
Taliban hang up Kalashnikovs to pen memoirs of Afghan war
A flood of books has been written, mostly from a Western perspective, about the war between the US-led forces that invaded Afghanistan in the wake of the September 11 attacks until the Taliban's return to power in 2021.
But in the years since, a proliferation of writings by Taliban figures -- praising their exploits and the achievements of the "Islamic Emirate" -- is now the reigning narrative in Afghanistan.
"No matter what foreigners have written... they have largely ignored the reality of what happened to us and why we were forced to fight," author Khalid Zadran told AFP.
A member of the Haqqani network -- long viewed as one of the most dangerous militant factions in Afghanistan -- he now serves as the spokesman for the capital's police force.
In his 600-page tome in Pashto published in April, he recounts US incursions in his home province of Khost, his childhood steeped in stories of soldiers' "atrocities", and his desire to join the Taliban in the name of his country's "freedom".
"I witnessed horrific stories every day -- mangled bodies on the roadside," he writes in "15 Minutes", a title inspired by a US drone strike he narrowly escaped.
Muhajer Farahi, now a deputy information and culture minister, penned his "Memories of Jihad: 20 Years in Occupation" to "state the facts", he said.
"America, contrary to its claims, has committed cruel and barbaric acts, destroyed our country with bombs, destroyed infrastructure, and has sown discord and cynicism between nations and tribes," he told AFP from his office in central Kabul.
Little attention is paid in either book to the thousands of civilians killed in Taliban attacks -- many of them suicide bombings that entrenched fear across the country for nearly two decades.
Farahi insists the Taliban "were cautious in saving civilians and innocent" lives, while criticising fellow Afghans who collaborated with the pro-Western police as a "stain" on the country.
Rights groups accuse the current Taliban authorities of widespread abuses -- particularly against women and girls, who the United Nations say are victims of what amounts to "gender apartheid".
In his book published in 2023, Farahi claims the Taliban attempted to negotiate -- in vain, he insists -- with the United States over the fate of Osama bin Laden, whose capture or death Washington demanded after his plane hijackers killed around 3,000 people in the September 11, 2001 attacks.
Bin Laden, the leader of Al-Qaeda, who had been based in Afghanistan, was killed by US forces in Pakistan in 2011.
American 'bloodthirsty dragon'
"It was clear... that the Americans had already planned the occupation of Afghanistan," writes Farahi in the English version of his book, which has been translated into five languages.
In the wake of the September 11 attacks, Afghans thought it would "have nothing to do with our country", he continues, but soon realised that Afghanistan would face "punishment".
For 20 years, the war pitted Taliban militants against a US-led coalition of 38 countries supporting the Afghan Republic and its forces.
Tens of thousands of Afghans died in the fighting and in Taliban attacks, as did nearly 6,000 foreign soldiers, including 2,400 Americans.
For Farahi, the war reflects the West's desire to "impose its culture and ideology on other nations".
His disjointed journal mixes battlefield memories with polemical chapters railing against the American "bloodthirsty dragon".
The book "reveals the truths that were not told before because the media, especially the Western media, presented a different picture of the war", he said.
According to him, the "mujahideen", or holy warriors, despite being far less equipped, were able to rely on their unity and God's aid to achieve victory.
New front
Only a few of the new wave of Taliban books have been autobiographies, which appeal to an audience seeking to understand the war "from the inside", according to Zadran.
His book, initially 2,000 copies in Pashto, sold out quickly and another 1,000 are in the works -- along with a Dari-language version, he said.
Many chapters mention Bowe Bergdahl, the US soldier held hostage for five years by the Haqqani network.
He recounts treks through the mountains along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border to move him between hideouts, efforts to convert him to Islam and conversations about his girlfriend back in the United States.
Both accounts end in 2021, before the transformation of the fighters who moved from remote mountain hideouts to the carpeted offices of the capital.
There, their battle has turned diplomatic: the Taliban are now fighting for international recognition of their government.
"The war is over now," Farahi said, "and we want good relations with everyone" -- even with the "bloodthirsty dragon".

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Euronews
an hour ago
- Euronews
Can the EU lower the cap on Russian oil without the US?
