Taliban Calling
The extremist regime wants tourists. Why shouldn't it? It's part of the normalisation of brutality
Kim Jong Un last month posed on a beach, surfing on the 'wave of happiness' that North Korea's Dear Leader has promised tourists visiting the newly developed Wonsan Kalma coastal tourist zone. The dictator wants more international tourists. So far, small Russian groups are the only package deal North Korea receives. This month, it's Taliban's turn to invite tourists to Afghanistan. Wonsan Kalma and Afghanistan are beautiful places. But they are not on tourists maps for good reason.
Taliban's ad is made by a tour operator. It starts with a familiar chilling scene of beheadings: men, heads covered, kneeling in front of gun-wielding, presumably, Afghans. Only here, the headcover is yanked off to reveal a grinny White male flashing a thumbs-up sign. A flower tucked in the barrel of a machine gun, a close-up of an M4 rifle with 'property of US govt' etched, the 50-second ad flits between making light of Taliban as people who terrorised to stunning footage of Afghanistan. It is as extraordinarily tone-deaf as many of Trump's Truth Social posts.
Taliban meanwhile is intensifying its war against Afghan women. Banned from work and education, they're publicly flogged, refused healthcare unless a male relative's present, and their movement is fully restricted. Heavily sanctioned Taliban wants tourists to earn some hard cash. But to make a beheading scene part of a promotion targeted at Americans is a cold measure of how normalised brutality is. Will Americans go, though their govt says don't? Undoubtedly. Indifference to violence is global culture, the unthinkable is routinely normalised. So, for a certain section, what could thrill more than swinging an M4 or Kalashnikov at Afghanistan's majestic peaks? Reality and rights & wrongs can take a vacation.
Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email
This piece appeared as an editorial opinion in the print edition of The Times of India.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
9 minutes ago
- Hans India
Japan willing to resume peace talks with Russia
Japan is open to resuming peace treaty negotiations with Russia as soon as conditions permit, Japanese Ambassador to Moscow Akira Muto said. 'In order to build stable relations with Russia based on the rule of law, it is necessary to conclude a peace treaty by resolving the territorial issue between our two countries, leaving no undefined borders between us. This will determine the boundary, which is in the interest of both countries. We maintain this position without change," he said in an interview with Russian state-run news agency TASS, responding to a question on whether Tokyo was prepared to take steps toward concluding a peace treaty with Moscow. The ambassador noted that Japan is Russia's natural neighbour and partner and recalled Russian President Vladimir Putin's statement that Russia is ready to 'build relations with Tokyo.' 'We pay attention to the statements of the Russian leadership, and we also intend to resume negotiations on a peace treaty with our neighbour, Russia, as soon as the situation allows,' Muto stressed. He further emphasised that Tokyo backs US President Donald Trump's initiative to resolve the conflict in Ukraine and would welcome a potential meeting between the US leader and his Russian counterpart, Putin. 'The Japanese government supports President Trump's efforts to achieve peace in Ukraine. Engagement with the United States to resolve the conflict, including a dialogue between the US and Russian leaders, is essential to stopping hostilities and establishing a just and lasting peace in Ukraine as soon as possible. This process should also be supported by other G7 nations,' Muto mentioned. Moscow and Tokyo have been engaged in talks since the mid-20th century to conclude a peace treaty. The main obstacle remains the dispute over the southern part of the Kuril Islands known as the Northern Territories in Japan. After the war, the entire archipelago was incorporated into the then Soviet Union, but Japan disputes the ownership of Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan, and a group of small uninhabited islets. The Russian Foreign Ministry has repeatedly asserted that Russia's sovereignty over these territories is indisputable, with an established international legal basis. However, according to the Japanese Foreign Ministry, the Northern Territories are an inherent territory of Japan that continues to be illegally occupied by Russia. Earlier relations worsened when Japan imposed multiple packages of sanctions against Moscow after the launch of Russia's military operation in Ukraine. In response, the Russian Foreign Ministry announced that it does not want to continue consultations on the peace treaty, citing the impossibility of negotiating such a fundamental document with a state that adopts an unfriendly stance and allegedly seeks to undermine Russia's interests.
