Connect with us

MIDDLE EAST

Ahmad Sharia and Mullah Haibatullah; Why are their (Islams) so different?

Published

on

In his last interview, the leader of the Hayat Tahriri al-Sham (HTS) and current ruler of Syria spoke about holding elections and drafting the constitution. Ahmad Sharia’s desire to hold elections and draft a constitution shows that Syrian Islamists do not intend to build a system similar to the Taliban emirate in Kabul.

Speaking to Saudi Arabia’s state television, Ahmad Sharia also known as Abu Mohammad Jolani said that it may take four years to hold presidential elections in Syria and three years to draft a new constitution. Unlike the leader of HTS, the Taliban in Afghanistan has explicitly stated that free elections will not be held under their rule. The Taliban believes that the government should be based on Islamic Sharia and internal consultations of Taliban leaders and religious authorities, not on western democratic models of the ballot box.

Talking about holding elections and drafting the constitution is not the only difference between HTS in Syria and Taliban in Afghanistan. In the past months, Jolani has taken actions that show that he does not want the world community to look at him and Hebatullah Akhundzadeh, the leader of the Taliban from the same window.

He is aware of this comparison and has deliberately emphasized his difference with the secret and mysterious leader of the Taliban. Jolani had recently said that the society of Afghanistan and Syria are different and he will not create a government in the “style” of the Taliban.”

Jolani does not hide from his people and world

One of the main differences between Jolani and Hebatullah Akhundzadeh is that the leader of HTS does not hide from the public.

The presence of the leader of Jolani in public and the way he interacts with the members of his group and other Syrian citizens have significant differences with the leader of the Taliban. From these differences, it is possible to understand the different cultural, political, and ideological views that both groups adhere to.

In the three and a half years that have passed since Hebatullah Akhundzadeh’s rule over Afghanistan, he has been ruling by broadcasting audio files and orders from Kandahar and has shown no desire to have a closer relationship with the people. During this time, he never appeared in front of the media cameras to speak to the people of Afghanistan. To such an extent that prominent Sunni and Shiite clerics and a number of prominent media figures of the Taliban have also said that they have not been able to meet Akhundzadeh so far.

Hebatullah is against photographing of the living creature, but Jolani takes pictures with women in Damascus

Recently, a video of the moment Jolani took a picture with a young Syrian woman in Damascus became very popular and controversial on social media networks. In this video, it can be seen that Jolani asks one of them to cover his hair before taking a photo with several women in Damascus.

The leader of the Hayat Tahriri al-Sham (HTS) Ahmad Sharia (R) and Taliban leader Hebatullah Akhundzadeh (L).

Critics criticized Jolani’s “intervention” about a woman’s veil. There are many positive and negative opinions about this video. In addition to these views, the video shows two differences between Jolani and Akhundzadeh – unlike Akhundzadeh, Jolani is not afraid of appearing in the streets of the capital of the country he leads and is not afraid of appearing in front of people’s cameras and that he is not against filming.

Akhundzadeh has banned filming and broadcasting images of living creatures in the controversial law through the Ministry of Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice. The law that seriously threatens the future of visual media in Afghanistan and has provoked differences among the cabinet members of this group.

Following the passage of this law, the Taliban have intensified pressure to ban the broadcast of images of living creatures on televisions across Afghanistan.

Appointing a woman as head of the central bank for the first time in the history of Syria

In one of the latest actions, the Syrian transitional government appointed Misa Sabrin as the head of the country’s central bank. Mrs. Sabrin is the first woman in the history of this bank to become its president. Before this position, she was the first deputy as well as director of supervision of the Central Bank of Syria.

Misa Sabrin’s appointment probably shows Jolani’s desire to involve women in the country’s top management. On the contrary, the Taliban administration has barred women not only from participation in higher jobs, but also from government jobs in general. Also, women have lost the right to education and participation without discrimination and gender segregation in the country’s economy. This action has had negative effects on the economy and health of Afghan women.

Afghan women are banned from working in NGOs and international organizations including UN offices across Afghanistan. Afghan women were also banned from going to work and also schools’ girls above sixth grade forced to stay at home. In the last action, the Taliban also banned female medical students from attending classes.

Contrary to the dissolution of the Ministry of Women’s Affairs of Afghanistan, the Office of Women’s Affairs of Syria continues to work.

The interim government of Syria has appointed Ayesha Al-Debs as the head of the country’s women’s affairs office. With this appointment, Ayesha Al-Dabs was the first woman to hold an official position in the new Syrian government led by the Islamist Tahrir al-Sham group.

Ayesha Al-Dabs is a human rights and civil society activist. She has previously worked in humanitarian fields in Idlib, Syria and helping Syrian refugees in Turkey.

