U.S. President Joe Biden, in a speech reflecting on his foreign policy legacy, defended the decision to withdraw troops from Afghanistan, stating it allowed his administration to focus on “more immediate challenges.”
Biden emphasized that rival powers like Russia and China were pleased to see the U.S. entangled in Afghanistan and said, “Nothing made our adversaries happier than seeing us stuck there for another decade.”
He reiterated that ending the war was the right decision and expressed confidence that history would validate his choice to withdraw U.S. forces.
Biden noted that he is the first U.S. president in two decades to not pass the Afghanistan war to his successor. He also highlighted that the mission’s goals, such as eliminating Osama bin Laden, were achieved.
According to Biden, al-Qaeda no longer poses a primary threat from Afghanistan, and there is no justification for a significant U.S. military presence in the region. He dismissed concerns that withdrawal would harm alliances or enable terrorist groups to threaten the U.S.
Republicans have criticized the withdrawal, arguing it damaged the U.S.’s credibility as a reliable ally and emboldened Russia and China. They claim the chaotic exit gave Putin the confidence to launch his invasion of Ukraine.
Biden refuted these claims, asserting that the U.S. continues to address global security threats effectively, as demonstrated by the killing of al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri in Kabul in 2022.
Despite Biden’s confidence in his decision, critics highlight the resurgence of terrorist groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. The UN Security Council has reported their reorganization and growing presence in the region, raising concerns about future threats.
The debate over the Afghanistan withdrawal underscores the broader challenges of U.S. foreign policy, balancing military disengagement with ensuring stability and combating terrorism. The unfolding situation in Afghanistan will continue to test these strategies.
Joe Biden: China and Russia wanted the US stuck in Afghanistan
The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), continuing its response to the detention of Mahdi Ansari, has called on the Taliban to drop all charges against the journalist and release him from prison.
In a statement released late Monday, January 13, the IFJ condemned the Taliban’s Supreme Court order sentencing Mahdi Ansari to 18 months in prison.
Mahdi Ansari, who was arrested on October 5, 2024, in the Dasht-e-Barchi area in western Kabul, was sentenced to 18 months in prison by the Taliban court.
The International Federation of Journalists stated that the accused Mahdi Ansari of collaborating with media outlets outside Afghanistan and conducting propaganda against the government.
The organization expressed concern over the “continued detention and harassment of journalists by the Taliban” and urged the Taliban administration to put an end to these actions against Afghanistan’s journalists.
Last week, the Afghanistan Journalists Center also reacted to the Taliban court’s ruling, calling the arrest of Mahdi Ansari and the charges of anti-regime propaganda against him “illegal and against the principles of freedom of expression.”
The Taliban has not yet responded to the reactions of journalist-supporting organizations regarding Mahdi Ansari’s detention. However, the Afghanistan Independent Journalists Union (AIJU) announced that efforts to reduce Ansari’s sentence in the next court hearing are ongoing.
The detention of Mahdi Ansari raises broader concerns about the shrinking space for press freedom in Afghanistan. Continued suppression of journalists undermines fundamental rights and limits the ability of the media to report freely and impartially.
International organizations and press advocacy groups must amplify their efforts to pressure the Taliban to uphold international norms on press freedom. Collective action is essential to protect Afghanistan’s journalists and ensure their safety in a challenging environment.
IFJ urges immediate release of Afghan journalist Mahdi Ansari
The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) states that $279.7 million is required to provide health assistance in Afghanistan.
On Tuesday, January 14, OCHA announced through a message on its X platform that health assistance is planned to reach approximately 9.3 million people.
According to the organization, it is estimated that around 14.3 million people across Afghanistan will require healthcare services this year.
The report highlights that 53% of those in need of health assistance are women, while the rest include children and individuals with disabilities.
The United Nations has consistently expressed concern over the worsening healthcare situation in Afghanistan, especially in remote areas of the country.
Meanwhile, the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) in Afghanistan announced on Tuesday, January 14, that the Japanese government has donated $1.5 million to address the needs of Afghan mothers, children, youth, and reproductive and mental health services.
According to the UNFPA report, this contribution will provide healthcare services to approximately 60,000 women, girls, and children.
Previously, OCHA also stated that in 2025, 22.9 million people in Afghanistan will require humanitarian assistance, and an estimated $2.24 billion will be needed to address their needs.
