REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE  
comments_imageCOMMENTS: 141

Why Is a Leading Feminist Organization Lending Its Name to Support Escalation in Afghanistan?

Waging war does not lead to the liberation of women anywhere -- even if you call soldiers "peacekeeping forces."
July 8, 2009  |  
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Reproductive Justice headlines via email.

 
 
Advertisement
 

Sadly, as horrifying as the status of women in Afghanistan may sound to those of us who live in the West, the biggest problems faced by Afghan women are not related to patriarchy. Their biggest problem is war.

More than 2,000 civilians were killed in Afghanistan in 2008. And disastrous air strikes like the one in Farah province in May that killed an estimated 120 people -- many of them women and children -- are pushing the death toll ever higher. Afghans who survive these attacks often flee to cities, where overcrowded refugee camps strain to accommodate them. Living in tents without food, water and often blankets, the mortality rate soars.

For those who do not flee, life is not better. One in three Afghans suffers from severe poverty. With a 1 in 55 chance of mothers surviving delivery, Afghanistan has been, and still, is the second most dangerous place for women to give birth. Afghan infants still face a 25 percent risk of dying before their fifth birthdays. These are the consequences of war.

In addition, in the eight years since the U.S. invasion, opium production has exploded by 4,400 percent, making Afghanistan the world capital of opium. The violence of the drug mafia now poses greater danger to Afghanistan and its women than the rule of the Taliban.

Some of the biggest drug-traffickers are part of the U.S. puppet regime. To make matters worse, corruption in the Afghan government has never been so prevalent -- even under the Taliban. Now, even Western sources say that only pennies of every dollar spent on aid reach the people who need it.

If coalition forces are really concerned about women, these are the problems that must be addressed. The military establishment claims that it must win the military victory first, and then the U.S. will take care of humanitarian needs. But they have it backward.

Improve living conditions and security will improve. Focus on security at the expense of humanitarian goals, and coalition forces will accomplish neither. The first step toward improving people's lives is a negotiated settlement to end the war.

In our conversations arguing this point, we are told that the U.S. cannot leave Afghanistan because of what will happen to women if they go. Let us be clear: Women are being gang raped, brutalized and killed in Afghanistan. Forced marriages continue, and more women than ever are being forced into prostitution -- often to meet the demand of foreign troops.

The U.S. presence in Afghanistan is doing nothing to protect Afghan women. The level of self-immolation among women was never as high as it is now. When there is no justice for women, they find no other way out but suicide.

Feminists and other humanitarians should learn from history. This isn't the first time the welfare of women has been trotted out as a pretext for imperialist military aggression.

Columbia Professor Lila Abu-Lughod, a woman of Palestinian descent, writes: "We need to be suspicious when neat cultural icons are plastered over messier historical and political narratives; so we need to be wary when Lord Cromer in British-ruled Egypt, French ladies in Algeria, and Laura Bush, all with military troops behind them, claim to be saving or liberating Muslim women."

Feminists around the world must refuse to allow the good name of feminism to be manipulated to provide political cover for yet another war of aggression.

The Feminist Majority Foundation would do well to heed the demand of dissident Member of Parliament Malalai Joya, representing Farah province, who was kicked out of the parliament last year for courageously speaking out. Addressing a press conference in the wake of the U.S. bombing of her province she was clear: "We ask for an end to the occupation of Afghanistan and a stop to such tragic war crimes."

That should be the first action item for the Feminist Majority Foundation's Campaign for Afghan Women and Girls.


Sonali Kolhatkar is co-cirector of the Afghan Women's Mission, a U.S. nonprofit that funds health, educational and training projects for Afghan women. She is also the host and producer of Uprising Radio.

Mariam Rawi is a member of the Revolutionary Association of Women of Afghanistan writing under a pseudonym.

