Afghan Conflict: Zelenskyy, NRF Attend Danish Summit

[Insaanistan]

If I was deliberately spreading news from questionable sources, I’d be using Pro-NRF YouTube channels, like this one:

https://youtu.be/PG9M1HJNR20

The news I’ve been citing largely comes from Sputnik, Aamaj News, the Independent (Persian language site), Iranian Students News Agency, and sometimes times TRT, Republic World, DW & BBC (Persian language site).

I’m not gonna cite news that’s not credible because I frankly don’t a give two 2 Fs about what “Sounds good”. It doesn’t help the NRF when people do that, because we’re not in Pants on Fire, where my lies magically come to truth (even then, his lies weren’t actually coming true, his sister was playing a prank on him to teach him a lesson about his pathological lying).

What we are in is in the real world, where multiple news sources have reported the Taliban are preparing to assault Panjshir again, where it’s known fighting picks up again in Afghanistan as winter comes to an end, where ISIS-K is STILL doing suicide bombings across the country, where the vast majority of Afghanistan are suffering & most want to leave and never come back now.

Sputnik:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/sputnik-news/

"Factual Reporting: Very Low"

Aamaj is so unreliable it got deleted from Facebook for spreading misinformation.
https://www.facebook.com/AamajNews
https://twitter.com/Paktyaw4l/status/14 ... 0796023811

IndyPersian is pro-NRF.

Do some background research on the sources you cite.

The last time there were huge reinforcements coming into Panjshir, there were videos of the Taliban convoys everywhere.

See:
https://twitter.com/Natsecjeff/status/1 ... 6644026374
https://twitter.com/Natsecjeff/status/1 ... 4783321090
https://twitter.com/Natsecjeff/status/1 ... 8904483840
https://twitter.com/Natsecjeff/status/1 ... 6622285824

and there's still more videos. None of that exists for whatever Sputnik is going on about.

Meanwhile, Ad Fontes Media rates Sputnik as Generally Reliable:
https://adfontesmedia.com/sputnik-inter ... liability/
The main criticism against it is that it’s Pro-Russian govt, which, makes sense, as it’s Russian state media run. That isn’t to say that I’m going to trust everything they say, it’s still Russia. But nonetheless, it’s not as if everything that’s on the site is a lie: for propagandists, it’s much more useful to provide facts & explain them the way you want to explain them rather than to just make stuff up completely.

As for Aamaj News, it’s still alive & well on Twitter & has been sourced by CNN, NYT, WaPo, AP & Reuters.

On the note of the Independent Persian, really? Should we not trust any American news outlet other than Fox’s reports on Democratic candidates? You haven’t provided any evidence that they’re untrustworthy, all you said is that they like the NRF.

[Nociav]

Meanwhile, Ad Fontes Media rates Sputnik as Generally Reliable:
https://adfontesmedia.com/sputnik-inter ... liability/
The main criticism against it is that it’s Pro-Russian govt, which, makes sense, as it’s Russian state media run. That isn’t to say that I’m going to trust everything they say, it’s still Russia. But nonetheless, it’s not as if everything that’s on the site is a lie: for propagandists, it’s much more useful to provide facts & explain them the way you want to explain them rather than to just make stuff up completely.

Given that Sputnik failed many fact checks, no, they are not reliable. Their sourcing is poor. I would have thought you would be humbled after half your links to Sputnik turn error 404 within 10 minutes.

As for Aamaj News, it’s still alive & well on Twitter & has been sourced by CNN, NYT, WaPo, AP & Reuters.

Being cited doesn't make them reliable. When they've been deleted from Facebook for misinformation, it becomes clear they're untrustworthy.

On the note of the Independent Persian, really? Should we not trust any American news outlet other than Fox’s reports on Democratic candidates? You haven’t provided any evidence that they’re untrustworthy, all you said is that they like the NRF.

If you can't see how being pro-NRF doesn't immediately discount a source then I have no idea how to explain it to you. It's extremely basic. It's the same reason why I wouldn't trust a pro-Trump source on anything to do with Trump's opinions.

Here's a taste of how ludicrous the NRF standpoint is so as to illustrate why pro-NRF sources are as good as reading tea leaves:

https://twitter.com/FrenkieMark/status/ ... 7987295235
https://twitter.com/antipakio/status/14 ... 2914489348
https://twitter.com/Natsecjeff/status/1 ... 9264029702

At least 100,000 have joined so far, including veterans of the first mujahideen fighters.

[A White Africa]

With the sheer range of questions your asking, some of which are loaded or have next to nothing to do with the Afghan national identity, I have no clue what your trying to say. You seem to implicitly admit that there is a national identity in your final paragraph which only adds to my confusion. What is it your trying to say?

The last paragraph just points out that Afghanistan is simply the creation of Pashtun strongmen dominating the other ethnicities, with no creation of a common positive identity over the past centuries.

