Afghanistan’s Yunus Qanuni Says Is in Constant Contact with Ahmad Massoud

Yunus Qanuni speaks with Camelia Entekhabifard. (Independent Persian)
Yunus Qanuni speaks with Camelia Entekhabifard. (Independent Persian)
TT
20

Afghanistan’s Yunus Qanuni Says Is in Constant Contact with Ahmad Massoud

Yunus Qanuni speaks with Camelia Entekhabifard. (Independent Persian)
Yunus Qanuni speaks with Camelia Entekhabifard. (Independent Persian)

Yunus Qanuni, former speaker of Afghanistan’s parliament, is in constant contact with Ahmad Massoud, he told Independent Persian in an interview.

“Ahmad Massoud, son of Afghanistan’s national hero, is not after creating crisis, adventure, clash or war. From the outset, he has emphasized a political solution and an end to war and crisis in Afghanistan and his position remains the same,” Qanuni said.

But he warned that if “Taliban’s provocations bring a war” and if the group shows up to Panjshir or put people in Kabul and other parts of Afghanistan under pressure or threats, “the war or anti-Taliban resistance becomes inevitable.”

Qanuni, who was a comrade-in-arms of Ahmad Shah Massoud during the years of the occupation of Afghanistan and the war against Taliban, said: “If Taliban’s method and conduct promotes war and makes it inevitable, we have Ahmad Massoud who has inherited resistance and defense of his people and country from his martyred father. There will then be room for a nationwide national movement.”

He said Afghanistan was lucky that its people were not divided along ethnic lines. “Resistance is based on an idea and thinking that includes Pashtun, Tajik Hazara and Uzbek,” he said.

“If Taliban picked war from the two options presented to them, i.e. a method that doesn’t have popular support, resistance becomes inevitable. Ahmad Massoud has the possibility to build an axis of resistance among the Afghan youth.”

Qanuni, who is now in Pakistan to meet and discuss with officials there, told Independent Persian: “The invitation had been sent out about a month ago, but since Ghani’s exclusivist team opposed it, our trip finally happened on August 15.”

“When we were on the plane, Taliban was yet to militarily enter Kabul,” Qanuni said. “We had other topics to discuss, but after military developments in Kabul, our topics of negotiations also changed.”

He revealed the talks in Pakistan had two specific topics: First, what should be the priority from now that President Ashraf Ghani has fled and there is a vacuum of power to when a new government can be formed? Here they demanded that Pakistan wield its influence on Taliban to avoid bloodshed, violence and attacks on the areas not yet held by the group.

According to Qanuni, Pakistanis welcomed this proposal.

The second topic was the future of government formation in Afghanistan. According to Qanuni, Pakistanis were clear that they don't want only one ethnicity or one group to rule. Rather they prefer an inclusive government that opens a new chapter in Kabul-Islamabad relations. They said they see Afghanistan as part of regional stability.

“These were good discussions and a very good welcome was given to our group,” he remarked.

Will the next government include figures like Qanuni or Abdullah Abdullah? Qanuni said talks with Pakistan had not yet reached a result on this issue because Taliban itself is divided and has not been able to form a team, even an internal team, that can fill the power vacuum in Afghanistan. Taliban have many divisions and differences inside them.

Qanuni insisted that the intention of his delegation was not to negotiate with Pakistan over the next government; the discussions were on “principles which should undergird the future system.” For instance, Qanuni said forming an “Islamic Emirate” was unacceptable, adding: “We want an inclusive system based on just participation of ethnicities and religions in Afghanistan. We believe the basis of the future system should be the will of the people, both men and women.”

There should first be an agreement on principles and only then it will be clear whether forming a joint government is possible. The third step would be to mull over individuals who will form such a government.”

Qanuni said his aim was to help prevent violence and bloodshed before the next government is formed.

“Our people are very worried, in both center and provinces,” he said. “We hear that searching homes and targeted murders have started. There is already violence against opponents and dissidents. People are deeply worried and our first priority is to stop such events before the next government is formed.

Qanuni said he had asked “Pakistani friends” to use their influence with Taliban to convince it not to attack Pansjhir, where a majority of forces of the Afghan army are.

