Malalai Joya versus US State Department

Malalai Joya versus US State Department

Malalai Joya is widely acclaimed across the globe for her work as an Afghan citizen, former elected official, as a critic of the Karzai’s government, warlords, druglords, the Taliban and oppressors of women, as an indomitable activist, as an author, and as an opponent of the US/NATO war and occupation. Why does she deserve wide attention? You can get a sense of her well-deserved achievements at Wikipedia, Malalai Joya http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

Entry Visa Denied

This extraordinary woman made the news on March 19, 2011, and ensuing days when she was initially denied an entry visa by the US embassy in Afghanistan to re-visit the United States. Joya had been scheduled for a three-week speaking tour in the US to discuss the paperback edition of her memoir, A Woman Among Warlords, written with Derrick O’Keefe, along with her views on the US/NATO war/occupation of her country and other issues.

She has long taken the position that all foreign troops should leave the country as soon as possible, not a slow multi-year withdrawal of troops, not a continuing occupation until 2014 or later, but a full withdrawal as soon as possible, certainly sometime this year.

Reason for rejection of Visa: Bureaucratic rigidity?

The Afghanistan Women’s Mission identifies the official US reasons for the visa rejection, namely, that “[c]olleagues of Ms. Joya’s report that when she presented herself as scheduled at the U.S. embassy, she was told she was being denied because she was ‘unemployed’ and ‘lives underground.’ http://www.afghanwomensmission.org/?p+1255"

It is true that Joya lives “underground” and may thus not conform to the rigid bureaucratic visa rules of the US State Department, but, hey, she does so to protect her life for having spoken the truth about the Karzai government, warlords, Taliban, and the war/occupation.

Here is what the Afghan Women’s Mission has to say about it. “Because of her harsh criticism of warlords and fundamentalists in Afghanistan, she has been the target of at least five assassination attempts. ‘The reason Joya lives underground is because she faces the constant threat of death for having had the courage to speak up for women’s rights – it’s obscene that the U.S. government would deny her entry,’ said Sonali Kolhatkar of the Afghan Women’s Mission, a U.S. based organization that has hosted Joya for speaking tours in the past and is a sponsor of this year’s national tour.”

Reason for rejection: Ideological exclusion?

Opposition to US decision quickly grew.

The news spread on the internet, stirring a widespread furor over the embassy’s decision to reject Joya’s request for an entry visa. Derrick O’Keefe gives some sense of this outpouring of support for Malalai Joya. In a post on malalaijoya.com, he shares his observations. “In just a few days, over 2500 people have signed an to protest the denial of a U.S. travel visa to Afghan women's rights activist and author Malalai Joya, who was to make a three-week U.S. tour to promote the updated edition of A Woman Among Warlords.

O’Keefe adds: “The effort to overturn this visa denial continues. On March 18, a letter signed by six congresspeople and three senators urged that Joya be allowed the right to travel and complete her book tour in the United States.”

US rescinds its earlier decision and grants Malalai Joya an entry visa, as she originally requested

The Afghan Women’s Mission happily posted that “US Responds to Broad Public Campaign, Grants Malalai Joya Visa!” http://www.afghanwomensmission.org/?p=1301.

Here are excerpts:

“A U.S. Embassy today granted acclaimed Afghan human rights activist and former MP Malalai Joya, a visa, a little over a week after she was initially turned down….

“Afghan Women’s Mission’s Co-Director Sonali Kolhatkar responded to the news saying, ‘We are ecstatic and gratified that the government finally did the right thing and allowed Malalai Joya into the country so that Americans could hear what she has to say about the reality of the war, and particularly how Afghan women are faring under the occupation.’

The basis for Malalai Joya’s optimism There can be an end to the foreign occupation and a transition to a better Afghanistan.

The fourteenth chapter of Joya’s book, A Woman Among Warlords, is titled “The Long Road Ahead,” where she offers her alternative vision for Afghanistan. The basis for Malalai Joya’s optimism is captured by her beliefs in the basic goodness of the majority of the Afghan people. Here is how she expresses this optimism.

“…I believe that, given the opportunity, the Afghan people are capable of charting a course toward peace and independence.” (211)

“You can kill me, but you can never kill my spirit.

“As I often say, there are many others to follow me. Afghans are more than just a handful of warlords, Taliban, drug lords, and lackeys. I have a country full of people who know what I know and believe what I believe: "That we Afghans can govern ourselves without foreign interference. That democracy is possible here but can never be imposed at gunpoint. That the blood of millions of freedom-loving martyrs runs through our veins, and their memories live on in every corner of our country. That Afghan women have been at the forefront of our struggle throughout our proud history” (228-229). “Our enemies can cut down the flower, but nothing can stop the coming of the spring” (229).

>Is it all just wishful-thinking?

It is not when you read about the uplifting experiences and achievements described in Greg Mortenson’s books, Three Cups of Tea and Stones into Schools. It is not when we learn about the challenges to or overthrow of dictators in North Africa and the Middle East. It is not when you become informed about the election of democratic governments in South America, despite generations of US domination. There may be possibilities for peace and justice that we have not dreamed of….

Malalai Joya is what such dreams, and their actualized expressions, are made of. As she titles the concluding chapter of her book, “A River is Made Drop by Drop.”

Malalai Joya offers an inspiring example and vision for an Afghanistan of justice and democracy

Malalai Joya represents a voice for Afghanistan independence and democracy about which you rarely read or hear. She was elected to the lower house of the Afghan parliament in 2005. Then banned from the parliament after she criticized the warlords who were "chosen" or "elected" by the people in their districts. From Malalai's point of view, they were in the parliament not because of their desire to serve their constituents and the public good, but because of the fear of reprisal that they generated in the villages and towns.

In her book, A Woman Among Warlords, Malalai provides a memoir and political analysis of her journey from being a refugee with her family to her election to the parliament and to the years thereafter. As a member of parliament, she continued to speak out against the corrupt government of President Karzai and the warlords who dominate the parliament and Karzai's government. She does not mince words when it comes to the Taliban, speaking out agains them for their undemocratic, oppressive and mysogynist agenda and for their violence and extremist Islamic religious beliefs. As a result there have been assassination attempts on her life. She must move from safe-house to safe-house to avoid her would-be killers. And, all along, she continues to speak out against the warlords, Taliban, Karzai government, and the US-NATO occupation that causes more death and devastation than anything else. In the last pages of her book, Malalai writes these inspiring words:

"I am young [born in 1978 in a small village of Ziken] and value life; I don't want to be killed. But I don't fear death; I fear remaining silent in the fact of injustice...You can kill me, but you can never kill my spirit...Afghans are more than just a handful of warlords, Taliban, drug lords, and lackeys." She continues: "I have a country full of people who know what I know and believe what I believe: That we Afghans can govern ourselves without foreign interference. That democracy is possible here but can never be imported at gunpoint. That the blood of millions of freedom-loving martyrs runs through our veins, and their memories live on in every corner of our country. That Afghan women have been at the forefront of our struggle throughout our proud history....Out enemies can cut down the flower, but nothing can stop the coming of spring" (pp. 228-229).

An article

I just came across the following article by Malalai Joya, titled "Afghanistan neither wants nor needs NATO's occupying force," at: http://stopwar.org/uk/content/view/2132/1/

Afghanistan neither needs nor wants Nato's occupying forces

The question should be not "What happens if we leave Afghanistan" but "What happens while we are in Afghanistan", because crimes of mutilation, rape and murder against women are commonplace today. While Afghans want the world's support and solidarity, we neither need nor want Nato's occupying forces.

By Malalai Joya The Guardian 02 November 2010

One year ago Hamid Karzai was declared re-elected as president of Afghanistan, ending an election that had no legitimacy in the eyes of ordinary Afghans.

The presidential election last year was a fraud, with ballot stuffing, vote buying and massive corruption reported by the world's media.

Even if the independent election commission had not cancelled the planned run-off between Karzai and his main challenger, Abdullah Abdullah, it would have represented only a choice of the "same donkey with a new saddle".

People had no incentive to participate as they knew that both main candidates would bring nothing positive for Afghan people.

Karzai had lost his popularity way before the 2009 election. This was due to the ever increasing corruption of the government, the never-ending crimes of the many fundamentalists and warlords in his regime, and the financial scandals and corruption of his brothers. In Kandahar people even started calling Ahmed Wali Karzai the "little Bush", after the hated US president.
The vast majority of Afghans have lost all hope in Karzai. For us his words and actions have no value, and that includes his latest "peace negotiations" and other measures. Including killers like Mullah Omar and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar in the government is not about negotiating for peace, but completing the decades-old circle of warlordism and fundamentalism.

It's important to say that these so-called elections haven't damaged Afghanistan as much as the US and its Nato allies have, with their bombing and occupation. Wikileaks has exposed some of the truth about the civilian toll of this war against the Afghan and Iraqi peoples. Afghans hold the US and Nato, and their puppet Karzai, responsible for these war crimes.

Biggest terrorists

They claim to fight terrorism, but in fact they are the biggest terrorists in the eyes of our people because of their crimes and brutalities.

