources, capacity and stability to fulfill its mandate. 

    We welcome the renewal of the Fact Fin­ding Mission on Sudan with broader support (23 votes in favor in comparison to 19 votes last year, and 12 votes against in comparison to 16 votes last year). This responds to the calls by 80 Sudanese, African, and other international NGOs for an extension of the man­date of the FFM for Sudan. We further reiterate our urgent calls for an immediate ceasefire and the prompt creation of safe corridors for humanitarian aid organisations and groups, and to guarantee the safety of their operations, as well as our call on the UN Security Council to extend the arms embargo on Darfur to all of Sudan and create effective monitoring and reporting mechanisms to ensure the implementation of the embargo. 

    We welcome the renewal of the mandates of the Fact-Finding Mission on Venezuela (FFM) and of OHCHR for two more years. The deepening repression at the hands of government forces following the fraudulent Presidential elections in July has made evident the vital importance of continued independent documenting, monitoring and reporting by the FFM and its role in early warning of further human rights deterioration. We are pleased that OHCHR is mandated to provide an oral update (with an ID) at the end of this year. This will be key ahead of the end of the term of the current presidency on 10 January 2025. This resolution is an important recognition of and contribution to the demands of victims and civil society for accountability.  

    We regret that the Council failed to take action on Bangladesh. We welcome Bangladesh’s cooperation with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights including by inviting the Office to undertake investigations into allegations of serious violations and abuses in the context of youth-led protests in July and August, as well as positive steps by the interim government. However, we believe that a Council mandate would provide much needed support, stability and legitimacy to these positive initiatives at a time of serious political uncertainty in the country.

    The Council’s persistent inaction and indifference in the face of Yemen’s escalating human rights crisis is deeply troubling. Since the dissolution of the Group of Eminent Experts, and despite years of mounting atrocities, we have yet to see the type of robust, independent international investigation that is desperately needed. Instead, the Council’s approach has been marked by half-measures and complacency, allowing widespread violations to continue unchecked. Despite the precarious humanitarian situation, the recent campaign of enforced disappearances and arbitrary detention by the de facto Houthi authorities and recent Israeli bombardments, Yemen has increasingly become a forgotten crisis. The current resolution on Yemen represents this failure. Technical assistance without reporting or discussion is an insufficient response. The decision to forgo an interactive dialogue on implementing this assistance is an oversight, undermining the principles of accountability and transparency. We welcome the inclusion of language in the resolution recognizing the vital role of NGO workers and humanitarian staff who the Houthis have arbitrarily detained. We call for the immediate and unconditional release of those who continue to be detained for nothing more than attempting to ensure the rule of law is respected and victims are protected. We urge this Council to act decisively, prioritize the creation of an independent international accountability mechanism, and place civilian protection at the forefront of its deliberations on Yemen. 

    We continue to deplore this Council’s exceptionalism towards serious human rights violations in China committed by the government. On 17 August, the OHCHR stressed that ‘many problematic laws and policies’ documented in its Xinjiang report remain in place, that abuses remain to be investigated, and that reprisals and lack of information hinder human rights monitoring. We welcome the statement by the Xinjiang Core Group on the second anniversary of the OHCHR’s Xinjiang report, regretting the government’s lack of meaningful cooperation with UN bodies, the rejection of UPR recommendations, and urging China to engage meaningfully to implement the OHCHR’s recommendations, including releasing all those arbitrarily detained, clarifying the whereabouts of those disappeared, and facilitating family reunion. It is imperative that the Human Rights Council take action commensurate to the gravity of UN findings, such as by establishing a monitoring and reporting mechanism on China as repeatedly urged by over 40 UN experts since 2020. We urge China to genuinely engage with the UN human rights system to enact meaningful reform, and ensure all individuals and peoples enjoy their human rights. Recommendations from the OHCHR Xinjiang report, UN Treaty Bodies, and UN Special Procedures chart the way for this desperately needed change.