Like I wrote before, take away the presence of a foreign & non-Muslim intruder (forcing the different groups to align with each other) and what's left? You pretty much have a consistent succession of Pashtun leadership, intermittently assisting in Pashtun settlement of the country's north & center.

You're no doubt familiar with the debate over whether the denonym "Afghan" itself is just a synonym for Pashtun. The various questions I've raised just highlight how little there seems to be in common for a supposedly cohesive and integral Afghan nation, the largest of these being where exactly does the eastern border of the country
legitimately terminate in the eyes of "Afghans".

After that, whose Islam is the Afghan Islam? Is it representative of the different sects and intensities, or is it the brand pushed by whatever temporal Pashtun leadership at a given time?

[Insaanistan]

Meanwhile, Ad Fontes Media rates Sputnik as Generally Reliable:
https://adfontesmedia.com/sputnik-inter ... liability/
The main criticism against it is that it’s Pro-Russian govt, which, makes sense, as it’s Russian state media run. That isn’t to say that I’m going to trust everything they say, it’s still Russia. But nonetheless, it’s not as if everything that’s on the site is a lie: for propagandists, it’s much more useful to provide facts & explain them the way you want to explain them rather than to just make stuff up completely.

Given that Sputnik failed many fact checks, no, they are not reliable. Their sourcing is poor. I would have thought you would be humbled after half your links to Sputnik turn error 404 within 10 minutes.

As for Aamaj News, it’s still alive & well on Twitter & has been sourced by CNN, NYT, WaPo, AP & Reuters.

Being cited doesn't make them reliable. When they've been deleted from Facebook for misinformation, it becomes clear they're untrustworthy.

On the note of the Independent Persian, really? Should we not trust any American news outlet other than Fox’s reports on Democratic candidates? You haven’t provided any evidence that they’re untrustworthy, all you said is that they like the NRF.

If you can't see how being pro-NRF doesn't immediately discount a source then I have no idea how to explain it to you. It's extremely basic. It's the same reason why I wouldn't trust a pro-Trump source on anything to do with Trump's opinions.

Here's a taste of how ludicrous the NRF standpoint is so as to illustrate why pro-NRF sources are as good as reading tea leaves:

https://twitter.com/FrenkieMark/status/ ... 7987295235
https://twitter.com/antipakio/status/14 ... 2914489348
https://twitter.com/Natsecjeff/status/1 ... 9264029702

At least 100,000 have joined so far, including veterans of the first mujahideen fighters.

Ah, yes, because the Independent is a random Pro-NRF Twitter account & totally not a reputable news outlet.

[Nociav]

Given that Sputnik failed many fact checks, no, they are not reliable. Their sourcing is poor. I would have thought you would be humbled after half your links to Sputnik turn error 404 within 10 minutes.



Being cited doesn't make them reliable. When they've been deleted from Facebook for misinformation, it becomes clear they're untrustworthy.



If you can't see how being pro-NRF doesn't immediately discount a source then I have no idea how to explain it to you. It's extremely basic. It's the same reason why I wouldn't trust a pro-Trump source on anything to do with Trump's opinions.

Here's a taste of how ludicrous the NRF standpoint is so as to illustrate why pro-NRF sources are as good as reading tea leaves:

https://twitter.com/FrenkieMark/status/ ... 7987295235
https://twitter.com/antipakio/status/14 ... 2914489348
https://twitter.com/Natsecjeff/status/1 ... 9264029702

Ah, yes, because the Independent is a random Pro-NRF Twitter account & totally not a reputable news outlet.

When you realise your beloved fake news source isn't what you think it is:
https://www.arabnews.com/node/1441096/media

Independent-branded digital properties will be launched in Arabic, Turkish, Urdu and Persian.

Not even owned by the respectable Independent. Literally just leeching of its name.

Before you deflect, Arab News was the first result I plucked off Google. Here's the Guardian saying the exact same:
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/ ... -spotlight

[Insaanistan]

Ah, yes, because the Independent is a random Pro-NRF Twitter account & totally not a reputable news outlet.

When you realise your beloved fake news source isn't what you think it is:
https://www.arabnews.com/node/1441096/media

Independent-branded digital properties will be launched in Arabic, Turkish, Urdu and Persian.

Not even owned by the respectable Independent. Literally just leeching of its name.

Before you deflect, Arab News was the first result I plucked off Google. Here's the Guardian saying the exact same:
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/ ... -spotlight

From the Guardian article you were kind enough to provide:

The Independent’s editor, Christian Broughton, is understood to have recently reassured concerned London-based staff that the new sites will be as independent as their name suggests, despite their links to the Saudi government.

It further explains

But two people approached by the Independent to apply for a job overseeing the Persian language site – aimed at Iranian readers – said they walked away after failing to receive enough assurances about the site’s editorial independence from the Saudi state, given that Saudi Arabia is locked in proxy war with Iran across the Middle East.