Unfortunately the Afghan people are not yet strong enough to drive out the US, overthrow the mafia government of Karzai and bring an end to the crimes of the Taliban and other fundamentalists. Our history proves that this resistance to occupation will continue until we have won our freedom. Until both the US and the fundamentalists – of both the Northern Alliance and Taliban brands – are driven out of power in Afghanistan, we cannot see a bright future.

It is now more than five years since I was elected to the Afghan parliament. My experience of this "democratic process" was to see my microphone cut off, and to be threatened with death by other MPs – many of whom teamed up to remove me illegally from my seat. My case alone is enough to prove that women's rights in Afghanistan have not truly been safeguarded – our situation was just invoked to justify the war.

In fact, it's important to remember another document that Wikileaks exposed earlier this year: a CIA paper assessing western public opinion on the war that recommended using "testimonials by Afghan women" expressing fear about a Taliban takeover in the event of Nato pulling out. A Time cover story featuring the disfigured Bibi Aisha was a clear example of using the plight of women as war propaganda.

The headline – "What happens if we leave Afghanistan" – could have, or should have, been "What happens while we are in Afghanistan", because crimes of mutilation, rape and murder against women are commonplace today.

Many warlords and commanders aligned with Nato and Karzai carry out their sexist, misogynist crimes with impunity. Time could, for example, have done a cover story condemning the law signed by Karzai in 2009 that legalised crimes against Shia women, or about the shocking levels of women committing suicide by self-immolation.

Bad joke

We had another so-called parliamentary election in September, but I chose not to run. Any hope I had for using the ballot box to achieve change in Afghanistan is gone. Like last year's presidential vote, September's election was full of the buying and selling of votes – one province, Paktika, reported a turnout of 626%. This sort of thing is the reason elections in Afghanistan long ago became a bad joke.

Tomorrow there is an election in the US, and it is now two years since Barack Obama was elected president. His surge of troops has brought only a surge of violence, and his expansion of the war into Pakistan has claimed many innocent lives. Obama promised "hope" and "change", but Afghans have seen only change for the worse. Here he is now seen as a "second Bush".
The only change that can make us hopeful about the future is the strengthening and expansion of a national anti-fundamentalist and democracy-loving movement. Such a movement can be built only by Afghans. And while we want the world's support and solidarity, we neither need nor want Nato's occupying forces.

See also by Malalai Joya:
Memo to America: Stop murdering my people...
A troop surge can only magnify the crime against Afghanistan...
Afghan people want immediate end to US occupation...

Obstacles to a settlement in Afghanistan

The following article, orginally from Guardian newspaper online, was included in short commentaries and a list of abridged articles from various sites on today's Just Foreign Policy website: http://justforeignpolicy.org, July 20-10.

One of the central points of the article, expressing the views of various experienced and knowledgeable analysts, is that the US-led occupation cannot succeed. Why? The insurgency is too strong, the Afghanistan state is in shambles, and the sanctuaries to which insurgents can retreat and regroup are plentiful across the border in Pakistan. In addition, the US-led counterinsurgency is focused on Kandahar and Helmand provinces, where the Taliban have their greatest influence. Counterinsurgency is not effective in this context.

Some analysts now think that there is no constructive point in extending the conflict. In the end, there will be a settlement that allows the Taliban to control southern provinces, while warlords will dominate elsewhere in the country. There is not much attention paid in this discussion to "democracy." US and/or UN forces would, it's suggested, keep the Taliban confined in the south. Pakistan could play a vital role in constraining the Taliban. If there is a settlement of this kind in the not-to-distant future, it would leave little room for democratic participation, secular education, or women's rights.

Taliban talks: the obstacles to a peace deal in AfghanistanJon Boone, Guardian, 19 July 2010 20.02 BST
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/19/taliban-talks-obstacles-peace-deal-aghanistanKabul -

[...]
Organisers have attempted to attach great historic symbolism to the half-day conference. Of the nine international conferences on Afghanistan held in the last nine years, this is the first to actually convene inside Afghanistan. But even diplomats involved in the five-hour event roll their eyes when asked whether it is going to produce any dramatic changes in policy.

The communique - already leaked in draft form to the media - focuses on efforts to build up the Afghan state by making it more effective, better funded and less corrupt. But on the fringes of the conference the hot topic is a subject that is barely mentioned in the draft and until recently eschewed by the US administration; making peace with the Taliban.

That's because despite the fact that the Afghan government is finally strong enough to organise its own conference, the prospect of that government ultimately prevailing over an ever stronger insurgency has never looked more bleak. At an evening reception a few days before the conference, a senior European diplomat said glumly: "I cannot think of a single reason to die for Afghanistan."The country, which has suffered almost 30 years of war of one form or the other, is a problem for its neighbours, not for Europe, he said. It was a different a few years ago, when most people still thought victory was possible, he said. But now, pessimism has taken over.