The European Union is readying a new round of sanctions against Russia to pile extra pressure on the Kremlin and pressure it to agree to a 30-day unconditional ceasefire in Ukraine, a step that Western allies consider indispensable for serious peace negotiations. Ursula von der Leyen has already provided an outline of what that package, the 18th since February 2022, is supposed to target: Russia's financial sector, the "shadow fleet" and the Nord Stream pipelines, which are currently non-operational. On top of that, the president of the European Commission has pitched a downward revision of the price cap on Russian oil to further squeeze profits from worldwide sales, a crucial cash flow to sustain the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. "We need a real ceasefire, we need Russia at the negotiating table, and we need to end this war. Pressure works, as the Kremlin understands nothing else," von der Leyen said earlier this week after meeting with US Senator Lindsey Graham. But there's a catch: unlike other sanctions the bloc has imposed on Russia, such as the multiple export and import bans, the price cap has a political and practical dimension that exceeds the institutional sphere of Brussels and stretches across the ocean. More specifically, to Washington, DC. The price cap on Russian oil was introduced in December 2022 by the Group of Seven (G7) under the initiative of the Joe Biden administration. It was hailed as an ingenious, ground-breaking mechanism to mobilise the collective power of Western allies and cripple Russia's high-intensity war machine. As part of the plan, the G7, together with Australia, passed laws prohibiting their domestic companies from providing services, such as insurance, financing and flagging, to Russian tankers that sold seaborne crude oil above a predetermined price. The secret lay in market power: for decades, Western firms, particularly British ones, have dominated the sector of Protection and Indemnity (P&I), a type of insurance that gives shipowners broad protection and allows them to cover potentially huge costs from any accidental harm caused to the crew, their property or the environment. Due to the inherent risks of moving oil in high waters, P&I is today considered the norm in maritime trade and a must-have to be accepted in a foreign port. By leveraging their leading firms, the G7 intended to create an extraterritorial effect that would cap the price of Russian oil not only within their jurisdictions but all around the world. Following intense behind-the-scenes talks, the cap was set at $60 per barrel, a compromise between hard-line and cautious member states. The strategy only worked up to a point however. Although the price of Russian Urals oil gradually decreased, it consistently remained above the $60 mark, often exceeding the $70 threshold. The blatant circumvention was attributed to the "shadow fleet" that Russia deployed at high sea. These tankers are so old and poorly kept that they fall outside P&I standards and rely on alternative, obscure insurance systems that escape G7 surveillance. By the time the cap entered into force, Moscow "had spent months building a 'shadow fleet' of tankers, finding new buyers like India and China, and creating new payment systems, to the point that its oil does not need to be greatly discounted to sell," Luis Caricano, a professor at the London School of Economics, wrote in a recent analysis. "What should have been a blow became a manageable problem," Caricano said. With few sectors in the Russian economy left to sanction, Brussels has turned its sight to the cap as a means to tighten the screws on the Kremlin and secure a ceasefire in Ukraine. The Commission has reportedly pitched a revision between $50 and $45 per barrel, which the UK and Canada are believed to support. However, the US has so far refrained from endorsing a lower price cap, raising the stakes ahead of crunch talks at the G7 summit in Alberta, scheduled for mid-June. Now, a tough question emerges: Can the EU dare, and afford, to go it alone? In the strictest legalistic sense, the EU could, indeed, establish a lower price cap on its own. After all, the G7, as an organisation, lacks regulatory powers: each ally amends its laws individually to fulfil a collective mission. In this case, the EU introduced new legislation to prohibit EU companies – rather than, say, American or British companies – from servicing Russian tankers that bypassed the $60-per-barrel cap. Similarly, the bloc could now change the text to adjust that prohibition to a tighter price without waiting for other allies to reciprocate. Here appears the first roadblock: any change to sanctions must be approved by a unanimous vote among member states. It is highly unlikely that all 27 countries would choose to move forward with a lower cap without having an explicit guarantee that Washington