Syrian Jews hope for revival of ancient heritage
Syria's tiny Jewish community and Syrian Jews abroad are trying to build bridges after Bashar al-Assad's ouster in the hope of reviving their ancient heritage before the community dies out.
This week, a small number of Jews living in Damascus, along with others from abroad, held a group prayer for the first time in more than three decades, in the Faranj synagogue in Damascus's Old City.
"There were nine of us Jews (in Syria). Two died recently," community leader Bakhour Chamntoub told AFP in his home in the Old City's Jewish quarter.
"I'm the youngest. The rest are elderly people who stay in their homes," the tailor in his sixties added in a thick Damascus accent.
After Islamist-led rebels finally toppled Assad in December last year after nearly 14 years of conflict, the country's dwindling community has recently welcomed back several Syrian Jews who had emigrated.
Syria's millennia-old Jewish community was permitted to practise their faith under Assad's father, Hafez, and had friendly relations with their fellow countrymen.
But the strongman restricted their movement and prevented them from travelling abroad until 1992. After that, their numbers plummeted from around 5,000 to just a handful of individuals, headed by Chamntoub, who oversees their affairs.
AFP correspondents met with Chamntoub, known to neighbours and friends as "Eid", after he returned from burying an elderly Jewish woman.
"Now there are seven of us," he said, adding that a Palestinian neighbour had looked after the woman during her final days.
- 'Tree uprooted' -
The 1967 Arab-Israeli war cast a heavy cloud over the Jewish communities in several Arab countries.
Syria lost most of the strategic Golan Heights to Israel, which later annexed them in a move never recognised by the international community as a whole.
Chamntoub said the community did not experience any "harassment" under Bashar al-Assad's rule.
He said an official from the new Islamist-led administration had visited him and assured him the community and its properties would not be harmed.
Chamntoub expressed hope of expanding ties between the remaining Jews in Syria and the thousands living abroad to revive their shared heritage and restore places of worship and other properties.
On his Facebook page, he publishes news about the community -- usually death notices -- as well as images of the Jewish quarter and synagogues in Damascus.
He says nostalgic Syrian Jews abroad often make comments, recalling the district and its surroundings.
At the Faranj synagogue, Syrian-American Rabbi Yusuf Hamra, 77, led what he said was the first group prayer in decades.
"I was the last rabbi to leave Syria," he said, adding that he had lived in the United States for more than 30 years.
"We love this country," said Hamra, who arrived days earlier on his first visit since emigrating.
"The day I left Syria with my family, I felt I was a tree that had been uprooted," he said.
- 'Family ties' abroad -
His son Henry, travelling with him, said he was happy to be in the synagogue.
"This synagogue was the home for all Jews -- it was the first stop for Jews abroad when they would visit Syria," the 47-year-old said.
When war erupted in Syria in 2011 with Assad's brutal suppression of anti-government protests, synagogues shuttered and the number of Jews visiting plummeted.
In the now devastated Damascus suburb of Jobar, a historic synagogue that once drew pilgrims from around the world was ransacked and looted, with a Torah scroll believed to be one of the world's oldest among the items stolen.
Chamntoub said his joy at publicly worshipping in the Faranj synagogue again was "indescribable".
He expressed hope that "Jews will return to their neighbourhood and their people" in Syria, saying: "I need Jews with me in the neighbourhood."
Hamra said that like many emigrants, he was hesitant about returning permanently.
"My freedom is one thing, my family ties are another," he said, noting that many in the 100,000-strong diaspora were long established in the West and reluctant to give up their lives and lifestyles there.
Chamntoub said many Jews had told him they regretted leaving Syria but that he doesn't expect "a full return".
"Maybe they will come for trips or to do business" but not to stay, he said.
He expressed hope of establishing a museum in Syria to commemorate its Jewish community.
