Tag: Lisa Nandy

England’s Cricket Controversy: Taliban and Women’s Rights


Minister supports England playing Afghanistan despite Taliban’s actions against women
January 2025

In a recent post, we criticised the International Cricket Council’s decision to carry on with games involving Afghanistan. This decision was made despite the multiple and atrocious actions by the Taliban against women. A large number of MPs have argued that games should be banned in view of the dire nature of women’s rights in that county.

Lisa Nandy MP, the culture and sports minister disagrees and thinks the games should go ahead. She said in an interview the following:

  • It will deny sports fans the opportunity that they love,
  • She was instinctively against boycotts in sports, partly because they are counterproductive,
  • ‘I think they deny sports fans the opportunity they love, and they penalise the athletes and sports people who work very, very hard to reach the top of their game’,
  • They will not be rolling out the ‘red carpet’ she said and instanced the Winter Olympics, where she was vocal saying ‘we did not give the Chinese the PR coup that they were looking for’,
  • Keir Starmer added that he welcomed the England and Wales Cricket Board making strong representations to the ICC on Afghanistan’s Women’s cricket team. Rather missing the point that the team no longer exists.

It is likely that women in Afghanistan will be unimpressed by these arguments. Sports people being denied the ‘opportunity they love’ has to be set against the fact that women in Afghanistan do not have thls or any other opportunity. Not education, going out unescorted, being seen at a window or work are ‘opportunities’ unavailable to them. They cannot walk the street without being clad head to toe with a grill across their eyes.

And who is the ‘we’ in the statement ‘we will not be rolling out the red carpet’? It has nothing to do with Ms Nandy how much publicity, attention and coverage these games get. As for the prime minister expecting the ICC to make ‘strong representations’ to the Taliban about a non-existant women’s cricket team who have had to flee the country, it is almost laughable if it wasn’t so serious.

The essential question is: will playing cricket with an Afghani men’s team make an iota of difference to the wretched lives being lived by women and girls in that country? It is unlikely. Will playing cricket with an Afghani men’s team make matters worse? Probably. It will send a message to the Taliban that women can be treated abominably yet a British minister – and a female British minister – seems to care more for ‘not denying sports fans the sport they love’ than for women in their country. She is anxious ‘not to penalise the sports people who work so hard to reach the top of their game’. Does not the word ‘people’ include women? They won’t be working hard or working at all to reach the top of their game. Because they are banned.

To pretend that the ICC or any of these sporting bodies will make strong – or indeed any kind of representation – to the Taliban is a fantasy. Sport at this level is about money. And the Taliban will correctly assume that the ICC is more concerned about money than it is about women being allowed to play cricket. Or women being allowed to marry whom they wish. Or girls not being forced into marriage with much older men. Or women being able to acquire an education. Or women being allowed to walk the streets without being totally covered over. Or women not being allowed to get a job. Or women not receiving help and support as a result of domestic violence.

The irony is that cricket was an important element of the British Empire. The game was introduced into more or less all the colonies. But with it came a culture, the idea of gentlemanly conduct, and fair play. It was more than just a game for the colonialists. It was seen as a civilising force. It was a key showpiece for civility. We no longer have an empire but the concepts of the game live on. Yet here we have a situation where cricket is being used by a monstrous regime to promote itself on the world stage supported by a British minister.

Sources include: Portico Magazine, Kent Messenger; The Guardian

1

UK Government criticised


Opposition shadow Foreign Secretary Lisa Nandy criticises government failure to condemn violence

Lisa Nandy MP said:

Britain is “absenting itself from the world stage” by refusing to show leadership over Hong Kong residents, confront China or condemn President Trump over his handling of the fallout from George Floyd’s killing, the shadow foreign secretary has warned.  Observer 7 June 2020

This statement was made during the violent events which have taken place across the US following the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis and the continued unrest in Hong Kong over the concerns of the Chinese governments attempts to crack down on protest.

We will “lose all moral authority” to talk about police brutality in Hong Kong and elsewhere if we are not prepared to apply those standards equally to all parts of the world she said.  These comments were made following questions to Dominic Raab who declined to condemn the violence in either country.

It is becoming clearer by the day that the principle concern of the UK government is trade and nothing can stand in the way of that.  William Haigh tried to introduce a moral element to conservative party thinking when he was leader of the party but that seems to have been abandoned.  Now what matters is business and criticism of China or anyone else is not allowed it seems.  Similar reticence can be seen with other countries with dire human rights records such as Saudi, where a desire to sell arms trumps all moral considerations.

The Chinese Minister Chen Wen was interviewed on BBC’s World at One on 5 June and justified the imposition of tough new laws in Hong Kong are needed to create stability.  “Stability a prerequisite for prosperity” she said and that the new laws were only targeted at a handful of criminals, terrorists and those colluding with foreign forces.  This is far from the case and as Amnesty’s Regional Director Joshua Rosenzweig said the National Anthem law just passed is an “insult to free speech.”  Turning one’s back on the Chinese flag can result in up to 3 years in prison.

Sources: Observer; South China Morning Post; BBC; Amnesty International

 

 

0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