In Panjshir, no one, including Ahmad Massoud, wants “any violence or skirmishes,” said Qanuni, “so long as issues are solved by understanding.”

But if Taliban attacks Panjshir, “war would be inevitable,” warned Qanuni, adding that: “Defense is both a human duty and a religious duty.”

Asked how much Taliban can be trusted, Qanuni said in such conditions, nobody has the necessary confidence to work with Taliban. “At this stage, we need more confidence-building measures,” he added. “What Taliban claimed to have changed in its ideology and behavior it should show in practice.”

Qanuni warned that “Islamic Emirate” model of Taliban with its system centered around an individual was unworkable.

“We need to first negotiate on key points and reach an agreement. Otherwise, I don’t believe well-known and influential politicians of Afghanistan would work with Taliban under the umbrella of an Emirate,” he said.

When asked about the fate of 20-year-old Afghan democracy if Taliban continues and is recognized by other countries, Qanuni replied: “If Taliban take this path, we will once more see the events of 1996 in Afghanistan, i.e. a system with one group and one ethnicity, without national or international legitimacy and doomed to failure and internal divisions. This is what we saw in the six years of Taliban rule from 1996 to 2001.”

“I believe Taliban have learnt their lessons from history and we should look at things especially with the violence we’ve seen in the past few days and Afghanistan’s fundamental change. We are in 2021, not 1996,” Qanuni noted.

“This generation includes seventy percent of the country. None of them were born during Taliban rule or they were very small kids. This generation is key for Afghanistan and its political and social institutions,” he said.

“Half of Afghanistan’s population are women,” Qanuni added. “They’ve learnt their rights and demand them.”

“Given these changes, naturally Taliban’s 1996 formula won’t work for Afghanistan and is doomed to fail.”

Commenting on Afghanistan’s future, Qanuni said: “Given that Taliban are unpredictable, it is impossible to make exact predictions. But based on our experiences in the past, developments in Afghanistan of the last 20 years and the expectation of our people, we can say that military transformation has taken place in Afghanistan. Yes, Taliban were able to capture most of the country’s territory but conquering geography is not the same as conquering the Afghan people,” Qauni said.

“The people of Afghanistan are not conquerable,” stressed Qanuni. “They need a regime that will represent people’s demands.”

Qanuni said they accepted that Taliban seized power in Afghanistan but It’s impossible to force people and especially the young generation that has experienced transformations and calm to go back to the past.

“I believe Taliban are currently entrenching their own movement,” Qanuni said. “They speak of change and a different attitude toward women and people. If these statements become true, this is positive. But if it remains a tactic before they can fully entrench themselves, so that they could then go back to revenge, Afghan people won’t have a good future.”

In the end, Qanuni said: “Our generation has seen at least five or six rounds of power shifts. I want to say that the simplest part of an armed struggle is overthrowing a regime. The most difficult part is the nation-building that comes after. Taliban have experience in overthrowing but I don’t believe they have what it takes for longevity in politics.”

“If the international community and regional countries aren’t hasty in recognizing Taliban and supporting them,” Qanuni concluded. “If they don’t act in a rushed manner and decide carefully, we will have the chance to see change. With the help of people and world community we can form a better future for our people.”



Syrian Minister of Economy: Sanctions Relief Tied to Reforms

Syrian Minister of Economy and Industry Nidal Al-Shaar standing in line outside Al-Razi Bakery in Aleppo Province, listening to citizens’ concerns (Facebook page). 
Syrian Minister of Economy and Industry Nidal Al-Shaar standing in line outside Al-Razi Bakery in Aleppo Province, listening to citizens’ concerns (Facebook page). 
TT
20

Syrian Minister of Economy: Sanctions Relief Tied to Reforms

Syrian Minister of Economy and Industry Nidal Al-Shaar standing in line outside Al-Razi Bakery in Aleppo Province, listening to citizens’ concerns (Facebook page). 
Syrian Minister of Economy and Industry Nidal Al-Shaar standing in line outside Al-Razi Bakery in Aleppo Province, listening to citizens’ concerns (Facebook page). 

