What looked difficult some years ago, just probable after the beginning of the withdrawal of the NATO forces from Afghanistan and inevitable in the last few months has finally happened: The Taliban, so far notorious as an ultra-conservative and fundamentalist Islamic terrorist organisation with medieval mindset and scant respect for universal values, has finally taken control of Afghanistan (15th August 2021) after a lapse of 20 years, putting an end to democracy and rule of law in that country.&nbsp;

The only element of surprise is the swift manner in which the Taliban walked into Kabul without having to face any meaningful resistance from the President Ashraf Ghani’s Afghan Government and Afghan Army; the flip side of the story is that Kabul was spared of the bloodshed witnessed in some other parts of Afghanistan for which President Ghani who was allowed to leave the country is claiming credit.

It is also intriguing that the global players and international community remained a silent spectator and literally did nothing substantial to prevent the takeover of Afghanistan by Taliban.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/womens-rights-will-be-protected-within-islamic-law-says-taliban-in-first-pc-after-kabul-takeover-406606/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

The key objectives of the continued presence and involvement of the US in Afghanistan beyond May 2011 when their arch enemy Osama Bin Laden was captured and killed, were manifold : On the one hand the Western powers were keen to strengthen the institutions of democracy and rule of law and build the required infrastructure. On the other hand the US presence was needed to counter the resistance from the Taliban and in this context considerable investments were being made in training and equipping the Afghan armed forces to make them capable of countering the Taliban offensive. .&nbsp;

They have failed for sure in their objective to neutralise Taliban and other terror outfits operating from Afghan soil and Afghan-Pakistan border areas; also the gains made in democratic governance and infusion of liberal thoughts in the Afghan society now face serious threat at the hands of Taliban.&nbsp;

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/will-such-images-of-happy-women-in-afghanistan-be-a-thing-of-the-past-406291">Will such images of happy women in Afghanistan be a thing of the past?</a>

So who is responsible for the latest Afghan debacle? The US or the Afghan government/ army or both or perhaps the entire international community?

Arguably, the US and its allies could not have stayed on in Afghanistan forever. The US is reported to have spent USD 2.6 trillion on military operations and development assistance in Afghanistan. However, the US cannot escape the criticism over the manner in which they abandoned the Afghan ship midstream in the midst of a devastating storm.

The US intention to ultimately withdraw its forces from Afghanistan was made known even during the tenure of the then US President Barack Obama. His successor, President Trump sealed the decision by entering into a formal agreement with the Taliban on 29th February 2020 and setting 31st May 2021 as the day for the final US withdrawal from Afghanistan in return for the assurances that the Taliban would not target the US interests in Afghanistan.&nbsp;

The agreement was signed without the involvement of elected government of Afghanistan but provided for an intra-Afghan negotiations to agree upon the future political roadmap for the country.

Two messages emerged loud and clear from the US-Taliban agreement: One, the US had come to the conclusion that it could not fight a sustained war forever against Taliban and it was in America’s interests to exit Afghanistan after negotiating a deal with Taliban. Two, the US did not care anymore as to what would or could be the outcome of the “intra-Afghan” talks, which were imposed on the duly elected government in Afghanistan.&nbsp;

The Americans also did not consider it necessary to link their withdrawal with progress in peace talks leading to an amicable political resolution.

President Biden who reversed several of the decisions taken by his predecessor Donald Trump, however, chose to adhere to the idea of draw-down from Afghanistan except that he extended the deadline to 11th September, 2021.

He stood indifferent when the Taliban created hurdles in peace talks, did not abandon violence and kept capturing districts after districts and provinces after provinces through violent means. Biden was reportedly vacationing when the Taliban was knocking at the doors of Kabul. He later defended his decision to withdraw from Afghanistan and even held the Afghan leadership for the debacle. He went to the extent of making an erroneous statement that the nation-building in Afghanistan was never a part of the US plans.

