A senior Taliban diplomat urged the international community to aid Afghanistan’s recovery during a meeting in Kabul on Sunday, emphasising the destruction caused by decades of conflict.

Deputy Foreign Minister for Political Affairs Shir Mohammad Abbas Stanekzai called on the United Nations and international NGOs to provide support to Afghanistan in the form of technical help, economic development initiatives and agricultural cooperation.

He particularly addressed countries that were previously militarily involved in Afghanistan, claiming they have a moral obligation to help rebuild the country based on the Doha Agreement.

Stanekzai indirectly pointed to Nato countries that took part in US-led operations, claiming that for 20 years these countries bombed Afghanistan and conducted military missions that led to fatalities and destruction of the country.

“Cooperate with Afghanistan in all fields, especially in politics, economy, agriculture and medicine, so that Afghanistan reaches self-sufficiency,” he said.

The United States and the Taliban signed a peace agreement in Doha that led to the ending of the US occupation of Afghanistan and the subsequent return to power of the Taliban in August 2021.

Since then, the Taliban government has been seeking international recognition and aid, while also facing criticism over its governance practices. As a result, no country has officially recognised the Taliban government yet.

Archive link

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    claiming they have a moral obligation to help rebuild the country based on the Doha Agreement.

    IIRC the Doha Agreement was with the Afghanistan government, not with the Taliban who overthrew them.

    • MarxMadness@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      22 hours ago
      1. Do you care about people living in destitution or not? If you do, why punish them for their government?
      2. The puppet government the U.S. propped up had no internal legitimacy, as evidenced by it disintegrating before the U.S. had even fully left the country. You shouldn’t skate on terrorizing a country for 20 years because your agreement to help recovery was made with the sham government you assembled, that no one in the country actually wanted.
      • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        22 hours ago

        It seems like giving money to religious fundamentalists who treat women like cattle is probably not the best use of international aid.

        • Sodium_nitride@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Actually, those regions of the world are exactly the kinds of places where international aid is needed the most. You aren’t going to be giving international aid to a place that has all its chickens in order because such a country will be doing fine on its own.

          • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            21 hours ago

            In the theoretical sense, you are right. But the big question is how do you give aid to those that need it in a country that is run by people who treat women as cattle.

            • finderscult@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              12 hours ago

              By giving aid to those that need it regardless of whose in charge. And Muslim women aren’t cattle, even in extreme regressive versions of Islam. This shows an inherent misunderstanding of why the repressive rules were created, which will lead to failure in understanding how to correct it.

        • MarxMadness@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          22 hours ago

          So the answer to the first question is “no.”

          “We had to starve the women in order to save them.”

  • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    During the withdrawal, the US stole like $2B of Afghanistan’s emergency recovery fund, which for anticommuniam heads out there, is the first actual case of a punitive famine being brought on by a vengeful despot named Joe.

    • Sodium_nitride@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Last October, Afghanistan’s acting commerce minister told Reuters the Taliban wanted to formally join Xi’s flagship “Belt and Road” infrastructure initiative.

      This could be a game changer, as the progress of the BRI in the region (especially China-Pakisthan economic corridor) has been slowed down due to militant activity in the region.

  • Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    “Cooperate with Afghanistan in all fields, especially in politics, economy, agriculture and medicine, so that Afghanistan reaches self-sufficiency,” he said.

    You don’t treat women as human.

    • matcha_addict@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 hours ago

      The world in general doesn’t treat women as human. Your conclusion is treating Afghanistan as if it’s unique in that, when it isn’t.

    • OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      And should everyone, including the women, face starvation because they’re controlled by misogynists?

      Oh, or should they spontaneously develop feminism without the material basis for the formation of a feminist movement?

      • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 hours ago

        It’s the same situation with North Korea. Either let people starve and hope something will change, or encourage bad leadership by saving their citizens from their bad decisions.

        • finderscult@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          13 hours ago

          Dprk has been food stable for a decade, and their leadership seems pretty good given they’ve managed to stave off invasions and us meddling for so long.

    • Korkki@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      I still remember when Taliban was marching into Kabul and while US was fleeing out of the country, that there were many people who were desperate to argue for the war and occupation going to keep going, because Taliban would be bad for women’s rights. There is no question about Taliban being bad towards women. However the logic of keeping the war going that killed mostly civilians, including women, to guard women’s rights is just twisted. This “They don’t let girls to go to school. let’s keep bombing them” is just slightly worse of the “You won’t let girls to go to school even after we bombed you. I hope you stay poor, suffer and starve”.

      What does motivate this? Neocon butthurth? Racism? A sense of vengeance of those who still believe in liberal universalism and nation building? A just general confusion and mixup in moral priorities?

      • AngryMob@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        Realistically what will US aid accomplish? Will those suffering even receive any of it? Won’t it just provide the means for Taliban leaders and ideals to remain in power and strengthen? And won’t that inevitably lead to them getting comfortable enough to lash out at the world once again?

        I understand the problems and suffering caused by our “war on terror”. Its not as simple as you make it seem though. its more of a moral dilemma rather than moral priorities.

        • Korkki@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 day ago

          There is no US aid, there are US sanctions and seizure of afghan funds. Who do you think is going to suffer from those? It’s not the men in power with the guns, they will be fine either way. It just means that all the civilians will have even less opportunities.

    • RubicTopaz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Who do you think funded the Taliban in the first place?

      Shitlibs don’t even support paying reparations for problems they caused.

      • LukácsFan1917@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        Wow someone should have tried threatening peripheral countries by withholding trade deals, aid, loans from the World Bank and IMF in exchange for political changes. Why didn’t anyone think of that already? 🤣

        The global financial system does not care about human rights, firms want peripheral countries to remain undeveloped to keep costs down. With improvements in living standards come improvements in civil rights. That is what every single person who studies any society will tell you, except for liberals who want to justify extortion and sanctions, but only to “help” of course.

    • LukácsFan1917@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      So you want them to remain undeveloped. Do you even know how Afghanistan ended up under Taliban control to begin with?

  • LukácsFan1917@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    in b4 liberals come in complain about how countries they consider backward should not be allowed to develop in any way