    Finally, we welcome the outcome of elections to the Human Rights Council at the General Assembly. States that are responsible for atrocity crimes, the widespread repression of civil society, and patterns of reprisals are not qualified to be elected to this Council. The outcomes of the election demonstrate the importance of all regions fielding competitive slates that are comprised of appropriately qualified candidates.  

    Signatories:

    1. International Service for Human Rights (ISHR)
    2. Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)
    3. CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation 
    4. FIDH 
    5. Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies

    https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/hrc57-civil-society-presents-key-takeaways-from-the-session

    see:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/oct/11/us-un-human-rights-israel

    https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2024/oct/08/rights-activists-urge-un-reject-abusive-bid-saudi-arabia-bid-join-human-rights-council

    Following a concerted campaign led by ISHR together with other civil society partners, Saudi Arabia was just defeated in its bid to be elected to the UN Human Rights Council!

  • Activists hope a change in international law could help to address the intensifying erosion of women and girls’ rights in Afghanistan

    Read more: Afghan exiles on the Taliban’s gender apartheid

    Over the past three years, the world has watched in horror as women and girls in Afghanistan have had their rights and freedoms systematically stripped away.

    In the face of inaction by the international community, a campaign for the conditions being imposed on Afghan and Iranian women to be made a crime under international law as gender apartheid was launched last year. What does the term mean and will it make a difference?

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • What women face in Afghanistan is a crime against humanity, say activists pushing for recognition by UN

    Explainer: What is gender apartheid – and can anything be done to stop it?

    When Sima Samar and other Afghan women came up with the term “gender apartheid” in the 1990s to describe the systematic oppression faced by women and girls under Taliban rule, she never imagined it would have become a key weapon in the fight to hold a second Taliban regime to account for their crimes two decades later.

    “When the first Taliban regime fell, the idea that we would once again see the persecution, isolation and segregational and systematic repression of half the Afghan population on the basis of their gender seemed impossible,” says Samar, who served as the minister for women’s affairs after the overthrow of the Taliban in 2001 and now lives in exile. “But now, in 2024, it is happening again and this time we must find a way to fight for justice.”

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Annie Kelly reports from a conference in Albania where Afghan women have spoken publicly about the Taliban’s brutal crackdown on their freedom

    In August, the Taliban published “vice and virtue” laws that banned women’s voices being heard in public. Weeks later, more than 130 women travelled to Tirana in Albania to attend the All Afghan Women summit to talk about the Taliban’s human rights abuses.

    The Guardian reporter Annie Kelly spoke to Afghan women at the conference about how their lives had changed since the Taliban took control.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • New York, September 23, 2024 —The Taliban must stop transmitting disruptive signals to prevent residents in the Afghan capital Kabul watching the popular London-based Afghanistan International on television, the Committee to Protect Journalists said Monday.

    “The Taliban must immediately cease jamming Afghanistan International’s broadcasts, which marks a new low in their shameful campaign to silence an important source of independent news in Afghanistan,” said CPJ Program Director Carlos Martínez de la Serna. “The Taliban’s decision to use this sophisticated technology is highly alarming, demonstrating the lengths they are prepared to go to in order to prevent the free flow of information and news to the Afghan people.”

    Harun Najafizada, executive editor of Afghanistan International, told CPJ that the television station had been using other satellites to ensure people in Kabul could watch its news after September 5, when the Taliban blocked its usual signal from a ground station in Afghanistan. Any independent media organization committed to providing accurate information faces threats and intimidation from the Taliban, he said.

    Video clips reviewed by CPJ showed black screens and a “no signal” message on the TV station’s usual frequency. Kabul residents told CPJ that the signal was intermittent due to the jamming.

    On September 4, the Taliban’s Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Stanekzai denounced Afghanistan International as an “enemy” for reporting that aid relief sent to the flooded northern province of Baghlan had been allegedly misused. In May, the Taliban ordered journalists and citizens to boycott Afghanistan International for falsifying information and producing broadcasts that aided the group’s opponents.

    It is the country’s most popular international television channel, also available via social media and cable.