The ongoing challenges in Afghanistan underscore the urgent need for continued international support to prevent a complete healthcare collapse. The lack of sufficient funding and resources directly impacts vulnerable populations, particularly women and children, who make up a significant portion of those in need.
Strengthening global partnerships and ensuring consistent aid delivery can help mitigate the worsening humanitarian crisis. Collaborative efforts, such as Japan’s recent contribution, highlight the potential for impactful change when nations come together to support those in need.
UN requests $ 279 million for health services in Afghanistan
The ministry also reported that over the past two weeks, more than 200 Afghan families have returned to Afghanistan from Pakistan.
The Ministry of Refugees and Repatriations has announced plans to hold a trilateral meeting with Pakistan and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to address the situation of Afghan refugees in Pakistan.
The ministry also reported that over the past two weeks, more than 200 Afghan families have returned to Afghanistan from Pakistan.
Abdul Mutalib Haqqani, the spokesperson for the Ministry of Refugees and Repatriations, said about the trilateral meeting: “It has been agreed that a trilateral meeting will be held between the Islamic Emirate, Pakistan, and UNHCR, but the exact date has not yet been determined.”
With the worsening of relations between Kabul and Islamabad, Pakistan has intensified pressure on Afghan refugees. Over the past 14 days, incidents of deportation, arrests, and mistreatment of Afghan refugees in Pakistan have increased.
At the same time, the Ministry of Refugees and Repatriations reported a meeting between officials from the Islamic Emirate’s embassy in Pakistan, including the embassy’s refugee affairs attaché, and the Chief of Police in Islamabad. According to a statement from the ministry, the challenges faced by Afghan refugees in Pakistan were discussed during this meeting.
Ehsanullah Ahmadzai, a refugee rights activist, told TOLOnews: “The governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan must jointly establish a mechanism to address these issues so that the problems faced by Afghan refugees in Pakistan can be resolved quickly.”
On the other hand, some Afghan refugees in Pakistan have complained about the ongoing deportation and arrests of refugees in the country.
Nasir Bayat, an Afghan refugee in Pakistan, told TOLOnews: “My request to the government of Pakistan is this: You hosted us for forty years, and now, in these difficult circumstances that we are facing, please do not expel us from here.”
Waheeda Ghulami, another Afghan refugee in Pakistan, said: “Afghans in Pakistan are facing difficulties due to the non-renewal of their visas. This lack of visa renewals leads to forced deportations by the Pakistani police. We urge the United Nations and human rights organizations to address this issue.”
Following increased tensions and clashes between Pakistan and the Islamic Emirate, Pakistan has accelerated the expulsion of Afghan refugees from the country since the beginning of January.
Pakistan, Afghanistan, and UNHCR to Hold Talks on Afghan Refugees
Biden added that the United States has maintained its capability to manage Afghanistan remotely over the past three years.
Joe Biden, the President of the United States, said in his final speech as president on Monday (January 13) that Afghanistan has not been a safe haven for terrorists or a threat to the US since the withdrawal of American forces.
In his speech, the US president also mentioned that Washington has been able to manage Afghanistan remotely.
Speaking about the nature of threats from Afghanistan, he said: “When we got Bin Laden during the Obama-Biden administration, the primary objective of war had been accomplished. And I believe that going forward, the primary threat of al-Qaeda would no longer be emanating from Afghanistan, but from elsewhere. And so we do not need to station a sizable number of American forces in Afghanistan.”
Biden further added that contrary to assumptions, Afghanistan did not become a safe haven for terrorists after the US withdrawal, and the United States has maintained its capability to manage Afghanistan remotely over the past three years.
“Remember, critics said if we ended the war, it would damage our alliances and create threats to our homeland from foreign-directed terrorism out of a safe haven in Afghanistan. Neither has occurred. Neither has occurred. Our alliance has stayed strong. We’ve used our over-the-horizon capabilities to strike in Afghanistan and elsewhere when we had to,” Biden said.
The US president also referred to the withdrawal from Afghanistan as one of his administration’s significant achievements, saying that there was no justification for the extensive US military presence in Afghanistan.
Amanullah Hotaki, a political analyst, commented on Biden’s remarks, saying:
“Over the past four years, Biden has frequently spoken about Afghanistan and often made contradictory statements. Afghanistan was not a safe haven for terrorists in the past, it is not now, and it will not be in the future.”