You claimed we can’t trust it because it’s Pro-NRF, a group that Iran has called upon the Taliban to work with & seems to be cozying up to the theocracy, and is against al-Qaeda.

If Saudi’s using the site to make itself look great & Iran look bad by promoting the relatively pro-Iran NRF, then it’s doing a bad job.

Bin Salman is evil, not a moron.

[Nociav]

When you realise your beloved fake news source isn't what you think it is:
https://www.arabnews.com/node/1441096/media



Not even owned by the respectable Independent. Literally just leeching of its name.

Before you deflect, Arab News was the first result I plucked off Google. Here's the Guardian saying the exact same:
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/ ... -spotlight

From the Guardian article you were kind enough to provide:

The Independent’s editor, Christian Broughton, is understood to have recently reassured concerned London-based staff that the new sites will be as independent as their name suggests, despite their links to the Saudi government.

It further explains

But two people approached by the Independent to apply for a job overseeing the Persian language site – aimed at Iranian readers – said they walked away after failing to receive enough assurances about the site’s editorial independence from the Saudi state, given that Saudi Arabia is locked in proxy war with Iran across the Middle East.

You claimed we can’t trust it because it’s Pro-NRF, a group that Iran has called upon the Taliban to work with & seems to be cozying up to the theocracy, and is against al-Qaeda.

If Saudi’s using the site to make itself look great & Iran look bad by promoting the relatively pro-Iran NRF, then it’s doing a bad job.

Bin Salman is evil, not a moron.

You went from using its British namesake as proof it's reliable to now admitting that it has nothing to do with the actual Independent but it still isn't biased. Let's continue.

It being owned by the Saudis had nothing to do with anything I said. I used it as proof that you pulling out the British Independent as reliable doesn't apply here.

Now, then. The NRF bias of IndyPersian is obvious. Routinely posting things that the NRF spokesmen say and from an NRF standpoint. To add the final nail in the coffin, it's editor-in-chief is a literal NRFer. From defending Saleh's corruption, to telling Afghans to pray for an NRF victory, to retweeting this tweet from an NRF account alleging genocide.

If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, and is seen in the company of other ducks, is it not a duck?

None of this wasn't already public knowledge. People paying attention to Afghanistan have known IndyPersian's bias for a while now. Either your deliberately spreading fake news or the stars have aligned to deprive you of this common knowledge.

[Fahran]

I've pointed out concrete ways in which it has damaged institutional access and harmed the prospects of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of vulnerable people already. I could even elaborate on a lot of the social dysfunctions the Islamist approach to policy has introduced or exacerbated in countries where it is embraced, including both Pakistan and Afghanistan.

You cut up my sentence and cut out the context ie. your post. You said:

In many cases, pursuit of conventions promoted and supported by these institutions has made many Afghans worse off in real terms.

I said no they haven't. Peace and order is a very real benefit. Afghans are better off with peace than they are with war.

There's an ongoing insurgency in Afghanistan. Hazaras and women's rights activists are being murdered by local Taliban. Taliban patrols are being ambushed and beheaded by IS-K. The NRF is still likely active in its heartlands around Panjshir, continuing resistance in the mountains. Given the Taliban contributed significantly to the absence of peace and order, I'm not sure we should give them credit for not waging a war against the government because they became the government. Feels a lot like praising the Nazis for bringing peace to the streets of Berlin or Munich.

There isn't ongoing insurgency that matters. No insurgency on the Taliban's level. Hazaras and women activists aren't being murdered. Your exaggerating the few incidents into some nationwide campaign. Taliban patrols are not being ambushed and beheaded by ISKP. Your once again exaggerating a few ambushes and a beheadings of civilians. Stop propagandizing ISIS. The NRF is defeated. I only know of one confirmed NRF attack since the 6th of September. Stop propagandizing the NRF. Things are more peaceful since the Taliban took over. Read here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/17/worl ... ssoud.html

and here:

https://www.afghanistan-analysts.org/en ... f-history/

Your creating a false equivalence by comparing the Taliban to The Nazis.

Do they matter more than having a right to be educated or receive adequate medical attention? What about access to food?

Peace matters far more than access to education. Your line of reasoning goes:

"A teenage girl being educated in a bombed out forward operating base and risking being killed by an IED or a stray bullet" is better than "a teenage girl sat at home with no education but not risking their lives by IEDs and bullets".

Medicine and food is on the world. Afghanistan never had any self-reliance in these sectors. The world is to blame for the catastrophe.

And, if the Taliban reenacts what they did the last time around and what they promised to do as they assumed control of the country, we can expect sexual and ethnic violence to increase as well.

Really interested to see where you've gotten the data to draw this conclusion, the reasoning behind it, and your supporting arguments. Then again, your probably trying to divert this discussion.