    CPJ’s text messages to Taliban spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid requesting comment on the broadcast jamming went unanswered.


    This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by CPJ Staff.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Deception, lies and secrecy — including lies to cover secrecy — characterize authoritarian regimes. However, the politics of lying and official secrecy are no less common in democratic governments. For example, thanks to whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg releasing the Pentagon Papers, the public learned of the truth about the Vietnam War: U.S. military officials were systematically lying to Congress…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Organisers of international summit hope to create pressure to reverse laws including a ban on women speaking in public

    More than 130 Afghan women have gathered in Albania at an All Afghan Women summit, in an attempt to develop a united voice representing the women and girls of Afghanistan in the fight against the ongoing assault on human rights by the Taliban.

    Some women who attempted to reach the summit from inside Afghanistan were prevented from travelling, pulled off flights in Pakistan or stopped at borders. Other women have travelled from countries including Iran, Canada, the UK and the US where they are living as refugees.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • New York, September 11, 2024—The Taliban must stop harassing the popular London-based broadcaster Afghanistan International, which they accused of conducting a “propaganda war against us,” the Committee to Protect Journalists said Wednesday.

    In his September 4 speech, Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Stanekzai attacked the independent outlet as an “enemy” for reporting that aid relief sent to the flooded northern province of Baghlan had been allegedly misused. This latest criticism follows the Taliban’s ban in May on journalists and experts from cooperating with Afghanistan International and on people providing facilities for broadcasting the channel in public.

    Separately, on September 4, Ministry of Propagation of Virtue and Prevention of Vice officials met with Afghan media executives in the capital Kabul and gave them verbal orders to replace Persian words — which they described as “Iranian” — with the Pashto equivalent in their reporting.

    Persian, also known as Farsi, is the most widely spoken language in Afghanistan and in neighboring Iran. But the Taliban mainly speak Pashto and they have removed Persian words from signboards for public institutions and spoken out against the teaching of Persian in universities since their return to power in 2021.

    The officials also ordered the journalists to respect Taliban leader Hibatullah Akhundzada.

    “The Taliban must immediately halt their campaign of intimidation against Afghanistan International and lift their restrictions on Persian-language reporting,” said CPJ Asia Program Coordinator Beh Lih Yi. “The Taliban’s recent vice and virtue law has already emboldened their notorious morality police to further restrict the media, threatening to annihilate press freedom gains made during the two previous decades of democratic rule in Afghanistan.”

    CPJ’s text messages to Taliban spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid requesting comment went unanswered.


    This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Committee to Protect Journalists.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • This week marks 23 years since George W. Bush declared a U.S.-led “war on terror” and the people of Afghanistan and Iraq are still suffering its consequences. After the U.S. invaded Iraq, an estimated half a million Iraqis were killed and at least 9.2 million were displaced. From 2003-2011, more than 4.7 million Iraqis suffered from moderate to severe food insecurity. Over 243,000…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Despite the regime withdrawing even the most basic human rights of women and girls, liberal democracies have failed to take action

    ‘So pervasive is the Taliban’s institutionalised gender oppression, and so slender are the spaces in which women and girls may live freely, that in Afghanistan today almost any act can be characterised as an act of resistance.”

    That conclusion from Richard Bennett, the UN special rapporteur on human rights in Afghanistan, encapsulates how unbearably suffocating it is to be female in Afghanistan today: excluded from education and from running a business; forbidden from going outside for a walk or to exercise, to speak or show any part of their face or body outside the home; or even for their voices to be heard singing or reading from within their own home. There is no other country where women and girls are so oppressed on the basis of their sex.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • ‘Dismal’ lack of progress leaves women and girls facing litany of abuses – with no country on track to achieve equality

    More than 850 million women and girls are living in countries rated as “very poor” for gender equality, says a new report, subjecting them to a litany of potential restrictions and abuses, including forced pregnancies, childhood marriage and bans from secondary education.

    The SDG Gender Index, published today by a coalition of NGOs, found that no country has, so far, achieved the promise of gender equality envisioned by the UN’s 2030 sustainable development goals (SDGs).

