ZMag Aug 14

quote:

---

JP: You have described all of these Islamic political movements as enemies of the people, whether they are supported by the West or fighting NATO. I have heard the argument here that Pakistan and Afghanistan are deeply religious countries, and any political movement has to contend with that fact. As a consequence, I have heard that groups like RAWA isolate themselves because of their uncompromising stand on secularism and religion. Do you find that your secularism makes you unpopular?

RAWA: That is the impression the Western media give of Afghan society. Maybe it is true from their eye. We Afghans have lived through it. How it expresses itself depends on many factors, including social, cultural, and economic factors. We have worked in some of what would be called the most 'backward' areas, very religious, without much recognition of women's rights. But after some time, and sometimes it is quite quickly, over weeks or months, they come to like what we are doing and even get involved, even whole families. We have seen this in some areas. So I do not agree that the country as a whole couldn't accept democratic rights or secular values. It needs time and work to build social and political awareness, and in recent years people have not had that opportunity.

The brand of Islam the fundamentalists present is different from that of common Afghan people. Their Islam is a political Islam and each party has their own brand, which contradict each other. The Islam of Mullah Omar is different from the Islam of Burhanuddin Rabbani or Rasul Sayyaf, and these groups have been at war for years although they all pretend to be true Muslims. The fundamentalist groups have committed unprecedented crimes under the name of Islam over the past two decades. Today Afghans are so fed up with them that majority of Afghans support any voice raised against the fundamentalists. When Malalai Joya spoke against them for only 2 minutes in the Loya Jirga, her voice was soon echoed and supported by millions of Afghan across the country and she was called a heroine and voice of the voiceless. The fundamentalists impose their domination with the help of their weapons, foreign masters and money. Without these, they have no footing in Afghan society.

JP: Is the NATO' occupation helping or harming Afghanistan? Can it be used somehow to strengthen progressive forces? Is it holding back a Taliban victory which would be worse than the current situation?

RAWA: Seven years ago when the US invaded, the situation was different. Many Afghans appreciated their presence and were happy to get rid of the Taliban's oppressive rule. They thought - the Taliban had been eliminated, the international community worked, they were promised a better life, democracy and freedom and an end to the fundamentalist groups. Within months, it was clear that the US government still continues its wrong policy of supporting the fundamentalists in Afghanistan. We saw that the US rely on the fundamentalists of the Northern Alliance to fight another fundamentalist band - the Taliban. It doesn't matter if they fight the Taliban or "terrorism", they are supporting the Northern Alliance, and for Afghans both are the same - both are terrorists and fundamentalists, supported by foreign governments, whether by the West, or Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia or any other country. They violate human rights, they abuse women, they commit corruption and fraud and smuggling, as we have documented.

From the beginning, RAWA announced that the US and the West have their own reasons for being here and it is not for the freedom of the Afghan people. We said that what the US/NATO is doing under the name of democracy is in fact a mockery of democracy. It is clear for us. Today NATO bombings are increasing, more civilians are being killed, and other violations are being done by the US and NATO. And now even they are trying to share power with the Taliban and terrorist party of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. If this plot is realized, it will mean another tragedy for Afghanistan and its people, the unification of all enemies of Afghan people under one umbrella so they could jointly smash the Afghan people and freedom-loving individuals and forces.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by kropotkin1951:
Here is a Znet interview released today. IMO Clearly these women are the voice of reason in Afghanistan.

ZMag Aug 14
I am in awe of women brave enough to stand up to both NATO and the Taliban. I wish them well in their attempts to rid their country of fundamentalist scum.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
Do they call for the withdrawal of foreign troops?

---

Yes.

quote:

---

Today we have two problems: our own local fundamentalists and a foreign occupier. If NATO left we would have one problem rather than two.

---

quote:

---

JP: What about the argument that if NATO left, Afghanistan would quickly fall to the Taliban, which would be worse?

RAWA: It is true that it might be worse under a Taliban regime. But at least we will not be occupied by a foreign power. Today we have two problems: our own local fundamentalists and a foreign occupier. If NATO left we would have one problem rather than two.

RAWA has announced a number of times that neither the US nor any other power wants to release Afghan people from the fetters of the fundamentalists. Afghanistan's freedom can be achieved by Afghan people themselves. Relying on one enemy to defeat another is a wrong policy which has just tightened the grip of the Northern Alliance and their masters on the neck of our nation.

---

[ 14 August 2008: Message edited by: M. Spector ]

I may have missed it. Can you direct me to such a call? You know, something simple, like: "We call upon all foreign countries to withdraw their troops?"

To fast-forward to the next question, if they have never actually issued such a call, does anyone have any insight as to why not?

