'The State Duma Has Proposed Banning...'
An initiative has been "wandering" in the corridors of the State Duma for a long time, trying to eliminate freedom of choice.
Deputy Speaker of the State Duma and former ombudsman for children's rights Anna Kuznetsova is lobbying for a bill aimed at eradicating "destructive ideology as a whole." Can you imagine the scale? Two volumes of research have already been prepared with the support of the Ministry of Science! It turns out that all of this is laid down in presidential decree No. 809 "On approval of the Fundamentals of state policy for the preservation and strengthening of traditional Russian spiritual and moral values." Until now, the decree was recalled to cite the list of "traditional values," so beloved by officials and clergy. And now, if Kuznetsova's initiative is implemented, ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING can be banned! After all, "fundamentals" are not a joke, but a "strategic planning document in the sphere of ensuring national security of the Russian Federation." Everything is serious!
Elvira Kikhareva
They Intend To Ban Almost Anything
The list of "traditional values" in itself, it seems, is quite decent: life, dignity, patriotism, family, humanism, justice... Who would argue? But, as they say, the devil is in the details! It turns out to be a cognitive dissonance: either this is a traditional value, or a tool of the West for the destruction of sovereignty (and everything Western, in the opinion of the Russian elite, is pure evil).
After all, for some reason, the State Duma is in no hurry to discuss how to implement these values. It is much easier to ban something! And here comes the decree, which lists all the "enemies" that threaten our values: extremists (they are those who go out to the squares with a poster saying "no to war"), the media (numerous liberal publications that have been dispersed and banned by the authorities), the United States, and even some organizations and individuals within the country. Well, you get the idea – enemies are everywhere! At the same time, the very concept of "destructive ideology" is vague to the point of impossibility, which allows it to include absolutely everything that the Kremlin does not like. As a result, they intend to ban almost anything, and punish violations to the fullest extent of the law!
Who benefits from this? Yes, everyone who wants to curry favor with the authorities, the "experts" of Putin's pool, and, of course, law enforcement agencies. After all, it is much easier to catch "violators of ideology" than real criminals! Sleight of hand – and no miracles!
But in addition to the "bans" that Russians are accustomed to, there are also proposals. According to parliamentarians, they are very useful.
Russian lawmakers, no doubt motivated by concern for the welfare of citizens, have recently decided to expand the practice of forced labor for those who have committed minor offenses. Of course, this has nothing to do with the desperate shortage of labor in the economy, which the government modestly estimates at two million people. Just a coincidence...
So, the State Duma, in a fit of extraordinary generosity, on July 8 adopted a package of amendments that effectively introduce forced labor as a new type of punishment for as many as 45 articles of the code. Now, if you accidentally cause moderate harm to health or, say, involve a minor in innocent pranks, the court will happily give you the chance to work for the good of society in a correctional center for up to five years.
It is especially touching that "corrective labor" will also be applied to economic articles. Did you delay your employees' salaries for three months? Welcome to re-education through labor! Did you falsify reports? No big deal, forced labor will help you realize the depth of your fall.
The authors of this "brilliant" initiative claim that forced labor has an exclusively positive effect on crime prevention. Convicts, as one, demonstrate simply inhuman motivation to work, acquire valuable skills and, of course, are spiritually enriched.
It seems that it is time to open a network of free labor camps – those who want to will certainly line up!
We Get A Clear Example Of Slavery
As Russian legislative practice shows, at least in these few seemingly sarcastic, but in fact very symptomatic examples, any expansion of state powers can lead not only to selective application of the law in relation to citizens of a particular country, but also to the desire to expand these powers in foreign, neighboring, sovereign territories.
Undesirable officials, leaders of neighboring states, entrepreneurs, oppositionists or simply "wrong" citizens can end up in a correctional center for far-fetched reasons, be expelled from the country or forcibly sent to the front for the sake of someone's geopolitical ambitions. Today, there is practically no one to protect them from tyranny – they should have thought about this earlier.