This comes as a new administration in the United States is set to take office in less than a week. Previously, Afghanistan’s caretaker government had also called on the incoming US administration to reconsider its policies toward Afghanistan.
Biden: Afghanistan No Longer Poses a Threat to the US
Chief national security correspondent Alex Marquardt denied that his report about security contractor Zachary Young was a “hit piece.”
CNN chief national security correspondent Alex Marquardt told a Florida jury Monday that he never had any ill intent while reporting a 2021 story that featured security contractor Zachary Young.
Young sued the network in 2022, arguing that he was defamed by Marquardt’s report, which focused on private contractors who were charging large amounts of money to evacuate Afghans from the country after the Taliban regained control. Young was shown charging tens of thousands of dollars to evacuate Afghans who faced possible death, paid by corporations such as Bloomberg LP and Audible. A defamation trial in Young’s case against CNN began last week in Panama City, Florida. If the jury finds for Young, the network could be on the hook for millions of dollars.
“I wasn’t going after him. I never was going after him,” Marquardt testified.
“It was not a hit piece. I don’t do hit pieces,” he said. “Good reporters shouldn’t. I like to think of myself as that, and I didn’t do a hit piece.”
Under intense questioning from Devin “Velvel” Freedman, Young’s lawyer, Marquardt defended his reporting.
“I reported the facts. I reported what I found,” Marquardt said. “Everything in there was factual, accurate and, I believe, fair.”
“You needed a bad guy for your scandal story,” Freedman said later in the morning. “You hated him, did you not?”
“No, that’s not true,” Marquardt replied.
Young’s legal team is attempting to convince a jury that Marquardt was negligent in his reporting out of a desire to harm Young, who told the jury last week that both his business as a security contractor and his personal life was harshly affected by CNN’s segment.
The trial is, in some ways, a referendum on the act of reporting — specifically, television news reporting. Freedman argued that Marquardt was seeking out dirt on Young; the journalist said he was simply pursuing leads on a story of significant public interest.
The jury on Monday watched behind-the-scenes footage of Marquardt calling Young. After his initial call, the cameras recorded Marquardt standing over his phone as if he were making another call; the lawyer referred to it as a “fake phone call,” but the journalist said it was a standard production practice to take additional photos and video.
“I appreciate that you’re trying to paint this as some sort of scandal,” Marquardt told Freedman.
And when the lawyer accused Marquardt of participating in “theater” by referring to Young as a “character” in an internal message, he responded that “this is the lingo that we use in television news — the people who appear in stories are called ‘characters.’ Certainly I was not engaging in ‘theater.’”
At another point in Marquardt’s testimony, Freedman accused him of “profiting on war and refugees [his] entire career” because of his decades of experience reporting on conflicts around the world.
Still, the lawyer presented evidence to the jury that he argued was proof that Marquardt was angling to hurt Young. “We gonna nail this Zachary Young [expletive],” the journalist said in a message to an editor about a week before the segment aired on CNN. “Gonna hold you to that one, cowboy,” the editor responded.
Young’s team has also shown jurors messages in which CNN employees refer to Young as a “s—bag” with a “punchable face.” “It’s your funeral, bucko,” Marquardt said in one message.
“From what I had seen in his communications with a lot of people, I could tell that there were some unsavory traits,” Marquardt said when asked to explain his messages.
The jury is expected to begin deliberations on a verdictas soon as Thursday. If the jury finds CNN guilty of defamation, jurors could also choose to award Young punitive damages, typically a much larger amount.
To meet the standard for punitive damages, Young will have to prove that CNN intended to harm him and knew what it was reporting was false.
CNN reporter defends Afghanistan story that led to defamation lawsuit
Afghanistan’s mineral resources harbour great untapped potential. The country sits on an estimated 2.2 billion tonnes of iron ore, 60 million tonnes of copper, 183 million tonnes of aluminium, and vast reserves of rare earth elements such as lanthanum, cerium and neodymium. In a world where access to these minerals is a matter of national security, there is a geopolitical race to secure control of critical mineral supply chains. While China currently leads, the US, EU, and others are seeking to establish and secure independent mineral supply chains.
