Taleban hang up Kalashnikovs to pen war memoirs

KABUL: Since trading the battlefield for Afghanistan's halls of power, some Taleban members have also swapped their weapons for pens to tell their version of the 20-year conflict with Western forces, who they accuse of distorting 'reality'. A flood of books has been written, mostly from a Western perspective, about the war between the US-led forces that invaded Afghanistan in the wake of the September 11 attacks until the Taleban's return to power in 2021.
But in the years since, a proliferation of writings by Taleban figures - praising their exploits and the achievements of the 'Islamic Emirate' - is now the reigning narrative in Afghanistan. 'No matter what foreigners have written... they have largely ignored the reality of what happened to us and why we were forced to fight,' author Khalid Zadran told AFP. A member of the Haqqani network - long viewed as one of the most dangerous militant factions in Afghanistan - he now serves as the spokesman for the capital's police force.
In his 600-page tome in Pashto published in April, he recounts US incursions in his home province of Khost, his childhood steeped in stories of soldiers' 'atrocities', and his desire to join the Taleban in the name of his country's 'freedom'. 'I witnessed horrific stories every day - mangled bodies on the roadside,' he writes in '15 Minutes', a title inspired by a US drone strike he narrowly escaped. Muhajer Farahi, now a deputy information and culture minister, penned his 'Memories of Jihad: 20 Years in Occupation' to 'state the facts', he said.
'America, contrary to its claims, has committed cruel and barbaric acts, destroyed our country with bombs, destroyed infrastructure, and has sown discord and cynicism between nations and tribes,' he told AFP from his office in central Kabul. Little attention is paid in either book to the thousands of civilians killed in Taleban attacks - many of them suicide bombings that entrenched fear across the country for nearly two decades. Farahi insists the Taleban 'were cautious in saving civilians and innocent' lives, while criticizing fellow Afghans who collaborated with the pro-Western police as a 'stain' on the country.
Rights groups accuse the current Taleban authorities of widespread abuses - particularly against women and girls, who the United Nations say are victims of what amounts to 'gender apartheid'. In his book published in 2023, Farahi claims the Taleban attempted to negotiate - in vain, he insists - with the United States over the fate of Osama bin Laden, whose capture or death Washington demanded after his plane hijackers killed around 3,000 people in the September 11, 2001 attacks. Bin Laden, the leader of Al-Qaeda, who had been based in Afghanistan, was killed by US forces in Pakistan in 2011.
American 'bloodthirsty dragon'
'It was clear... that the Americans had already planned the occupation of Afghanistan,' writes Farahi in the English version of his book, which has been translated into five languages. In the wake of the September 11 attacks, Afghans thought it would 'have nothing to do with our country', he continues, but soon realized that Afghanistan would face 'punishment'. For 20 years, the war pitted Taleban militants against a US-led coalition of 38 countries supporting the Afghan Republic and its forces.
Tens of thousands of Afghans died in the fighting and in Taleban attacks, as did nearly 6,000 foreign soldiers, including 2,400 Americans. For Farahi, the war reflects the West's desire to 'impose its culture and ideology on other nations'. His disjointed journal mixes battlefield memories with polemical chapters railing against the American 'bloodthirsty dragon'. The book 'reveals the truths that were not told before because the media, especially the Western media, presented a different picture of the war,' he said. According to him, the Mujahideen, or holy warriors, despite being far less equipped, were able to rely on their unity and God's aid to achieve victory.
New front
Only a few of the new wave of Taleban books have been autobiographies, which appeal to an audience seeking to understand the war 'from the inside', according to Zadran. His book, initially 2,000 copies in Pashto, sold out quickly and another 1,000 are in the works - along with a Dari-language version, he said. Many chapters mention Bowe Bergdahl, the US soldier held hostage for five years by the Haqqani network.
He recounts treks through the mountains along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border to move him between hideouts, efforts to convert him to Islam and conversations about his girlfriend back in the US. Both accounts end in 2021, before the transformation of the fighters who moved from remote mountain hideouts to the carpeted offices of the capital. There, their battle has turned diplomatic: The Taleban are now fighting for international recognition of their government. 'The war is over now,' Farahi said, 'and we want good relations with everyone' - even with the 'bloodthirsty dragon'. — AFP