I feel like genocidal is the right adjective to describe a group that murdered 8,000 civilians based on their ethnic and religious background, that occasionally conducted killings and war rapes against civilians based on ethnic and religious background between 2013 and 2018, and that has been summarily executing unarmed men based on their ethnic and religious background since they assumed power. You don't have to be a Nazi to be engaged in genocidal policies or to be genocidal.

1. Instead of admitting your in the wrong to so lazily throw the word genocide around, you've doubled down.

2. Instead of throwing around numbers and hinting at things. Lay clear what your talking about. Where were 8000 civilians killed for their ethnicity? Where's your proof they have a policy of killing summarily on an ethnic basis? Stop appealing to most people's ignorance of Afghanistan's nuance and start posting with your arguments, facts, and reasoning laid bare the first time.

This is literally still aid.

Once again, stop cutting up my posts when subsequent lines are incredibly relevant.

Fair. But, again, this isn't a long-term economic solution.

Read above.

I'm not certain Afghanistan actually have strong centralized institutions at the national level anymore. Those have been effectively destroyed by firty years of off and on civil wars. That's part of why I tend to advocate for regional power bases under the moral guidance of a widely-respected leading figure as a means of eventually creating alliances and paving the road for institutions that are agreeable to as many Afghans as possible. At present, the only one everyone seems to agree on Islam - and the Islamists still fight each other all the time.

As you admit, the only institutions still left are the Islamic ones. There is an Islamic government in charge. The Taliban have a proven track record of running a highly centralised state. What is there to doubt? The Taliban have the backing of just about every Mullah in the country.

I mean... in practice, the Taliban is often decentralized - at least if we're hospitable in how we characterize a lot of the purges that seem to have taken place in the last few months. I doubt Akhunzada or Baradar are directly ordering hits on women's rights activists or Hazaras. If they are, yeah, I don't want them to have more money.

The Taliban are not decentralised. I don't know how anyone can draw that conclusion when we have 27 years of history that says otherwise. What the Taliban do have is a level of autonomy for their commanders which exists out of necessity for fighting as an insurgency. They've been purging and shuffling their ranks ever since September and have been progressing towards more centralised control.

In my previous responses, I divided your posts because they often included distinct ideas that I wanted to address in detail. While I absolutely appreciate the benefit of writing a proper essay and understand why you would prefer that, I'm a touch anxious about neglecting important points that you might bring up. It wasn't my intention to mischaracterize what you had to say on these matters. With that being said, I'll format my responses as you requested going forward.

It strikes me as strange to credit the Taliban with bringing peace to Afghanistan when the Taliban played an integral role in continuing the conflict and contributed a decent portion of the civilian casualties associated with it. To quote the linked source...

It said the surge in civilian casualties noted with the start of intra-Afghan negotiations between the government representatives and the Taliban in September last year continued with the insurgents charged for 43.5% of all civilian casualties, security forces for 25% of civilian casualties, and undetermined anti-government elements for 12.5% of the civilian casualties.

UNAMA date also depict an upward trend in civilian casualties, with a slight drop in 2020 when the US and Taliban inked Doha Agreement paving the way for foreign troops to leave Afghanistan.

According to the estimates, 3,133 civilians were killed in 2011, 2,769 more to the raging conflict in 2012, 2,969 deaths in 2013, 3,701 in 2014. This was the time when the foreign troops ended their combat mission and went into the Resolute Support mission focusing mainly on training the Afghan forces.

However, it did not help reduce violence and instead resulted in more deaths. A total of 3,565 civilians were killed in 2015, in 2016, 3,527 were killed, and in 2017, the number of civilian deaths was 3,442, 3,803 in 2018, 3,409 in 2019, and 3,035 in 2020.

During this time, the number of wounded was more than twice that of the number of deaths.

As per the perpetrators, with the Taliban-led insurgency gaining momentum in this decade, the group was held responsible for most of these casualties.

I'm not so sure we should give the militant Islamist organization credit for the alleged peace brought about by their conquest of the country when their long-running insurgency was a serious obstacle to said peace and they killed a lot of civilians, on occasion deliberately.

As for the assertion you made regarding peace and the ongoing insurgencies being NRF/ISIL propaganda... Per your own source.

The violence this year has not been limited to the fighting itself. Many people reported looting – whether by Taleban or others, it was often not clear. There have also been continuing allegations of killings carried out by Taleban despite the location-specific and general amnesties given to government officials and members of the ANSF. Such killings are now being documented. Amnesty International has published details of killings by Taleban in: Spin Boldak in Kandahar province in July, along with the denial of medical treatment to wounded male civilians and government soldiers; Malestan in Ghazni, also in July, including three men allegedly tortured to death; Khedir district of Daikundi in August, which included the alleged killing of a 17-year old girl and; Panjshir in September, alongside the torture and mistreatment of detainees.