Current Scenario

Aware of its poor reputation, the Taliban, in control of most of Afghan territory, is engaged in an exercise of image building to escape international isolation and economic sanctions. On the previous occasion only three countries; Saudi Arabia, UAE and Pakistan; had recognised the Taliban regime. Its spokesperson has made several benign statements to calm the nerves both at home and abroad. All these statements have to be taken with a pinch of salt, considering particularly that the Taliban has made it amply clear that they are in the process of establishing an Islamic State and all human rights will be available within the framework of Sharia. If Taliban’s interpretation of Sharia remains what it was in 1990s, the people of Afghanistan, particularly women and child girls are in for difficult times.

What Next?

The international community failed to prevent the take- over of Afghanistan by the Taliban through the route of bullets rather ballots. The least it can do now is to collectively ensure that the sufferings of the common Afghan people are minimised through humanitarian assistance. In fact the international community must use humanitarian assistance as a leverage to ensure that the Taliban grants human rights to its people in letter and spirit.&nbsp;

Another important issue on the table is the international acceptance or rejection of the Taliban as legitimate government in Afghanistan. Looking at the trend so far, some of the countries such as Pakistan, China and Russia followed by others may selectively accord diplomatic recognition in near future.

Takeaway for India

From India’s Perspective, the Taliban victory is a definite setback to its political, economic and strategic interests in Afghanistan where India invested around $3bn to develop much-required infrastructure, besides capacity building. As a result, India enjoyed close relations with the elected government and enormous goodwill of the Afghan people. Unfortunately, at no point of time, India was in a position to influence the evolving political roadmap of Afghanistan.&nbsp;

The position is worse now.&nbsp;

India is now required to carve some space for itself on a territory that has largely fallen under the influence of its adversaries namely Pakistan and China. Pakistan and Taliban were always in hand-in-glove.&nbsp;

The latter has been reached out by Taliban on more than one occasion, and has several strategic and economic interests including the use of Taliban to counter radical Uighur Muslims, enormous natural resources of Afghanistan which await to be exploited and finally extension of Belt and Road Initiative project. One of the biggest foreign policy challenge for India is to choose between ideology and pragmatism. Needless to add that it is premature to expect any articulation of its position in black and white in immediate future from the Indian government which has rightly adopted a wait-and–watch policy though sooner or later India will have to take a tough call.

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.) 
&nbsp;

What looked difficult some years ago, just probable after the beginning of the withdrawal of the NATO forces from Afghanistan and inevitable in the last few months has finally happened: The Taliban, so far notorious as an ultra-conservative and fundamentalist Islamic terrorist organisation with medieval mindset and scant respect for universal values, has finally taken control of Afghanistan (15th August 2021) after a lapse of 20 years, putting an end to democracy and rule of law in that country.