"Afghanistan is in a state of freefall and I don't think strategy proposals announced at a one-day conference will solve that," said Candace Rondeaux, a senior analyst from the International Crisis Group. A paper by the Afghanistan NGO Security Office articulated what most people believe: that the counter-insurgency programme cannot win. It sees this summer's surge of US troops in southern Afghanistan as the "grand finale" of a western intervention which is looking to wind itself up.

The biggest problem is that what Nato soldiers are trying to do cannot be achieved on the time frames of the "political clocks" ticking down in Washington and its allied cities. In a recent off-record briefing, one of the most senior US soldiers in Afghanistan pointed out that no counter-insurgency has prevailed against an enemy with sanctuaries of the size the Taliban and other groups enjoy over the border in Pakistan.

No wonder then that most people's thoughts, including Barack Obama's administration, are turning to some sort of negotiated settlement with the insurgents. It is now part of the conventional wisdom in Kabul that the west will have to make compromises with insurgents that once would have been unthinkable, including dropping efforts for women to be given a more equal place in Afghan society. Few people put it quite as bluntly as Francesc Vendrell, a retired senior diplomat who served first the UN in Afghanistan before 2001 and then worked as the top representative of the European Union in Kabul. He recently told the Guardian that the current military effort to push the Taliban out of Kandahar and Helmand was particularly foolish because these are precisely the areas that, in his view, will have to be handed over to Taliban control.

Such a handover of the south could be achieved, he argued, through constitutional reform that would decentralise power from Kabul. In a trice, the south would be ceded to Taliban control, under the pretence of local democracy. Meanwhile, the north would similarly be handed back to the old warlords, the former strongmen who rose to prominence during the 1980s resistance to the Soviet occupation and its violent aftermath.

[...]
European diplomats say that whatever the latest thinking in the White House might be, David Petraeus, the new US commander of Nato forces in Afghanistan seems interested in making the fight against the Taliban last as long as possible. After years of refusing to contemplate even the most secret of discussions with a movement viewed as partly responsible for the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, the Americans have precious few ways of reaching out to the other side.

A security official who has in the past been involved in efforts to reach out to the Taliban bemoaned the fact that so many years had been wasted, pointing out that in Northern Ireland the British government had contacts "from the beginning".

Instead of a well-organised effort to talk to the Taliban, there is currently an extraordinary free-for-all, with a whole range of people and countries trying to make contacts with the quetta shura, the Taliban's leadership council. They include Karzai's elder brother Qayoum, and even Burhanuddin Rabbani, a northern power broker and former president. Countries interested in getting in on the act are the UK, Germany, Turkey and Indonesia.

[...]

Malalai Joya - courageous and dedicated as ever

The following article by Syed Hamad Ali was first published in the GulfNews Weekend Review, and then at: http://www.malalaijoya/com/dcmj/joya-in-media/523-fearless-campaigner.html.

The article is based on highlights of Malalai Joya's activism as a Afghan citizen who has worked tirelessly and courageously for peace and justice in her country, openly criticized the Karzai government for its corruption, the Taliban, the warlords, and the US-led occupation.

The article also includes a long interview with Malalai that gives the reader an idea of her devotion to justice and peace, her values and goals and world view. She has an unyielding belief in the actual or potential fairness and rationality of ordinary Afghan people and especially in the women of Afganistan. Bear in mind that Malalai was once elected by those in her home district to the Afghan Parliament in 2005. She was later banned from the Parliament because of her outspoken criticisms of the warlords in the Parliament.

On this blog, we have been impressed by Malalai Joya's courage and ideas since we first came upon them in her book, A Woman Among Warlords.


Fearless campaigner

Defying threats to her life, Malalai Joya singlehandedly fights for Afghanistan

Syed Hamad Ali, GulfNews Weekend Review, July 2, 2010

Malalai Joya is an Afghan politician who has publicly railed against the presence of warlords in the country's parliament and is a vociferous critic of the Taliban and the government of President Hamid Karzai. "The warlords and the Taliban — they are cancer for my country," she says.

Her outspoken nature has drawn the ire of her detractors, resulting in threats to her life. "My life in Afghanistan is not quite normal and I keep changing houses," she says.

Joya believes the United States is occupying her country and committing war crimes. "Democracy never comes with occupation," she says.

She brands George W. Bush "criminal" and says Barack Obama should first change his foreign policy if he wants to be any different from his predecessor. "His supporters are losing hope because of his wrong policies." She demands withdrawal of all the troops as soon as possible from Afghanistan. "We don't need this kind of so-called helping hand," she tells Weekend Review. "My people are so fed up they don't expect anything good from them. Just stop the wrongdoing. This is a war crime. They are bombing and killing civilians."

