>> this is al jazeera, these are the top stories. people have in clashes with israeli police at the al-aqsa mosque. thousands of muslims packed the site for the last friday prayers of the holy month of ramadan. we have from ramallah. >> the situation seems to be calming down near all oxen mosque compound but we have been told their ongoing clashes near

the compound in the old city of jerusalem. we have been hearing from many going back to the west bank they were subject to humiliation or torture at the checkpoint. one of the checkpoints is separating jerusalem from the west bank and that they were subject to arrest as well. >> the chinese covid-19 vaccine sinopharm, has become the sixth to receive the world health organization stamp of approval for emergency use which means it can be added to the u.n. backed covax scheme. numbers in the poll have shot up as the crisis spills over from india, with 57 times more cases than a month ago. the lockdown has been extended in kathmandu, née paul. -- nepal. india recorded 400,000 coronavirus infections in a day

but experts fear the number is higher. the head of if he o.p.s. orthodox church described ethiopians accent -- actions in the tigray province as genocide. the ethnic tigrean says his previous attempt to speak out was blocked. in a previous attempt -- an operation brazil that left 25 people dead. somebody saying officers used disproportionate force in an arrest with drug traffickers in a for zella -- a favela in the north of the city. those are the headlines. more details on the website. we will continue after inside story. goodbye for now. ♪

♪ >> the u.s. and nato troops start to withdraw from afghanistan and they leave behind a resurgent taliban and afghans living in fear. what needs to be done to keep the country safe? this is inside story. ♪ hello and welcome to the program. i am imran khan. president joe biden promised troops will be gone by september 11, 2021, years after the attacks that triggered the fight against the taliban.

several thousand nato personnel believe but as they go the taliban is launching more attacks. the un's as the number of people killed or injured is up by one third compared to this time last year. the u.s. defense secretary admits, afghan security forces face a major task ahead. >> we will remain partners with the afghan government, with the afghan military, and certainly we hope through our continued support, the afghan security forces can be effective. but, you know, they have significant capability but we expect this will be a challenge for them. >> afghans who helped foreign soldiers over the years, scared of reprisal attacks from the taliban. many applied to move to the u.s. but their applications are stuck in a bureaucratic backlog. we report from kabul. >> she knew that she was risking

it all when she started working as a contractor for the u.s. government. her house has been attacked and she has received threat. her supervisor suggested she apply for a special immigrant visa for herself and her family, to safely move to the u.s. that was in 2017. she is still waiting for approval. >> in this country most of the people, even the. women work for afghans. the thing is the situation is getting worse day by day. we all know the taliban will take over the governments of what will happen to our lives? the main thing i am concerned is myself and my family security. who would take this responsibility? because most of the people can recognize me. even though i am hiding myself, but i cannot guarantee that. >> she is one of 18,000 afghans, who have worked alongside u.s. troops, diplomats, and government personnel, and are awaiting decisions on those

special immigrant visas. the process is long and grueling. a report published in early april found the program ineffective. in addressing the needs of those applying. >> by law the application process should take nine months. on average, it takes four years, if not more. since the announcement of the troop withdrawal, the u.s. state department has said, it is aware of the risks afghan visa applicants face, and that it is committed to the program. >> but it has yet to commit to concrete reforms to address the backlog, or accelerate the visa approval. as u.s. troops withdrawal, pressure from congress and organizations, including, no one left behind, has been mounting. >> if we do not do anything, if we do not expedite this process, i am pretty much sure after the withdrawal, there will be tortured and killed in front of their family.

and their videos will be uploaded on the social media for other people to not support the u.s. government in the future. >> dozens of afghans who have worked with us trillion troops in afghanistan are also pleading to have their protection visa applications processed. the taliban considers those afghans who worked with the u.s. and other foreign countries, as traders and has vowed retribution against them. dozens of afghan interpreters and contractors have already been killed, several, while waiting for visas. >> i have no option. the option i have is the only way to die here in this country, or get my visa to have safe life in the states. >> since 2009, when the visa program was established, thousands of afghans, many with families, have relocated to the united states. she, along with thousands of others, desperately want to join them, before it is too late. al jazeera, couple.

