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.”



Al-Hadi Idris to Asharq Al-Awsat: The Parallel Government Aims to Prevent Sudan’s Fragmentation

Al-Hadi Idris, former member of Sudan’s Sovereign Council (Asharq Al-Awsat).
Al-Hadi Idris, former member of Sudan’s Sovereign Council (Asharq Al-Awsat).
TT
20

Al-Hadi Idris to Asharq Al-Awsat: The Parallel Government Aims to Prevent Sudan’s Fragmentation

Al-Hadi Idris, former member of Sudan’s Sovereign Council (Asharq Al-Awsat).
Al-Hadi Idris, former member of Sudan’s Sovereign Council (Asharq Al-Awsat).

As Sudan grapples with ongoing turmoil following the outbreak of war in April 2023, the establishment of a “parallel government” in areas controlled by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) has sparked widespread concern. Domestically, regionally, and internationally, fears are mounting over Sudan’s future, the risk of further division, and the threat of another partition. However, supporters of this initiative—who recently signed a new constitution and a governance roadmap—view it as a major opportunity to build a new Sudan founded on freedom, democracy, and justice, preventing the country from descending into chaos and fragmentation.

A Government for Peace and Unity

The new administration, known as the “Government of Peace and Unity,” aims to rebuild the state on principles of justice and equality while ensuring essential services for all Sudanese citizens—not just those in RSF-controlled areas. Its proponents have sought to reassure both Sudanese citizens and neighboring countries that their objective is to preserve Sudan’s unity.

Emerging at a critical juncture, this initiative presents itself as an alternative to the military-backed government based in Port Sudan, which serves as Sudan’s temporary capital. The parallel government hopes to earn the trust of Sudanese citizens and secure international support by demonstrating a serious commitment to ending the war and reconstructing the state on democratic, secular, and decentralized foundations.

Will this government succeed in bringing about the desired peace, or will the challenges it faces prove insurmountable? Asharq Al-Awsat spoke with Dr. Al-Hadi Idris, a key leader in the “Tasis” coalition behind the formation of the parallel government.

Why Form a Parallel Government?

Idris, a former member of Sudan’s Sovereign Council during the transitional government led by Dr. Abdalla Hamdok, emphasized that their goal is to establish a “government of peace and unity.”

“As a political and military force, we have always been committed to resolving Sudan’s crisis, which erupted on April 15, 2023, through peaceful means,” Idris explained. “We have made extensive efforts to push those supporting the war toward dialogue and engagement with peace initiatives, including those in Jeddah, Manama, and Geneva. However, the army and the de facto authorities in Port Sudan have refused to negotiate. This left us with no choice but to explore more effective ways to bring the warring parties to the table and stop the conflict. The formation of a parallel government is a step toward fulfilling our responsibilities to the many people who have been neglected and left without adequate care.”

Why Is the Army Refusing Dialogue?

Idris, who also leads the Revolutionary Front—a coalition of armed movements from Darfur and political groups outside the region, such as the Beja Congress led by Osama Saeed and the Kush Movement from northern Sudan—claims that the military’s reluctance to negotiate stems from external influences.

“We understand why the army refuses to come to the negotiating table,” he said. “It is under the control of the Islamic movement and remnants of the former regime, who fear that any political process will remove them from power and diminish their influence. They are keen on prolonging the war despite the devastation, suffering, and displacement it causes to civilians.”

Accusations of Division Policies

Idris accused Sudan’s military leaders of implementing measures that risk deepening the country’s divisions. These include issuing a new currency exclusive to areas under their control, restricting access to education in certain regions, and selectively issuing travel and identity documents.

“Such actions could lead to the country’s partition, which we completely oppose,” he stressed.

A Government for All Sudanese

Idris rejected claims that the new government is tied solely to Darfur or the RSF.

“Our government is not for Darfur alone, nor for the RSF or any single region,” he said. “It represents all of Sudan—from north to south, east to west. We have drafted a constitution that guarantees equal rights for all, signed by individuals and entities from across the country. The new government will be responsible for rebuilding the state and delivering essential services, including education, healthcare, and security.”

Local and Regional Concerns

Despite strong opposition to a parallel government from neighboring states, as well as international and regional organizations—including the United Nations and IGAD (Intergovernmental Authority on Development)—Idris remains confident that these concerns will dissipate once the government takes shape.

“People have a right to be worried,” he admitted. “But once they see our government in action, they will understand that we stand for unity, peace, and stability—not the opposite.”

International Recognition: A Secondary Concern

Idris dismissed concerns over whether the new government would gain international recognition.

“This is not something that worries us,” he said. “We have already engaged with countries like Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, and Chad, where we have encountered sympathy for our cause. These nations have a vested interest in Sudan’s stability. In Uganda, we were received by President Yoweri Museveni himself, and in Kenya, President William Ruto welcomed us with open arms.”

The Failure of the Old State Model

According to Idris, Sudan’s traditional state structure has failed and is no longer viable.

“The world is changing around us,” he observed. “Lebanon has entered a new era, and Syria has moved past its oppressive old regime. The old political systems have no future. Since Sudan’s independence in 1956, no government has succeeded in establishing a stable, unified national state. Our history is marked by conflict and instability. That is why, during our meetings in Nairobi, we emphasized the need for a democratic, secular, and decentralized state that protects the rights of all citizens, regardless of their regional or ethnic background.”

A Role for the US in Ending the War

Idris believes the United States can play a decisive role in resolving the Sudanese conflict.

“Washington was heavily involved from the beginning of the war in 2023,” he said. “President Joe Biden’s administration made significant efforts to help Sudan, though it was unable to stop the war. We hope that the new US administration under Donald Trump will take a more effective approach, using a mix of incentives and pressure on all parties to achieve peace. We are open to working with anyone who can help resolve the crisis. Our government is a government of peace, and we are ready to engage with all stakeholders.”

Protecting Civilians from Airstrikes

Idris stressed that any legitimate government must prioritize civilian protection.

“A government that does not protect its citizens has no value,” he asserted. “We will appoint a defense minister whose primary mission will be to develop defensive strategies aimed at safeguarding civilians by all possible means. Additionally, we are working to establish the nucleus of a new national army, drawing from our allied forces, including the RSF, the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-North, the Sudan Liberation Movement-Transitional Council, and other armed factions. A unified Joint Chiefs of Staff will be formed, and after the war ends, this force will serve as the foundation for a restructured national army dedicated solely to border protection and internal security—completely detached from politics.”

“There will no longer be two separate armies,” Idris declared. “There will be one unified military.”

Currency and Travel Documents

Idris confirmed that the new government will introduce its own currency, passports, and travel documents.

“The currency issue was a major factor in our decision to establish this government,” he said. “In many parts of Sudan, people rely on bartering because the Port Sudan government has drained cash supplies from areas outside its control. As a result, goods like salt, sugar, and wheat are traded in lieu of money. In some regions, cash is virtually nonexistent, making daily life incredibly difficult.”

When Will the New Government Be Announced?

Idris revealed that intensive consultations are underway to finalize the launch date.

“We expect to announce the new government within a month, from inside Sudan,” he said. “We have several options for where the announcement will take place, and we will reveal the location in the coming days.”

Participation in Future Negotiations

As for potential peace talks, Idris made it clear: “We are open to any serious and responsible initiative—whether local, regional, or international—but we will only engage in negotiations as the legitimate government of Sudan, a government of peace.”