this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2023

117 points (97.6% liked)

World News

39045 readers

2349 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Recommendations

How to spot Misinformation and Propaganda

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

quinten@lemmy.world

NewsAutoMod@lemmy.world

jordanlund@lemmy.world

Tenthrow@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

lemmyAtom@lemmy.world

FlyingSquid@lemmy.world

117

Taliban to join China's Belt and Road forum, elevating ties (www.reuters.com)

submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

32 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The Taliban will attend China's Belt and Road Forum next week, a spokesman said on Saturday, underscoring Beijing's growing official ties with the administration, despite its lack of formal recognition by any government.

Taliban officials and ministers have at times travelled to regional meetings, mostly those focussed on Afghanistan, but the Belt and Road Forum is among the highest-profile multilateral summits it has been invited to attend.

The forum in Beijing on Tuesday and Wednesday marks the 10th anniversary of President Xi Jinping's ambitious global infrastructure and energy initiative, billed as recreating the ancient Silk Road to boost global trade.

top 32 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nothing says multipolar world like banning education for women.

[–] PugJesus@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

Critical support for our Taliban comrades /s

[–] luthis@lemmy.nz 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Who can join the Belt and Road, And blow up people too? The Taliban can!

[+] TWeaK@lemm.ee -23 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Have the Taliban been blowing people up lately though? Their idealogy is not great, but they're who the people wanted (as opposed to the boy raping warlords that the US propped up) and the region is seeing some measure of peace for the first time in 40 years.

[–] AlmightySnoo@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago (1 children)

An important reminder that Afghan girls are still not allowed to go to school beyond 6th grade since the Taliban took over: https://edition.cnn.com/2023/10/05/asia/afghanistan-girls-hidden-schools-taliban-intl-cmd/index.html

[+] TWeaK@lemm.ee -13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Absolutely. The Taliban are terrible for women's rights. This is the most obvious and biggest negative. Although, they've not been as bad as Iran recently - Western media has been itching to find examples of the Taliban really cracking down and assaulting women but haven't found much if anything. While we could assume that they have been doing it and perhaps even probably be correct, that's still just an assumption.

[–] PugJesus@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Although, they’ve not been as bad as Iran recently

There are so many levels of 'what the fuck' to this, not least the lack of understanding of the comparative horror of Iran and Taliban-ruled Afghanistan.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Care to actually explain what you mean?

[–] PugJesus@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Iran is far better on women's rights than Afgahnistan under the Taliban. And that's NOT praise for Iran.
Afghanistan has been quite prominent in its display of horrors against women's rights, it's just that the West has moved on since the fall of the non-Taliban Afghan government.
The whole argument you're putting forward is mega-fucked and inaccurate at its base, and the idea that the Taliban are some populist uprising is fucking absurd to anyone who knows anything about Afghanistan.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Can you please provide some sources? I was specifically referring to Iranian police beating women to death or locking them away for social media posts, and all the various stories like that. Maybe Afghanistan is doing similar or worse, but I need to see evidence.
Again, sources? With particular reference to the "horrific" parts.
I'm not saying the Taliban was a populist uprising, I'm saying the people saw the Taliban as the better option and did not resist when they took over. As a result, war has ended in the country. That doesn't mean everything is rosy now, but it is objectively better than before in that regard - the alternative would have been ongoing conflict in the form of a civil war.

I'm definitely open to changing my position, but I need something more than just a back and forth in comments.

[–] bernieecclestoned@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

👇

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Weird that the image isn't loading for me in situ. Edit: It came up after a few refreshes. /e Anyway.

Got any context? Date? An article to go with it?

[–] bernieecclestoned@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The urgent call from the ten Special Rapporteurs and members of the Working Group on discrimination against women and girls, came in response to an announcement by the Taliban-appointed Supreme Court in favour of punishments including stoning, flogging and burying people under a wall.

https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/05/1136562

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thanks. That's rubbish then, not surprising of course but it's pretty much the worst way things could go.

Is there anything you can tell me about the photo above?

[–] bernieecclestoned@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 year ago

Yes

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

By that standard the US occupation was a blessing because Afghan infant mortality rates plummeted.

The Taliban are still sexist extremists.

[+] TWeaK@lemm.ee -16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

By that standard the US occupation was a blessing because Afghan infant mortality rates plummeted.

My standard was about wars being fought, not about the death rate of a small portion of the population. And yours completely ignores the practice of Bacha Bazi that the warlords were doing.

The Taliban are still sexist extremists.

Absolutely, no questions there. However, the people wanted them - there's a reason why they took over almost completely uncontested. Now, it's up to the people to change their government from within.