Email
Print
Share
Post on reddit
Post on stumbleupon
Post on facebook
Post on digg
Post on twitter
Post on delicious
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest Reproductive Justice headlines via email
See more stories tagged with: afghanistan, feminist majority foundat


Comments are closed-

Feminists stand up for ALL women
Posted by: SekhmetsatRa on Jul 8, 2009 2:54 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Did you know the Taliban is taking over Afghanistan AGAIN? Even in the "friendly" government over there, they legalized marital rape, and women still must wear a burqa. THAT is why Feminists(REAL ones) are for the liberation of Afghanistan. it hasn't happened because Shrub went to Iraq. now we are in both, and it is our responsibility to pull the stone-agers kicking and screaming into the 21st century. The rights of women is a major part of whether or not a country will succeed or fail.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» With respect, you're an idiot Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: Feminists stand up for ALL women Posted by: progressive-life

Comments are closed-

would I rather be subject to the Taliban without war or subject to a non-Taliban warlord
Posted by: Suzon on Jul 8, 2009 2:57 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
during a war.

Though the issue is serious, there's not much of a dilemma, really. Especially if those non-Taliban warlords are still being supplied with Viagra.

Is it just a coincidence that the US and the UK have the biggest military budgets, are the world's major manufacturers of arms and have a long and shameful history of waging war?

If only! It's that corporation thing again, isn't it? In the UK they support (blackmail) the monarchy and in the US they buy the politicians with campaign contributions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

For them, it was never about women but about money and power.
Posted by: JenniferBedingfield on Jul 8, 2009 4:33 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These so-called "feminist" groups went out of their way to support Afghan bombing shills like Obama, Pelosi, Reid, etc ... but ignore real progressives such as Kucinich, Nader, Mckinney, Sheehan, etc ... Do any of you think that these same "feminist" groups really cared about the plight of women in the Middle East to begin with? These groups are all about money and power and nothing about women. If anything, I'd say these "feminist" groups are perfect in a society where Mars, the Roman God of war, rules and people worship Mammon for greed and more materialism. In a nation that has been programmed to worship Mammon and Mars, Mammon means you do NOT question the sacred cow personified as the Federal Reserve, and Mars means equally no questions are rendered to the all-important, ever-omnipotent military-industrial complex. As to the Biblical "Let there be no gods before me," those are the two that command most of our nation's blood and treasure, so until this truth is disected, the beast brought down, everything else is shuffling papers. Current prescribed remedies are like offering someone with cancer an aspirin to get through the day. There is always money in ample supply to go to war/Mars and Mammon/Wall St-banksters. This is an INSANE as well as IMMORAL set-up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

It's the culture!
Posted by: DrBrian on Jul 8, 2009 4:39 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
War cannot change culture, and misogyny is deeply rooted in Afghan tribal culture and fundamentalist Islam. Subjugation, and even abuse, are cultural norms that will, sadly, take generations to change.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's the culture! Posted by: sunnywater
» RE: It's the culture! Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: It's the culture! Posted by: Gabba_Gabba_Hey

Comments are closed-

The height of emperial hubris
Posted by: tedrowe on Jul 8, 2009 4:46 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What does it mean to liberate Afghanistan? It is the height of emperial hubris to believe that the people of a country want to be liberated from the status quo. All we have to do is consider the American invasion from their standpoint. Whether or not they support the Taliban, and undoubtedly many do, the people of Afghanistan can only see American troops as invaders and occupiers, just like the Soviets. And they resist the occupation just as an red-blooded patriots of any country would do. The Taliban arose in response to the excesses of the warlords, so it should come as no surprise that when we took them out, the warlords came back into power. The Taliban, while horrible in many ways, stopped the production of opium, and in general were no worse than the warlords, who kidnapped, murdered, and raped at will. It is extremely naive to believe that through the use of force, we can create a new cultural model in Afghanistan, one entirely alien to their traditions. You can't liberate people from themselves. Note that the Soviet Union did not fall through invasion and occupation. It collapsed from within. And despite the fantasies of the Reaganites, Western television probably had more to do with it than the arms race.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Bravo! Posted by: CRaPWHiSPeReR
» RE: The height of emperial hubris Posted by: sunnywater
» Imperial Posted by: leafsong1

Comments are closed-

The CIA is giving local heroin warlords Viagra
Posted by: PaulK on Jul 8, 2009 6:00 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Much of Afghanistan has shifted from growing wheat to growing opium poppies. I'm not exactly sure how heroin production liberates women.

Perhaps the Mexican smuggling cartels have set a good example recently in liberating women? Pay them a million dollars and they will set one kidnapped woman free? Have the cartels cut back on forced prostitution?

