Topic: [2021-08-21] Inside Afghanistan's cryptocurrency underground as the country plu (Read 298 times)

Actually, when there's a war such things happen all the time: armies putting to death their own soldiers for looting, killing or raping civilians. I just thought it was a possibility.


 Considering that they are fighting each other, ISIS and Taliban, it can be assumed that their goals are different. After all, Taliban says it itself that it's an interim government. We don't know yet what the real government will look like.
 
 
They have banned songs accompanied with musical instruments and movies showing "inappropriate"(according to them) images, because they can find a Quranic justification for the ban. I don't think there's something about cryptocurrencies in the Quran and Hadith, but we'll see about that. I mean, we'll see how they will interpret the Islamic laws. 

That is again not the argument. I am not talking about what the Taliban would or would not allow. I am asking about accomplishing financial and economic stability for a country in disorder through Jack Mallers original roadmap for hyperdollarization through stablecoins.

The Taliban might also be using American dollars, iphones, android phones, shovels, cars, television and many more. Is it also your opinion that they should not use these?

There are several reasons, accurate or not:

First, the belief from many that stopping fighting somewhere else or at least confining it there can prevent it from spreading.

Second, that innocent people deserve help - e.g. to prevent things like the Holocaust, genocide etc. Look at the hundreds of millions that were killed by the statist authoritarians over the last century. 

Third, the (perhaps real reason) deep state (per Glenn Greenwald in 2017 ) is invested in power and war. For example, look at who provided the "evidence" of WMDs?  The three letter agencies (DoD, NSA, CIA, etc).  Look who provided the "intelligence" about Afghanistan?  Three letter agencies again. All unelected bureaucrats who have nothing to fear from being wrong for decades or committing perjury - Clapper and Brennan - about spying on the US (and the world) per Snowden.  Some, like Clapper and Brennan don't believe in liberty, only power and will do much to undermine the US overseas in order to get people to distrust liberty.

Fourth, nation building - give people a taste of a republican form of government combined with democracy and they'll be able to keep it.

Number 1 and 2 are often used as public rationale while 3 is the deep rationale.  Good, sincere people may believe in the first two while being used by those in 3.

Which are real, which are accurate, which make sense, I don't know, but those are some reasons about which I have read.  Personally, I think a lot of people believe #2, and really mean it. They're being hijacked though.

I think you are confused. These acts were done by the Taliban, and not by some other terrorist group. And you want the Taliban to condemn their own actions? These people want to live in the stone age. Although they don't want to openly proclaim that they want to go back to the 7th century, that is their intention (the ISIS on the other hand openly state that they want to go back to the 7th century). You guys are being overly optimistic about the Taliban allowing cryptocurrency usage. When they have banned songs and movies, how they are going to allow cryptocurrency?

It won't be if we are talking about people who are leaving the country, people who were on the side of Western forces. I don't think such people will have problems with converting their BTC to fiat in Western countries. As of Taliban, it's surely not their main financial problem right now. Converting BTC to fiat, I mean.


The things you listed are really horrible acts of violence, and certainly people who did them are terrorists. The question is whether Taliban is going to consider such acts unlawful, and severely punish the terrorists? We'll see about that in the nearest future, but right now we can't say for sure.

They maybe using mixers, but it is impossible to find out. At some point they need to convert their BTC to fiat, and this step is going to be very tedious.

And it is funny that they don't want to be called as terrorists. I don't know what else should I label someone, who have done these atrocities in the past few days:

1. Massacred dozens of Hazara men, because they looked different from them (Hazara are mostly Mongoloid)
2. Cut off the hand of a young woman, for having nail polish
3. Young women shot dead, because their palm was "exposed"
4. Mentally challenged person executed and body thrown in nearby creek
5. Unmarried girls as young as 12-years forced to become third or fourth wives of Taliban terrorists

Do they have similar stuff in Saudi Arabia? Even if they do, I don't think that the mainstream media has the balls to label the Saudis as terrorists.

Or maybe because they were using it wisely, with crypto mixers and stuff? Actually, I don't want to use the word "wisely" here because being a terrorist is not wise at all, in the first place.

The thing is that it looks like the Taliban doesn't want to be associated with terrorists any more. I think they want to be like Saudi Arabia these days: living under Sharia law and collaborating with Western countries at the same time.

