When the United States attacked Afghanistan ten years ago, we were told that not only were we going after those who had attacked us but also that we would liberate Afghan women from the Taliban.  It was a very effective selling point, there is nothing we tend to like better than rescuing helpless women.  But let’s be clear–that was not the reason we invaded Afghanistan–women had been being abused by the Taliban and the warlords before them for quite some time by then.  As we observe the 10th anniversary of what now seems like an endless war, it is important to look at what Afghan women have experienced since the U.S. invasion and what needs to be considered going forward.

ActionAid and Oxfam have both issued lengthy reports addressing these issues.  In a survey of 1000 Afghan women, ActionAid found that,

72% of Afghan women believe their lives are better now than they were 10 years ago, while 37% think Afghanistan will become a worse place if international troops leave. A massive 86% are worried about a return to Taliban-style government, with one in five citing their daughter’s education as the main concern…

…However women’s rights groups in Afghanistan say they are being kept in the dark regarding the talks with the Taliban, as well as being frozen out of an important international conference on the country’s future and transition of power, which will take place in Bonn, Germany in December 2011…

…Women who have stood up for women’s rights in the past 10 years are also worried about their own personal safety if the Taliban returns to power, with some activists making plans to leave the country.

The report goes on to say that today,

  • 39% of children who attend school are girls
  • 27% of MPs are women (higher than the world average)
  • 5% of positions in the army and police force are filled by women
  • 25% of government jobs are filled by women

These achievements are real and should not be underestimated. Yet huge challenges remain and too many women are still denied rights that should be taken for granted. Even now, a woman who runs away from home to escape domestic abuse is seen as dishonouring her family and often loses the right to see her children.

Forced and child marriage are common and only 13% of women are literate (the figure for men is 43%). Eighty-seven per cent of all women in Afghanistan suffer domestic abuse, according to a UN survey and life expectancy for both men and women is around 45 – more than 20 years lower than the world average. The Save the Children index this May described Afghanistan as the worst place in the world to be a mother – one in 11 women perishes in pregnancy (one every 30 minutes) while one child in every five dies before reaching its fifth birthday. This means that every mother in Afghanistan is likely to face the loss of a child. And many women remain isolated. The ActionAid poll found that four in 10 women never leave their village or neighbourhood.

It is important to note, which this report does not, that not only do women run away from home to escape domestic abuse, but all too often they attempt suicide to escape, frequently setting themselves on fire to do so.  The abuse itself is often horrific beyond description, including brutal disfigurement and outright murder.

As for where we are now, ActionAid reports,

“After the fall of the Taliban things got better. But then gradually, after 2006, the situation got worse,” says Selay Ghaffar, executive director of ActionAid partner HAWCA. “All these efforts were undermined because of security and the presence of people who committed crimes and abuses in the past who are still in power. Girls’ schools shut down, acid was thrown in girls’ faces, schools were burnt down.”…

…And despite the early statements from international leaders, women’s rights seem to have been deprioritised as the military operation against the Taliban and other insurgents has been stepped up…

This is  delusional phrasing–women’s rights have never been the priority in Afghanistan except to the extent that they are politically expedient towards other ends.  The report continues,

…In September last year the Afghan government set up a High Peace Council – a 79-member body which is tasked with talking to the Taliban. There are just nine women on the council and many women’s rights activists say they hold merely symbolic positions and are not part of the real negotiations.

…The international community can also support Afghan women through deeper engagement with women’s civil society and community-based organisations. Direct funding to women’s organisations to build their capacity as advocates and leaders will enable funds to aid transformation to a more democratic society, not just facilitate transition without the promise of sustainable change…

…However, providing this support will require a fresh look at funding priorities, and methods to ensure aid reaches women and can address the root causes of women’s inequality. Women’s organisations working to reduce poverty and empower women and girls say they receive little or no funding, forcing them to operate hand to mouth and limit activities to practical services rather than also being able to lobby for long-term changes for women….

