Women's Rights Groups differ on Afghan policy

The view expressed consistently on this blog is that the US-led occupation of Afghanistan is bad for the Afghan people, and that Afghan women and children are among the greatest victims. We think it is also about larger structural dynamics that are rooted in an imperialistic agenda that gives priority to US geo-political interests in the region. Therefore, out of ethical and analytical reasons, we have supported an end to the occupation.

The following article by Alison Cross for the Vancouver Sun newspaper identifies both some women's rights group who favor a continuation of the occupation out of fear that the Talibon will take over the country again, as well as Afghan women who want the occupation to end. We have been much influenced by Malalai Joya, who wants foreign troops out of Afghanistan. Joya maintains that much of the country, outside of southern provinces that are dominated by Taliban groups, are dominated by warlords. With support from US funds, often from drug money and various corrupt activities, the non-Taliban warlords are just as mysoginistic and authoritarian as the Taliban.

This is a worrisome debate, but the evidence that we have compiled indicates that the occupation has done more harm than good and has been largely ignorant of innovative options that would promote Afghan development, human rights, and democracy. Malalai Joya makes a point that sways us, namely, that it will be easier for women to join and help marshal democratic forces within the country when the US-led occupation is ended and the warlords have one less major source of support.

Bob

---------------------------------

Published on Monday, December 14, 2009 by Vancouver Sun

Women's Rights Advocates Square Off over Status of Afghan Women
by Allison Cross

Women's rights groups in Canada and the United States are butting heads over the planned withdrawal of NATO troops from Afghanistan, and whether it will benefit the women of the war-torn country or will simply intensify their pain and suffering.

An Afghan woman worker watches as she sorts pomegranates at a juice factory in Kabul on December 7. A leading rights group Monday accused the Afghan government of failing to protect women from endemic violence such as rape and murder and from discrimination, warning that their plight risks getting worse. (AFP/Shah Marai)Some advocates have come forward to express their support for a continued military presence - a departure from the anti-war stance often expressed by feminist groups.

``This is not an issue of security for the United States and Canada. We have 15 million women in (Afghanistan). If they are not secured, there will be a humanitarian catastrophe of immense proportions. It will be a terrible mistake and these countries will live to regret it,'' said Esther Hyneman, a board member for the New York-based group Women for Afghan Women.
The group, which runs guidance and children's centres in three regions of Afghanistan, has previously called for an increase in the number of U.S. troops and an extension of their mission. Without it, Hyneman says, she believes the country will fall easily back into the hands of the Taliban, which will destroy any progress made in improving the lives of women.

The planned withdrawal of Canadian troops from Afghanistan is set for 2011. U.S. President Barack Obama announced earlier this month he would inject 300, 000 more troops into the country before also initiating a pullout at the same time as Canada.

``We would have to pull out (of the country) too,'' Hyneman said. ``Our local staff, about 100 local Afghans, will be in serious danger. I don't know how they'll protect themselves if these cities and provinces fall to the Taliban.''

A Canadian military presence helps maintain a level of security that gives organizations the freedom to operate schools and increase access to health care, said Lauryn Oates.
``In essence, we think the military should definitely be there,'' said Oates, a program director for Canadian Women for Women in Afghanistan. ``If there are no international troops, there would be a civil war on a much bloodier scale than what we're seeing now.''

A toppling of the Afghan government could see women return to the conditions they experienced under the Taliban in the 1990s, Oates said, which included a ban on women working outside the home, a ban on education for girls and forced marriages.

She said she is confident conditions have improved for some women in Afghanistan.
But Judy Rebick, a Ryerson University professor and social justice advocate, said life couldn't get much worse for women in Afghanistan and it's time for the troops to leave.

``Even though women have more access to school and there are women in parliament, the level of violence against women is much higher and the unpredictability of it is much worse,'' Rebick said. ``Women are just as oppressed now by the warlords in some places. My view is that you don't liberate people by occupation.''

Rebick said she listens most to Malalai Joya, a female Afghan MP who was exiled from the country and recently visited Canada on a book tour.

Joya co-wrote a book about Afghanistan with Derrick O'Keefe, a Canadian activist and co-founder of StopWar.ca, and in it calls for the end of the military presence in Afghanistan.

``The war was always waged under false pretences,'' O'Keefe said. ``It's never been about women's rights. The longer we stay in Afghanistan, the worse the eventual situation is going to be for women and people . . . in general.''

The NATO-backed government led by Afghan President Hamid Karzai is misogynist, he said.
``Karzai himself signed a law legalizing marital rape and denying rights to Shia women in Afghanistan,'' he said.

The Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan, established in 1977, is also strongly opposed to the occupation by foreign troops.

© 2009 Canwest News Service
Article printed from www.CommonDreams.org
URL to article: http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/12/14-1