logo
‘Where do we even go?': Iran deports more than one million Afghans

‘Where do we even go?': Iran deports more than one million Afghans

Irish Times4 days ago
At the sand-swept border between
Iran
and
Afghanistan
, nearly 20,000 are crossing every day – shocked and fearful Afghans who have been
expelled from Iran
with few belongings in a wave of targeted crackdowns and xenophobia.
More than 1.4 million Afghans have fled or been deported from Iran since January during a government clampdown on refugees in the country without authorisation, according to the United Nations' refugee agency. More than half a million have been forced into Afghanistan just since the war between Israel and Iran last month, returned to a homeland already grappling with a severe humanitarian crisis and draconian restrictions on women and girls, in one of the worst displacement crises of the past decade.
They are being dumped at an overcrowded border facility in western Afghanistan, where many expressed anger and confusion to New York Times journalists over how they could go on with few prospects in a country where some have never lived, or barely know any more.
'I worked in Iran for 42 years, so hard that my knees are broken, and for what?' Mohammad Akhundzada, a construction worker, said at a processing centre for returnees in Islam Qala, a border town in northwestern Afghanistan, near Herat.
READ MORE
The mass expulsions threaten to push Afghanistan further toward the brink of economic collapse with the sudden cut-off of vital remittance money to Afghan families from relatives in Iran.
The sudden influx of returnees also piles on Afghanistan's already grim unemployment, housing and healthcare crises. More than half of Afghanistan's estimated population of 41 million already relies on humanitarian assistance.
Taliban authorities distribute cash stipends to Afghans returning from Iran, many of whom were expelled with few belongings, at a reception centre in Islam Qala, Afghanistan. Photograph: Jim Huylebroek/The New York Times
With a cane by his side, Akhundzada was waiting with his wife and four children, all born in Iran, for a bus to take them to Kabul, the crowded Afghan capital. He was hoping that some relatives could host them, despite the lack of spare rooms.
'We don't have anything,' said Akhundzada (61), 'and we have nowhere to go.'
Driven out
Iran hosts the world's largest refugee population, and about 95 per cent – estimated to be around four million – are Afghans, according to the UN refugee agency. Iran says the real number is closer to six million, after decades of war and upheaval in Afghanistan.
Iran limits where Afghans can live and work – only in 10 of the country's 31 provinces – and they are usually allowed only arduous, low-skill work.
Iran's government has said it can no longer absorb Afghan refugees given its own economic crisis and shortage of natural resources, including water and gas.
In March, the government said Afghans in the country without authorisation would be deported and set a July 6th deadline for voluntary departures. But after last month's 12-day conflict with Israel, the crackdown intensified.
Security forces have raided work places and neighbourhoods, stopped cars at checkpoints set up throughout big cities and detained scores of Afghans before sending them to overcrowded deportation centres in sweltering heat.
Officials and state media, without providing evidence, have claimed that Afghans were recruited by Israel and the United States to stage terrorist attacks, seize military sites and build drones.
Kadijah Rahimi (26), a cattle herder, echoing many Afghans at the border crossing, said that when she was arrested in Iran last month, the security agent told her: 'We know you're working for Israel.'
Abolfazl Hajizadegan, a sociologist in Tehran, the Iranian capital, said Iran's government was using Afghans as scapegoats to deflect blame for intelligence failures that enabled Israel to infiltrate widely within Iran.
'Mixing Afghan deportations with the Iran-Israel conflict underscores the regime's reluctance to acknowledge its security and intelligence shortcomings,' Hajizadegan said in an interview.
Hate crimes
The spying accusations have fuelled racist attacks on Afghans in Iran in recent weeks, according to interviews with more than two dozen Afghans living in Iran or those who have recently returned to Afghanistan, reports by aid and rights groups, and videos on social media and news media.
A Taliban official hands out bags of cucumber to Afghan refugees at reception centre in the border town of Islam Qala, Afghanistan. Photograph: Jim Huylebroek/The New York Times
Afghans have been beaten or attacked with knives; faced harassment from landlords and employers who are also withholding their deposits or wages; and have been turned away from banks, bakeries, pharmacies, schools and hospitals.
Ebrahim Qaderi was riding his bicycle to work to a cardboard factory in Tehran one morning last month when two men stopped him. They shouted 'dirty Afghan' and demanded his smartphone. When Qaderi refused, they kicked him in the leg and slashed his hand with a knife, he recounted at a relocation centre in Herat. His mother, Gull Dasta Fazili, said doctors at four hospitals turned him away because he was Afghan, and that they left Iran because of the attack.