Another report, by Human Rights Watch, ‘No Forgiveness for People Like You’: Executions and Enforced Disappearances in Afghanistan under the Taliban, published on 30 November, focused on the summary execution and forced disappearance of security sector personnel from 15 August up to 31 October.[7] It alleges that requests for security personnel to register for amnesty and hand in their weapons were used to identify and then target them. It also traces the Taleban searching for former personnel who had gone into hiding, “often threatening and abusing family members to reveal the[ir] whereabouts.” As ever in Afghanistan, contacts may offer some protection, as Human Rights Watch notes: “Those executed on the spot often included lower-level security force members who were less well-known or lacked the protection of tribal leaders, especially in the south.”[8]
Nada al-Nashif, United Nations Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights has also said, on 14 December, that they had documented more than 100 Afghans killed since the Taleban took power, including former ANSF personnel, at least 50 men suspected by the Taleban to be members of ISKP, who were beheaded or hanged, at least eight activists and two journalists. The UN, al-Nashif said, was particularly alarmed about the “safety of Afghan judges, prosecutors, and lawyers – particularly women legal professionals.”

The other form of violence suffered by some Afghans in the wake of the Taleban victory has been forced displacement. Human Rights Watch in a press release from 22 October alleged that former officials, as well as Hazara communities, have been targeted. Earlier that month, it said:

… the Taliban and associated militias forcibly evicted hundreds of Hazara families from the southern Helmand province and the northern Balkh province. These followed earlier evictions from Daikundi, Uruzgan, and Kandahar provinces. Since the Taliban came to power in August, the Taliban have told many Hazaras and other residents in these five provinces to leave their homes and farms, in many cases with only a few days’ notice and without any opportunity to present their legal claims to the land.

As the year ended, no group except the Taleban enjoyed any territorial control in Afghanistan. However, there have continued to be occasional attacks, mainly involving small arms, hand grenades or IEDs, against the Taleban. Some attacks have been claimed by ISKP and a few by the National Resistance Front, the group established by former first vice president Amrullah Saleh, and son of the mujahedin commander, Ahmad Shah Massud, Ahmad Massud, which held out for several weeks in the Panjshir. Many attacks, however, are unclaimed and may not be linked to any organised group. Such attacks are far lower in number and generally more minor in scale than those directed by the Taleban at the previous government. As yet, however, they show no signs of fading away.

In Nangrahar, violence has been more systematic and on a larger scale, with assassinations by Taleban and ISKP of each other’s cadre or suspected cadre, and with some suicide attacks by ISKP. The Taleban have also closed down, reported al-Jazeera on 27 September, “more than three dozen Salafist mosques across 16 different provinces.” (Salafism, also known as Wahabism is the school of Islam to which ISKP adheres, along with a sizeable number of non-ISKP-aligned Afghans; most Afghan Sunni Muslims, including the Taleban, are Hanafi.)

The article seriously challenges a number of your claims, beginning with the claims that no insurgency is ongoing against the Taliban and that violence has not been directed against Hazaras and women's rights activists.

Let's begin with the claims about women's rights activists since these can be easily demonstrated. Four women's rights activists were found murdered in Mazar-i-Sharif

Last week, bodies of four Afghan women’s activists were discovered in Mazar-i-Sharif, northern Afghanistan. One of the victims was identified as Frozan Safi, a 30-year-old activist and private university economics lecturer. According to Safi’s family, she left her home on October 27 after she received an anonymous call asking her to collect her documents because they would take her abroad. Frozan was expecting a call as she was waiting to leave the country, her request for asylum in Germany was in progress. Her body, along with the bodies of three other women were found in a pit near the Khalid ibn al-Walid town in Mazar-i-Sharif. “

Her face was destroyed by the bullets, there were bullet wounds all over, too many to count, on her head, heart, chest, kidneys, and legs,” her sister told the reporter.

According to the Australian news, the four victims said to have participated in public demonstrations against Taliban repression. Afghan women have been protesting almost every week since the Taliban regained power in Afghanistan, demanding their rights to education and work. But as time passed, the Taliban became increasingly harsh and have in fact known to beat women, many women have gone into hiding, and now the bodies of four women protestors have been found.

This isn't a novel or unexpected development from the Taliban. The Pakistani Taliban, which broadly seems to hold similar attitudes towards women, previously shot school girls and activists in the head. Again, I'm not sure what your interest in providing cover for the very overt and violent misogyny of the Taliban is, but they're absolutely not going to advance opportunities for women and they will probably continue to maim and murder women who speak up and irritate them.

As for why this matters, the exclusion of women from public life has already led to worsening humanitarian conditions, especially related to healthcare. The demand that women remain at home have either been walked back or ignored to address ongoing health issues it exacerbated. Restrictions are still in place that prevent female healthcare professionals from collaborating with their male counterparts or treating male patients. Likewise, male healthcare professionals cannot properly treat female patients. This puts people at serious risk, and serves no genuine purpose beyond checking a fundamentalist box.