    Between 2019 and 2022, nearly 40% of countries – home to more than 1 billion women and girls – stagnated or declined on gender equality.

    Continue reading…

  • This brave journalist and young women like her are bearing the brunt of the failed democratisation project: ‘Hope is fading’

    In the final days of the Afghan republic – in defiance of a looming takeover by the Taliban – the Hazara journalist Mani sang revolutionary poems in public in Kabul about women, freedom and justice. Now she is on the run, waiting for the Australian government to grant her a humanitarian visa.

    It’s three years since Australia pulled its final troops out of Afghanistan. Their presence over two decades saw the country emerge from the ashes of civil war, embrace a relative peace and a fragile democracy before falling back into the darkness of fundamentalism under the Taliban.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • With more than 70 people reportedly killed by rebels this week, Dr Mahrang Baloch’s effective and non-violent protests against Pakistan’s government are rapidly gaining support

    On the morning of 26 August, about three dozen armed men intercepted traffic at Musakhel in Pakistan, a district on the border between Balochistan and Punjab. Identifying and off-loading 23 men from the Punjab province from different vehicles, they shot them dead. They also set 35 vehicles ablaze.

    The Balochistan Liberation Army, the most active militant group in the province, claimed responsibility for the attack, which was the second of its kind this year. In April, nine passengers were forced out of a bus near Noshki, a city in Balochistan, and shot dead after the assailants checked their ID cards.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.


  • This content originally appeared on Amnesty International and was authored by Amnesty International.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Seg3 afghan women public

    The Taliban government in Afghanistan is drawing renewed outrage over a new law banning women’s voices in public, forcing them to completely cover their bodies and faces out of the home, and more. This comes after the Taliban banned women from working in most fields and ended girls’ education past primary school following their takeover of the country in 2021. We speak with Sima Samar, an Afghan human rights advocate and doctor who chaired the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission from 2002 until 2019; she also briefly served as minister of women’s affairs in the interim Afghan government in 2002, after a U.S.-led coalition toppled the first Taliban government for its support of al-Qaeda. “You cannot see such a law in any other regime on this planet,” she says. “This is a crime against humanity. It is gender apartheid.”


    This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Human Rights Watch and was authored by Human Rights Watch.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • New vice and virtue restrictions offer ‘a distressing vision of Afghanistan’s future’, says UN

    New Taliban laws that prohibit women from speaking or showing their faces outside their homes have been condemned by the UN and met with horror by human rights groups.

    The Taliban published a host of new “vice and virtue” laws last week, approved by their supreme leader Hibatullah Akhundzada, which state that women must completely veil their bodies – including their faces – in thick clothing at all times in public to avoid leading men into temptation and vice.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • From what is read and what is said, Iran is the major sponsor of international terrorism — creating turmoil, preventing peace, and wanting to dominate the Middle East. One problem with the accepted scenario is that the facts do not coincide with the assumptions.

    Except for revenging terrorist attacks by Iranian dissidents and Israeli intelligence and military services, the Islamic Republic has not harmed anybody in the Western nations. In the last 200 years, Iran has fought only one war ─ a defensive battle against aggressor Iraq. It has assisted friendly nations in their conflicts with other nations, similar to United States actions, but on a smaller scale. The demise of Ayatollah Khomeini established a refreshed Islamic Republic that promoted cordial relations with nations who were willing to return the cordiality. Iran has not sought hegemony, economic advantage, or extension of its influence to others than those who desire the influence.

    Do a somersault and find the real Iran. The real Iran has tried to cooperate with the United States and other nations and bring peace and stability to the Middle East.

    This does not excuse Iran’s semi-autocratic regime and human rights violations, no more than they can be excused in nations with whom the United States has friendly relations — Israel, Egypt, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Pakistan, Mexico, Tajikistan, and others. For American diplomats, the concept of “cannot excuse” is an excuse for not engaging in diplomacy and resolving problems with Iran. The results have been disasters — harm to American society, harm to the American people, and an unending voyage to calamities.