In Iran, many Afghans said they lived in constant fear and were staying home. Farah (35), a computer engineer in Tehran, said in a telephone interview that neighbourhood youths attacked her and her four-year-old son as they were walking home one day last week and repeatedly kicked the child.
Last week, Farah, who like others interviewed by the Times asked that her last name not be published out of fear of retribution, saw an Afghan woman being beaten while riding the metro. 'I sat there paralysed and shaking because I knew if I said a word I would be also beaten,' she said.
Even Afghans who are legal residents say security guards have ripped their documents and deported them anyway. Ali (36), who said he had been born and raised in Iran and had legal status, was stopped at a checkpoint along with an Iranian friend recently.
'He told me: 'I'm going to tear up your residency card, what are you going to do? You are going to a deportation camp,'' Ali said. 'I was shaking with fear. I begged and argued with them, saying all my life I have lived in Iran, please don't do this to me.'
Mohammad Akhundzada, a construction worker in Iran for decades, carries biscuits provided by aid groups to his family in the border town of Islam Qala, Afghanistan. Photograph: Jim Huylebroek/The New York Times
Struggling
Jawad Mosavi and nine of his family members stepped off the bus from Iran last week, scrambling under the sweltering heat of Islam Qala to gather his thoughts and the family's dozen suitcases, rugs and rucksacks.
'Where do we even go?' he called out.
His son Ali Akbar (13) led the way to the building where they could get their certificates of return. His half-open backpack carried his most precious belongings – a deflated soccer ball, a speaker and some headphones to listen to his favourite Iranian hits, in Persian. 'The only kind of music I understand,' he said.
Like the Mosavi family, between 20,000 and 25,000 people were left to navigate a maze of luggage, tents and fellow returnees every day last week, trying to find their way through crowded buildings and warehouses run by Afghan authorities and UN agencies.
Mothers changed their babies' diapers on filthy blankets amid relentless gusts of wind. Fathers queued for hours to get their fingerprints taken and collect some emergency cash under temperatures hovering over 95 degrees. Outnumbered humanitarian workers treated dehydrated returnees at a field clinic while others hastily distributed food rations or dropped off large cubes of ice in water containers.
Afghanistan was already grappling cuts in foreign aid from the United States and other donors before Iran began expelling Afghans en masse. Even before then, nearly a million Afghans had been ejected or pressed to leave from Pakistan. Organisations have been able to fund only a fifth of humanitarian needs in the country this year, and more than 400 healthcare centres have been shut down in recent months.
Uncertain futures
Afghan officials have pledged to build 35 townships across the country to cope with the influx of returnees, many of whom have been deported without being allowed to collect belongings or cash from the bank.
Afghanistan's prime minister, Muhammad Hassan Akhund, has urged Iran to show restraint in the deportations, 'so as to prevent the emergence of resentment or hostility between the two brotherly nations.'
'We have to recognise that Iran has accommodated lots of Afghans and has the right to decide who can stay and who cannot,' said Miah Park, the country director for the UN Migration agency in Afghanistan. 'But we demand that they be treated in a humane and dignified manner.'
A mother and child get medicine from a United Nations-run pharmacy at a reception centre for refugees returning from Iran. Photograph: Jim Huylebroek/The New York Times
In Islam Qala, many Afghans said they were coming back to a country they hardly recognised since the Taliban took control and imposed strict rule in 2021.
Zahir Mosavi, the patriarch of the family, said he dreaded having to halt education for his four daughters because the Taliban have banned girls' education above sixth grade.
'I want to keep them busy, I want them to learn something,' he said.
One daughter, Nargis, was in eighth grade in Iran. Now, she said she would try to focus on the tailoring skills she had learned. 'I'm not good at it, but at least there's that,' she said.
That evening, after a day at the processing facility in Islam Qala, the family boarded a van bound for Herat, the largest city in western Afghanistan, 70 miles from the border.
Ali Akbar cried throughout the trip when he realised he had lost his phone, and with it the only way to listen to his favourite Iranian music.
The family dropped off their suitcases at 1am in a public park that had been transformed into a tent city hosting 5,000 people. Single men slept outside, using tree trunks as pillows. The family's women and children received two tents.
A journey of hundreds of miles still lay ahead, to their home province of Helmand, in the rural south. Few opportunities were there, but they decided it was all they could afford.
This article originally appeared in
The New York Times
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

A rules-based order - but who makes the rules?
A rules-based order - but who makes the rules?

