
August 15, 2021: The Return of Darkness for Afghanistan
August 15 holds a solemn place in the collective memory of the Afghan people as a symbol of state collapse, the onset of darkness, and the failure of the international conscience. On this day, a fundamentalist, misogynistic, and anti-human group used force to reassert its control over the fate of a nation. This moment marks one of the darkest chapters in contemporary Afghan history. It was not only a political collapse but the destruction of half a century of women's struggle for freedom, equality, and human dignity – a disintegration of core human rights and values.
The Taliban, a group born out of regional and international intelligence projects, assumed power on August 15, 2021 through the humiliating surrender of Kabul. As with the group's origin, the Taliban's return to power was sealed by agreements among global powers, rather than the Afghan people's will.
The result was the total erasure of Afghan women, who are not only denied education, political participation, and civil engagement but stripped of the basic right to exist in society. The Taliban formally and completely deny the social and individual presence of Afghan women.
United Nations reports, including those by Richard Bennett, the U.N. special rapporteur on human rights in Afghanistan, have documented systematic, organized violence against women: arbitrary arrests, imprisonment, torture, gang rape, forced marriages, and targeted killings are all weapons in the deliberate silencing of Afghan women.
The Taliban's hostility toward education, especially women's education, is neither accidental nor superficial; it is a fundamental pillar of their ideology. Since their inception, the Taliban have viewed education not as a human right but as a threat to their political, ethnic, and religious dominance.
An educated woman is one who reads history, understands her rights, knows laws and international agreements, raises her voice, and refuses silence in the face of injustice. To the Taliban, this is unacceptable. Therefore, the systematic and total exclusion of women from schools and universities is not merely political but part of a broader project to remove the active, critical, and aware woman from society's fabric.
This policy is deeply rooted in the Taliban's primitive, patriarchal interpretation of Islam, entwined with tribal culture and ignorance. In this view, women are not equal partners in life and society but property and sources of 'fitna' (discord). Hence, they must be confined to the home, kept in ignorance, and relegated to reproductive and servile roles.
More importantly, excluding women from education is not only a goal itself but a means to produce a generation that is purposefully kept ignorant and obedient, deprived of tools for critique and change. Children born to illiterate mothers face a bleak future. The Taliban, aware of this fact, are advancing a 'generation destruction' plan by excluding women from education and public life.
Banning girls' education, closing schools and universities, firing female teachers, and threatening families who send children to school are one side of the coin; the other side is replacing curricula for schools that still exist with extremist content. This is a calculated scheme to stifle awareness and expand ignorance and extremism in Afghanistan and the region. Ignorance is the foundation of Taliban power; knowledge is its end.
More shocking than Afghanistan's fall has been the shameful silence – and even disgraceful complicity – of the international community in the face of the Taliban's egregious abuses. Countries claiming to defend freedom and human rights today are moving to normalize relations with a group that commits crimes against humanity.
Russia, Germany, China, and other global powers engage with the Taliban as if forgetting that the Taliban exclude women from society, ban girls from education, and suppress critics. This policy not only legitimizes violence and reactionism but erodes the moral foundations of a global order based on human rights. Today, human rights have become a selective political tool, not a universal principle.
While politicians fled and global institutions watched, Afghan women stood firm. With bare hands and no support, facing a machine of violence and terror, they marched in the streets, shouted, wrote, protested, were arrested, tortured, and killed – but never silenced. This resistance is not only about education and employment but a comprehensive fight to preserve human dignity, social existence, and the voice of future generations.
Despite all the cries, resistances, and sacrifices by Afghan women, the bitter question remains: Why do global institutions not hear us? Why do the United Nations, the European Union, and countries professing freedom and human rights fail to provide real, practical support to Afghan women's resistance? Is our victimhood insufficiently strategic? Is our pain politically unprofitable?
August 15, 2021, marked not only the fall of a government but a historical moment of moral failure – the collapse of human values and the principles the international community long claimed to uphold. On this day, not just Afghanistan, but humanity's trust in the promises of the free world was broken.
