Connect with us

Features

Afghanistan:Broken promises, burning nation

Published

on

Afghan refugees

Afghanistan remains on a knife-edge. Looming famine, widespread malnutrition, and the forced repatriation of refugees are signs not of a nation in crisis — but one already collapsed, hollowed out to its core. What we witness now is the brutal depth to which a country can fall when gutted by decades of foreign intervention and abandoned in its ruins. In the arid camps near the Iran–Afghanistan border, thousands of Afghans — mostly women and children — queue not just for bread, but for the return bus to a country ravaged by the West and its yesteryear darling boys — extremist factions it nurtured during the Soviet invasion of the 1980s. Since early June, almost 450,000 Afghans have been repatriated from Iran.

Iran has discovered, with alarming clarity, that some among the flood of Afghan refugees were not innocent victims of Taliban rule, but clandestine agents — spies, informants, operatives — aligned with foreign intelligence services. Tehran’s recent internal assessments suggest that these “refugees” played a significant role in intelligence collection that aided the decapitation strike conducted by Israel during the 12-day war — a conflict so sharp, so surgical, that it dismantled the upper echelons of Iran’s military leadership. Some of Iran’s most decorated commanders, long feared for their reach in the Shi’ite axis, were eliminated in what now appears to have been a masterclass in pre-emptive warfare.

This is no accident of modern conflict. It is the outcome of an intelligence matrix decades in the making. And while the dust of that brief war is still settling over Gaza and Tehran, across the Mediterranean one can already hear the humming of American-funded military construction projects in Israel. One does not need clairvoyance to see the writing on the wall: the United States and Israel are preparing, not for “possible contingencies”, but for the final war — against Iran. Whether it will unfold in six months or before 2029, its inevitability now seems axiomatic. The American empire, battered by the blunders of its interventions, is not retreating — it is refocusing.

It is no hyperbole to say that Iran is teetering on the brink of collapse. With its regional ambitions bloodied and internal fractures widening, the regime faces a perilous trilemma: strike first and pre-emptively test a nuclear weapon; open negotiations that will be seen as capitulation; or allow the centre to collapse into a Hobbesian morass of tribal, ethnic and ideological warlords. The ghosts of Syria and Libya beckon. And it is not improbable — if not entirely likely — that the Islamic Republic will stumble into the same abyss.

But it is to Afghanistan that we must return, for it is the starkest embodiment of Western hubris and geopolitical cruelty — a nation devastated not only by extremist violence but by the far more insidious and enduring destruction wrought by the United States. Over two decades, Washington’s relentless drone campaigns, black-site renditions and proxy wars annihilated communities and dismantled civil society under the guise of “nation-building.” The 2021 cynical withdrawal was no triumphant exit but a chaotic abdication, leaving behind a shredded country — over 240,000 dead, millions displaced, and a social order torn to pieces. President Reagan once welcomed Afghan jihadists into the White House as “freedom fighters”, while Zbigniew Brzezinski proudly admitted in 1998, “We didn’t push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.” This cold calculus of manipulation and betrayal inflicted damage on Afghanistan deeper than any extremist group, making the US not just a foreign invader but the principal architect of the nation’s catastrophic unraveling. As a result, Afghans are starving, and their women and children are subjugated under draconian Sharia law — all while Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize and now Trump is busy tailoring his own suit for the same honour. Are we not long overdue for a conscience to reject this century-old bully?

Where democracy once stood, theocracy returned. Child marriage is now resurgent under Taliban rule. For instance, this week, a 45-year-old man in Helmand married a six-year-old girl, but the Taliban, adhering to their own codes, forbade him from taking her home until she turns nine. Girls are denied education beyond primary school. Women are barred from parks, gyms, universities — erased from public life with a bureaucratic efficiency that chills the soul. In a recent report, UNICEF estimated that more than 80% of Afghan girls are now out of school, a number that would have been unimaginable during even the darkest years of the Taliban’s first rule. And yet, this is the “stability” some regional powers now seek to legitimise.