Irish Examiner

timean hour ago

  • Irish Examiner

A rules-based order - but who makes the rules?

Earlier this month the Taoiseach Micheál Martin made a four-day trip to Japan to strengthen bi-lateral ties between the two countries. During a speech at the opening of the new Ireland House in Tokyo the Taoiseach said: 'The Ireland-Japan relationship is built on a solid foundation of shared and longstanding commitment to the rules-based international order. We share a vision for a future of peace and prosperity for all, built through international co-operation, democratic values and peaceful resolution of disputes.' He went on to note that 'these shared values were already evident in 1974, the year that Ireland established its first embassy here in Tokyo. In that year, Ireland's former minister for foreign affairs, Seán MacBride, and the former Prime Minister of Japan, Eisaku Satō, shared that year's Nobel Peace Prize for their work on disarmament.' To underline the importance of Ireland-Japan collaboration on disarmament the Taoiseach also visited the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park during his trip. There he met with hibakusha, survivors of the US's atomic bomb attacks. The Taoiseach spoke to journalists about the harrowing testimony he heard from Teruko Yakata, who was eight years old when the bomb was dropped on her hometown, and about the legacy of trauma still suffered by Yakata and other survivors. As he was leaving Hiroshima Mr Martin was asked if he believed the world was a more dangerous now than in 1945. 'I believe it is,' he answered, 'it is in a very dangerous place.' The Taoiseach was right to highlight Ireland's proud tradition of international leadership on nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament. This is a particularly important history to underline whilst visiting Japan, which remains the only country to have suffered attack with nuclear weapons. The United Nations' landmark Treaty of the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), signed in 1968, had its origins in the 1950s when then Fianna Fáil foreign minister Frank Aiken introduced the first of what became known as the 'Irish Resolutions'‌ which eventually led to the NPT. Aiken was the first to sign the NPT in 1968 in recognition of Ireland's crucial role in advancing the cause of disarmament. The Taoiseach Micheál Martin was right to highlight Ireland's proud tradition of international leadership on nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament. File photo: GIS Press Office Yet, at the very same time as the Taoiseach was in Japan promoting Ireland's commitment to international diplomacy and disarmament, he is leading a government that is trying to fundamentally re-orient Ireland's foreign policy away from disarmament and international peace building towards militarization and war-fighting alliances. In doing so Mr Martin and his government are betraying the foreign policy achievements of Aiken and his own party, Fianna Fáil, but more importantly they are betraying the will and trust of the Irish people who remain deeply attached to active neutrality. Opinion polls consistently show a large majority of the Irish public support maintaining neutrality. A poll conducted in January by Uplift found that 75% were in favour of maintaining neutrality. In April another poll, conducted by The Irish Times and Ipsos, found that 63% of people wanted to keep Ireland's neutrality as it is. The Government's revolution in foreign affairs In his speech to the Global Ireland Summit on May 6 this year the Taoiseach said that even in newly volatile geopolitical conditions 'Ireland will maintain its role as a strong advocate for the rules-based international order, with the UN at its centre.' Yet, his government is actively undermining the UN in its quest to remove the Triple Lock, legislation that requires a UN mandate for more than 12 members of the Irish Defence Forces to be deployed overseas. The government justify this change on the basis of false claims that Russia and China enjoy a veto over Irish peace-keeping missions in the UN Security Council. It is not only the UN Security Council that can authorize peace-keeping missions. File picture: REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton This is not true because it is not only the UN Security Council that can authorize peace-keeping missions. The UN General Assembly also has the power to do so. Further, this is a hypothetical. China alone has exercised such a veto, and then only once regarding the extension of an existing UN peace-keeping mission. That was in 1999, before the Triple Lock existed. Why is the government making these false claims? Removing the need for a UN mandate on deploying Irish Defence Forces personnel overseas would allow this government - and any future Irish government - to commit Irish troops to EU and NATO military operations. Remarkably the government insist that removing the Triple Lock will not impact Ireland's neutrality, but participating in western military alliances would clearly mark the end of neutrality. Participating in EU and NATO military operations overseas without UN backing is certainly not