Afghanistan is one of the theatres in which this race is being played out. The country’s resources are not just a matter of foreign economic interest – they are a potential for domestic economic development and growth. But they can also become a source for conflict and repression, depending on whether they are managed with the long-term welfare of the Afghan people in mind. The mining sector in Afghanistan is controlled by the Taliban, and it is unclear where the revenues end up.
Undermined
The new Taliban de facto authorities sought to capitalize on Afghanistan’s mineral resources after their return to power in 2021. Since then, they have awarded at least 205 mining contracts to more than 150 companies, and in September 2023 they announced new mining deals worth more than US$6.5 billion. In May 2024, the Taliban-controlled Ministry of Mines and Petroleum (MoMP) said that the group had secured investments worth more than US$7 billion from China, Qatar, Turkey, Iran and the UK. The details of these contracts remain undisclosed.
The Taliban inherited many of the Republic-era challenges in the country’s extractives sector, particularly the lack of a comprehensive regulatory framework and an effective oversight body. According to the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, these challenges also include the country’s inability to reform mineral policies and regulations, corruption, unregulated artisanal and small-scale mining, and lack of infrastructure and security. The Taliban are navigating through outdated institutional structures, making changes along the way, while working on a complete overhaul of the extractives policy.
Although the MoMP claims to have taken steps to curb illegal mining, these measures lack a formalized structure with independent oversight. Workers can be subjected to exploitation in mining operations, including child labour. In addition, unregulated mining is often carried out in unsafe working conditions and can cause serious environmental damage.
Afghanistan’s suspension from the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative in June 2024 points to the problems around transparency and accountability mechanisms in the country’s extractives sector. Failure to follow clearly defined mining regulations prevents the equitable distribution of the country’s mineral wealth. With limited transparency around international mining contracts, the international community should consider the risks these pose for Afghanistan’s mineral sector, ranging from exploitation to monopolization by foreign actors.
Geopolitical relevance
Afghanistan’s reserves of copper and lithium, among other minerals, are crucial to the global shift towards renewable energy and reliance on digital technologies. China has shown a keen interest in securing access to Afghanistan’s resources and has invested heavily in its mining industry, signing multi-billion-dollar contracts for projects such as the Mes Aynak copper mine, one of the largest copper deposits in the world.
The investment is not only driven to secure critical minerals, but also by Chinese strategic considerations linked to its Belt and Road Initiative designed to enhance the country’s global influence and project its power. Taking advantage of the power vacuum created by the collapse of the previous government and the US withdrawal, China is becoming a valuable partner to the Taliban. China’s contracts and investments in Afghanistan’s mining sector are a sign of how it is seeking primacy in the region, which could deter other international actors from entering the sector. Afghanistan’s economic future could become increasingly tied to Chinese interests, reducing the country’s bargaining power and making it more difficult to establish trade relations with other countries.
Although China is leading the race, other countries, including Russia, are jockeying for access to critical minerals. The recent visit to Kabul by Sergei Shoigu, secretary of Russia’s National Security Council and former defence minister, sends a clear signal to the G7+ countries about which bloc has the most influence in the country.
An opportunity not to be missed
For Afghanistan to truly benefit from its resources, there needs to be a multilateral approach to mining, involving different international actors to ensure transparency and fair competition. Investment in Afghanistan’s mining sector could help develop the country’s infrastructure, creating roads, railways and facilities that would benefit the economy and enable resource extraction. This could provide jobs and strengthen capacities of Afghan workers, as well as a more stable revenue stream for the country.
The UN-led engagement with the Taliban in Doha is a potential opportunity to shed light on the sector and strategize on how the extractives sector could improve the economic situation for Afghans. The talks are designed to help Afghanistan integrate into the global community, with a focus on fostering dialogue between the Taliban and international stakeholders. So far, however, the process has yielded little other than a commitment by all countries to continue such discussions and the appearance of the Taliban on the international stage. While discussions have touched on security and political stability, the issue of natural resource management, particularly mineral extraction, has not been addressed. As natural resources play a central role in financing the Taliban, shaping power dynamics and post-conflict rehabilitation, linking resource management to social and economic development seems a potential area of mutual interest.
