The idea of gender justice is the substantive recognition of equality in its ethical syntactics, but it remains in a vacuum unless and until it is manifested in pragmatics in the lives of the women and girls. The gender justice is the target to achieve full equality with equity among women and girls and men and boys in all spheres of human development.
The gender justice is the result of men and women jointly defining and shaping the policies and structures on the anvil of equality in the civil society. The gender justice confronts the discrimination against women and girls that have been affecting the lives of women since time immemorial and is the most widespread and acute human rights violations. Discrimination prevents women and girls from accomplishing their socio-political, eco-cultural and lego-institutional objectives ordained in all regions, all constitutions and based on the ordinary prudence of equity, equality and a clear conscience. The gender justice makes available to women equal rights with men in all spheres of human life including matrimonial relationships that has been an institution of gender abuse, women subjugation, and women exploitation to the hilt among the Muslim community in India. However, other religious communities in India also have the privilege to demean their wives in different departments of life but Muslims in the name of Islam have denied and deprived Muslim women from their lawful claims, entitlements, and rights provided in the Holy Quran particularly their rights in conjugal causes by limiting their ability to access Quranic model of dissolution of Muslim marriage that invokes religious syntactics in interpreting their rights.
The tyranny of Triple Talaq or Triple Divorce has been put in the ground for once and all on August 22, 2017, which was litigated before the highest judicial establishment of India. It is, indeed, a great occasion for an audacious assembly of Muslim women for winning their legitimate rights within the walls of the constitutional sanctity of Quranic idea of annulment of marriage. They have dauntlessly and successfully challenged the parochial, disgraceful and despicable practice of subjugation of Muslim women that too in the name of the un-Islamic orientation of Islam. The Supreme Court (SC) of India delivered a jolt to perpetrators of Triple Talaq practice who circumvented all standards of human civility, spousal equality, and the rule of law. The latest SC verdict in the Triple Talaq Case is capable of addressing the gender justice project across the religious denominations in India. In fact, the beginning of the social justice movement in India against the Triple Talaq initiated on 18 April 1966, in Maharashtra for protecting the Muslim women’s rights. In other parts of the world, for example, there are many countries in the Arab peninsula such as Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, UAE, Kuwait, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, and Yemen who have promulgated the laws against the practice of Triple Talaq. Thus, the Triple Talaq is not Islamic, and it is a departure and deviation from the tenets of the Holy Quran to undermine the Muslim women rights on divorce, and it has also been outlawed in many other countries including Pakistan.
Triple Talaq Wiles
Primarily, the Muslim women contended that the practice of Triple Talaq is unconstitutional and it has attained the ugliest form since Triple Divorce is being pronounced by the SMS Text, phone, email, and Whatapps, etc. The SC has viewed that the practice of Triple Talaq is the cruelest, vilest and undesirable form of Muslim marriage dissolution barring few exception of its recognition in some of the schools of Muslim law as observed and practiced in India. Many scholars and academic described the method of Triple Talaq detestable, repulsive, repugnant, and discriminatory to the core that deprives the constitutional right to equality and incompatible with the tenets of the Holy Quran. Therefore, no volume of advocacy can justify its retention. Even GOI had designated all forms of Talaq provided in the Holy Quran such as Talaq-e-Hasan and Talaq-e-Ahsan, as “unilateral” and “extrajudicial” inconsistent with the Constitution of India. However, Kapil Sibal argued on behalf of AIMPLB that the practice of Triple Talaq has been prevalent since 637 AD and cannot be said as un-Islamic and Muslims have been practicing it for the last 1400 years. Unfortunately, that makes it more dangerous and detrimental to the cause of Muslim women’s right to equality. The AIMPLB has behaved arrogantly and irresponsibly in this matter and did not come out with any credible proposal during marathon hearing of the case despite the fact there was opposition to this abhorrent practice in the Muslim community. Therefore, the SC put right a historical wrong that had demeaned the idea of gender equality and perpetuated discrimination based on patriarchal supremacy, bad in theology and sinful and reformed the miasma that was imposed upon the Muslim women.