compatible with what the Irish public understand neutrality to mean. Further, states around the world, including those that the government claim are already hostile, will understand that Ireland is no longer to be regarded as a neutral state. This will only serve to increase the security risks Ireland faces, not defend against them. Whilst the government continue to pay lip service to neutrality it is clear they aim to abandon it in order to explicitly 'take sides' with the US, EU, and NATO in international conflicts, even when this is manifestly against the wishes of the Irish people. Ireland is in effect undergoing a quiet revolution in foreign affairs imposed from above, even as the government lacks a mandate to fundamentally reorient the state's place in the world. All those interested in Ireland's future security and in world peace, should be extremely concerned by the government's backdoor erosion of neutrality. 'Rules-based international order' vs The UN Despite the Taoiseach's insistence that Ireland remains committed to a 'rules-based international order, with the UN at its centre,' his government is actively trying to depart from a world in which the UN is the body tasked with defining, governing, and sometimes policing the 'rules-based international order'. In attempting to remove the requirement for a UN mandate to deploy Irish troops overseas, Mr Martin and his government have been arguing that the UN is not the international guarantor of international order but rather an obstacle to it, on the basis that Russia and China might hypothetically veto peacekeeping missions. Likewise, the government are arguing that the role of these states within the UN Security Council is an obstacle to the exercise of Irish sovereignty. This might make sense if Irish sovereignty were defined by the capacity to join EU and NATO military operations overseas without a UN mandate. This might make sense if the rules of the 'rules-based international order' are set not by the UN but by the US, EU, and their allies. However, it is incompatible with a commitment to a 'rules-based international order' governed by the UN. It is interesting to note that western governments, including our own, are increasingly using the terminology of 'rules-based international order' rather than reference the UN or 'international law'. Whilst a majority of the public no doubt understands the 'rules-based international order' to refer to the UN and the existing institutions of international law the sudden popularity of this term amongst western states indicates that it may mean something quite different. It seems clear from the Irish government's maneuverings around the Triple Lock that the 'rules-based international order' they have in mind is at very least not principally defined by the UN. This is extremely concerning given that we can see the type of 'rules' western states adopt beyond the frame of the UN. The active material and diplomatic support given to Israel's genocide in Gaza by the US, the UK, and the EU (notably Germany) indicates that the 'rules-based international order' these states have in mind has no regard for international law whatsoever, at least not when it applies to them or their allies. It is right and reasonable then that the public ask who defines the 'rules' of the ''rules-based international order' and whose interests these 'rules' might serve. America first 'America should write the rules. America should call the shots. Other countries should play by the rules that America and our partners set, and not the other way around.' It may surprise some that these are not the words of President Trump but of former President Barack Obama, writing in the Washington Post in 2016. Obama was writing about the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a trade agreement designed to constrain China's increasing influence over Pacific trade, but regardless of the context, the quote is indicative of a fundamental set of assumptions about the role of the US in the world - assumptions common to US liberals and conservatives alike, Democrats as well as Republicans, and shared by most European states, certainly those that are also members of NATO. The Taoiseach and his government like to argue that the Russian invasion of Ukraine marked the beginning of a new world and that Ireland's foreign policy must adapt to meet the changing times. According to the government this means abandoning neutrality (in everything but name) and massive increases in military spending to prepare Ireland for future conflict with Russia, or even China. Former US President Barak Obama wrote in the Washington Post in 2016: 'America should write the rules. America should call the shots'. File photo: Chris Jackson/PA The EU White Paper on European Defence published in March makes the direction of EU foreign policy travel and expectations of military spending for member states very clear. Yet this breakneck European militarization is not only a reaction to Russia's invasion of Ukraine but responds to a longer term strategic shift of US resources and attention away from European security towards Chinese containment. This move was first announced in 2009 with Obama's 