Joya holds Pakistan and the CIA responsible for the rise of the Taliban. "By supporting the warlords, who destroyed our unity, and the Taliban, they [the US] are hindering the growth of national unity in my country," she says.

Describing the Karzai government as a "puppet, corrupt mafia regime", she alleges that the Afghan president has joined hands with dubious elements to stay in power.
Joya has immense faith in the women of Afghanistan, who she says can play a crucial role in the development of the country. "This is the part of the population of my country which I believe has power."

Excerpts from an interview:

Question: You have repeatedly called on President Obama to apologise to the Afghan people. Why?

Malalai's response: When Barack Obama took office, his first news for my people was more war and conflict. His foreign policy is quite similar to criminal [George W.] Bush, even worse because he sent more troops to Afghanistan. And now, adding a soft tag to the Taliban, these terrorists, [he says] we are ready to negotiate with moderate Talib, when we have no moderate Talib. They are terrorist Talib.

These eight years they supported the Taliban directly and indirectly. Now [President Hamid] Karzai has been calling on Mullah Omar and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar to join the government but Obama is silent. If he [Obama] is honest to my people, he must first apologise to my people, criticise the wrong policy of the criminal Bush, and at least make powerless the minister of war, this Robert Gates, who was in the Bush administration. And apologise to the democratic nation of America in whose name they are committing these crimes.

After the war crimes they apologise to the Hamid Karzai regime. And Karzai's administration says thank you. That's it!

[It is] the blood of my people, not water, that they shed. It's worth as much as the blood of a Westerner.

My message to democratic people around the world, especially those from the countries with troops in my country, is that democracy never comes by cluster bombs, by white phosphorous. The troops themselves are the victims of the wrong policy of their governments, who send them for a bad cause. They are not children of Obama or Michelle that they will be sad if the soldiers get killed. It is the ordinary Afghans they are killing, not their family. This is just a war crime. They must end it.

Malalai Joya being welcomed in Kabul. 'Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor. It must be demanded by the oppressed,' she says [must go to source for photo].

Question: Many still insist on calling Iraq the ‘bad war' and Afghanistan the ‘good war'. How would you respond?

Malalai's response: They are wrong politicians who say good war and bad war. There are many similarities between the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the main being both these countries have been occupied. My country [has been occupied] under the banner of woman's rights, human rights and democracy — but they betray these values. In Iraq as well, they destroyed a Fascist regime when they made powerless a dictator such as Sad-dam Hussain. But now they have their own puppet regime there. The civilians are the victims. Ditto in my country, where they destroyed the Taliban — terrorist, fascist people — but they got into power a photocopy of the Taliban.

The US occupied Iraq because of oil. They occupied Afghanistan mainly because of the geopolitical location of Afghanistan. When they have their military base in Afghanistan, they can easily control Iran, China, Russia, Uzbekistan, etc. They will have easy access to the gas and oil of Central Asian republics.

The third reason is that they turned Afghanistan into a centre of drugs. Ninety-three per cent of the world's opium is produced from Afghanistan and billions of dollars are received for its distribution. This is not only a so-called war on terror in my country. This is a war of propaganda as well. Look at history of the US since the Second World War. In several countries, they have destroyed democrat regimes and supported dictators instead.

Question: What do you make of President Karzai's statement when he said that he might join the Taliban if he continues to be put under foreign pressure and also his accusations about fraud in the elections?

Malalai's response: For eight years he [Karzai] has deceived my people and now wants to deceive them again. But he cannot do that because now they understand him very well.
He supported compromise with dirty-minded elements such as Khallili, Fahim, Dostum and Esmail Khan. Hadi Arghandiwali, who is Karzai's minister of economy, is the key person in Gulbuddin Hekmatyar's party. Gulbuddin is not in power but his photocopy is. While Arghandiwali publicly says he belongs to this terrorist party, the US says Gulbuddin is on its blacklist. It makes no sense to my people. Now Karzai is inviting the terrorist Mullah Omar to join the corrupt, puppet regime. Karzai only wants to complete the circle of druglordism, warlordism and terrorism.

Question: When Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, Professor Noam Chomsky suggested your name as someone who should have been picked instead. What was your reaction when Obama won this prize?

Malalai's response: The support of Noam Chomsky, who I respect as an anti-war activist, and many others put extra responsibility on my shoulders. Because when you are involved in a struggle against occupation, against enemies of my people, warlords, the Taliban and their foreign master, their support gives me more courage, determination and hope.