Gender Justice Law & Sensitization
The people with a preference for homosexuality, lesbianism, gay, transgenderism, and queer (LGBTQ) and cross dressings are illegal in many Muslim countries like Saudi Arab, UAE and a sizable section of Muslim community in India consider these orientations and punishable offensive with prison terms. Therefore, the issue of gender justice in Muslim Personal Law has not been attended sensitively, and it was always entwined with a controversial issue of Uniform Civil Code (UCC) that has deflected the larger issue of gender justice. The UCC has been floated as a plausible alternative to achieve the unachievable in the present circumstances. There is no attempt to decipher and define the contours of the UCC about marriage, divorce, maintenance, inheritance rights, matrimonial property rights and custody of children, etc. Presently, these are the contentious issues simmering in all the religious communities, and all communities consider their religious laws and practices inviolable and unimpeachable to the hilt. For example; the position of Hindu community is dicey and volatile on the dilution of HUF (Hindu Undivided Family) that brings them huge tax concessions and exemptions and other benefits. Therefore, there cannot be utopian UCC likely to be a launch pad for social reforms and gender justice in future. The women movements and organizations like AIDWA (All India Women’s Democratic Association) have been spearheading the cause of equal rights and equal laws for the women and girls to ensure gender parity in all communities in India. AIDWA has supported the significant movement led by Mary Roy for women’s inheritance rights of the Syrian Christian Women. However, a large section of the Christian clergy has started a campaign to demand that the Christian Personal Laws relating to marriage, divorce, and inheritance must be reformed while taking into global norms of gender justice. Among the Muslims, after the Triple Talaq, the practices of Halala, and polygamy must also be addressed with greater vehemence and vitality.
There are many relevant provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 like Sections 294 [singing lewd songs and demanding sexual favours], 354 (A) [Making unwanted physical contact] (C) [Voyeurism] & (D) [Stalking], 503 [Criminal Threat], 499 [Morphing pictures of women], 509 [Making sexually coloured remarks against women], Section 67 [posting any obscene or defamatory material on online platforms] of the Information Technology Act, 2000, There are some legislations enacted like Domestic Violence Act, 2005, Prohibition of Dowry Act, 1961, and the Sexual Harassment of the Women at Workplace-Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal-Act, 2013 and other laws and judicial guidelines against sexual harassment; rape and incidental offences laid down in the matter of Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan & Others that have been appreciated through the lenses of gender equality. The SC had perceived sexual harassment in the workplace as a social problem of considerable magnitude based on discriminatory tendencies against women. The court stated that “Gender equality embraces protection from sexual harassment and the right to work with dignity, which is a universally recognized fundamental human right.” In reality, it is the Libidinal Perversion Gratification (LPG) mindset of the menfolk that works against the women in the public space as well as on the internal walls. All these laws have been enacted under the mounting pressure, but there are many violations of these statutes than the compliance with their provisions. The implementation of these laws has become the biggest challenge in the wake of entrenched patriarchy in all the religious communities in India. The patriarchal mindset has seeped deep into the government and its instrumentalities resulting in the incremental incidences of crimes against women. Thus, it is time to implement these legislations without brooking an iota of discrimination and to establish India as a modern liberal democracy.
Supreme Court of India
The constitution bench of five-judges of the Supreme Court (SC) of India has delivered the historical and unprecedented judgment and rightly banned and declared the practice of unilateral Triple Talaq (also known as Talaq-e-Biddat—Innovative Divorce) unconstitutional and ultra-vires of the Constitution of India. It is now unequivocally established that Triple Talaq is not fundamental to the religion of Islam in India that has often been misused whimsically against Muslim women contrary to gender jurisprudence evolved by the SC and principles of equality as ordained in the Constitution of India, international human rights law, and Holy Quran. The judgement has the guidance from Muslim Law in India and Abroad by Prof. Tahir Mahmood, and SC has identified as many as 19 countries including Egypt, Pakistan, and Turkey and other nation-states from Arab peninsula, South-East Asia, and South Asia that have abolished Triple Talaq and SC has consulted and cited the laws of these countries. This judgment is not against any individual or any institution, organization or religion of Islam rather the true meaning and spirit of the Holy Quran has been delineated on the idea of individual rights, the rule of law, and human rights enunciated in the Constitution of India.
