A new book by a veteran international journalist uses the history of Kabul’s Intercontinental Hotel to trace decades of political upheaval in Afghanistan, while highlighting the experiences of ordinary Afghans who lived through successive governments, conflicts and social transformations.

The author argues that Afghanistan’s modern history is marked by repeated cycles of change and uncertainty, yet many Afghans continue to hold on to a belief that no political system is permanent. That sense of resilience, she says, remains one of the defining characteristics of the country despite the challenges facing its people.

“Afghans always used to say: the last to die is hope,” she said during an interview discussing the book. “Afghanistan has possibly lived through every political system the world has tried. The thread through Afghan history is that nothing lasts forever.”

At the centre of the narrative are employees of Kabul’s Intercontinental Hotel, one of the country’s most recognisable landmarks. Through their personal accounts, the book documents how political changes shaped everyday life across generations.

Among those featured are a longtime housekeeper who worked at the hotel from its opening, one of its first female chefs, an engineer responsible for maintaining the property through periods of conflict and instability, and one of the hotel’s pioneering female waiters.

Their experiences provide a perspective on Afghanistan’s recent history that extends beyond political leaders and military campaigns.The author said documenting those stories required the trust and cooperation of Afghans who were willing to speak despite potential risks.

“I have to pay tribute to the Afghans who helped me and spoke to me for the book, because in Afghanistan even sharing stories can have risks,” she said.The journalist began her reporting career as a freelance correspondent in West Africa before joining the BBC and covering conflicts and political developments around the world.

She later became the broadcaster’s chief international correspondent, reporting from some of the most significant geopolitical events of recent decades.Her latest book opens with the collapse of the internationally backed Afghan government in August 2021 and the return of the Taliban to power following the withdrawal of U.S. and allied forces.

The fall of Kabul and the chaotic evacuation that followed form a central part of the narrative.Recalling the scenes at Kabul airport, she described a period marked by fear, confusion and desperation as thousands attempted to leave the country.“There was this fear at the end,” she said.

“People kept talking about Vietnam. In fact, it was a hundred times worse.”She remembered military transport aircraft, helicopters and large crowds carrying only essential belongings as they sought evacuation. Images of Afghans clinging to departing aircraft became some of the most widely circulated photographs of the withdrawal and drew international scrutiny over the manner of the exit.

The events of August 2021 remain among the defining moments of her reporting career and continue to shape international debate over the consequences of two decades of foreign military involvement in Afghanistan.Since regaining power, the Taliban administration has introduced a series of restrictions affecting women and girls.

Secondary education and university access for girls have been suspended, while women have been excluded from many forms of employment and public participation. Additional regulations have imposed strict dress requirements and further limited women’s visibility in public life.The journalist described the situation as one of the most pressing human rights concerns facing Afghanistan today.

“Five years in and it is getting worse. It is a stain on our world,” she said.Despite those restrictions, she said Afghan women continue to demonstrate remarkable resilience and determination in the face of mounting obstacles.She also expressed concern about challenges faced by Afghan women outside the country, particularly those seeking educational opportunities abroad.

While scholarship programmes remain available in some cases, she noted that visa barriers and immigration restrictions have prevented many students from pursuing studies overseas.“There are Afghan women getting scholarships, but there are no visas now to allow Afghan women to come and study in Britain and in many other places,” she said.

According to the author, many Afghans who once held prominent roles in journalism, civil society, education and public service have been forced to rebuild their lives from the beginning after leaving the country.“People who were somebody in Afghanistan — activists, world-class journalists — find themselves having to start again from scratch,” she said.

The displacement of professionals and educated workers has contributed to concerns among international observers about the long-term impact on Afghanistan’s social and economic development.At the same time, the author cautioned against viewing the entire period between 2001 and 2021 solely through the lens of its final outcome.

She argued that the years of international engagement produced significant changes in education, media, civil society and opportunities for women, even if many of those gains are now under pressure.She said debates about whether two decades of foreign involvement achieved meaningful results often overlook the experiences of millions of Afghans whose lives changed during that period.

“People often say: what did 20 years of international engagement achieve? Was it all for nothing?” she said. “I always say it wasn’t for nothing.”Through the story of one hotel and the people who kept it operating across decades of turmoil, the book seeks to document those experiences and preserve the voices of Afghans whose lives intersected with some of the most significant events in the country’s modern history.

As the Eurovision Song Contest 2026 marks its 70th anniversary, performers, broadcasters and former contestants have described the competition as a platform capable of delivering international recognition, domestic backlash and enduring cultural influence.