"If they don't return or get married and have children here, we will end soon," he said.
mam-kls/lg/kir
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
13 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Democratic governors will defend immigration policies before Republican-led House panel
WASHINGTON (AP) — As President Donald Trump spars with California's governor over immigration enforcement, Republicans in Congress are calling other Democratic governors to the Capitol on Thursday to question them over policies limiting cooperation with federal immigration authorities. The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform posted a video ahead of the hearing highlighting crimes allegedly committed by immigrants in the U.S. illegally and pledging that 'sanctuary state governors will answer to the American people.' The hearing is to include testimony from Govs. JB Pritzker of Illinois, Tim Walz of Minnesota and Kathy Hochul of New York. There's no legal definition of a sanctuary jurisdiction , but the term generally refers to governments with policies limiting cooperation with federal immigration authorities. Courts previously have upheld the legality of such laws. But Trump's administration has sued Colorado, Illinois, New York and several cities — including Chicago and Rochester, New York — asserting their policies violate the U.S. Constitution or federal law. Illinois, Minnesota and New York also were among 14 states and hundreds of cities and counties recently listed by the Department of Homeland Security as 'sanctuary jurisdictions defying federal immigration law.' The list later was removed from the department's website after criticism that it errantly included some local governments that support Trump's immigration policies. As Trump steps up immigration enforcement, some Democratic-led states have intensified their resistance by strengthening state laws restricting cooperation with immigration agents. Following clashes between crowds of protesters and immigration agents in Los Angeles, Trump deployed the National Guard to protect federal buildings and agents, and California Gov. Gavin Newsom accused Trump of declaring 'a war' on the underpinnings of American democracy. The House Oversight Committee has long been a partisan battleground, and in recent months it has turned its focus to immigration policy. Thursday's hearing follows a similar one in March in which the Republican-led committee questioned the Democratic mayors of Chicago, Boston, Denver and New York about sanctuary policies. Heavily Democratic Chicago has been a sanctuary city for decades. In 2017, then-Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner, a Republican, signed legislation creating statewide protections for immigrants. The Illinois Trust Act prohibits police from searching, arresting or detaining people solely because of their immigration status. But it allows local authorities to hold people for federal immigration authorities if there's a valid criminal warrant. Pritzker, who succeeded Rauner in 2019, said in remarks prepared for the House committee that violent criminals 'have no place on our streets, and if they are undocumented, I want them out of Illinois and out of our country.' 'But we will not divert our limited resources and officers to do the job of the federal government when it is not in the best interest of our state, our local communities, or the safety of our residents,' he said. Pritzker has been among Trump's most outspoken opponents and is considered a potential 2028 presidential candidate. He said Illinois has provided shelter and services to more than 50,000 immigrants who were sent there from other states. A Department of Justice lawsuit against New York challenges a 2019 law that allows immigrants illegally in the U.S. to receive New York driver's licenses and shields driver's license data from federal immigration authorities. That built upon a 2017 executive order by then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo that prohibited New York officials from inquiring about or disclosing a person's immigration status to federal authorities, unless required by law. Hochul's office said law enforcement officers still can cooperate with federal immigration authorities when people are convicted of or under investigation for crimes. Since Hochul took office in 2021, her office said, the state has transferred more than 1,300 incarcerated noncitizens to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement at the completion of their state sentences. Minnesota doesn't have a statewide sanctuary law protecting immigrants in the U.S. illegally, though Minneapolis and St. Paul both restrict the extent to which police and city employees can cooperate with immigration enforcement. Some laws signed by Walz have secured benefits for people regardless of immigration status. But at least one of those is getting rolled back. The Minnesota Legislature, meeting in a special session , passed legislation Monday to repeal a 2023 law that allowed adults in the U.S. illegally to be covered under a state-run health care program for the working poor. Walz insisted on maintaining eligibility for children who aren't in the country legally, ___ Lieb reported from Jefferson City, Mo. Also contributing were Associated Press writers Anthony Izaguirre in Albany, N.Y.; Steve Karnowski in St. Paul, Minn.; and Sophia Tareen in Chicago. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
IU's governance crisis reflects dangerous trend undermining democracy
