Many years ago, when young educators were taking great chances to change school structures and curricula so that they might be more in sync with the realities of the world and the lives of the young, many educators forsook schools to seek other ways to educate. When I asked one very committed teacher who was very disaffected from “the system” why he continued to teach in public school, his answer was straight forward and telling. He responded, “Because that’s where the kids are.” Revealing what to my mind is the essential factor of commitment to a purpose, care of and concern for the people involved.
Peace educators familiar with the crimes and conditions Medea Benjamin and Ariel Gold outline in the statement posted below will be asking themselves a similar question. In the face of these circumstances, why deal with the Taliban? The answer we are given in the well-articulated argument that follows a previously posted call to pay Afghan teachers and health workers is as clear and authentic as that spoken by that teacher, “Because that’s where the Afghan people are.” Their lives are now – we pray not for too long – under the control of a brutal Taliban. Those of us who care about their survival, about keeping alive the possibilities for a better future for the country, will also be seeking ways to interact with the Taliban that makes survival possible while preventing further abuse, and perhaps finding ways to reduce the human rights violations of which we are so painfully aware.
As before, we urge peace educators to reach out to all relevant decision-makers, urging them to do all in their power to prevent further humanitarian catastrophe, to approach the Taliban in such a way as to persuade them to take steps toward the wellbeing of the Afghan people. (BAR, 10/19/2021)
Last month, the International Monetary Fund approved a historic $650 billion allocation of Special Drawing Rights to help jump-start the global economic system battered by COVID. The IMF earmarked $450 million of this for Afghanistan, a country whose economy is collapsing and desperately needs an infusion of funds.
But Arkansas Republican French Hill corralled 17 of his Republican colleagues to pen a letter to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen urging her to intervene at the IMF to “ensure that no allocated SDRs are made available to a Taliban-led Afghanistan.” The IMF quickly complied.
This is part of a larger effort to starve the Taliban of funds. When the U.S. pulled out of Afghanistan at the end of August, it froze $9.5 billion of the Afghan Central Bank’s assets. The World Bank suspended the disbursement of money through its Afghanistan Reconstruction Trust Fund. Given that foreign aid to Afghanistan had previously been about $8.5 billion a year — nearly half of the country’s gross domestic product — the impact of freezing these funds has been catastrophic.
To be clear, there’s a good argument for non-cooperation with the Taliban. Since coming to power, the Taliban have said that they would allow girls to attend school. They kept their promise as far as elementary schools, but in most parts of the country, girls are being kept out of grades 7-12. Most women enrolled in public universities have not been attending classes due to fear, canceled classes, or Taliban restrictions. Even though Taliban spokesmen insist that women can continue to work, there have frequent reports of Taliban militants ordering women to leave their workplaces, being denied freedom of movement outside of their homes, having strict compulsory dress codes imposed on them, and not being allowed to peacefully protest.
According to Amnesty International, Taliban members have been persecuting journalists and threatening the safety of human rights defenders. On August 30th, Taliban forces killed 13 ethnic Hazaras. Eleven of them were reportedly former government soldiers who were surrendering, and the other two, including a 17-year-old girl, were civilians attempting to flee the area as the Taliban opened fire.
While we should all be outraged about the abuses and deterioration of rights that Afghans are experiencing, freezing Afghan funds is victimizing the victims. It is taking food out of the mouths of children. It is putting millions of lives at risk.
Right now, the nation’s economy and public services are screeching to a halt. Banks have run out of money, civil servants have not been paid and food prices have soared. Let this sink in: The World Food Programme (WFP) estimates that 93 percent of Afghans are not getting enough food to eat.
The schools have no funds. There are about 220,000 teachers in Afghanistan, and since June, most of them have not been paid. On October 6, the 45,000-member Afghan Teachers Association put out an urgent appeal calling attention to their dire situation. “The Ministry of Education has very few resources, and it is hard to ask our teachers to keep working without salaries. Many of them are the sole breadwinners in their families, and they are really struggling. It will be difficult to keep the schools open if we have no funds.” How can we insist that the Taliban open all schools to girls but then refuse to pay the teachers?
The nation’s healthcare system is on the brink of collapse. Only about 15 percent of the country’s more than 2,000 health facilities are operational and most of the personnel who are working are doing so on a voluntary basis. If money is not released for salaries and supplies, a mass exodus of healthcare workers is imminent. “There is a risk that the Afghan people will have virtually no access to primary health services,” UNDP’s Asia-Pacific Director Kanni Wignaraja said. The UN Development Fund recently announced that it will start to directly pay salaries into the bank accounts of thousands of doctors and nurses, circumventing the central government. While this is a welcome development, it is not enough to revive the nation’s entire healthcare system.
The same is true of humanitarian relief; it is critical but not a solution. On October 12, the European Union announced a $1.2 billion aid package and Secretary of State Anthony Blinken said the US will provide more humanitarian aid (although his measly $64 million pledge is about one-fifth of the $300 million a day the US spent during 20 years of occupation). It will be nearly impossible to effectively distribute this aid while Afghan banks remain under US and UN sanctions, unable to access physical dollars.
We understand the serious concerns about payment mechanisms, including not wanting to strengthen the Taliban or facilitate the kind of corruption that existed under prior governments. Promising options are being tested by UN agencies for direct payments to public service workers. But if the banking system and key ministries are to function, dogmatic opposition to any cooperation with the Taliban will be counterproductive.
A harsh winter is approaching. Without quick action, there will be famine, death, and a destabilized country ripe for civil war. Terrorist groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS will find plenty of fertile ground. Millions of desperate Afghans will attempt to flee the country, exposing them to predatory smugglers and triggering a renewed flood of refugees to neighboring countries and Europe that could rival the 2015 Syrian refugee crisis. Germany’s lame-duck Chancellor Angela Merkel told reporters at the recent G20 meeting, “To stand by and watch 40 million people plunge into chaos….cannot and should not be the goal of the international community.”
After 20 years of military operations during which we squandered over $2 trillion and killed tens of thousands of Afghans, the U.S. should not retaliate against the Afghan people for the policies of their regressive, misogynist rulers. And we in the West who advocate for human rights must recognize the primacy of the right to eat. We must grapple with the complexities in Afghanistan today and become strong advocates for releasing funds now held by foreign banks and international institutions, funds that rightly belong to the Afghan people.
Student-leaders from the Ikeda Center’s 2017-2018 seminar series devoted to nuclear abolition have been asking the kinds of questions that will both raise awareness of nuclear issues among regular citizens and increase their motivation to take action toward the ultimate goal of a world free of nuclear weapons. On April 21, they reported on their activities at the Ikeda Center’s first-ever student-led public peace dialogue, called “Nuclear Abolition: Claiming Your Right to Live.” [continue reading…]
This new book presents commentaries by a leading international group of peace education scholars and practitioners concerning Reardon’s peace education theory and intellectual legacy. [continue reading…]
This article by Betty Reardon is the third in a series exploring Betty’s 6 decades of peacelearning: a review of her publications in development of theories, pedagogies, curricula, and teacher preparation in peace education. In this post, Betty comments on “War Criminals, War Victims,” a world order study unit for senior secondary grades from the “Crises in World Order Series” published in 1974. Betty’s commentary explores the “Shimoda case,” and raises issues of the legality of nuclear weapons and the standing of individual citizens in international law. She links this case to contemporary efforts to apply international law to the abolition of nuclear weapons. The case and collateral materials used together could open inquiry into the role of law in, and citizen responsibility for the disarmament and peace movements at upper secondary and lower tertiary levels. [continue reading…]