Connect with us

Middle East

Human rights in state of collapse in Afghanistan: Don’t forget about ISIS-K too

Published

on

Amidst continuous role on the part of the international community, especially UN gun-toting Taliban have celebrated what they called “victorious return” into power corridors of war Afghanistan couple of days back. Giving a deaf ear response to international community’s appeals of “honoring and respecting human rights (HR),” Taliban rulers on that particular occasion also demonstrated its inhuman and immoral acts of punishing and victimizing innocent civilians especially those who remained part of previous regimes or believed in other religious faith.

Instead of listening to cries of war affected Afghans who are passing through miserable conditions throughout the world and HR defenders, one Taliban office holder has defended, “denial of education rights to women” by saying, “similar is the situation in Israel where civilians are subjected to the worst kind of violence.” On that particular day, instead of answering to stock of queries regarding women and children rights, the Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid through X page message “has stressed on the implementation of justice in Afghanistan and warned if justice is not implemented the regime will be collapsed.” Such remarks on the part of Mujahid also confirm that Afghan Taliban, fearing threats to their regime, imposed on Afghans through guns and bullets.

No one can deny the fact that since a long the UN and other international organs are helpless before US lead allies who give preference to its own purposes and interests in war like situations especially prolonged Afghan conflict, Ukraine and others. Instead of building up pressure against Taliban to observe human rights as it did  against former USSR backed regimes from December 1979 till April 1992, the US has admitted to releasing a huge amount of 239 million US dollars to Kabul authorities. Amidst this confession, senior most Pakistani politician Afrasiab Khattak is known for his words, “in accordance with Doha Qatar agreement, US making payment to Kabul on weekly basis.”

Since 2021, Taliban systematically stripped women of their rights, including education and work

On the eve of Taliban’s third year, the Rawadari, an organization working for rights in its statement states, “Taliban have increased their enforcement of their repressive policies against women including detaining women for their “bad hijab” and arresting teachers for running secret classes for girls.” It recalled that on August 15, 2021, the Taliban seized power in Afghanistan, leading to severe consequences for Afghans, particularly women and girls. Over the past three years, the Taliban have systematically stripped women of their fundamental rights, including the right to education, work and freedom of movement. Afghanistan is the only country in the world where girls are banned from secondary education. The Taliban have increased their enforcement of their repressive policies against women including detaining women for their “bad hijab” and arresting teachers for running secret classes for girls.”

It further states, “Rawadari has continuously monitored and documented these violations, despite severe and increasing restrictions on access to information by the Taliban. From August 15, 2021, to June 30, 2024, Rawadari has recorded 9,276 cases of human rights violations, nearly half of which involve the right to life. These include targeted killings, civilian casualties from attacks, enforced disappearances, illegal detentions and cruel punishments.”

Besides, Rawadari, the UN also denounced the Taliban for its aggressions based policies towards the civilians, by saying, “ The International Community must not normalize de facto authorities and their regime of institutionalized discrimination, segregation and exclusion of women and girls.” “Over the past three years, the people of Afghanistan, especially women and girls, have been subjected to an appalling and intensifying attack on their rights and freedoms by a regime that lacks legitimacy and inclusivity, quashes all forms of dissent, represses civil society and the media, and has shown a flagrant disregard for the principles of justice, non-discrimination, equality, and the rule of law.”

Taliban labels women and girl’s rights to education and work as an internal matter

It further states that the situation continues to deteriorate, and stronger international action is needed immediately. In the last year, the Taliban has further entrenched and intensified its system of institutionalized gender-oppression, introducing new discriminatory edicts and practices, and implementing them by harsh and violent means. Since taking power, the de facto authorities have issued more than 80 edicts, directives, and statements which specifically target and restrict the rights of women and girls.

According to a UN statement, “the Taliban’s deliberate subjugation of women and girls is widespread and systematic, amounting to crimes against humanity, including the crime of gender persecution. The situation is so severe that many Afghans, especially women, say the situation can be best described as ‘gender apartheid.’ Despite this, Taliban officials have insisted the situation of women and girls is an ‘internal’ matter.