    Designating Iran as the greatest menace to peace assumes there is peace in the Middle East. Is there peace and has there been peace since the words Middle East entered the lexicon? The conflagrations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria would have existed without the presence of the Islamic Republic; the former two wars occurred due to United States’ invasions in those nations. Is the Islamic Republic responsible for Israel’s continuous wars with its neighbors and for Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and the Emirates battles with their own citizens and quarrels they had with Yemen and Gaddafi’s Libya. The Islamic Republic and its well-educated and alert citizens have not initiated a war against another nation and their restraint holds the key to Middle East peace. The United States refusal to allow the key to unlock the cages that maintain the doves of peace is one of the great tragedies of the century. This was shown in the U.S. invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.

    Unlike America, Iran had special connections and interests in Afghanistan. After the Sept. 11 attacks, U.S. officials responsible for preparing the war in Afghanistan, solicited help to unseat the Taliban and establish a stable government in Kabul. Iran had organized the resistance by the Northern Alliance and provided the Alliance arms and funding, which helped topple the Taliban regime.  In an interview with Iranian Press Service (IPS), Flynt Leverett, senior director for Middle East affairs in the National Security Council (NSC), said, “The Iranians had real contacts with important players in Afghanistan and were prepared to use their influence in constructive ways in coordination with the United States.”

    Because the Northern Alliance played a significant role in driving the Taliban out of Kabul in November 2001, they demanded 60 percent of the portfolios in an interim government and blocked agreement with other opposition groups. According to the U.S. envoy to Afghanistan, Richard Dobbins, Iran played a “decisive role” in persuading the Northern Alliance delegation to compromise its demands.

    Dobbins, J. (2009). “Negotiating with Iran: Reflections from Personal Experience,” The Washington Quarterly, 33(1), 149–162.

    The Northern Alliance delegate, Younis Qanooni, on instructions from Kabul, was insisting that his faction not only retain the three most important ministries—defense, foreign affairs, and interior—but also hold three-fourths of the total. These demands were unacceptable to the other three Afghan factions represented in Bonn. Unless the Northern Alliance demand could be significantly reduced, there was no way the resultant government could be portrayed as broadly based and representative.

    Finally Iranian representative, Javad Zarif, stood up, and signaled Qanooni to join him in the corner of the room. They spoke in whispers for no more than a minute. Qanooni then returned to the table and offered to give up two ministries. He also agreed to create three new ones that could be awarded to other factions. We had a deal. For the following six months, Afghanistan would be governed by an interim administration composed of 29 department heads plus a chairman. Sixteen of these posts would go to the Northern Alliance, just slightly more than half.

    Dobbins worked with Iranian negotiators in Bonn and related that at a donors conference in Tokyo, in January, 2002, Iran pledged $540 million in assistance to Afghanistan.

    Dobbins writes:

    Emerging from a larger gathering in Tokyo, one of the Iranian representatives took me aside to reaffirm his government’s desire to continue to cooperate on Afghanistan. I agreed that this would be desirable, but warned that Iranian behavior in other areas represented an obstacle to cooperation. Furthermore, I cautioned him by saying that my brief only extends to Afghanistan. He replied by saying, “We know that. We would like to work on these other issues with the appropriate people in your government.”

    On returning to Washington, O’Neill and I reported these conversations, to then-National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice and cabinet level colleagues, and to the Middle Eastern Bureau at the Department of State (DOS). No one evinced any interest. The Iranians received no private reply. Instead, they received a very public answer. One week later, in his State of the Union address, President George W. Bush named Iran, along with Iraq and North Korea, an “axis of evil.” How arch-enemies Iran and Iraq could form any axis, evil or otherwise, was never explained.

    How would the Afghanistan fiasco have played out if the American governments cooperated with the Iranian governments? No analysis can supply a definite and credible answer; clues are available.