Syrian Minister of Economy and Industry Nidal Al-Shaar stated that while the serious lifting of US sanctions on Syria could gradually yield positive results for the country’s economy, expectations must remain realistic, as rebuilding trust in the Syrian economy is essential.

In an exclusive interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, Al-Shaar described the removal of sanctions as a necessary first step toward eliminating the obstacles that have long hindered Syria’s economic recovery. Although the immediate impact will likely be limited, he noted that in the medium term, improvements in trade activity and the resumption of some banking transactions could help create a more favorable environment for investment and production.

The breakthrough came after Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman successfully facilitated a thaw in relations between Washington and Damascus, ultimately convincing the US president to lift sanctions on Syria. During his historic visit to Saudi Arabia last Wednesday, President Donald Trump announced he would order the removal of all sanctions on Syria to “give it a chance to thrive”—a move seen as a major opportunity for the country to begin a new chapter.

Al-Shaar cautioned, however, that Syrians should not expect an immediate improvement in living standards. “We need to manage the post-sanctions phase with an open and pragmatic economic mindset,” he said, stressing that real progress will only come if sanctions relief is accompanied by meaningful economic reforms, increased transparency, and support for the business climate.

He added that Syrians will begin to feel the difference when the cost of living declines and job opportunities grow—an outcome that requires time, planning, and stability.

According to Al-Shaar, the first tangible benefits of lifting sanctions are likely to be seen in the banking and trade sectors, through facilitated financial transfers, improved access to essential goods, and lower transportation and import costs. “We may also see initial interest from investors who were previously deterred by legal restrictions,” he said. “But it’s important to emphasize that political openness alone isn’t enough—there must also be genuine economic openness from within.”

He also underscored the importance of regional support, saying that any positive role played by neighboring countries in encouraging the US to lift sanctions and normalize ties with Damascus “must be met with appreciation and cooperation.” Al-Shaar emphasized that robust intra-Arab economic relations should form a cornerstone of any reconstruction phase. “We need an economic approach that is open to the Arab world, and we could see strategic partnerships that reignite the national economy—especially through the financing of major infrastructure and development projects.”

When asked whether he expects a surge in Arab and foreign investment following the lifting of sanctions, Al-Shaar responded: “Yes, there is growing interest in investing in Syria, and several companies have already entered the market. But investors first and foremost seek legal certainty and political guarantees.” He explained that investment is not driven solely by the removal of sanctions, but by the presence of an encouraging institutional environment. “If we can enhance transparency, streamline procedures, and ensure stability, we will gradually see greater capital inflows—especially in the service, industrial, and agricultural sectors.”

As for which countries may play a significant role in Syria’s reconstruction, Al-Shaar said: “Countries with long-term interests in regional stability will be at the forefront of the rebuilding process. But we must first rebuild our internal foundations and develop an economic model capable of attracting partners under balanced conditions—ones that protect economic sovereignty and promote inclusive development.”

The minister concluded by stressing that lifting sanctions, while significant, is not the end of the crisis. “Rather, it may mark the beginning of a new phase—one filled with challenges,” he said. “The greatest challenge isn’t securing funding, but managing resources wisely, upholding the principles of productivity, justice, and transparency. We need a proactive—not reactive—economy. We must restore the value of work and implement policies that put people at the center of development. Only then can we say we are beginning to emerge from the bottleneck.”

Last Wednesday, Riyadh hosted a landmark meeting between the Crown Prince, Trump, and Syrian President Ahmad Al-Sharaa—marking the first meeting between a Syrian and a US president since Hafez Al-Assad met Bill Clinton in Geneva in 2000.

Most US sanctions on Syria were imposed after the outbreak of the country’s conflict in 2011. These targeted deposed President Bashar Al-Assad, members of his family, and various political and economic figures. In 2020, additional sanctions came into effect under the Caesar Act, targeting Assad’s inner circle and imposing severe penalties on any entity or company dealing with the Syrian regime. The Act also sanctioned Syria’s construction, oil, and gas sectors and prohibited US funding for reconstruction—while exempting humanitarian organizations operating in the country.