ETA: I'm asking a serious question here. What does RAWA demand? Here's an example of their ambiguity, right in the midst of a blistering anti-U.S. headline, "The US and Her Fundamentalist Stooges are the Main Human Rights Violators in Afghanistan". You read the whole statement, and one question remains: Should the U.S. leave? Stay? What?

[ 14 August 2008: Message edited by: unionist ]

If you read the interview with Justin Podur it is abundantly clear that this woman has nothing good to say about the US and NATO, and plenty to criticize. She completely undercuts the rationales that are commonly put forward for NATO's being there. It's not hard to draw the conclusion that NATO forces should get out of Afghanistan.

If RAWA doesn't recognize the logic of their own critique (which I doubt), it should not prevent us from drawing the logical conclusions.

[ 14 August 2008: Message edited by: M. Spector ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:

ETA: I'm asking a serious question here. What does RAWA demand? Here's an example of their ambiguity, right in the midst of a blistering anti-U.S. headline, "The US and Her Fundamentalist Stooges are the Main Human Rights Violators in Afghanistan". You read the whole statement, and one question remains: Should the U.S. leave? Stay? What?

[ 14 August 2008: Message edited by: unionist ]

---

I don't find this all that ambiguous:

quote:

---

Instead of defeating Al-Qaeda, Taliban and Gulbuddini terrorists and disarming the Northern Alliance, the foreign troops are creating confusion among the people of the world. We believe that if these troops leave Afghanistan, our people will not feel any kind of vacuum but rather will become more free and come out of their current puzzlement and doubts. In such a situation, they will face the Taliban and Northern Alliance without their “national” mask, and rise to fight with these terrorist enemies. Neither the US nor any other power wants to release Afghan people from the fetters of the fundamentalists. Afghanistan’s freedom can be achieved by Afghan people themselves. Relying on one enemy to defeat another is a wrong policy which has just tightened the grip of the Northern Alliance and their masters on the neck of our nation.

---

I don't know why they don't make a "we call on" statement. Maybe that's not part of their rhetorical tradition.

quote:

---

Originally quoted by RosaL:
Instead of defeating Al-Qaeda, Taliban and Gulbuddini terrorists and disarming the Northern Alliance, the foreign troops are creating confusion among the people of the world. We believe that if these troops leave Afghanistan, our people will not feel any kind of vacuum but rather will become more free and come out of their current puzzlement and doubts. In such a situation, they will face the Taliban and Northern Alliance without their “national” mask, and rise to fight with these terrorist enemies. Neither the US nor any other power wants to release Afghan people from the fetters of the fundamentalists. Afghanistan’s freedom can be achieved by Afghan people themselves. Relying on one enemy to defeat another is a wrong policy which has just tightened the grip of the Northern Alliance and their masters on the neck of our nation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by M. Spector:
RosaL, where is that quote taken from? It's not the Justin Podur interview.

---

The US and Her Fundamentalist Stooges are the Main Human Rights Violators in Afghanistan

Interesting how "Mariam's" response to Podur's question was in part a verbatim quote from the document you quoted.

From the interview (bolding added by me):

quote:

---

RAWA has announced a number of times that neither the US nor any other power wants to release Afghan people from the fetters of the fundamentalists. Afghanistan's freedom can be achieved by Afghan people themselves. Relying on one enemy to defeat another is a wrong policy which has just tightened the grip of the Northern Alliance and their masters on the neck of our nation.

---

quote:

---

Neither the US nor any other power wants to release Afghan people from the fetters of the fundamentalists. Afghanistan’s freedom can be achieved by Afghan people themselves. Relying on one enemy to defeat another is a wrong policy which has just tightened the grip of the Northern Alliance and their masters on the neck of our nation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by M. Spector:
Frankly, it doesn't make any difference to me whether RAWA calls explicitly for NATO withdrawal or not.

---

Does it matter, then, whether or not they support the insurgency?

Do they support the insurgency?

I understand that our position is withdrawal, irrespective of what RAWA says. That's not the issue I'm raising. I really am not sure what they do in Afghanistan, what their platform is, where they're active - and I think that in an occupied country, one of the first questions anyone would ask is: Which side are you on?

I can't imagine (for example) a Palestinian organization being ambiguous about the Occupation. They may not all mean it, but they all have to pay lip service. Likewise in Iraq.

Anyway, the thread is about RAWA, so I was wondering whether anyone really knew anything about what they do.

See, here's what they said on International Women's Day, 2002:

quote:

---

We look upon the US military campaign in Afghanistan not as an aggression against Afghanistan or a war on the Afghan people, or as an aggression against Islam or the Muslims but as a fracas between patron and ex-protégés. In contradistinction to some mealy-mouthed, colluding women's organisations, the total obliteration not only of the Taliban and their al-Qaeda props but also of the criminal Jehadis is a top RAWA political priority.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
I understand that our position is withdrawal, irrespective of what RAWA says. That's not the issue I'm raising. I really am not sure what they do in Afghanistan, what their platform is, where they're active - and I think that in an occupied country, one of the first questions anyone would ask is: Which side are you on?