But regarding the award that Obama got, I think it is a question for himself as well — in nine months what did I [Obama] do to receive the Nobel Peace Prize? There are thousands in the world who are risking their lives. They are the real heroes and heroines who do a lot for peace. But nobody even knows their names. In my country, around the world, they are the ones who must be winners of the Nobel Peace Prize. So this [award] is just making fun of peace.
What is going on in Palestine today? He is silent on the wrong policy of the Israeli regime. But he follows on in Iraq, in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen and then receives the Nobel Peace Prize.

Question: You have spoken out against some of the NGOs and aid agencies in Afghanistan, calling them NGO-lords, similar to the terms warlords and druglords.

Malalai's response: Unfortunately most Afghan and foreign NGOs are corrupt as the system is corrupt. Eighteen parties have been registered but we know what their backgrounds are. They belong to these warlords. And they have beautiful names. Same is the case with NGOs.
My life itself should be an example. Many attempts have been made to assassinate me and I am now receiving more death threats. I have been banned from meeting the media and going abroad. They took my diplomatic passport. I have gone underground and going from one country to another with great difficulty.

Unfortunately the NGOs — and heads of some of the NGOs are women — are getting into a compromise with warlords. For example, they are building schools with cheap material and most of the money goes into their pockets. After a year, if you see the school, you cannot believe it is the same building.

Question: In your book you mention how Benazir Bhutto helped in giving rise to the Taliban in the Nineties. Do people in Afghanistan blame her for it?

Malalai's response: She herself said that in an interview. Anyway she is not alive anymore and was even talking about secularism before she got killed. I condemn those who killed her. Of course they are terrorists but her policy when she was in power unfortunately supported the Taliban.

My people say Pakistan supported the Taliban and now the Taliban have become a problem for the Pakistanis themselves. Caught between all this, the ordinary people are the victims. Ordinary Pakistani people such as taxi drivers call the madrassas Talib-making factories because that is where they do the brainwashing.

The CIA created the Taliban.

Question: You are also critical of another figure, Ahmad Shah Masoud, looked upon almost as a legend in certain quarters in the West. Is he a misunderstood character?

Malalai's response: A terrorist of yesterday, he is a hero today. So the terrorist of today will be a hero of tomorrow. Ahmad Shah Masoud was imposed on my people as a hero by the CIA and the French government.

They even compare him with Che Guevara. His first act of treason was he signed a ceasefire with Russia. In Panjshir he killed at least 85 anti-Russia intellectuals. When he was in power from 1992-1996, he was the defence minister of warlords. This point says enough about this so-called hero of Afghanistan.

When you come to Kabul you go to Afshar, populated by the Hazara people. There was a massacre there during the civil war. Gulbuddin Hekmatyar was shooting from one side and Ahmad Shah Masoud from the other. My people, caught in between, were the victims. People of

Afshar call him the butcher of Afshar.

After 9/11, when Masoud was killed by his brothers in creed, the Taliban, the US tried to present him as a hero. The brothers of Masoud came to power. And this puppet, non-democratic, regime has named a street in Kabul after him.

Still today people do not call the street by Masoud's name because they hate him. A hero is always made by the people, not by a foreign country. Masoud has been imposed on my people.
Whether a person is alive or not, we have this famous saying in Afghanistan, if you want to know a person well, ask who his or her close friends are. As long as Masoud was in power, his close friends were Rabanni, Qanooni, Abdullah Abdullah, Sayyaf, Fahim. You can look up the Human Rights Watch website. These dirty-minded elements were close friends of Masoud. So this is enough to know who Masoud was.

Malalai Joya in a girls' school in Afghanistan (go to source for photo).

She believes if women are educated and play their role, many positive changes will take place
You grew up being inspired by Palestinian children who throw stones at those who have occupied their country.

Question: Do you draw strength from the Palestinians' struggle for the freedom of your own country?

Malalai's response: Every day that I spend, I realise the meaning of a sentence which my father told me: Try to be a ‘Palestinian of your own country'. When you compare my country with Palestine, there are many differences, but also similarities. The main similarity is that in both countries, ordinary people are the victims. For example, there the Israeli regime is killing ordinary people by the gun; in my country America plus 40 other countries who have occupied Afghanistan, are bombing and killing people. But the difference is: In Afghanistan, the regime in power is 100 per cent under the control of the US; but in Palestine, Israel is still trying to establish such a regime.

In Palestine, the people are part of a movement against Israel, even with stones, to defend their country. But in my country it is a prolonged struggle. Why? Because Palestine is a country where most people are educated. In my country most people are uneducated, so it takes more time.

Question: Given your fierce criticism of President Obama's Afghan policy, have you ever thought about arranging a meeting with Obama in the White House to explain your viewpoint?