-- kabul. >> let's bring in our panel joining us in pittsburgh. colin clarke, a senior research fellow. in nice, victoria fontan american university of afghanistan in kabul. and in doha sultan barakat doha , institute for graduate studies. a warm welcome to you all. let's begin in pittsburgh. this of administration, particularly, is pushing the fact that the afghans can do this themselves. that the afghan security forces are ready to do this themselves. you heard from the u.s. secretary of defense say they have the capability to be able to do it. what do you make of that? >> i respectfully disagree. i think if you watch what has

happened in afghanistan over the years, if you have watch the afghan national security forces, who are clearly brave and courageous, they need the help and assistance of the united states military, not only in day-to-day operations, but in those critical, over the horizon operations. and i would say particularly in areas like i.s. are, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance. >> but then you were looking at a situation where they are always going to be needed so they are never going to leave. at some point, 20 years after the fact, you can understand why this administration said, enough is enough. >> i totally understand and i empathize, and i hope it works out. i just disagree with the decision. i completely agree with you when you look at a calendar-based withdrawal versus a conditions-based withdrawal, many argue, and it is credible, that the conditions will never be there. i go back to the fact that they're still u.s. troops in germany, japan, and south korea. i do not hear people raising issues about that. so i would 20 years be the magic

number for afghanistan, when clearly the afghan security forces are not yet ready to stand on their own? >> let's bring in our from nice, normally based in kabul, at the american university of afghanistan in kabul. that is the kind of institution likely to be attacked if the americans leave. because you will still be there and be a symbol of america in kabul. ? are you worried? >> absolutely. we were attacked in 2016 and we lost 15 students and faculty at that time, and many more were wounded. we know that some of our faculty members, national faculty members, have been the targets of the nation and threat -- targets of intimidation and threats in the past few months and we are worried this withdrawal will impact our national faculty as well as students, who are risking their lives every day to come and

study. so this is a big concern of ours. we are looking into different scenarios for the future in the time being. but we will resume and continue our operations and look ahead for it not to break our promise to our students and faculty and staff. >> that is a personal take, thank you for that. it is very important. generally, with people you speak to, there must be those who say, enough is enough. americans, nato, they must leave and we must be able to do this ourselves, particularly within the afghan government? >> absolutely and we hear that every day. the op-ed written by the afghan president which clear. there is fatigue on both sides, the afghan side and the international side. at the same time, we have sold a dream and the job is not done. the afghan security forces are not capable of maintaining the

security of the country. the taliban feel important by this condition-less withdrawal, and so in that light, things are very difficult at the moment. and many are very pessimistic, even though we do understand that afghans need to stand on their own two feet, of course. >> from doha joining us now, we are in a position where there are 50,000-60,000 fighters with the taliban. they control some parts of the country but do not control other parts of the country. the entire country of afghanistan is not unified and one third remains lawless. the rest is supposedly controlled by the afghan government. we had several rounds of talks here in doha between the taliban and the americans no agreement but in real agreement, was ever reached between the two and now we have this announcement that the americans are leaving

september 11, 2021. to think the americans have cited the right way? >> well, obviously they have played at the right way as far as american interest is concerned. so american interest first i think, this is all they can do. and the way thehave announced a deadline and link that to another symbolic date, and the american memory, is an indication of that. t i agree with the other speakers, that there is a major risk here, for those who live in afghanistan. at the same time, we must keep in mind that all of the american forces has fundamentally changed since 2014 onwards. there are no longer on the front lines. they are not really directly in any fighting or with the taliban. the role and nato have changed into support and advice mission. and for the last few years, it has been the afghan national army, who is paying the price.