This appointment took place while there were concerns that the role and rights of women would be ignored in the new structure.

After her appointment, Ayesha El-Debs announced in an interview that the Syrian interim government will provide opportunities for women to participate in all social fields, according to their abilities and qualifications.

On the contrary, the Taliban dissolved the Ministry of Women’s Affairs and replaced it with the Ministry of Public Affairs, whose task is to oppress women and deprive them of fundamental rights and freedoms.

Hebatullah Akhundzadeh is isolated

Jolani and his representatives have been busy meeting with officials and high-ranking envoys of foreign countries in Damascus in the past couple of days.

In one of the most important events, US Deputy Secretary of State Barbara Leaf said after the meeting of the US diplomatic delegation with the leader of Tahrir al-Sham in Damascus, Washington has canceled the $10 million reward for the arrest of Jolani.

In justifying the decision, Barbara Leaf, the US assistant secretary of state for Middle East affairs, said that the leader of Tahrir al-Sham is committed not to allow terrorist groups to operate in Syria and pose a threat to the United States or neighboring countries.

Unlike him, so far similar awards set by the United States and the United Nations on Taliban leaders have not been removed.

On the contrary, Hebatullah Akhundzadeh’s isolation in Kandahar has become one of the most prominent features of her leadership period.

In more than three years of ruling Afghanistan, only once Akhundzadeh held a face-to-face meeting with the Prime Minister of Qatar, Mohammad bin Abdul Rahman Al Thani. The meeting was held in Kandahar.

Apart from this meeting, Akhundzadeh has never met a foreign official. Akhundzadeh has not only refused to appear in public, but also has almost no connection with the outside world at the diplomatic level.

The reluctance of foreign officials to travel to Kabul is mostly due to the policies of the Taliban, which have led to strong international reactions. For example, the suppression of women under Taliban rule has intensified so much that a famous American actor said at a UN meeting that “cats and birds” have more freedom than Afghan women.

Any fear of Jolani becoming another Hebatullah?

Jolani is a figure who emerged from among a rebel Islamist group and is now in a position that many consider him to represent a change in the approach of this group. However, examining his background, it is very important in assessing whether he will really take a different path from similar leaders like Hebatullah Akhundzadeh.

Since the beginning of his activity as the leader of HTS, Jolani has tried to present a different image from similar Islamist groups. In recent years, unlike the traditional and strict approach of many Islamist groups, he has shown a desire to interact with regional countries and the international community. At the same time, these changes are mostly tactical and it is not yet clear to what extent this more open approach is committed to the fundamental principles of the group and the political future of Syria.

Another point is the structure and history of writing Sham, which consists of a rebel group with strong ideological tendencies. In the past, many similar groups have moved to establish single-party governments after coming to power, severely suppressing dissent.

This risk is also present with HTS and Jolani’s leadership, especially if some of these changes are designed solely to garner international support.

Paying attention to his performance in the near future, especially in matters such as drafting a constitution, holding elections, and interacting with different ethnic groups in Syria, will determine whether Jolani really intends to lead Syria to a more diverse and democratic path, or whether he will also finally give in to the ideological and political limitations of his group.

The key question is, does Jolani have the ability and real desire to protect citizen rights and respect human rights, or will his policies ultimately, similar to other ideological Islamist governments, lead to the concentration of power and limiting freedoms? Only time and his performance in future critical situations can clarify the answer to this question.

Two different Islams

The fundamental differences between HTS under the leadership of Jolani and Islam of Taliban under the leadership of Akhundzadeh are due to the different approaches of these two groups in the field of politics, human rights and interaction with the outside world.

HTS has moved more towards interacting with the international community, holding elections and accepting some democratic principles, while the Taliban under the leadership of Akhundzadeh emphasize an Islamic governance system based on strict (Sharia law) and are against any kind of political or social participation. These differences are especially evident in women’s rights, diplomatic relations and individual freedoms.

Despite these strict approaches, the Taliban say that their goal is to establish an Islamic order, but this order comes at the cost of removing individual freedoms and human rights. Finally, instead of creating stability, the Taliban’s governance has led to the deepening of crises and further isolation of Afghanistan.

MIDDLE EAST

Netanyahu government moves to dismiss Attorney General

Published

on

The Israeli government unanimously declared “no confidence” in Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara during its cabinet meeting on Sunday. This step officially initiates the process of Baharav-Miara’s dismissal, marking a first in the country’s history.

Justice Minister Yariv Levin accused the Attorney General of obstructing government policies and argued that cooperation had become impossible due to “long-standing fundamental disagreements” between them.

Baharav-Miara’s response was swift. Stating that the government was trying to place itself above the law, the Attorney General said, “They are seeking unlimited power; an unchecked administration is being targeted.”