The constitution bench consisted of judges from different religions—Hinduism, Islam, Sikhism, Christianity and Parsi headed by CJI Justice J.S. Khehar, and other Justices U.U. Lalit, S Abdul Nazeer, Kurian Joseph, and R.F. Nariman and they had examined a bunch of seven petitions including the five individual petitions filed by Muslim women challenging the practice of Triple Talaq in the Muslim community. The bench set aside the cruel practice of Triple Talaq by a 3-2 majority. Justice Nariman and Justice Lalit set it aside by terming it unconstitutional and contravening the Article 14 while Justice Joseph also set it aside on the ground of its being against the teachings of the Holy Quran. The CJI Mr. Justice J.S. Khehar and Justice Abdul Nazeer supported the Triple Talaq and recognized that the Triple Talaq was part of Muslim Personal Law and, thus, enjoys the status of fundamental rights.
The Holy Quran & International Law
The Triple Talaq verdict has created a new space for gender justice, and the court treated the women’s rights as human rights under International Human Rights Law. Therefore, the court has recognized the Quranic injunctions on gender equality that Muslim women lacked for centuries. In the Holy Quran, the Triple Talaq is pronounced by a man with the word Talaq speaking thrice over the period of three months. In such a manner, a person may withdraw his word of Talaq twice before finally pronouncing it to end the spousal relationship. Therefore, the Marriage Dissolution under Quranic Mechanism has a justification to establish that a marital union does not conclude by uttering Talaq thrice in one go due to sudden provocation, intoxication, and anger. However, during the life of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) three or more than three utterances of Talaq in one sitting were regarded as one statement. But, the second Caliph of Islam Hazrat Umar, the Great has taken a different view of Triple Talaq due to administrative reasons for a temporary period to bind Muslim men who rush into instant and final Talaq by uttering word Talaq three times in one go. However, the step of Second Caliph was against the principles of Holy Quran. Though, Caliph Umar had put off the impugned practice by flogging the man who resorted to the Triple Talaq. But, unfortunately, the practice of Triple Talaq got embedded into the Islamic Law based on the authoritarian analysis adjudicated by the later Imams particularly Imam Abu Hanifa and it has wrongly been presented to ordinary Muslims as the inalienable part of Islamic law.
India is a signatory to many international human rights instruments to endorse its global obligations and commitments and to address the gender justice matters in the absence of comprehensive and consolidated municipal laws. The court stated that India is a signatory to the CEDAW (UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women-1979) that prohibits discrimination at the workplace and laid down specific state obligations to eliminate all forms of discriminations:
- To protect the right to work, the right to health and right to safety in the conditions at the workplace including the safeguarding of the function of reproduction under Article 11(1) (a) and (f) of the CEDAW;
- To undertake the adoption of all necessary measures at the national level to achieve the full realization of the rights recognized in the Article 24 of CEDAW; and
- To adhere to the General Recommendation No. 19 on the elimination of violence against women under the CEDAW.
Therefore, the Government of India has enacted the domestic legislation called the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act-2013 to adequately address sexual harassment in the workplace to achieve gender equality and non-discrimination as enshrined in the universal human rights norms and standards.