What looked difficult some years ago, just probable after the beginning of the withdrawal of the NATO forces from Afghanistan and inevitable in the last few months has finally happened: The Taliban, so far notorious as an ultra-conservative and fundamentalist Islamic terrorist organisation with medieval mindset and scant respect for universal values, has finally taken control of Afghanistan (15th August 2021) after a lapse of 20 years, putting an end to democracy and rule of law in that country. The only element of surprise is the swift manner in which the Taliban walked into Kabul without having to face any meaningful resistance from the President Ashraf Ghani’s Afghan Government and Afghan Army; the flip side of the story is that Kabul was spared of the bloodshed witnessed in some other parts of Afghanistan for which President Ghani who was allowed to leave the country is claiming credit. It is also intriguing that the global players and international community remained a silent spectator and literally did nothing substantial to prevent the takeover of Afghanistan by Taliban. × The key objectives of the continued presence and involvement of the US in Afghanistan beyond May 2011 when their arch enemy Osama Bin Laden was captured and killed, were manifold : On the one hand the Western powers were keen to strengthen the institutions of democracy and rule of law and build the required infrastructure. On the other hand the US presence was needed to counter the resistance from the Taliban and in this context considerable investments were being made in training and equipping the Afghan armed forces to make them capable of countering the Taliban offensive. . They have failed for sure in their objective to neutralise Taliban and other terror outfits operating from Afghan soil and Afghan-Pakistan border areas; also the gains made in democratic governance and infusion of liberal thoughts in the Afghan society now face serious threat at the hands of Taliban. Also Read | Will such images of happy women in Afghanistan be a thing of the past? So who is responsible for the latest Afghan debacle? The US or the Afghan government/ army or both or perhaps the entire international community? Arguably, the US and its allies could not have stayed on in Afghanistan forever. The US is reported to have spent USD 2.6 trillion on military operations and development assistance in Afghanistan. However, the US cannot escape the criticism over the manner in which they abandoned the Afghan ship midstream in the midst of a devastating storm. The US intention to ultimately withdraw its forces from Afghanistan was made known even during the tenure of the then US President Barack Obama. His successor, President Trump sealed the decision by entering into a formal agreement with the Taliban on 29th February 2020 and setting 31st May 2021 as the day for the final US withdrawal from Afghanistan in return for the assurances that the Taliban would not target the US interests in Afghanistan. The agreement was signed without the involvement of elected government of Afghanistan but provided for an intra-Afghan negotiations to agree upon the future political roadmap for the country. Two messages emerged loud and clear from the US-Taliban agreement: One, the US had come to the conclusion that it could not fight a sustained war forever against Taliban and it was in America’s interests to exit Afghanistan after negotiating a deal with Taliban. Two, the US did not care anymore as to what would or could be the outcome of the “intra-Afghan” talks, which were imposed on the duly elected government in Afghanistan. The Americans also did not consider it necessary to link their withdrawal with progress in peace talks leading to an amicable political resolution. President Biden who reversed several of the decisions taken by his predecessor Donald Trump, however, chose to adhere to the idea of draw-down from Afghanistan except that he extended the deadline to 11th September, 2021. He stood indifferent when the Taliban created hurdles in peace talks, did not abandon violence and kept capturing districts after districts and provinces after provinces through violent means. Biden was reportedly vacationing when the Taliban was knocking at the doors of Kabul. He later defended his decision to withdraw from Afghanistan and even held the Afghan leadership for the debacle. He went to the extent of making an erroneous statement that the nation-building in Afghanistan was never a part of the US plans. Current Scenario Aware of its poor reputation, the Taliban, in control of most of Afghan territory, is engaged in an exercise of image building to escape international isolation and economic sanctions. On the previous occasion only three countries; Saudi Arabia, UAE and Pakistan; had recognised the Taliban regime. Its spokesperson has made several benign statements to calm the nerves both at home and abroad. All these statements have to be taken with a pinch of salt, considering particularly that the Taliban has made it amply clear that they are in the process of establishing an Islamic State and all human rights will be available within the framework of Sharia. If Taliban’s interpretation of Sharia remains what it was in 1990s, the people of Afghanistan, particularly women and child girls are in for difficult times. What Next? The international community failed to prevent the take- over of Afghanistan by the Taliban through the route of bullets rather ballots. The least it can do now is to collectively ensure that the sufferings of the common Afghan people are minimised through humanitarian assistance. In fact the international community must use humanitarian assistance as a leverage to ensure that the Taliban grants human rights to its people in letter and spirit. Another important issue on the table is the international acceptance or rejection of the Taliban as legitimate government in Afghanistan. Looking at the trend so far, some of the countries such as Pakistan, China and Russia followed by others may selectively accord diplomatic recognition in near future. Takeaway for India From India’s Perspective, the Taliban victory is a definite setback to its political, economic and strategic interests in Afghanistan where India invested around $3bn to develop much-required infrastructure, besides capacity building. As a result, India enjoyed close relations with the elected government and enormous goodwill of the Afghan people. Unfortunately, at no point of time, India was in a position to influence the evolving political roadmap of Afghanistan. The position is worse now. India is now required to carve some space for itself on a territory that has largely fallen under the influence of its adversaries namely Pakistan and China. Pakistan and Taliban were always in hand-in-glove. The latter has been reached out by Taliban on more than one occasion, and has several strategic and economic interests including the use of Taliban to counter radical Uighur Muslims, enormous natural resources of Afghanistan which await to be exploited and finally extension of Belt and Road Initiative project. One of the biggest foreign policy challenge for India is to choose between ideology and pragmatism. Needless to add that it is premature to expect any articulation of its position in black and white in immediate future from the Indian government which has rightly adopted a wait-and–watch policy though sooner or later India will have to take a tough call. (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Opinion | Return of Taliban: What does it mean for India and the world?