This history reminds us all how nations become victims of geopolitical interests; how women, children, and intellectuals are silently erased in a puzzle of security deals; and how human rights bodies, meant to be the voice of the oppressed, remain inert at critical junctures.
In a world where the U.N., the Security Council, and international institutions merely witness repeated crimes, it is the conscience of people and history that will one day shout for justice. That day, though perhaps distant, is inevitable. History will judge – not based on what was written, but on what was ignored.
And on that day, Afghan women, with empty hands but mountain-like resolve, will stand with the truth. They are not only victims of this dark era but the awakened conscience of the future.
This year, may August 15 serve as a painful but necessary reminder that silence in the face of injustice is itself complicity in crime.

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


The Mainichi
5 hours ago
- The Mainichi
Let's strive for global peace as we move toward 100th anniv. of WWII's end in Japan
Around the world today, gun triggers are being pulled and missiles are flying about, with "nuclear threats" going unchallenged. Humanity went through two worldwide wars in the 20th century. Out of regret over the catastrophic sacrifices paid, the United Nations was established. Conflicts were meant to be resolved through dialogue. Eighty years on, what is unfolding before our eyes today is the resurgence of "rule by force" and the nightmarish sight of the United States breaking rules when it was the guardian of post-World War II order. Insanity has shown no signs of abating, with the United Nations not even on the fringes of their mind. Japan also once experienced an era ruled by the madness of war. On the outskirts of the city of Nagano, central Japan, lies an underground bunker known as "Matsushiro Imperial Headquarters," built by drilling bedrock in a checkerboard pattern. It extends a total of more than 10 kilometers long. There was even a makeshift "Imperial Palace." The construction of the bunker commenced in the fall of 1944, and it was almost 80% complete before Japan was defeated in the war. The regime of the time was eyeing a "decisive battle on mainland Japan." The bunker was to serve as the nerve center of the government to give commands safely while avoiding aerial bombings. The "absolute national defense sphere" -- set during the war as essential regions for Japan to continue the war -- had already collapsed. As the country inclined toward spiritualism, calls for "suicide attacks by 100 million people" were made. The nation turned its back on truly necessary decisions, resulting in victims piling up through air raids, the Battle of Okinawa and the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. What Japan clung to was "preserving the national polity" centering around the emperor. It took no account of the lives of the people. The humongous bunker in the Shinshu region tells us that, after all these years that have passed, these were the very realities of the war. So how far has Japan managed to break with insanity? Certainly, Japan has never once exchanged fire since the end of World War II. The question is the "shadow of the United States" being cast over the country. The emperor at the time of the conflict was not prosecuted for war crimes at the discretion of the Allied occupation authorities, allowing Japan to return to the international community with its war responsibility being left ambiguous. The country initially pushed ahead with complete demilitarization. The tide changed with the Korean War, when Japan was considered a frontline base against communism and the wheels of rearmament began to turn. Japan's postwar diplomacy was based on the Yoshida Doctrine, named after then Prime Minister Shigeru Yoshida. If Japan was to achieve economic growth while leaving its security to the U.S., it could help show off the superiority of the Western allies. This also fitted Washington's international strategy. After the end of the Cold War, regional conflicts have erupted. The U.S. stepped up its pressure on Japan to contribute internationally. The answer Japan came up with was security legislation that paved the way for the country's limited exercise of the right to collective self-defense. The integration of Japan and the U.S. has accelerated. Yet concerns linger over Japan's endurance against insanity if the country remains passive. It is even more so amid the circumstances where the U.S. is backing away from its role of maintaining international order. The rise of populism is making it difficult to confront insanity. Globalization has generated winners and losers, and the middle class that has supported democracy is shrinking. Entwined with anxiety about the future among youth and xenophobic sentiment, populism turns into a typhoon while teaming up with social media. The storm has also hit Japan. Politics vies for immediate "achievements," raising instability. Threats are being fueled. Some of the candidates who referred to Japan going nuclear in their campaigning for the House of Councillors election got elected. The late novelist and historian Ryotaro Shiba rated Japan around the early Showa era (1926-1989), when it was overshadowed by the war, as "itai" -- literally a child who doesn't feel like one's own. Even if the period was a mutant, it was part of Japan's history that is connected to modern society. Japanese society in the current Reiwa era (2019-) is urged to be one that will check where it stands and speak out if it finds something is amiss, so it will never again tumble down the hill toward destruction. We will continue our reporting with the lessons from having fueled parochial nationalism etched in our hearts. Let us not make the present day an interwar period, but carry on with the "postwar" era. For that to happen, we would first like to see global peace as we move toward the 100th anniversary of the war's end. (Japanese original by Hirotomo Maeda, Executive Editor)