The Holy Quran & the Constitutional Law of India
The SC for the first time has made Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India “absolute” despite their being subjected to restrictions. However, the Triple Talaq Judgment (TTJ) has not been a unanimous decision and two judges dissented including the CJI Justice J.S. Kehar who regarded the Triple Talaq inalienable part of Muslim personal law in India and opined that Triple Talaq does not contravene Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution of India while majority judgment held the view that instant Triple Talaq is an un-Islamic practice and Justice Kurien’s judicial construction of Shamim Ara Judgment as the decisive law of divorce in India that should have been followed. However, the dissenting judges have taken a cautious approach to balancing the whole gamut of Triple Talaq by outlining the fact the practice is not prevalent even in Muslim theocracies. Therefore, dissenting judges have directed the Government of India (GOI) to frame the appropriate law in this regard. The GOI must demonstrate the political will to come out with a concrete legislation to lay down the quantum of punishment that shall be meted out to the offenders otherwise this judgment would remain a pyrrhic victory. The TTJ has been welcomed as a milestone for unprecedented social change by every progressive section of the civil society institutions including Amnesty International India and international human rights organizations.
Now, political discourse on Triple Talaq must be set at rest and ways must be rummaged to implement the SC decision in its letter and spirit without brooking any pressure from organizations like All India Muslim Personal Board (AIMPLB) who played the politics of procrastination on this issue for its political ends. The AIMPLB is a conglomerate of so-called Muslim leaders and does not represent diverse voices of the Indian Muslims. There are multiple religious practices and beliefs which Indian Muslims follow in their daily life. Among the Indian Muslims, there are 90% Sunni Hanafi and remaining 10% belong to Ahle-Hadees and Shafaiis and Shafaiis support the Hanafi stand on the validity of Triple Talaq in one go. However, one sect called Ahle-Hadees does not subscribe to the practice of Triple Talaq. Moreover, TTJ has clarified that all personal laws must conform to the Constitution of India regarding marriage, divorce, property, and succession. It has rightly been contented by the GOI before the SC that it is not “majority community” v. minority community” discourse but an intra-Muslim community power struggle between fundamentalists and the subjugated Muslim women.
It is, now, evident that the political will of the highest order in the Government of India is needed to take necessary measures for enforcing the judicial dicta. August 22, 2017, would be regarded a defining moment and turning point in the legal history of India when gender equality attained its zenith in the lives of Muslim women. India’s Muslim women have achieved what was considered unattainable since independence. The latest SC decision has established the supremacy of constitutional guarantees in upholding the gender equilibrium in human relationships within the religious structures including of Islam. Now, the time has come to reform the unjust and obsolete religious practices under the new laws across the communities while expanding the horizons of gender justice. Therefore, progressive codification of Muslim Law must be commenced while taking into primacy of the jurisprudence expounded by the Supreme Court, Constitution of India and the Holy Quran for once and all.
Possible scenarios in Afghanistan after US withdrawal
After two decades of U.S. warfare in Afghanistan, President Joe Biden has announced the date for the withdrawal of U.S. troops and ends the longest war. According to him, the United States wills withdrawal its entire military forces from Afghanistan military bases by 9/11/2021. Many Afghanistan politicians do not believe that the U.S. withdraws all of its troops because the central government of Afghanistan does not have adequate preparation after the U.S. withdrawal situation. However, in this article, I will explore the thinkable scenarios in Afghanistan after the U.S. troop’s withdrawal? In this study, I will focus on some possible situations in Afghanistan.
First, achieving peace and construction of Afghanistan National Unity Government (ANUG) is the first possible option post-exit of U.S., Now that foreigners have announced they have left the country, there is no reason for conflict. Such a situation will achieve long peace and stability in Afghanistan and the region; this option needs a comprehensive peace, including internal and external players involved in the coming peace process. I look forward to how the Afghan government maintains the balance of power between the Taliban and other political parties; this is very crucial because the imbalance drawback to the collapse of government and Afghanistan will plunge into civil war as we experienced during the Najibullah government as well. In the external arena, the most affirmative scenario is the situation for the regional country will not be worse. The U.S. will continue its support to the Kabul government in the post-exit era. The external stakeholders, particularly China and Russia, are interested in stability and durable peace in Afghanistan through cooperation with the other regional states (Pakistan, India, Iran, and Turkey). The resolution of the Afghanistan issue will guarantee the security of South and Central Asia its vital for China and Russia because of the core threats to China and Russia from Afghanistan terrorist groups activities, its danger for the U.S. as well.