As the country navigates an uncertain path forward, its mineral resources should be treated as key elements in a broader strategy for stability, ensuring that resource wealth benefits all Afghans. If critical economic assets such as minerals are ignored in ongoing engagement strategies, they can become a force driving conflict or obstructing post-conflict rehabilitation. If left unaddressed, this pattern risks being replicated in Afghanistan. The country’s resources need to be more than just assets buried in the ground – they need to be an active part of the dialogue about Afghanistan’s future.
Why is Afghanistan part of the great extractives race?
Pakistan’s restive western border and Delhi’s outreach invited comment and analysis in the country’s press Aakash Joshi
Afghanistan, once seen by the Pakistani military and intelligence establishment as an instrument of its “strategic depth” against India, has become an albatross around Rawalpindi’s neck. For long, it propped up the Taliban in the hope of a proxy regime in Kabul.
The recent cross-border attacks by Pakistan – ostensibly to target the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan’s (TTP) infrastructure – in which civilians, including women and children, were killed show just how far ties have soured. The Taliban regime in Kabul reportedly responded to the strikes as well.
ADVERTISEMENT
In this context, the meeting between Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri and Amir Khan Muttaqi, acting foreign minister of the Taliban regime, has invited both comment and concern. Beijing, too, seems to be trying to open avenues with Kabul.
Dawn, in its editorial on January 11, writes, “The Indians have reacted cautiously with the Taliban, but matters are proceeding nonetheless. The Taliban also maintain significant links with China and Russia.”
“These developments,” the editorial argues, “should concern Pakistan, and make its policymakers revisit their Afghan strategy. The stark fact is that while the Afghan Taliban may be difficult customers, Pakistan cannot afford a hostile neighbour to its west.” It suggests a practical engagement with the Taliban, including the leaders in Kandahar, from where the “real power flows.”
ADVERTISEMENT
“The Taliban are welcome to keep the TTP, as long as they pose no harm to Pakistan,” Dawn says, and concludes, “As others are making diplomatic inroads with the Afghan Taliban, including unfriendly governments, Pakistan must reassess and readjust its strategy.”
Shazia Anwar Cheema, writing in The Express Tribune on January 10, writes, “We [Pakistan] used to blame (former Afghanistan president) Ashraf Ghani for being a stooge of New Delhi… while the Afghanistan Taliban had been called ‘brothers and friends’.” She argues that the situation seems to have reversed now and that Washington and New Delhi are acting in concert to make their presence felt in Kabul.
If this scenario is indeed coming to pass, argues Dr Cheema, Pakistan must act. “The reports of Pakistan’s first-ever friendly contact with the so-called Northern Alliance, which is made up of non-Pashtun Afghans can be a step towards this. Pakistan has been blamed for the fall of Panjshir Valley and its handover to the Afghan Taliban as well.”
Najm us Saqib, a senior Pakistani diplomat, takes a broader view of his country’s external orientation in an opinion article for The Nation: “The recent wave of terrorism—Afghanistan’s adamant stance on the Khawaraj (TTP) and the like; Washington’s total neglect of its erstwhile ‘strategic’ partner’s economic and security concerns; the region’s volatile predicament, particularly in the face of the ongoing Middle East crisis; and the West’s overall policy of leaving Afghanistan to its own devices—paints a grim picture for Pakistan.”
His argument, in essence, is that Pakistan now seemingly lacks a foreign policy and the country’s economic woes make matters worse. Unfortunately, “The economic crunch and the ongoing political uncertainty do not leave the present government with many options. Crisis management—as opposed to conflict resolution—seems to be the order of the day.”
aakash.joshi@expressindia.com
View from Pakistan: Discomfort over India’s meeting with Afghan Taliban
Dr. Stern is a research professor at Boston University and an author of “ISIS: The State of Terror.”
The New York Times
On New Year’s Day, a confused, disgruntled and indebted veteran drove into a crowd of joyful celebrants in New Orleans, killing 14 and injuring 35 more. The assailant said shortly before the attack that he had joined the Islamic State, the brutal terrorist movement that at one point controlled an area in the Middle East the size of Britain.
In its heyday, ISIS marketed itself as offering what one fighter called a “five-star jihad,” promising recruits a paradoxical mix of religious authenticity and material rewards, from free housing to a glamorous new identity to access to wives. At its height, it was the wealthiest terrorist organization in modern history.