Interviews with several figures associated with the contest illustrate how Eurovision has evolved from a regional music competition into one of the world’s most closely watched live television events.Finnish hard rock performer Lordi, which won the contest in 2006 with “Hard Rock Hallelujah,” said the group originally viewed participation in Finland’s national selection process as a promotional opportunity rather than a serious attempt to compete internationally.

Frontman Mr Lordi said the band expected little success and entered primarily to gain television exposure for a new album.The group’s unconventional stage presentation, featuring elaborate monster costumes and heavy metal theatrics, drew extensive international media attention during the contest in Athens.

According to Mr Lordi, some delegations and participants reacted negatively to the disproportionate media focus surrounding the band, leading to formal complaints during the event.Despite eventually winning the competition, Mr Lordi described the final performance as personally disappointing because he was ill with a fever during the broadcast.

He said the latex costumes created extreme heat conditions on stage, making vocal performance difficult. Finland’s victory marked the country’s first Eurovision win and triggered significant domestic celebration, including the naming of a public square after the singer in his hometown.

However, Mr Lordi said the aftermath also revealed divisions within Finland’s music community. He stated that sections of the country’s rock and metal audience viewed the band’s Eurovision participation as commercial compromise rather than artistic achievement.

According to him, the backlash intensified to the point where the band reportedly struggled to secure live performances in Finland for several years after the victory, even as its international profile continued to grow.The contest has also played a role in shaping internet culture.

Moldovan saxophonist SunStroke Project member Sergey Stepanov became internationally known as “Epic Sax Guy” after footage from the group’s 2010 Eurovision performance circulated widely online. The viral clip became one of the contest’s earliest major internet memes, helping introduce Eurovision performances to audiences outside Europe through social media and video-sharing platforms.

British singer James Newman, who represented the United Kingdom in 2021 and received zero points from both juries and public voters, described the immediate aftermath of the result as difficult but manageable. Newman said the atmosphere inside the venue remained supportive despite the outcome and that fellow attendees responded positively after the voting concluded.

He recalled returning to Britain to widespread encouragement from radio stations, music industry figures and members of the public. Newman also said Chris Martin contacted him after the contest to offer support and discuss the pressures associated with public performance setbacks.

According to Newman, the conversation reinforced the distinction between competitive results and professional recognition within the music industry.Ireland’s Eddie Friel, who represented the country in 1995, described Eurovision during the mid-1990s as both culturally significant and financially controversial for Irish broadcaster RTÉ.

Ireland had hosted and won the contest multiple times during that period, generating domestic debate about the cost of repeatedly staging the event.Friel said speculation circulated in Ireland suggesting the broadcaster could not afford another victory because of hosting obligations.

He rejected those claims as exaggerated but acknowledged a degree of public fatigue surrounding the contest at the time. Ireland’s repeated successes during the 1990s coincided with growing scrutiny over Eurovision’s production costs and commercial viability for smaller broadcasters.

Friel also noted that his Eurovision appearance later became associated with a popular parody storyline in the Irish sitcom Father Ted. The programme’s “My Lovely Horse” episode depicted fictional Eurovision participants and included references resembling public debates surrounding Ireland’s contest history and allegations of musical similarity involving songs from earlier decades.

For broadcasters, Eurovision has become an increasingly complex production as the scale of the event has expanded. Graham Norton, who has provided BBC commentary for the contest since 2009, described the event as comparable in operational scale to a major international sporting competition.

Norton said first-time attendees are often surprised by the size of Eurovision’s infrastructure and the extent to which it dominates host cities during preparation periods.

He noted that while audiences often associate his commentary with satire and criticism, his approach differs from that of former BBC commentator Terry Wogan, whose broadcasts became known for sharper humour directed at performances and organisers.

According to Norton, Eurovision productions have become increasingly professional and technically polished, reducing opportunities for the type of spontaneous mishaps that once shaped the contest’s reputation. He said earlier editions often featured inexperienced hosts and production inconsistencies, whereas contemporary contests operate with significantly higher technical standards.

Norton also described the contrast between Eurovision’s global television reach and the practical realities of live broadcasting. He said commentators often work from confined production booths with limited space and difficult working conditions despite the event’s large-scale public image.

The broadcaster added that one of the more difficult aspects of the role involves travelling home with unsuccessful national contestants following disappointing results.The contest, launched in 1956 by the European Broadcasting Union, has grown into one of the world’s largest non-sporting live television events.

Recent editions have attracted audiences exceeding 160 million viewers across Europe and international streaming markets, according to organisers and participating broadcasters.Eurovision’s transformation has mirrored wider shifts in media consumption, particularly the influence of online audiences and social platforms in amplifying performances beyond the contest itself.

