Mediaboss Marketing

As U.S. military forces have withdrawn from Afghanistan, much attention has been given to the monitoring of, and possible action against, any terrorist activity inside Afghanistan. CIA Director William Burns stated in congressional testimony in April that the military withdrawal would diminish the ability to collect and act on threats in Afghanistan. In testimony last month, FBI Director Christopher Wray expressed concern that foreign terrorist groups will have an opportunity to reconstitute, plot, inspire in a space thats much harder for us to collect intelligence and operate against than was the case previously.

The heads of U.S. agencies responsible for collecting information on terrorist groups will focus, understandably and appropriately, on the challenges of such collection. But the fear of, in Wrays words, a terrorist safe haven to be recreated in Afghanistan is an artifact of Americans traumatic history with the 9/11 attacks. To the extent that a terrorist group may find a geographic haven useful, there is nothing special about Afghanistan. If such a group is looking for a conflict-ridden place with some local sympathizers where outlaws can hang out and the group can pitch a tent, there are numerous other locations in the world from which to choose.

More fundamentally, a patch of real estate is one of the less important factors that determine a groups ability to conduct international terrorist attacks, especially ones aimed at a target half a globe away. Access to real estate may be useful for a group engaged in insurgency or civil waras al Qaeda was in Afghanistan prior to 9/11. The country provided space for the training and basing of recruits, most of whom engaged in military operations inside Afghanistan in support of the Taliban during the war there in the late 1990s.

As U.S. military forces have withdrawn from Afghanistan, much attention has been given to the monitoring of, and possible action against, any terrorist activity inside Afghanistan. CIA Director William Burns stated in congressional testimony in April that the military withdrawal would diminish the ability to collect and act on threats in Afghanistan. In testimony last month, FBI Director Christopher Wray expressed concern that foreign terrorist groups will have an opportunity to reconstitute, plot, inspire in a space thats much harder for us to collect intelligence and operate against than was the case previously.

The heads of U.S. agencies responsible for collecting information on terrorist groups will focus, understandably and appropriately, on the challenges of such collection. But the fear of, in Wrays words, a terrorist safe haven to be recreated in Afghanistan is an artifact of Americans traumatic history with the 9/11 attacks. To the extent that a terrorist group may find a geographic haven useful, there is nothing special about Afghanistan. If such a group is looking for a conflict-ridden place with some local sympathizers where outlaws can hang out and the group can pitch a tent, there are numerous other locations in the world from which to choose.

More fundamentally, a patch of real estate is one of the less important factors that determine a groups ability to conduct international terrorist attacks, especially ones aimed at a target half a globe away. Access to real estate may be useful for a group engaged in insurgency or civil waras al Qaeda was in Afghanistan prior to 9/11. The country provided space for the training and basing of recruits, most of whom engaged in military operations inside Afghanistan in support of the Taliban during the war there in the late 1990s.

But territory is less relevant to the planning and preparing of an international terrorist attack. An example is the 9/11 operation itself. It obviously had an Afghanistan connection, but not in ways that were unique to Afghanistan, and preparations for the attack were geographically dispersed. Financing of the hijackers activities, for example, was centered in the United Arab Emirates and Germany. Plot mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed used long-distance electronic communication for coordinating those activities. The most important preparations for the attack took place more in apartments in Europe, flight schools in the United States, and cyberspace than in Afghanistan.

The fact is that many factors affect the likelihood of Americans falling victim to international terrorism. These include a host of economic and political circumstances in the places where would-be terrorists live. Research by the scholar Robert Pape, for example, has found that the single most frequent motivation for suicide terrorism is foreign military occupation.

That finding is highly relevant to the United States and Afghanistan. Like the Soviets before them, U.S. forces in Afghanistan came to be seen by many Afghans and those who sympathized with them as occupiers, not liberators or stabilizers. It was as perceived occupiers that Americans most recently fell victim to international terrorismin an August suicide bombing by the Islamic State that killed 13 U.S. service members outside the Kabul airport.