And, again, this isn't a novel policy. It's a continuation of what the Taliban was doing in 1997 when they banned women from most hospitals in Kabul according to Ahmed Rashid, a journalist who specialized in coverage of Afghanistan, and medical journals and websites that covered the ongoing crisis. This isn't just women wanting to wear miniskirts outside. It's something that has an actual impact on the life prospects and health of both men and women, and this is one example.

As for subjugation and harassment being preferable to death... again, the Taliban have been doing a lot of the killing you mentioned before. Should we really give them credit for not killing women and girls because they managed to deny women and girls the right to move freely or work? It's like blaming the police for cultivating informants when the gang getting informed on decides to kill the informant's family. I would posit that this actually paints the Taliban in a worse light than we were doing previously.

Moving on though, let's address the Hazaras. Your article above mentioned the expulsion of Hazaras in four provinces. This is an act of ethnic cleansing. And it's not occurring on a small scale. We're talking about hundreds of families and thousands of people, sometimes entire communities, being uprooted, which will, again, lead to a worsening humanitarian crisis.

In early October 2021, the Taliban and associated militias forcibly evicted hundreds of Hazara families from the southern Helmand province and the northern Balkh province. These followed earlier evictions from Daikundi, Uruzgan, and Kandahar provinces. Since the Taliban came to power in August, the Taliban have told many Hazaras and other residents in these five provinces to leave their homes and farms, in many cases with only a few days’ notice and without any opportunity to present their legal claims to the land. A former United Nations political analyst said that he saw eviction notices telling residents that if they did not comply, they “had no right to complain about the consequences.”

“The Taliban are forcibly evicting Hazaras and others on the basis of ethnicity or political opinion to reward Taliban supporters,” said Patricia Gossman, associate Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “These evictions, carried out with threats of force and without any legal process, are serious abuses that amount to collective punishment.”

The media have reported that Hazara residents of Mazar-e Sharif's Qubat al-Islam district in Balkh province said that armed men from the local Kushani community were working with local Taliban security forces to force families to leave, and had given them only three days to do so. Taliban officials claimed the evictions were based on a court order, but evicted residents assert that they have owned the land since the 1970s. Disputes over conflicting claims arose out of power struggles in the 1990s.

Residents of Naw Mish district in Helmand province told Human Rights Watch that the Taliban issued a letter to at least 400 families in late September ordering them to leave. Given little time, the families were unable to take their belongings or complete harvesting their crops. One resident said the Taliban detained six men who tried to challenge the order; four remain in custody.

Another resident said that in the early 1990s, local officials distributed large tracts of land among their relatives and supporters, exacerbating tensions between ethnic and tribal communities. Securing a claim to land depended on who was in power, and those who lost out in earlier decisions have now petitioned the Taliban to support their claims. An activist from Helmand said that the property is being redistributed to Taliban members holding official positions. They “are cannibalizing land and other public goods” and redistributing it to their own forces, he said.

The largest displacements have taken place in 15 villages in Daikundi and Uruzgan provinces, where the Taliban evicted at least 2,800 Hazara residents in September. The families relocated to other districts, leaving their belongings and crops behind. One former resident said that “after the Taliban takeover, we received a letter from the Taliban informing us that we should leave our houses because the lands are in dispute. A few representatives went to the district officials to ask for an investigation but around five of them have been arrested.” Human Rights Watch was unable to determine if they have been released.

The former resident added that the Taliban had established checkpoints on the roads out of the villages and “did not let anyone take even their crops with them.” Following media coverage of the evictions, Taliban officials in Kabul retracted eviction orders for some Daikundi villages, but as of October 20, no residents had returned.

So they're low-key threatening to murder Hazaras who don't comply with the evictions and stealing their belongings and crops after they do comply. This also isn't a novel development given the Taliban carried out an act of genocide in Mazar-i-Sharif in 1998. Killing around 8,000 people in a single community because they're Hazara, Tajik, or Uzbek meets the standard of genocide, so it's not inaccurate to describe the militant organization that carried out that act and that is presently carrying out acts of ethnic cleansing that could lead to starvation as genocidal. It's extremely accurate.

[Fahran]

I want to be clear here. I'm not advocating for a NATO intervention, but we should not delude ourselves into believing that Taliban rule of the country will benefit Afghans in the long-term. The policies they put in place in 1997 and 2021 are exactly as I described them previously.

I'll address the claim about the centralized Taliban a bit later and why it's not exactly accurate, but I figured it would be easier to point to the human rights abuses that have led me to call the Taliban genocidal and to assert that, perhaps, limiting women's presence in public life isn't a great idea when your economy is in shambles and you have a looming humanitarian crisis to address because the aid that made up 44% of your economy got cut off, in part, because of your violent misogyny.

