Connect with us

MIDDLE EAST

Prevalence of religious hypocrisy

Published

on

After the return of the Taliban, hundreds of thousands of Afghan citizens went to European countries and the US, where they started a new life in the shadow of a different society and culture. In the meantime, one of the frequent scenes was the conflict of behavior of these citizens in Afghanistan and now in the West.

When a famous lady lived inside the country, she considered herself bound to wear the usual clothes in Afghanistan and was even careful not to publish her photo on social media outlets, but the same person as soon as she set foot in Europe, America or Australia, her way of dressing changed drastically and one of the first changes that appeared was to wear a mini dress and bare his head and neck.

Also, in the case of men, some of whom could not hear even a single word from their language in criticizing the current situation or the need to revise popular religious views, but these same people, after leaving the country and feeling immune from possible punishments, relentlessly attacked religious beliefs. They started and ridiculed the popular opinions in the country and also acted as revolutionary in criticizing the ruling policy and prominent politicians.

Another example, There were a large number of people who had jobs in the republic and had become wealthy, which they are thankful to the blessing of that system and were comfortable in their lives and did not show any kind of dissatisfaction with the existing situation. However, these people as soon as the republic system collapsed, they became first-class critics and suddenly opened their throats in praise of the “Emirate” system and even tried to build an image that they were already with the Taliban even during the Republic system.

What are the reasons for this behavior-conflict and what factors are involved?

Unfortunately, hypocrisy and pretense are one of the chronic and long-lasting diseases in our society, and the experts and academicians in the past have already spoken about this and proposed solutions. Despite this, the fact is that until the aggravating factors of this disease are removed from society, it should not be expected that hypocrisy will not become a second habit of citizens.

It seems that people use pretense and hypocrisy as a shield to protect themselves from possible calamities and disasters, and consider this method necessary to survive in unstable and chaotic conditions.

Although experts have tried to criticize pretense and hypocrisy for a long time, but the criticism of this phenomenon is not fruitful without doing something to provide a dignified life for humans. Until the root of this problem is not dealt with, there is no hope to improve the situation.

Religious governments are one of those governments that promote hypocrisy and hypocrisy

The Taliban government, is unfortunately, currently one of the worst examples of religious government in the world. This government gives itself the right to interfere in the smallest issues of the daily lives of the people and even impose rules for citizens on the type of clothing, beard and hair.

In the shadow of such governments that impose a certain way of life on people, the people are forced to turn to hypocrisy and pretense and choose a special way of dressing and a special way of life in order to be safe from any punishment of the government.

As soon as these people get out of the realm of totalitarian governments, they completely change their faces and reveal their inner selves. These days, if you walk the streets of the big cities of Afghanistan, such as Kabul, Balkh, and Herat, you will see the absolute majority of people with the same clothes and appearance, and fewer people are willing to take risks and, for example, shave their beards or grow their hair in a different way. This shows the intensity of citizens’ fear of the Taliban.

The society is blame for such messy rules

Although the Taliban regime is currently trying to establish an iron rule and impose a certain lifestyle on the citizens, if we do not ignore the truth, the Afghan society is also to blame for this situation. The citizens of Afghanistan often take the same layer and appearance from religion and do not have access to its depth and meaning.

It is that religious appearanceism is very common in the society, and of course, what has happened recently is that the political government is also in harmony and compatible with the majority of people in the appearanceism and giving priority to religious rites and rituals and disregarding the essence of religion.

If you want to gain the respect of the citizens and achieve a desirable social status and benefit from the facilities, you have to adhere to religious appearances and attend congregational prayers, let your beard grow long, carry a rosary in your hand, and chant religious slogans. Talk about piety, purity and fear of God. In such a situation, the majority of people act according to instinct and pretend to be religious and pious, but deep down they do not believe in these words at all.

Oppressive systems turn people into worthless and dishonorable creatures

In a society where bigotry is rampant, hypocrisy becomes common, and efforts are made to hide one’s opinion, because exposing one’s political or religious opinion threatens one’s life, property, and reputation. The higher the concentration of prejudice, the more hypocrisy spreads and becomes the rule of life. In such a society, reasoning and logic do not achieve the desired position and people see their interest in being with power and force.