Another significant reason is that Afghanistan is the gateway to the Central Asian States with potentially untapped energy resources. The regional Actors want direct access through Afghanistan to these natural resources to meet their dire energy demands. Because of American military presence in the region, the regional countries, particularly Iran, Pakistan, China, and Russia, felt threatened. They began to oppose and protect their interests connected with Afghanistan’s peace and security. The notion is that, in the prolonged presence of the United States, these states that have economic and security interests in Afghanistan would be in danger. China and Afghanistan have several ongoing projects underway, and different transnational actors have sabotaged these projects on several occasions. Likewise, Pakistan has a direct border link with Afghanistan, has several stakes in Afghanistan, and needs access to Central Asia. Pakistan also has concerns about the presence of America. It has also made strong connections with China so that mutual interests could be met by joining hands together.
Similarly, Iran and Russia being strategic partnerships have profound political and economic interests in Afghanistan and arch-rivals of the United States. Both countries have to oppose the actions of the United States and a potential threat for both country’s interests in the Afghan mainland and Central Asia. It means the diverging interests in Afghanistan of regional and American interests, politico-military outcomes would in the long term seem not conducive for lasting peace in Afghanistan unless these could have a political consensus on the said diverging interests vis-à-vis Afghanistan internal reconciliation. If all stakeholders involving in the Istanbul negotiation, they could form an ANUG that all have so far required. Agree, this will be the best option to end the war, and such a government will be bringing peace and stability in Afghanistan and the region.
Second, maintain the status quo: U.S. President announced the date of the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan, reminding that the United States continued its assistance, exceptionally provide large military and financial aid to Afghanistan. It is unclear whether such a promise will be fulfilled; if the U.S. keeps its support, particularly military and financial assistance to Kabul, the Afghan security forces have enough power to maintain the status quo after the U.S. exit. In this case, if the peace talks in the Istanbul conference fail, the Kabul government will survive. The Afghanistan national army will able to fight against the Taliban and other terrorist groups. Let us remember that Dr. Najib’s government was still strong in terms of power, defense. Still, the main reason was led to his government downfall are the imbalance between internal control and ethnic divisions. Regarding imbalance, we can see the role of General Dostum. In the beginning, he was a core ally with Najib when he turned to the North alliance because he did not see himself in the power position. The ongoing situations in Afghanistan are similar; the statement should focus on the role of warlords and political parties to maintain the inter balance this significant for the central government to survive. On the other hands, the economic and military support for the Afghanistan government crucial because without external support Afghanistan government cannot survive; if the necessary financial resources for security are not available from external donors at the same times in the government of the internal situation have many challenges such as insurgency, terrorist, ethnicity, corruption, and warlords. The current conditions Afghanistan faces the external and internal threat; the Afghanistan government need to deal with it. In this situation how the Ghani will deal with post-U.S. withdrawal, he has two choices two survive the first; he imbalance with China and Russia because china can help Afghanistan financially and play a significant role to force Pakistan and Taliban as well, this choice very dangerous if he fails cannot survive if he succeeds he will be overcome both threats. The second is to keep its alliance with the U.S. this situation will maintain the status quo but not bring durable peace and stability in Afghanistan.