As a result, we get a clear example of slavery: people are forced to live according to pre-written rules under the threat of punishment and a constant feeling of anxiety. And this is completely incompatible with the proclaimed values of freedom, justice and humanism.
The growth of state control over life and the suppression of dissent, which we see in the example of Russia, create an atmosphere of fear and suspicion. In such an environment, a constructive dialogue between the authorities and society is practically impossible, and any disagreement is dangerous for "national security."
It is especially alarming that such practices are increasingly justified by ideological cliches about "traditional values" and a "special path." These slogans serve as a cover for authoritarian methods of governance and suppression of freedoms under the pretext of the uniqueness of national character, allegedly incompatible with Western democracy.
Leading The Multi-Million Nation Into A Dead End
However, history proves that rights and freedoms are universal values, independent of geography or culture. The desire for justice, equality, and dignity is inherent in every person, regardless of nationality and beliefs. Attempts to justify restrictions on rights by referring to a "special path" and the adoption of dubious laws are just a disguise for the usurpation of power and the protection of the selfish interests of the ruling elite.
Ultimately, a strong and prosperous state can only be built by respecting rights and freedoms. An open society with guaranteed freedom of speech, assembly and an independent judicial system is the basis of the economy, science, and culture. Otherwise, the country is doomed to many years of stagnation, and legislators have no choice but to continue to strengthen control, passing more and more odious laws that help to preserve and extend their influence, but lead the multi-million nation into a dead end.
*Elvira Vikhareva is a renowned Russian opposition politician based in Russia. In 2023, she was poisoned with heavy metal salts.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Shafaq News
3 hours ago
- Shafaq News
Zelenskyy: Putin meeting in Istanbul POSSIBLE
Shafaq News – Kyiv On Friday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy revealed that a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin is being discussed as part of ongoing negotiations in Istanbul. 'We need to end the war, and that likely starts with a meeting between leaders,' Zelenskyy told reporters, calling the talks a step forward toward a potential summit. The Kremlin has indicated, however, that Putin would only attend such a meeting in the final stages of negotiations, citing "wide differences" and the need for "thorough preparation." Ukraine has proposed holding the summit by late August. As negotiations continue, Russia's Defense Ministry reported earlier that its air defenses had destroyed 105 Ukrainian drones, including 93 overnight across 10 regions, in one of the largest such incidents in recent weeks. Zelenskyy also said Ukraine is working to secure funding for 10 US-made Patriot air defense systems, with Germany and Norway already covering the cost of three. Another agreement will allow Ukraine to export drones to the US, reversing a previous informal restriction on arms exports. Today I spoke with the manufacturers of interceptor drones. I visited the facility, thanked the team, and saw firsthand how protection for our cities and villages, for our people, is being produced. Ukraine knows how to create outstanding things and maintains its technological… — Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) July 25, 2025 At home, Zelenskyy is facing large-scale protests over a new law that removes the independence of two top anti-corruption agencies, drawing criticism from European allies concerned about Ukraine's reform track. In response, the government submitted legislation to restore the autonomy of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAPO), pending parliamentary approval. 'It's natural for people to protest when they disagree,' Zelenskyy said. 'We're listening—but right now, the war remains our top priority.' Today, my bill is already in the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine – fulfilling my promise – for justice, for law enforcement and anti-corruption agencies. Full-fledged guarantees of the independence of anti-corruption agencies. Real opportunities to verify, so that any Russian… — Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) July 24, 2025
Memri
5 hours ago
- Memri
Hezb-e-Islami Leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar Discusses Russia's Recognition Of Afghan Taliban, Advocates 'National And Religious Unity Within The Framework Of A Just And Lawful System' In Afghanistan