So, according to one story, a field agent successfully bought great loyalty from one local warlord by giving away a few Viagra tablets. Drugs for drugs! The warlord was completely satisfied with his four wives, and apparently all was happy in feminist Afghanistan.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Fortress Embassy
Posted by: dimityrose on Jul 8, 2009 6:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the U.S. planned on stopping the war ever they would NOT have built a fortress embassy for billions of dollars in Afganistan. War is there to stay, war is money and jobs now with the economy gone in the U.S. One look at the plight of woman in the U.S. and you see they are also under the stress of their families at war constantly. Woman sacrifice and are expected to do so, even in the so called free world. Free only if you have enough money, free to sell sex or give it away in marriage, free to work with no health care, no rest, no peace: only to have their home repossed by a bank that got government monies. Who thinks femininist can't be bought.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Fortress Embassy Posted by: Sister_Lauren

Comments are closed-

What about the kind hearted boys and men in Afghanistan?
Posted by: Benn_Miller on Jul 8, 2009 6:41 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For all the focus on women's suffering in Afghanistan, the least they could do is include the guys. Most males in Afghanistan don't approve of the oppression and suffering of women. Just because a minority of men give others a bad name doesn't give you the right to paint all males in Afghanistan as mean and oppressive to women. Until the plight of all Afghans regardless of gender is addressed, everyone there suffers

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Sonali Kolhatkar and Mariam Rawi - Thank you
Posted by: aahpat on Jul 8, 2009 7:02 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Seeing all of these things you reference in the media over the years I have always wondered why feminist organizations don't advocate for more and more creative alternatives to the chaotic and unstable status quo of making war. Afghanistan being simply the latest example of militarism invariably fosters oppression of women, children, the poor and nonaggressive elements of society.

As a wise man once sang:

War! What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing!

There are real solutions for Afghanistan that could lead to quick and significant positive change for the economy and thus the people of Afghanistan. Without firing a shot or putting another pair of boots on the ground we could cut as much as 70% of the Taliban's funding.

Poppy for Medicine

Is a program for diverting the opium, that farmers today are dependent upon for sustenance, to a legal medicine producing market.

Military experts say that the Taliban get as much as 70% of their funding to buy bullets, bombs and suicide bombers from the opium trade. Distribution and protection.

The medical diversion of opium is only half the issue. It will not succeed unless the nations of the world come together on a program to free the current global population of addicts from their dependence on the $ 320-billion global drug black market. The Taliban are only the supply. We need also to take the demand population of addicts away from the Taliban.

The fastest and most responsible way to take the addict population away from the Taliban, and other radical organizations that use illegal drugs to subsidize their violent anarchy, is to medically regulate addiction. The Swiss have a heroin maintenance program that takes addicts out of the black market economy altogether. Addicts no longer are the sales force to new potential addicts. Swiss heroin model reporting benefits

The current global black market for non-addictive substances could have the criminals, cartels and terrorists regulated out of them.

Regulated intoxicant drug markets would reduce crime victimization in poverty oppressed communities around the world. Fewer dollars would leave local economies making the communities stronger. Fewer children would have access to drug sales when sales are under responsible regulated adult supervision rather than the addict dealers and gangsters of today.

Taxes on these billions of dollars in consumer demand can go to adequately fund drug rehab.

Getting back to Afghanistan. Legal industrial hemp could give Afghan farmers 3-4 harvests a year quickly. This durable fiber plant would immediately supply the growth of the textile industry that has long existed in Afghanistan.

Rebuilding the Afghan economy is the best way to advance the rights of women and all the people. fighting to end the war on drugs is the best way to do that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

This campaign actually started during the CLINTON ADMINISTRATION
Posted by: Beck on Jul 8, 2009 7:08 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
BEFORE this current war started. You just know that when an article here has to have a question as a headline, it's not going to be journalism. I googled the campaign (it began in l997, for heaven's sake) and found out that almost everything about it was left out of this article, except that maybe the writers usurped the ideas in the campaign, then wrote an article criticizing it.. Here's a bit from the website:

"In 1997, The Feminist Majority launched the Campaign to Stop Gender Apartheid in Afghanistan to urge the US government and the U.N. to do everything in their power to restore the human rights of Afghan women and girls. Chaired by Mavis Leno, the Feminist Majority Foundation's campaign has brought together more than 200 leading human rights and women's organizations to condemn the Taliban's human rights abuses against women and girls and to put pressure on the US and UN to end gender apartheid in Afghanistan.

"The Campaign has been successful in increasing public awareness about the plight of women and girls in Afghanistan, preventing US and UN recognition of the Taliban, increasing the admission of Afghan women and girls as refugees, increasing humanitarian aid to the region and pressuring UNOCAL, a California oil company to abandon its plans for an Afghan oil and gas pipeline which would have produced over $100 million in royalties for the Taliban.

"With the fall of the Taliban regime, the Feminist Majority Foundation began working to convey to the world that women are an essential part of the solution for the future of Afghanistan . In 2002, the Feminist Majority Foundation intensified its nationwide public education campaign - renaming it the Campaign For Afghan Women and Girls - to win the full and permanent restoration of women's rights, promote the leadership of women in the planning and governing of post-Taliban Afghanistan, increase and monitor the provision of emergency and reconstruction assistance to women and girls, urge the expansion of peacekeeping forces, and support the Afghan Ministry for Women's Affairs, the Afghan Independent Rights Commission and Afghan women-led non-governmental organizations (NGOs)."


Just google these words :

Feminist Majority Foundation's Campaign for Afghan Women and Girls.

So "That is why it was so discouraging to learn that the Feminist Majority Foundation has lent its good name -- and the good name of feminism in general -- to advocate for further troop escalation and war."? yes, I guess the FMO "has lent" its good name, if you count something that began in the Clinton administration to respond to the Taliban as coming under the tense "has lent". That's not what the writers meant to imply, obviously. They meant this to appear as though this just happened, in support of THIS war and THESE forces. And they have to know that this is flat-out wrong.

Anyhow, the "f" word in the title is going to please the advertisers. It gets lots of clicks.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You begin with a lie... Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: You begin with a lie... Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: You begin with a lie... Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: You begin with a lie... Posted by: EncinoM
» More lies and dishonesty.... Posted by: EncinoM
» Come on... Posted by: EncinoM

Comments are closed-

Women used to be big
Posted by: aahpat on Jul 8, 2009 7:11 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
in the peace movement but they shifted over to the feminist movement. Damned shame. Together, women and men ended wars and changed the world when women saw the bigger picture. Women's rights are human rights.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I'd ask what you mean Beck Posted by: aahpat
» RE: Women used to be big Posted by: laoma

Comments are closed-

"Women always disproportionately suffer the effects of war"
Posted by: Gabba_Gabba_Hey on Jul 8, 2009 7:34 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yeah right - except for the combat and stuff.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Let's sit around and talk about feminism. That'll work.
Posted by: Gabba_Gabba_Hey on Jul 8, 2009 7:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After reading this it's hard to see what WILL help the women of Afghanistan. When the U.S. leaves, feminists like these writers can no longer complain "the U.S. is doing X" (hypocritically), and Americans and Europeans will no longer be there to do anything at all, hypocritically or not.

There isn't even any economic leverage in this case, as there might be with most of the misogynist Muslim societies. Afghanistan has no oil and produces absolutely nothing that developed countries need or want, unless you count opium and heroin.

This is essentially a call for slavery without war.

But yeah, let's all sit around drinking herbal tea and talking about feminism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You miss the point. What WILL work? Posted by: Gabba_Gabba_Hey
» RE: You miss the point. What WILL work? Posted by: Gabba_Gabba_Hey
» RE: You miss the point. What WILL work? Posted by: Gabba_Gabba_Hey

Comments are closed-

Has anybody bothered to ask what the women of Afghanistan think?
Posted by: Defenestrator on Jul 8, 2009 8:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lots of Americans here debating... not one mention of polls in Afghanistan or Afghan womens' organizations, as far as I can tell.

RAWA opposes US occupation

Most polls show that Afghans want better government, but that they do not trust the US to "liberate" them without killing huge numbers of civilians.

There are ways to help that do not involve bombs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» It does not Posted by: mjglow

Comments are closed-

ANOTHER POINT OF VIEW
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Jul 8, 2009 8:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yesterday while the Michael Jackson's Three Ring Circus was seen all over the world and Sarah Palin was once again going nuts in public, we lost seven American soldiers, 2 British and one Canadian. That's ten. Then there were the two luckey ones, they each just lost both legs. If this is what it takes for a woman half way around the world to be allowed to 'show her face', well the price is WAY TOO HIGH! If the Afgan women really believe that anyone owes them this degree of sacrifice, they are being misled and lied to. I personally don't care what they wear. Fact is: the war has nothing to do with women, Afgans or Americans. It's about oil and natural gas pipelines. I'm tired of having the "Woman thing" shoved down my throat. It's insulting and patronizing to all of us. ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Bill Perdue
Posted by: donal1944 on Jul 8, 2009 9:19 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you really want to help women in Afghanistan immediately withdraw all US and satellite troops and arm women, trade unionists and GLBT folks with RPGs, machine guns and etc. plus a pair of surgical scissors to deal with Talibanistas ala Lorena Bobbitt.

And then tell them to go for it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Tsk, tsk. You are calling for WAR! Posted by: Gabba_Gabba_Hey
» Not at all Posted by: laoma

Comments are closed-

Sallyport
Posted by: sallyport on Jul 8, 2009 9:44 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is indeed dismaying that a supposedly savvy feminist organization should have swallowed the koolaid about our reasons for being in Afghanistan. We only go to war for profit & there is no profit for us in the rights of Afghan women. The idea that American military forces are a suitable instrument for protecting Afghan women stumbles a bit over the record of rapes within those very services. Perhaps the idea that we are out struggling for the rights of women halfway around the world is supposed to make us forget that here in the Enlightened USA we DO NOT HAVE an Equal Rights Amendment for women.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Well-intentioned lost cause
Posted by: Illiteratilumen on Jul 8, 2009 10:08 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The West, in my estimation, has no moral obligation to these women. They have the misfortune of being born into a backwards culture fueled by the ridiculous superstitions of Islam. People who advocate this sort of action with such a narrow justification are blinded by their own dogma.

We have no more of a moral obligation to these women than we do to make sure that every person in India wears his or her seatbelt. Surely many thousands of traffic deaths occur in India that could be easily prevented if we were to dispatch a safety patrol to that subcontinent and back them up with a few divisions of troops just in case the locals get unruly.

If you want to stay on the subject of women's rights why don't we send the Marines in to occupy China or even the whole of southeast Asia to combat the rampant kidnapping and enslavement of women and girls in those areas? Surely that would be a just and noble action to further the cause of women's rights.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» As an added point... Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: Defenestrator
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: cplot
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: cplot
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: cplot
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: cplot
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: Defenestrator
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: Defenestrator
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» Afghanistan in the 70s Posted by: Defenestrator
» RE: Well-intentioned lost cause Posted by: trusetufree

Comments are closed-

Consortium of Pub-going, Loose and Forward Women's Support group
Posted by: Litt_Wmn1 on Jul 8, 2009 10:28 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First off, APOLOGIES for posting off topic. Also, this post is cross-posted to other comment threads - I'm really trying to attract knowledgeable and aware people to the group below. Please bear with me. Thanks!

I cordially invite those of you who can make the time to join the Facebook group: "Consortium of Pub-going, Loose and Forward Women's Support group." This group was originally formed in February this year to protest the beating of some women by Hindu right-wing extremists in India. These women were having a drink at a bar, and the righties felt that they were not being "good Hindu women" by consuming liquor.

The elitist leanings of some of the group members, however, has now begun to become apparent. When I fisrt started a thread called "U.S. Imperialism" I did not expect the vituperation, hostility and plain flat-out denial that have come my way. Some have called me a liar; others deluded; still others a Commie-lover. And bear in mind that these are not Americans saying these things, but Indians - who, we might have thought, would have some understanding, at least a historical consciousness, of what it means to live under colonialism.

Instead, here's what one of them, a well educated, intelligent and articulate young woman, had to say: she wd rather live under U.S. overlordship than under Russian or Chinese. She also claims that those who think the world wd be a better or "less heinous" place of the U.S. did not "intervene" are fooling themselves.


The reason I'm inviting you all to the group is not that I do not have answers for these people - but that it's too easy for them to write people like us off, if there are only one or two of us, as lunatics who are beyond the pale of reasonable argument. I am hoping that the intervention and addition of more knowledgable people - who seem to be in plenty here - can perhaps create more awareness in the Indian mind about the abuses of our colonial masters, old and new.

Alternet is not letting me post the link, but if you enter the group's name in your Facebook Search, it will come up. Thanks again and sorry for the distraction!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Leave Afghanistan to the Afghans
Posted by: tim_s_eb@yahoo.com on Jul 8, 2009 11:40 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dear readers,
I am an Afghan American and know my people and the Afghan history well enough to state that nether the US nor any other nation has the right to dictate to the people of Afghanistan how to conduct themselves. The American feminist movement is an angry, reactionary organization made up of mostly older careerist, childless, anti male members who are unable to make peace and live in harmony with others. Their contributions to women are limited and militant which is based on violence, killing and supporting of authoritarian tactics. This truly places them on equal standing with the Taliban they are complaining about.

The Taliban are actually freedom fighters these days and have every right and obligation to defend their nation and freedoms from the invading, brutal barbarian American forces who are drone rocketing their women and children on daily basis. The Taliban are no longer pursuing strict Islamic laws, besides what business of America is it to tell others how to live? This war just like the one on Iraq is about OIL. The Southern California based Unocal corporation wants to construct an oil and gas pipeline through Afghanistan. It is not about Al Qaeda, the Taliban or woman's rights in Afghanistan. The US wants to pacify the Afghan nation with an iron fist so the pipeline can be constructed from Uzbekistan through Afghanistan Into the Indian ocean for exports to South East Asia and Europe with huge profits to the American oil giant Unocal. I cannot believe the American feminists are so ignorant not to know or chose to ignore this fact about the oil/gas pipeline construction and tow the US government line of pure crap?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS FREEDOM WHEN US ARMY IS INVOLVED.
Posted by: brian boru on Jul 8, 2009 2:08 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All types of propaganda have been used over the generations to justify US military involvement overseas. As the mayor of Chicago mistakenly said once "The police are not here to create disorder, they're here to preserve disorder".

The same has to apply to the US military who have no interest in promoting feminine issues as they seem to struggle with this in their own organization.

The US has become a militaristic society where the majority of the population feels it has a divine right to invade poorer countries. Now even some of the feminist movement feels that they can look to the US military for moral guidance.

I do agree that careerists in feminist groups are responsible for this view just as women politicians become less pacifistic when they are rewarded with power. The Taliban may not be angels but they actually live in Afghanistan, unlike Americans who cannot understand the local languages or customs. They are part of the culture and it is only through information not bombs that they will change to something more amenable to women.

The US should get out of Afghanistan. It is the blood lust of the US military that stokes the flames of anger there as in many other parts of the world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

If we remove troops then there will be peace and love?
Posted by: gGreen on Jul 8, 2009 3:46 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I understand that Iraq was an illegitimate war. Bush lied. I know that this is not new news.

The war in Afghanistan was a legitamate war. We were attacked by the tyranical government in Afghanistan.

If there were not American soldiers fighting then the feminist progress that the two authors of this article have made will be gone. The Afghan Women's Mission, which Sonali Kolhatkar supports, would be illegal if there were no foreign soldiers.

The use of force to stop violent extremists is the only way that the will of the people of Afghanistan will shine through.

The only reason Ghandi was able to bring freedom to India was the same reason why OJ Simpson was found innocent. If Ghandi had died during one of his fasts in jail, then large violent riots would happen across India. Not peaceful protests, VIOLENT RIOTS.

Yes, there is antifeminist opression going on in Afghanistan. The only way to solve this, however, is to send more soldiers. Yes, the soldiers there are having trouble, but so would any fighting army if it had too few soldiers.

We gave peace a chance. Now let the millitary have a try.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Under Its Communist Government Afghan Women Advanced
Posted by: booboo on Jul 8, 2009 4:35 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Only to be undone by the violence of a U.S./Saudi created al Qaeda movement."

"Seems that Cold War concerns trumped women's rights."

"And so has the so-called War On Terror."

"The answer being?"

"Troops out now."

"And then what'll become of women's rights in Afghanistan?"

"That'll be up to its people."

"Anything else?"

"Power to the people."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Listen to Afghani feminist activists - RAWA
Posted by: zola77 on Jul 8, 2009 6:27 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wish activists, and this silly feminist group, would take the time out to find out about RAWA and their perspectives and demands for Afghanistan and Afghani women.

