adrian: the united nations says that afghanistan has the worst humanitarian crisis in the world. a taliban edict banning women from working is hindering the delivery of international aid. as the u.n. discusses the future of its mission, what's next for afghans? this is "inside story." ♪ hello. welcome to the program. i'm adrian finighan. decades of war since the 1970s have left afghanistan is in a dire humanitarian crisis.

around 97% of its people live in poverty, while 28 million need aid just to survive this year. since it returned to power in august, 2021, the taliban has introduced a series of curbs on women's freedoms, including a ban on women working. the united nations says that that's unacceptable because it threatens the work of aid agencies. senior u.n. officials have been meeting this week in doha and kabul without the taliban to decide on the future of the mission. we'll be discussing the implications of all of this for the afghan people with our guests. but first, let's talk to the head of the taliban political office in doha, sohail shaheen, who is here in doha. good to have you with us, sir. the taliban as we said wasn't invited to those talks in doha. what's your view on that? >> yes. to have a meeting about

afghanistan to know the issues in afghanistan, the humanitarian crisis, the need for a -- the need for humanitarian aid, and also development project is a good thing. but you see, there was no delegation or participation from the islamic community of afghanistan, i think it was a flaw. because if they do not listen to us, they do not listen to our angle of view, to identify the issue, the issues the people of afghanistan are facing, how can they resolve issues? so it was one-sidedly. no issue can be resolved one-sidedly. adrian: but what about the taliban listening to what the u.n. and the international community are saying? as we said in the introduction, the curb on women's freedoms,

the ban on them working is unacceptable, according to the u.n., that's why international donors are not keen to to fund the u.n.'s humanitarian effort. >> we have -- i never said that we deny women access to education, but we say it should be in the light of our values and rules. so, you know, the people of afghanistan, they struggled for dear liberation for 20 years. so they want to resolve all issues, whether education or other issues, according to our values and laws. and for that, it is necessary that the two sides, the u.n. and others who want to resolve issues, to sit with us, with our leadership, with our delegation, and first identify the issue and

then how to resolve them. but without our participation and our delegation, they are deciding one-sidedly and even do not identify the ground realities which are prevalent in afghanistan. i think that is of law. adrian: is there any appetite for compromise at least on your side of this disagreement? >> we want to resolve all issues, all problems, according to our laws and our values. we do not say we do not, we want to resolve them, but something they want, maybe the difference of culture or values is a reality, we want to resolve all issues, including education, in light of our values. we never said that we do not want to resolve that or deny. adrian: you talk, sir, about

your values and customs, before the taliban came back to power two years ago, it made certain assurances, which it has has u-turned upon. is there any debate within the taliban itself that it needs to change its stance on certain issues, in order to prevent the people of afghanistan from starving? >> so, i heard this issue should not be politicized. the people are suffering because of the sanctions. and humanitarian relief, humanitarian aid should be separate from other issues. and they should not be used as a tactic, a pressure against the people. you see the sanctions have made the people of afghanistan suffer. and i want to say another point, that at the beginning, the secondary schools were open, the universities were open. even at that time, the sanctions were imposed on afghanistan.

that was a time even the women were working for the ngos, for the united nations. why at that time the sanction was imposed and still continuing? adrian: all right, but that's not the situation now. women are unable to work in the country. the u.n. says that that threatens the work of aid agencies across the country. the fact that the teenage girls can't go to school. and that in a certain -- and that in certain circumstances, aid is delivered and distributed through school children, who take that that home back to hungry families. what is the taliban doing to feed its people? >> well, first, i see two years ago, they are mentioning there was nothing no hurdle at that. and even now, it's important that the women who need are in need of relief, the united nations can deliver them, even

men can deliver them, we have elders in villages, they can deliver to anywhere. we have about 40,000 registered in the ministry of martyrs and disabled. they are delivering aids and pay treatment every month to them. so that is not a hurdle. still, about their working in ngos, in united nation, in education, so, we are working on all issues, including these, to be resolved according to our laws. because the people of afghanistan want that, because the people, they struggle for that and they want that. the problem should be resolved. but, according to our warriors, we need to sit with any side, including the united nation. they know our position. we will know their position and proceed how to resolve the issues. adrian: all right, good to talk

to you. so many thanks indeed for being with us on inside story. -- on "inside story." suhail shahinda, who is the taliban's international spokesman. well, let's bring in our guests for today's discussion. from kabul, we're joined by a familiar face, james bays, al jazeera's diplomatic editor who was following those u.n. meetings in doha and kabul this week and has reported extensively afghanistan for many years. from toronto, mina sharif, an afghan rights activist who founded "sisters 4 sisters," a mentorship program for women and girls in marginalized communities. mina also developed "voice of afghan youth," a tv and radio series. and from new york, obaidullah baheer, a lecturer in transitional justice at the american university of afghanistan and the founder of the "save afghans from hunger" campaign. welcome to you all. james, let's start with you. you heard what the taliban spokesperson said there. what happened at the doha conference this week? does anyone have any leverage over the taliban? >> well, it's a real problem.