On July 9, 2025, Daily Shahadat published a Dari-language article by former mujahideen commander and the leader of Hezb-e-Islami Afghanistan Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, who is also the publisher of the daily, addressing Russia's recognition of the Afghan Taliban government and its acceptance of the Taliban-appointed ambassador to Moscow. Hekmatyar also publishes Daily Shahadat. In the article – titled "Acceptance Of The Islamic Emirate's Ambassador In Moscow – Political Maneuver Or Political Gamble?" – Gulbuddin Hekmatyar describes Russia's move to recognize the Taliban government variously as a political and diplomatic maneuver, a gamble, and a reaction to developments in Syria and Iran, suggesting it may also be part of a broader deal between Russia and the United States. The article is informative and offers insight into the past half-century of Afghanistan's history and its unique geographical location, which draws global powers to seek to control it in a strategic game. However, the Hezb-e-Islami leader thinks that foreign powers' meddling in Afghanistan can be ended. "If Afghanistan succeeds in realizing its national and religious unity within the framework of a just and lawful system, it will overcome the most dangerous conspiracies and pressure circles of foreign actors," he says. Following are excerpts from the article: "The Coup Against Najib [Dr. Mohammad Najibullah Ahmadzai, President Of Afghanistan Executed By The Taliban In 1996] Was A Joint Plan Of Russian And American Intelligence, And Iranian And Saudi Intelligence Were Also Involved In It" "Acceptance Of The Islamic Emirate's Ambassador In Moscow – Political Maneuver Or Political Gamble? "A Reaction To The Events In Syria And Iran Or A Give-And-Take Deal With America? "In The Light Of Moscow's Policies On Afghanistan From The Founding Of The Soviet Union To Today "Moscow, since the time of Peter the Great – when it emerged as a regional power – has always pursued the expansion of Russian influence toward the south and access to warm waters. "In this regard, Afghanistan, due to its sensitive geopolitical position, was considered one of the areas of interest to Russia. The expansionist policies of Peter the Great laid the groundwork for the (rivalry between Russia and Britain) in Afghanistan. This rivalry later turned into the Great Game in the 19th century, and Afghanistan was accepted as a (buffer) between Russia and Britain. "After the establishment of the Soviet Union and when it occupied the regions of Central Asia and the Caucasus and reached the borders of Afghanistan, this country gained greater importance. Until today, throughout all this time, it has had an active presence in the affairs of our country. As the Soviet Union, at one time, it competed with Great Britain over the occupation of Afghanistan, and at another time with the United States of America. "At one point, against the first Taliban government, it, together with India, Iran, Israel, France, Britain, and America – supported the [anti-Taliban] Northern Alliance, which included the Parcham Party, militias from the Soviet occupation era, Shura-e-Nazar, Jamiat, and Shia parties under Iran's influence. It provided them with weapons and printed Afghani [currency] for them. "There was also a time when Russia and Iran helped America in the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq. From 2001 to 2014, a major part of the logistics for NATO and American forces in Afghanistan was carried out through Russian land and airspace, and another part of America's logistics was delivered through Pakistan's land and airspace. Groups affiliated with Moscow and under Tehran's influence, during the 20 years of occupation, were at the service of America. "This coalition was formed when Moscow, due to continuous failures and the financial and human losses in the war in Afghanistan, and the problems that this situation created for it within the Soviet Union, had no choice but to withdraw its forces from our country. It considered the establishment of an Islamic government in Afghanistan a serious threat to its dominance over Central Asia. America and Iran had similar concerns. They jointly decided to unify their positions regarding Afghanistan and to prevent the establishment of a Mujahideen government... "The coup against Najib [Dr. Mohammad Najibullah Ahmadzai, former president of Afghanistan executed by the Taliban in 1996] was a joint plan of Russian and American intelligence, and Iranian and Saudi intelligence were also involved in it..." "Saudi Support Was Cut Off When The Taliban Refused To Hand Over [Saudi National] Osama Bin Laden To Them"; "Saudi Intelligence Chief