Recent commentary in IndyStar defended Indiana University's leadership and questioned the focus and intensity of faculty criticism. But what's happening at IU isn't just a campus controversy — it's part of a national trend. Across the country, public institutions are quietly dismantling the democratic processes that once guided their decisions. IU has become a flashpoint not because of any one leader or protest, but because it shows how shared governance and expert input are being replaced by top-down control. For over a century, American universities have followed a model known as shared governance. That means faculty, administrators and trustees work together to shape a school's mission and values. It's not just tradition — it's a safeguard. It ensures that decisions about teaching, research and student life are made by the people who do the work. In recent years, IU's shared governance has been steadily eroded through a series of top-down decisions. The April 2024 no-confidence vote in President Pamela Whitten by IU Bloomington faculty — 827 to 29 — wasn't about politics or personalities. It was a response to a pattern: refusing to recognize graduate workers' union efforts; sending state police to arrest peaceful protestors in Dunn Meadow; and canceling a long-planned exhibition by Palestinian-American artist Samia Halaby without consulting curators or faculty committees. These decisions bypassed longstanding university processes like faculty review, shared governance consultation and curatorial oversight — processes that have historically guided how academic and cultural decisions are made. Now, that erosion has been written into law. Indiana's House Enrolled Act 1001, passed in 2024, officially reduced faculty governance to an 'advisory only' role. Some argue that faculty governance was always advisory in practice — but this law removes any doubt. It replaces collaboration with control. Opinion: I was running for IU Board of Trustees — until Mike Braun took it over What is happening at IU is a symptom of a pattern playing out more broadly. We're seeing the slow dismantling of democratic decision-making in public institutions. At the federal level, the National Institutes of Health was recently blocked from posting notices in the Federal Register, which froze the review of over 16,000 new research grant applications — worth about $1.5 billion. Around the same time, the agency abruptly canceled more than 1,400 already awarded grants, halting active research projects without the usual expert review or explanation. Both the review of new applications and the continuation of awarded grants typically rely on deliberative panels of scientists to ensure decisions are fair, transparent and based on merit. In both of these cases, those processes were bypassed. Though some meetings have resumed, the damage is clear: Critical systems can be disrupted with little warning and no input from the people who are supposed to guide them. Other federal agencies have followed suit. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration have recently bypassed their own expert advisory committees in making major public health decisions. The Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee was not convened to review or vote on the 2024–2025 influenza vaccine strain selection, breaking with decades of precedent. Around the same time, both ACIP and VRBPAC were sidelined in the rollout of new COVID-19 vaccine guidance and, just this week, the entire 17-member ACIP committee was fired. A top CDC vaccine adviser resigned, citing concerns that the agency was ignoring its own deliberative processes. Whether in universities or federal agencies, the pattern is the same: Leaders are cutting out the people who should have a voice. That might seem faster or easier — but it comes at a profound and ultimately self-defeating cost. When decisions are made without input from those most affected, institutions don't just lose trust — they undermine their own legitimacy and effectiveness. And in a democracy, trust is everything. Opinion: IU deserves a serious president. Pamela Whitten must go. This isn't a partisan issue. No matter your politics, the loss of open, thoughtful decision-making should be alarming. Processes like faculty governance, peer review and public advisory boards aren't meant to slow things down or push a political agenda. They exist because they lead to better decisions. When they're ignored, we don't just lose transparency. We lose trust. Indiana's public universities — and all public institutions — can only succeed when decisions are made with the people who do the work, not imposed on them from above. When we exclude the experts, educators, scientists, and advisors who sustain these institutions, we don't just weaken the process. We weaken the outcomes. Gabriel Bosslet, is a professor of clinical medicine and Tracey Wilkinson an associate professor of pediatrics at the Indiana University School of Medicine. This article originally appeared on Indianapolis Star: Indiana University's shared governance is under attack | Opinion
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘An attack is imminent': The Afghan ambassador fighting the Taliban's grip from afar
