Next week marks the fifth anniversary of the takeover of Afghanistan by the Taliban after US coalition troops were evacuated from the country. That is five years for the terrorists to have consolidated their grip, so now is a good time to reflect on what the “coalition of the willing” left behind.
Through vindictive edict after edict, these five years have brought an ever-escalating repression of Afghan girls and women — with far too little done by any outside authority to speak up or stand up against the most egregious denial of girls’ rights in the world today.
Barely reported was the shocking massacre in June by troops who fired on a group of women’s rights protesters as they demonstrated against girls’ exclusion from education and the enforcement of strict dress codes. They were marching under the banner Azadi, meaning “freedom.” Two people, including a young boy, were shot dead and several were injured.
Illustration: Kevin Sheu
In the most medieval of ways, the Taliban are also imposing even harsher laws to legitimize child marriage and provide legal exemption for domestic violence perpetrated by husbands, including against school-age girls.
According to UN observers, these girls, often sold into marriage or forced to become child brides, are victims of a new form of crime: gender apartheid. Historians would look back and ask why it is that, after landing more than 1 million coalition troops, suffering more than 3,500 deaths and 23,000 injuries, and spending in excess of US$1 trillion, we have been unable to prevent the Taliban destroying the most basic of rights. Perhaps more importantly, and with the Taliban entrenched in Kabul and religious leaders regularly sending out instructions from Kandahar, the question for now is: What can we do immediately to improve the lives of girls and women?
Can we help them fulfil their potential? Globally, the proportion of women aged 20 to 24 who were married before 18 has declined over the past decade, and Unicef suggests at least 25 million child marriages that could have involved school-age brides have been prevented. Yet an estimated 12 million girls under 18 are still married off each year when they could be at school.
The issue is acute in the Afghanistan the coalition left behind, where girls are banned from secondary schooling and Afghan women are banned from university, public sector employment and even work with NGOs and charities. They are forbidden to travel or to enter many public places, from parks to restaurants, unless accompanied. And with the Taliban confident that they can act with impunity, a dozen anti-girl, anti-women injunctions are tightening their grip. In one case, a 15-year-old Afghan girl is reported to have been killed, along with her mother, by a Taliban official after he tried to abduct her for a forced marriage.
It is appalling, and it does speak to the particular brutality of the Taliban. Pakistan’s Sindh province, by contrast, has enacted one of the strongest legal frameworks in the developing world against child marriage, criminalizing marriage under 18 and introducing penalties for those who facilitate it.
Bangladesh, too, has enacted new laws. A stronger birth registration system has made it harder to conceal a girl’s age, closing off a common pathway into early marriage. At the same time, programs providing small-scale financial support to poor families have enabled girls to remain in education. Save the Children reports that in one program in Bangladesh, the offer of financial support helped more than 1,000 girls stay in school and avoid early marriage. Child marriage is not simply a cultural practice, as often portrayed. It is also driven by poverty, as much as weak enforcement of the law.
There are “child marriage-free zones” in parts of Pakistan and Bangladesh, where young people come together to support any school friend who is being married off against her will. Young people become known as “wedding busters” because of their willingness to intervene. With assistance and will, so much is possible.
It is no accident that the Taliban have focused so much attention not just on denying women’s rights, but specifically on denying them an education, because they know, as we do, that schooling is the most potent enabler. Across the world, it is the single most powerful protection against early marriage.
Organizations such as Girls Not Brides have established that every additional year a girl spends in secondary education significantly reduces the likelihood that she would be married as a child.
If we could open the doors to quality schooling, ensure girls have access to safe spaces and provide financial support for their families, tens of thousands more could get that education.
Even in Afghanistan, that is no pipe dream. Through Unicef and Education Cannot Wait, and with secret, on-the-ground support, girls are learning in unconventional ways: often online, sometimes in underground schools or in family homes, unseen by the authorities.
However, there is so much more to be done, not least because thousands of girls have had to leave the country to obtain schooling, and with tension rising between Afghanistan and Pakistan, one favored route out of the country is fast closing.
The UK home secretary Shabana Mahmood has announced that under the new immigration and asylum bill, there would be two routes under a refugee resettlement scheme for students that could help girls get the education they have been denied. The first is through recognized charities sponsoring girls coming to the UK. The second is through colleges and universities offering scholarships.
That is good, but we must go further. I believe a fund must now be set up in support of Afghan girls who are threatened with being married off against their will. It should offer them bursaries to continue their education, if necessary outside their home country. And as UN special envoy for education, I am happy to work with any charity or educational institution that wants to assist girls in defense of their human rights.
It might be a small gesture, but five years after they were condemned to Taliban rule, is it not time to truly support all the girls who risk their freedom and their lives for an education, and the hope of a meaningful existence? They yearn for things we take for granted. It is our moral duty to help them.
Gordon Brown is the UN’s special envoy for global education and former British prime minister from 2007 to 2010.
China exploits the mythical “status quo” to undermine regional stability. Crucially, the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) never actually mentions this concept. Instead, Sections 2(b) and 3 establish explicit, legally binding US obligations to provide defensive weapons and maintain the capacity to resist any force or coercion that threatens regional peace or Taiwan’s security, society and economy. Framing these mandates as a vague “status quo” creates a conceptual trap. It paralyzes defenders by mislabeling Taiwan’s self-defense as a provocation, allowing Beijing to slowly strangle the island through gray-zone warfare. To fulfill the TRA, Washington and Taipei must replace passive ambiguity with
Did the artificial intelligence (AI) boom begin when it did simply as a result of scientific breakthroughs? At first glance, it would seem so. The transformer architecture — the foundation of today’s large language models — was introduced in 2017. By 2020, researchers had established the basic logic of scaling: More computation and data produce predictably better models. Then, in late 2022, the public launch of ChatGPT revealed the mass-market appeal of the technologies, setting off a global race for AI leadership. However, scientific advances alone do not trigger investment booms. Rather, AI delivered a market-wide shock to the semiconductor
Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) has developed a habit of overstepping his authority. The question is: Why? On Monday last week, he said that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators had discussed holding a vote of no confidence in Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) and that he fully supported the move. On Wednesday, he praised the work of Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Chi-mai (陳其邁) for his handling of food safety in the municipality and suggested that President William Lai (賴清德) should replace Cho with Chen. That appeared to be a magnanimous thing for a mayor from an opposition party to say of a counterpart from
A Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Central Review Committee member has called for the party to discuss a vision of “peaceful reunification” with China, a proposal that was defended by the KMT’s think tank. Although it is currently an internal party conversation, the measure is significant. Political ideas rarely move from the fringe to the mainstream overnight. Before they become policy proposals, they are introduced, debated and normalized. That process might be under way. Taiwanese overwhelmingly oppose unification. Data from National Chengchi University’s Election Study Center show that only a small share of the public support immediate or eventual unification. So
RSS