AFGHANISTAN: Terrorism is not dead in Afghanistan: MP

The day Fawzia Koofi was born, her parents, disappointed she wasn't a boy, left her to fry in the sun. It was a cruel introduction to the world, but Koofi was not deterred. She says she has faced every challenge her country has thrown at her and is still willing to die for a country that's threatened to kill her from day one.

She persevered after her father and four brothers were killed because of their politics. She fought to get her husband freed from jail. She won a political office in a country that just ten years ago didn't allow women to go to school. Recently, she narrowly escaped insurgents as they shot at her car. Today, she's on her way to running for the Afghan presidency.

She is touring Canada promoting her memoirs, “Letters to My Daughters”. While in Ottawa, she sat down for an interview with Globalnews.ca's Rebecca Lindell to speak about Afghanistan's political progress, the resilience of the Taliban and why she thinks it is too early for Canada to pull-out.

One of the goals for Canada was to come into Afghanistan and help establish a strong and stable government. How far along is the government in that respect?

The government was established in terms of institutions. We have a parliament, which is democratically elected. We have a constitution, which was developed by the votes of people. We have had four elections so far, two presidential and two parliamentary.

The point is that the effectiveness of all these institutions has still not been proven to the people. You get legitimacy by the votes of people, but the continuation of that legitimacy depends on delivering and being accountable for what you are supposed to do.

Yesterday during the reading of your book, you mentioned the government lost focus. What do you mean by that?

It's a democratically-elected government and it needs to focus on the basic commitments, meaning the domestic policies rather than focusing on reconciliation and reintegration talks. We will not be able to get rid of the Taliban, but certainly we will be able to marginalize them if we have a strong government that's able to deliver its basic commitments to the people, which include creating jobs.

It's a country where more than 70 per cent of the population is under the poverty line. Last year alone, out of 130,000 students who did the university entrance exam, only 32,000 students manage to attend universities. Seventy-five thousand students didn't manage to go. They have no alternative but to join the insurgents. We need to do something about those sorts of things instead of being detached from people and their needs and working on big issues like reconciliation and peace.

Reconciliation and peace is a big need. Nobody deserves peace more than the Afghan nation because they have been suffering for over 30 years of conflict, but it's also important that we define, who we are talking to. What will we lose? What will we gain?

The focus on reconciliation means that conservative tribal leaders and the Taliban are at the table. Do you think they should be there?

I think the 21st century is the century of talks and dialogue, but in the case of Afghanistan it's important that we define who we are talking to. Is it the Taliban as a group? If yes, they haven't come forward and said they would like to talk and negotiate. They have always said we want changes in the constitution: “We want to rule the country. We want the Islamic rights of women...” They have not said they have changed and “now we will allow women to go to school. “

Above all, I believe there is a strong regional link to the Taliban, rather than just an Afghan element. They have a lot of back up and support and the Taliban of today are not the Taliban of 2001. They have become stronger. Their links are more expanded. They have created more financial support. Their objectives have expanded, so with that I don't think we can just ask them to sit on the other side of the table. The issues are much more complicated.

I've spoken with some women in Afghanistan who express concern that these talks, the political reconciliation, could derail some of the gains that they've made. What do you think?

It is always easy in any talks to compromise women's issues. Women don't have weapons. They don't have guns. They have not destroyed the country. They will just go to the streets and demonstrate, and that is easy to ignore.

Our leaders listen to those who destroy and kill. That is why the focus of the government has shifted. It was much easier for me to run in 2005 than in 2010. There was less protection and security. There was less tension.

The government is paying a language bribe. Freedom of speech, media, women's issues will be the first thing to be compromised if any reconciliation process starts, if it is not through a democratic means.

Allow the Taliban to come and participate in an election, if they win it, then well done. But we shouldn't hand over everything we have. We invested blood and treasure to defeat the Taliban.

In Canada a lot of the focus is that this month our troops will be leaving Afghanistan in terms of their combat role. How will this shift impact the political development in Afghanistan?

There is a need to train the police and army in Afghanistan, not only to train them but to provide them with the weapons and machinery they need. Right now, the machinery is very weak. It's even weaker than the ones the Taliban use. It's important that we provide them with quality and quantitative support. It's good the training role is still there.

I was reading in The Globe and Mail this morning that Stephen Harper was talking about what the troops have achieved. But to be honest, I don't know what they have achieved that they want to leave now. It's a big question for all Afghans. It was clear why the international community first came. They wanted to get rid of the Taliban and al-Qaida. But why are they leaving? Is Afghanistan no longer a security threat to the world? That's what the prime minister said.

I doubt it's not a security threat for the world. There is still a war. We have a long, uncontrolled border with Pakistan. We have a weak army, in the process of training. We have very weak police. In the past few months the insurgency has increased, suicide bombings have increased and have killed very good people who I respect. I cried when they were killed. The last one was killed when I was on the plane coming to Canada. The insurgency is growing. And certainly when there is insurgency, there is space for terrorism to grow. The consequence of that growth doesn't just threaten Afghan people. It threatens you. What are the benchmarks which allow us to satisfy ourselves that this is a safe place and it is no longer a threat to the world?

You said that it is not right for Canada to leave the country without bring a proper end to the war. What do you mean by a proper end?

First of all, we need a regional approach to end this war. Put pressure on the neighbouring countries to stop supporting the Taliban and al-Q aida. They have been doing so and killing Osama is just proof to the claim. There should be diplomatic, as well as financial, pressure on Pakistan to stop the support.

The second thing is that military is not the only solution. We need to also as a government focus on good governance. Not all of the people who join the Taliban are ideologically Taliban. They are the ones who are not happy with the government because there is poverty, because there is injustice, because there are political appointments based on connections not qualifications. There is a sign of sympathy within the government for the Taliban. For example, in Kandahar 500 prisoners escaped. How could they escape if there was no support? We need to really mobilize our resources to have one objective as a government.

One of questions being asked in Canada as we look back at 10 years in Afghanistan is, was the mission worth it. How would you answer that?

It was a worthwhile mission, but the reasons for the withdrawal for next month are not convincing enough for us.

In Kandahar, there are girls that go to school in the very remote areas. They will go to school if there is security, so education is one achievement.

There are also a lot of development projects in Kandahar going on; a lot of development projects and people seem to be supporting the process. This is because people believe in democracy and Canada's role in promoting this democracy was crucial.

These are progresses that have been made. Of course you cannot stay there forever, but we need you to work on a strategy that in the longer term could substitute the police and army in the long-term. Then you could think of a regional approach and then you can think about leaving. But to leave so quickly like that, from a very difficult province, where the police and army are weak, 500 prisoners escaped from prison, the province may fall in the hands of the Taliban again.

You still believe in our country despite the fact that you've almost had to give your life for it. What makes you so convinced of change?

It's the people of Afghanistan. They are democratic by mindset. I don't agree with the claims that it is a country that produced terrorism and the Taliban. It's only one side of the story. The Taliban were extremists imposed on us during war.

By nature and by mind people are very much pro-democracy. And by democracy, I don't mean for women wearing short sleeves or the mini-jupe. They are pro-democracy within the context of our culture. They are for a government that is accountable to them for what they do.

For instance, in the last provincial election there were rocket attacks in the city until 12 o'clock because the Taliban didn't want people to go and vote. The rocket attacks stopped at 12 and by 1 o'clock people went to the polling station to vote. Here people don't use their votes and that's why they are surprised with the results of the election.

I wonder, God forbid, if the situation got worse in Canada and there was fighting, do you think people would go to the polling station?