The knife has reached the bone

In the past few hours, some emotionally charged Afghanistanis have shown a bit of excitement regarding the Pakistani army's airstrikes on Taliban militants' bases in Kabul, Kandahar, and other places. "Pakistan zinda bad - Long live Pakistan"- is a repeated phrase I see shared across social media platforms.  

One user even wished that Syed Asim Munir (the Pakistani army chief) would liberate Afghanistan from the grip of the Taliban. One user wrote, "Pakistan's airstrikes have made the groundwork for resistance against the Taliban feasible."

Another user warned that "In these circumstances, one must be vigilant that the people must not be deceived in the name of the homeland by the Taliban criminals. A homeland that is under the criminal rule of the Taliban is not a homeland." As the old proverb goes, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

After reading these comments of those emotionally invested Afghanistanis, obviously with a sense of responsibility, regarding Pakistan's strikes on Taliban regime bases, now I understand better the conversation I had with an Iranian friend who told me, "You know, every year around this time, we Iranians used to look forward to Nowruz Eid, this year, we're counting down the days and hours to an American attack."

Now I better understand the situation of those Iranians who are waiting for American bombs. And I also better understand the desires of those who are under the rule and oppression of the Taliban and are happy about Pakistan's airstrikes on Taliban military bases and wish for their country to be freed with the help of Pakistan.

"kard ba ustukhan rasida" -- The knif has reached the bone-- [i.e., they are at their breaking point], a popular proverb in Farsi, is what my Iranian used to explain to me the situation of those living under oppression, whether in Iran or Afghanistan.

I mean, what parallels of anguish. From those Iranians who wish for American bombs to those Afghanistanis who hope for Pakistani strikes, it is a deeply unsettling time. 

What a world we are living in!

Wishing for bombs

These days, some Iranians are dying to see the US attack their country. This morning, I was talking to an Iranian friend, Reza, who told me, "You know, every year around this time, we Iranians used to look forward to Nowruz Eid, this year, we're counting down the days and hours to an American attack."

I didn't have the words to express myself, except to acknowledge a subdued sense of sadness. I said that an attack, no matter the form, is bad. He then asked, "Is the attack by the mullahs and their deadly forces, who have killed thousands recently, good?"

I said the answer is negative (i.e., of course not). An attack, from any perspective and by any state or actor, is horrible. I mean, people should not reach the point where they wish for a foreign attack on their homeland.

Then, my Iranian friend, with an angry retort, countered, "Imagine a prisoner who is tortured daily and whose agony is unending. He or she wishes that one of the torturers would end the torment with a single bullet. Can you now understand how much some Iranians suffer?"

"Have the people of Iran really reached this point?" I countered.

Eventually, I told my Iranian friend that I do not allow myself to pass judgment on this matter because I do not have the experience of what those in Iran are experiencing, and my understanding falls short, too. "The question is, will their situation improve with a US attack?" I asked.

"Now compare this situation with Afghanistan. Would you wish for a foreign intervention that would lead to the overthrow of the Taliban, who are killing your people, the Hazaras?" Reza irritably followed with his analogical question.

"Not militarily," I said.

"Well, why not for Iran?" he asked bitterly.

"I have no answer," I replied.

The 1993 Afshar Massacre: Testimony from Rabbani's Government

This is part of the confessions of General Mohammad Nabi Azimi, a high-ranking official in the government of Rabbani and Massoud, as recorded in his book. (Urdu va Siyasat Dar Seh Daheh Akheer-e Afghanistan [Army and Politics in the Last Three Decades in Afghanistan] Peshawar: Qisa-khani Bazara Peshawar, Saba Kitabkhanah 1998. p. 632-33)

"The third war of Shura-e Nazar [Ahmad Shah Massoud's party] and the Hazaras occurred on February 11, 1993, and as a result, Afshar in Kabul was leveled to the ground. The men, women, and children of the Afshar Hazaras were mercilessly put to the sword and annihilated by Massoud and Sayyaf forces... To completely intimidate the Hazaras, Ahmad Shah Massoud directed all the tanks, mortars, rocket launchers, and aircraft he had at two points of the city, Chindawol and Afshar [both are Hazara neighborhoods]. Afshar was razed to the ground, and Chindawol was destroyed... Ahmad Shah Massoud himself had gone up on the TV Hill, from where he watched, directed, and managed the attacks. This attack lasted five nights. Hazara people and Shiites were buried alive under tons of rubble from their homes, or were roasted alive and burned in fires. The number of martyrs reached hundreds, even thousands. The Kabul hospital was destroyed, the Maywand Road buildings were ruined, the businesses, homes, caravanserais, and apartments that could be seen from Lailami Caravanserai to Chindawol were all leveled to the ground" (page 632-633).