Russia’s recent decision to formally recognise the Taliban government is neither noble nor necessary — it is a calculated geopolitical gambit. “The new authorities in Kabul are a reality,” proclaimed Sergey Lavrov — yet this “reality” includes Haibatullah Akhundzada and Abdul Hakim Haqqani, both pinned by ICC warrants for gender persecution. The farce lies not in Moscow’s blunt pragmatism, but in the ICC’s selective zeal: united in punishing the powerless, yet devoid of courage when the accused is powerful.

Benjamin Netanyahu, under ICC scrutiny for war crimes in Gaza, yet breezed into the White House just this week, greeted by an American administration that praised him as a cornerstone in regional stability. As Thucydides observed, “The strong do what they can; the weak suffer what they must.”

Afghanistan today stands as both a metaphor for the West’s failed imperial vision and a testing ground for future experiments led by self-proclaimed guardians of the “Global South”.

In other words, the profound tragedy of Afghanistan lies not solely in the retreat of Western influence, but in the manner by which the country has become a focal point for emerging geopolitical forces, each pursuing their own strategic interests under the banner of a shifting world order. The much-discussed notion of “multipolarity” increasingly reveals itself less as a path to balance and more as a terrain of transactional pragmatism. Where the United States once established drone bases, new actors invest in natural resources. Where former alliances shaped conflict lines, new diplomatic overtures seek footholds in an uncertain landscape. The promise of democracy, once championed as the nation’s future, has given way to an uncertain present with diminished prospects.

And amid all this, the Afghan people — the real victims, not the regimes — are forgotten. They are trafficked, starved, silenced. Their pain is co-opted into geopolitical scorecards. Their exile is treated as a statistical inconvenience. Iran turns them away. Pakistan bombs their borderlands. Europe offers token visas to a lucky few. America forgets them entirely. What remains, then, is a question no policymaker dares to answer: Is this what liberation looks like? Is this the sum total of $2.3 trillion spent, 20 years of occupation, and a whole generation raised on promises of democracy and progress?

Afghanistan’s tragic arc exposes the profound moral failure of those who claimed to save it. From the covert intelligence operations that fostered future extremists in the 1980s to today’s cynical realpolitik — marked by selective recognitions and shifting alliances — the Afghan crisis transcends its borders. It stands as a stark indictment of global power, reminding us all that history’s judgment will be neither lenient nor forgetful. Nor should it be.

by Nilantha Ilangamuwa ✍️



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

US’ drastic aid cut to UN poses moral challenge to world

Published

on

An UN humanitarian mission in the Gaza. [File: Ashraf Amra/Anadolu Agency]

‘Adapt, shrink or die’ – thus runs the warning issued by the Trump administration to UN humanitarian agencies with brute insensitivity in the wake of its recent decision to drastically reduce to $2bn its humanitarian aid to the UN system. This is a substantial climb down from the $17bn the US usually provided to the UN for its humanitarian operations.

Considering that the US has hitherto been the UN’s biggest aid provider, it need hardly be said that the US decision would pose a daunting challenge to the UN’s humanitarian operations around the world. This would indeed mean that, among other things, people living in poverty and stifling material hardships, in particularly the Southern hemisphere, could dramatically increase. Coming on top of the US decision to bring to an end USAID operations, the poor of the world could be said to have been left to their devices as a consequence of these morally insensitive policy rethinks of the Trump administration.

Earlier, the UN had warned that it would be compelled to reduce its aid programs in the face of ‘the deepest funding cuts ever.’ In fact the UN is on record as requesting the world for $23bn for its 2026 aid operations.

If this UN appeal happens to go unheeded, the possibilities are that the UN would not be in a position to uphold the status it has hitherto held as the world’s foremost humanitarian aid provider. It would not be incorrect to state that a substantial part of the rationale for the UN’s existence could come in for questioning if its humanitarian identity is thus eroded.

Inherent in these developments is a challenge for those sections of the international community that wish to stand up and be counted as humanists and the ‘Conscience of the World.’ A responsibility is cast on them to not only keep the UN system going but to also ensure its increased efficiency as a humanitarian aid provider to particularly the poorest of the poor.