The White House on Thursday said that the United States has the ability to keep an eye on any resurgence of al Qaeda in Afghanistan without keeping a military footprint there a day after US&nbsp;President Joe Biden said that he was pulling out U.S. forces after nearly 20 years of war.

"We believe we have the means to keep our eye on any terrorist threats or any sign of al Qaeda's resurgence without having a persistent footprint on the ground," White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters. 
&nbsp;

The White House on Thursday said that the United States has the ability to keep an eye on any resurgence of al Qaeda in Afghanistan without keeping a military footprint there a day after US President Joe Biden said that he was pulling out U.

The White House on Thursday said that the United States has the ability to keep an eye on any resurgence of al Qaeda in Afghanistan without keeping a military footprint there a day after US President Joe Biden said that he was pulling out U.S. forces after nearly 20 years of war. "We believe we have the means to keep our eye on any terrorist threats or any sign of al Qaeda's resurgence without having a persistent footprint on the ground," White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters.

US has ability to keep eye on any resurgence of al Qaeda in Afghanistan: White House

The FBI on Thursday added Hamza bin Laden, son of <a href="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/india-general-elections-2019/masood-azhar-getting-designated-as-global-terrorist-big-win-for-bjp-adityanath-216664&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjw-u-cqZDiAhUM4o8KHVl-B8A4HhAWMAJ6BAgQEAI&amp;usg=AOvVaw235l6kfG98KWXy1Hxseuu-">slain al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden</a> to its Seeking More Information List (SMIL).

This comes after the US had announced a $1 million reward for information on Hamza bin Laden`s whereabouts.

"Hamza bin Laden is wanted for questioning in connection with his membership in the Al Qaeda organisation and his public declarations threatening the security of the United States," the FBI said in a statement.

He has ties to and may be located in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria or Iran and is known to speak Arabic, it added. The US designated Hamza bin Laden as a "global terrorist" in 2017.

In March, the State Department had said that it would offer a reward of $1 million for information on Hamza bin Laden.

Investigators believe that Hamza bin Laden is married to the daughter of al-Qaeda senior leader Abdullah Ahmed Abdullah, aka Abu Muhammad al Masri, who has been indicted for his alleged involvement on August 7, 1998 bombings of the US Embassies in Tanzania and Kenya. It is worth mentioning that Saudi Arabia had earlier revoked Hamza bin Laden`s citizenship.

The FBI on Thursday added Hamza bin Laden, son of slain al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden to its Seeking More Information List (SMIL). This comes after the US had announced a $1 million reward for information on Hamza bin Laden`s whereabouts.

The FBI on Thursday added Hamza bin Laden, son of slain al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden to its Seeking More Information List (SMIL). This comes after the US had announced a $1 million reward for information on Hamza bin Laden`s whereabouts. "Hamza bin Laden is wanted for questioning in connection with his membership in the Al Qaeda organisation and his public declarations threatening the security of the United States," the FBI said in a statement. He has ties to and may be located in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria or Iran and is known to speak Arabic, it added. The US designated Hamza bin Laden as a "global terrorist" in 2017. In March, the State Department had said that it would offer a reward of $1 million for information on Hamza bin Laden. Investigators believe that Hamza bin Laden is married to the daughter of al-Qaeda senior leader Abdullah Ahmed Abdullah, aka Abu Muhammad al Masri, who has been indicted for his alleged involvement on August 7, 1998 bombings of the US Embassies in Tanzania and Kenya. It is worth mentioning that Saudi Arabia had earlier revoked Hamza bin Laden`s citizenship.

FBI adds Osama bin Laden's son to its 'seeking more information list'

The US Department of State's Rewards for Justice Program has increased the reward from US $5 million to up to US $10 million for information leading to the identification, location, arrest, and/or conviction of Qasim al-Rimi who is the terrorist of Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP).

The department is further offering a reward of up to US $5 million for information leading to the identification or location of Khalid Saeed al-Batarfi, a senior regional leader of the AQAP.

Qasim al-Rimi was named the leader of the AQAP in 2015 and has called for renewed attacks against the USA.

The US Department of State designated al-Rimi as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) under Executive Order (EO) 13224 in May 2010, while he had already been listed by Saudi Arabia as a most wanted terrorist suspect on February 3, 2009. He has also been added to the United Nations (UN) 1267 Sanctions Committee's Consolidated List of individuals associated with Al Qaeda/ISIL in May 2010.

Al-Rimi has been charged in numerous terror incidents, including being convicted in Yemen of plotting to assassinate the US Ambassador to Yemen in 2005. He escaped from a Yemeni prison in 2006, after which Al-Rimi has been linked to the September 2008 attack on the US Embassy in Sana'a that left 20 dead, and the December 2009 attempted suicide bombing by "underwear bomber" Umar Farouq Abdulmutallab aboard a US-bound airliner.

The "emir" of AQAP has also praised Omar Mateen, who killed 49 people in the June 2016 mass shooting at a nightclub in Orlando, Florida. He has also instigated 'supporters' living in Western countries to conduct "easy and simple" attacks in a video that was released in May 2017.

Khalid al-Batarfi, on the other hand, is a senior member of AQAP in Yemen's Hadramaut Governorate and a former member of AQAP's shura council.

Born in Saudi Arabia, he fought alongside the Taliban against US forces and the Northern Alliance in 2001. In 2010, al-Batarfi joined AQAP in Yemen, led AQAP fighters in taking over Yemen's Abyan Province, and was named AQAP's emir of Abyan.

He issued a statement warning that the al-Qaeda would destroy the US economy and attack other US interests after a US attack killed a senior leader of AQAP. After the US announced that it would recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, al-Batarfi appeared in an AQAP video in January 2018 threatening the US and Jews.

On January 23, 2018, the US Department of State designated al-Batarfi as an SDGT under E.O. 13224.

The US Department of State's Rewards for Justice Program has increased the reward from US $5 million to up to US $10 million for information leading to the identification, location, arrest, and/or conviction of Qasim al-Rimi who is the terrorist of Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP).

The US Department of State's Rewards for Justice Program has increased the reward from US $5 million to up to US $10 million for information leading to the identification, location, arrest, and/or conviction of Qasim al-Rimi who is the terrorist of Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). The department is further offering a reward of up to US $5 million for information leading to the identification or location of Khalid Saeed al-Batarfi, a senior regional leader of the AQAP. Qasim al-Rimi was named the leader of the AQAP in 2015 and has called for renewed attacks against the USA. The US Department of State designated al-Rimi as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) under Executive Order (EO) 13224 in May 2010, while he had already been listed by Saudi Arabia as a most wanted terrorist suspect on February 3, 2009. He has also been added to the United Nations (UN) 1267 Sanctions Committee's Consolidated List of individuals associated with Al Qaeda/ISIL in May 2010. Al-Rimi has been charged in numerous terror incidents, including being convicted in Yemen of plotting to assassinate the US Ambassador to Yemen in 2005. He escaped from a Yemeni prison in 2006, after which Al-Rimi has been linked to the September 2008 attack on the US Embassy in Sana'a that left 20 dead, and the December 2009 attempted suicide bombing by "underwear bomber" Umar Farouq Abdulmutallab aboard a US-bound airliner. The "emir" of AQAP has also praised Omar Mateen, who killed 49 people in the June 2016 mass shooting at a nightclub in Orlando, Florida. He has also instigated 'supporters' living in Western countries to conduct "easy and simple" attacks in a video that was released in May 2017. Khalid al-Batarfi, on the other hand, is a senior member of AQAP in Yemen's Hadramaut Governorate and a former member of AQAP's shura council. Born in Saudi Arabia, he fought alongside the Taliban against US forces and the Northern Alliance in 2001. In 2010, al-Batarfi joined AQAP in Yemen, led AQAP fighters in taking over Yemen's Abyan Province, and was named AQAP's emir of Abyan. He issued a statement warning that the al-Qaeda would destroy the US economy and attack other US interests after a US attack killed a senior leader of AQAP. After the US announced that it would recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, al-Batarfi appeared in an AQAP video in January 2018 threatening the US and Jews. On January 23, 2018, the US Department of State designated al-Batarfi as an SDGT under E.O. 13224.

US increases bounty to $10 million for information on Al-Qaeda terrorist Qasim al-Rimi

&quot;We reached a point where we are nearly forced to swear we exist. We exist, I swear,&rdquo; quips&nbsp;Yassin al Haj Saleh, a Syrian writer and dissident now living in exile in Turkey. One can&#39;t miss the bitter laugh that he breaks into.

&nbsp;&ldquo;Our struggle is not new. We have been fighting the Assads since two generations. I was arrested as a young man during my university years and I have spent 16 years in jail. We have always refused to be humiliated, to be treated as second-class human beings. And&nbsp;we paid for this. We have been tortured and many of us are forced to live in exile,&rdquo; he goes on.

&nbsp;&ldquo;For the first two years of&nbsp;protests in Syria, we were part of&nbsp;those peaceful demonstrations. We created coordinating committees, it is because of us that people took to the streets. Secular organisations are still present&nbsp;but they have been sidelined by the war.&rdquo;

&nbsp;Yassin is a native of Raqqah, the current capital city of the Islamic State. He is part of the leftwing secular section of the Syrian society who started demonstrating against President Bashar Al Assad in 2011, asking for greater&nbsp;democracy and more freedom. His wife Samira Khalil is also a political dissident and is missing since December 2013&nbsp;when a group of Islamists abducted her along with human right activists Razan Zaitouneh, Wael Hamada and Nazem Hammadi. &ldquo;Samira was my beloved and also my assistant and our destiny, along with the one of our friends, represents the tragedy of being Syrian today and&nbsp;living in a society built on political genocide.&rdquo;&nbsp;

The mainstream narrative seems to have forgotten the role of secular and pro-democracy moderate groups in the Syrian uprising. The narrative is now majorly flattered on the war on terror: sovereign nations on one side and the Islamic State and Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, formerly al-Nusra, the Syrian branch of Al Qaeda on the other. There is no space for liberal, progressive, pro-democracy dissidents who risk&nbsp;being labelled&nbsp;terrorists. &nbsp;&nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
2012 is when the situation started getting militarised in Syria. More and more weapons started arriving&nbsp;on the streets&nbsp;on both&nbsp;sides. The main armed anti-Assad group, the Free Syrian Army where many former military personnel fight, was involved in a fullscale fight against regular troops. It was a civil war, Syrians against Syrians.&nbsp;

In this environment, terrorist organisations started gaining ground. &ldquo;Since August 2011, Syrians asked for international protection&nbsp;but nothing happened. Day by day, people started feeling&nbsp;they were left to their fate. We felt left alone, without any protection,&rdquo; recalls Yassin but &ldquo;nobody wanted to passively suffer another Hama massacre.&rdquo; &nbsp;&nbsp;

He refers to what happened in the city of Hama in 1982. Under the order of then president Hafez Al Assad, the Syrian Army attacked the town to stop an uprising by the Muslim Brotherhood, killing thousands of citizens.&nbsp;

Frustration, mistrust, anger and constant war served as lifeline for hardline Islamists. &ldquo;These organisations are nihilist, they want to destroy everything in the world who is against them. They are a minority, but they have a lot of visibility. It is the dynamic of the production of the &lsquo;desired enemy&rsquo; and it helped the regime and its allies: you need terrorists to justify the war on terror,&rdquo; says Yassin.&nbsp;

The 2013 open intervention of Lebanese Hezbollah forces played an important role and started a new phase of the Syrian crisis&nbsp;which started to be increasingly described as a conflict between Shia countries against Sunni radical groups. &nbsp;

&ldquo;Sectarianism is a strategy of control: it is the old &lsquo;divide and rule&rsquo; colonial principle. It is one of the ways elites used to stay in power,&rdquo; says Yassin. &ldquo;If Kurds do not like Arabs who do not trust Christians who are suspicious of Muslims or Sunnis do not like Shias and so on, a regime becomes the solution instead of the problem. As long as you rely on sectarianism, you can stay in power forever. The war in Syria has nothing to do with primordial identities or religion, the regime just wants power and resources. Their project is to stay in power forever.&rdquo; &nbsp;&nbsp;

Sectarianism in West&nbsp;Asia&#39;s societies is a dangerous element, often used in an opportunistic way to hide political and economic interests. Iran and Saudi Arabia are valuable examples of this strategy. Tehran openly funds Shia paramilitary groups fighting both in Iraq and Syria with the aim of protecting Shiite&nbsp;followers and shrines from Sunni terrorists&nbsp;but this is also a way to expand their regional influence. Saudi Arabia plays the same game and funds Salafi organisations in order to penetrate societies and expand its influence.&nbsp;

&ldquo;When Russia stepped in, an imperialist phase of the war started,&rdquo; says Yassin. &ldquo;We (the leftwing) became invisible, we came to the point that our very existence was a controversial issue,&rdquo; says Yassin. &nbsp;

The US, who armed several anti-Assad groups since the very beginning without taking enough care of who they were, accused Russia of war crimes due to their heavy bombings. The Kremlin replied this is how they fight the terrorists Washington armed. &nbsp;

Five years of conflict have led to&nbsp;more than 4,00,000&nbsp;deaths, 13.5 million refugees, destroyed cities and have seen different countries involved.&nbsp;The Syrian civil war is not about Syria anymore. It has become a power struggle between regional and international actors who are fighting for&nbsp;political hegemony in&nbsp;West&nbsp;Asia.&nbsp;

&ldquo;We the people of Syria live in an impossible situation. We are attacked from every front, we are killed in hundreds of thousands, we are displaced in millions and we are blamed at the same time. We do not even have on our side the concept of sacrifice, of dying for a reason.&rdquo;&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

(WION)

He spent 16 years in jail for opposing Assad's father and is part of the secular left wing which organised the 2011 pro-democracy protests

"We reached a point where we are nearly forced to swear we exist. We exist, I swear,” quips Yassin al Haj Saleh, a Syrian writer and dissident now living in exile in Turkey. One can't miss the bitter laugh that he breaks into. “Our struggle is not new. We have been fighting the Assads since two generations. I was arrested as a young man during my university years and I have spent 16 years in jail. We have always refused to be humiliated, to be treated as second-class human beings. And we paid for this. We have been tortured and many of us are forced to live in exile,” he goes on. “For the first two years of protests in Syria, we were part of those peaceful demonstrations. We created coordinating committees, it is because of us that people took to the streets. Secular organisations are still present but they have been sidelined by the war.” Yassin is a native of Raqqah, the current capital city of the Islamic State. He is part of the leftwing secular section of the Syrian society who started demonstrating against President Bashar Al Assad in 2011, asking for greater democracy and more freedom. His wife Samira Khalil is also a political dissident and is missing since December 2013 when a group of Islamists abducted her along with human right activists Razan Zaitouneh, Wael Hamada and Nazem Hammadi. “Samira was my beloved and also my assistant and our destiny, along with the one of our friends, represents the tragedy of being Syrian today and living in a society built on political genocide.” The mainstream narrative seems to have forgotten the role of secular and pro-democracy moderate groups in the Syrian uprising. The narrative is now majorly flattered on the war on terror: sovereign nations on one side and the Islamic State and Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, formerly al-Nusra, the Syrian branch of Al Qaeda on the other. There is no space for liberal, progressive, pro-democracy dissidents who risk being labelled terrorists. 2012 is when the situation started getting militarised in Syria. More and more weapons started arriving on the streets on both sides. The main armed anti-Assad group, the Free Syrian Army where many former military personnel fight, was involved in a fullscale fight against regular troops. It was a civil war, Syrians against Syrians. In this environment, terrorist organisations started gaining ground. “Since August 2011, Syrians asked for international protection but nothing happened. Day by day, people started feeling they were left to their fate. We felt left alone, without any protection,” recalls Yassin but “nobody wanted to passively suffer another Hama massacre.” He refers to what happened in the city of Hama in 1982. Under the order of then president Hafez Al Assad, the Syrian Army attacked the town to stop an uprising by the Muslim Brotherhood, killing thousands of citizens. Frustration, mistrust, anger and constant war served as lifeline for hardline Islamists. “These organisations are nihilist, they want to destroy everything in the world who is against them. They are a minority, but they have a lot of visibility. It is the dynamic of the production of the ‘desired enemy’ and it helped the regime and its allies: you need terrorists to justify the war on terror,” says Yassin. The 2013 open intervention of Lebanese Hezbollah forces played an important role and started a new phase of the Syrian crisis which started to be increasingly described as a conflict between Shia countries against Sunni radical groups. “Sectarianism is a strategy of control: it is the old ‘divide and rule’ colonial principle. It is one of the ways elites used to stay in power,” says Yassin. “If Kurds do not like Arabs who do not trust Christians who are suspicious of Muslims or Sunnis do not like Shias and so on, a regime becomes the solution instead of the problem. As long as you rely on sectarianism, you can stay in power forever. The war in Syria has nothing to do with primordial identities or religion, the regime just wants power and resources. Their project is to stay in power forever.” Sectarianism in West Asia's societies is a dangerous element, often used in an opportunistic way to hide political and economic interests. Iran and Saudi Arabia are valuable examples of this strategy. Tehran openly funds Shia paramilitary groups fighting both in Iraq and Syria with the aim of protecting Shiite followers and shrines from Sunni terrorists but this is also a way to expand their regional influence. Saudi Arabia plays the same game and funds Salafi organisations in order to penetrate societies and expand its influence. “When Russia stepped in, an imperialist phase of the war started,” says Yassin. “We (the leftwing) became invisible, we came to the point that our very existence was a controversial issue,” says Yassin. The US, who armed several anti-Assad groups since the very beginning without taking enough care of who they were, accused Russia of war crimes due to their heavy bombings. The Kremlin replied this is how they fight the terrorists Washington armed. Five years of conflict have led to more than 4,00,000 deaths, 13.5 million refugees, destroyed cities and have seen different countries involved. The Syrian civil war is not about Syria anymore. It has become a power struggle between regional and international actors who are fighting for political hegemony in West Asia. “We the people of Syria live in an impossible situation. We are attacked from every front, we are killed in hundreds of thousands, we are displaced in millions and we are blamed at the same time. We do not even have on our side the concept of sacrifice, of dying for a reason.” (WION)

Exclusive: Syrians living a political genocide, says writer and dissident Yassin al-Haj Saleh

al-quaeda

Al Quaeda, News on Al Quaeda, stories on Al Quaeda, articles on Al Quaeda, Al Quaeda stories at Wion, Al Quaeda news, Al Quaeda latest news

al quaeda

Opinion | Return of Taliban: What does it mean for India and the world?

US has ability to keep eye on any resurgence of al Qaeda in Afghanistan: White House

FBI adds Osama bin Laden's son to its 'seeking more information list'

US increases bounty to $10 million for information on Al-Qaeda terrorist Qasim al-Rimi

Exclusive: Syrians living a political genocide, says writer and dissident Yassin al-Haj Saleh