The attempt to dismiss Baharav-Miara, along with the dismissal of Shin Bet Director Ronen Bar and discussions on judicial reform, is seen as a new crisis regarding the independence of the judiciary.

The process has been initiated despite many legally required steps. According to the current cabinet decision, the dismissal file must first be sent to a special five-member committee, and then the attorney general must be given the right to defend herself. However, this commission has not yet been formed.

It was leaked to the press that some ministers made sarcastic comments about Baharav-Miara during the cabinet meeting. Economy Minister Nir Barkat said, “She probably attended a meeting of another government,” while Environment Minister Idit Silman said, “She was a secretary in the previous government, now she acts like an opposition leader.”

Baharav-Miara, who did not attend the meeting, accused the government in her letter of trying to evade legal oversight, saying, “This initiative aims to weaken the judiciary and intimidate loyal public servants.”

Opposition leader Yair Lapid called the attempt to dismiss the Attorney General “illegal,” stating, “Netanyahu first wants to dismiss his investigator, and now his prosecutor. Gali Baharav-Miara is an honest and competent attorney general. That’s precisely why she’s a target. This is illegal, this is corruption. They will not succeed.”

National Unity Party leader Benny Gantz claimed that the government’s move was motivated by a law that would grant military service exemptions to ultra-Orthodox Jews: “Netanyahu wants an attorney general who will bypass the Supreme Court and disregard the reserve soldiers joining the army. We are all paying the price.”

Continue Reading

MIDDLE EAST

Shin Bet Director dismissed amid ‘Qatargate’ probe

Published

on

The Israeli government has unanimously dismissed Shin Bet Director Ronen Bar. Bar stated that the real intention behind his dismissal was to “continue ceasefire negotiations without reaching an agreement.” Referencing the Qatargate scandal investigated by Shin Bet, Bar said his dismissal “smells of foreign interests and an unprecedented conflict of interest.”

In a first for Israel, the director of Shin Bet, considered an independent institution, was dismissed by a cabinet decision. Bar did not attend the meeting where the dismissal was to be voted on, despite being summoned, but sent a letter to the ministers.

In his letter, Bar refuted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s claim that there was a trust issue between them, which Netanyahu cited as the reason for the dismissal. Bar stated, “There has been intense and effective cooperation between Shin Bet under my leadership and the Prime Minister.”

Arguing that the Shin Bet Director should be loyal to the people, not the Prime Minister, Bar said, “Netanyahu could not support the reasons he put forward for my dismissal. Despite my request, no concrete examples were provided.”

Bar argued that Netanyahu’s insistence on the lack of trust between them was not a valid basis, but that his real intention was to continue ceasefire negotiations in Gaza without reaching an agreement.

Bar stated that Netanyahu’s decision to exclude him and Mossad Chief David Barnea from the ceasefire and prisoner exchange negotiations harmed the delegation and prevented any progress in the release of prisoners.

Bar added that Netanyahu is taking steps that will “weaken the country both internally and against its enemies.”

According to Bar, the decision is driven by “foreign interests and conflict of interest.”

Shin Bet Director Bar also referred to the “Qatargate” investigation in Israel, conducted by Shin Bet, regarding allegations that Netanyahu’s close advisors received money from Qatar through shell companies.

Bar stated, “Important investigative steps are being taken. Following the disruption of these steps by a sudden and hasty dismissal based on completely unfounded allegations, there is a smell of foreign interests and an unprecedented conflict of interest.”

He warned that the dismissal, initiated by Prime Minister Netanyahu, sends a dangerous message to those under investigation and could jeopardize the outcome of the investigation.

The government’s decision to dismiss the Shin Bet Director has been taken to the High Court.

The Movement for Quality Government requested the decision be halted in a petition to the High Court.

The decision also drew a swift reaction from the opposition. Yisrael Beytenu party leader Avigdor Liberman said, “By firing Shin Bet Director Ronen Bar, Netanyahu is doing exactly what our enemies dream of.”

The main opposition leader Yair Lapid says that the government dismissed Bar “for one reason only”: to stop the Qatargate investigation.

Lapid stated, “The opposition parties will jointly object to this reckless move to legitimize the infiltration of a hostile state into the prime minister’s office.”

The “Qatargate” discussions began with allegations that millions of dollars were taken from Qatar and transferred to Netanyahu’s election campaign.

These allegations turned into an investigation conducted by Shin Bet, with Prime Minister Netanyahu’s spokespeople Eliezer Feldstein and advisors Jonathan Urich and Srulik Einhorn in the defendant’s seat.

Israeli media reported that Netanyahu also received $15 million from Qatar in 2012 and $50 million in 2018.