Time of India
12 minutes ago
- Time of India
US Supreme Court approves nearly 1,400 layoffs from the Education Department under Trump's federal downsizing push
US Supreme Court approves nearly 1,400 layoffs in the Education Department. In a ruling that could permanently alter the landscape of American public education, the US Supreme Court has allowed the Trump administration to proceed with mass layoffs at the Department of Education, a key step in President Trump's broader plan to decentralise federal control and shift responsibility for education back to the states. The court's unsigned emergency order effectively lifts a lower court's block on the administration's move to terminate more than 1,300 federal employees. Critics say this will gut the department's core functions, including oversight of civil rights protections in schools, financial aid distribution, and special education services. The Education Department began 2025 with over 4,000 employees. Post-layoffs, the workforce is expected to shrink by nearly half, after including probationary dismissals and voluntary resignations. Particularly affected is the Office for Civil Rights, where seven out of twelve regional offices have already been shut down. Judiciary expands presidential power The Supreme Court's decision marks another major expansion of executive power, signalling judicial backing for Trump's efforts to reconfigure, or even dismantle, a department created by Congress nearly 50 years ago. The ruling did not include a vote breakdown, but liberal justices dissented strongly. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing on behalf of Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, warned that the court was enabling an unconstitutional overreach. She argued that only Congress has the power to eliminate a cabinet-level department, and that the administration's unilateral action would inflict "untold harm" on students, particularly those affected by discrimination, disability, or lack of educational access. From the executive order to legal showdown President Trump had signed an executive order in March directing Education Secretary Linda McMahon to begin the process of shutting down the department. He cited low student test scores and bureaucratic inefficiency as justification for transferring federal education functions back to the states. Almost immediately, legal challenges erupted. School districts, education unions, and 21 Democratic-led states filed lawsuits in federal court, arguing that dismantling the department without congressional approval violated the Constitution and federal statutes. Judge Myong Joun of the US District Court in Massachusetts had sided with the plaintiffs in May, ordering the administration to halt layoffs and reinstate fired workers. His ruling was later upheld by the First Circuit Court of Appeals. But the Trump administration appealed to the Supreme Court, which has now reversed course, allowing the layoffs to resume while the underlying legal battle continues. Reactions split along political lines Trump and his allies celebrated the ruling as a victory for local control and executive leadership. The White House reiterated that the president has full constitutional authority to reorganise federal agencies, and said the cuts were necessary to streamline operations and reduce federal overreach. Education Secretary McMahon stated that the department will proceed with a reduction in force to promote efficiency and accountability, while continuing to carry out statutory duties with a scaled-back staff. Democratic lawmakers and education advocates condemned the decision. Senator Chuck Schumer said the move amounts to sabotage of public education, adding that it's American kids paying the price. Sheria Smith, president of the union representing Education Department workers, warned that the firings would disrupt critical programs and services that millions of families rely on. What comes next While the court's decision allows the layoffs to proceed immediately, the underlying lawsuits are far from over. Courts are still examining whether the Trump administration's move to essentially dismantle the department violates congressional authority and statutory mandates. Meanwhile, the impact is already rippling through the education system. Several states have reported delays in federal funding for after-school programs, summer learning, and civil rights compliance. With fewer federal employees in place to monitor and enforce these mandates, education equity advocates fear that marginalised students will suffer the most. The future of the Education Department, and the federal role in American schooling, now hangs in a precarious legal and political balance. TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us here . Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
13 minutes ago
- Business Standard
US won't publish major climate change report on Nasa website as promised
The Trump administration has taken another step to make it harder to find major, legally mandated scientific assessments of how climate change is endangering the nation and its people. Earlier this month, the official government websites that hosted the authoritative, peer-reviewed national climate assessments went dark. Such sites tell state and local governments and the public what to expect in their backyards from a warming world and how best to adapt to it. At the time, the White House said NASA would house the reports to comply with a 1990 law that requires the reports, which the space agency said it planned to do. But on Monday, NASA announced that it aborted those plans. "The USGCRP (the government agency that oversees and used to host the report) met its statutory requirements by presenting its reports to Congress. NASA has no legal obligations to host data," NASA Press Secretary Bethany Stevens said in an email. That means no data from the assessment or the government science office that coordinated the work will be on NASA, she said. On July 3, NASA put out a statement that said: "All preexisting reports will be hosted on the NASA website, ensuring continuity of reporting. "This document was written for the American people, paid for by the taxpayers, and it contains vital information we need to keep ourselves safe in a changing climate, as the disasters that continue to mount demonstrate so tragically and clearly," said Texas Tech climate scientist Katharine Hayhoe. She is chief scientist at The Nature Conservancy and co-author of several past national climate assessments. Copies of past reports are still squirrelled away in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's library and the latest report and its interactive atlas can be seen here. Former Obama White House science adviser and climate scientist John Holdren accused the administration of outright lying and long intended to censor or bury the reports. "The new stance is classic Trump administration misdirection," Holdren said. "In this instance, the administration offers a modest consolation to quell initial outrage over the closure of the site and the disappearance of the National Climate Assessments. Then, two weeks later, they snatch away the consolation with no apology." "They simply don't want the public to see the meticulously assembled and scientifically validated information about what climate change is already doing to our farms, forests, and fisheries, as well as to storms, floods, wildfires, and coast property and about how all those damages will grow in the absence of concerted remedial action," Holdren said in an email. That's why it's important that state and local governments and every day people see these reports, Holdren said. He said they are written in a way that is "useful to people who need to understand what climate change is doing and will do to THEM, their loved ones, their property and their environment". "Trump doesn't want people to know," Holdren wrote. The most recent report, issued in 2023, found that climate change is affecting people's security, health and livelihoods in every corner of the country in different ways, with minority communities, particularly Native Americans, often disproportionately at risk.