Malalai's response: If I were to meet Obama in the White House or outside, I will tell him to stop this war crime and end this tragic drama of a war on terror which is a war on innocent civilians. I will tell him to stop the occupation. No nation can donate liberation to another nation. These eight years have been enough for my people to know about the wrong policy of the US government.

I love what Patrick Tyler says. He says there are two superpowers in the world. One is the US government and other is public opinion. I will tell him you are hiding the truth. You are betraying the truth through the mainstream media. But you cannot deceive the people forever. One day world public opinion will stand up [for our cause]. I trust the power of my people and the world. If the truth is told, I am sure they will never sit silent.

Similarly, in the parliament I exposed the warlords. That is why they couldn't tolerate me, they expelled me and even wanted to eliminate me.

Question: You are incredibly outspoken. Don't you feel scared?

Malalai's response: I don't fear death. I fear political silence against injustice. One day everyone will die. But I hope to be alive. As I always say, I am young, I have lots of energy and want to do a lot for my people — especially for women. If they get education and play their role, a lot of positive changes will take place. I compare my country, every society, to a bird. One wing is the woman, the other is the man. If one wing is injured, it will be impossible for the bird to fly.

Same is the case with society.

I always quote Samad Behrangi. He says death can come easily but I should not be the one to seek it. If it is my turn to go, it should not matter. What matters is whether my living or dying has a ramification on the lives of others. This is the only point I am always thinking about. I am sure if something happened to me, my people will not remain silent.

Question: During Obama's surprise trip to Afghanistan, he said: ‘The United States of America does not quit once it starts on something. You don't quit, the American armed services do not quit. We keep at it, we persevere, and together with our partners, we will prevail. I am absolutely confident of that.' What gives you hope in light of Obama's determination to continue this war?

Malalai's response: The resistance of my people is a big hope for Afghanistan. We are proud to have a history that we never accept occupation. The British wanted to occupy Afghanistan on three occasions but faced the resistance of my people. Russia, a superpower, wanted to occupy Afghanistan and faced the resistance of my people. Still the US government plays the role that the British did in the past — which was to divide and rule.

In front of every audience, I say no nation can donate liberation to another nation. Regarding Obama's comment, [I can say] as a democratic intellectual of my country, as a freedom-loving fighter, only this sentence is enough. In an interview before he came to power, Obama had said the war in Iraq was bad but the one in Afghanistan was a good war. Someone should ask him what is the difference between these two? He just deceives himself with such comments. He is a pro-war person, unfortunately no different from Bush.

[Because he was black,] some people even compared Obama with Martin Luther King. If King were alive today, he would have said, ‘Don't insult me.' King believed our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor. It must be demanded by the oppressed.

Blacks already had power in Bush's regime. Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell are examples. Black and white solve nothing. What matters is their policy. Unfortunately the foreign policy of Obama is quite similar to that of the criminal Bush, even worse. Why? Compare the number civilians killed in the short time that Obama has been power with the figures during Bush's presidentship.

It's a big question for my people. How does Obama recognise which terrorist is moderate and which one is not? Moreover, they have never apologised to my people. By making such comments, Obama is only deceiving himself, and maybe for a while, the people of the world.
He is the first president who in a short time — in one year — has lost lot of support. Do you know this extraordinary man John Pilger? In one of his speeches, he spoke about how Obama as a senator had voted for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Pilger also exposed Obama with many other examples.

Syed Hamad Ali is a writer based in London.

Time Magazine award to Malalai Joya distorts what she stands for

MAY 4, 2010 11:10AM
How TIME Magazine hijacked Afghan activist Malalai Joya
http://www.salon.com/blog/judy_mandelbaum/2010/05/04/how_time_magazine-hoodwinked_afghan_activist_malalai.joya

Malalai Joya (Source: Women's Space)

Judy Mandelbaum (JM) offers excerpts from her interview with Malalai Joya (MJ) and related commentary.

JM - Beware of Greeks bearing gifts, Homer wrote thousands of years ago. Today human rights activists would be well-advised to beware of major American news magazines passing out honors. Last week, noted Afghan politician Malalai Joya, the author of "A Woman Among Warlords" whom the BBC has called “the bravest woman in Afghanistan,” was named one of TIME Magazine’s “World’s Most Influential 100 People” of 2010. The trouble is, the magazine presented her to the world in a brief but misleading text by Islam critic and American Enterprise Institute fellow Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who concluded her tribute with the words: “I hope in time she comes to see the US and NATO forces in her country as her allies. She must use her notoriety, her demonstrated wit and her resilience to get the troops on her side instead of out of her country.”

JM - What an odd choice of words, considering that Ali is writing about a woman who wrote in the Daily Beast last week that:

MJ - more than eight years of occupation have made life bleak, and we are tired of being pawns in the US and NATO's game for control of Central Asia. We can longer bear the killing of our pregnant mothers, the killing of our teenagers and young children, the killing of so many Afghan men and women. We can no longer bear these "accidents" and these "apologies" for the deaths of the innocent.

JM - Are Ali and the editors of TIME really entitled to tell Malalai Joya what to think about her country's plight? To set the record straight and to find out what really motivates this activist, journalist Sonali Kolhatkar of UprisingRadio contacted Ms. Joya yesterday and conducted an interview, which I have excerpted below (you can – and should – read the entire discussion here):

MJ - I am very angry with the way they have introduced me [Joya said]. They have a completely painted a false picture of me that does not mention at all about my struggle against the occupation of Afghanistan by the US and NATO, which is disgusting. In fact every one knows that I stand side by side with the glorious-anti war movement around the world and have proved again and again that I will never compromise with the US and NATO who have occupied my country, empowered the most bloody enemies of my people and are killing my innocent compatriots [inaudible] in Afghanistan. What TIME did was like giving an award to someone by one hand and getting it back by another hand. I have sent my protest to it to the Defense Committee [for Malalai Joya] but TIME did not bother to even answer than protest letter. Perhaps this is the kind of freedom of expression exercised by TIME and the USA. …

JM - Regarding this freedom and the war that is supposedly designed to secure it:

MJ - Most of the civilian casualties take place in remote areas of Afghanistan where there is no media to report it. So no one notices it. In many cases after killing people NATO [releases] statements saying that many insurgents were killed. When you try to find out from the local people, they are actually many women and children, not insurgents. Afghan media are also truly in the hands of the Afghan criminal bands. They rarely report civilians killed by the US and NATO. … For the US it’s not just fighting a war through military means, but they also fight on the propaganda front. I think propaganda plays a major role. They are trying to show the war as justifiable. For this they are using their lie-machines. When they kill civilians they immediately deny it and say all they have killed are Taliban. …

JM - Regarding the upcoming US and NATO offensive in Kandahar, Ms. Joya said:

MJ - [T]he US does not want to defeat the Taliban forever. They only fight with them here and there to show the American people that the US is at war in Afghanistan and their presence is necessary here. The offensive of Kandahar will not be different from Marjah and other areas of Helmand where they had such operations in the past. They make such hue and cry about their military actions but in fact they just push the Taliban to other areas and then install some corrupt officials and police forces who are worse than the Taliban. In a few days the Taliban return as we experienced in the past as well. … They will launch the operation and then allow the Taliban to go to another area and then later start an operation there. This is a battle for show, not a real war against terrorism. Otherwise for the US and NATO, it is a task of a few days to uproot the Taliban and defeat them forever. But then everyone will ask them to end the occupation of Afghanistan. The only outcome of such operation is civilian casualties. Poor and innocent are killed in the war. But the Taliban do not experience any defeat and even major casualties. Afghans know well that the US will neither bring democracy nor peace in Afghanistan.
… I will continue the struggle as long as these criminals are in power, these sworn enemies of democracy, women’s rights, human rights, and as long as these occupation forces are bombing from the sky, and [inaudible] supporting the enemies of my people and killing innocent people of my country. So as long as I am alive I am the same person. As always I am saying if a thousand times they will kill me and again I will be alive, and see that these same enemies are in power with the mask of democracy and continue with their wrong policy and their crimes and war crimes, these internal enemies of my country, these warlords, also Taliban, and also their foreign masters, these occupation forces, the US and NATO.

JM - How to explain this discrepancy? Is TIME Magazine pursuing a sinister or at least tendentious editorial policy? You can bank on it. But TIME is also a commercial enterprise, and I suspect that this choice - like so much of our politics - has a lot to do with the middle-brow American take on the world, which always follows the rules of melodrama. As far as the money-driven mainstream media are concerned, our planet is packed to the rafters with heroes and villains, perpetrators and victims. It is particularly shaped by long-suffering heroines and noble fighters for human rights and justice, who must by necessity be allied with the United States, the leader of the “free world" and the very essence of truth and justice. If Malalai Joya hates the Taliban, it follows that she must love the US, right?

JM - I’m afraid that a heroine who hates both – and who openly protests the ongoing destruction of her country by remote-controlled drones in order to "save" it for... whom exactly? – is too complex for most Americans in the age of talk radio and “24.” Their brains simply can't process this sort of information anymore, rather like those African famine victims whose emaciated bodies can't absorb rich Western food supplies. Malalai Joya asks too many embarrassing questions and leaves behind too many messy loose ends. But I'm sure the American Enterprise Institute would love to have a go at her.