When Kabul fell on August 15, 2021, Afghanistan's ambassador to Italy and the UN agencies stationed in Rome was travelling through Madrid airport. As a vocal critic of the Taliban, Khaled Ahmad Zekriya knew he needed to get back to the embassy in the Italian capital as a matter of urgency, as Western forces withdrew from his home country. 'There was an Afghan woman at the airport and she literally collapsed,' he remembers. 'That's when I first realised what had happened. I made it back to Rome at around 10 o'clock at night and we immediately removed the flag from the front gate.' The career diplomat had been posted to Italy for less than a year when the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan under President Ashraf Ghani was overthrown – to be replaced by an 'interim' all-male administration of hardline clerics, seasoned fighters and wanted terrorists. Many, including Zekriya, had seen it coming following the signing of the United States-Taliban deal in Doha, Qatar, 18 months earlier, which significantly weakened the Afghan National Defence and Security Forces' resistance to the Taliban insurgency amid false promises of a more 'inclusive' approach. For Afghanistan's diplomats stationed around the world – the last remaining outposts of the now-deposed government, established after the US-led invasion in 2001 – it posed a serious challenge. Should they swear allegiance to the new Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, or face being completely cut off from their homeland – or worse? As someone who has made nurturing democracy in the country his life's work, Zekriya was never going to surrender. 'I'm not going to work with a government that espouses extreme Islamic views,' he says. 'It's not a legitimate government.' Today, almost four years on from the capture of the capital where he was born and raised, the father of one remains an ambassador adrift. While the palatial Afghan embassy in Via Nomentana, dating back to 1914, does carry out limited consular services, its consular paperwork is not officially recognised by the Taliban, leaving Zekriya, 56, his Afghan wife Lina, 47, and the mission's dwindling staff in limbo. How the funding works is, for now, off the record. 'I knew that the Republic would collapse eventually,' he nods, recalling the last election, when both the incumbent Ashraf Ghani and his opponent Abdullah Abdullah claimed to have won, quite preposterously holding concurrent inauguration ceremonies. 'We had two presidents who thought they had both been elected. Imagine! These were elections where voters lost fingers.' Lost fingers? 'They were chopped off by the Taliban if they didn't vote in the right way,' he explains. 'The Doha agreement that was meant to lead to the formation of an inclusive government through intra-Afghan dialogue; that never happened.' As soon as the deal was signed, 8,000 contractors who had been taking care of transportation, logistics and maintenance left Afghanistan. 'We knew that after their departure, the military would collapse. It wasn't that the military was not brave. We fought. We lost close to 72,000 men and women alongside the Americans, the Italians and others. But when you look back on it, the Taliban were regrouping right under the very noses of the US and then hoodwinking them into believing that they were more moderate than their predecessors,' Zekriya continues. 'I've said it from the beginning, that there is no such thing as moderate Taliban. So I knew it was coming and I knew I had to improvise.' As chaotic scenes played out on the world stage, with the Americans orchestrating the largest non-combatant evacuation operation in US military history, and our own foreign secretary Dominic Raab holidaying in Crete, plucky Zekriya was preparing to defend himself from an internal coup attempt. 'The reason I took the flag from downstairs to upstairs was to protect this symbol, which personifies everything; the territorial integrity of Afghanistan, the sovereignty of Afghanistan, the independence of Afghanistan, its historical flag. 'But the most important thing for me was to protect this embassy, this enclave, because I knew sooner or later, there would be dissent, there would be diplomatic mutiny. I knew I had to keep it open, not only to provide consular services but also to be able to represent Afghanistan, in both bilateral and multilateral forums. 'We're providing cultural diplomacy, human rights diplomacy, ecclesiastical diplomacy and we have certain projects that we're working on with various organisations to assist girls in Afghanistan. We're working very hard because we believe the only way we can prevail in Afghanistan is through negotiation; through peace.' Having served in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and taught diplomacy to Afghan civil servants, the music-loving University of California San Diego graduate knew he had to remain a voice for moderate Muslims both at home and abroad. But one diplomat at the embassy, which serves about 23,000 Afghans in Italy, had other ideas and attempted to overthrow Zekriya. 'He entered the embassy and physically assaulted me but I was able to protect myself,' says the ambassador, recalling the incident, which happened a few months after Kabul fell in 2021. The Taliban sympathiser was kicked out, along with others pledging allegiance to their new jihadist masters. Others simply fled. 'I had to block certain bank accounts to make sure they wouldn't have access and then I also had to look to the future. How are we going to be able to maintain this embassy with the little money we had? How were we going to pay people's wages?' Last year, the Taliban announced that the consular paperwork of 14 of Afghanistan's missions abroad – including in Italy – was null and void. 'We used to issue 20 to 30 visas a month – but now we can't issue any,' Zekriya explains. 'Documentation for Afghans, power of attorney, inheritance papers and so on, that is no longer accepted either. But we can certify paperwork and that is where we are still able to maintain the embassy. We've had to use our ingenuity to keep the place open.' In common with the rest of the world, Giorgia Meloni's government does not formally recognise the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. And unlike the UK, which closed its Afghan embassy when the Taliban sacked all staff, Italy has been supportive of this embassy's quest in continuing to provide consular services to Afghans. 