Afghanistan is basically in all banned lists of international online banks, exchanges and services from years even under what was called a moderate governments. Since there is not many people using crypto then p2p trading will be very hard and the only solution to spend it is with those services that are blacklisting the country.
In other words, these imposed restrictions that will not be lifted any time soon will not help the usage of crypto in that country regardless of the new rulers position.

I would still stick to my argument. Either they don't have enough cryptocurrency experts among them, or they don't think that Bitcoin is as convenient as the other methods for their purpose. Because there have been only isolated incidents linking groups such as Taliban and Islamic State with cryptocurrency, despite its anonymity and portability. And even in these cases, those who detained were not directly linked to these groups. As things stand now, they can easily accept funds or purchase weapons through the fiat route, as the Pakistan regime is friendly towards them. They may consider using other options such as cryptocurrency, if this situation changes.

I agree to BetWrong, they got bunch of people that are educated and well aware of the things happening in the world including what's with the technology.

As for confiscating crypto from their users, they cannot know that if those people owning cryptos will remain lowkey and as if they don't know that such technology exists.

Are you kidding? Do you really think it's possible for organisation like Taliban, or any other of such level, to be so uneducated in whole? Surely they have tech savvy people among them, and I wouldn't be surprised if some of them where hanging out on this very forum.

Overall I think Taliban government is going to embrace crypto because using it is not against Sharia.

The last thing we actually want is the Taliban confiscating cryptocurrency from users in Afghanistan and using it for purchase of weapons and terror financing. That would give the perfect excuse for the western governments to shut down Bitcoin mixers, DEX platforms and P2P exchanges. They may even go for KYC on online wallets. So far it looks as if Bitcoin is too technological for Taliban to understand it's purpose, but we can't be sure whether the situation will remain like that for the long-term.

I just wish that the Talibans won't be too bold with cryptocurrencies and that guy might not the only one that has crypto assets.

He chose to go back because of their economy status and probably his portfolio is giving him that feeling that he's at a good status.

Reminds me of this news item that made its rounds in the last crypto boom -- this was also the period where teaching girls to code and empowering girls/women in post-Taliban Afghanistan was all the rage. Always wondered how many Afghan girl bounty hunters ended up on this forum, I never ran across any!

Not that I'm not supportive of these efforts, I think it's great anyway that girls and boys everywhere should learn to code, it's the most underrated skill to equip yourself for the next decade or so. I just always think they overestimate how useful these crypto-related things are.

The idea of implementing something like this in a country like Afghanistan hardly makes sense unless you think you can compare that country to El Salvador. I don’t think the Taliban regime would allow such a thing, despite all the stories of how they have changed.


It is not up to me to determine who will use what, but I express my opinion with good reason that positioning Bitcoin to a higher level in a country now ruled by alleged former terrorists would only bring more problems than benefits. I doubt the Taliban use cryptocurrencies, as far as I can see they specialize in using weapons, torturing and killing anyone who doesn't think like them - so if they can't control something, then they won't even accept it.

I see 2 possible directions here:

1. The Americans really believe that by trying to fight those (anti-American, dictatorial) regimes and "export" democracy they'll avoid nuclear war and keep... not necessarily peace, but the war away from their home.

2. Weapon manufacturing industry is very powerful and influential in the US. Those super expensive weapons and ammo must be used in order to get new ones made (better and even more expensive). And afaik the US even try to recover the cost of those weapons from the "liberated" countries. So it's a good business for some.

Then why the same mistake is being repeated, again and again? Did they stopped after Vietnam? Korea was different, because at that point almost all the cold war superpowers got involved. But Vietnam was an internal power struggle and the US had no business there. And take the example of Iraq. The justification given was that Saddam was manufacturing WMDs. Two decades have passed. Where are the so called WMDs? And then came Afghanistan. After that it was Libya. A country that was one of the most prosperous in the African continent is now even worse than Somalia.

In Afghanistan, events are unfolding so badly that there is practically no hope for normal economic development. The Taliban have practically fought all their lives, they walk and sleep with weapons. They are no longer adapted for a peaceful life, not to mention the possibility of using cryptocurrency by them. Therefore, they will look for reasons to continue fighting and take property from others. In this regard, it is likely that the international community isolates them from the outside world, and if the Taliban attack their neighbors or seriously violate the rights of civilians in Afghanistan itself, then missile and bomb strikes will be launched against the accumulations of Taliban personnel and equipment. However, the re-introduction of foreign troops is only possible as a last resort. After the shameful surrender of government troops to the Taliban, along with a significant amount of weapons, no one will help them. Afghans will have to rely mainly on their own strength.
The Taliban now have access to less than one percent of the funds previously held by the former government. Therefore, there will be a financial collapse very soon. Where this will lead, we'll see soon.