these people have been fighting directly with the taliban. d -- the principle that taliban have been holding so far as there fighting against occupation and he see that their brothers and sisters are being pushed in front of them and between them and the americans. now at the time the americans are withdrawing i think the taliban would have much less legitimacy and continuing their fight. and they would have to seek a solution, where they can come together with the rest of the afghans, on an agreed arrangement for security and stability of the country. keeping in mind it is not just the taliban, as a military force that exists at the moment. there are many other groups that have risen. and there are many that have come back and rearmed over the last two years, specifically because of those concerns. >> you say the taliban and other groups are civilly fighting and

occupation in their country, get rid of the occupation, and there no longer reason to fight. but that was not the case in 1992? they were fighting to take power in 1992 and the taliban succeeded. they took over in early two thirds of the country. what is to stop them doing it once the americans leave? >> as far as i know that taliban were not part of the fight in 1992. the taliban have arisen as a result of the mujahedin having a go at each other seeking power, and the taliban really came to existence because of the insecurity that was created in the country. as far as we are aware and as far as they have been making of statements, their objective is simply to overcome it to turnaround the occupation. of course cover the temp tatian power is always there. the temptation of forcing one's opinion is always there.

but we can only judge by what statements they have put to the public. and it is very unfortunate that over the last year or so of negotiations, they have not been forthcoming in clarifying their positions, and comforting people back in afghanistan. because, ultimately, they all need to live together. and if there is an ambition, to be a major force in power, or to control the country, and so on, they need to understand that they cannot control the country by force. they have to be able to govern the country properly. they have to be able to manage its resources, meet the needs of its people. any assumption that their capturing power that comes with wealth is obviously mistaken. afghanistan is in a great debt, and they need to understand how that debt will be managed. the government, on its own, is incapable of providing services to the millions of afghans across the country right now,

with all the western support. so imagine if they were to turn against their own people and against the western support, how they provide for their fellow afghans? >> you are shaking her head and noting during some points, are you worried that the tele-banner not trustworthy? the intra--- that the taliban are not trustworthy? the intra-afghan talks, there was a talk in his temple recently, are you afraid those talks will fail and there -- wasn't talking istanbul recently. are you afraid those talks will fail? >> absolutely and everyone is worried back in couple -- kabul about that. the indication the taliban gave i being unwilling to come to the negotiation table in his temple was very clear -- in istanbul was very clear.

the indicated since the withdrawal was now going to happen, they no longer needed to discuss with anyone about any future, let's a political accommodation, in afghanistan, for peace. so from that perspective, everybody is worried because actions speak louder than words, even though we have not had any words with respect to this. right now, there's no indication they were even be an idea of power-sharing. so everybody is worried. and it would be high time for that taliban to actually clearly indicate what their intentions are. for the moment, they have not. there has only been a statement, here and there, the stamens are not encouraging. at the same time, there has been a wave of targeted assassinations against civil society individuals, journalists and intellectuals. so that definitely is also an

indication of what is to come, and the fact that an inclusive society, is definitely on the horizon, if the taliban were to come back. so they had better be very clear about what they want. but i do not agree that they are willing to share any power at this time. >> one of the mistakes i feel many people have said to me the americans made when negotiating with the taliban, is to consider them a unified model of, that they -- unified monoliths, that they are together. we saw this together in the doha talks were often agreement will be reached and then the taliban representatives here and don't hot would say we need to go back to afghanistan and sell this to our people and therefore an agreement was not reached because they never actually managed to get that agreement. do you think the united states underestimated how to diss unified, and how much for threat

taliban are because they are not a monolith? >> absolutely and i think united states, after to get kids and after -- after two decades in afghanistan still fails to understand the organization they are at odds with. i think that also goes for al qaeda and the haqqani's and other nonstate actors in afghanistan and through the broader region. 1.i would raise when we are talking about, can we take the taliban at their word? are there credible broker? the taliban still has not renounced al qaeda. few people suspect once the taliban withdraw will break with them, there indication they will. so the u.s. is leaving at a time when al qaeda is hurting, but i fully suspect that or expect, al qaeda, to regenerate its networks in afghanistan and throughout south asia. >> one of the things, and i want to come to you all with this question.

