After Dr. Aisha Wahab’s comments about Afghanistan, I saw many different reactions. Some people supported her, while others quickly accused her of supporting the Taliban, normalizing the Taliban, and even betraying Afghanistan.
But I think before we judge her, we should ask a few simple questions.
First, how much power and responsibility will Dr. Aisha Wahab actually have in Congress?
She was recently elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in a special election. We still need to see which committee she will serve on and how much influence she will have on U.S. foreign policy.
If she serves on a committee that deals directly with foreign policy and Afghanistan, then naturally her words and decisions will become more important.
But one member of Congress, especially a new member, does not decide U.S. policy toward Afghanistan alone.
Second, we should criticize what was actually said.
Dr. Aisha Wahab said the United States should keep the door open for diplomacy and communication with whoever is in power in Afghanistan.
People can agree or disagree with that position.
But diplomacy is not the same as recognizing a government.
Talking with the Taliban does not mean accepting the Taliban, just as talking with an enemy does not mean becoming friends with that enemy.
If someone believes that talking with the Taliban is wrong, they have every right to explain why and criticize that position.
But if we say that Dr. Aisha Wahab wants to give legitimacy to the Taliban, we should be able to show where she actually said that.
Third, we should not forget another part of her comments.
In the same interview, she criticized the situation of women and children in Afghanistan. She said preventing them from going to school and living a normal life is leading Afghanistan toward disaster.
So we should not take one sentence from her interview and ignore everything else she said.
However, I also see a serious problem with part of Dr. Aisha Wahab’s own comments.
She spoke about “warlord groups” and said that groups other than the Taliban are seeking power and putting their personal interests ahead of Afghanistan’s interests.
This needs an explanation.
Dr. Wahab, who exactly do you mean when you speak about warlords?
Do you mean specific commanders and groups with a history of war, personal power, and armed forces?
Or do you consider anyone who resists the Taliban today to be a warlord?
These are two very different things.
Opposing the Taliban does not make someone a warlord, just as talking with the Taliban does not make someone a Taliban supporter.
If we are going to speak about Afghanistan, we need to choose our words carefully. The people of Afghanistan have paid with their blood for these words and divisions for many years.
There is something else I have seen in some of the criticism that concerns me even more.
Dr. Aisha Wahab’s childhood, losing her parents, the family that raised her, her ethnicity, and who may have influenced her growing up should not replace political criticism.
If her political position is wrong, criticize that position.
If she supports the Taliban, show the evidence.
If she is unfair toward those who oppose the Taliban, ask her to explain herself.
But we should not turn a political disagreement into another argument about someone’s ethnicity or family background.
Afghanistan has already suffered greatly from this kind of politics.
At the same time, Dr. Aisha Wahab’s Afghan background should not protect her from political criticism either.
The fact that an Afghan American woman has entered the U.S. Congress for the first time may make many Afghans proud. But that pride should not become a blank check.
Every politician must be held accountable.
This is where the comparison with Dr. Zalmay Khalilzad can teach us something.
Dr. Khalilzad was also Afghan American and reached the highest levels of U.S. foreign policy. Many Afghans supported his work, while many others have serious criticisms of his role, especially regarding the Doha negotiations and the agreement with the Taliban.
But does Dr. Khalilzad’s experience mean that every Afghan American who enters U.S. politics should immediately be treated as another Dr. Khalilzad?
I do not think so.
The lesson from Dr. Khalilzad is different.
We should not completely trust a politician simply because that person is Afghan. But we also should not call someone a traitor because of one statement before we have seen their record.
Today, Dr. Khalilzad can be judged based on years of responsibility, negotiations, decisions, and the results of his policies.
Dr. Aisha Wahab does not yet have such a record in Congress.
She is just beginning this chapter.
Let us see which committee she joins.
Let us see how she votes.
Let us see what she does regarding the rights of Afghan women.
Let us see whether, when she talks about warlords, she is willing to clearly explain who she means.
And if one day she supports a policy that harms the people of Afghanistan, then we should criticize her with facts and evidence.
We should criticize her strongly if necessary.
But a healthy society should not turn politicians into heroes, and it should not turn them into enemies without evidence.
Today, our responsibility is not to defend Dr. Aisha Wahab.
Our responsibility is also not to condemn her.
Our responsibility is to ask questions, pay attention, and remember.
A politician should not be judged by ethnicity, gender, childhood story, or slogans.
A politician should be judged by their record.
Dr. Aisha Wahab should be no exception.
Noor Wodjouatt