Whatever the claims and stances on the part of Taliban and their “visible and invisible” patrons, the fact is that they converted Afghanistan into a “BIG PRISON” where the inmates are safe but their lives are at mercy of rulers. Despite adopting or following patience and restraint policies, even the regional countries are reluctant in having friendly and cordial relations with Afghanistan due to UN pressures. In the last three years, over 0.7 million have made good their flee towards western and European world. Millions of others, not only those waiting for chances in neighboring South and Central Asian States but also in the Arab world are in hunt of fleeing to western world for their survival.

Compared to the 1990s, the internal situation of Afghanistan is hostile for those who either remained part of the US backed Afghan War or Western-World supported democratic process. One can disagree but the fact is that the US lead allies through the Doha Accord achieved what they didn’t through the 2001 War on Terror and 1988 Geneva Accord. Prior to Taliban entrance in Kabul, Pakistan had also played an important role in remaining a very honest and sincere inheritance to British Colonial rulers famous strategic policies of “divide and rule.” Earlier in the 1990s almost non-Pushtoon Afghans didn’t leave the country and remained on the forefront of armed resistance against Pakistan patronized by the Taliban. But this time healthy wealthy like Dostam and co already settled in Turkey and almost successors and followers of late Prof. Rabbani and Ahmad Shah Mehsud airlifted to Pakistan little before the entrance of Taliban into Kabul.

Taliban ties with Pakistan turning unfriendly or even foes-like relations; Meanwhile don’t forget about ISIS-K

Major failure on the part of Taliban could be considered its growing unfriendly or even foes like relations with Pakistan. Such relations are only multiplying miseries of common people but it is also paving the way for strengthening or consolidating positions of Islamic State Khurasan. Strengthening of IS K is not only harmful to the very interests of Afghanistan and its people but it is considered “a very fastly emerging threat” to regional countries especially to neighbors including Pakistan. The Afghanistan Security Watch, an online organization in its report about the ISIS-K operations states that during the past three years in Afghanistan and said after August 15,2021 this group has conducted 62 terrorist attacks, leading to 857 deaths and 1,575 injuries, affecting civilians, Taliban members, and foreign nationals. According to reports, almost all of these attacks, apart from capital Kabul, have been carried out in cities and towns adjacent to neighboring countries. In 2019, Afghan government with help of US and others picked up over three thousands IS-K militants from Nangarhar and its surrounding areas. Afghanistan Security Watch Report reveals, “in 2021 following the Taliban’s release of approximately 3,000 ISKP members and their families from prisons, the group rebuilt its structure and emerged as a significant threat to Afghanistan and the broader region. 2022: Internal discord, weak governance, and divisions within the Taliban allowed ISKP to increase its influence within various Taliban factions and expand its terrorist activities in Afghanistan. In this year, ISKP also claimed responsibility for two rocket attacks on Tajikistan and Uzbekistan from Afghan territory. 2023: Intelligence cooperation between the Taliban and regional powers, particularly Iran and Russia, led to targeted operations against ISKP, resulting in a reduction in attacks compared to 2022. 2024: ISKP bolstered its cells by intensifying recruitment and propaganda efforts.”

Security and economic hardships of the South and Central Asian region couldn’t afford a war like situation any more. Keeping in mind increasing miseries of wars, terror and poverty hit people of this particular region, the Taliban leaders must review its internal and external policies. Their ignorance or reluctance towards an inclusive government would definitely enable no other than IS-K militants who are already engaged in waging proxies. It is the time for Taliban leaders to get rid of abroad patronage and let the representative leadership decide the destiny of war affected and war scattered people.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Middle East

US and Israel weigh Iran strikes after midterm vote, reports say

Published

23 hours ago

on

22/10/2026

By

The US and Israeli defence ministries have drawn up plans for a fresh assault on Iran, with the envisioned offensive under consideration to launch after the US Congressional midterm elections on 3 November.

Citing sources, The New York Times reported that the blueprint anticipates a brief but intense campaign.