It is not only military occupation but also the harm to civilians from military operations that motivates terrorism. The killing of 10 innocent Afghan civilians, including seven children, in late August by a missile fired from a U.S. drone exemplifies the kind of harm inflicted all too often in the so-called war on terrorbecause of either mistaken identification, as in this instance, or seemingly unavoidable collateral damage from operations aimed at legitimate targets. The military operations, including in Afghanistan, may have bred at least as many anti-U.S. terrorists, through the anger and desire for revenge that such operations incite, as they have eliminated.

Even if a safe haven were important, the notion that one would be available to international terrorists in Afghanistan rests mostly on the past partnership between the Taliban and al Qaeda. Mentioned less often is how that partnership was a wartime alliance, at a time when the Taliban were struggling to defeat the opposition Northern Alliance and conquer the portion of Afghanistan it did not control.

If civil war were to resume in the months ahead, the Taliban conceivably might find use for assistance from even the much weaker al Qaeda of today. But to the extent that the Taliban secure their position as the new ruler over all of Afghanistan, the old alliance loses its relevance.

The history of that alliance, along with various personal and familial relationships, will sustain ties between elements of the Taliban and what remains of al Qaeda. The question is notas it is too often phrasedthe either/or one of whether the Taliban will cut all such ties. What matters instead is the direction in which the Taliban will exercise influence, including on al Qaeda, that is relevant to possible international terrorism.

Whatever one thinks of the Taliban, they can be counted on to pursue their overriding interest in maintaining political power in Afghanistan. They are highly insular and have no interest in international terrorism. Among their strongest memories is how al Qaedas 9/11 operation resulted in the biggest disaster the Taliban have ever sufferedbeing ousted from power and setting back by two decades their quest to rule all of Afghanistan. They have every interest in not letting that happen again, as well as continuing to be the archenemy of the Afghan branch of the Islamic State.

Because of the trauma of 9/11, fear of terrorism emanating from Afghanistan will forever lurk in American minds. Fear of the political fallout from a future terrorist incident somehow connected, however tenuously, to Afghanistan probably is part of what led three U.S. presidents to keep troops there before Joe Biden finally pulled the plug on the operation. There are no guarantees about how policies toward Afghanistan will affect the danger of terrorism against Americans. But considering all the relevant factors and not just one or two, that danger is less with the U.S. military out of Afghanistan than it would be if U.S. forces remained there.

Continued here:
Afghanistan Won't Be a Safe Haven for Al Qaeda, ISIS, or Other Terrorists - Foreign Policy

Why are the Taliban stripping away so many of Afghan womens hard-won freedoms?

That may seem like a facetious question. When the Taliban ruled the country in the 1990s, after all, their regime was known for having some of the worlds harshest restrictions on women. The group still adheres to a fundamentalist vision of Islamic society.

But ideology is only part of the story.

Every group has a range of beliefs, and not all of them become priorities for governance. Some Taliban officials, particularly those who conducted peace negotiations and favored international engagement, have suggested that this iteration of Taliban governance might be less restrictive toward women. And there are certainly economic incentives, as the resumption of international aid would be based at least in part on human rights considerations.

None of that has seemed to make a difference thus far. Though some Taliban officials continue to say that conditions will improve, women are still being kept from workplaces and schools. Each week seems to bring a new report of restrictions.

In that light, the Talibans decision to restrict womens freedom begins to look like a political choice as much as it is a matter of ideology. Understanding why the Taliban might see that choice as rewarding, experts say, offers insight into the groups state-building efforts, and to the nature of the society they now rule again.

The Insecurity of Taliban Security

I did not for a minute believe that the Taliban had changed, said Muqaddesa Yourish, a former deputy minister of commerce who fled to the United States with her family when the Taliban took power. If anything has changed about them, it is that they know how to deal with the West.