---

Malalai Joya said Canada should change its policy on Afghanistan and act independently of Ottawa's imperial-master nation, the USA. Alexa McDonough and the NDP seem to be the only party willing to listen to the Afghan parliamentarian, banned for three years for her outspoken remarks.

Women represent somewhere around 51% of any healthy population. The civil war in Afghanistan began as a women's rights movement. Some have said it was the first of its kind in relatively recent history. How the U.S. destroyed progressive secular forces in Afghanistan

eta: I think RAWA does many things for women and children in Afghanistan. They also see themselves simply as witnesses to the crimes perpetrated against women, children, men, and how reports of U.S.-NATO democratization of their country are a complete sham. Indigenous people in various countries have taken it upon themselves to record the damage done to their cultures and surroundings in general by outside aggressors and war. Some Afghan women have taken to suicide as the ultimate protest.

[ 14 August 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

In conditions when -even with the presence of several thousand foreign troops in Kabul- the capital cannot be deemed a safe and secure place, there is no alternative to the deployment of an effective UN security force across the country to ensure secure conditions for the convocation of a Loya Jirga and, more importantly, countrywide suffrage. Despite all the criticism that is being levied against the UN modus operandi, RAWA much prefers the presence of UN troop to the unleashing of Jihadi psychopaths on the Afghan population. Such UN troops should not, however, comprise troops from countries who have hitherto aided and abetted fundamentalists and brutal warlords, e.g. Turkey, which has been a prime supporter of the criminal Dostum.

---

[ 14 August 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

If we could turn back time and the damage done by the US with its support for the mujahideen, we might have gotten somewhere. However, the secularists in the 1970s were just as murderously factional as the mujahideen, which is why the Soviets ended up intervening (in fact, they intervened with good intentions, little realizing that the Americans were already busy stirring the pot with massive aid to the Islamic rebellion).

Here is an interview where she apparently called upon Canada to withdraw its troops (no direct quote here) and act independently of the U.S.:

quote:

---

Canada must pull its troops out of Afghanistan and no longer support a government full of "warlords, drug lords and criminals" if it wants to aid in rebuilding the stricken nation and avoid another 9/11, says a controversial Afghan politician.

"(Canada) must act independently and not follow the policy of the United States," says Malalai Joya, 29, a firebrand currently on a nationwide speaking tour that brings her to Toronto tomorrow night.

Canadian soldiers fighting the Taliban are unwittingly promoting U.S. foreign policy, which is propping up a corrupt government, says Joya, who has garnered a legion of fans for her advocacy work on women's rights. "This policy is a mockery of democracy and a mockery of the war on terror," the youngest member of the Afghan parliament says during a telephone interview from Vancouver.

Despite the likelihood that Afghanistan will collapse into civil war if foreign troops leave, she says their presence is making the country more unstable and will fuel "another Sept. 11."

---

From her website, originally reprinted from Toronto Star article of Nov. 5, 2007.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ceti:
(in fact, they intervened with good intentions, little realizing that the Americans were already busy stirring the pot with massive aid to the Islamic rebellion).

---

Good comments, ceti. Yes, Zbignew Brzezinski admitted to aiding Gulbeddin Hekmatyar and others a full six months before the Soviets "invaded" Afghanistan.

Hekmatyar and others were busy assassinating Islamist-Marxists born of university life in Kabul even earlier, in the 1970's.

The CIA admitted to aiding and abetting Afghan drug barons as soon as the PDPA declared a ban on opium. The Soviet-backed government's plan to redistribute land and educate women obviously weren't on theocratic-feudalists' to-do lists.

[ 14 August 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

Excerpt:

quote:

---

[Joya:]Not merely Karzai, but also all these war lords have been sustained in power by the USA. That is why, when there are demonstrations against war lords, there are also demonstrations against foreign troops. People here believe that the warlords are cushioned by the US troops. If the USA leaves, the warlords will lose power because they have no base among our people. The people of Afghanistan will deal with these warlords once US troops leave Afghanistan.

Q: Don’t you think the security situation will get even worse once troops pack off?

Joya: Maybe. But tell the people in Sweden that Swedish troops are helping implement US agenda in Afghanistan. The democracy-loving people of Sweden should rather support democratic forces in Afghanistan and instead of sending soldiers; Sweden should send doctors, nurses, teachers and build schools and hospitals.

---

No kidding!

"Sweden should send doctors, nurses, teachers and build schools and hospitals."