In these societies, the protection of property and life is prioritized and opinion loses its importance. The members of such a society always hide themselves behind masks.

To build a good society, freedom should be considered before anything else. In a society where there is no freedom, people’s lives suffer from all kinds of plagues, including the disease of hypocrisy and pretense. Hypocrisy and pretense should not be considered only as a mental illness, but it should be considered as a phenomenon that spreads humiliation and slander and brings society to ruin and endangers social integration.

MIDDLE EAST

Trump will conditionally support West Bank annexation

Published

on

Former Trump aides have cautioned Israeli ministers not to assume Trump’s unconditional support for West Bank annexation in a potential second term, according to The Times of Israel.

At least two officials from Donald Trump’s previous administration advised Israeli ministers to temper expectations about Trump’s support for Israel’s annexation of the West Bank. Sources close to the discussions indicated that while annexation is not off the table, Israeli leaders should avoid viewing it as a “foregone conclusion.”

The message was delivered in meetings and discussions held in the months leading up to Trump’s recent presidential victory. However, some far-right cabinet members remained undeterred. On Monday, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich declared that 2025 would mark “the year of sovereignty in Judea and Samaria [the West Bank]” following Trump’s re-election. Last week, National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir also asserted that “the time for sovereignty has come.”

On Friday, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu announced Yechiel Leiter as Israel’s next ambassador to the United States. Leiter, a former settler leader, is known for his support of West Bank annexation and opposition to a Palestinian state.

In a statement to The Times of Israel, an anonymous Israeli official said Trump’s former advisers have not ruled out his potential support for annexation. However, they indicated it could jeopardize Trump’s broader foreign policy priorities, including countering Iran, competing with China, and ending the war in Ukraine. Trump would likely need the support of key Gulf allies—notably Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE)—to achieve these goals. Unconditional support for Israeli annexation, however, could risk backlash from these regional allies.

In 2020, Trump’s peace plan proposed annexing all Israeli settlements while leaving open the possibility of a Palestinian state in other areas of the West Bank. Although Prime Minister Netanyahu had hesitations, settler leaders and officials like Smotrich celebrated Trump’s recent victory as a chance to realize annexation plans.

A former Trump adviser told an Israeli minister that Trump’s support for Israeli sovereignty would likely come with more conditions than in 2020. After the Palestinian Authority rejected Trump’s “Peace to Prosperity” proposal in 2020, the Trump administration and Israel began planning a partial annexation of the West Bank. However, this initiative was set aside when the UAE agreed to normalize relations with Israel.

The U.S. commitment to the UAE to delay Israeli annexation efforts expires at the end of 2024. Still, a former Trump official told The Times of Israel that a major shift in U.S. support for annexation should not be expected. “If any shift happens, it would need to be part of a process,” the official commented.

Jason Greenblatt, Trump’s former Middle East envoy, reinforced this message, stating:

“I think it’s important that those in Israel who are celebrating President Trump’s victory do so because of his strong support for Israel, as evidenced by many historic achievements during his first term. Some Israeli ministers are assuming that expanding Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria is an automatic done deal and will happen as soon as President Trump takes office.

I suggest they take a deep breath. If I were advising these ministers, I would strongly urge them to focus on working closely with Prime Minister Netanyahu to strengthen U.S.-Israel relations and address the significant threats facing Israel. The time for discussions around Judea and Samaria will come, but context and timing are crucial.”

Continue Reading

MIDDLE EAST

India’s foreign policy and relations with the Taliban

Published

on

Indian diplomat J.P Singh, who is in charge of Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan affairs in the Indian Ministry of External Affairs, visited Kabul recently and held enormous meetings and discussions with senior Taliban officials, including Defense Minister Mullah Yaqoob and Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi. Although many details of these meetings have not been published, the Times of India in a report on this trip called it a “fundamental progress” in the relations between India and the Taliban.

The Ministry of Defense of the Taliban also said that the two sides emphasized their common desire to expand bilateral relations, especially in the fields of humanitarian cooperation and other issues, and expressed their interest in strengthening more interactions between Afghanistan and India.

