The legacy of the London Conference: the UN and Taliban impunity
By Nasim Fekrat (in Pennsylvania, U.S.)
On January 28, 2010, during the London Conference on Afghanistan—which was intended to focus on security issues—President Hamid Karzai presented a list of top Taliban figures who are on the UN’s black list. For the last few years, Karzai has been pleading with the UN and the US to remove these Taliban leaders' names from the list in order to pave the way for negotiations. Karzai's position has led to widespread criticism from civil society and human rights organizations inside Afghanistan, and has raised concern globally.
Two days before the inauguration of the London Conference, Brad Adams, the Asia director at Human Rights Watch, said: "Justice and human rights are not optional extras. To make progress in Afghanistan, the London Conference should not just focus on military plans in the south and east, but on producing implementable national strategies that tackle impunity and warlordism.” <http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2010/01/26/afghanistan-conference-should-link-rights-security> However, in spite of all these concerns, a day before the London Conference, the United Nations announced that five former Taliban officials were being removed from the black list. With this action, the UN, which champions human rights throughout the world, left Afghans in a state of shock and awe. Because the UN and other international human rights organization were historically responsible for prosecuting human rights violations in Afghanistan, the London Conference was a chance to lay out a strategy for strengthening and securing the country in order to bring justice and peace.
Of course Afghans want security and peace. They have been suffering from three decades of civil war. Today, they are tired of violence and tired of brutality. They are exhausted from long years of fighting. Since the withdrawal of the Taliban, many internal and external human rights organizations have been fighting for human rights in Afghanistan. Owing to the presence of international institutions in Afghanistan, people feel safe and every year on December 10, on Human Rights' day, thousands of people demonstrate in different cities in Afghanistan. Their demand from the United Nations is to bring those responsible for war crimes to justice.
But today, Afghans are clearly suspicious of the United Nations and the international community. They were supposed to be the remedy for thousands of people who were victimized during the Taliban regime, but have just granted the perpetrators impunity instead.
Nasim Fekrat is the editor of the Afghan Lord blog. He is now a student at Dickinson College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania.
I suspect this is a ploy by Karzi to retain power rather than to have a younger person with more modern ideas take power. I imagine this is the age old ritual of power brokering. The idea is that the Taliban would hold values more in line with those of Karzi and those who desire an Islamic state.
If you look at the legislation passed within Afghanistan with respect to women and how Karzi has reacted to that legislation, it does not surprise me one bit. What he says and what he believes seem to be two different things.
The war lords within Afghanistan have a lot to answer for and they are trying to buy time. There wealth and power come from their positions in the government and as power borkers. They greatly fear change as does Karzi.
If Afghanistan is going to come into the modern world it needs to change. It needs new leaders who are truely interested in the long term interests of Afghanistan's people.
We are seeing many articles pointing to an extensive outflow of funds from Afghanistan to other parts of the Muslim world. Serious questions are being asked and it seems that diplomatic immunity by many including Karzi's associates is being used as a ploy to avoid formal detection. This is an example of one of the problems within Afghanistan and Pakistan.
It would appear that massive corruption is taking place and money intended for projects and the people is disappearing as fast as it appears in Afghanistan. We to have that problem at times and it is called greed.
Personally I was hoping Karzi's competitor would win the past election as I thought it would be good for Afghanistan. It would bring new leadership and ideas to the government, but that didn't happen. Karzi seems to be taking steps to make certain he has no challengers. It is to bad that that is happening.
Fekrat I assume you are studying political science so that you can one day return to your country and try to be a leader. I would say you face a difficult path based on the entrenched nature of the old leadership. They have power and wealth and they do not want to give that up.
In Afghanistan and Pakistan it seems that the preferred method of defeating competion is to eliminate it. In a democratic state the power often ebbs and flows with the ages. No one party dominates forever.
People realize that power changes over time and people realize they have to recommit their efforts to gain back their power by persuading the people they are the better leaders. In a democracy there is an orderly transition from one leadership group to another without violance and massive rule changes to keep the previous leadership from returning to power. Hopefully one day Afghanistan achieves that goal.
Sunday
February 28, 2010
4:53 pm
Post new comment