By Karl F. Inderfurth and Theodore L. Eliot, Jr. As former State Department officials, we have had the opportunity to witness Afghanistan and its citizens up close during momentous times. These include the turbulent period leading up to the brutal Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, in 1979, and the years of repressive rule under the Taliban before 9/11. We believe another momentous time may be approaching. Talks are now underway in Qatar between high-level U.S. diplomats, led by special envoy Zalmay Khalilzad, and senior Taliban representatives, led by their deputy leader Mullah Abdul Baradar. They have already agreed in principle to a conditional withdrawal of U.S. and allied troops in exchange for a Taliban pledge not to allow Afghanistan to be a safe haven for international terrorists, like al-Qaeda. Afghans are watching closely. To date, however, what has not taken place—and must—is direct talks between the Taliban and the government of President Ashraf Ghani, which the Taliban consider "illegitimate." It will be up to them to achieve a comprehensive intenal settlement, one that covers such critical issues as ceasefires, power sharing, constitutional arrangements, and protections for women's and civil rights. But as a possible inflection point approaches, we need to know what the Afghan people... read more | | |
| By Riya Sinha In South Asia, rice security is synonymous with food security. Particularly in Bangladesh, India, and Nepal (BIN), rice is a staple food, constituting approximately 50 percent of total cereal production and providing 30 percent of the total caloric requirements of the population. This requires that the market price of rice be kept low, and one way these countries have achieved this is by providing agricultural subsidies to farmers. Over the years, the growth of these subsidies, particularly in India, has become a major point of contention, both at the WTO and domestically, where farm relief is often multilayered and inefficient. The debate has centered on the size of the subsidies: how much is enough? But this has raised another question: are subsidies really necessary at all, or are they, as some have argued, a political gimmick that distorts the farm economy and fails to help... read more | | | By Melissa Chong More than 40 million people are victims of modern-day slavery. Two-thirds of them are in Asia, and most of them toil in industries deeply embedded in global supply chains. But a growing international movement is calling businesses to account for human rights, and supply-chain transparency is the new frontline in this ongoing battle. Speaking at a recent conference, Michael Fletcher, chief commercial officer of supermarket giant the Co-op, said that concern for the plight of supply-chain workers may be nearing a tipping point where consumers will demand corporate action to end slavery, just as educated consumers began to push for a phase-out of plastics. We've come a long way since 2010, when the voluntary UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) ended years of international stalemate over corporate responsibility. We're entering uncharted territory, as one national government after another mandates corporate transparency on human rights in their supply chains. As of 2018, eight G20 countries had passed legislation to fight supply-chain slavery... read more | | |
|