    The result of 20 years of U.S. occupation and battle in Afghanistan resulted in nearly 111,000 civilians killed or injured, more than 64,100 national military and police killed, about 2500 American soldiers killed and 20,660 injured in action, and $1 trillion spent by the U.S. in all phases of a conflict that ended with the Taliban return to power. The only accomplishment of the twenty years of strife had Osama bin Laden leave the isolated, uncomfortable, and rugged mountain caves in Tora Bora for a comfortable and well-equipped walled compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, a gift from Pakistan intelligence. Note that the al-Qaeda leader did not flee to U.S. adversary, Iran; he joined his family in U.S. friendly, Pakistan. The 20-year U.S. occupation of Afghanistan was a catastrophe and anything is better than a catastrophe.

    More than any other nation Iran had justifiable reasons for wanting a stable, friendly, and economically secure government in Afghanistan.

    • Iran had previous problems with the Taliban and did not want to repeat them.
    • Terrorists enter Iran from Afghanistan and cause havoc to the Islamic Republic.
    • Iran and the Afghan government created a free trading zone on their border and Iran wanted to continue to continue to exploit the arrangement.
    • In 2017, Iran surpassed Pakistan as Afghanistan’s top trade partner and, in 2019, Iranian exports reached $1.24 billion.
    • Iran had funded construction of the 90-mile (140 kilometer) line from Khaf in northeastern Iran to Ghoryan in western Afghanistan.
    • Iran and Afghanistan had several mutual problems that needed, and still need, close contact to resolve. Among them are water distribution, poppy production in Afghanistan, export of opium to Iran, and refugee flow to Iran. “Between 1979 and 2014, Iran claims to have lost some 4,000 security forces fighting heavily armed drug traffickers along its eastern border. In 2019, Iran seized more heroin and illicit morphine than any other country, according to U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime.”
    • Iran shared ethnic, linguistic and religious links with millions of Afghan Shi’a and was interested in their protection.

    More than any other nation, Iran had assets to assist in achieving a stable, friendly, peaceful, and economically secure government in Afghanistan.

    • Iran was a large source of foreign direct investment, and provided millions of dollars for Afghanistan’s western provinces to build roads, electrical grids, schools, and health clinics.
    • Afghanistan found Iran could assist Afghanistan in trade. “On April 2016, Iran, Afghanistan and India signed an agreement to develop the Chabahar port in southeastern Iran as a trading hub for all three nations.  Afghan goods would be transported to the Iranian port by rail, and then be shipped to India by sea. The first phase of the port was inaugurated in 2017.”
    • Iran had knowledge of Taliban personnel, arrangements, and activities. It had contacts and informants who could provide intelligence.
    • Not sure if they would acquiesce, but the Iranians could accommodate bases from which to attack the Taliban and to which fighters could retreat.

    The U.S. State Department learned nothing from its disjointed and catastrophic actions in Afghanistan. It repeated the same worthless and aggressive policy in its invasion of Iraq.

    After supporting Iraq against Iran in the 1980s Iraq-Iran war, the U.S. declared war in 1991 against Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, and performed a first in the history of foreign policy ─ helping a nation that wars against a nation that is not doing any harm to you, and then attacking the nation that it helped do the harm to the nation that was not harming you. The U.S. continued with sanctions against the nation it previously supported, Iraq, and then, in 2003, engaged it in another war, finally ending up with the nation it initially wanted to contain, Iran, essentially winning the war without firing another shot, and gaining influence in Iraq; another example of a U.S. policy toward Iran that backfired. Foreign policy at its finest.

    While stumbling and fumbling its way into destroying Iraq, the U.S. managed to have al-Qaeda (remember them, the guys that America invaded Afghanistan to defeat) reconstitute itself in Iraq. This renewed al-Qaeda, “organized a wave of attacks, often suicide bombings, that targeted security forces, government institutions, and Iraqi civilians.” The American military was forced to use Iraq’s notorious militias, known as “Awakening Councils,” to expel the al-Qaeda organization; a short-lived victory that led to the formation of the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq (ISIS).