will follow suit. Hungary, in particular, has fully aligned itself with the Trump administration and could veto any proposal opposed by the White House. Even if the bloc managed to overcome internal differences and agreed to a lower cap on its own, more formidable obstacles could impede its success. The bloc's revised cap would have to co-exist with America's existing cap. This means that one side of the Atlantic Ocean would apply a $50-per-barrel limit while the other side would apply a $60-per-barrel limit, creating a cacophony for all actors involved. "Different price caps across G7 countries could confuse maritime service providers and weaken overall enforcement," Petras Katinas, an energy analyst at the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA), told Euronews. "A solo move by the EU could cause friction within the Price Cap Coalition, damaging trust and coordination, both of which are crucial for keeping pressure on Russian oil revenues," Katinas added, warning the project could be rendered "largely symbolic". The legislative chaos would immediately benefit the Kremlin, which has long sought to exploit loopholes to evade and undermine international sanctions. Moscow, though, would also face hurdles: the continued crackdown on "shadow fleet" vessels has forced the country to increase its reliance on G7 insurance, which, in theory, could make it easier for the EU to apply the revised measure. "If the EU alone decides to tighten the screws on the cap, it's an additional constraint on Russia's oil exports but not as tight as with a whole of G7 approach," said Elisabetta Cornago, a senior researcher at the Centre for European Reform (CER). Besides practical snags and legal matters, there is geopolitics to consider. One of the reasons why the G7 initiative has fallen short of expectations is that, as the name suggests, it has remained a G7-exclusive plan. Countries in Asia, Latin America and Africa have refused to play along and join the coalition. China and India openly buy Russian crude oil, sometimes to refine it and resell it under a different label. Having the EU and the US go separate ways would further destabilise the Western alliance and create the impression of a transatlantic break-up. But for many, that is already a reality: the "Coalition of the Willing", born after Donald Trump unilaterally launched negotiations with Vladimir Putin, bears testament to the political divide. "The price cap was a G7 + EU initiative, and so in its current form, I do not see any pathway in which the EU could adjust the cap without the support of the broader coalition, including the US," said Ben McWilliams, an affiliate fellow with Bruegel. "That said, the EU is free to implement whatever measures it wants on its own domestic ships and insurance companies, which it could likely encourage the UK to join," McWilliams added. "So the EU can still move ahead – it would just need to be under a different institutional format than currently exists." This week we are joined by Mika Aaltola, a Finnish MEP representing the centre-right European People's Party, Dorota Bawolek, a seasoned EU correspondent for Polish broadcaster TVP and Ian Lesser, Vice President of the German Marshall Fund, the transatlantic think tank. US President Donald Trump's renewed trade offensive has left Brussels rather stressed with sweeping tariffs hitting European steel, aluminium, and car exports — and threats of more to come. European Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič is trying to defuse the crisis, warning that retaliatory EU measures could kick in as early as July 14. MEP Mika Aaltola blasted the US approach as 'unfair treatment'. The OECD also warned this week that Trump's tariffs are dragging global growth to its weakest levels since the COVID-19 pandemic. In a very tight presidential race, Poland elected conservative Karol Nawrocki, a nationalist and eurosceptic, narrowly defeating pro-EU candidate and Warsaw mayor Rafał Trzaskowski. The result marks a blow for Prime Minister Donald Tusk who has called for a vote of confidence in his government early next week. Nawrocki's rhetoric — emphasizing national sovereignty, anti-migrant policies, and a rejection of 'Brussels diktats' — has alarmed Europhiles. However, his nationalist platform resonated with a rather divided electorate. "He's not very presidential", Dorota Bawolek told the panel adding that history shows Poles prefer an 'ordinary guy'. Finally, the panel discuss the Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez' diplomatic setback after the EU Council rejected his proposal to make Catalan, Basque, and Galician official EU languages. The move, promised to Catalan separatists in exchange for political support, was rejected by member states over fears of a domino effect involving other regional languages. Watch the full episode in the player above.