It is unfortunate that the US is increasingly opting for a position of international isolation. Such a policy position was adopted by it in the decades leading to World War Two and the consequences for the world as a result for this policy posture were most disquieting. For instance, it opened the door to the flourishing of dictatorial regimes in the West, such as that led by Adolph Hitler in Germany, which nearly paved the way for the subjugation of a good part of Europe by the Nazis.

If the US had not intervened militarily in the war on the side of the Allies, the West would have faced the distressing prospect of coming under the sway of the Nazis and as a result earned indefinite political and military repression. By entering World War Two the US helped to ward off these bleak outcomes and indeed helped the major democracies of Western Europe to hold their own and thrive against fascism and dictatorial rule.

Republican administrations in the US in particular have not proved the greatest defenders of democratic rule the world over, but by helping to keep the international power balance in favour of democracy and fundamental human rights they could keep under a tight leash fascism and linked anti-democratic forces even in contemporary times. Russia’s invasion and continued occupation of parts of Ukraine reminds us starkly that the democracy versus fascism battle is far from over.

Right now, the US needs to remain on the side of the rest of the West very firmly, lest fascism enjoys another unfettered lease of life through the absence of countervailing and substantial military and political power.

However, by reducing its financial support for the UN and backing away from sustaining its humanitarian programs the world over the US could be laying the ground work for an aggravation of poverty in the South in particular and its accompaniments, such as, political repression, runaway social discontent and anarchy.

What should not go unnoticed by the US is the fact that peace and social stability in the South and the flourishing of the same conditions in the global North are symbiotically linked, although not so apparent at first blush. For instance, if illegal migration from the South to the US is a major problem for the US today, it is because poor countries are not receiving development assistance from the UN system to the required degree. Such deprivation on the part of the South leads to aggravating social discontent in the latter and consequences such as illegal migratory movements from South to North.

Accordingly, it will be in the North’s best interests to ensure that the South is not deprived of sustained development assistance since the latter is an essential condition for social contentment and stable governance, which factors in turn would guard against the emergence of phenomena such as illegal migration.

Meanwhile, democratic sections of the rest of the world in particular need to consider it a matter of conscience to ensure the sustenance and flourishing of the UN system. To be sure, the UN system is considerably flawed but at present it could be called the most equitable and fair among international development organizations and the most far-flung one. Without it world poverty would have proved unmanageable along with the ills that come along with it.

Dehumanizing poverty is an indictment on humanity. It stands to reason that the world community should rally round the UN and ensure its survival lest the abomination which is poverty flourishes. In this undertaking the world needs to stand united. Ambiguities on this score could be self-defeating for the world community.

For example, all groupings of countries that could demonstrate economic muscle need to figure prominently in this initiative. One such grouping is BRICS. Inasmuch as the US and the West should shrug aside Realpolitik considerations in this enterprise, the same goes for organizations such as BRICS.

The arrival at the above international consensus would be greatly facilitated by stepped up dialogue among states on the continued importance of the UN system. Fresh efforts to speed-up UN reform would prove major catalysts in bringing about these positive changes as well. Also requiring to be shunned is the blind pursuit of narrow national interests.

Continue Reading

Features

Egg white scene …

Published

on

Hi! Great to be back after my Christmas break.

Thought of starting this week with egg white.

Yes, eggs are brimming with nutrients beneficial for your overall health and wellness, but did you know that eggs, especially the whites, are excellent for your complexion?

OK, if you have no idea about how to use egg whites for your face, read on.

Egg White, Lemon, Honey:

Separate the yolk from the egg white and add about a teaspoon of freshly squeezed lemon juice and about one and a half teaspoons of organic honey. Whisk all the ingredients together until they are mixed well.

Apply this mixture to your face and allow it to rest for about 15 minutes before cleansing your face with a gentle face wash.

Don’t forget to apply your favourite moisturiser, after using this face mask, to help seal in all the goodness.