Turki Al-Faisal Traveled On His Private Jet... To Kabul [But Osama Was Too Powerful For The Taliban To Hand Him Over]" "[During 1996-2001] The first era of the [Islamic] Emirate, from beginning to end, was spent in war against the Northern Alliance. The Hezb-e-Islami did not want to fight the Taliban; it considered such a war neither useful nor in accordance with its military policies. The Alliance benefited from financial, military, and political support from Russia, the United States, India, Iran, France, Britain, and Israel, while the Taliban were supported by Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, who also recognized their government. "Saudi support was cut off when the Taliban refused to hand over [Saudi national] Osama bin Laden to them. This was despite the fact that a gathering of the Emirate's religious scholars in Kabul asked Osama to leave Afghanistan. The Emirate's foreign minister traveled to Saudi Arabia with the message that they were willing to hand over Osama to the Saudis. "Saudi intelligence chief Turki al-Faisal traveled on his private jet, together with the Taliban foreign minister [Wakil Ahmad] Muttawakil, to Kabul and then Kandahar to take Osama and bring him to Saudi Arabia. But the Taliban were not able to do so, because Osama was so powerful that the Taliban simply were unable to arrest and hand him over to Turki al-Faisal. In fact, in the war against the Alliance, the Taliban were largely indebted to the active role of Osama's loyal fighters, who fought on the front lines in all Taliban battles. "The 9/11 attacks and the refusal to hand over Osama to Saudi Arabia and the United States led America to strike Afghanistan from land and sky – first targeting it with cruise missiles and then bombarding the Taliban centers and strongholds with terrifying B-52 bombers. The Taliban offered no resistance whatsoever; from the day the first American missile was launched toward Afghanistan to the day the Taliban evacuated Kandahar and, through a press conference, surrendered to America and Karzai, a total of five weeks (35 days) passed!" After 9/11 "The U.S. Decision Changed – A Large-Scale Aerial And Ground Assault, With The Participation Of Hired Afghan Fighters Belonging To The Northern Front And Groups Under Iranian Influence, Replaced The Limited And Covert Operation Planned With Russia And Iran [To Replace The Taliban Government]" "Before the United States began its operation to occupy Afghanistan, it had a plan for a joint operation with Russia, in such a way that 17,000 Russian soldiers would participate in the operation, capture Mazar and Takhar, and hand them over to the Northern Alliance. The expenses of this operation were to be paid by the United States. "Akhdar Ibrahimi [aka Lakhdar Brahimi], the special representative of the United Nations Secretary-General for Afghanistan, told a group of Afghans in a meeting in Switzerland: Moscow and Washington have a plan for a joint operation; it is better that you get on this train! "Before September 11, 2001, the United States and some Western countries including Russia, Iran, and India were providing intelligence, weapons, and financial support to the United Northern Front [aka Northern Alliance] against the Taliban. In the years 2000–2001, secret meetings were held in Moscow, Dushanbe (Tajikistan), Tehran, and Delhi to coordinate this support. "After the Al-Qaeda attack on America, the U.S. decision changed. A large-scale aerial and ground assault, with the participation of hired Afghan fighters belonging to the Northern Front and groups under Iranian influence, replaced the limited and covert operation planned with Russia and Iran. And the United States was able to launch its operations under the flag of 'the international counter-terrorism coalition' (ISAF)." "Although Pakistan's Role... In Assisting The U.S. In The Occupation Of Afghanistan Was No Less Than That Of Russia And Iran, Due To Its Support For The Taliban, It Was Deprived Of An Active And Significant Presence In The Bonn Negotiations [That Led To Formation Of Post-Taliban Government Headed By Hamid Karzai]" "The United States first overthrew the Taliban government and captured major cities, including Kabul and Kandahar. Then, it convened a meeting in Bonn with the participation of representatives from the United States, Britain, Germany, Iran, and Russia, so that with their consultation and agreement, the future government during the occupation period could be formed. "The share of Russia and Iran in the governments during the occupation period was greater than other countries due to their extensive cooperation in the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan. Although Pakistan's role and contribution in assisting the United States in the occupation of Afghanistan was no less than that of Russia and Iran, due to its support for the Taliban, it was deprived of an active and significant presence in the Bonn negotiations. Former mujahideen commander Gulbuddin Hekmatyar "Britain insisted on the restoration of [former king of Afghanistan Mohammad] Zahir Shah as king, but Iran was sensitive to this, because the restoration of monarchy in Afghanistan would pave the way for the return of Reza Shah Pahlavi in Iran. The replacement of [Burhanuddin] Rabbani, a Tajik, with [Hamid] Karzai, a Pashtun, was also not pleasing to Iran; they preferred Satar Sirat, who was the representative of the deposed king, but did not succeed. The United States considered Karzai suitable to its own liking, and in the Bonn meeting, the final word had to be spoken by the actual victor of Afghanistan – the United States. "Karzai used to refer to Zahir Shah as 'Baba' [father or grandfather] and would bow to kiss his hand. However, in his first presidential term, in the face of the Northern Alliance – and especially [Mohammad Qasim] Fahim, who was his defense minister and later his deputy – he resembled a sparrow in a cage beside a hawk. Even his protection in Arg [the Presidential Palace] was provided by the gunmen of Shura-e Nazar [created by Ahmad Shah Massoud]. "Russia and Iran formed the Jabal Al-Siraj Alliance led by Rabbani against Hezb-e-Islami [led by Gulbuddin Hekmatyar] and supported it for four years with financial, military, intelligence, and propaganda assistance, and supported the fight against the Taliban for five years. Both of them helped the United States in the occupation of Afghanistan and the overthrow of the Taliban government with all their capabilities..." "Russia Abandoned Its Important And Strategic Friend In The Region (Iran) During The Hardest Days And The Dangerous U.S.-Israel Attack, And Aside From Empty Rhetoric, Gave Iran No Help – Neither Did It Provide The S-400 Air Defense System, Nor The SU-35 And SU-57 Fighter Jets – Iran Was Forced To Purchase 40 Chinese J-10 Aircraft" "However, the United States, in its negotiations with the Taliban [in Doha, 2020] and in handing over Kabul to them, did not inform Moscow and Tehran and made a unilateral decision. The reason was its differences with its two former partners on one hand, and their efforts to establish an anti-American front – BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization [SCO] and its expansion – on the other. The founders of this organization are Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, and these five countries constitute more than 40 percent of the world's population and about 25 percent of the global gross domestic product. "Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran, Ethiopia, and the United Arab Emirates have also joined [BRICS subsequently]. So far, more than 30 countries have expressed their desire to join or cooperate with BRICS. All of these countries want to reduce their dependence on the dollar and the Western financial system. The United States considers any effort to strengthen this organization or join it as hostility toward itself and finds it intolerable. "However, regarding the lack of official recognition of the Taliban government [since it assumed power in August 2021] and how to engage with it, they had a joint position. The events in Syria and later the massive and joint attack by the United States and Israel on Iran [in June 2025] deepened the rift in their relations, and Moscow decided to be the first country to accept the Taliban's ambassador in Moscow and allow the white Taliban flag to replace the previous tricolor flag [of Afghanistan] – perhaps in this way they could lessen the pain that had reached Russia. "It is clear that this is a political game and nothing else – Russia has not changed, nor has its policies and positions regarding Afghanistan. Official recognition or non-recognition of any government has had no effect on its policies in the past, nor will it in the future. "Russia abandoned its important and strategic friend in the region (Iran) during the hardest days and the dangerous U.S.-Israel attack, and aside from empty rhetoric, gave Iran no help – neither did it provide the S-400 air defense system, nor the SU-35 and SU-57 fighter jets. Iran was forced to purchase 40 Chinese J-10 aircraft. Russia's position regarding the U.S. attack on Iran was so passive and vague that some observers and analysts thought perhaps a deal had been made between Moscow and Washington over Iran." "Basically, Russia Has Always Pursued Policies Regarding Afghanistan That Are Based On Its Strategic Goals"; "This Was Part Of An Agreement Between Moscow And Washington During The Dissolution Of The Soviet Union: That Russia Would Withdraw From Eastern Europe But Would Continue Its Active Presence In Central Asia" "Moscow's move [to recognize the Taliban government] led to the issuance of a warrant by the Hague International Court [ICC] for the arrest of the Taliban leader [Mullah Hibbatullah Akhundzada] and Chief Justice [Abdul Hakim Haqqani]. "The United Nations also called it a unilateral decision [by Russia]. The White House, the U.S. State Department, and Congress also reacted, emphasizing their firm rejection of recognizing the Taliban, maintaining sanctions, imposing additional sanctions, and continuing the freeze on Afghanistan's assets in American banks. And [U.S. President Donald] Trump once again said: We handed over the world's most powerful base (Bagram) to China! "Basically, Russia has always pursued policies regarding Afghanistan that are based on its strategic goals. Central Asia was under the complete control of the Soviet Union, and after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the region remained under Moscow's influence. In some countries, such as Tajikistan, power remains to this day in the hands of former KGB members, and in others, they hold the largest share and role in governments. "This was part of an agreement between Moscow and Washington during the dissolution of the Soviet Union: that Russia would withdraw from Eastern Europe but would continue its active presence in Central Asia. At that time, we repeatedly heard from Washington statements such as: Central Asia is the soft underbelly of the Soviet Union; it is facing threats from radical Islamic groups in Afghanistan; the mujahideen government destabilizes the region's stability and security; the withdrawal of Soviet forces from this region is harmful and will have dire consequences! Meaning, America agreed to the continued dominance of Moscow over this region, despite the complete collapse of the Soviet Union! "Likewise, Moscow does not allow Central Asia to connect to the South through Afghanistan, nor for its gas and oil to be transported via this route to the South – thus freeing itself from dependence and reliance on Moscow and its transit path. At any cost, this must be prevented. It would be the height of folly for anyone to think that Russia would easily abandon its strategic objectives merely by accepting the ambassador of the Kabul government in Moscow." "When Hezb-e-Islami Forces Entered Kabul, [Hashemi] Rafsanjani, The Former President Of Iran, Said In His Friday Prayer Sermon: We Will Never Allow Hezb-E-Islami To Rule Over Kabul"; "Pakistan Also Does Not Favor The Establishment Of An Islamic Government Led By A Pashtun And Considers It A Cause For Provoking And Encouraging The Pashtuns Of Pakistan To Separate From Pakistan" "In this regard, Iran also holds a position identical to that of Russia: the transfer of Central Asian gas and oil through Afghanistan to Pakistan and India – two important markets for Iran – is in no way acceptable to it. Iran's opposition to the project for transporting Turkmenistan's gas to Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India (TAPI), and the creation of obstacles against it, stems from this very point. Iran has spared no effort to prevent the implementation of this project, and one of the main reasons behind its massive investments in the continuation of insecurity and war in Afghanistan has been exactly this. "Furthermore, a majority Pashtun and Sunni government in Afghanistan is intolerable for Iran. When Hezb-e-Islami forces entered Kabul, [Hashemi] Rafsanjani, the former president of Iran, said in his Friday prayer sermon: We will never allow Hezb-e-Islami to rule over Kabul. Iran opposes U.S.-backed TAPI gas pipeline, while U.S. opposes Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline "Pakistan also does not favor the establishment of an Islamic government led by a Pashtun and considers it a cause for provoking and encouraging the Pashtuns of Pakistan to separate from Pakistan and join Afghanistan. For this very reason, it preferred non-Pashtuns belonging to ethnic minorities, such as Mojaddedi [Sibghatullah Mojaddedi, former President of Afghanistan] and [Burhanuddin] Rabbani, for the presidency. "One of the heads of Pakistan's ISI [Inter-Services Intelligence of Pakistani military], who was known for being propagandistic, wrote in his analytical report to Pakistan's decision-making authorities: A government led by a Pashtun in Kabul is not in Pakistan's interest. When the forces of Hezb-e-Islami entered Kabul, this same general, in a meeting with the leaders of the Peshawar-based factions [of the Taliban], said: Pakistan will never allow Hekmatyar to rule Kabul. One of them said to him: Please, General Sahib, do