I don't see it that much in black and white. Some - especially women with higher education - know that under the talibans their life will become harsh. Some know that they just lost democracy. I guess that they are - by far - too few. Also I'm sure that there were some that had great benefits under that fragile and corrupted democracy. All these could have done more, I guess... that's why I see it as being rather complicated.



I've seen in many places: it doesn't matter that much what the book tells, it matters the most how the priests interpret it/what they say.
Imho, if some of the taliban leaders do have Bitcoin, then it will probably not be banned; but I kinda doubt that.

That is outside the argument. I am only asking if Jack Maller’s original idea to hyperdollarize El Salvador through stablecoins would work in dollarizing a country in disorder similar to Afghanistan.

Also, it is not for you, me or anyone who dictates who should or should not use this technology. They might presently be using it and we do not know, similar to criminals use of American dollars in the black market.

It can be a financial savior if people prepare in time. The people of Hong Kong could've converted some assets to bitcoin to save them from the communists. The people of Taiwan should be protecting themselves this way.  Just as the people of Afghanistan have had the chance to do so.

Anything that needs a cross border asset transfer that can't be confiscated easily if someone doesn't know you have it.

Lots of money, lots of bribes, and corruption - and I believe a good portion of that money ended up in the private accounts of Americans, Afghans, and everyone else who used that country 20 years for their war-political games. It would be interesting to follow the trail of money coming from the US to Afghanistan, and these days I have read an article about all the absurdities of various projects being done in that country, and they have served literally nothing. I have to correct you about the amount, because since 2001, American taxpayers have paid more than $2 trillion for Operation Afghanistan, and they must be very proud of all those clowns who approved it.

---

Why do you think the Taliban would embrace a new technology when it comes to people who are quite traditional and don’t allow some fundamental things like foreign music, movies, and beauty salons? Although it is true that they currently have a problem with payment services, because Western Union has currently blocked its service for Afghanistan, and $800 million in foreign remittances came through it.

I don't really want the Taliban to start using Bitcoin, do we want to link to terrorism, even though the US suddenly says they are no longer terrorists - what's next, an apology to kill Bin Laden and put Al-Qaeda on the list of friendly organizations?

What is everyone’s comment if Jack Mallers went to Afghanistan and talked to the Taliban leadership to bring his Strike technology to hyperdollarize the country through a stablecoin with bitcoin used only as the medium to send value similar to the original plan for El Salvador?

Lived in a 3rd world country before. Bitcoin cannot pay the bills there.


Because most of them are just civilians with no arms or combat experience (similar to Palestine vs Israel). Instead of building a state army Ghani just ran away with all the government cash.


Not really, you basically nailed it in your last paragraph. Nobody liked the former, corrupt, government so what happens is they see the Taliban terrorists as better than them (sadly) because they're the only choice they have.

---

Also I don't like how he's still keeping his money on Binance when they have an impending withdrawal limit clusterbomb about to explode, I hope someone warned him about that.

So, bottom line, Binance is his "savior" not bitcoin as he could simply hold $ there, it makes no difference if he withdraws bitcoins he has nowhere to spend if he withdraws $ he must deal with the banks. It's again one of those tales where BTC is saving everyone that turns out to be quite different in reality.




"some" of the oil fields. Most of them are run owned by anything but American companies, from China and Russia, so 20 years later, let's simply drop this myth about Americans invading countries for their resources as it's getting pretty old. I love that the fact that everyone is talking about the riches of Iraq and Afghanistan but none of the ones in Korea or Vietnam, maybe because it doesn't fit the narrative, right?

OK.. I got it. But still don't understand one point. If they had to leave Afghanistan like this, then what was the point in spending around $1 trillion from the US tax revenue there? They spent a larger amount in Iraq ($2 to $3 trillion), but in this case at least some of the American corporations got control of the oil fields. But the Afghan involvement was a loss making proposition for the United States. They spent $1 trillion, and didn't got anything in return. And obviously, this loss will be covered by printing a few trillion USD worth of banknotes by the federal reserve.

I think it depends on Taliban's policy regarding Bitcoin, which we can't know yet. There are no words in the Quran that condemn Bitcoin, so it can turn out to be pretty halal.

I absolutely agree regarding those leaving the country, though. Right now they are trying to buy BTC with all their possessions.