Viral moments, meme culture and international fan communities have helped Eurovision expand beyond its traditional European base, while also increasing scrutiny of performers and broadcasters.

The broadcaster is under scrutiny for alleged foreign exchange violations in India and an investigation was launched shortly after tax authorities searched BBC’s offices in Delhi and Mumbai in February.

The action by Indian authorities came after the BBC aired a critical documentary on Prime Minister Narendra Modi in January, examining his leadership during deadly communal riots in 2002, which prompted an angry response from the government.

The broadcaster said on Tuesday four staff members, including current India head Rupa Jha, would leave the organisation to form the new company named “Collective Newsroom” and provide services as commissioned by BBC.

“The regulations that govern publishing the news in India have changed,” BBC’s deputy CEO Jonathan Munro told staff in an email, seen by Reuters.

“The changes mean that any company publishing digital news content in India, must be majority-owned by Indian nationals,” he said.

Around 250 BBC staff will be asked to transfer to Collective Newsroom, which will be fully owned by its nine Indian shareholders, Munro and Jha told staff in a separate email.

The BBC did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Reuters on Munro’s email.

An Indian government adviser said in February that tax searches at the BBC’s offices were not vindictive. The BBC has said it was cooperating fully with tax authorities and hoped to resolve matters quickly.

The BBC did not air its two-part documentary “India: the Modi question” in India. The documentary examined Modi’s leadership as chief minister of Gujarat state during riots in 2002, in which at least 1,000 people were killed, most of them Muslims. Activists put the toll at more than twice that number.

The government dismissed the documentary as “propaganda” and blocked the sharing of any clips from it on social media. BBC said its documentary was “rigorously researched according to highest editorial standards”.

Modi, who is aiming to win a third term in elections next year, has denied accusations that he did not do enough to stop the riots, and he was exonerated in 2012 following an inquiry overseen by the Supreme Court. A petition questioning his exoneration was dismissed last year.

The programme will aim to provide those in Gaza with the latest information plus safety advice on where to access shelter, food and water supplies, said the BBC.

“BBC News Arabic are extremely well-placed to offer this vital service for the people of Gaza at a time of greatest need,” BBC World Service Director Liliane Landor said in a statement.

Produced in Cairo and London, the Gaza radio service will run one programme from Nov. 3 and begin a second daily broadcast from Nov. 10.

The BBC World Service, which represents the British broadcaster’s non-commercial international broadcasting services, has a previous track record of launching emergency broadcasts.

In the summer of 2014 it launched a service for Gaza following an escalation in hostilities there.

It also launched an emergency radio service during the conflict in Sudan in May, and ran extended TV bulletins in Ukraine following the invasion of the country last year.

The announcement came days after BBC Arabic released an investigative documentary about the illicit drug trade in Syria, where they highlighted links between the estimated multi-billion dollar industry and the Syrian army as well as members of President Bashar Assad’s family.

The Syrian Information Ministry in a statement late Saturday said the decision was made after“ warning the channel more than once that it has broadcasted its misleading reports relying on statements and testimonies from terrorist entities and those hostile to Syria”.

Damascus revoked the licenses of both the British broadcaster’s radio and television correspondents in Syria, as well as their videographer.

“We speak to people across the political spectrum to establish the facts,” the BBC said in a statement emailed to the Associated Press, adding that the broadcaster provides “impartial independent journalism. ”We will continue to provide impartial news and information to our audiences across the Arabic-speaking world”.

The illicit drug industry, most notably the addictive Captagon amphetamine pills, has blossomed in war-torn Syria in recent years. While experts say it has been a way to generate revenue for the country’s crippled economy and sanctioned leadership, it has scourged neighboring Jordan and Saudi Arabia, as well as other Gulf countries.

Captagon has been used both recreationally and by people with physically demanding jobs to keep them alert as well as fighters on the battlefield.

The United Kingdom, United States, and European Union have sanctioned a handful of drug kingpins and close associates of Assad for their involvement in the trade.

The Syrian government denies any involvement in the production of Captagon. A Syrian parliamentarian told the AP last month that Syria has been used as a transit state for Captagon and other drugs, and accused opposition groups of running the industry.

After Syria restored relations with many of its neighboring countries and returned to the Arab fold, cracking down on drug smuggling has been a key issue in regional talks.

Syria’s uprising which turned into a full-blown civil war, now in its 13th year, has killed nearly half a million people and displaced half of its prewar population of 23 million. Syrians in both government-held territory and an opposition-held enclave in the country’s northwest suffer from rampant poverty and crippled infrastructure.