As military units step up their drills, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth discussed prospective strike options with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The list of targets encompasses Iran’s nuclear sites, its energy infrastructure, and its arsenals of missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles.

Several officials who spoke to the newspaper argued that a new wave of attacks could deal a heavy blow to the Iranian economy, forcing the leadership in Tehran into concessions.

Conversely, other sources doubt whether a resumption of fighting would prove any more successful than the earlier campaign conducted between February and April.

That previous offensive drove energy prices higher and drained US stockpiles of interceptor missiles.

It remains unclear whether US President Donald Trump will authorise the operation.

Domestic political calculations in Israel could also influence the trajectory of the plans, given that the country faces general elections on 27 October.

While some experts speaking to the newspaper contended that Netanyahu could leverage the threat of war to form a national unity government, others pointed to the opposition’s distrust of the prime minister.

Washington fears regional spillover

The US administration also harbours concerns that the fighting could engulf the wider region. On Wednesday, the US State Department ordered non-essential government personnel and their family members to leave Saudi Arabia following attacks by the Iran-backed Houthis.

A US military build-up, comprising three aircraft carriers, fighter aircraft, and special forces units, is slated to be fully deployed to the region by early November.

The targets under review include the deep underground nuclear facility code-named “Pickaxe”. Trump suggested that the high-yield GBU-43/B bomb, known as the “mother of all bombs”, could be deployed against the site, though experts doubt whether the ordnance can destroy a complex buried so deeply.

For its part, Tehran is preparing for a potential escalation, threatening to broaden its target list. Retaliatory options under consideration by Iran reportedly include data centres and subsea internet cables, in addition to shipping and energy facilities.

Mehdi Mohammadi, an adviser to an Iranian negotiator, dismissed US hopes of wrapping up a new campaign within 72 hours as a “fantasy”. Mohammadi warned that Tehran’s response would be more severe and unpredictable.

The Financial Times previously reported that an Israeli strike on Iran set for 10 October had been called off because the US president was unwilling to risk a broader conflict ahead of the Congressional midterms.

According to that report, the Israeli military had prepared a multi-day assault on nuclear sites, Iranian government targets, power plants, and civilian infrastructure on Netanyahu’s orders. The strikes had been designed to exceed the intensity of the campaign begun in February.

Washington seeks to secure an agreement from Tehran covering both the Strait of Hormuz and its nuclear programme.

“It will either be a deal or a strike,” one source told the Financial Times, adding that an operation could get under way in the coming weeks.

Another official who spoke to the paper suggested that Israeli preparations might serve as leverage to squeeze Iran in negotiations.

Axios also reported that the Pentagon had issued orders to prepare for renewed strikes, though the directive contained no specific date and Trump has yet to take a final decision.

The US and Israel launched their offensive against Iran on 28 February. Iran hit back by targeting US and Israeli assets across the region and curbing vessel transit through the Strait of Hormuz.

Although both sides signed a memorandum of understanding in June that provided for a ceasefire and talks to lift the blockade in the Strait of Hormuz, reciprocal attacks between the US and Iran have persisted.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Netanyahu trails Eisenkot in Israeli polls despite Trump backing

Published

2 days ago

on

21/10/2026

By

As general elections scheduled for 27 October approach in Israel, the opposition camp led by former Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot continues to lead Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in public opinion polls.

Survey data published in the Israeli press on 19 and 20 October reveal that the governing coalition has failed to catch the opposition, despite explicit backing from US President Donald Trump.

However, the current distribution of votes documents that neither wing can reach a governing majority on its own.

Neither bloc reaches the 61 seats needed to form a government

According to a survey conducted by Channel 13, if an election were held today, Eisenkot’s bloc would win 51 seats, while the Netanyahu coalition would take 50.

A Channel 12 poll indicates that the gap has widened slightly, projecting 55 seats for Eisenkot’s alliance and 51 for the governing bloc. A minimum of 61 seats is required to form a government in the Knesset, Israel’s 120-seat parliament.