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Kuwait Times

13 hours ago

• Kuwait Times

Ankara slams Zionist assaults, UNRWA to open office in Turkey

ISTANBUL: The United Nations' Palestinian refugee agency UNRWA will open an office in Ankara, President Tayyip Erdogan said on Saturday, urging Muslim countries to give the agency more support after the Zionist entity banned it. Turkey has called the Zionist entity's assault on Gaza genocide and its move to ban UNRWA a violation of international law, particularly amid worsening humanitarian conditions in Gaza, which has been reduced to rubble with millions displaced. Addressing foreign ministers of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation in Istanbul, Erdogan said opening an Ankara UNRWA office would deepen Turkey's support for the agency. 'We must not allow UNRWA, which plays an irreplaceable role in terms of taking care of Palestinian refugees, to be paralyzed by (the Zionist entity). We expect our organization and each member state to provide financial and moral support to UNRWA to thwart (the Zionist entity's) games,' Erdogan said. A Turkish diplomatic source said Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan and UNRWA chief Philippe Lazzarini were expected to sign an accord on the sidelines of the OIC meeting in Istanbul on establishing the office. Turkey has given UNRWA $10 million a year between 2023 and 2025. In 2024, it also transferred $2 million and sent another $3 million from its AFAD disaster management authority. Fidan on Saturday accused the Zionist entity of leading the Middle East towards 'total disaster' by attacking Iran on June 13. Iran and Zionist entity have been at war for nine days after the Zionist entity, claiming the Islamic Republic was on the brink of acquiring a nuclear weapon, launched a massive wave of strikes on its archrival, triggering an immediate response from Tehran. '(The Zionist entity) is now leading the region to the brink of total disaster by attacking Iran, our neighbor,' Fidan told a meeting of top diplomats of the OIC. 'There is no Palestinian, Lebanese, Syrian, Yemeni or Iranian problem but there is clearly a (Zionist) problem,' he said. He called for an end to the 'unlimited aggression' against Iran. 'We must prevent the situation from deteriorating into a spiral of violence that would further jeopardize regional and global security,' he added. Speaking after Fidan, Erdogan accused Western leaders of providing 'unconditional support' to the Zionist entity. A trenchant critic of the Zionist entity's actions in both Gaza and Iran, Erdogan called for 'high-level peace talks' between Tehran and the United States, according to his office, adding that Turkey was ready to play a 'facilitator' role to help bring an end to the war. Erdogan, who met Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi on the sidelines of Saturday's meeting, said Turkey would not allow borders in the Middle East to be redrawn 'in blood'. 'It is vital for us to show more solidarity to end (the Zionist entity's) banditry — not only in Palestine but also in Syria, in Lebanon and in Iran,' he told the OIC's 57 member countries. The OIC, founded in 1969, says its mission is to 'safeguard and protect the interests of the Muslim world in the spirit of promoting international peace and harmony'. According to Qatar's foreign ministry, Araghchi also met the Gulf state's top diplomat in Istanbul, who said he was working to bring the sides 'back to the path of dialogue'. – Agencies

Kuwait Times

17 hours ago

• Kuwait Times

US strikes on Iran nuclear sites are real-life test of hard power's limits

North Korea-style race for bomb is one possible scenario VIENNA: US military strikes overnight in which President Donald Trump said Iran's main nuclear sites were 'obliterated' will put to the test the widely held view that such attacks can delay a nuclear program but not kill a determined push for atom bombs. As Iran's nuclear program has expanded and become more sophisticated over the past two decades, many officials and nuclear experts have warned: You can destroy or disable a nuclear program's physical infrastructure but it is very hard or impossible to eliminate the knowledge a country has acquired. Western powers including the United States have publicly suggested as much, complaining of the 'irreversible knowledge gain' Iran has made by carrying out activities they object to. 'Military strikes alone cannot destroy Iran's extensive nuclear knowledge,' the Washington-based Arms Control Association said in a statement after the US strikes with massive bunker-busting bombs on sites including Iran's two main underground enrichment plants at Natanz and Fordow. 'The strikes will set Iran's program back, but at the cost of strengthening Tehran's resolve to reconstitute its sensitive nuclear activities, possibly prompting it to consider withdrawing from the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and possibly proceeding to weaponization.' Zionist entity has also said it has killed Iranian nuclear scientists but, while little is known about the personnel side of Iran's nuclear program, officials have said they are sceptical about that having a serious impact on Iran's nuclear knowledge, even if it might slow progress in the near term. The West says there is no civilian justification for Iran's enrichment of uranium to near weapons-grade fissile purity. Iran says its nuclear objectives are solely peaceful and it has the right to enrich as much as it wants. Iran's nuclear program has made rapid advances since Trump pulled the United States out of a 2015 nuclear deal between Tehran and major powers that placed strict limits on its atomic activities in exchange for sanctions relief. After the US withdrawal in 2018 and the re-imposition of US sanctions, Iran pushed past and then far beyond the limits imposed by the deal on items like the purity to which it can enrich uranium and how much it can stockpile. At least until Zionist entity's first strikes against its enrichment installations on June 13, Iran was refining uranium to up to 60 percent purity, a short step from the roughly 90 percent that is bomb-grade, and far higher than the 3.67 percent cap imposed by the 2015 deal, which Iran respected until the year after Trump pulled out. The last report on May 31 by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN nuclear watchdog that inspects Iran's nuclear facilities, showed Iran had enough uranium enriched to up to 60 percent, if enriched further, for nine nuclear weapons, according to an IAEA yardstick. It has more at lower levels like 20 percent and 5 percent. The exact impact of Zionist and US strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities and materials has yet to be determined. In addition to the enrichment sites, the US struck Isfahan, where officials have said much of Iran's most highly enriched uranium stock was stored underground. One important open question is how much highly enriched uranium Iran still has and whether it is all accounted for. A senior Iranian source told Reuters on Sunday most of the highly enriched uranium at Fordow, the site producing the bulk of Iran's uranium refined to up to 60 percent, had been moved to an undisclosed location before the US attack there. Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi told state TV last weekend Iran would take measures to protect nuclear materials and equipment that would not be reported to the IAEA, and it would no longer cooperate with the IAEA as before. The IAEA has not been able to carry out inspections in Iran since the first Zionist airstrikes nine days ago, but has said it is in contact with the Iranian authorities. What Iran will do next in terms of its nuclear program is also unclear. Its threat to pull out of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty hints at a race for nuclear weapons, but Iran has maintained it has no intention of doing so. The only other country to announce its withdrawal from the NPT is North Korea in 2003. It expelled IAEA inspectors and went on to test nuclear weapons. 'Our biggest concern is that we end up with a North Korea scenario whereby these strikes convince the Iranians that the only way to save the regime is to go for the bomb. Nobody is bombing North Korea now, are they?' a European official said. Even if inspections continue, because of Trump's withdrawal in 2018 Iran had already scrapped extra IAEA oversight provided for by the 2015 deal. That means the agency no longer knows how many centrifuges Iran has at undeclared locations. The IAEA says that while it cannot guarantee Iran's aims are entirely peaceful, it also has no credible indication of a coordinated nuclear weapons program. The Zionist and now US strikes have already raised fears among diplomats and other officials, however, that Iran will use those centrifuges to set up a secret enrichment site, since one could be built inside a relatively small and inconspicuous building like a warehouse. 'It is quite possible that there are enrichment sites that we don't know about. Iran is a big country,' a Western official said, while adding that Iran could also choose to bide its time. 'In two years, if Iran were to start from scratch, they would only need a few months to reconstitute a new program and to get back to where they were yesterday.' — Reuters