The defamation suit states the documentary “India: the Modi question” that aired earlier this year cast a slur on India’s reputation and that of its judiciary and the prime minister, the reports said.

The summons came months after Indian tax officials inspected the BBC’s offices in New Delhi and Mumbai in February following an angry response by the Indian government to the documentary.

The media reports said the suit was filed by a non-profit based in Gujarat, which is Modi’s home state. The BBC did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The documentary focused on Modi’s leadership as chief minister of the western state of Gujarat during riots in 2002 in which at least 1,000 people were killed, most of them Muslims. Activists put the toll at more than twice that number.

Modi has denied accusations that he did not do enough to stop the riots and a Supreme Court-ordered investigation found no evidence to prosecute him. A petition seeking a fresh investigation was dismissed by the Supreme Court last year.

The government called the documentary, which did not air in India, a biased “propaganda piece” and blocked sharing of any clips from it on social media.

The BBC has previously said that it “does not have an agenda” and has stood by its reporting for the documentary.

Hindus, who make up 80% of the Indian population, are major meat-eaters. Even only a third of the privileged, upper-caste Indians are vegetarian.

What are the most common myths and stereotypes about what Indians eat?

The biggest myth, of course, is that India is a largely vegetarian country.

But that’s not the case at all. Past “non-serious” estimates have suggested that more than a third of Indians ate vegetarian food.

If you go by three large-scale government surveys, 23%-37% of Indians are estimated to be vegetarian. By itself this is nothing remarkably revelatory.

But new research by US-based anthropologist Balmurli Natrajan and India-based economist Suraj Jacob, points to a heap of evidence that even these are inflated estimations because of “cultural and political pressures”. So people under-report eating meat – particularly beef – and over-report eating vegetarian food.

Taking all this into account, say the researchers, only about 20% of Indians are actually vegetarian – much lower than common claims and stereotypes suggest.

Hindus, who make up 80% of the Indian population, are major meat-eaters. Even only a third of the privileged, upper-caste Indians are vegetarian.

The government data shows that vegetarian households have higher income and consumption – are more affluent than meat-eating households. The lower castes, Dalits (formerly known as untouchables) and tribes-people are mainly meat eaters.

Vegetarian cities in India
Indore: 49%
Meerut: 36%
Delhi: 30%
Nagpur: 22%
Mumbai: 18%
Hyderabad: 11%
Chennai: 6%
Kolkata: 4%

(Average incidence of vegetarianism. Source: National Family Health Survey)

On the other hand, Dr Natrajan and Dr Jacob find the extent of beef eating is much higher than claims and stereotypes suggest.

At least 7% of Indians eat beef, according to government surveys.

But there is evidence to show that some of the official data is “considerably” under-reported because beef is “caught in cultural political and group identity struggles in India”.

Narendra Modi’s ruling Hindu nationalist BJP promotes vegetarianism and believes that the cow should be protected, because the country’s majority Hindu population considers them holy. More than a dozen states have already banned the slaughter of cattle. And during Mr Modi’s rule, vigilante cow protection groups, operating with impunity, have killed people transporting cattle.

The truth is millions of Indians, including Dalits, Muslims and Christians, consume beef. Some 70 communities in Kerala, for example, prefer beef to the more expensive goat meat.

Dr Natrajan and Dr Jacob conclude that in reality, closer to 15% of Indians – or about 180 million people – eat beef. That’s a whopping 96% more than the official estimates.

And then there are the stereotypes of Indian food.

Delhi, where only a third of residents are thought to be vegetarian, may well deserve its reputation for being India’s butter chicken capital.

But, the stereotype of Chennai as the hub of India’s “south Indian vegetarian meal” is completely misplaced. Reason: only 6% of the city’s residents are vegetarian, one survey suggests.

Many continue to believe that Punjab is “chicken loving” country. But the truth is that 75% of people in the northern state are vegetarian.

So how has the myth that India is a largely vegetarian country been spread so successfully?

For one, Dr Natrajan and Dr Jacob told me, in a “highly diverse society with food habits and cuisines changing every few kilometres and within social groups, any generalisation about large segments of the population is a function of who speaks for the group”.

“This power to represent communities, regions, or even the entire country is what makes the stereotypes.”

Also, they say, “the food of the powerful comes to stand in for the food of the people”.

• Cooking the world’s oldest known curry.
• The Indian street food bringing theatre to your plate.
• Why India is a nation of foodies.

“The term non-vegetarian is a good case in point. It signals the social power of vegetarian classes, including their power to classify foods, to create a ‘food hierarchy’ wherein vegetarian food is the default and is having a higher status than meat. Thus it is akin to the term ‘non-whites’ coined by ‘whites’ to capture an incredibly diverse population who they colonised.”