'Pivot to Asia' but was pursued more aggressively since under both Trump and Biden administrations. Hence, it is crucial that we understand European militarization not simply as a collective response to Russian aggression in Ukraine, but a development dictated by the shifting geostrategic priorities of the US. I am hardly alone in wondering if Obama's upcoming visit to Dublin in September is partly timed to smooth public concerns about militarization ahead of a Dáil vote on the Triple Lock, by presenting an image of US leadership more acceptable to the Irish public than the current occupant of the White House. Government fog It is reasonable that there be a frank and honest discussion of the changes the government are trying to implement to Ireland's foreign policy, that the real drivers and consequences of these transformations are acknowledged, and that the policy changes proposed are open to serious democratic scrutiny and challenge. Currently, this is not the case. The nature and stakes of the changes the government are trying to implement are shrouded in a technocratic fog and most media coverage platforms anti-neutrality partisans, advocates of militarization, and arms lobbyists as the relevant 'experts'. Government parties protest that they are being honest with the public, but in reality they are trying to ensure their plans are subject to as little democratic oversight as possible. The government know that a great majority of Irish people do not support the changes they are attempting to ram through and that insulating them from transparency is the best path to success. The government's gamble is that if the public don't know about - or understand – that removing the Triple Lock means the end of Ireland's neutrality then they won't mount any meaningful opposition. By the time Irish troops are being sent to take part in multiple EU 'Battlegroups' overseas and the public spending needed to address pressing crises in housing, health, care, and climate is being used to buy fighter jets it will be too late. Such a scenario is not a conspiracy but a plan, and it lies just on the other side of a successful vote on removing the Triple Lock. The coalition have promised a vote when the Dáil returns from summer recess. Merrion Square Just opposite the Dáil in Merrion Square Park stand two memorials marking the horrors of war. Facing government buildings is the National Memorial to members of the Defence Forces who died in the Service of the State, a pyramid-shaped structure by the sculptor Brian King, unveiled in 2008 by then President Mary McAleese. Close by a small plaque marks the spot where a cherry tree was planted in 1980 by the Irish Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament 'in memory of A-bomb victims'. Just metres away from each other, these memorials offer a stark reminder of the distance the Irish government has already gone in weakening the foreign policy positions that have been Ireland's strength on the world stage. The principled stand Ireland has taken against militarization, imperialism, and great power conflict have ensured this country enjoys a positive international reputation and outsize diplomatic influence, particularly in the Global South. The Irish public are rightly proud of and deeply attached to this legacy. Pursuing a foreign policy based on international diplomacy, the peaceful resolution of conflict, and independence from military alliances has not always been an easy path and it has often displeased friendly states on whom Ireland is economically dependent. Then-Taoiseach, Brian Cowen and Then-President, Mary McAleese at the ceremony in 2008 at Merrion Square to mark the Dedication of the National Memorial to Members of the Defence Forces who have died in the service of the State. File photo: Sasko Lazarov/Photocall Ireland However, it has not only been the right thing to do - upholding the state's values, as expressed in the Constitution - but it has also served the country's interests well. A lack of enemies has been, and remains, Ireland's best defence. The Irish public remember the lessons of our own history, and the terrible costs of war, even as the government seem determined to forget them. Opinion polls show that a very large majority of the Irish public are deeply attached to a vision of Ireland that is opposed to imperialism and war. However, active neutrality is not simply a popular policy position but something that people strongly identify with, that touches on the core of what they understand 'Irishness' to be. The government's attempts to remove the Triple Lock threatens to undermine this crucial connection between people and State. Betraying the public on this issue risks sowing alienation, suspicion, and resentment - sentiments already providing fertile soil for the growth of anti-democratic and far right forces across the country. The government is right that the world is changing. It is up to all of those invested in democracy, peace, and international co-operation – best expressed in the existing institutions of the UN – to ensure they make the right response. Read More Government proposal on triple Lock gives an Irish solution to an Irish problem