i mean, i think first, let's explain what the doha conference was, and it was criticized by lots of people, because the main issue that they were trying to deal with was the taliban's relationship to the women of afghanistan, and there were no afghan women invited and there were no taliban invited. that, though, was not the purpose, according to the u.n. secretary general who i spoke to about it. he said, what i wanted to do with my conference this time was get the international community all on the same page, because if you have a unity of the international community, then perhaps you have some leverage with the taliban. but they don't hold many cards. they did get a u.n. security council resolution through last week condemning the taliban and their policies towards women. and it had been hard to get unity on the u.n. security council. at this meeting, what came out of it? well, not a great deal, in the sense that the main achievement seems to be an agreement to call yet another meeting of the same

people, of members of the international community, of neighboring countries, of regional powers, of the big international powers, the five permanent members of the security council. and the hope is, i was told by one senior un source, when you have other meetings taking place, you've got one about to start with the pakistan foreign minister and the chinese foreign minister, meeting the taliban foreign minister, the hope from senior un sources is that when the chinese and pakistanis meet with the taliban, for example, they now know the script from the international community, the parameters from the international community. adrian: and in terms of influence, china and pakistan, the people who are best placed to exert influence over the taliban? >> well, there aren't many people who do have a lot of influence on the taliban. i think pakistan, when the taliban first took power, thought it would have more influence than it does.

and in fact, in many ways, the situation has backfired for pakistan with regard to the pakistan taliban and the fact that they seem to effectively have a safe haven now in afghanistan to do some of their operations and organizations. but, yes, pakistan still is a country with more influence than quite a few others, and china certainly is interested in playing a role here. which is interesting, because it's part i think of china to playing a more assertive role on the diplomatic stage worldwide. you saw what happened with saudi arabia and iran, that raprochement brokered by china. and in fact, only the other week, the chinese ambassadors, the u.n., saying they wanted to get involved in negotiations between israel and palestine. so, yes, chinese, china, an important international power. adrian: mina sharif, what's your view of the u.n.'s position, its handling of of the crisis in afghanistan, is it worsening the plight of the afghan people? i mean, how can it hold talks on afghanistan without including

afghans in those talks? >> right, so, i'm actually confused about where the u.n. is coming from. are they comfortably compromising their own values and standards that are outlined in their mandate and in this soft approach that they have taken with the taliban to date, or are they confused about the situation in afghanistan to begin with? either way, part of that, beginning towards a solution in that, is including afghan voices in the conversations. i mean, it's quite absurd that meetings are held about a country without members of that country present. and i think if you were to replace the name afghanistan with any other country, this would be laughable. but for whatever reason, this cycle is allowed to continue. the u.n. and international community is not holding their position on afghanistan to the same standard they would hold anywhere else, and of course that is frustrating the afghan community.

also, even just this fixation on school is dangerous, because they're doing so much more than that. and it's washed over and it's dismissed because we're able to almost give them leeway by keeping the subject so limited, when if afghans were brought to the table, so much more would be brought to light that all go against the mandates of accessibility of acceptability -- mandates of acceptability both by the u.n. and the international community. adrian: there is the world's desire to help the people of afghanistan, without further empowering the taliban. can that be done? >> it's a tricky situation, obviously. it's not something the

international community is very used to. i mean, the meeting's purpose initially, we also have to understand that engagement helps. you engage with your enemies because you want to figure out how to move forward. it doesn't necessarily mean you're endorsing them. so those are very different things. we have to understand that the afghan economy is in a very fragile state and that the afghan people do not have the option of opting out of the regime that is moving the country today. however, i think that expecting the u.n. to include all parties in a conversation which is specifically meant for the special envoys, for them to have a cohesive approach towards the afghanistan, unity of expectation is a very important part of any dialogue within opposite side. -- with an opposite side. the fact that the taliban should be sitting with in their group and talking to each other, international afghans have to sit amongst themselves and have some unity of approach, that's important. so i guess it's tone deaf after taliban as well to expect to be