It was reported that Feldstein was paid by an international company to support Qatar’s image, and Netanyahu’s advisors Urich and Einhorn also provided image consultancy for Qatar.

Continue Reading

MIDDLE EAST

Gaza ceasefire: The bell of war ringing again

Published

on

The ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas did not last long, and eventually the bell for war had sounded again. According to media reports, hundreds of Palestinians have been killed in the Gaza Strip as a result of Israeli airstrikes. Israeli officials also warned that the gates of hell had opened on Gaza. The United States also announced that it had responded positively to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s request to resume the war.

The question: Why has the Gaza war resumed?

First: These days, US President Donald Trump has been feverishly pushing for talks with Iran, which is not pleasing to the Israeli side. Trump has repeatedly emphasized the need to negotiate with Iran before pursuing other options.

More importantly, he recently sent a letter addressed to the Iranian Leader and also informed the media. The content of the letter is also focused on starting negotiations with Iran, although it is spoken from a position of power. Furthermore, Adam Boehler, Trump’s representative for Israeli hostage affairs, met with the Hamas leadership in Doha, the capital of Qatar, and evaluated the meeting as constructive, while in response to Tel Aviv’s criticism, he described Hamas members as good people.

Of course, it was recently claimed that he was removed from his position. Now, in order to prevent Trump and Iran from entering the negotiating line and for the US to avoid direct talks with Hamas, the Israeli side has wanted to make the situation critical so that the atmosphere for consultations remains unfavorable. Furthermore, by intensifying the attacks, Netanyahu wants to force Hamas to accept conditions that the group has so far refused to accept.

Second: In the meantime, Trump also has specific goals that he is seeking to achieve: forcing Iran to negotiate. Trump has repeatedly emphasized establishing peace; but from the position of exercising power, using the tools of sanctions and military threats. The deadly airstrikes by the US military on Yemeni Houthi positions and the hints and insinuations of Trump and his entourage towards Iran are also intended to force Tehran to agree to negotiations, and that is, negotiations whose terms and conditions are determined by the American side.

Trump’s green light to resume the Gaza war could also be in this direction, because if the ceasefire goes ahead as included in the agreement, the American and Israeli sides believe that Iran and the so-called “axis of resistance” will declare themselves victorious, and in that case Tehran will either refuse to negotiate or will try to enter the arena from a strong position.

Third: It is true that Trump signed the plan to resume the war, but he will not support the continuation of the war and its spread, for three reasons:

1- it would contradict the slogans that Trump has constantly chanted to end wars. More importantly, since he values ​​the principle of “cost-benefit” so much, his support for a long and consequential war would harm the achievement of the larger goals he has in mind.

Therefore, it supports what Netanyahu wants to a certain extent, which is natural; but it seems unlikely that the previous US administration would want to continuously pump advanced weapons and military equipment into Israel for more than a year.

2- Second, Trump’s support for a long war that results in the deaths of Palestinian civilians could undermine the prospects for expanding the Abraham Accords, an agreement that Trump holds in high regard and cites as the most important achievement of her first administration.

Arab governments also have a sense of dignity and prestige and will not join this treaty for free, especially Saudi Arabia. Therefore, Trump does not want the scope of this treaty to remain narrow.

3- If Trump agrees to support a large-scale and high-consequence war in Gaza, America will be stuck in the Middle East, which will sideline the rest of the White House’s priorities: Ending the war in Ukraine, a trade war with China, Canada, Europe, etc. When the US is once again involved in the Gaza conflict, Russia will become bolder and, instead of giving in to Trump’s demand to sign a ceasefire agreement, will insist on continuing the war to occupy more territory in Ukraine. The trade war with China and Europe also requires that Trump be comfortable with the Middle East.

4- Netanyahu’s cabinet is grappling with numerous internal problems. For example, Internal Security Minister Ben-Governor resigned and left the government in response to accepting the first phase of the ceasefire. Smotrich, another Netanyahu ally, has also warned that he will resign in response to accepting the second phase, which would lead to the collapse of the cabinet.

Apart from that, the risk of launching a comprehensive investigation to clarify the dimensions of the October 7 attack is also prominent, which is possible in the absence of war conditions. In recent days, a serious disagreement between Netanyahu and Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar has flared up, leading to the latter’s dismissal. This dismissal is said to be related to the risk of leaking documents that could jeopardize Netanyahu’s political life.

Now, the simple and inexpensive way to keep the government going and quell internal disputes is to resume the war with Hamas, so that the opposing and supporting view of the external enemy is fixed. In the meantime, the protests of the families of the hostages and the opposition forces are important as a deterrent; but not to the extent of the internal conflict in the cabinet, the disclosure of documents and the preparation of the investigation file into the October 7 attack, which could put an end to the life of the Netanyahu government.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey