WRITTEN QUESTION E-1788/01 by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Ban on music and singing in Afghanistan.
Date: 2001-06-19
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Afghanistan, cultural heritage, heritage protection, international sanctions, music, religious fundamentalism

C 134 E/4

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.6.2002

indirect taxation (1). Furthermore, it should be mentioned that in its Communication on ‘The elimination of
tax obstacles to the cross-border provision of occupational pensions’ of 19 April 2001 (2) the Commission
suggested that Member States agree detailed arrangements for automatic information exchange on
occupational pensions in order to safeguard the application of their tax rules.

(1) OJ L 336, 27.12.1977 (as amended by Council Directive 92/12/EEC, OJ L 76, 23.3.1992).
(2) OJ C 165, 8.6.2001.

(2002/C 134 E/004)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1788/01

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Ban on music and singing in Afghanistan

(19 June 2001)

The low esteem in which the Taliban regime holds the arts is no secret. Recently the British musicologist
John Bailey announced that the Taliban had recently imposed a ban on music and gone so far as to rule
that dancing, singing and television were anti-Islamic activities which should be banned.

Mr Bailey who has been studying Afghan music for the last thirty years also indicated that the Taliban
regime has also banned the playing of musical instruments, which is quite inconceivable since it means the
death of musical creativity, the disappearance of the country’s professional musicians and the consignment
to oblivion of its musical tradition.

No international organisation or body (including the EU) has yet managed to bring any influence to bear
over the obscurantist Taliban Islamic fundamentalists, doing no more than express disapproval.

What specific action will the Commission take (including extremely severe economic and other sanctions)
in order finally to bring to a halt the relentless destruction of the riches constituted by Afghanistan’s
cultural heritage?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(19 September 2001)

The Commission wishes to draw the attention to the Council’s common position of 22 January 2001
which purposes notably to support the peace efforts and the respect of human rights in Afghanistan (1)
including an appeal to respect the Afghan cultural heritage. With regard to specific economic and political
sanctions the Council imposed certain restrictive measures against the Taliban regime (2). Moreover, the
Council condemned the destruction of the two giant statues of the Buddha in Bamiyan by the Taliban.

Following the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolutions 1267 (1999) of 15 October 1999 and
1333 (2000) of 19 December 2000 the Council adopted on the basis of a proposal of the Commission,
additional measures against the Taliban regime (3).

When imposing sanctions of the kind referred to by the Honourable Member, the Commission believes
that it is important to avoid bringing further misery and hardship to the population of Afghanistan, which
is already suffering from the effects of more than twenty years of war in the country and from the effect of
the worst drought to affect the region in living memory.

Many observers believe that a severe famine may afflict
circumstances further ‘extremely severe economic and other sanctions’ may be considered inappropriate.

the country this coming winter.

In these

(1) Common position 2001/56/CFSP, OJ L 21, 23.1.2001.
(2) Common position 96/746/CFSP, OJ L 342, 31.12.1996, Common position 1999/727/CFSP, OJ L 294, 16.11.1999,

Common position 2001/154/CFSP, OJ L 57, 26.2.2001.

(3) Regulation (EC) No 467/2001 of 6 March 2001, OJ L 67, 9.3.2001.