[Salus Maior]

I want to be clear here. I'm not advocating for a NATO intervention, but we should not delude ourselves into believing that Taliban rule of the country will benefit Afghans in the long-term. The policies they put in place in 1997 and 2021 are exactly as I described them previously.

I'll address the claim about the centralized Taliban a bit later and why it's not exactly accurate, but I figured it would be easier to point to the human rights abuses that have led me to call the Taliban genocidal and to assert that, perhaps, limiting women's presence in public life isn't a great idea when your economy is in shambles and you have a looming humanitarian crisis to address because the aid that made up 44% of your economy got cut off, in part, because of your violent misogyny.

Tbh I don't think there are any real means of stopping a genocide outside of direct action.

[Salus Maior]

I want to be clear here. I'm not advocating for a NATO intervention, but we should not delude ourselves into believing that Taliban rule of the country will benefit Afghans in the long-term. The policies they put in place in 1997 and 2021 are exactly as I described them previously.

I'll address the claim about the centralized Taliban a bit later and why it's not exactly accurate, but I figured it would be easier to point to the human rights abuses that have led me to call the Taliban genocidal and to assert that, perhaps, limiting women's presence in public life isn't a great idea when your economy is in shambles and you have a looming humanitarian crisis to address because the aid that made up 44% of your economy got cut off, in part, because of your violent misogyny.

Tbh I don't think there are any real means of stopping a genocide outside of direct action.

[Fahran]

Tbh I don't think there are any real means of stopping a genocide outside of direct action.

I'm not sure we have the public will to stop ethnic cleansing in Afghanistan. We've also allowed ethnic cleansing to go forward in Syria, Israel, and Armenia lately, so I'm not sure it's a very high priority of people in office anyhow. Iran could perhaps consider assisting the Hazaras in some way, but, realistically, they're probably in for a rough couple decades. Which isn't really new. Afghan governments have been mistreating them for like a century at this point.

[Salus Maior]

Tbh I don't think there are any real means of stopping a genocide outside of direct action.

I'm not sure we have the public will to stop ethnic cleansing in Afghanistan. We've also allowed ethnic cleansing to go forward in Syria, Israel, and Armenia lately, so I'm not sure it's a very high priority of people in office anyhow. Iran could perhaps consider assisting the Hazaras in some way, but, realistically, they're probably in for a rough couple decades. Which isn't really new. Afghan governments have been mistreating them for like a century at this point.

I'm not saying we will, we just can't expect anything to be done about it if we're not willing to commit to direct action, unfortunately.

[Sungoldy-China]

In the absence of external intervention, the boiling water in Afghanistan will eventually calm down.
It doesn't matter how much water evaporates during this period

[Insaanistan]

Iranian Foreign Minister’s Visit to India to Discuss Afghanistan, Hazara-Tajik Situation, Postponed due to India’s Foreign Minister Testing Positive for Covid

[Insaanistan]

Journalist From the Independent Persian Claims Group Calling Itself “Turkestan Tigers of Freedom” Has Attacked Taliban, Killing 4 & Injuring 2

Protesters in Kabul Chant “Death to the Emirate” Follwoing Killing of Shopkeeper & Arrests of Others by the Taliban

Talibs Reportedly Killed by Roadside Bomb in Paranda-Bazarak Valley (Exact Casualties Unknown) Just Weeks After Talib Commander Khorasani Survived a Bazarak Roadside Bomb

[A White Africa]

Iran could perhaps consider assisting the Hazaras in some way, but, realistically, they're probably in for a rough couple decades. Which isn't really new. Afghan governments have been mistreating them for like a century at this point.

I'm genuinely curious how many folks in Liwa Fatemiyoun (Iran's Hazara legion in Syria) know what's going on over in Afghanistan. I recognize that each one of those men was originally a refugee in the first place, but I'd be awestruck if there aren't some seasoned veterans by now contemplating going back home to embed in the populace and foment uprising.

[Fedel]

In the absence of external intervention, the boiling water in Afghanistan will eventually calm down.
It doesn't matter how much water evaporates during this period

Some would beg to differ I'd imagine.

[Fahran]

In the absence of external intervention, the boiling water in Afghanistan will eventually calm down.
It doesn't matter how much water evaporates during this period

It doesn't look as though it will completely calm down at any point in the near future. As multiple articles, including the one that alleged that the Taliban had brought peace to the country, suggested, insurgencies against the Taliban are ongoing. They're not as severe as the Taliban insurgency was, but they're a definite obstacle to the boiling water calming down.

[Rusozak]

In the absence of external intervention, the boiling water in Afghanistan will eventually calm down.
It doesn't matter how much water evaporates during this period

It doesn't look as though it will completely calm down at any point in the near future. As multiple articles, including the one that alleged that the Taliban had brought peace to the country, suggested, insurgencies against the Taliban are ongoing. They're not as severe as the Taliban insurgency was, but they're a definite obstacle to the boiling water calming down.