    A statement by the ever-unaware President Trump, in a January 8, 2020 speech, argued the US had been responsible for defeating ISIS and the Islamic Republic should realize that it is in their benefit to work with the United States in making sure ISIS remained defeated. The US spent years and billions of dollars in training an Iraqi army that fled Mosul and left it to a small contingent of ISIS forces. Showing no will and expertise to fight, Iraq’s debilitated military permitted ISIS to rapidly expand and conquer Tikrit and other cities. Events energized Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces, which, with cooperation from Iran and personal assistance from Major General Qasem Soleimani, was able to retake Tikrit and Ramadi, push ISIS out of Fallujah, and eventually play a leading role in ISIS’ defeat in Mosul. The U.S. honored Soleimani’s efforts by assassinating him ─ one of the most vicious crimes in history ─ and commended Iran by continually sanctioning it. No good deed goes unpunished.

    As in Afghanistan, the Islamic Republic assisted in the re-building of Iraq. As far back as 2012, The Guardian reported that “Iran is one of Iraq’s most important regional economic partners, with an annual trade volume between the two sides standing at $8bn to $10b.” The U.S. confused competitive advantage with diabolical meddling and regarded Iran as a troubling factor in the Fertile Crescent, even though the inhabitants of Mesopotamia considered the United States as the troublemaker in the region. Iran had leverage in Iraq that could not be ignored nor easily combated.

    Why is the Islamic Republic, sanctioned, vilified, and isolated? One clue is that almost all references to Iran in the U.S. media succeed with the phrase, “leading state sponsor of terrorism.” The phrase is stuck onto the word Iran as if by Velcro and all the words are one word. How does this coincidental commonality occur?

    It occurs because the Zionist press distributes most reports on Iran to the American media. Israel has used U.S. support to subdue Israel’s adversaries — Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Libya, Sudan, and Iraq —and  has turned its national army to coerce Iran, the last man standing, into battle. It has turned its worldwide army of thought controllers to vilify Iran and entice Western powers to remove the Islamic member of the “axis of evil” from the map. Blind the world to reality.

    Substitute the nation Israel for the nation Iran in each of the salient accusations made against Iran and the accusations become correct. Nowhere do the facts and historical narrative demonstrate that Iran has disrupted peace and stability by any of the combining factors. Israel is present in all the factors. During the 2016 presidential campaign, contender Donald Trump said, “Many nations, including allies, ripped off the US.” Doesn’t Donald Trump, in his support for apartheid Israel, know that he verified his statement? Bet on the wrong horse and you are sure to lose.

    The following table summarizes the factors and clarifies the issues.

    Iran ─ Key to World Peace

    Analysis shows that Iran has not displayed characteristics of a “major sponsor of international terrorism — creating turmoil, preventing peace, and wanting to dominate the Middle East.” The only directives against Iran are sanctions and some human rights violations. The former are engineered by the U.S., Israel and their allies, have proved ineffective, not accomplished their intentions and greatly harmed the Iranian people. The latter need attention and can be addressed to almost any country on the planet, including the U.S. in its treatment of its African American citizens.

    Israel displays all the characteristics falsely attributed to Iran plus being recipient of tens of Resolutions and decisions by International agencies that accuse Israel and its leaders of aspects of genocide, war crimes, apartheid, illegal occupation, and crimes against humanity. In the 21st century, in Resolutions by the UN that condemn nations, Israel is mentioned more times than all others combined, an enviable record.

    Incorrect U.S. policies have led to continuous warfare in the Middle East, the unnecessary sacrifice of U.S. lives, economic disturbances, and waste of taxpayer money. When something is wrong, the normal practice is to make it right. Why does the United States maintain an aggressive attitude toward Iran and a permissive attitude to Israel? The answer is that the U.S. is controlled by traitors to American principles and to the American people. This cannot continue until its final denouement ─ settled by Armageddon.