'We have a lot of history with the Italians,' Zekriya says, as he proudly gives me the grand tour of the building, which boasts gilt-edged furniture, elaborate works of art and even classic cars in the garden, which have been there since the 1970s. The suited and booted ambassador is quite a character: modern in his outlook, animated in conversation and boasting an admirable sense of humour considering the adversity he is facing. Italy was one of the first nations to recognise Afghanistan's sovereignty in 1919. In 1921, the countries signed an agreement for the exchange of permanent diplomatic missions, and the embassy in Rome was bought by the modernising King Amānullāh Khan in 1928. After he was deposed the following year, he and his family – including Queen Soraya Tarzi – settled in exile in Rome, having been invited by Queen Elena of Italy. Many of their children and other descendants, including Princess India of Afghanistan, were raised in Italy; some still call the country home. When King Mohammad Zahir Shah was deposed in 1973, he was also exiled to Italy, living in Rome until his return to Afghanistan 29 years later. He was flown to Kabul on 18 April 2002, on an Italian military plane. The only church in Afghanistan, the chapel in Kabul, was at the Italian embassy and was maintained by an Italian until it had to be closed in 2021. As the Taliban regained control over Afghanistan, Italy withdrew its military contingent and moved its embassy to Qatar. Although Zekriya suggests that there are a 'very small number of pragmatic Taliban', he cautions, 'as far as moderation is concerned – no, because this runs contrary to their Islamist or jihadist ethos. It's very difficult to change a terrorist organisation and their perception of the world. They do not believe in international conventions. They do not believe in universal values. They do not believe in a what I would call a principled, value-driven world order. Bureaucratic hierarchy doesn't exist.' Zekriya is surprisingly calm and measured as he speaks – but you can tell his heart is aching for his homeland and his people. 'The Taliban have taken all the jobs. And right now corruption has become institutionalised in Afghanistan, along with the institutionalisation of certain terror tactics. Everyone's involved. Al-Qaeda is there, Isis is there, you know, the martyr brigade – you name it.' Some people naively believed that the death of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in 2011 – a decade after 9/11, one of many terror attacks he masterminded – would signal the end of the pan-Islamist militant organisation. Yet al-Qaeda remains active in Afghanistan, even following the death of its subsequent leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, in Kabul in 2022. Islamic State Khorasan Province (ISKP), also known as Isis-K, has experienced a resurgence since 2021 and is viewed by international observers as posing 'the greatest threat' within Afghanistan and beyond. US Central Command's general Michael Erik Kurilla suggested in 2023 that ISKP was capable of conducting 'an external operation against US or Western interests abroad in under six months', a warning he repeated in March 2024 testimony. The Haqqani network, led by deputy Taliban leader Sirajuddin Haqqani, is a semi-autonomous component of the Taliban and a long-time ally of al-Qaeda. It has been blamed for some of the deadliest attacks against US troops, and al-Zawahiri was reportedly killed in a Haqqani-linked safe house. Since September 2021, Sirajuddin has been the acting Interior Minister in the Taliban government, the highest ranking of several Haqqani-network-aligned individuals to hold cabinet posts. UN sanctions monitors reported in June 2023 that the Haqqanis were 'increasingly involved in the production and trafficking of methamphetamine and synthetic drugs'. Another group, Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan (TTP), also known as the Pakistani Taliban, draws support from both the Taliban and al-Qaeda. 'Don't forget intermarriages have occurred,' Zekriya says. 'That has brought the Taliban and al-Qaeda together. They are all regrouping. Al-Qaeda are mainly located in the southern and eastern part of Afghanistan. Isis-K is divided into two divisions in the north and the south. The Taliban is now using the TTP against Pakistan, the authorities claim. Then we also have smaller groups like Tehrik-e Taliban Tajikistan [TTT] and Boko Haram. There are about 26, 27 terrorist groups in Afghanistan.' What threat do they pose to the Western world order? 'So-called Islamisation should be the least of our concerns,' Zekriya warns. 'I think it's more than that. An attack is imminent, either on Europe or the US: a 9/11-scale attack, probably larger.' Why larger? 'They have the capability of having an attack simultaneously in two or three parts of the world. 9/11 was very different – it was one group. But this time, with the synergy and unification that has occurred amongst these groups, I think an attack by one of these terrorist organisations is imminent. They also have a lot of supporters abroad, let's not forget.' Can we really be under greater threat now, after 20 years of Western forces in Afghanistan, than we were in 2001? 'Of course, because the Taliban are occupying a political space in Afghanistan as the holder of authority. They have pseudo legitimacy and have given greater aspirations for other groups. Normalised engagement has emboldened the Taliban,' Zekriya explains, clearly somewhat exasperated by Western complacency. 