Let someone correct me if I'm wrong, but Afghanistan is one of the countries where Binance is not supported - and even if the person in the article uses a VPN, it's only a matter of time before they discover it and block his account. In addition, I get the impression that Binance serves as his main storage, so the whole story loses a bit of meaning. I think that there is no crypto underground in Afghanistan, but only isolated cases, considering that according to the data from the beginning of 2021, only 8.64 million had access to the Internet (total population 39.38 million).

---

The defeat of the Afghan national army actually took place much earlier, and it all started with US negotiations with the Taliban in which everything was actually agreed. For some reason known only to them, they decided to withdraw from the country and leave it to those they had fought against for 20 years.

The Afghan national army numbered 350,000 as per official sources, but most of these soldiers existed only in paper. The real strength was in five digits. And even these guys had no apatite to pick up fight with Taliban. When the Jihadis came, they just signed deals with them, handed over their weapons, equipment and uniform, and returned to their hometown. That is how Taliban managed to conquer all of Afghanistan in a matter of few weeks, with just tens of thousands of fighters. And the national currency will become devalued and many of the Afghans will be forced to use foreign currencies (Pakistani Rupee, Iranian Rial.etc), or cryptocurrency.

To a certain extent, yes, but not yet as a whole ^{[for now]}.

In addition to what NeuroticFish mentioned, a large portion of their population has already lost a lot in the last decade or so, and with little to no access to weapons, they can't fight back ^{[even if they want to, it'll never be a fair fight]}.

Despite having a volatile nature, in this case, it'd help them to preserve/retain their wealth's worth/value.

Based on the interviews I've watched recently, I have to respectfully disagree.

In a mostly cash based economy, Bitcoin cannot help much. Maybe a little in the bigger cities, but now, since the legislation is on a change, anything unusual is suspect and can cause troubles.
While Bitcoin is great for those who have economies "stored" in BTC and now leaving the country, yes. But the others... may not be able to benefit for quite a while from now on.



From what I've read the army was basically bought to not fight. The Taliban leaders are super rich. I guess that there was an anti-American narrative going on for many years too. A big chunk of the population may see this defeat as a victory; since the democracy was fragile and the corruption high, many won't lose much or, better said, won't understand what they've lost. It's... complicated.

Ironic in all of this is knowing that the population of Afghanistan outnumbers the Taliban terrorists, but the population does not unite to fight the terrorists and expects other countries to do the dirty work. i like bitcoin but in case of afghan problems the solution is in the hands of the afghan people, if the afghan people just watch the terrorists do what they want then nothing will change for the better anytime soon

Inside Afghanistan's cryptocurrency underground as the country plunges into turmoil

Farhan Hotak isn't your typical 22 year-old Afghan.

In the last week, he helped his family of ten flee the province of Zabul in southern Afghanistan and travel 97 miles to a city on the Pakistani border. But unlike others choosing to leave the country, once his relatives were in safe hands, Hotak then turned around and came back so that he could protect his family home – and vlog to his thousands of Instagram followers about the evolving situation on the ground in Afghanistan. 

He has also been keeping a very close eye on his crypto portfolio on Binance, as the local currency touches record lows and nationwide bank closures make it next to impossible to withdraw cash.

"In Afghanistan, we don't have platforms like PayPal, Venmo, or Zelle, so I have to depend on other things," said Hotak.

Afghanistan still mostly operates as a cash economy, so money in Hotak's crypto wallet won't help him put dinner on his table tonight, but it does give him peace of mind that some of his wealth is safeguarded against economic instability at home.

It also offers bigger promises down the road: Access to the global economy from inside Afghanistan, certain protections against spiraling inflation, and crucially, the opportunity to make a bet on himself and a future he didn't think was possible before learning about bitcoin.

"I have very, very, very limited resources to do anything. I'm interested in the crypto world, because I have earned a lot, and I see a lot of potential in myself that I can go further," he said.
Run on the banks
For many Afghans, this week has laid bare the worst-case scenario for a country running on legacy financial rails: A nationwide cash shortage, closed borders, a plunging currency, and rapidly rising prices of basic goods.

Read more https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/21/bitcoin-afghanistan-cryptocurrency-taliban-capital-flight.html

---

I guess this has become a trend for struggling economies to turn to bitcoin when things hit rock-bottom, we have seen this in Zimbabwe, Venezuela etc and now Afghanistan,  we can say bitcoin is a financial savior.