Newsweek Sorely Off-Base on Afghanistan Report

Newsweek recently printed a article titled "A War on Schoolgirls" (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13392086/site/newsweek/) covering incidents of the Taliban torching grade schools and using other kinds of foul intimidation tactics against civilians attending or involved with public schools throughout Afghanistan's Southern region. This piece conveys the incredible willingness among Afghani civilians to risk their lives for the opportunity to pursue an education, however, important historical facts are overlooked by the journalists entirely discrediting the article.

It is unacceptable to report on the symptom of a conflict while blatantly disregarding the objective history of the region and a thorough account of the political culture and civilian life. There is no mention of the numerous detrimental inflictions the US military and other powerful foreign militaries have had on the people of Afghanistan. It shamefully avoids all rational linkage that the US and other wealthy nations bear heavy responsibility to the terror occurring in Southern Afghanistan. The main events ignored are as follows:

With no legal evidence implicating Osama bin Ladin or verified intelligence on his whereabouts, the US and Britain proposed plans to bomb regions of Afghanistan where they presumed he was hiding. The bombing threats halted food shipments from Pakistan into already bleak parts of the country, which supplied approximately 5 million people. Aid workers were forced to withdraw their support and millions were displaced from the major cities of Kandahar and Herat. Best estimates indicate 3,000-3,500 were killed directly by air attacks between October '01 and March '02. Deaths by starvation are estimated to have reached the thousands caused by the bombings. These aggressive military measures as means of overthrowing the Taliban were pursued despite; Afghan public opinion strongly opposing the bombing strategy; prominent anti-Taliban groups presenting plausible internal methods to the international community; and the prior knowledge of US and British government officials that massive civilian casualties would result.

The US/British decision to intervene in Afghanistan has created just the latest instance where foreign militaries have harmed the local population and provoked a violent response from national political militia groups, all of whom have fundamentally directed their measures towards the occupation and Afghanis they've felt supported it. The Soviet invasion of the capital, Kabul, in 1979 was the first direct intrusion of a foreign military in Afghan modern history. Approximately one million Afghanis were killed from aerial bombings during this military venture and nearly a third of the population fled the country to escape the danger. Heavy resistance from regional Islamic organizations arose to combat the Soviet occupation. These groups known as the mujahideen, accepted military assistance from the US and other foreign governments to support their efforts to expel the foreign incursion. After the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan, the Taliban gradually took power over the US-backed mujahideen (by this time known as the Northern Alliance), which today is viewed to have been the much more repressive regime of the two.

This conflict that began about a quarter century ago was very similar to the one the Taliban is engaged in today. The only difference was that the nationalist fight was to expel the Soviets instead of American and British troops.

In the fall of 1994 the Taliban emerged as a powerful political and military group in the southern city of Kandahar. Their initial mass appeal was their call to remove the Northern Alliance from power. In 1996 they captured Kabul, and much of the outside world (namely the US and other Western nations) reacted critically to the Taliban's extreme Islamic policies, especially towards the place of women in society.

Policies the Taliban holds and imposes on Afghan society viewed by outsiders as spiteful, disillusioned or savage, shows they posses a lack of understanding of public affairs, and local politics and culture in Afghanistan. The Taliban's version of Islamic law is a natural response to the experiences of disruption of sovereignty, political and economic chaos, and even human rights abuses. Their reversion to traditional cultural and religious mores is historically consistent with states whose people face longstanding oppression. The logical reaction of the Taliban is to reject public education because to them it is merely a newfangled form of foreign influence, not gateway for national liberty and economic opportunity, which undoubtedly portends further suffering and submission for Afghanis.

This article encourages us to realize (albeit painfully) that we should be critical of superficial reports on important issues, particularly when appearing in such widely read and highly reputed publications. Instead of absorbing the shallow observations when reading this report, we should question: "when ever has a poor nation who faced greater indignity and poverty under the threat of foreign domination has a nationalistic regime risen with socially progressive policies?"