The Afshar massacre: why we must not forget

Today marks the thirty-third anniversary of the Afshar massacre. On February 11, 1993, a state-sponsored attack under the command of Ahmad Shah Massoud targeted Afshar, in the west of Kabul, a predominantly Hazara neighborhood, during which between 1,500 and 2,000 people were massacred. It remains one of the darkest chapters in the history of Afghanistan. 

For Hazaras, February 11 marks remembrance day each year, a day that brings back the deep wound inflicted on the body and soul of the Hazara people. Many Hazaras believe that it was part of the ongoing genocidal violence against the Hazaras. 

In the early 1990s, a pivotal moment occurred when Hazara, for the first time in history, took up arms to resist their systematic repression.  And yet, the violence did not come from the usual source, such as Pashtuns, but from the Tajik-led Mujahideen government under the leadership of Ahmad Shah Massoud and Burhanuddin Rabbani.

What concerns me most today is that we commemorate this tragedy only once a year — and even then, often only in words. My hope is that one day, Hazaras will compile and establish a comprehensive oral history archive of the Afshar massacre so that future generations become aware of their history and carry forward the memory of this wound so that it never occurs again. 

It is a Nimrod World

"It's a nimrod world, berar [brother]," Zahra told me, describing what she has been witnessing: the rise of authoritarianism and a rapid decline in morale in the current situation, not only here in the US, but across the world. 

After I ended my phone conversation with Zahra, one of my key interlocutors, I found myself dwelling on her phrase jahan-i nimrod—"nimrod's world." I turned to research to better understand its resonance. 

Nimrod is a legendary figure known for his cruelty and tyranny. He is mentioned in the Qur'an as someone who acknowledged no power greater than his own, claimed to be a God, and eventually rebelled even against that divine authority (Surah Al-Baqarah-2:258). His rule was characterized by force, and his realm was perpetually marked by violence and suffering. 

Nimrod, the tyrannical ruler, was killed by a mosquito in the end. The mosquito entered through his nostril, made its way into his brain, and brought him down.

Today’s rulers, from Afghanistan under Pashtun rule, the tribal group the Taliban, to the far‑right white extremists in Europe and America, all share the traits of Nimrod. They are contemporary little nimrods. They are selfish, oppressive, and merciless; thirsty for power and wealth; narcissistic; they see no one but themselves and their families. They want to conquer the world. At the same time, they are foolish. They have little understanding of their own time, place, and environment. They have little understanding of culture and society. They have little understanding of history. 

And they are also cowards. As much as they are cruel and oppressive, they are equally timid and fearful. They only dare to bully the weak. They cannot even look straight in the eye of those who are strong. The root of this fear lies in their arrogance, ignorance, and stupidity, along with traits such as narcissism and aggression.

The Epstein scandal and moral rot

Today I was speaking with Asad, a friend and a long-time interlocutor, someone with whom I often have deep conversations. We were discussing how the release of more of Epstein's files, the convicted sex offender, has revealed the extent to which this pedophile was well-connected to some of the most powerful and famous people. Thousands of names are mentioned in the files, but the notables are a network of powerful and wealthy people. Individuals like Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Bill Clinton, Trump, and Prince Andrew, as well as the most prominent university professors at MIT, Harvard, and Yale, were all friends and companions of this predator. Disturbingly, some of these individuals were apparently complicit in his crime, including the sexual abuse of underage girls, but now deny any wrongdoingdoing.

The Epstein files expose two failures: first, that the institutions supposed to prevent abuse instead enabled it; and second, that our ethical foundations and social trust have fundamentally collapsed. 

What emerges is an implicit double standard in how ethical principles are understood and applied. One set of ethics for the masses, and ethics for the powerful, the wealthy, and influential people. Maybe it should be more explicit. That way, we would have a better understanding of social interactions. At least it would become clearer to us that just as societies are divided and defined into class categories based on power, wealth, education, and profession, creating social stratification, ethical principles should also be defined on the same basis. Such clarity would help us understand that the true nature of social orders, rather than believing in the fiction that justice is applied equally to everyone.