The Times of India has evaluated this meeting as a “strategic change in India’s approach to Afghanistan”; in the sense that the Taliban’s repeated assurances that Afghanistan’s soil will not be used against India, probably influenced India’s decision to increase its interactions with Afghanistan under the control of the Taliban.

This shows that the Taliban, after taking control of Afghanistan, do not shy away from any attempt for international and regional recognition as well as interaction with the regional and world powers, that is just for the purpose of legitimizing their ruling.

India’s relations with the Taliban and its challenges for the country’s regional strategies is a complex and multifaceted issue that requires a more detailed analysis.

After the Taliban’s control of Afghanistan and the fundamental change in the political and security equations of the region, India also sought to review its policies towards Afghanistan and the Taliban. This relationship, although designed to protect India’s immediate interests in the region, is undoubtedly not without significant strategic concerns.

India’s instrumental policy in Afghanistan

India’s foreign policy in Afghanistan was not originally based on the values ​​of the Non-Aligned Movement and its historical relations with Afghanistan. This has become more intense especially after the coming to power of the Hindu Nationalist Party led by Narendra Modi. Since Modi’s party came to power, India’s policy towards Afghanistan has become more of a political game focused on short-term interests. In this policy, the element of enmity with Islam and negation of cultural and historical relations with the Muslim countries of the region has become a decisive element.

Joint secretary of India’s Ministry of External Affairs, J.P. Singh, meets with acting Afghanistan defense minister of Taliban Muhammad Yaqoob Mujahid.

As tensions escalate between Pakistan and the Taliban, known as Pakistan’s former proxies, India is once again considering using Afghanistan as a tool to counter Pakistan. In this framework, while establishing relations with the Taliban on the one hand, on the other hand, India seeks to create more tensions between Afghanistan and Pakistan in order to somehow achieve its goals against Pakistan.

India’s policies in this regard have not only led to the consolidation of the Taliban’s power in Afghanistan, but have also indirectly fueled the expansion of tensions and instability in the region. The instrumental use of Afghanistan and the escalation of differences between Afghanistan and Pakistan have generally been the defining element of India’s foreign policy.

India has always tried to use every opportunity to weaken Pakistan’s relations with Afghanistan, even if this leads to the strengthening of extremist groups such as the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). This approach is not only harmful for India in the long run, but it can turn the region into a clash of strategic and security interests, which will not benefit any of the countries in the region.

India’s transactional and dual policy in Afghanistan

India has always abandoned its allies in Afghanistan and has never acted as a strategic partner during difficult times, especially after the collapse of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan in 15 August 2021 at least.

This is evident from India’s behavior towards Dawood Khan’s government, Dr. Najibullah and his government members and even Hamid Karzai and his government members who had close relations with India and considered India as their natural ally. After the Taliban came to power, India cut ties with these people, which shows the instability and lack of loyalty in India’s foreign policy. Even when Afghanistan needed vital and strategic help, India did not stand by the people of Afghanistan as a strategic ally.

This fact can be seen in India’s severance of relations with Hamid Karzai and members of his government who strongly trusted India. This move of India even shows lack of commitment to strategic cooperation and disloyalty to diplomatic principles.

India prevented Afghan students from entering the country even in critical situations when Afghan youth needed support, and many Afghan students who were studying in Indian universities were not allowed to finish their studies.

Unlike Pakistan, India has never been loyal to its allies in Afghanistan as strategic partners. Even when many Afghans were trying to escape from Taliban rule, India closed its gates to them and many people who took refuge in India did not have their visas extended.

Security challenges and threats

Strengthening India’s relations with the Taliban can bring new security threats to Afghanistan in the long run. One of the most important risks arising from these relations is the strengthening of (TTP), which has now become one of the serious threats to the security of Pakistan and the region.

TTP has had influence in the border areas of Afghanistan since the past, and even in some areas, it is difficult to separate them from the Afghan Taliban. This influence and links have made the Pakistani Taliban to enjoy a powerful position and, regardless of the official relations between the Afghan Taliban and Pakistan, they have organized themselves and organized complex attacks inside Pakistan.

