The demonization of Iran for executing criminals

Share

Mohammad S. Tahir

April 19, 2010

There’s been a lot of news and talk recently about Afghan citizens being arrested for drug trafficking, and then being executed by the Iranian authorities. Some Afghans have legitimate concerns that the Afghans in Iran may have been mistreated and executed without a fair trial. However, the majority of the people, many of them being anti-Shia (and thus anti-Iranian), pro-Taliban Afghans, and Americans are using this opportunity to demonize Iran, and in the process hurt Afghan-Iranian relations.

The stories being published and talked about are indeed troubling. For example, an Afghan man who is a father and a husband attempts to smuggle drugs into Iran; he is caught, arrested, jailed and then executed by the Iranian authorities. The body is then returned to his family. It’s sad to see that Afghans are involved in these types of activities in the first place. Being poor can cause some people to take risks, and in the end, the risk they take only hurts their families in a much worse way.

Even though the stories are sad, let’s not forget the fact that these people are choosing to engage in an illegal activity. Just like alcohol, drug trafficking, and drug abuse is against Islam. Anyone involved in these types of activities deserve to be punished, because they are participating in the destruction of other people’s lives. People involved in these activities are criminals and deserve death, because their actions, directly or indirectly, ruin lives, lead to the deaths of innocent people, and destroy families. Being poor should not be an excuse to participate in smuggling drugs or other activities. It is much more honorable to die hungry, then to participate in an act that is against Islam, and in the end, destroys the lives of other people.

Moreover, the Iranian government has publicly made it aware to people that if you engage in drug trafficking, you may end up dead. The Iranians have the right to decide the type of punishment that will occur for illegal activities committed on their soil. In fact, the penalty for drug smuggling has been the same in Iran since the time of the Shah.  The death penalty is not just for Afghans, but for anyone, including Iranians that engage in these types of activities.

Illegal drugs are smuggled into Iran; some are sold there, and then eventually make their way to Europe and the United States. Iran is one of the few countries that have been successful in reducing the amount of illegal drugs being smuggled out of Afghanistan. They have invested quite a bit of money, because their own population has suffered a lot from these illegal drugs. For this, they should be applauded, not attacked and demonized.

So, what type of people are twisting the facts and using this as an opportunity to attack Iran? Iran has two enemies in Afghanistan: the Americans and the pro-Taliban, anti-Shia Afghans.

Since getting involved in Afghanistan in late 2001, the Americans have been trying to “cool” Afghan-Iranian relations. Despite being power hungry and corrupt, Afghan President Hamid Karzai has resisted pressure from the Americans to publicly criticize the Iranian President, and downgrade diplomatic relations between the two countries. With Pakistan arming and financing the Taliban to commit gruesome attacks on Afghan soil, Afghanistan, and especially Karzai’s government, needs all the friends it can get. The Iranians have been very committed to the new Afghan government, despite propaganda by U.S. sources claiming that they are secretly arming the Taliban. So far, there has been no credible evidence to show that Iran is working against Karzai’s government or supporting the Taliban.

Interestingly enough, the other group of people who are against the Iranians are the pro-Taliban, anti-Shia Afghans. The majority of Iranians are Shia and the Taliban hate them because they are Shiites. These people may not publicly claim they support the Taliban, and many are secretly on the payroll of Pakistan’s ISI. They are quiet when the Pakistani authorities abuse Afghan refugees, yet when it comes to Iran, they go out of their way to attack and demonize Iran.

For those Afghans who have genuine concerns, let it be known that, so far, there has been no credible evidence to show that the Iranian authorities are mistreating Afghan citizens. If they are executing criminals, then they have every right to do so. Of greater concern for the Afghans should be the innocent civilians being killed by both the Pakistani-supported Taliban, and the US and NATO forces. It’s not Iran that is conducting deadly night raids, and it is not Iran that is training and funding the Taliban so that they can commit suicide attacks in Afghan cities, which ends up killing numerous Afghan civilians – many of them women and children. Let’s focus our energies to keep innocent women and children alive, not the drug trafficking criminals. Don’t buy the propaganda against Iran.

Share
1 Comment

Do We Want a Stable Democracy in Afghanistan – Or Just a Short Term Ally to Fight the Taliban?