Less than two months after the Taliban seized control of Afghanistan, their promised allowances for women in the workplace and schools have yet to appear. Most women are still banned from going to work, a supposedly temporary measure the Taliban claim is necessary for security.

The leadership is using the same wording in describing when women might be allowed to attend public universities. And when secondary schools reopened this month, the Taliban directed boys to return to the classroom but said nothing about girls, which families across the country understood as a directive that girls should stay home.

Groups like the Taliban often struggle to make the transition from violent insurgency to actual governance, said Dipali Mukhopadhyay, a researcher at the University of Minnesota who studies rebel governance in Afghanistan, Syria and elsewhere.

They do not have the experience, funding or personnel to deliver sophisticated government services. Instead, their main strength is controlling security using their status as the countrys most powerful violent group to operate a kind of country-level protection racket, exchanging public safety for obedience.

We shouldnt buy this narrative that they are an alternative to the previous government because they are providing security, said Metra Mehran, the co-founder of the Feminine Perspectives Campaign, which sought to bring womens voices into peace negotiations. Theyre not providing security; theyve just stopped killing us.

Dr. Mukhopadhyay echoed that sentiment. Thats the cornerstone of understanding what the Taliban is offering: security and also the threat of force, she said. But people, particularly women, know that form of security comes with an ideology attached to it.

Viewed through that lens, restricting womens freedom serves as a powerful demonstration of the Talibans power. When women and girls vanish from offices and schools, it shows that the Taliban have enough power and implicitly, enough capacity and willingness to use violence to dramatically re-engineer public spaces.

Dr. Mukhopadhyay noted that the Taliban had not only dismantled the Ministry for Womens Affairs, but had also replaced it with the Ministry for Vice and Virtue, the feared religious police known for their public beatings of women who went out without a male relative or were dressed in something other than a burqa.

Thats a very potent symbol of whos winning within the Taliban right now, she said.

But marketing is only part of the story. Despite support and funding for gender-equality efforts during 20 years of U.S.-backed governments, Afghan womens freedoms have always been fragile.

Ms. Yourish said she has always sensed that many Afghan men were uncomfortable with women in public life. Although her own father and husband were supportive of her career, she said, they often seemed like outliers.

In the final days before the Taliban took power, Ms. Yourish said, she and her friends traded stories of how the Talib in every man is coming out, she said. Male strangers approached her and other women on the street, shouting cryptic threats like your days will be over soon, she said. She could sense womens progress crumbling, she said, even before the previous government fell.

On paper and in the tables of foreign aid budgets, gender equality was a priority for two decades. And there were substantial improvements for many women, especially those who were educated and lived in more urban areas.

But Afghanistan remains a deeply patriarchal society. The Talibans promise to return to traditional values, in which women are subordinate to their male relatives, is an attractive offer to many Afghan men.

Who are the Taliban? The Taliban arose in 1994 amid the turmoil that came after the withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan in 1989. They used brutal public punishments, including floggings, amputations and mass executions, to enforce their rules. Heres more on their origin story and their record as rulers.

Who are the Taliban leaders? These arethe top leaders of the Taliban, men who have spent years on the run, in hiding, in jail and dodging American drones. Little is known about them or how they plan to govern, including whether they will be as tolerant as they claim to be. One spokesman told The Timesthat the group wanted to forget its past, but that there would be some restrictions.

Alice Evans, a researcher at Kings College London who studies womens economic and social progress, said womens rights were caught in a patrilineal trap.

Societies where family wealth passes through the male line traditionally place a high value on brides chastity, Dr. Evans said. Girls are then closely policed to improve their marriage prospects and family honor, she said, and norms develop that keep women out of public life.

The dynamic is self-reinforcing: Families do not want to risk deviating from social norms on their own, so everyone ends up stuck in a system in which women have to stay close to home.

To get out of that trap, womens wages have to become high enough that the benefits of working outweigh the risks to family honor, Dr. Evans said. In East Asia, for instance, rapid industrialization raised womens potential earnings, effectively buying them out of the honor-based rules that constrained them to the home.