My hope is that they now have the taste for equal rights and such, and that the people might be successful. Maybe even form better relations with the West. That would certainly be better than them providing copper to China, which will primarily be used for war efforts. Although, as a civil infrastructure project this road is a good thing.

[–] ocassionallyaduck@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is an absurdly oversimplified version of events. The Taliban waged a successful insurgency effort for nearly 2 decades, and remained armed and organized the entire time. The reason they took over after US withdrawl was in no way because they were "what people wanted". They killed those who opposed them swiftly, and have continued to do so. They took power through swift application of force.

They will never "change their government from within". The Taliban is not a democracy where you vote on policy. It's is a religious group and opposition to their policies is handled as opposition to God. You will die.

I understand the tact you were attempting to take here, but the Taliban is not a populist force in the region, at all. There was fairly widespread support (not unanimous) for the changes the US brought, but rebuilding a nation is not simple. Corruption can take decades to expunged. Unfortunately the Taliban returned first and the sitting leadership just rolled over and hoped not to die.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee -5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

They killed those who opposed them swiftly, and have continued to do so. They took power through swift application of force.

No they didn't. Most Afghani people laid down their weapons and didn't oppose them when the Americans left. They stormed through the country so quickly because there was almost no resistance - in no small part because they were against Bacha Bazi and vowed to stop the practice.

I agree that it's incredibly unlikely that the Taliban can be changed. However, I wasn't particularly referring to social change via democracy. Either way, it's up to the Afghani people to sort it out.

There was fairly widespread support (not unanimous) for the changes the US brought

In Kabul, sure. The rest of the country, no.

Edit: As for the people wanting them, I should probably expand on that. They probably didn't particularly want the Taliban as their ideal choice, but saw it as the better of the options available to them.

[–] money_loo@1337lemmy.com 2 points 1 year ago

No they didn't. Most Afghani people laid down their weapons and didn't oppose them when the Americans left. They stormed through the country so quickly because there was almost no resistance - in no small part because they were against Bacha Bazi and vowed to stop the practice.

The Afghan people are not fighters, my guy. They lack enough homogeny for that. At least that’s what my brother who existed amongst them for nearly a decade told me when he got home from protecting them.

[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The people wanted them so bad some were clinging to the landing gears of the last planes leaving Kabul and plummeting to their deaths.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

People in Kabul, where the city has been developed and westernised, sure. The rest of the country just let them roll through unopposed.

[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sure, but you’re also ignoring rural ethnic groups like the Tajiks and the Hazaras that are certainly not happy with Taliban rule. The Taliban are a Pashtun movement and are not all that friendly to many other ethnic groups in Afghanistan, especially in the north.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

Yes, the north was a hold out for a long while.

[–] Echo71Niner@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

they’re who the people

you mean to tell me Afghanistan has reliable elections?

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Clearly that's not what I meant, as explained in another comment.

[–] Echo71Niner@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe I should've clarified, I was sincere in asking, because, I stereotypical-assumeed their election would be biased, for sure no women can vote.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ah OK, fair enough, my bad. I think I was a bit terse with my last comment.

I was basically referring to the fact that the Taliban took over almost completely unopposed. That isn't to say they were chosen or democratically elected, just that they likely saw them as the better of the bad options available.

[–] money_loo@1337lemmy.com 2 points 1 year ago

Bro, they took over unopposed because they were the only ones there. Most of Afghanistan is a bunch of distinct ethnic people that don’t even usually communicate with each other. They couldn’t even muster up enough people to fight it if they wanted to.

[–] luthis@lemmy.nz 4 points 1 year ago

That is the worst second verse to the song I have ever read. It didn't even have any rhythm.

[–] MyNameIsIgglePiggle@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

Yeah if the boys were raped the Taliban executed them for their crimes

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 1 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

KABUL, Oct 14 (Reuters) - The Taliban will attend China's Belt and Road Forum next week, a spokesman said on Saturday, underscoring Beijing's growing official ties with the administration, despite its lack of formal recognition by any government.

The Taliban's acting minister for commerce and industry, Haji Nooruddin Azizi, will travel to Beijing in the coming days, ministry spokesman Akhundzada Abdul Salam Jawad said in a text message to Reuters.

Azizi will continue discussions in Beijing on plans to build a road through the Wakhan corridor, a thin, mountainous strip in northern Afghanistan, to provide direct access to China, Akhundzada said.

A series of restrictions on women's access to public life and the barring of many female NGO staff from work has increased roadblocks to recognition, especially by Western countries, officials and international relations analysts say.

Other nations have kept on previous ambassadors or appointed heads of mission in a charge d'affaires capacity that does not involve formally presenting credentials to the government.

The original article contains 426 words, the summary contains 197 words. Saved 54%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!