included in a meeting that is being held because of them, not for them, but i guess it has been a major failure on the u.n.'s part to clarify the misinformation campaign around how their aid is making it to the hands of the taliban, and that should have been clarified much earlier, that has an impact on the amount of pledges that come to afghanistan, also on how aid is seen and as to whether it can be disbursed to afghans without empowering the taliban and enabling their bad behavior. adrian: james, does the u.n. accept the criticism that's been leveled at it this week for not inviting the taliban to these talks? i mean, it is stuck between a rock and a hard place, isn't it? it has to balance its humanitarian obligations with the political objectives of many of its donor nations. >> yeah, i mean, i'm not here to defend the u.n., of course, my job, i spend quite a lot of my time asking tough questions to the u.n. but what the u.n. would say is that they do engage with the

taliban. they have a whole mission here in kabul, they have a special representative, rosa autumn b., who is a former president of kyrgyzstan. she speaks to the taliban. the deputy secretary general was here earlier in the year speaking to the taliban. and i think the u.n. feeling on that is they went a long way, sending the number two in the organization, amina muhammad, who is also a female muslim, to afghanistan, and they got absolutely nothing from the taliban in return. in fact, the taliban just hardened their position. so i think the u.n. will say they have been engaging with the taliban. but as you say, it's very hard for the u.n., because there are two roads they could take, and neither of them are ones that they really want to take, and there's division within the u.n. circles, there's division between the political side of the u.n. and the humanitarian side. now, the humanitarians are

saying, yes, it's awful that the women can't work, but we must not stop the delivery of humanitarian aid. the figures are quite stunning with 97% of afghans living in poverty, and the u.n. really struggling with the money. it's only got 6% of the funding that it needs this year. so a really serious situation and secretary general says it's the worst humanitarian situation anywhere on earth. the political side of of the u.n., they are saying something slightly different than the humanitarian side, they're saying if we give in on this issue of female un workers, then we're never going to get women back in a normal place in society in afghanistan. it's a very, very difficult decision. the u.n.'s been struggling with it. lots and lots of meetings. in the end, i'm afraid i think we're going to get typical u.n. fudge. adrian: mina, james mentioned the u.n. deputy secretary general, what do you make of the widely criticized talk of of

baby steps being made towards recognition of the taliban? is it only a matter of time do you think before that happens? >> well, i think this is really reminiscent of 2014, when barack obama announced that its international forces would be leaving afghanistan, and it creates that sense of of panic, loss of leverage that the women for example who were protesting on the streets have, and rightfully so, all signs lead to it. should afghan voices have been included in these meetings, we might feel differently. but because the cycle is repeating to completely disable civil society, women's voices, anyone who is actually affected by what the taliban's decrees and ruling does to everyday life, none of those voices are included and so the cycle looks like it's continuing, and so we have every right to believe that it's a repeat. adrian: mina, to what extent has

the u.n. made the people of afghanistan dependent upon aid? i'm talking about historically now. has its well-meaning intention created the problem that it's now trying to circumvent today? >> well, we talk about aid, i think as a collective, we're under this impression that it's an act of generosity. i mean, the united nations for example is a business they have big salaries, they have political pull and i don't know how we can call it a neutral organization or even let ourselves think it's neutral with those two points in mind. when distributions happen from a business like the united nations, are they for example purchasing locally to work towards a more sustainable economy within the country? no, they're not. they fly in their own staff. they fly in their own goods. and so as far as it being a solution driven program, i have not seen it to be.

so ultimately, if we look at logic, aid dependency is in their interest as an existing organization, so no, i don't think they've been a solution in the past. but i do think unfortunately we are in a position worse than we were before the international presence. and afghanistan, when it comes to poverty and the risk that it has on everyday lives and people, so we do need the support. i just don't know why we have to accept the support with blind gratitude, rather than asking for accountability on how the taliban are interacted with and on how that distribution takes place. adrian: will the taliban ever compromise on its stance on women and civil liberties? you heard what the taliban spokesperson was saying about its laws, its values, its culture. if the u.n. or the international community persist with this

characteristic approach almost, -- carrot and stick approach almost, who'll win? >> first off for the sake of factual accuracy, the u.n. in afghanistan especially the world food program they procure locally through local vendors, so that helps the economy have some sort of circulation. but, yes, i mean, it's quite ironic honestly to hear about values and norms that supposedly haven't been figured out in the past two years. we constantly hear a mention of laws. what laws? we don't have a constitution in place in afghanistan. we see little inclination towards even drafting a constitution. there is complete centralization of power. and the problem is everyone looks at the taliban like they are a pandora box that we -- or a black box that we don't understand, even though they have a political manifesto. their chief of justice has written a political manifesto