we have to take a look at the regional players as well. you have pakistan, and you are talking about the haqqani network, often pakistan accused of supporting the haqqani network. you have iran accusedf supporting the northern alliance and other factions. then you have it yet which sees afghanistan as a very strategic place to try and battle their competition with pakistan itself. the regional players are likely to replace nato and america, when america leaves, perhaps not with troops on the ground, but with influence. is that a factor in america's thinking? >> it could be. but actually i spent 10 years at the rand corporation doing research on insurgency and counterinsurgency. what is the main takeaways from years and years of research, looking at data, is that the more players involved in a civil war, the more external actors, the longer that conflict will last, and often the bloodier it will be. so if the united states is

banking on quote unquote regional players without a military presence but with influence, then i think that assumption is fully mistaken. >> this idea of regional players, particularly within kabul, in the administration, has been controversial. the afghanis have been critical of pakistan for supporting groups in the country, and they have had to go to india for investment. there is a new great game being played out. it used to be russia and britain and russia and america and now it is between regional players. that is not going to be helpful for peace, is it? >> absolutely not especially if the regional players are at odds with one another. however, the new influence of china could be a game changer, since pakistan also needs china at the moment. so it remains to be seen. but definitely, what is important to understand and what

afghans understand really well, is that those regional players do not have afghan at the core of their thinking -- afghanistan at the core their thinking. they care more about the regional infighting than afghanistan itself. that is something i think is going to have an impact in the months to come, and that i hope will influence the afghan political scene to unify, and seek for, let's say estate response -- let's say, a state response to the taliban, and the future. that is something that remains to be seen. but quite hopeful. >> regional players, helpful or hindrance? >> i think afghanistan has had always a challenge with its collection of neighbors and,

unfortunately, there continue to be a mix of attitudes per the end of the conflict in afghanistan. for the first time in a long time, we have now reached a stage where the global context is changed in circumstances. it is helping everyone go more or less in the same direction. there are still some differences between certain neighbors, and somewhat pursuing their national interests, at the expense of the afghans. but, overall, i think the position is much better than it was for many, many years ago. the real challenge now is, on the afghans themselves. they need to come up with a position. and i think the responsibility has to really go back to the afghans. for many years, they have relied

on international actors in one way or the other. and it is time to realize that no one is there for free. no one is there out of interest for any minority group in afghanistan genuine lake -- genuinely. it is only a national vision i think will help pull the country together. as i said earlier, with the removal of the label of occupation, that should in principle, take away one of the fundamental bases the taliban and other groups have been using as excuse for engaging in more. -- in war. >> quickly because we are running out of time, do you think the american government, this administration, realized there is an afghan peace agreement, between the taliban and other groups in the afghan government, that might not come

at the expense they want? it may not come by denouncing isil, by denouncing al qaeda. it might just be that the taliban when everything they want and become a regional power in afghanistan and the americans have to deal with it, do think they realize that? >> i think that is one scenario that is being discussed. from folks ice between washington, there seems to be confidence -- from folks that i speak with in washington there seems to be confidence can be managed, the threat come up from an offshore counterterrorism strategy, but only time will tell. >> i want to thank all of our guests and thank you for watching. you can see this in our previous programs any time by visiting our website, al jazeera.com. for further discussion go to our facebook page, and you can join the conversation on twitter. for me and the whole team,

goodbye for now. ♪ ♪ >> al jaera, we ask. >> the army attacking rohingya and now they are attacking everyone in myanmar. do you regret wos like that? >> we listen. >> nigeria with a woman president, it would be great. >> we meet with global newsmakers and talk about stories that matter on al jazeera. >> may, on al jazeera. >> from a third way to the vaccine rollout, the latest

development as the coronavirus pandemic continues to spread across the world. >> al jazeera semi award-winning investigative programming is back, exploring the u.s. >> is america attempts to tackle police brutality and shootings against people of color, there is growing demand to hold to account those who have sworn to preserve and protect. >> from hostile, x -- from hotels to hostile, exploring the front line. >> and former south african president jacob zuma was on trial for corruption. >> may on al jazeera. >> redrawing the geopolitical map for post-oil world, where does that leave oil producers? >> columbia's tax revolt still needs to figure out how to cut its debt. where are self-driving car's?

tñññvvvvvrrzozozozoñ?ñ

♪