And the relative peace won't last, either. The Taliban proved the last time they ruled and beginning to prove again that they are not good at nation building and governance. A 7th century model for how to run a country isn't sustainable in the 21st century. As society begins to disintegrate and basic needs aren't met, more and more people will rise against the Taliban in desperation, if foreign actors don't seize the opportunity first.

[Fahran]

And the relative peace won't last, either. The Taliban proved the last time they ruled and beginning to prove again that they are not good at nation building and governance. A 7th century model for how to run a country isn't sustainable in the 21st century. As society begins to disintegrate and basic needs aren't met, more and more people will rise against the Taliban in desperation, if foreign actors don't seize the opportunity first.

The Taliban are arguably more extreme than the Sahabah were in terms of how they interpret and apply sharia. Their ideology is a blend of Pashtun political culture and Islamic revivalism that tends to collide face first with the fact that they need to run a narco-state to keep their coffers full and that perhaps a bunch of men with sexist and racist attitudes who have spent the better part of the last decade huddling in the foothills of Kandahar aren't always super great people who will befriend others.

[Nociav]

-snip-

I wrote down my thoughts, did some research and re-reading, finished writing, and then decided "nah, not worth it". The inevitable wails and shrieks of "Taliban sympathizer", "terrorist supporter", or even "genocidal maniac", just aren't worth an internet argument. I'll stick to criticising the NRF. Low hanging fruit but one that doesn't come bundled with biting personal attacks.

[A White Africa]

-snip-

I wrote down my thoughts, did some research and re-reading, finished writing, and then decided "nah, not worth it". The inevitable wails and shrieks of "Taliban sympathizer", "terrorist supporter", or even "genocidal maniac", just aren't worth an internet argument. I'll stick to criticising the NRF. Low hanging fruit but one that doesn't come bundled with biting personal attacks.

Well if you already put something together, telegram it to me. I hope I've been at least civil thus far.

[Nociav]

I wrote down my thoughts, did some research and re-reading, finished writing, and then decided "nah, not worth it". The inevitable wails and shrieks of "Taliban sympathizer", "terrorist supporter", or even "genocidal maniac", just aren't worth an internet argument. I'll stick to criticising the NRF. Low hanging fruit but one that doesn't come bundled with biting personal attacks.

Well if you already put something together, telegram it to me. I hope I've been at least civil thus far.

You've been civil. I'll respond to you soon.

[Insaanistan]

From the Guardian article you were kind enough to provide:

It further explains


You claimed we can’t trust it because it’s Pro-NRF, a group that Iran has called upon the Taliban to work with & seems to be cozying up to the theocracy, and is against al-Qaeda.

If Saudi’s using the site to make itself look great & Iran look bad by promoting the relatively pro-Iran NRF, then it’s doing a bad job.

Bin Salman is evil, not a moron.

You went from using its British namesake as proof it's reliable to now admitting that it has nothing to do with the actual Independent but it still isn't biased. Let's continue.

It being owned by the Saudis had nothing to do with anything I said. I used it as proof that you pulling out the British Independent as reliable doesn't apply here.

Now, then. The NRF bias of IndyPersian is obvious. Routinely posting things that the NRF spokesmen say and from an NRF standpoint. To add the final nail in the coffin, it's editor-in-chief is a literal NRFer. From defending Saleh's corruption, to telling Afghans to pray for an NRF victory, to retweeting this tweet from an NRF account alleging genocide.

If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, and is seen in the company of other ducks, is it not a duck?

None of this wasn't already public knowledge. People paying attention to Afghanistan have known IndyPersian's bias for a while now. Either your deliberately spreading fake news or the stars have aligned to deprive you of this common knowledge.

Aight, gonna delve into this.

Bro the Arab News article & the Guardian article outline something you either didn’t realize or chose not to mention.

The whole reason people were concerned about the Independent Persian was that they feared pro-Saudi propaganda wouldn’t be blocked.

But two people approached by the Independent to apply for a job overseeing the Persian language site – aimed at Iranian readers – said they walked away after failing to receive enough assurances about the site’s editorial independence from the Saudi state, given that Saudi Arabia is locked in proxy war with Iran across the Middle East...
“When I asked whether the consultant editor would be empowered to kill a story that did not meet the Independent’s editorial standards, I was told that it was not yet clear whether the consultant editor would have that authority. It was pretty clear that the Independent’s editorial control would be nominal.”

But as the Guardian & Arab News both affirm, the Independent soon said this

As we made clear at the time the partnership was announced, the foreign language sites will be owned and operated by SRMG, and all editorial practices and output will conform to the standards, codes and ethos of the Independent.

As for the claims about “genocide”, that’s because many believe that Taliban killings of Tajik and Hazara civilians and The evictions of hundreds of Hazara families to amount to genocidal intent.