A key factor deadlocking the political arithmetic is the refusal by both sides to form a coalition with parties representing Palestinian citizens of Israel. This stance stands as the most tangible obstacle to securing a parliamentary majority after the election.

Channel 12 data shows that overall voter turnout is expected to remain at 72%. The inclination to head to the ballot box climbs to 81% among opposition voters, compared with 74% measured among Netanyahu supporters.

The same poll notes that Eisenkot has widened his lead over Netanyahu by two further points in prime ministerial preferences.

Yashar party climbs after Gantz bows out

A survey published on the Walla news site shows that the balance shifted after Benny Gantz decided to withdraw his Blue and White party from the race. Following that move, Eisenkot’s Yashar party increased its projected tally to 23 seats, while Netanyahu’s Likud dropped by one seat to 19.

Eisenkot’s party and the “Zionist Opposition” bloc it anchors have remained atop the polls for several months.

In an earlier message of support, Trump praised Netanyahu as “a great fighting prime minister and an even greater partner for peace.” Public opinion polls document that this diplomatic and political backing has not proved sufficient to tip the preferences of the Israeli electorate in favour of the incumbent government.

Support for Ben Gvir rises among young voters

Although Netanyahu’s alliance trails in overall strength, far-right figures within the coalition appear to be expanding their grassroots base. Gauged interest in the Jewish Power party of Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir is climbing, particularly among younger voters.

Speaking to a study conducted by Agam Labs, affiliated with the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, an 18-year-old student described his shifting preference: “I used to think he was a bit crazy, but then I actually looked at what he was saying, and it all made sense.”

Another Israeli citizen stated that Ben Gvir’s push to arm West Bank settlers gave them “room to breathe.”

Ben Gvir is known for leading settler incursions into the Al-Aqsa compound and distributing military-grade rifles to tens of thousands of settlers since 7 October 2023.

Criticized for escalating violence against Palestinians, Ben Gvir has called for starving Gaza, maintaining military operations in Lebanon, and bombing Beirut. The far-right minister’s militaristic stances also find a political constituency across several opposition parties in Israel.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Netanyahu unveils security doctrine and regional alliance map

Published

3 days ago

on

20/10/2026

By

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has shared an updated security doctrine with the public ahead of general elections scheduled for 27 October.

Announced by the Prime Minister’s Office on 18 October and shaped with contributions from the National Security Council, the work includes a detailed map classifying Israel’s regional allies, adversaries, and spheres of influence.

The new doctrine aims to eliminate elements defined as threats directly through pre-emptive military interventions rather than containing them, to expand buffer zones, and to establish new regional partnerships.

Al Jazeera points out that this approach has effectively been put into practice during Israel’s recent military operations and strikes against neighbouring countries.

Regional blocs and allies classified on the map

The map presented by Netanyahu classifies not only sovereign states into blocs, but also armed groups, de facto administrations, and territories controlled by various forces.

The terms “alliance” and “friend” used on the map do not imply that formal and binding partnerships have been established with all these entities.

The “Hexagon Alliance” on the Israel-United Arab Emirates (UAE) axis and parties considered “friends” of this bloc are shown in blue and light blue shades.

This group includes Azerbaijan, Greece, southern Cyprus, the Druze in Syria’s As-Suwayda province, eastern Libya under Khalifa Haftar’s control, Ethiopia, Somaliland, Puntland, areas in Yemen held by the UAE-backed former Southern Transitional Council, and territories controlled by the Rapid Support Forces in Sudan.

The “Sunni Diamond Alliance”, formed by Türkiye, Egypt, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia, alongside peripheral actors, is distinguished by green and light green shades.

This cluster marks Azerbaijan, Syria, Qatar, Kuwait, areas in Yemen controlled by the Saudi-backed Presidential Leadership Council, Eritrea, Sudan, the West Bank, Jordan, the Lebanese government, Northern Cyprus, and Somalia. In Libya, both the Tripoli-based western administration and the Haftar-dominated eastern administration are shown as linked to this bloc.