That did not happen in Afghanistan, where economic productivity and employment languished despite the influx of aid. Womens wages did not rise enough, in enough places, to outweigh their families honor-based concerns, or to transform social norms.

That may strengthen the Taliban. Rebel groups that are seen as grounded in local communities and values tend to be more successful, Dr. Mukhopadhyay said. For conservative Afghans, particularly men, restricting womens freedom may be a way for the Taliban to claim they support local values.

But it could still backfire, Dr. Mukhopadhyay said, if restrictions are so extreme that Afghans see them as overreach by leaders who do not understand how the country has changed. For decades, the Talibs were living across the border in Pakistan, she said. Their perceptions of Islam, and modernity, are not the same as those of people in Afghanistan.

Womens employment did become widespread enough that many families relied, at least partly, on their income, said Manizha Wafeq, the co-founder and president of the Afghanistan Women Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

Their earnings have vanished in recent weeks as a result of Taliban restrictions, and that could cut into the publics acceptance of their rule.

Its already an economic crisis for the whole country, Ms. Wafeq said. People are already trying to figure out how to feed their families.

See original here:
Why the Talibans Repression of Women May Be More Tactical Than Ideological - The New York Times

Turkey provided 33 tons of food aid to conflict-ridden Afghanistan Monday. The Turkish Red Crescent (Kzlay) delivered the aid to its Afghan counterpart at a ceremony in the capital Kabul.

The aid will cover the one-month need of 16,000 people in the country that has seen a growing wave of migration abroad and faces uncertainty after the Taliban takeover.

Turkish Ambassador in Kabul Cihad Erginay said more aid would be delivered in the coming months.

Ankara maintains close ties with Afghanistan since the first formal ties were established during the early years of the Republic of Turkey.

Speaking at the hand-over ceremony, Ambassador Erginay urged the international community to take part in humanitarian aid efforts in Afghanistan.

Turkish Red Crescent and other Turkish agencies will continue to help the people of Afghanistan. This is our humanitarian duty, he said.

Erginay added that Afghanistan suffered for a long period from problems such as drought to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Sefatullah Quraishi, head of the Afghan Red Crescent, said they appreciated Turkeys aid. Afghanistan just emerged from war and we have a growing humanitarian crisis. We have 19 to 25 million people who are affected by drought and economic problems, he said.

The Turkish Red Crescent, which set up its first office in the country in 2018, will deliver aid in cooperation with the Afghan Red Crescent in Kabul, as well as in Jalalabad and Ghazni.

Afghanistan hopes Turkey would provide aid and support to the Afghan people, the Taliban-led interim government's Second Deputy Prime Minister Abdul Salam Hanafi said last week.

"Afghanistan and Turkey are two brotherly countries. In particular, the friendly relations of the two nations are so historical that one cannot be separated from the other. During the Soviet Union's occupation of Afghanistan, both the Turkish state and its nation stood by the Afghan people. It helped the people of Afghanistan. We want to have close relations in the future as well," he told Anadolu Agency (AA).

On his expectations from Turkey, Hanafi said: "Our expectation is that Turkish institutions and people who do humanitarian aid and charity work will help the Afghan people on various issues. We expect them to help the people of Afghanistan in education, health and all areas where help is needed."

Hanafi also said the 20-yearlong United States occupation has damaged every area of his country and that it is a moral responsibility of Western countries to compensate Afghanistan for this damage.

Read more:
Turkey delivers 33 tons of aid to Afghanistan | Daily Sabah - Daily Sabah

Ive felt it too, every time. Ive walked through places where Jews lived for hundreds or even thousands of years, people who share so many of the foundations of my own life the language and books I cherish, the ideas that nourish me, the rhythms of my weeks and years and I have felt the silence close in.

I dont mean the dead Jews silence, but my own. I know how I am supposed to feel: solemn, calmly contemplative, and perhaps also grateful to whoever so kindly restored this synagogue or renamed this street. I stifle my disquiet, telling myself it is merely sorrow, burying it so deep that I no longer recognize what it really is: rage.

That rage is real, and we ignore it at our peril. Its apparently in poor taste to point out why people like Mr. Simentov wind up as Last Jews to begin with: People decided they no longer wanted to live with those who werent exactly like themselves. Nostalgic stories about Last Jews mask a much larger and darker reality about societies that were once ethnic and religious mosaics, but are now home to almost no one but Arab Muslims, Lithuanian Catholics or Han Chinese. It costs little to wax nostalgic about departed Jews when one lives in a place where diversity, rather than being a living human challenge, is a fairy tale from the past. There is only one way to be.

What does it mean for a society to rid itself of other points of view? To reject those with different perspectives, different histories, different ways of being in the world? The example of Jewish history, of the many Last Jews in places around the globe, holds up a dark mirror to those of us living in much freer societies. The cynical use of bygone Jews to inspire us can verge on the absurd, but that absurdity isnt so far-off from our own lip service to diversity, where those who differ from us are wonderful, so long as they see things our way.

On paper, American diversity is impressive. But in reality, we often live siloed lives. How do we really treat those who arent just like us? The disgust is palpable, as anyone knows who has tried being Jewish on TikTok. Are we up to the challenge of maintaining a society that actually respects others?

I hope so, but Im not holding my breath. The Last Jew of Afghanistan is gone, and everyone is glad to be rid of him.

Dara Horn is the author, most recently, of People Love Dead Jews and the creator and host of the podcast Adventures With Dead Jews.

Follow this link:
Opinion | What Happens When the Last Jew Leaves Afghanistan - The New York Times

Vendors sell Taliban flags in front of a wall alongside the US embassy in Kabul on September 13, 2021. KARIM SAHIB/AFP via Getty Images

According to a new report from The Art Newspaper, during the initial scramble of American officials from Afghanistan that took place when it became clear that the Talibans takeover efforts would be successful, the United States embassy also hastily ensured that the art collection housed in its facility would be sent back to America as well. These works evidently include Pat Lipskys Builder (1999), a carpet installation by Lisa Anne Auerbach and New Morning (2009) by Judy Pfaff. Camille Benton, the curator of the U.S. State Departments Art in Embassies program, also reportedly told Lipsky that the governments main priority was getting people out of Afghanistan, but that more information regarding her works location would be forthcoming.

During the time that the art evacuation was taking place, many US staff were still struggling to leave Afghanistan. We have confirmed that pieces of art were packed up and shipped before embassy operations shifted to the Kabul airport, a spokesperson for the State Department told The Art Newspaper. These items have arrived in the United States and are in the process of being reviewed and inventoried. Ever since the Talibans takeover of Afghanistan, concerns have been raised regarding whether the group intends to pose a threat to items that make up the countrys cultural heritage.

Some, like representatives from the D.C.-based Alliance for the Restoration of Cultural Heritage, have said that Taliban counterpartshave stated that they agree with the need to protect historic sites. But given the Talibans proven track record of cracking down on artistic expression and wrecking significant artifacts, including the 2001 destruction of the Buddhas of Bamiyan, organizations like the British Council have suspended Afghanistan-based heritage projects until further notice. Afghan musicians have also been fleeing the country.

Afghan artists recently told the Washington Post that theyve been burying paintings, stashing away books and hiding hard drives packed with films out of anxiety that the Taliban will destroy them. The Taliban has not issued any statements regarding the arts, Safiullah Habibi, the director of Kabuls Fine Arts Institute, told the Post. But artists themselves are limiting themselves. They think the Taliban will repeat what happened in the 1990s. At that time, the arts had no place in their rule.

Until the Taliban elucidates its official policies when it comes to art, its clear that American officials werent going to take any chances when it came to the U.S. embassys collection.

Go here to read the rest:
American Art Was Evacuated During the Talibans Takeover of Afghanistan - Observer