    Only Iran has been willing to challenge Israel and halt its destructive path. Iran cannot do it alone. By supporting Israel, the Western powers have turned their backs on their own people. It is radical and will be greeted with gasps, but it is time to turn the other way and support Iran in its endeavors. Stopping war is mandatory and preliminary to achieving peace. If fortifying Iran stymies Israel’s aggression and stops the wars, then peace can be achieved. Iran is the key to world peace.

    In the cauldron of corruption and autocracies, which pits Sunni against Shi’a, Gulf states and Saudi Arabia against Iran, religious extremists against moderates and Israel against all, the United States makes its choice of allies. Whom does Washington support – those who are the most repressive, most corrupt, most militaristic, most prone to cause Middle East instability, and to add to the obvious State Department confusion, Israel, the principal instigator of Al Qaeda terrorism, and Saudi Arabia, the principal supplier of al-Qaeda terrorists. A new perspective of Iran yields a revised perspective of a violent, unstable, and disturbed Middle East. Israel would finally receive attention as the major participant in bringing chaos to the region.

    Discouraging to note that policies that determine war or peace proceed from agendas and not from facts and obligations. Maybe, when the makers and shakers realize their warlike polices will one day result in the eventual nuclear catastrophe, they will have an awakening and comprehend that the quotation, attributed to Plato, “Only the dead know the end of war,” is given more meaning by adding, “after you’re dead, it’s too late to stop the war.”

    The post Iran: Key to World Peace first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Analysis on third anniversary of seizure of power finds regime officials implicated in more than half of reported incidents of gender-based violence

    The 300-plus reported cases of Afghan women being killed by men since the Taliban seized power are just “the tip of the iceberg” when it comes to the true scale of gender-based violence in Afghanistan, according to new data analysis.

    Open-source investigators at the Centre of Information Resilience’s Afghan Witness project combed through social media and news sites to record 332 reported cases of femicide since the Taliban took Kabul on 15 August 2021.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.


  • This content originally appeared on Human Rights Watch and was authored by Human Rights Watch.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • New York, August 6, 2024—The Afghan Telecom Regulatory Authority (ATRA) suspended 17 broadcast licenses for 14 media outlets on July 22 in eastern Nangarhar, one of Afghanistan’s most populous provinces.

    “Taliban officials must immediately reverse their decision to suspend the broadcast licenses of 14 active media outlets in Nangarhar province that collectively reach millions of people,” said Beh Lih Yi, CPJ Asia program coordinator. “The Taliban continues to exert pressure on media outlets to control their programming and broadcasting operations in Afghanistan. They must cease these tactics and allow the independent media to operate freely.”

    The order also stipulated that the outlets must renew their licenses and pay any outstanding fees or risk having all the outlet’s licenses revoked, according to CPJ’s review of the order, the exiled Afghanistan Journalists Center watchdog group, and a journalist who spoke to CPJ on the condition of anonymity. 

    ATRA is a regulatory body that operates as part of the Taliban’s Ministry of Communications and Information Technology.

    Outlets with suspended radio and TV licenses: 

    Radio networks affected: 

    CPJ’s text messages to Taliban spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid for comment did not receive a reply.


    This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Committee to Protect Journalists.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • With music now a crime in Afghanistan, Braga has become one of the few places where the practice is being preserved

    A stone’s throw from Portugal’s oldest cathedral and buzzing bakeries serving up pastéis de nata, the complex notes of a sitar fill the ground floor of an unassuming building in the northern city of Braga.

    The soft strumming belies the radical nature of the mission that has taken root here: to preserve Afghan music and use it as a tool to counter those who want to eradicate it.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Sara Nabil is a human rights defender and artist from Afghanistan. She spoke to ISHR about her dream of one day seeing a ‘free democratic Afghanistan, where each human being [regardless of which] gender they are, man or woman, neutral or other genders, [would be] treated equally.’

    Stand in solidarity with Sara and other women human rights defenders from Afghanistan: join us in our campaign to push for UN experts and States to explicitly and publicly recognise the situation in Afghanistan as a form of gender apartheid and the need for an accountability mechanism to address gross human rights violations against women.

    This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.