Today, while the ISIS caliphate is gone, the group has cells and affiliates scattered across Africa, Southeast Asia, Afghanistan and Syria. It maintains an active online presence and is still a threat: With the fall of the Assad regime in Syria, the authorities are concerned about a potential resurgence by ISIS there, while an offshoot in Afghanistan, ISIS-K, claimed responsibility for a significant attack last year in Russia and is believed to be behind another in Iran.
But the twisted heart of the utopia ISIS was trying to build, and all that it claimed to offer, no longer exists. So why would the group’s extreme ideology — rejected by the overwhelming majority of the world’s Muslims — appeal to a down-on-his-luck American veteran five years after the caliphate’s fall?
For 20 years, I’ve been studying Western recruits to domestic and transnational terrorist organizations. I’ve interviewed jihadis, white-nationalist terrorists and eco-terrorists to understand their motivations and to prevent future violence. In my view, the appeal of some of the most crucial elements that ISIS offered to vulnerable or confused Western recruits — doctrinal certainty, identity, redemption and revenge — is as strong as ever and will continue to resonate with people who can find it online.
Most of us, as adults, live in a state of spiritual confusion and uncertainty. We rarely get to choose between good and evil but often face a frustrating choice between actions that lead to marginally better or worse consequences. Rewards for good behavior are often ephemeral, and punishment for bad decisions is mostly of our own making.
To some, ISIS offered a seductive alternative: moral certitude, backed by brutal enforcement. From 2013 to 2019, an estimated 53,000 fighters from 80 countries traveled to ISIS-held territories in Syria and Iraq to be a part of what the group sold as an idealized Islamic state. An estimated 300 individuals from the United States either made their way to ISIS-held territory or tried to. Some foreign fighters became notorious for perpetrating the caliphate’s worst atrocities.
For sympathizers unable to make the journey, the chief spokesman for ISIS,’ Abu Muhammad al-Adnani, called for supporters around the world to attack nonbelievers at home. In a September 2014 speech, Mr. al-Adnani said that if you were unable to bomb or shoot the enemy disbeliever, you should “smash his head with a rock, or slaughter him with a knife, or run him over with your car.” ISIS sympathizers began undertaking such vehicle attacks, including a truck assault in Nice, France, in 2016 that killed 86 people and injured 450. It was followed by many others.
In the last few hours before his suicidal rampage in New Orleans, the attacker, Shamsud-Din Jabbar, posted about his plans on Facebook. Perhaps the most telling recording was his confession that he had considered harming his family. “I don’t want you to think I spared you willingly,” he said. But Mr. Jabbar apparently worried that if he hurt only his family, news headlines might not focus on the “war between the believers and disbelievers” that he thought was taking place.
In my work, I have found that self-recruited, lone-actor terrorists are often motivated at least as much by personal grievance as their claimed ideals. In one recent study, many former violent extremists said that underlying social and emotional distress was as strong a factor in their radicalization as intellectual or religious adherence to extremist ideologies. Most reported having a history of mental health problems, such as depression, and suicidal ideation was common.
Obviously, most people experiencing a mental health crisis do not become lone-actor terrorists. But there is often so much distress in individuals carrying out attacks on their own that it is reasonable, in my view, to think of lone-actor terrorism as a crime of despair.
There is no single pathway into violent extremism, but many of the risk factors I’ve observed in my research seem to apply to Mr. Jabbar. He was a veteran who appeared to be having difficulty adjusting back to civilian life. He had been divorced for the third time. He had run-ins with the law. He may have been deeply distressed over his financial burdens. Revenge against his family — and a world that had disappointed him — appears to have been a significant part of his underlying motivation, with his allegiance to ISIS providing a perverse spiritual gloss.
The persistent appeal of ISIS in America was evident in a disturbing series of alleged plots in the last year alone: the arrest of an Afghan in Oklahoma accused of conspiring to commit an attack on Election Day; the arrest of an Arizona teenager accused of planning an attack on a Pride parade using a remote-controlled drone armed with explosives; the indictment of a Houston man on charges of attempting to provide material support to ISIS; and the arrest of an Idaho teenager accused of plotting to attack churches on behalf of ISIS. In December, the F.B.I., the National Counterterrorism Center and Department of Homeland Security warned law enforcement that pro-ISIS messages were calling for attacks at large holiday gatherings, pointing out the previous use of vehicles to ram victims.
Years after its zenith, ISIS has demonstrated remarkable adaptability. As an organization, it may yet grow stronger. After its territorial defeat in 2019, stated U.S. military strategy shifted its focus from counterterrorism in the Middle East toward nation-state adversaries, notably China and Russia. But the underlying conditions that first enabled ISIS’ rise in the region persist: Weak states, unstable governments, large populations of underemployed youth, and religious and ethnic conflicts all continue to create fertile ground for extremism.
No single solution exists for preventing terrorist attacks. But actions can be taken to reduce their impact, as well as their frequency. For cases like New Orleans, prevention is critical.
Perpetrators of targeted violence often “leak” their intentions ahead of time to family, friends, social media and even to the authorities, creating the opportunity for communities to step in to help people who are at risk. One approach to preventing violence like the attack in New Orleans builds on public health models that aim to reduce the rates of suicide, domestic violence and drunken driving. For it to prevent terrorist attacks, the authorities have to educate the public about the importance of bystander reporting and “off ramps” from violent radicalization.
The New Orleans attack serves as a grim reminder that the ISIS digital caliphate is still able to transform personal crises into public tragedy. The alarming reality is that many other people remain vulnerable to similar paths of radicalization.
It was a normal summer morning in July last year when 19-year-old Samira* made her way to the carpet-weaving shop where she worked in Kabul to pick up her wages. She had no way of knowing that in just a few hours, her life as she knew it would be over.
She would end the day in a Taliban police station, a victim of forced marriage with her entire future decided for her by a group of strangers with guns.
That morning, as she waited alone outside her employer’s shop to collect her salary while he ate his lunch, the Taliban’s “morality police” were on patrol nearby.
“I had to wait because the workshop was an hour’s walk from home,” she says. “The shop was near a main road. Unluckily, I was sitting right outside the door when the Taliban passed by and suddenly noticed me.”
The Taliban officials roam the streets enforcing the Islamic fundamentalists’ strict interpretation of sharia religious law, such as bans on women speaking or showing their faces outside their homes or travelling without a male relative. They can make decisions about people’s lives and liberties on the spot, say human rights activists, including forcing them to marry.
Under Taliban rule, girls aged over 12 are not allowed to attend school, so carpet-weaving is one of the few areas where women and girls deprived of education can still work.
More than 20 women and young girls along with Samira worked for the carpet-weaving business, located in the basement of an unfinished building in a poverty-stricken neighbourhood. They earned about 7,000 Afghanis (£80) a month.
That day, Samira says, she was “frozen with fear” as they approached her. “They asked, ‘Who is this man [her employer] to you? Why are you alone? What are you doing here? How can you allow such a thing? What are you doing with a man who isn’t your relative?’”
The Taliban officers arrested Samira and Mohammad*, 42, on charges of an immoral relationship and contacted both of their families.
Weaving carpets is one of the few forms of work still open to women and girls. Photograph: Atif Aryan/Stockimo/Alamy
“No matter how many questions they asked, I had no answers because they kept insulting me with hurtful words and curses. They pushed us into their car and took us to the police station.”
Samira says that out of fear, she did not give the Taliban her father’s phone number, so her sister Yasmin* and her sister’s husband came to the police station instead.
The video player is currently playing an ad.
Fearing for the teenager’s safety and worried she might be imprisoned, they told the Taliban that Samira and Mohammad were engaged. Mohammad’s family, who were also frightened, said the same thing.
Without any further investigation, the Taliban forced Samira to marry her employer, a man who already had a wife and two children. His eldest son is the same age as Samira.
The marriage was officiated at the station that same day by the Taliban police, who have been given the authority to perform marriage rites since the Islamists’ takeover in 2021. The only witnesses from their respective families were Samira’s sister and brother-in-law, and Mohammad’s father.
Shaharzad Akbar, director of the Afghan human rights organisation Rawadari, says Samira’s story is not uncommon, but many women remain fearful of coming forward to share their story.
“[In the minds of the ‘morality police’] they have to do something when they find a man and a woman together,” she says. “Women are not supposed to be working with men and so this forced marriage is their solution.
“The Taliban police’s power to marry two people is not something that is clear in law. Taliban officials feel entitled to make decisions about people’s lives and liberties and there are no consequences – they are coming up with rules on the spot,” says Akbar.