…In addition the international community should broaden diplomatic efforts to include consultations and information sharing with women’s organisations. Amplifying the concerns of women’s organisations and ensuring women’s voices are heard is a valuable role the international community can play.

Conspicuously absent in ActionAid’s analysis is the existence of U.N. Security Council Resolutions 1325 and 1889 as  framework for conflict resolution and peace negotiating which are however addressed by Oxfam (see below).

According to Oxfam,

Western leaders have a responsibility toward Afghan women, not least because protection of women’s rights was sold as a positive outcome of the international intervention in October 2001. Ten years on, however, time is running out to fulfill these promises.

The Afghan government and the international community must:

  • Ensure women’s rights are not sacrificed, by publicly pledging that any political settlement must explicitly guarantee women’s rights;
  • Make a genuine commitment to meaningful participation of women in all phases and levels of any peace processes.

The Afghan government must:

  • Enhance efforts to increase representation of women in elected bodies and government institutions at all levels to 30 per cent;
  • Encourage religious leaders to speak out on women’s rights in Islam;
  • Intensify efforts to promote female access to education, health, justice, and other basic services.

The Ministry of Interior and Ministry of Defence must:

  • Improve awareness of women’s rights and human rights law in the justice and security sector, and ensure effective imple- mentation of these laws;
  • Increase substantially women recruits in the security and justice sectors.

The international community must:

  • Support expanded civic education programmes to raise awareness of women’s rights at community level;
  • Support efforts to improve female leadership;
  • Intensify support to promote access to education and other key services, and ensure this support will continue at current or in- creased levels even as international military forces prepare to withdraw.

The UN must:

  • Continue to monitor all government actions including the peace processes and provide increased support to the Afghan government on all negotiation, reconciliation, and reintegra- tion processes.

The report points to the dichotomy between the current lip-service regarding Afghan women and the realities of how the issue is being approached,

Publicly, Western politicians are still backing Afghan women. In July 2011, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reiterated her commitment to women, saying: ‘Any potential for peace will be subverted if women and ethnic minorities are marginalised or silenced…And so when we look at what will happen in Afghanistan, the United States will not abandon our values or support a political process that undoes the progress that has been made in the past decade.’ But behind the scenes it is less clear what will happen if the Taliban make demands that require compromise on women’s rights, as the US government prepares to withdraw the majority of its troops by the end of 2014 and seeks a political settlement to bring an end to the fighting. In July 2011, a Washington Post article reported one USAID official as saying ‘gender issues are going to have to take a back seat to other priorities’.This reflects ‘growing realism’ tempering expectations of what they can achieve on the ground after ten years. As one analysis puts it, ‘On this list of priorities, ‘gender’ is generally seen as a luxury to be left aside until the supposedly gender-neutral objectives in the domains of security and governance have been achieved.’ (Emphasis mine.)

Let’s be very clear here–gender issues have always taken a back seat.  This isn’t a question of ‘growing realism’, it is a question of persistent, pandemic misogyny that has infested and damaged life on this planet since the dawn of patriarchy.  It is precisely the stupidity of seeing these issues as a luxury that undermines any realistic achievement of security since the day men first started going to war.  But as Oxfam points out,

The vital role of women in peace-building at the national level and in peace negotiations has been recognised in UN Security Council Resolutions 1325 and 1889, applicable to all UN member states, including Afghanistan. The Afghan government reaffirmed its support for women’s role in peace-building in its national peace plan, the donor-funded Afghanistan Peace and Reintegration Programme (APRP), which began to be rolled out nationwide in early 2011.

Yet women are currently under-represented or not represented at all in the APRP, which augurs poorly for female participation in any future formal peace talks with the Taliban. There are just nine women on the 70-member High Peace Council (HPC), which was created to lead the peace process. Many of the male members are former warlords and powerbrokers who do not take their female counterparts seriously. The APRP has also established provincial peace councils under the HPC, composed of between 20 and 35 members, with a minimum of three women, one of whom must be a representative from the Department of Women’s Affairs (DoWA). However, no council as yet has more than three female members. Women at the community level have little understanding of APRP; their formal role, at the moment, is unclear but is likely to be limited to involvement in community development programmes. According to a provincial DoWA head, ‘although women have great potential as negotiators and peacebuilders, the will and commitment from Kabul to involve them is almost nil.’

In their conclusions, Oxfam writes that, “words must be matched with action and firm guarantees,” and this is indeed true but not sufficient.  Our words in regard to Afghan women were used in 2001 as a tool to garner support for the invasion of Afghanistan, not a call on its own merits to address Afghan human rights issues.  Just bringing women to the table will not be enough–it must be insured that the women who come to the table are not puppet window dressing proxies for warlords or the Taliban and that they are allowed to safely speak freely and that their words be taken seriously.

The most crucial point to be made however is that while women’s human rights, progress and security are a huge concern, they should not be construed as a reason for continued, never ending foreign military presence in Afghanistan, which is only aggravating the continuing violence that pervades the country.  Killing and maiming people does not secure human rights, it destroys them.  There is no possibility of living in peace until the violence ends.  It is time to disarm the warring factions within Afghanistan and for the U.S. military to leave–only then will there be a realistic chance for women’s human rights in Afghanistan.

 

DeliciousFacebookGoogle+RedditStumbleUponTwitterPrintFriendlyEmailEvernoteDiggShare
 

Ten years ago, after the World Trade Center towers crumbled, the United States declared a war on terror. At first we were told we would defeat the enemy quickly. But that war with its ever-shifting enemies and goals continues today with no end in sight. In late 2001, we were told that one of the reasons it was imperative that we attack Afghanistan was to liberate Afghan women from the Taliban. And then a few months later we were told that we must also rescue Iraqi women.

But the truth is that women’s human rights were never a priority, merely an excuse for exerting military domination. Today in Afghanistan and Iraq, the problems faced by women are myriad, little has been improved and much has been made worse. In Afghanistan, women continue to be maimed and beaten and their maternal mortality rate continues to be the second highest in the world. In Iraq, trafficking of women has increased dramatically, women human rights defenders are attacked in public places and women’s health, jobs and education has suffered dramatically as a result of the U.S. invasion.

Looking beyond Afghanistan and Iraq, the gender-specific impact of war and violence is all too apparent throughout the world.

  • It is not possible to say that  women’s lives are a priority while we stand by as crises like the never-ending mass rapes in the Democratic Republic of Congo continue unabated.
  • It is not possible to say that women’s lives are a priority while women refugees are raped in Somali refugee camps or while women are murdered in Guatemala and Mexico and their killers go unpunished.
  • It is not possible to say that women’s lives are a priority when women’s reproductive rights are under siege in the U.S. and throughout the world.
  • It is not possible to say that women’s lives are a priority when women are afraid to walk down the street for fear of being attacked and harassed or of going home and being beaten and raped behind closed doors.
  • It is not possible to say that women’s lives are a priority when women are more likely to be food insecure, have less access to education and earn less than men throughout the world.

The monumental irony is that it has been proven time and time again that when women do not live in fear and when they have equal access to food and education and work, we are all better off and there is less likelihood of violence.  We cannot improve women’s lives by bombing their countries and when conflict does occur, we cannot truly resolve it unless women have a full and equal stake in the peace-making.

The only way to end terrorism is to quit creating terrifying conditions and the uncomfortable truth is that in the years since the World Trade Center towers fell, the U.S. has done everything in its power to create and further the conditions in which terror ferments.  As long as we persist on this path, we will live in a state of terror that only exacerbates the undeclared war on women.

DeliciousFacebookGoogle+RedditStumbleUponTwitterPrintFriendlyEmailEvernoteDiggShare
 

The following letter was received from Yanar Mohammed, President of the Organization of Women’s Freedom in Iraq (OWFI), an organization FPN has long supported in their tireless efforts to help women in Iraq.  While their evidence is anecdotal, it is substantive enough to warrant immediate further investigation so that justice and help can be gotten for those who are suffering.

In the current weak (sic), an OWFI delegation visited repeatedly the district of Haweeja, west of Kirkuk city in Iraq, to find that the villages have practically turned into contaminated backyards of radioactive waste of the live ammunition operations field of the US base. This matter has initiated human tragedy in levels unprecedented in the district, and yet was totally ignored by both the Iraqi and US governments who were not concerned with the human lives wasted in the surroundings of the military operations training field.

Within a Haweeja population of 109,000 people, a new disabled generation of infants and children were born with abnormal and under-developed brains, most of whom suffer polio, paralysis and sometimes blindness. The cases registered in the local clinic are 412, while the real numbers add up to more than the 600. Similarly, cancer spreads in all ages, with big numbers among teenagers who currently await their death without any treatment offered by the Iraqi government or the US military which is responsible for the contaminations resulting from their daily live ammunition radiation and emission. The US government continues to grant all the liberty for its military arsenal to practice shelling and explosions in the training field of Haweeja which is only one mile from the homes of families, with no barriers to stop children, sheppards and sheep to walk across in the ammunition training fields.

Most of the disability and cancer cases are in the villages closest to the US base training field, and in the direction of the wind, i.e. south of the field, such as Al Kubeyba, Al Hamdouniya, Al Aatshana and Hor Al Sufun. For example, Al Kubeyba village has a population of 1400 people – out of whom 21 cases were diagnosed with cancer. 3 have recently died while 18 are awaiting their destiny desperately with no hope of being provided treatment or medication by the authorities who should be held accountable.

OWFI delegate invited a group of reporters on August 23rd to witness, report and reveal the Haweeja dilemma globally, thus reversing the censorship of the authorities over it. It arrived to our attention that a resident of Haweeja had taken a sample of soil to Kirkuk Health Department, to be threatened in his next visit that he is summoned for investigation by the US military forces.

OWFI calls for the international courts and tribunals to set up a war crime tribunal committee to investigate into the party which was responsible of contaminating the air, soil and water of Haweeja and thus causing birth defects, disabilities, polio, paralysis and cancers. OWFI also calls upon the international humanitarian organizations to support the people of Haweeja against their daily sufferings, knowing that the Iraqi government deprived them of clean drinking water, adequate basic services, and sources of income. Moreover, there is absolutely no governmental concern of providing them with physical or psychological treatment or medication in any way.

Furthermore, OWFI holds the US government accountable for the devastation of tens of thousands of Haweeja residents who suffer from having one or more disabled children in their immediate family (25% of newborns), thus forcing the residents to abstain from having more children who are destined to suffer alongside their parents. OWFI demands an adequate financial compensation for the victims and their families, as they have been subjected to what amounts to be crimes of war. Exposing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians to depleted uranium and other radiation from a US base which is implanted within Iraqi villages shows a clear disregard for Iraqi human life and disrespect to international treaties. The US administrations demonstrates willingness to plague lives of thousands of unsuspecting innocent infants and teenagers with disability and cancer while denying them medication or even acknowledgement of any rights.

OWFI hopes to get help from international organizations to help reduce the sufferings of the people of Haweeja. Our experiences of eight years have taught us not to expect any positive response from both US and Iraqi governments who have cooperated in imposing the disaster in the first place.

Yanar Mohammed
Organization of Women’s Freedom in Iraq, president
23/08/2011

DeliciousFacebookGoogle+RedditStumbleUponTwitterPrintFriendlyEmailEvernoteDiggShare
 

As has been pointed out on this blog numerous times, in the aftermath of environmental disasters, there are gender-specific impacts that need to be addressed.  This is especially true in a nuclear disaster such as the one that occurred in Japan in the aftermath of the earthquake and tsunami.  As IPS reports,

Women of reproductive age are at significant risk from the effects of radiation on their bodies and reproductive systems. Studies show women’s exposure to radiation may harm her future ability to bear children and can cause premature aging. The U.S. Center for Disease Control warns pregnant women that, in the event of exposure to radiation, even at low doses, the health consequences for unborn foetuses “can include stunted growth, deformities, abnormal brain function, or cancer that may develop sometime later in life…

…In the two decades after Chernobyl, approximately 200,000 people died. Women living in highly contaminated areas in Ukraine and Belarus were affected by chromosome disorders, leukaemia, psychological trauma, depression, and multiple birth defects in their children. Among women who lived in the affected area, medical studies detected high levels of thyroid and breast cancer. Unfortunately, the former Soviet Union failed to provide timely and continuous information about the effects of radiation on human health.

In light of the unique risk to women’s health caused by exposure to radiation, the Japanese government and international agencies must take immediate action. Yet neither the World Health Organisation nor the International Atomic Energy Association – the two international bodies that monitor health and nuclear security respectively – have provided any information about the effect of radiation exposure to women’s bodies. Even a simple google search on the impact of radiation on women does not yield much, nor are there steps that women can take to mitigate the impact on her health and her children.

At the very least, pregnant women and women of childbearing age should be offered the opportunity for counseling about the risks and given the opportunity to access food and water that is radiation-free.  But as IPS points out, for those already exposed, the damage is done and cannot be reversed and the result is that there will be many miscarriages and children born with birth defects.

———-

As I write this, I note that the radiation readings at the Fukushima nuclear power plant are the highest they have been since the earthquake and tsunami struck, a start indication that this the magnitude of this crisis is not in any way decreasing and in all likelihood, will get worse.  Think it can’t happen in the U.S.?  The Perry Nuclear Power Plant in Ohio had to be shut down after abnormally high readings last week.

DeliciousFacebookGoogle+RedditStumbleUponTwitterPrintFriendlyEmailEvernoteDiggShare
 

Every now and again, I get in a mathematical frame of mind.  So today I offer you this math problem:

(.13 x 1,000) x 365 = ?

I’ll give y’all a few minutes to get out those calculators…okay times up.  Everyone come up with 47,450?

Now let’s talk about what that number is.  Every day, 1000 women fall victim to maternal mortality, about 365,000 women per year (although some put that figure higher, nearer 500,000/yr.). Almost all of those deaths are preventable.

According to the United Nations, there are three things we could be doing to stop maternal mortality, they are:

1. Strengthening health systems

Women are more than just mothers, and improving the health care they receive throughout their lives improves their health as mothers, too.

It doesn’t get donor support because compared to targeting a specific disease, health system strengthening is not as sexy. (And takes a while to explain.)  Improving the Ministry of Health’s ability to allocated health care funds is nowhere near as photogenic as distributing prenatal vitamins.

2. Improving access to safe abortion

Unsafe abortion accounts for 13% of maternal deaths. When you add that to the number of women who die giving birth to unwanted pregnancies, it becomes clear that access to safe abortion would radically improve the health of mothers.

Access to safe abortions doesn’t get funded because abortion is incredibly controversial, and no donor will be associated with it.

3. Supporting access to contraception

It’s safer not to be pregnant than it is to be pregnant. Across the board, in all circumstances. You know what helps with that? Contraceptives.  Yet 200 million women around the world want to control their family size and have no access to contraception.

Contraception does get donor support, but it’s hard to improve access because there are so many barriers. The barrier might be access to a health care provider, money, or a whole pile of other things. For example, even if a woman can easily get free contraception from a provider, she may not be allowed to use it by a husband or mother-in-law. Use of contraception is tied to women’s roles in society, and that doesn’t change overnight.

I guess the point I am trying to make is that 13% might not sound like all that big a number but it translates to 47,450 women  dead every year because we can not get our collective act together to provide them a safe way to end their pregnancies.  We need  to quit thinking of abortion as something that is too controversial to be included in discussions of how to provide global reproductive health.  The truth is that it is essential and tens of thousands of women are dying every year because we refuse to accept that truth and it is time, once and for all, for that to stop.  Learn more about Millennium Goal 5, Improving Maternal Health here.

DeliciousFacebookGoogle+RedditStumbleUponTwitterPrintFriendlyEmailEvernoteDiggShare