Iran and the Axis of Resistance are defined in red and pink colours. Hashd al-Shaabi in Iraq, eastern and southern parts of Lebanon where Hezbollah is active, Ansar Allah-controlled areas in Yemen, and Hamas-administered Gaza find a place within this axis. Russia is marked on the map in pink under “friend” status to this bloc.

Orange and yellow markings are also used around NATO members, alliance partners, and actors with friendly relations with Washington. The lines also illustrate the permeability between blocs.

For instance, Azerbaijan is presented with two-toned stripes as a friend of both the Israel-UAE axis and the Türkiye-led bloc, while India stands out as the only actor classified as a “friend” to all parties.

The map in question was reportedly prepared in May by Marc Saxer and Marcus Schneider for the Germany-based Friedrich Ebert Foundation, which has engaged with Israeli governments since 1978.

Pre-election rhetoric of the “indispensable leader”

Netanyahu is facing voters in a bid to retain power amid ongoing corruption proceedings and continued criticism over his management of the 7 October 2023 attacks and subsequent conflicts.

According to Al Jazeera’s analysis, releasing the security doctrine and map on the eve of elections rests on Netanyahu’s strategy of establishing himself as the only capable leader who can protect Israel.

Backed by electoral support from US President Donald Trump, Netanyahu pointed during his presentation to a potential change of administration in the White House.

Arguing that an administration distant or hostile to Israel could take office in Washington within two years, Netanyahu said his country must expand its network of alliances and become an attractive regional partner because of that possibility.

Mohanad Hage Ali, deputy director for research at the Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center, noted that this presentation, built on rival blocs and security corridors, deepens existential anxieties within society.

According to Hage Ali, this approach reinforces voters’ perceived need for a tough leader, and Netanyahu is attempting to rally support from populations wary of uncertainty through this reassurance.

Fierce backlash from the Israeli opposition

The publication of the document provoked reactions in Israeli domestic politics.

Gadi Eisenkot, leader of the Yashar Party and former chief of general staff, criticised the work as consisting of “two empty pages filled with slogans that have nothing to do with an actual security doctrine”.

Emphasising that the Netanyahu government was responsible for the “gravest failure and disaster in Israel’s history” on 7 October, Eisenkot said subsequent escalating regional clashes had also left every front engulfed in flames.

Eisenkot argued that the document exposes a lingering strategic vacuum, while the prime minister is reviving fears to divert attention from misleading claims in his election pledges.

Yesh Atid leader and former prime minister Yair Lapid also described the text as superficial.

“Even by Netanyahu’s current standards, which are defined by exhaustion and detachment from reality, this document looks as if it was written using a free version of an AI chatbot,” Lapid said.

Lapid added that a text consisting merely of bulleted headings cannot be deemed a doctrine, and that the effort is nothing more than an attempt to cover up the disasters caused by the prime minister.

The buffer zone model

The buffer zone concept featured in the strategy document is based on Israel establishing direct military control over cross-border territories.

Al Jazeera notes that the current occupation conditions in Gaza and southern Lebanon are practical reflections of this policy.

Mohanad Hage Ali warned that a plan based on making military control permanent could bring fresh conflicts and the risk of ethnic cleansing.

Hage Ali also noted that portraying actors such as the Rapid Support Forces in Sudan and Haftar’s forces within the Israel-UAE axis could damage their legitimacy in the Arab world.

Arguing that this choice reflects Netanyahu’s domestic priorities, Hage Ali observed: “What Israelis think becomes more important than the reputation of your allies and the sustainability of these alliances.”

Netanyahu’s proposal for a “hexagon of alliances”, raised at the beginning of the year and covering India, Greece, southern Cyprus, and unspecified Arab, African, and Asian nations, has yet to be formalised.

While international analyses describe the initiative as a diplomatic branding exercise rather than a binding defence pact, observers recall that actors such as India prioritise commercial interests and non-alignment over rigid blocs.

Finally, Hage Ali stated that the presented map will provide propaganda material for the Tehran government and its allies, reinforcing arguments that Israel harbours regional expansion and domination ambitions.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey