In its latest assault on basic freedoms, Afghanistan has banned women and girls from speaking in public. It marks a new low in the Taliban-led government’s enforced gender apartheid.
Promises that girls and women would be allowed to study and work were broken shortly after the Taliban returned to power. The group banned girls from going to school beyond sixth grade and outlawed them from pursuing higher education at university. It even prohibited them from taking a stroll in the park or going to the gym, and from nearly all professions that could earn them a living and a semblance of independence and dignity.
And yet even as Afghan women are kept prisoner in their homes and denied basic rights, neither the Islamic nations in the region nor the United States have taken an active interest in compelling the group to reverse its misogynistic policies.
The new rules were announced in the middle of the presidential campaign in the United States, but both candidates kept mum on the issue of women’s rights, even though each of their respective governments knowingly left Afghan women to a fate that was hardly unexpected.
When Kamala Harris and Donald Trump faced off in a debate last week, Afghanistan was raised only in the context of the domestic ramifications of American withdrawal. No mention was made of what happened to Afghans left behind. Neither candidate said a word about how the U.S. exited without securing any guarantees from the Taliban on the future of women and their rights.
The Taliban, firmly in control, brushed off all of its atrocities on Afghan women and violation of their very basic rights as “Afghan values’’ in a conversation with Foreign Policy. Taliban spokesperson Suhail Shaheen said the group was open for engagement with the West, but on economic issues only.
“They can invest in minerals,’’ he told FP. “China, Russia, all have business ties with us, the West can also do that. It is good for them and good for us.’’
“Women’s rights and those things are up to us, and we will determine them according to Afghan values and traditions,’’ he added, as if speaking and reading were matters of Afghan sovereignty and not basic human rights.
Mahbouba Seraj, an Afghan women’s rights activist who was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize last year, blamed both the Trump and Biden administrations for the circumstances the Afghan girls and women find themselves in.
“When they were discussing the agreement in Doha, we were not even given the visa to come to Qatar because we would have asked questions, we would have confronted the Taliban, but that could have scuttled the deal and the Trump administration didn’t want that,’’ she told FP over the phone.
“Biden may not have had enough room to change the deal, but that was not the reason he stuck with it,’’ she said. The Biden administration “wanted to get out.’’
The key tenet of the U.S. policy on Afghanistan has been security and containing the threat that terrorist groups based there can pose to Western countries. The Doha agreement between the U.S. and the Taliban, which led to the U.S. exit, called on the Taliban “to prevent the use of Afghan soil by any international terrorist groups or individuals against the security of the United States and its allies.’’
But even the word “women’’ is missing from it. A post-withdrawal concern has been that a deteriorating humanitarian situation could exacerbate the refugee crisis, particularly in Europe.
In order to address these concerns, and heed calls by humanitarian actors, the U.S. agreed to ease some sanctions and infuse Afghanistan with billions in cash. That helped Afghans, but it also kept the Taliban afloat and emboldened it to carry on as it pleased.
“Since August 2021, the U.N. has purchased, transported, and transferred at least $2.9 billion to Afghanistan using international donor contributions,’’ according to a report by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) in January. It added that the U.S. is the largest donor, with $2.6 billion of that sum contributed by the American taxpayer.
While throwing money at the problem has somewhat mitigated a humanitarian crisis, it has also kept the Taliban in power and allowed it to maintain a support base. The report said that the Taliban has accumulated, “a large supply of U.S. dollars, through the conversion process of dollars for afghanis.’’
Some Afghan analysts argued that stopping the cash flow will weaken the Taliban, reduce its acceptability, and ideally encourage an anti-Taliban uprising. Or, at the very least, force them to make some concessions.
22-year-old Miryam, whose name has been changed to protect her identity, pleaded that the West, and especially the U.S., “should stop sending money to the Taliban.’’ Her education was cut short when the Taliban took over in 2021, she can’t wear what she wants, or do anything professionally, or step out of the house.
“Don’t recognize the Taliban,’’ she said from Kabul in her message to the international community, “put pressure on them to at least give women the right to work and study.’’
Davood Moradian, founder and the director-general of the Afghan Institute for Strategic Studies (AISS) now based in London, argued in favor of slashing the aid. “America is the main source of Afghan currency,’’ he told FP. “The moment the U.S. stopped funding, the Taliban will face a serious challenge,’’ to its rule, he added.
Others said if the Taliban didn’t break under 20 years of American presence, they wouldn’t abandon their hardcore ideology now, due to a cash crunch. Seraj, the women’s rights activist, advocated a diametrically different approach and said that the West should instead open the floodgates of developmental aid in a way that upward mobility emboldens the Afghan people to rebel against Taliban’s excesses and fight for women’s rights.
“You can’t even use the word women with them,’’ she said. “You have to come up with things like more investments and business deals and let that create the right conditions.’’
Thus far, the U.S. has threatened the Taliban with a global boycott if it doesn’t grant women their rights. But efforts ostracize the group from the international community are a farce since China, Russia, Pakistan, Qatar and several others continue to engage the group for economic and security reasons.
The truth is there hasn’t been an active U.S. policy to try and bring about a change or help the women of Afghanistan since the U.S. retreated. The policy has been outsourced to the U.N., which is engaging the group, often on the terms set by the Taliban. For instance, in July the U.N. organized Doha III, a dialogue platform to engage the Taliban and various stakeholders on the future of Afghanistan. But to appease the Taliban and make sure they attended, not a single women’s rights activist was invited.
One idea, way short of full recognition, could be to bring together a coalition of Islamic nations to challenge the Taliban’s understanding of Shariah and compel the group to let women and girls study and work, just as they can in other Islamic countries.
In April, the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) called on the Taliban’s deputy chief minister Abdul Kabir to end the ban on education and employment for women and girls. Last year, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said that preventing education for girls is “inhumane and un-Islamic.” Abdulkhaleq Abdulla, a prominent political advisor in the United Arab Emirates, told FP that an Emirati delegation visited Kabul to discuss women’s rights. “There are so many trends in Islam, some more moderate, others more extreme. The Taliban, they are following a very backward ideology,” he said.
But Afghan women’s rights activists say that the condemnations from fellow Islamic countries appear to be more perfunctory and unserious. It could carry weight if it was a cohesive regional policy pushed by the U.S. as one of the pillars of its Afghanistan strategy. The Taliban, after all, is carrying out its oppression in the name of Islam.
Shaheen, the Taliban spokesperson, seemed to make some room for concessions when he told FP that the decision on education and employment for girls and women was pending, and subject to a report by an Afghan “committee.”
As for the next American president, ignoring Afghanistan would be at their own peril. Caging women in their homes and denying them basic rights represents a pattern of the Taliban reneging on promises—and it’s easy to imagine that extending to foreign policy.
“They are all there, all there,’’ Seraj, the activist, said. “ISIS-KP, Al Qaeda, other terrorist groups, they are all there. They are all getting training. Don’t think nothing is happening. The American intelligence knows what’s going on.”
The post The Taliban’s Misogyny Finally Needs a U.S. Response appeared first on Foreign Policy.