After the marriage ceremony, the Taliban took them both to Mohammad’s house, but Samira’s nightmare did not end there.
When her father, uncle and older brothers learned what had happened, they broke into Mohammad’s house with sticks, shovels and other tools and beat Samira. Samira does not even remember which of her relatives hit her with the shovel. The marks from the wounds on her forehead are still visible six months later, she says.
Yasmin says she had intended to take Samira home before her father had arrived and had to tell Samira she could not now return home. Her father told her: “My honour is gone. How can I face the neighbours and the community?”
Yasmin tried to persuade her father but to no avail. “I apologised repeatedly, telling him that Samira hadn’t done anything wrong and that it was a misunderstanding. I asked him to let her come back now that the Taliban were gone, but no one would listen, not even my mother.
“Because of one word [engaged], my sister’s life was ruined,” she says.
Women arrested by Taliban for begging report rape and killings in Afghan jails
Before being barred from school, Samira says she had dreams of becoming an engineer, despite the mockery of her brothers, who told her: “What does a girl have to do with becoming an engineer? When you grow up, your father will find you a husband.”
Samira, who remains living with Mohammad and his first wife, says she is now struggling with depression and that the only place where she is allowed to go is her sister Yasmin’s house. Neither her father nor her mother will speak to her. She says the men in her family are “no different from the Taliban”.
“Without knowing the full story, without even asking me why I had gone to the factory’s office at that time of day, they feel entitled to call me a prostitute, just like the Taliban did, and enforce the marriage between Mohammad and me.”
As well as frequent reports of the forced marriage of girls and women, Rawadari says 1,202 men and women have been subjected to cruel punishments, including public execution, since the Taliban’s takeover in 2021.
A spokesperson for the Taliban said: “This claim is incorrect. No organisation or individual can force any sister into marriage. So far, this matter has not been brought to our attention, but if it is, it will definitely be investigated. Such a claim is not true.”
However, Richard Bennett, UN special rapporteur on human rights in Afghanistan, said there had been a worsening trend of forced and child marriages in Afghanistan, despite a Taliban order in December 2021 that banned forced marriages.
“Many Afghans have informed me that forced and child marriages still occur widely with impunity, including with Taliban members, especially in rural and remote areas.
“The ban on girls’ education above grade 6 increases exposure of girls to abuse, including early marriage. These marriages often lead to more suffering for women and girls, including marital rape, abuse, forced pregnancy and forced labour.”
* Names have been changed to protect their identities
The Taliban made me marry my boss: how one word led to a forced marriage
The United Nations says aid workers are still in a “race against time” to remove rubble and rebuild after the devastating earthquake struck eastern Afghanistan last month, killing at least 2,200 people and cutting off remote areas.
The 6.0-magnitude quake on Aug. 31 was shallow, destroying or causing extensive damage to low-rise buildings in the mountainous region. It hit late at night, and homes — mostly made of mud, wood, or rocks — collapsed instantly, becoming death traps.
Satellite data shows that about 40,500 truckloads of debris still needs to be cleared from affected areas in several provinces, the United Nations Development Program said Wednesday. Entire communities have been upended and families are sleeping in the open, it added.
The quake’s epicenter was in remote and rugged Kunar province, challenging rescue and relief efforts by the Taliban government and humanitarian groups. Authorities deployed helicopters or airdropped army commandos to evacuate survivors. Aid workers walked for hours on foot to reach isolated communities.
“This is a race against time,” said Devanand Ramiah, from the UNDP’s Crisis Bureau. “Debris removal and reconstruction operations must start safely and swiftly.”
People’s main demands were the reconstruction of houses and water supplies, according to a spokesman for a Taliban government committee tasked with helping survivors, Zia ur Rahman Speenghar.
People were getting assistance in cash, food, tents, beds, and other necessities, Speenghar said Thursday. Three new roads were under construction in the Dewagal Valley, and roads would be built to areas where there previously were none.
“Various countries and organizations have offered assistance in the construction of houses but that takes time. After the second round of assistance, work will begin on the third round, which is considering what kind of houses can be built here,” the spokesman said.
Afghanistan is facing a “perfect storm” of crises, including natural disasters like the recent earthquake, said Roza Otunbayeva, who leads the U.N. mission to the country.
Afghanistan Peace Campaign