'Last year, the third UN gathering in Doha was indicative of the fact that Afghanistan was actually calling the shots. They said [Afghan] women cannot be there and shifted the attention from the issue of terrorism to the issue of counter-narcotics, and other technical issues like national disasters. 'They have become very sophisticated. Though they've not gained diplomatic recognition, in terms of optics and being able to bring delegations to Afghanistan – it's very impressive. As of now, they have control of 39 of Afghanistan's missions abroad.' Zekriya understandably finds it hard to comprehend why some European and world nations continue to accommodate Taliban-run embassies when the regime is responsible for what he describes as 'gender apartheid' in Afghanistan, where almost a third of the population face crisis-level food insecurity. 'The current humanitarian crisis is unprecedented. It's persistent, it is complex, it is severe. State services are non-existent. There's no healthcare. They've brought in the clergy to assume those positions. There's a brain drain. At least 87 per cent of academics and civil servants have left Afghanistan.' And when it comes to the treatment of the female population, Zekriya claims, 'You've never seen anything like it. The Taliban, they really are intimidated by women. Everything's banned, secondary schools, colleges, beauty salons. They closed all the beauty salons. You know, 60,000 people lost their jobs. Women cannot go to parks. Women cannot even raise their voices in public. They cannot seek medical assistance. They have to have a male relative with them.' A recent decree banned windows looking into spaces used by women, which one spokesman suggested could lead to 'obscene acts'. 'Congregation is prohibited,' the ambassador explains, gesticulating a sense of disbelief that it has come to this. 'Early forced marriages are on the rise. Domestic violence has gone up. Child mortality is another thing, because their mothers aren't being educated.' Education, even for boys, has been 'Talibanised', he says. 'They want to have control over education, higher education, for the purpose of indoctrination.' Thousands of madrasas have been created across the country, he continues, to teach 'their misinterpretation of Islam'. 'The Taliban do not actually represent any ethnic group in Afghanistan,' he adds. 'They only represent an ideology born out of madrasa extremist preaching. It is a perversion of the Qur'an, of course. And just hatred of Judeo-Christianity.' He points out that recently, one Taliban minister likened non-believers to 'four-legged animals'. And yet no one marches through the streets of London in protest. The ambassador replies, 'Right now, the news is dominated by Gaza and Israel, also the Ukraine-Russia issue. We're trying very hard to bring Afghanistan back to the forefront of international politics. We need to bring the Afghan diaspora under one umbrella, maybe a national coalition or council of some sort in exile, because at the end of the day, I support negotiation with the Taliban, not war. Because we have built something in the last 21 years we don't want to destroy, at least the infrastructure. The institutions are still there, maybe not fully functional, but it's there. 'We don't want to go back to the 1990s, when Kabul was destroyed and all of our cosmopolitan, metropolitan cities were destroyed. Any negotiated settlement has to be inclusive. It has to be Afghan-owned, Afghan-driven. It should not be imposed. And the Taliban could be a factor, but not the only factor. 'If it's not a government that is based on a constitution, if it's not a representative, elected government, then it doesn't mean anything.' According to Zekriya, more than half of Afghanistan's 41 million population want to leave the country. 'Why do I support democracy? Afghanistan has had a legacy of constitutional monarchy and democracy. If you would look at Afghanistan in the 1960s, '70s and '80s, we were far more advanced than the countries in the region, but the former Soviets' invasion of Afghanistan really destroyed everything.' Do Afghans want democracy, though, or are they beholden to the Taliban? That the majority of people wish to leave their homeland, Zekriya replies, is 'indicative of the fact that they do not agree with the current regime'. 'Most Afghans, let's say the intelligentsia, the technocrats, the educated elite and even the general populace – they've seen different forms of government. We've had empires and a confederation. We've had centralised government and unitary governments. We've had Islamic emirates. But the people always go back to the democratic era of Afghanistan. That's why I believe any form of negotiated political settlement with the Taliban, it has to be principled out of that, and a new constitution should come out of it.' Could Afghanistan witness its own version of the Arab Spring? I point out that the Iranian resistance movement is gaining pace – with young people mobilised by social media to take on the mullahs. 'In Afghanistan, the illiteracy rate is way higher than Iran. And also, Iran in the last 50 years has been very successful. In Afghanistan, everyone's tired, but I will continue. The people of Afghanistan are trapped – it's like a concentration camp. It's hell to live under the current regime but I truly believe Afghanistan can have a proud and prosperous future, because we are a very proud and resilient nation. I look forward to the day when I can go home.' As Zekriya bids me farewell from the steps of the embassy, the scent of star jasmine filling the Roman air, I'm left with the distinct impression that if democracy is ever restored to Afghanistan, I could well have just met the country's next prime minister. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