Israel expands Gaza assault as Ireland and 24 other nations say suffering of civilians has reached ‘new depths'
Israel expands Gaza assault as Ireland and 24 other nations say suffering of civilians has reached ‘new depths'

Irish Times

time6 hours ago

  • Irish Times

Israel expands Gaza assault as Ireland and 24 other nations say suffering of civilians has reached ‘new depths'

Israel expanded its assault on Hamas on Monday, advancing for the first time during the 21-month war towards parts of central Gaza previously spared the worst devastation of the war. Gaza's health ministry said at least 130 Palestinians had been killed in Deir el-Balah and other areas of central Gaza in the past 24 hours, one of the highest such totals in recent weeks. The escalation came as Israel rejected international criticism of its conduct in the Gaza war, describing a statement by 26 countries, including Ireland, as 'detached from reality,' saying Hamas was responsible for the continued suffering of Gaza civilians. The 25 countries and the EU commissioner for equality, preparedness and crisis management, including the United Kingdom, France and Canada, called on Monday, July 21st, for the war in Gaza to end immediately. READ MORE The signatories condemned the 'inhumane killing of civilians' seeking aid through the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) aid sites. The foreign ministers of the countries, all members of the OECD, published a joint statement urging the Israeli Government to 'immediately lift restrictions on the flow of aid and to urgently enable the UN and humanitarian NGOs to do their life-saving work safely and effectively.' 'The suffering of civilians in Gaza has reached new depths,' the statement read. 'The Israeli government's aid delivery model is dangerous, fuels instability and deprives Gazans of human dignity.' The statement, signed by Tánaiste Simon Harris and other foreign ministers, says the signatories are 'prepared to take further action' to bring about a ceasefire in the Middle East. Israel's foreign ministry said the international criticism sent the wrong message to Hamas. 'All claims about the absence of a ceasefire deal and release of hostages should be directed at the terrorist organisation that started this war and is prolonging it,' the foreign ministry said. 'The declaration does not mention Hamas's role and responsibility for the situation. It is solely responsible for the continued suffering on both sides.' [ Israel sends tanks into Gaza's Deir Al-Balah, where it believes hostages are Opens in new window ] Incidents of Palestinians being killed while trying to collect food from distribution points run by the controversial GHF are reported almost every day. Gaza's civil defence agency said at least 93 Palestinians had been killed queuing for food on Sunday, but Israel has questioned these figures. The Israeli military posted a video clip on Monday of which appeared to show Gaza residents cheering Israeli soldiers after taking food parcels from an aid truck. United Nations secretary general António Guterres said he was appalled by an accelerating breakdown of humanitarian conditions in Gaza, 'where the last lifelines keeping people alive are collapsing,' his spokesperson said. 'He deplores the growing reports of children and adults suffering from malnutrition,' UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric said. Smoke and flames erupt from an Israeli airstrike in Gaza City on Monday, July 21st. Photograph: Jehad Alshrafi/ AP The latest developments came as ceasefire talks in Doha appeared to be deadlocked. US envoy Steve Witkoff does not plan to join the proximity talks taking place in the Qatari capital between Israel and Hamas until the gaps have narrowed sufficiently to enable him to close a deal. The Hamas-run Gaza health ministry said more than 59,000 people have been killed in the war, which began with the Hamas attack on southern Israel on October 7th, 2023 during which 1,200 people were killed and 250 kidnapped. Fifty hostages remain in Hamas captivity, of whom 20 are believed to be alive. Meanwhile, President Michael D Higgins said the latest developments in Gaza were aimed at destroying infrastructure to the point that would be 'nothing to return to on the part of those displaced.' 'It is now time for us to hear from an independent body or the European Union itself as to how the recently negotiated access of aid to those dying of starvation and dehydration, including the tiny infants and breastfeeding mothers who are going to die due to dehydration, is being provided,' he said.

UN concerned by Taliban's arrest of Afghan women for dress code violations
UN concerned by Taliban's arrest of Afghan women for dress code violations

Irish Examiner

time10 hours ago

  • Irish Examiner

UN concerned by Taliban's arrest of Afghan women for dress code violations

The United Nations has expressed concern about the Taliban's arrest of Afghan women and girls for their alleged failure to comply with dress code restrictions. In May 2022, the Taliban government issued a decree calling for women to show only their eyes and recommending they wear a head-to-toe burqa. The Taliban, which returned to power in 2021, has cracked down on the way women dress and behave in public, notably through morality laws forbidding them to show their faces outside the home. The UN mission in Afghanistan said it was concerned by the arrest of 'numerous' women and girls in Kabul between July 16 and 19, who authorities claimed had not followed instructions on wearing the hijab, or the Islamic headscarf. 'These incidents serve to further isolate women and girls, contribute to a climate of fear, and erode public trust,' the mission added, without details including the number of arrests or the ages and where they have been held. The UN mission urged the Taliban government to 'rescind policies and practices' that restrict women and girls' human rights and fundamental freedoms, particularly the ban on education beyond sixth grade. A Taliban representative was not immediately available for comment. In January 2024, the country's Vice and Virtue Ministry said it had arrested women in the Afghan capital for wearing 'bad hijab'. A ministry spokesman, Abdul Ghafar Farooq, did not say how many women were arrested or what constituted bad hijab. The UN mission said at the time it was looking into claims of ill treatment of the women and extortion in exchange for their release. The Taliban took control of Afghanistan in August 2021 following the withdrawal of US and Nato forces. Since then, the Taliban administration has sought international recognition while enforcing its interpretation of Islamic law. In July, Russia became the only country to grant formal recognition.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store