Third, the collapse of government and going to civil war: after two decades of war, the U.S. shortcut way to bring peace in Afghanistan. Washington tries to face save from withdrawal of Afghanistan. The U.S., represent Khalilzad, has provided a draft Afghanistan Peace Agreement to the Kabul government and Taliban. The core idea is to replace the elected Afghan government with a transnational one that may occur, including Taliban and negotiation between the parties for a future permanent system. At the same time, president Ghani receives a letter from U.S. Secretary of state Blinken saying it was “urgent” to “accelerate peace talks” and move “quickly toward a settlement.” The letter also has asked Turkey to host a high-level meeting between the Afghan sides “in the coming weeks to finalize a peace agreement.” Suppose the government is to think of independent defense. The Istanbul conference is a good opportunity for the Taliban and Kabul governments to achieve peace; otherwise, the situation will be worse. The current situations are an important opportunity for all different parties, ideologies, groups, and ethnic groups have come together. The unification and arrangement of these products is a complex and arduous task and requires compassion and sacrifice. On the other hand, if the Kabul government delays the negation to remain in power and the Taliban also holds up to returning to power by force, this condition will disintegrate because the ethnic, linguistic, religious, and other divisions turn into armed conflict. In the worst-case scenario, then the 1990s, conflict and war and killing will be restarted, and Afghanistan situations will be worse than Iraq and Syria. In conclusion, this paper argues the future situations of Afghanistan after the U.S. force withdrawal from Afghanistan. During the history of Afghanistan’s statement constantly losing in the diplomatic arena in this crucial moment, how the Ghani governments deal with internal and external issues? All Afghanistan people wish the politicians can play a good role and end the forty-year war and move towards prosperity and stability. If the intra-afghan dialog fails, keep the status quo is also good, at least worse government better than no government, for the benefit of the people and the inhabitants of the big cities, as far as it is acceptable. It is like being delivered in an explosion and suicide attack in these twenty years, and so on. But if we go to the civil war and ethnic conflict and alley to alley, people will forget the previous civil war. I hope that will not happen. People are starving for peace and stability. It would be suitable for political leaders to abandon their interests, focus on the national interest, and move toward a peaceful and prosperous Afghanistan.
Afghanistan: the US and NATO withdrawal and future prospects
On April 14, the United States of America announced that it would withdraw all its troops stationed in Afghanistan from May 1 to September 11, 2021. On the same day, NATO also said it would coordinate with the White House military to initiate the withdrawal.
The year 2021 marks the 20th anniversary of the outbreak of war in Afghanistan, a conflict that has actually been going on since the Soviet invasion of that unfortunate country on December 24, 1979.
What are the plans of NATO and the United States? How will the situation in Afghanistan change in the future?
Regarding the US announcement of the deadline for troop withdrawal, Afghan President Ashraf Ghani has said that the Afghan government respects the US government’s decision to withdraw its troops by the agreed date.
According to the Associated Press, there were 2,500 US troops in Afghanistan before May 1, far below the peak of over 110,000 in 2011.
According to the websites of the Financial Times and theDeutsche Welle, some ten thousand soldiers from the 36 NATO Member States and other US allies are currently stationed in Afghanistan, including as many as 895 Italian soldiers, as well as 1,300 Germans, 750 Brits, 619 Romanians, 600 Turks, etc.
President Trump’s previous Administration signed a peace agreement with the Taliban in Afghanistan in February 2020, setting May 1, 2021 as the deadline for NATO to begin withdrawing from that country. The Washington Post reported that after the current US government issued the withdrawal statement, the Taliban immediately said that if the United States violated the peace agreement and did not withdraw its troops in Afghanistan, the situation would get worse and one of the parties to the agreement would take responsibility for it.
This year is the twentieth since the United States started the war in Afghanistan after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The war in Afghanistan is the United States’ longest overseas war, and has killed over 2,300 US soldiers and wounded some 20,000 people, at a cost of over 1 trillion US dollars.
Although the United States and its allies attacked the Taliban and al-Qaeda, the situation in Afghanistan has been turbulent for a long time, with over a hundred thousand Afghan civilian casualties in the fighting.
According to The New York Times, both Parties’ members of the US Congress have differing views on the consequences of withdrawal. According to the newspaper, Republicans and some Democrats believe that the troop withdrawal will encourage the Taliban insurgency, while others believe it is necessary to put an end to this indefinite war.
But what considerations can be made for the US and NATO withdrawal from Afghanistan?
It is well known that the purpose of the United States in taking the war to Afghanistan was a very heavy measure of retaliation against al-Qaeda, which had organised the terrorist attacks of September 11, and against the Taliban regime that protected the top leaders of that terrorist organisation. Although al-Qaeda has not been destroyed, it is unlikely to create similar problems. The United States has achieved its strategic goals and is no longer involved in East Asia’s tactics and strategy.
