While the Taliban try to change Afghans, the reverse is also true: Saad Mohseni

To be called the Rupert Murdoch of Afghanistan can be a compliment or a jab. In the case of Saad Mohseni, the scale tips towards the former—a nod to his impact on a country that didn’t have much by way of the media 23 years ago. When he was a kid, after the 1979 Soviet invasion of his home country, Mohseni’s diplomat parents sought asylum in Australia. When the US overthrew the Taliban regime in 2002, Kabul beckoned him. In war-ravaged Afghanistan, Mohseni established, with US support, the media company MOBY Group and started a private FM channel, Arman FM, which played something that had been banned by the Taliban earlier—music. He later launched television and online platforms, delivering news and entertainment, including licensed, Indian saas-bahu serials. His business expanded to South and Central Asia, West Asia and Africa. With the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan and the Taliban back in power, things have changed. Tellingly, Taliban 2.0 haven’t thrown out the MOBY Group, although there have been changes in programming.

Mohseni was in India for the Jaipur Literature Festival to talk about his memoir, Radio Free Afghanistan. He spoke to Nirmal John on the current state of Afghanistan, women’s rights, conflict within Taliban and more. Edited excerpts:

It has been more than three years since the US withdrawal. How stable is the situation right now?
Afghanistan has been mired in conflicts for decades. A lot of people forget how stable Afghanistan was before the Soviet invasion. 1978 and ’79 were horrendous years with a tsunami of events that we haven’t recovered from. There were the Soviet invasion, the Iranian revolution and the seizure of the mosques in Mecca, which really radicalised the Saudis. There was also the peace deal between Egypt and Israel that was provocative for a lot of people in the Arab world. Before that, people could drive from Europe all the way to India. Afghanistan since the Taliban (came back) has been relatively stable in that there has been no fighting. There are, of course, groups like ISIS, but in terms of people’s daily lives, the impact is minimal. It is the first time the country is experiencing some form of stability in decades. The flipside is that you have a regime that is fairly dictatorial and intrusive. Since girls can’t go to school and there are limitations in terms of what women can do, it is not really an environment that people would welcome. Hundreds of thousands of Afghans have left or are trying to leave the country. But the fact that people can go about their lives without getting killed is welcomed, and the Taliban are seen as more honest and less corrupt than the previous government. But Afghanistan continues to face a humanitarian crisis. Two million people are close to starvation.


What role can India play in Afghanistan?
Indians may not be familiar with Afghanistan beyond Kabuliwala, but Afghans are very familiar with India and its culture. One of the first series we dubbed was Kyunki… Saas Bhi Kabhi Bahu Thi…, which was a massive hit, and was sort of transformative for the country. It is good that India still has some engagement in the region, but people-to-people connect has come to a standstill.

How have things changed for your media house under Taliban 2.0?
We have been forced to stop music. We had our own version of the Idol format called Afghan Star —that stopped. We don’t have soap operas. We have continued with game shows, chat shows, travel shows and cooking shows. On the news side, we continue to air programmes that deal with corruption, social issues and so forth. Is it exactly as it was before? Probably not. It’s not 100% (of what it used to be), but it’s probably 90%. But that 10% is pretty dramatic. Afghans still have an array of programming to choose from. When it comes to girls, it has been almost three and half years since they have not been to school. What will happen to them? There will almost be muscle atrophy. But we are trying, we have a lot of television education programmes now. Are they gamechangers? No, nothing replaces real schools. However, in terms of girl’s education levels, we are trying to be a bridge between before the ban and now. Ultimately, it may take a few years, but they will have to allow girls to go back to school.

What is the power equation between Kabul and Kandahar?
You have different people with different points of view. Some have moderate views and some are less moderate than others. The leadership is very much stuck in 4th century BC and they are based in Kandahar. Abiding by the leader is mandatory from a religious point of view because they have pledged allegiance. But there is a growing sense of frustration as there are people who understand that the leader is not interested in engaging with the world. The people in the cities, especially in Kabul, members of the cabinet and so forth, are much younger and their views reflect the views of a lot of Afghans who believe that the country needs to be more engaged and that it should be a member of the global community. Some of them have seen the world.

Will these differences come to a boil?
I think it will, it is not a question of if, but when. Something has to give. I can’t see this continuing indefinitely. There is the risk that the country could still get dragged back. We can’t take anything for granted. The situation is not good, but it could be far worse. What is interesting is that while the Taliban are trying to change the people of Afghanistan, the reverse is also true.

What do you mean by that?
The tolerance of women on the street, as compared with Taliban 1.0. They still have women working in government offices; if you go to the airport they still stamp your passport. There is tolerance of women in the media—there was no television during Taliban 1.0. In the 1990s, they were not allowed to walk on the street by themselves. Now they can drive. While that is not the case everywhere and much depends on local administrators, in major cities they enjoy more freedom than in the 1990s.

What can help the Taliban 2.0 gain the legitimacy they are craving for from the international community?
Two things—allowing girls to go back to school, and inclusivity. You cannot have a political movement completely monopolised in a nation as diverse as Afghanistan. People need to feel they are part of the process.

You have been accused of being an American agent, but you have continued to work with Taliban after US withdrawal.
Now we are being accused of being Taliban sympathisers because we are advocating engagement with Afghanistan (laughs). Our view has always been that we must empower the population and that we have to be truth-tellers. On the news side, we have advocated for transparency. The public demanded entertainment and we gave them what they wanted. Since the return of the Taliban, it was a difficult period because we did not know what to do—to leave or to stay. Leaving felt like abandoning, not just the population but also our employees. So the question was, how do we make the most of what we have. To report on what is happening in the country—that was important to us. We have continued to develop entertainment programme even in a restrictive environment. That said, we still have to reassess periodically. It is not a foregone conclusion that we will stay.

What made you write the book now?
Twenty years ago, there was a lot of hope. With that hope I went back to Afghanistan and created a media group, starting off with a radio station and then expanding into television. We had five networks of TV and radio stations. The book focuses on what we did inside the country. It is the story of the media group told through the different characters that worked with us. When I first thought about writing the book, I thought we were going to have to shut down and it would be cathartic to write. We have continued to remain in the country. I wanted to tell the story of the country and its transformation. In five years, we may look back and say those 20 years were crucial. The jury is still out on whether international occupation was a total failure or whether it set the foundation of a country that will go places.