it." "As Long As Afghanistan Lacks A Government Based On The Will Of The Majority Of The People And A Strong Consultative System, It Will Remain A Toy For External Competition – Neither Accepting Political Representatives From This Side Nor From That Side, Nor Financial Aid, Nor Diplomatic Maneuvers, Will Replace True Legitimacy" "The truth is this: As long as Afghanistan lacks a government based on the will of the majority of the people and a strong consultative system, it will remain a toy for external competition – neither accepting political representatives from this side nor from that side, nor financial aid, nor diplomatic maneuvers, will replace true legitimacy. If Afghanistan succeeds in realizing its national and religious unity within the framework of a just and lawful system, it will overcome the most dangerous conspiracies and pressure circles of foreign actors. "We also believe that as long as diplomatic and political relations among the countries of the world are not based on sound principles and genuine justice, and as long as unhealthy rivalries, reprehensible hypocrisy, and malicious intent are not set aside, the existing problems between countries will not be resolved, and trust and confidence will not be established. "Some of these sound and justice-based principles are as follows: "i) Non-interference by large and powerful countries in the internal affairs of small and underdeveloped countries. "ii) Non-support for imposed, non-national, non-popular, coup-installed, puppet, autocratic governments that lack internal legitimacy. "iii) Severing relations with ethnocentric and racist regimes. "These fundamental conditions must be strictly observed in dealing with any government and system: "1) The country's political and social system must be lawful and supported by the majority of the nation. "2) It must have a shura [council] that genuinely represents the will of the people, as the highest and most authoritative body for all major national decisions. "3) It must possess a constitution accepted by the nation, as a national covenant and guarantor of the individual human rights of every member of society. "However, diplomatic relations and political engagements between countries are currently, in general, based on reprehensible motives and unhealthy political, economic, and military rivalries. No attention is paid to who the counterpart is and what background and characteristics they have – whether they represent their nation and people or a forcibly imposed minority, whether they respect and submit to the will of their people or not. "If it were not so, and if these standards were observed in political relations, we would not witness authoritarian, coup-installed, and individual-centered governments in any country in the world. Such regimes would face severe global isolation, and the space for their survival and continuation would be significantly restricted. "Hekmatyar" Source: (Afghanistan), July 9, 2025.
Shafaq News
10 hours ago
- Shafaq News
Iran, European Powers kick off nuclear talks in Istanbul
Shafaq News – Istanbul Delegations from Iran, Britain, France and Germany met in Istanbul on Friday for a new round of nuclear talks, with Tehran describing the meeting as a test of European realism and an opportunity to recalibrate positions on its nuclear programme. Though Europe's influence has waned in recent years, Iranian officials emphasize that dialogue with the three European signatories of the 2015 nuclear deal has continued, framing the talks as part of a longstanding, if intermittent, engagement. Tehran urged European capitals to reconsider what it termed 'unconstructive' positions, presenting the Istanbul meeting as a chance for the trio to revise their approach and revive diplomatic momentum. The talks represent the first diplomatic contact between Iran and Western powers since the recent 12-day conflict with Israel, during which Israel and the United States carried out multiple strikes against Iranian nuclear sites, including Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. Earlier today, the Financial Times reported that some European governments were weighing a temporary pause before activating the 'snapback' mechanism — a process that would reinstate UN sanctions lifted under the 2015 accord. The move follows Iran's suspension of cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Meanwhile Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi reaffirmed Iran's nuclear policy remains unchanged, stressing that uranium enrichment continues as part of its declared peaceful programme. 'The world must understand that we remain firm and resolute in defending the Iranian people's right to peaceful nuclear energy, particularly enrichment,' he stressed.