Yomiuri Shimbun
7 hours ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
80 Years after End of WWII / Taking the Lead in Restoring Peace / Japan's Ability to Chart Diplomatic Vision is Tested
Friday marked the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II. The national memorial service for the war dead is set to be held in Tokyo. It is hoped that heartfelt prayers for the 3.1 million people who lost their lives in the war can be offered and that a pledge for peace can be renewed. Japan has enjoyed peace and prosperity over the past 80 years. This is solely because it has been able to continue its economic activities and other endeavors within the U.S.-led international order based on the rule of law and free trade. However, that international order is becoming increasingly shaky. This is partly because the United States has begun to turn its back on multilateral cooperation. Urgent need to rebuild U.N. The U.N. Security Council is in a position to lead the world toward peace and stability, but its key member Russia, a permanent member of the council, has continued its aggression against Ukraine. In the Middle East, Israel has gone beyond its right to self-defense and is killing large numbers of civilians in the Palestinian territory of Gaza. Japan must not be allowed to merely stand by and watch this situation, or continue to be a beneficiary of peace. Japan should take the lead in firing up international opinion for the rebuilding of order and the restoration of peace. Japan has long provided help to developing countries through its official development assistance and other means. It also maintains good relationships with Middle East countries. Japan must leverage this accumulated experience and strengthen its efforts to engage with countries involved in conflicts. The decline of U.S. influence and Russia's reckless behavior have resulted in the U.N. Security Council becoming dysfunctional. U.N. General Assembly resolutions are non-binding, but it is important for Japan to cooperate with other member states and contribute to shaping international opinion to ensure that Russia and other countries comply with them. Japan's capabilities to chart a vision are being put to the test in the pursuit of global stability. In 2016, then Prime Minister Shinzo Abe proposed the concept of a 'free and open Indo-Pacific' on the occasion of the sixth Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD) held in Kenya. The concept, which aims to promote free trade among other principles across the Pacific and Africa as a whole, has also been incorporated into the diplomatic strategies of the United States and European countries. However, it is regrettable that Japan has not been able to communicate such influential diplomatic policies since then. The ninth TICAD will begin in Yokohama on Wednesday. This should be an opportunity to deepen cooperation between the liberal camp, which includes Japan, and Africa. At home, the Liberal Democratic Party, which suffered a crushing defeat in the recent House of Councillors election, has been in turmoil for nearly a month over the question of whether Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba will resign or remain in office. With politics in a state of paralysis, the government is in no state to formulate a new diplomatic policy. It is essential that the prime minister quickly decides to resign, paving the way for a stable new administration to be inaugurated. Populism spreading The international situation is becoming difficult to foresee. U.S. President Donald Trump has championed an 'America First' policy and imposed high tariffs, even on its allies. In Europe, xenophobic populism is rampant, driven by dissatisfaction with policies on accepting immigrants and refugees, and the moderate centrist forces that led postwar development are losing ground. Japan is no exception. The established political parties that long held a dominant position after the war have lost public trust and, in their place, new opposition forces advocating for what appears to be antiforeignism have begun to rise. How to rebuild democracy at this crossroads is a serious challenge for Japan and other countries. The current situation, in which many democratic countries are turning inward, could lead to a power vacuum. Forces seeking to unjustly seize territory and resources may grow even stronger. China has repeatedly intruded into Japan's territorial waters around the Senkaku Islands. Recently, it has deployed aircraft carriers in the western Pacific and conducted takeoff and landing drills with carrier-based