The interests of NATO (considering its individual Member States) in Afghanistan are fewer than those of the United States. As a military alliance with the United States, the achievement of US strategic goals means that NATO’s equal strategic goals have also been achieved. Hence, rather than continuing to run the risk of confronting the Taliban and al-Qaeda after US military withdrawals, NATO is more willing to remove the “political burden” as soon as possible.
While announcing the terms of the withdrawal, the White House has stated that the threat of extremist organisations such as Somalia’s al-Shabaab and ISIS is spreading globally and it is therefore meaningless to concentrate forces in Afghanistan, with a steady expansion of its military cycle. At the same time, however, the White House has stated that after withdrawal, diplomatic and counter-terrorism mechanisms will be reorganised in Afghanistan to face security challenges. Hence, from the US perspective, there is currently a greater terrorist threat than al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
The prospectsfor advancing the Indo-Pacific regional strategy to oppose China also means that it would be counterproductive for the United States to remain in Afghanistan any longer. Even after the troop withdrawal, there will be insecurity in Afghanistan. That being the case, however, the United States will still find ways and means to support the Afghan regime and the armed forces of the Kabul government.
The Washington Post has also reported statements by a Pentagon official who has stressed that Afghanistan is a landlocked country: consequently, once US and NATO forces withdraw, one of the biggest challenges will be how to effectively monitor and combat extremist organisations and resist threats to US security: at that distance it will be even more difficult without sea landings.
According to Reuters, the CIA predicts that the possibility of a further US-Afghan peace deal is little and has warned that once the United States and its allies withdraw, it will be difficult to stop the Taliban.
The Afghan government forces currently control Kabul and other large cities, but the Taliban are present in more than half of the country’s territory and rural areas. In the future, the possibility of a Taliban counter-offensive cannot be ruled out.
Great Britain’s The Guardian has commented that the years of war have generally made Afghans feel a strong sense of insecurity and the withdrawal of troops will not bring much comfort to the local population. According to the London-based newspaper, for the United States this is yet another war that cannot be won.
According to experts, there are two extreme possibilities in the future situation in Afghanistan. The excellent situation is the one in which the less extremist wing of the Taliban mediates so that, once the United States withdraws, the Taliban can gradually move from being an extremist organisation to being an internal administrative one and then negotiate with the legitimate government supported by the United Nations: this would mean a long-term peace after forty-two years of war.
Under extremely unfavourable circumstances, instead, the Afghan government forces would overestimate their military strength and intend to continue the war alone against their traditional opponents, at which point peace negotiations between the two sides would break down.
This would mean falling again into a prolonged civil war and into eternal war.
Bhashan Char Relocation: Bangladesh’s Effort Appreciated by UN
Bhashan Char, situated in the district of Noakhali, is one of the 75 islands of Bangladesh. To ease the pressure on the digested camps in Cox’s Bazar and to maintain law and order, Bangladesh has relocated about 18,500 Rohingya refugees from the overcrowded camps to the island since December last year. The Rohingya relocation plan to Bhashan Char aligns with the Bangladesh government’s all-encompassing efforts towards repatriation. The initial plan was to relocate 100,000 of the more than a million refugees from the clogged camps to the island. From the onset of the relocation process, the UN and some other human rights organizations criticized the decision pointing to remoteness and sustainability. UNHCR showed their concern over the island’s susceptibility to seasonal storm and flood. They proposed for a “technical assessment” of the Bhashan Char facilities.