Share

Neil Wollman and Abdulhadi Hairan

May 5, 2010

In late March, President Obama paid a surprise visit to Kabul to meet his Afghan counterpart, reportedly asking Karzai to improve governance reform to combat corruption. Since then, the two governments have exchanged jabs. Karzai has been openly defiant of U.S. concerns, specifically election reform in the wake of a presidential election widely considered fraudulent, and has charged foreign interference in elections. The U.S. has focused on his decrees eliminating UN participants on the Election Complaint Commission (which was followed by a partial retreat). The reaction by the Afghan Parliament has been mixed, with the Karzai-dominated upper house supporting his decrees and the lower house rejecting them. In March, Karzai told a UN representative that by mid-April there would be a “major and constructive reshuffle of the election commission,” and he did dismiss the head of the Independent Election Commission (IEC). Most recently, Karzai and the UN worked out a compromise that makes some positive changes in personnel and procedure that will improve election governance, and which has brought the UN and donor nations on board to fund the September parliamentary elections. However, there are complaints from Afghan opposition leaders and some in parliament who say that the reforms are not sufficient. And likely were only enough to win international funding for the election.

What is known is that widespread corruption, going far beyond just elections, is destroying Afghan society. It continues to undermine efforts by the international community and Afghans to promote democracy, security, and nation-building, and to fight narcotics trafficking. The Karzai administration has dismissed any mention of corruption, labeling it as “foreign meddling.” But in Kandahar recently, Karzai heard the same complaints from his home town and tribe. There to solicit cooperation for the upcoming major military operation against the insurgents, Karzai was told by a tribal elder that his government was as much a problem for local people as were the insurgents. Afghan citizens interviewed by the second author of this piece said that the government is a problem on all levels–from top ministers and advisers to local employees. Corruption, nepotism, and the rule of warlords is badly affecting the Afghan people and their hopes for the future. It was not until Karzai’s fraudulent election victory that the issue of corruption in Afghanistan was thrust into the global spotlight and the Obama administration felt compelled to speak out. The question is, how willing is the U.S. to confront the issue?

There are at least two possible paths here for the Obama administration, and signals indicate that it is opting for a short term strategy that is more expedient, but a recipe for long-term failure. It appears Obama has chosen not to push for reform, preferring not to rock the boat. He needs Karzai’s cooperation in fighting the Taliban and in using U.S. and NATO forces to defeat the insurgents—eventually enabling the U.S. President to meet a policy goal and withdraw U.S. troops without losing face. Recent statements by top level Administration officials echo the assertion that Karzai is the head of a sovereign state and that he has been a loyal ally. And now the hot rhetoric between the two countries has ended. Presumably, then, especially with some give by Karzai on election reform, the U.S. will give only lip service to the need for changes in Afghan governance, hoping there is enough popular dislike of the Taliban and military fire-power to succeed.

Even if successful—not a given– this path will very likely result in a resurgence of the Taliban later, as occurred following the first U.S. effort to finish them off. For whatever military victory is achieved now will be lost in the future because of the lack of popular support for a corrupt Afghan administration. When that happens, will the U.S. be ready to fight the Taliban for a third time if it feels that it is in its strategic interest? Would there be any stomach for such a war among the U.S. public, even among those who would feel it is morally justified?

Can the U.S. push Karzai for reform? This risks alienating him, but on the other hand Karzai is beholden to U.S. forces to remain in power. The Obama administration could pressure (not abandon) Karzai to make changes and could work with the international community, the UN, and sympathetic Afghan parliament members and citizen groups to truly reduce the systemic corruption. It would help to accompany this with a foreign aid program to help build strong Afghan educational, economic, and political infrastructures. Such a comprehensive effort, which is less costly than an ongoing war, would likely ensure a government which is supported by Afghans, who would, then, surely reject the harmful Taliban for good.

Foreign interference in another government’s internal politics should always be suspect, but in this case it is the lesser of two evils. It is the right path for Obama to take for both moral and political reasons. Currently, it does not look like the U.S. will take the gamble to push for real change in Afghanistan. We hope we are wrong.

Share
 Comment