Egg White, Avocado:

In a clean mixing bowl, start by mashing the avocado, until it turns into a soft, lump-free paste, and then add the whites of one egg, a teaspoon of yoghurt and mix everything together until it looks like a creamy paste.

Apply this mixture all over your face and neck area, and leave it on for about 20 to 30 minutes before washing it off with cold water and a gentle face wash.

Egg White, Cucumber, Yoghurt:

In a bowl, add one egg white, one teaspoon each of yoghurt, fresh cucumber juice and organic honey. Mix all the ingredients together until it forms a thick paste.

Apply this paste all over your face and neck area and leave it on for at least 20 minutes and then gently rinse off this face mask with lukewarm water and immediately follow it up with a gentle and nourishing moisturiser.

Egg White, Aloe Vera, Castor Oil:

To the egg white, add about a teaspoon each of aloe vera gel and castor oil and then mix all the ingredients together and apply it all over your face and neck area in a thin, even layer.

Leave it on for about 20 minutes and wash it off with a gentle face wash and some cold water. Follow it up with your favourite moisturiser.

Continue Reading

Features

Confusion cropping up with Ne-Yo in the spotlight

Published

on

Ne-Yo: His management should clarify the last-minute cancellation

Superlatives galore were used, especially on social media, to highlight R&B singer Ne-Yo’s trip to Sri Lanka: Global superstar Ne-Yo to perform live in Colombo this December; Ne-Yo concert puts Sri Lanka back on the global entertainment map; A global music sensation is coming to Sri Lanka … and there were lots more!

At an official press conference, held at a five-star venue, in Colombo, it was indicated that the gathering marked a defining moment for Sri Lanka’s entertainment industry as international R&B powerhouse and three-time Grammy Award winner Ne-Yo prepares to take the stage in Colombo this December.

What’s more, the occasion was graced by the presence of Sunil Kumara Gamage, Minister of Sports & Youth Affairs of Sri Lanka, and Professor Ruwan Ranasinghe, Deputy Minister of Tourism, alongside distinguished dignitaries, sponsors, and members of the media.

Shah Rukh Khan: Disappointed his fans in Sri Lanka

According to reports, the concert had received the official endorsement of the Sri Lanka Tourism Promotion Bureau, recognising it as a flagship initiative in developing the country’s concert economy by attracting fans, and media, from all over South Asia.

Nick Carter: His concert, too, was cancelled due to “Unforeseen circumstances

However, I had that strange feeling that this concert would not become a reality, keeping in mind what happened to Nick Carter’s Colombo concert – cancelled at the very last moment.

Carter issued a video message announcing he had to return to the USA due to “unforeseen circumstances” and a “family emergency”.

Though “unforeseen circumstances” was the official reason provided by Carter and the local organisers, there was speculation that low ticket sales may also have been a factor in the cancellation.

Well, “Unforeseen Circumstances” has cropped up again!

In a brief statement, via social media, the organisers of the Ne-Yo concert said the decision was taken due to “unforeseen circumstances and factors beyond their control.”

Ne-Yo, too, subsequently made an announcement, citing “Unforeseen circumstances.”

The public has a right to know what these “unforeseen circumstances” are, and who is to be blamed – the organisers or Ne-Yo!

Ne-Yo’s management certainly need to come out with the truth.

However, those who are aware of some of the happenings in the setup here put it down to poor ticket sales, mentioning that the tickets for the concert, and a meet-and-greet event, were exorbitantly high, considering that Ne-Yo is not a current mega star.

We also had a cancellation coming our way from Shah Rukh Khan, who was scheduled to visit Sri Lanka for the City of Dreams resort launch, and then this was received: “Unfortunately due to unforeseen personal reasons beyond his control, Mr. Khan is no longer able to attend.”

Referring to this kind of mess up, a leading showbiz personality said that it will only make people reluctant to buy their tickets, online.

“Tickets will go mostly at the gate and it will be very bad for the industry,” he added.

Continue Reading

Trending