An 18-member UN delegation visited Bhashan Char Island on March 17 this year to have a first-hand assessment of the housing facility for the Rohingya forcibly displaced Myanmar Nationals (FDMNs). Shortly after the UN’s visit, a team with 10 diplomats including heads of missions of embassies and delegations from Turkey, the EU, US, UK, France, Germany, Japan, Australia, Canada and the Netherlands also went to the island on April 3 to appraise the facilities. All the members of the technical team opined that they are ‘satisfied’ with the facilities in Bhashan Char. The experts of the UN told, they will hand over a 10-page report of their annotations and they have already submitted a two-page abridgment. On April 16, they released the two-page synopsis after a month of the visit. After the three-day study of Bhashan Char by the UN delegates, they recommended the Bangladesh government to continue the relocation process to the island in a ‘phased manner’. The team twigged three points – education for Rohingya children, increasing heights of the embankments and better communication system. The Foreign Minister of Bangladesh A. K. Abdul Momen concerted to take the necessary measures to create a safe and secure environment for the Rohingya refugees until the repatriation takes place. The relocation is not the solution of the Rohingya crisis rather the over emphasis of the relocation and facilities inside Bangladesh is protracting the crisis and distracting the attention from the broader emphasis on the repatriation to Myanmar.
The UNHCR and other concerned parties should plan for a long run repatriation process. Repatriation is the only durable solution, not the relocation of the Rohingya refugees. For the time being, resettlement under the Asrayan-3 project is an ease for the FDMNs but in the long run the Rohingya crisis is going to turn as a tremendous threat for regional peace and stability. Besides, resentment in the host community in Bangladesh due to the scarce resources may emerge as a critical security and socio-economic concern for Bangladesh. It is not new that the Rohingyas are repatriated in Myanmar during the Military rule. Around 20,000 Rohingya refugees were repatriated to Myanmar in the 2000s. The focus of the world community should be creating favourable conditions for the Rohingyas to return safely regardless who is in the power seat of Myanmar-civilian or military government. The UN should largely focus on repatriating the Rohingya refugees in a “phased manner”, let alone deciding their concern in the camps and the Bhashan Char. After the praiseworthy relocation plan, they should now concentrate on implementing speedy and durable repatriation. Proactive initiatives are essential from all walks for a safe and dignified return of the FDMNs. To be specific, the relocation is a part of the repatriation, not the solution of the problem.
Hydro-projects in Africa: Interview with Vladislav Vasilyev
As widely known, Russia plans to hold the second Russia-Africa summit in 2022, as a further step to make inroads...
Belgrade and Pristina: Will a territorial exchange really happen?
The European Union is dialing up pressure on Serbia and Kosovo in an effort to convince Belgrade and Pristina to...
Weakness or calculation? How the pandemic undermined the US world leadership
Anyone watching the numerous doomsday movies, happily churned out by Hollywood, will see American doctors saving the planet from space-borne...
Prospects for a Settlement of the Libyan Conflict: Three Scenarios of the Mid-Term Forecast
More than ten years ago, in February 2011, the Arab Spring began in Libya. The armed uprising quickly escalated into...
Discerning the Human Element Amid the Pandemic
“We are not human beings having a spiritual experience. We are spiritual beings having a human experience.” – Pierre Teilhard de...
“Kharibulbul” festival represents a multi-ethnic, multi-confessional and multicultural Azerbaijan
As a country of multiculturalism, Azerbaijan promotes the cross-cultural dialogue inside the country, but also at the regional level. The...
A leaderless ship: The Bulgaria’s political crisis and the storm to come
Internal and international tensions Politics tends to develop in a complex conundrum in all Balkan countries. Thus, never can observers...
East Asia3 days ago
China’s Navy in the Arctic: Potential Game Changer for the Future of the Region?
Middle East3 days ago
Israel-Palestine Conflict Enters into Dangerous Zone
Europe3 days ago
Serbia’s EU accession: Pipe Dream or Possible Reality?
Europe3 days ago
The Idea of Global Britain: A Neo-Victorian Attempt to Define the Place of the English in the World
Eastern Europe2 days ago
Baltic States are the territories of geopolitical games
Defense3 days ago
The Irony of Afghanistan: US Plans Departure amidst Anarchy
Middle East2 days ago
Justice delayed is justice denied. I lost my family to Iran Regime’s barbarity
Middle East3 days ago
Can Biden Bring Peace to the Middle East?