endorsed by the amir himself, in which they say that women will stay at home, in which they say that women not require worldly education. all of these are fundamental beliefs within the movement. so whatever suhail shaheen or others are saying even though their own daughters go to school is for lack of any better word hypocritical of them, because they understand the value of education for women. somehow, neither do they stand up to their leadership in changing the mindset that is dominant amongst the ruling class. second, they keep defending it and making it sound like it's a temporary issue, whereas it is not. six years of the first taliban regime should have taught us a lesson, and right now, yes, leverages aren't working there are ways to work around it if we modernize, evolve our approach with regards to the carrots and sticks that we have. there are ways forward, but i don't think hoping or believing

the taliban pledges helps us anymore. adrian: mina, i saw you shaking your head there and disagreeing at one point. what was that you were disagreeing with? >> yeah, i mean, i've never seen evidence that the u.n. has had a focus on empowering local communities, and so i'd like to see that. adrian: -- >> it's just interesting to me that we would be in favor of that sort of dependency. and it's obviously been created, or we wouldn't be where we are today, versus 20 years ago. adrian: james, you've been to afghanistan many, many times over a number of years, with your work with al jazeera. you haven't though been back there in two years, since the taliban came to power. i know you've you've only been back in the country a matter of hours, but what are your first impressions upon landing there? >> very important caveat that i literally have only just landed here in the last few hours, and it's friday, so it's the weekend, so much quieter than normal.

it is a very odd feeling for someone who's lived here in the past, who's been here numerous times since 2001, to see the streets and see so many things that are the same, but one fundamental thing that is completely different, some things were very, very normal, to be honest with you. you get your visa. it's exactly the same visa you used to get from the previous government, looks exactly the same. you arrive in the airport, very efficient working very, very well. the airport, for me, at least when i arrived here, and interestingly, a contradiction perhaps, i saw female staff in the airport. my bags were scanned as i came through the scanner machine, that was operated by a woman working alongside men. well, if that can operate in the airport, why is that different from having female students going to schools and universities?

sort of a great contradiction straight away as i arrived in the country, then made my way where i am now, to the al jazeera office, which i've been to many times before, near the center of kabul and looking where the used to see the big flag of the islamic republic of afghanistan, it's really rather shocking to see the white flag of the taliban flying, a giant white flag over kabul. adrian: and james, what is the u.n. doing on the ground there in the country right now? >> well, it's, i think, not the easiest question, because what they've said they're doing is stopping their work and keeping their teams at home and working from home trying to keep some sort of a delivery, trying to keep some sort of normal service, but not sending people out until they can resolve this issue on women. as i told you earlier on, there is the dispute between the political and humanitarian side and the u.n. finally i think is going to come out with a position in the coming hours.

but i think it's going to be difficult for them going forward. they do not have unity within their team and i think that's going to make their work on the ground very, very hard indeed, matched by all the other problems we've talked about, by the really bad state of the economy, and that is just going to add to the distress and hardship for so many afghans. adrian: mina, the facts on the ground are going to be very difficult to change. i mean, politically, in the short term, at least, in the meantime, people are dying of hunger and malnutrition, as james said, they're suffering. i mean, how how do we move forward from this? how do we save lives? >> well, i mean the thing is it gets blurred together, right, the politics and the situation are two very different things. i think the there's a lot of hypocrisy going on in how we look at afghanistan politically so differently than we would anywhere else.

but at the end of the day, the situation was not helped in these past 20 years, it was worsened, and the numbers will show that. so i think ultimately we have to focus on aid as something as separate as we can from from the political situation, but that doesn't mean it has to come without accountability. i think when we're critical of the u.n. and and the international community and their support of afghanistan, it doesn't mean that we don't think that that aid is an emergency. it absolutely is. but it's because we feel that it's such an emergency, that we're demanding the accountability that should go along with it. adrian: all right, there we're gonna have to leave it. many thanks indeed to all of you, james bays, mina sharif, and obaidullah baheer. as always, thank you for watching. don't forget, you can see the program again at any time by going to the website at aljazeera.com. for further discussion, join us at our facebook page, that's at facebook.com/ajinsidestory. or you can join the conversation on twitter. our handle, @ajinsidestory.

from me, adrian finighan, and the team, thanks for being with us. we'll see you again. bye for now. ♪

linton besser: on the coast of west africa, the ships arrive day after day with an unrelenting cargo. in ghana, they call them "obroni wawu," or "the clothes of dead white men." emmanuel ajaab: take this bale from australia. linton: they're the charity shop castoffs from the western world. emmanuel: dirty. linton: it's sweat. emmanuel: see. yeah, rubbish. it's like a insult. linton: too many of them arrive in unwearable condition. while the trade in used clothes has created thousands of jobs,