France 24
3 hours ago
- France 24
French mayor to go on trial over alleged sex-tape blackmail of political rival
A French mayor accused of using a sex tape to blackmail a political rival is set to go on trial in September after a court on Friday ordered him to face criminal proceedings. Gaël Perdriau, who leads the city of Saint-Etienne in central France, is accused of orchestrating the plot in 2015, using footage of his deputy with a male escort. The two magistrates investigating the case ordered that Perdriau, 52, be tried for blackmail, theft, embezzlement of public funds by a public official and participation in a criminal association, Lyon 's chief prosecutor Thierry Dran said in a statement. The case, triggered by a whistleblower in 2022, involves a 2015 video of former deputy mayor Gilles Artigues receiving a massage from a male escort in a Paris hotel. Perdriau allegedly demanded political loyalty and electoral concessions from Artigues in return for keeping the compromising video private, according to court documents seen by AFP. Despite being ousted from the conservative Republicans party and under pressure to resign, Perdriau has maintained his innocence and continues to hold office – even hinting at a 2026 re-election bid. The trial is set to take place between September 22 and 26, pending any appeals, the prosecutor added.

LeMonde
6 hours ago
- LeMonde
Trump says he's focusing on Russia, China, Iran and 'not thinking about Elon Musk': 'I just wish him well'
US President Donald Trump said Friday, June 6, that Elon Musk had "lost his mind" but insisted he wanted to move on from the fiery split with his billionaire former ally. The blistering public break-up between the world's richest person and the world's most powerful is fraught with political and economic risks all around. Trump had scrapped the idea of a call with Musk and was even thinking of ditching the red Tesla he bought at the height of their bromance, White House officials told AFP. "Honestly I've been so busy working on China, working on Russia, working on Iran... I'm not thinking about Elon Musk, I just wish him well," Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One en route to his New Jersey golf club late Friday. Earlier, Trump told US broadcasters that he now wanted to focus instead on passing his "big, beautiful" mega-bill before Congress – Musk's harsh criticism of which had sparked their break-up. But the 78-year-old Republican could not stop himself from taking aim at his South African-born friend-turned-enemy. "You mean the man who has lost his mind?" Trump said in a call with ABC when asked about Musk, adding that he was "not particularly" interested in talking to the tycoon. Trump later told Fox News that Musk had "lost it." Just a week ago Trump gave Musk a glowing send-off as he left his cost-cutting role at the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) after four months working there. 'Very disappointed' While there had been reports of tensions, the sheer speed at which their relationship imploded stunned Washington. After Musk called Trump's spending bill an "abomination" on Tuesday, Trump hit back in an Oval Office diatribe on Thursday in which he said he was "very disappointed" by the entrepreneur. Trump's spending bill faces a difficult path through Congress as it will raise the US deficit, while critics say it will cut health care for millions of the poorest Americans. The row then went nuclear, with Musk slinging insults at Trump and accusing him without evidence of being in government files on disgraced financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Trump hit back with the power of the US government behind him, saying he could cancel the SpaceX boss's multi-billion-dollar rocket and satellite contracts. Trump struck a milder tone late Friday when asked how seriously he is considering cutting Musk's contracts. "It's a lot of money, it's a lot of subsidy, so we'll take a look – only if it's fair. Only if it's to be fair for him and the country," he said. Musk apparently also tried to de-escalate social media hostilities. The right-wing tech baron rowed back on a threat to scrap his company's Dragon spacecraft – vital for ferrying NASA astronauts to and from the International Space Station. And on Friday, the usually garrulous poster kept a low social media profile on his X social network. But the White House denied reports that they would talk. "The president does not intend to speak to Musk today," a senior White House official told AFP. A second official said Musk had requested a call. Tesla giveaway? Tesla stocks tanked more than 14% on Thursday amid the row, losing some $100 billion of the company's market value, but recovered partly on Friday. Trump is now considering either selling or giving away the cherry red Tesla S that he announced he had bought from Musk's firm in March. The electric vehicle was still parked on the White House grounds on Friday. "He's thinking about it, yes," a senior White House official told AFP when asked if Trump would sell or give it away. Trump and Musk had posed inside the car at a bizarre event in March, when the president turned the White House into a pop-up Tesla showroom after viral protests against Musk's DOGE role. But while Trump appeared to hold many of the cards, Musk also has some to play. His wealth allowed him to be the biggest donor to Trump's 2024 campaign, to the tune of nearly $300 million. Any further support for the 2026 midterm election now appears in doubt –while Musk could also use his money to undermine Trump's support on the right.