The Contradiction of Taliban Supporters in the West

-

 


The recent remarks by Khalid Hanafi, the Taliban’s Minister for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, have once again sparked widespread debate among Afghans. He reportedly said that “reason, study, and research have no place” in divine Sharia and that religious commandments should not be questioned or examined according to personal judgment.

But to me, the most surprising part of this controversy is not Khalid Hanafi’s remarks themselves. Hanafi is a religious figure and a representative of a system whose worldview and way of thinking have long been clear. He believes in a system that considers the enforcement of its interpretation of Sharia to be one of the fundamental duties of the state.

The real puzzle lies elsewhere.

The puzzle is that some Afghans who live in Western countries, and who themselves—along with their families—enjoy the freedoms and protections of secular societies, nevertheless defend the very Taliban mindset that Khalid Hanafi represents.

Hanafi, at least, lives according to his beliefs and defends the system in which he believes. But someone who enjoys freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and other civil rights in a secular society, while supporting a system for Afghanistan that could deny those same freedoms to others, embodies a far deeper contradiction.

Put simply: My question is not why Khalid Hanafi thinks like a religious figure. His worldview is well known. My question is why some people who enjoy the benefits of living under a secular system support a system for others that they themselves would never choose to live under.

That, to me, is the real contradiction—and perhaps a more troubling one than Khalid Hanafi’s remarks themselves.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Taliban's Illusion of Exceptions

-
Image
  The Taliban’s Illusion of Exception. On August 16, the Taliban mark their so-called “victory day” in Afghanistan. They present themselves as an exception to Afghan history, claiming permanence where others failed. Yet the history of this land tells a different story — one in which rulers, no matter how powerful, are ultimately forced to flee. Nearly two centuries ago, on August 3, 1839, Amir Dost Mohammad Khan abandoned Kabul and fled north toward Bukhara. His flight came after the British, fearing his growing ties with Russia, backed his rival Shah Shuja and marched him into Afghanistan with British forces. Kabul fell, and Dost Mohammad had no choice but to escape. His downfall was not only a matter of battlefield defeat but also the result of great-power politics and internal weakness — forces that have toppled Afghan rulers again and again. Shah Shuja himself did not escape this fate. On April 5, 1842, he was killed while trying to flee the country by supporters of Wazir Akb...
Read more

Iran's war on Afghan Refugees

-
Image
    Iran’s War on Afghan Refugees: An Unfair Scapegoating Strategy By Wahab Raofi   Human beings are members of a whole In creation of one essence and soul If one member is afflicted with pain Other members uneasy will remain If you have no sympathy for human pain The name of human you cannot retain n   Saadi Shirazi, Iranian poet   In the aftermath of the 12-day Iran-Israel war, Iranian authorities have launched a quiet campaign of terror — not against an external enemy, but against their own people,” Karen Kramer wrote in The New York Times . What remains largely untold, however, is that the regime’s crackdown falls disproportionately on Afghans residing in Iran. Much like Nazi Germany, which scapegoated Jews to deflect blame for its own internal failures, the Iranian regime targets the most vulnerable — poor and defenseless Afghans — whether they live legally in Iran or seek refuge from turmoil. This form of collective punishment no...
Read more

From Mosque to Throne: Why Mullahs Keep Returning to Power in Afghanistan

-
  From Mosque to Throne: Why Mullahs Keep Returning to Power in Afghanistan When political order collapses, religion remains the only organized force capable of restoring law and order.   The term “Taliban” is loaded, evoking images of religious zealots and Pashtun dominance. It is true that most Taliban leaders are Pashtuns from the south and east, Sunni Muslims from rural areas, who were further indoctrinated in Pakistani religious schools, or madrasas. Yet this contemporary image obscures a deeper historical reality: in Afghanistan, when political order collapses, religion has often been the only organized force capable of restoring law and stability. The Taliban, the seeker,  are not merely a militant group—they embody a recurring pattern in Afghan society. Historically, religious leaders have acted as a reserve force, stepping in to fill political vacuums during times of crisis and retreating to the mosque once stability returned. The Taliban’s rise—from mosque ...
Read more