Migration

Secondly, the researchers say, some of the stereotype is enabled by migration.

So when south Indians migrate to northern and central India, their food comes to stand in for all south Indian cuisine. This is similarly true for north Indians who migrate to other parts of the country.

Finally, some of the stereotypes are perpetuated by the outsider – north Indians stereotype south Indians just by meeting a few of them without thinking about the diversity of the region and vice versa.

The foreign media, say the researchers, is also complicit “as it seeks to identify societies by a few essential characteristics”.

Chicken is thought to be the most popular form of meat eaten by Indians

Also, the study shows up the differences in food habits among men and women. More women, for example, say they are vegetarian than men.

The researchers say this could be partly explained by the fact that more men eat outside their homes and with “greater moral impunity than women”, although eating out may not by itself result in eating meat.

Patriarchy – and politics – might have something to do with it.

“The burden of maintaining a tradition of vegetarianism falls disproportionately on the women,” say Dr Natrajan and Dr Jacob.

Couples are meat eaters in about 65% of the surveyed households and vegetarians only in 20%. But in 12% of the cases the husband was a meat eater, while the wife was a vegetarian. Only in 3% cases was the reverse true.

Clearly, the majority of Indians consume some form of meat – chicken and mutton, mainly – regularly or occasionally, and eating vegetarian food is not practiced by the majority.

So why does vegetarianism exert a far greater influence on representations of India and Indians around the world? Does it have to do with “policing” of food choices and perpetuating food stereotypes in a vastly complex and multicultural society?

Article first published on BBC.

The first issue is that religiosity is understood quite differently by an Arab (and indeed a Muslim) than by your average secular western European. 

A recent poll of twenty-five thousand Arabs was published last week by Arab Barometer, a “…nonpartisan research network that provides insight into the social, political, and economic attitudes and values of ordinary citizens across the Arab world” (Arab Barometer). It was one of five major surveys conducted by the organization and provides significant and relevant information about the region. The data is also interesting reading for those concerned with Arab attitudes and opinions.

Spanning eleven MENA countries and commissioned by the BBC, the survey included multiple choice questions on the religious attitudes and practices of Arabs. This most recent poll found that the percentage of Arabs interviewed that identified as non-religious had grown from 8% to 13% since 2013.

Prominent British newspapers such as The Guardian and The Sun jumped to the conclusion that the Arab world was “turning its back on religion”. 

The Arab world is by any measure, in deep crisis. Politically, economically, socially and even religiously (the survey showed a dramatic increase in those reporting a lack of trust of religious leadership). That said, to claim that Arabs were abandoning their religion is – at best – a gross exaggeration. There are a number of important reasons why.

The question posed to participants in the poll was “In general, you would describe yourself as religious, somewhat religious, or not religious?” Basing your argument that Arabs are losing their religion solely on the answers to this question, while ostensibly straightforward, is somewhat problematic.

The first issue is that religiosity is understood quite differently by an Arab (and indeed a Muslim) than by your average secular western European. 

For example, I asked a family member whether they considered themselves religious. “Not really. But I hope, one day” she replied. This response came from someone who prayed five times a day, fasted Ramadan, wore the hijab, and paid zakat. By any western, secular measure, this person would be considered a religious, practicing Muslim. Yet, she did not consider herself as such. This is because for many Muslims, to be religious means to be engaged in many supererogatory acts of worship, not only those which are obligatory. Indeed many practicing Muslims would be loathe to make the claim that they were pious individuals out of modesty.

While the data for the 2018-2019 survey is not yet available on the Arab Barometer site (at the date of writing), this thesis is supported by the data of the previous 2016-2017 poll. Out of the 9,000 participants, around 10.4% said they were not religious. Of the 10.4% that said they were not religious, 18% of them said that they always prayed five times a day and another 11% on top of that said that prayed five times daily most of the time. To suggest that the 29% had “turned their backs on their religion” as these outlets have reported is quite the overstatement. It will be interesting to see how many of those in the 2018-2019 survey who said they weren’t religious are actually practicing Muslims.

I was recently in a popular mall in western Amman, one of the more secularised parts of the Jordan. Maghrib call to prayer had just sounded and I headed to the large prayer hall which could fit around a hundred people. I arrived early and managed to pray in what became a completely packed space. When I finished, I turned around to find people, young and old, waiting outside for their turn to pray. This does not look like a people who have turned their backs on religion. Quite the contrary.

Dr. Moamer Khalili is a doctoral candidate of religious and theological studies at Cardiff University. His area of research is modern atheism and Islamic theology.