How has the migration situation changed since the Taliban retook Afghanistan?
Yes. But it’s not about what’s changed in Afghanistan. It’s about how things have changed in Europe and USA. Namely, that many people who were anti-immigration just a few months ago are suddenly in favor of accepting anyone who says they’re an Afghan interpreter. This is especially true of NATO-oriented conservatives. Support for NATO and acceptance of migrants are beginning to merge.
And make no mistake, there will soon be millions of Afghan interpreters. Every one of them will have a heartbreaking story of fleeing the Taliban. All those stories will be made up in European NGOs.
We hear from various places surprise at the speed with which the Taliban have taken over the country. Are you surprised too?
I haven’t studied the field reports. I couldn’t understand the situation there anyway. But I thought the American command had at least a basic idea of what was going on there. They didn’t.
From our point of view, what is more interesting is what was going on inside the US Army, NATO, and actually the Czech Army command. It confirms that you can have spy drones, eavesdropping, incredibly powerful computers, pay thousands of spies, and it doesn’t make any difference – as long as your subordinates are falsifying reports to cover up problems. It paints a picture of a military where most of the time is focused on creating media releases and beautiful powerpoint presentations. And where no one cares what the reality is anymore.
On the positive side, perhaps more people – including those in high places – can calculate how a clash between an army managed in this way and a real adversary would turn out.
It paints a picture of a military where most of the time is focused on creating media releases and beautiful powerpoint presentations.
Should there not be a fundamental reform of the secret services and the armed forces?
Of course it should. If a similar debacle had happened 50 years ago, it would have led to a radical change in the way the military was run. But nothing will happen. The existing bureaucratic structures are too strong.
What good has come out of the 20-year mission in Afghanistan? What did it bring and what did it take away?
You correctly mentioned the term “mission” – it means a mission or a task. What was the purpose of the Americans going to Afghanistan? To stop terrorism? Then the attack was supposed to be against Saudi Arabia or Qatar. They are the ones supporting the Islamisation of Europe, including terrorist attacks. To impose our civilizational values on the Afghans? They haven’t even tried. Islamic Sharia law has also been applied in occupied Afghanistan, in a harsher form than in some Arab countries.
It seems that the only aim was to milk the US state budget and improve the profits of arms suppliers. This has been achieved. We can therefore speak of a successful mission.
It seems that the only aim was to milk the US state budget and improve the profits of arms suppliers. This has been achieved. We can therefore speak of a successful mission.
However, the more interesting question is why the mission was terminated when it worked so well.
Why?
The question could be phrased differently. Who is stronger than the interests of the arms manufacturers and the banks that lend to the US government? And I’m afraid we’re heading towards an Odyssean answer of “Mr. Nobody”.
Once Donald Trump clearly labeled the war in Afghanistan a debacle, it began to resonate. Many journalists and intellectuals who would have had the desire and motivation to support the continuation of the Afghan adventure preferred to keep quiet, fearing the anti-war far left. The crowd got moving. And the crowd of intellectuals and executives behaved like any other dull mob. Once it moves in a certain direction, you can’t stop it.
Would it even be possible to bring our civilisational values to the Afghans?
I imagine that if an energetic man with a vision of modernisation, an Afghan Ataturk, were to take over the country, he might succeed. A combination of local knowledge, local connections, indomitable personal energy, good education… and of course sheer brutality. After a generation or two, the Afghans would find that they are much better off. That education is quite useful. That giving women more freedom would make life better for everyone. That humour makes life more bearable. Just like the Persians, Turks and Arabs found out before they reverted back to authentic medieval Islam.
Except that even if such a person could be found, his vision would certainly include national independence, and sooner or later his intentions would clash with American ideas of a vassal state. The occupation administration could not have needed anyone like him. Ashraf Ghani, who was dedicated to plunder and did not make trouble, was the ideal person. That is, the ideal person in terms of the interests of American officials of the moment. Not in terms of transforming the country.
And the crowd of intellectuals and executives behaved like any other dull mob. Once it moves in a certain direction, you can’t stop it.
Do you trust the Taliban not to rule the country with as heavy a hand as they did 20 years ago? And that women will get better treatment, be able to work, etc.?
He will rule with as hard a hand as befits Islam. Now there is a tendency to excuse the conditions there by saying that it is not a question of Islam but of local customs. Let us not believe it. The customs there are the result of the long rule of Islam. When the Muslims came to Afghanistan in the 10th century, there was a Western Buddhist civilisation, much more advanced than today. If Islam prevails in the Czech lands, in a few centuries there will be the same conditions as in Afghanistan today.
It may seem terrible to us, but that is the way most Afghans want it. They have grown up in it and are happy with it. A 2012 Pew Research poll showed that 99% of Afghans favour the full application of Sharia law.
And what about the women?
Women are always more conservative than men. They will do what Islam prescribes and be happy. If one of them breaks something and is punished, most other women will approve. They will still come to watch the execution.
If they happen to get to Europe, they will try to create a little world here too, with the same conditions as in Afghanistan.
If they happen to get to Europe, they will try to create a little world here too, with the same conditions as in Afghanistan.
Will there be a repeat of the 2015 migration wave? And is Europe, or the European Union, ready for it?
Some are too well prepared. Thousands of people in non-profits, offices and law firms are eager for every migrant they can get here, to integrate them, to care for them, to litigate on their behalf, to pressure schools and honest officials… And this fifth column has enormous support in the media, in universities, in corporate leadership and in the courts.
Of course, they’ll take any opportunity to get anyone posing as an Afghan in here. They don’t even have to speak Pashtun or any other local language. We have a recent Constitutional Court ruling that when an adult Iraqi claims to be a minor, he must be treated as such – even though there is clear evidence of his age. Why shouldn’t a black Somali be considered an Afghan?
But the difference against the so-called “migration wave” will be that it won’t be in the media. The 2015 migration wave was exceptional, especially the front page headlines. Since then, migrants have continued to flow in, but it doesn’t attract as much attention.
Publised in Parlamentni listy