Arab Times

20 hours ago

• Arab Times

What else will happen to Iran?

THE saying 'East is East and West is West, and never the twain shall meet' once held true in ancient times, but today, with advances in communication and technology, it has become outdated. Yet, this mindset still influences Eastern elites, contributing to the ambiguous relationship between the West, Europe, and the Middle East. There is a long history of negotiations between Middle Eastern countries and the West and Europe, often ending in favor of the latter. Consequently, talks between the United States, Iran, and Europe frequently reveal ambiguity surrounding Iran's stance, especially on critical existential issues like the nuclear program. Iranian negotiators often rely on a culture of ambiguity, manipulation of terminology, and postponement of decisions under the guise of further study. On the other hand, a clear and direct response is the best way to resolve difficult issues that could otherwise cause more hardship for the people. Questions persist about Iran's intentions to acquire a nuclear weapon, and why it enriches uranium to levels far beyond what is needed for peaceful nuclear activities, levels dangerously close to those required for producing a nuclear bomb. This question is not only raised by the West and the United States but also by Iran's friends and neighbors. Because the answers are unconvincing, ambiguity has become a core element of the issue. Even after the 2015 nuclear agreement was signed, Tehran failed to reassure the other parties involved. Consequently, the world witnessed that as soon as Washington withdrew from the agreement in 2018, Tehran rapidly increased its uranium enrichment to higher levels, threatening global peace and bringing Iran closer to possessing a nuclear bomb. Allowing inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) access to Iran's nuclear reactors was insufficient, and surveillance cameras proved ineffective, as many nuclear facilities were undisclosed. This situation fueled doubts and suspicions that the Tehran regime has yet to dispel. Furthermore, a mere religious fatwa forbidding the possession and use of nuclear weapons is not enough to reassure the international community, especially since such fatwas can be quickly revoked or amended, as recent reports circulating from Iran indicate. It is true that some countries have possessed nuclear weapons but have not used them, except for the United States, which dropped nuclear bombs on Japan in 1945 and has since come to understand the horrific consequences of their use. Moreover, the world does not tolerate any country being subjected to an existential threat, especially when that country already exists, is internationally recognized, and enjoys the support of many Western and international nations, namely, Israel. Therefore, when former US President Trump stated that 'Iran is raising the slogan of annihilating Israel and the United States,' it represents a serious threat to Western consciousness that cannot be dismissed or minimized as mere rhetoric for domestic audiences. This issue has placed the current Iranian regime in a critical position and has become a major obstacle to any solution that could reassure the international community. This explains the muted international response to the US bombing of Iranian nuclear sites. Tehran still looks to the example of isolated North Korea, which possesses nuclear weapons, yet the world collectively agrees to prevent their use, due to North Korea's limited capabilities on one hand, and the reluctance of its own allies to permit the use of nuclear weapons on the other. All of this stems from an Eastern culture of ambiguity, whereas what is truly needed is clarity in positions. Some may argue that Israel practices strategic ambiguity regarding its possession of weapons of mass destruction. However, this policy cannot be justified. Tel Aviv fully understands that any attempt to use nuclear weapons would provoke global condemnation, especially from the United States, which would be the first to punish Israel for crossing the red lines set by Washington and the West. Ultimately, Israel is a functioning state that cannot make unilateral decisions without consulting its allies, and those who are perceptive will understand this reality.