aircraft. North Korea is said to be seeking to improve its nuclear and missile capabilities in exchange for sending troops to Russia, which has continued its aggression against Ukraine. Japan cannot let its guard down. How to avoid a power vacuum In light of the deteriorating security environment, Japan plans to increase its defense spending to 2% of its gross domestic product. Meanwhile, European countries are moving toward raising their military expenses, including their defense-related public works spending, to 5%. What defense efforts should Japan make to protect its security? It is necessary to deepen the discussion not only within the government but also among the ruling and opposition parties. Trump has expressed dissatisfaction that, under the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty, the United States is obliged to defend Japan while Japan has no such reciprocal obligation. The costs Japan bears for U.S. bases stationed in Japan far exceed those of other U.S. allies. Trump's claims are unacceptable. The government must persistently explain the immense benefits the Japan-U.S. alliance brings to the United States. (From The Yomiuri Shimbun, Aug. 15, 2025)


Yomiuri Shimbun
8 hours ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Negotiators Won't Reach an Agreement in Geneva on a Plastic Pollution Treaty
GENEVA (AP) — Negotiators working on a treaty to address the global crisis of plastic pollution won't reach an agreement in Geneva Friday. Nations were meeting for an 11th day at the United Nations office in Geneva to try to complete a landmark treaty to end the plastic pollution crisis. They remain deadlocked over whether the treaty should reduce exponential growth of plastic production and put global, legally binding controls on toxic chemicals used to make plastics. The negotiations at the U.N. hub were supposed to be the last round and produce the first legally binding treaty on plastic pollution, including in the oceans. But just like at the meeting in South Korea last year, they're leaving without a treaty. Luis Vayas Valdivieso, the chair of the negotiating committee, wrote and presented two drafts of treaty text in Geneva based on the views expressed by the nations. The representatives from 184 countries did not agree to use either one as the basis for their negotiations. Valdivieso said Friday morning as the delegates reconvened in the assembly hall that no further action is being proposed at this stage on the latest draft. Delegates are still meeting and have not decided on next steps yet. Representatives of Norway, Australia, Tuvalu and others nations said they were deeply disappointed to be leaving Geneva without a treaty. European Commissioner Jessika Roswall said the European Union and its member states had higher expectations for this meeting and while the draft falls short on their demands, it's a good basis for another negotiating session. 'The Earth is not ours only. We are stewards for those who come after us. Let us fulfill that duty,' she said. Saudi Arabia said both drafts lacked balance, and Saudi and Kuwaiti negotiators said the latest proposal takes other states' views more into account and addressed plastic production, which they consider outside the scope of the treaty. That draft, released early Friday, did not include a limit on plastic production, but recognized that current levels of production and consumption are 'unsustainable' and global action is needed. New language had been added to say these levels exceed current waste management capacities and are projected to increase further, 'thereby necessitating a coordinated global response to halt and reverse such trends.' The objective of the treaty was also revamped to state that the accord would be based on a comprehensive approach that addresses the full lifecycle of plastics. The biggest issue of the talks has been whether the treaty should impose caps on producing new plastic or focus instead on things like better design, recycling and reuse. Powerful oil- and gas-producing nations and the plastics industry oppose production limits. They want a treaty focused on better waste management and reuse. Every year, the world makes more than 400 million tons of new plastic, and that could grow by about 70% by 2040 without policy changes. About 100 countries want to limit production. Many have said it's also essential to address toxic chemicals used to make plastics. Thursday was the last scheduled day of negotiations, but work on the revised draft continued into Friday. Science shows what it will take to end pollution and protect human health, said Bethanie Carney Almroth, an ecotoxicology professor at Sweden's University of Gothenburg who coleads the Scientists' Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty. The science supports addressing the full lifecycle of plastics, beginning with extraction and production, and restricting some chemicals to ensure plastics are safer and more sustainable, she added. 'The science has not changed,' she said. 'It cannot be down negotiated.' Environmentalists, waste pickers and Indigenous leaders and many business executives traveled to the talks to make their voices heard. Some used creative tactics, but are leaving disappointed. Indigenous leaders sought a treaty that recognizes their rights and knowledge.