India must understand that this situation could even be considered as a serious threat to India itself, because TTP can become a symbol of inspiration for Islamic extremist forces inside India and endanger India’s security by expanding the scope of violence and instability in the region.

Long-term consequences and strategic problems

In the long term, strengthening India’s relationship with the Taliban will lead to other regional actors, including Pakistan, taking advantage of this situation to weaken India’s position. This approach can strengthen extremist ideologies and asymmetry in India’s policies towards Afghanistan.

The Taliban, who present themselves as a “legitimate” government, will use these relationships to strengthen their international standing. While this can introduce India as an unstable actor without a clear policy in the region.

Already, Pakistan’s Defense Minister Khawaja Asif said that instability in Pakistan was fueled by an “Indian proxy war”, pointing to regional rivalries as a key factor. Asif also described the use of Afghanistan’s territory for attacks on Pakistan as an “action of aggression” following a deadly explosion in Quetta of Pakistan that killed at least 26 people, including 16 soldiers and 61 others received injuries.

Continue Reading

MIDDLE EAST

As ceasefire diplomacy accelerates in Lebanon, occupation expansion authorized

Published

on

U.S. President-elect Donald Trump recently urged the Biden administration to pursue a ceasefire on the Lebanese front before his departure from office. Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sent his top advisor to the United States for negotiations, while the Chief of Staff approved a plan to expand Israel’s occupation of southern Lebanon as leverage in potential negotiations. In response, Hezbollah has asserted that it possesses sufficient weapons, equipment, and resources for a prolonged conflict.

Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer traveled to the U.S. to engage in ceasefire discussions with Hezbollah representatives. Reports indicate that President-elect Trump conveyed a message to the Joe Biden administration underscoring the need for progress toward a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah.

According to Israeli media, Ron Dermer, a close ally of Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Minister of Strategic Affairs, recently made a secret visit to Russia as part of efforts to broker peace with Hezbollah. His office, playing a key role in ceasefire negotiations, did not comment on the details of the Russian visit.

Additionally, Axios reported that Dermer will meet with Trump in the U.S. to continue discussions around achieving a ceasefire.

Netanyahu stated in a video message following a cabinet meeting that he had held three important meetings with U.S. President-elect Trump in recent days.

A report by Yedioth Ahronot, citing unnamed U.S. officials, noted that Trump had conveyed a message to the Biden administration about the urgency of a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah. Senior U.S. adviser Amos Hochstein expressed confidence that the two sides could reach an agreement to end over a year of hostilities and Israeli strikes on southern Lebanon.

Meanwhile, the Israeli president’s office confirmed that President Isaac Herzog would meet with Biden at the White House on Tuesday.

Hezbollah spokesman Mohammed Afifi announced that Hezbollah is well-prepared with ample weapons, equipment, and materials for a long-term conflict on all fronts.

During a press conference marking Martyrs’ Day at the Sayyid al-Shuhada complex in Beirut’s Dahieh area, a Hezbollah stronghold, Afifi criticized Israel’s tactics. He stated, “You will never win your war with air superiority or by killing civilians, women, and children. Without effective ground control, you will not achieve your political goals, and the people of the north will never return.” Afifi further addressed Israeli claims that only 20% of Hezbollah’s rocket arsenal remains, emphasizing that they were actively targeting Tel Aviv, Haifa, and parts of the Golan Heights.

“We have enough weapons, equipment, and materials for a prolonged conflict,” Afifi reiterated, adding that Hezbollah maintains a strong relationship with the Lebanese army, despite ongoing efforts to divide them.

Since October 8, the Israeli army has been engaged in controlled skirmishes with Hezbollah, intensifying its attacks on Lebanon’s southern cities and on the Bekaa, Baalbek, and southern Beirut regions. Israel’s objective appears to be pushing Hezbollah forces north of the Litani River. The Lebanese Ministry of Health reported that 3,189 people have been killed, including 194 children and 621 women, with 14,778 wounded since the outbreak of violence on October 8.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey