X Close

The Taliban’s chaotic war on women Its erratic edicts have sparked an internal crisis

Cracks are starting to show (Paula Bronstein/Getty Images)

Cracks are starting to show (Paula Bronstein/Getty Images)


May 27, 2022   6 mins

One would think Afghanistan’s Taliban government has plenty to keep it busy: the banking system is collapsing; it is the target of crippling sanctions; the economy has ground to a halt; Isis conducts regular terror attacks; and not a single country has recognised their government. Yet instead of formulating a sensible plan to tackle these challenges, the Taliban are choosing to occupy their time with the issuance of increasingly preposterous edicts regarding girls and women. This is exasperating and disappointing. But it is also intriguing, because there are growing indications that this issue is starting to split the ranks of the Taliban.

Even within the iconoclastic organisation, there are some for whom this forced backward march does not make sense. It’s one thing to be highly pious and ultra-conservative. It’s quite another to blast out eccentric, made-up rules with no foundation in mainstream Islamic doctrine or Afghan history and custom. Today, it’s all too easy to imagine a bunch of bearded old men sitting around in Kandahar dreaming up the next ridiculous way to annoy girls and women: girls above the age of 12 turned away on the first day of school; female university students ordered by guards not to wear scarves that are too cheerful in colour; female news anchors told they must cover their entire faces except for the eyes. So much for the hopes that this time around, the Taliban would be different.

The conclusion from all this seems obvious: after seeming to have learned from the failure of their previous time in power, the Taliban are now back to oppression as usual. Yet a more granular look reveals a peculiar vacillation in the Taliban’s edicts on women.

Under the current regime, an order is announced — then, right away, it is partially taken back or softened. Attempts are made to enforce it, but these are also erratic and uneven. Flurries of contradictory explanations and announcements follow. We’re told that girls in Grade 6 and above will not return to school. Wrong — they will, just not yet. We’re told this is because additional female teachers need to be recruited. Wrong again — it’s because a more concealing Islamic school uniform needs to be designed and manufactured. As for adult women, we’re told they must wear a hijab, but then that a headscarf is sufficient. Actually, no it isn’t: they must wear the burqa and be covered up completely. Well, no, it doesn’t have to be an actual burqa, a hijab is fine after all. But wait, they must also cover their necks and faces except for the eyes. But that’s just a recommendation, not a requirement. But it will be enforced.

What is going on here? Are the Taliban collectively maniacal, changing their minds as their mood shifts? It’s unlikely — you don’t fight and win a 20-year insurgency by being indecisive. Rather, these sequences of contradictory statements reflect their internal divisions on how to govern, and where they want the country to go. A tug of war is taking place and the cracks are starting to show.

Already there have been a number of eruptions. In a recent speech, Sher Mohammad Abbas Stanikzai, a high-ranking Talib, went so far as to accuse those calling for the exclusion of girls from middle and high-school education of disrespecting shariah. Because how could girls and women claim their Prophet-given rights if they can’t get enough education to learn what those are? More astonishing still are the credible reports of shouting matches between the Supreme Leader in Kandahar, Haibatullah Akhunzada, and his own bodyguards, in which the latter accused him of wasting the sacrifices made by their comrades and turning the country into an impoverished backwater shunned by all.

These rumblings in the ranks are partly down to the fact that today’s Taliban is more like a multi-party system. In one corner we have the Doha Group, which consists of those Taliban who were involved in the peace negotiations. For years they lived in Qatar, which, while unimpeachably Islamic, is not neurotic on the subject of women. Education is universal and excellent. There are high-profile women in corporate and political life. Both men and women wear traditional dress that includes a head covering, but women are not expected to conceal their faces or to stay at home. Public life is very family-oriented, with malls and parks populated by happy, relaxed parents and their children enjoying their leisure time together. All of this was not lost on the Afghans. Indeed, many of them left their families there when they returned to Afghanistan to join the government.

Then there is the Haqqani Group, which was based in Pakistan. While the country is conservative, it is also home to strong, publicly engaged women: politicians including heads of state, entrepreneurs, cultural icons, scientists. Their Taliban guests took note. There are also regional Taliban power centres which, due to the decentralised nature of an effective insurgency, are accustomed to exercising considerable autonomy. The Taliban is not a hierarchical organisation, nor does Akhunzada have the theological position or weight of, say, Ayatollah Khomeini. So to have him issue consequential pronouncements on his own, without consultation, rankles.

There may also be ideological and theological reasons why some of the factions are distinctly more forward-leaning about women’s rights. A significant part of this more progressive interpretation of Islam seems to be rooted in their vision for the country, and its most likely path from abject poverty to modest prosperity. That path has as its absolute requirement the acceptance of the international community. Nothing good will happen unless the government is recognised, sanctions are eased, frozen assets are returned, and investment occurs.

There is a bit of healthy defiance in this vision. The insurgency was driven by the narrative that the country was bent under the yoke of foreign occupation and the corrupt elite it had introduced. But whatever its contradictions, the impulse is present and may prove impossible for the Kandahar Grandfathers to suppress.

In August and September of last year, as the Taliban took control of Kabul, videos and photos surfaced on social media showing young Taliban soldiers encountering modernity. These were amusing vignettes, the classic stereotype of hillbillies in the big city for the first time. One group had entered the abandoned Presidential Palace, gone exploring, and found the gym. Tentatively at first, they investigated the bizarre contraptions, testing to see if they were weapons, then quickly discovering their functions and filming each other laughing as they tried them out. Others went to the zoo and stared in dumbstruck fascination as they came face-to-face, for the first time, with the residents of an aquarium. Kalashnikovs slung across their torsos, one group traversed the lake in Bandiamir on swan-shaped pedal boats. The videos were faintly comical, but they were also enlightening. These were young people out in the world for the first time, and they were curious, open to new things, open to joy. These young Talibs don’t want to live in Jurassic Park. They want to be part of the larger world. And that world includes women.

This isn’t the only change worthy of note. The last time around, repressive edicts by the leadership were met with disdain by the outside world and sad despair by the Afghan public. What we see this time is quite different. Now, men are part of the protest against the backward slide of women’s rights. In reaction to the forced veiling of female news anchors, for instance, male colleagues made a high visibility statement by also reading the news with their faces covered.

Is there anything we can do to support these dissenters? Well, if the past 20 years have taught us anything, it’s that our efforts at overt social engineering are not likely to meet with much success. These kinds of changes, of foundational social norms and gender relations, must happen from within. And what are the prospects of that? On the downside, this is a deeply patriarchal society, in which everyone submits to the dominion of the alpha male. Such habits are hard, but are certainly not impossible to break.

On the other hand, we mustn’t forget that, demographically, this is an extremely young society, where the power de facto rests with the young soldiers, the young farmers and the small group of remaining young educated doctors, managers and technocrats. Also, there is no credible opposition. No one really believes that any of the has-beens can muster a plausible fighting force and take back the country, and everyone has had enough of war. There is Isis, but if the government became reasonable, they would have ample outside help against that threat.

There is little we can do, except follow the mantra of “do no harm”. Keep the sanctions in place enough to keep the hardliners in a stall and on the brink of failure, but not so much as to starve the population. Let the protest and the messages come from within, so there is no argument that once again the West is imposing its alien decadent values. Above all, keep the prospect of connection with the outside world alive.

Though most foreign embassies in Kabul have been shut down since the Taliban takeover, a significant Western presence remains. Various UN agencies, representatives of NGOs and of donor countries maintain offices, send delegations or conduct regular visits. Talking points always include the latest eccentric moves by Kandahar on the issue of women. This must be incredibly tiresome and exasperating for the emissaries involved, but it’s important. The younger Taliban hear this, see this and realise where the obstacles to progress lie. They now know that the world remains ready to welcome them, and that they have a choice between shaping their own future, or letting their Grandfathers shut them away in a dark corner.


Cheryl Benard is an academic and an author.

 


Subscribe
Notify of
guest

12 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Prashant Kotak
Prashant Kotak
2 years ago

Far, far too indulgent of the taliban – they are not a bunch of “..bearded old men sitting around in Kandahar dreaming up the next ridiculous way to annoy girls and women..”, they are a barbaric medieval theocracy, who think of women and girls, if they think of them at all, as chattels. The reason they don’t see the point of sending girls to school, is exactly the same as the reason you wouldn’t see the point of sending a field full of cows to kindergarten. Moreover, it be can’t the theocracy oldies making decisions there, because, the country has amongst the youngest age demographics in the world. The taliban in fact arose out of militant islamic student movements – these are hoardes of semi-literate young men, giving themselves the veener of deeply held religious faith, so they can behave ferally within a framework of formality.

And what I find curious about this article is this: these are not people who are even willing to treat their own sisters and daughters as fully formed humans – a typical talibani type wouldn’t think twice about marrying off his own barely teenage daughters to men four times as old, for the sake of cementing some dumass tribal alliance, so my question to the author is: why the soft-pedalling, verging on the edge of understanding, rather than outright condemnation? Why the kid-gloves language? Face it, these are horrible men – book burners and statue destroyers and so on, who want to wipe history off the face of the earth – exactly what is the problem with saying so outright?

Last edited 2 years ago by Prashant Kotak
Jeremy Bray
Jeremy Bray
2 years ago
Reply to  Prashant Kotak

A bit of restorative justice as described in Julie Bindel’s article will put it all right. You have just got to understand the Taliban are victims too. Yada Yada.

Andrew J Roman
Andrew J Roman
1 year ago
Reply to  Prashant Kotak

I see the difference between the writer and you as being that he sees the Taliban as heterogeneous 3 dimensional humans while you see them as homogeneous one dimensional monsters. As I have no personal knowledge of the Taliban I can only hope for the sake of the girls and women that his vision is more accurate.

Andrew D
Andrew D
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew J Roman

I think you’ve mis-gendered the writer

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Prashant Kotak

There’s clearly a level of naivety in the article. For instance, issuing edicts and then partially rowing back on them is almost certainly a way of gaming the Western response – “oh, they’re having a think about it, let’s give them some headspace”. If there is an element of genuine dissent from within the tribal ranks, it’ll be a dispute between complete oppression of women and some lesser but still unacceptable level of discrimination.
The simple fact is that the Taliban, thinking themselves to be real men, are in fact absolute cowards. Their fear of the sexual power of women is what drives them in their repression – religion is just a front, a way of justifying what their pathetic egos can’t accept.
What a waste of life.

Last edited 1 year ago by Steve Murray
ARNAUD ALMARIC
ARNAUD ALMARIC
1 year ago
Reply to  Prashant Kotak

Correct, but who really cares? This a “far away country of which we know little” filled with Semitic/Islamic nutters ossified in the 7th century who have ‘missed the bus’ and will never catch up.

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
1 year ago
Reply to  Prashant Kotak

“Why the kid-gloves language? ”
Fairly simple.
Modern, western culture (and in particular feminist women) are happy to accuse men and society of being “patriarchal” and intentionally horrible to women.
Except when it comes to cultures which are genuinely horrible and nasty to women, in which case they will go all out to defend them.

Islam based cultures such as Afghanistan is one example.
Inner city US black culture is another. (80% of fathers missing, very high rape rates)
In either case, a certain class of whiny westerners otherwise spouting a out “toxic masculinity”, will be their biggest defenders.

Andy O'Gorman
Andy O'Gorman
1 year ago
Reply to  Prashant Kotak

Hear, hear totally agree. These barbarian men don’t deserve one iota of recognition and should be shunned everywhere. The new catchphrase “Islamophobia” is the ridiculous lefts mantra to make people such as myself feel embarrassed by calling out Islam for it’s apathetic treatment of women. I live in South Africa and they have infiltrated this part in vast numbers.
I have always treated people with the respect they deserve, however, when and where does one draw the line?
I live in a most tranquil part of lower Natal and every week I expect the hideous wailing from the turret of some ugly mosque. When that day comes – the gloves will come off.
And if I hear that Muslim women are happy with their lot once more, I will lose any faith I have always had in women’s ability to think rationally.
One does not support cruelty.

Mike Bell
Mike Bell
2 years ago

Good article. The main failing of the West in Afghanistan has been our failure to see things from The Taliban point of view. Not that we should agree with it, just that actions taken with bad information are not likely to be effective.
One common mistake the West makes is believing that, if they back a friendly horse, that it will end up winning. In reality, outside intervention simply polarises the situation further and empowers the ideologue.
All ideologies are based on a false interpretation of reality. Many extremist regimes soften if you just leave them alone and let reality dawn on them.
Do we really believe that all this external ‘moralizing’ about girls’ education will hasten the restart of girls’ education?

Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
1 year ago

It isn’t just “old men sitting around in Kandahar dreaming up the next ridiculous way to annoy girls and women”. Look at virtually every global leader since the start of the Covid panic (as just one example). Dreaming up ways to annoy is their raison d’ĂȘtre. The only difference between the old men in Kandahar and the sparkly sophisticates currently cooking up new controls in Davos is money, hygiene, and private jets.

ARNAUD ALMARIC
ARNAUD ALMARIC
1 year ago

Well said, a voice of sanity in a rather sick world

.bravo!

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
1 year ago

This is a thoughtful and well written article, but there’s no amount of lipstick that will make this pig into a princess. The odds of the Taliban turning Afghanistan into a ‘mildly prosperous’ nation are probably considerably worse than the odds of hitting the Powerball jackpot. The Americans couldn’t do it, the Soviets couldn’t do it, the British couldn’t do it, and so on and so forth before that as far as recorded history goes. That so many attempts have been made stands as a monument to the hubris of man. The area is rugged, landlocked, isolated, resource poor, strategically unimportant, and unsuited for modern mass agriculture. Geography isn’t necessarily destiny, but it does shift the odds considerably in one direction or the other. I hope the Taliban become more enlightened in their views towards women, but in the end, that would only make the nation marginally less awful.