Set up during the soviet occupation of afghanistan it has a long and proud history. They want the Taliban and funamentalism out and democracy and womens rights in...but they say they need US imperialism OUT of afghanistan to acheieve those goals. The US occupation has NOT changed the sociopolitical climate.

They are an impressive group of activists and it is worth checking them out if you havent already.


http://www.rawa.org/index.php

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Afghanistan: Whose "Liberation" is it and from what?
Posted by: joboost on Jul 9, 2009 11:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We have been led by our noses like the chosen people for 40 years in Sinai:
Afghanistan was not a very democratic nor safe place before 1979. Then, the Soviets invaded. Why? Radical Islamists ("Taliban") were missioneering in the southern Soviet Republics with help from contries who liked anything to destabilize the "evil empire" (would that be the "Ungreedy Sunday-school of America"?).
As for Afghans, epecially Afghan women, schools opened, and professions - and bhurkas. Actually, the helicopter pilot that took some BBC reporters around the other day was ... a woman. And where/when did she learn it and get her license? In Soviet times.
Strange - it is that "evil empire" which gave women in Afghanistan such opening for the first time in the country's history - as had happened in Iraq - under the "evil dictator", Saddam.
And in both countries, now so "liberated", the occupation forces and "democracies" have killed, and are killing more people than Saddam and Soviets combined. And in both countries, now "liberated" with the support of NOW etc., women are worse off than before their "liberation".
And those "native liberators", Maliki/Karzai, are not able to walk a street alone among all those who should be so grateful - whether women, children, or men.
Let's face it: Such "liberation" is a shame. And that those "Women's Organizations" support it only shows how little those "Ladies" know about real women, and how even less they care.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Another disingenuous rouse they think we're stupid enough to get behind
Posted by: CRaPWHiSPeReR on Jul 13, 2009 3:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why not "liberate" the women in Darfur while they're at it?

Puhhh-thetic.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet Comments:

Comments are closed-

Feminists stand up for ALL women
Posted by: SekhmetsatRa on Jul 8, 2009 2:54 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Did you know the Taliban is taking over Afghanistan AGAIN? Even in the "friendly" government over there, they legalized marital rape, and women still must wear a burqa. THAT is why Feminists(REAL ones) are for the liberation of Afghanistan. it hasn't happened because Shrub went to Iraq. now we are in both, and it is our responsibility to pull the stone-agers kicking and screaming into the 21st century. The rights of women is a major part of whether or not a country will succeed or fail.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» With respect, you're an idiot Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: Feminists stand up for ALL women Posted by: progressive-life

Comments are closed-

would I rather be subject to the Taliban without war or subject to a non-Taliban warlord
Posted by: Suzon on Jul 8, 2009 2:57 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
during a war.

Though the issue is serious, there's not much of a dilemma, really. Especially if those non-Taliban warlords are still being supplied with Viagra.

Is it just a coincidence that the US and the UK have the biggest military budgets, are the world's major manufacturers of arms and have a long and shameful history of waging war?

If only! It's that corporation thing again, isn't it? In the UK they support (blackmail) the monarchy and in the US they buy the politicians with campaign contributions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

For them, it was never about women but about money and power.
Posted by: JenniferBedingfield on Jul 8, 2009 4:33 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These so-called "feminist" groups went out of their way to support Afghan bombing shills like Obama, Pelosi, Reid, etc ... but ignore real progressives such as Kucinich, Nader, Mckinney, Sheehan, etc ... Do any of you think that these same "feminist" groups really cared about the plight of women in the Middle East to begin with? These groups are all about money and power and nothing about women. If anything, I'd say these "feminist" groups are perfect in a society where Mars, the Roman God of war, rules and people worship Mammon for greed and more materialism. In a nation that has been programmed to worship Mammon and Mars, Mammon means you do NOT question the sacred cow personified as the Federal Reserve, and Mars means equally no questions are rendered to the all-important, ever-omnipotent military-industrial complex. As to the Biblical "Let there be no gods before me," those are the two that command most of our nation's blood and treasure, so until this truth is disected, the beast brought down, everything else is shuffling papers. Current prescribed remedies are like offering someone with cancer an aspirin to get through the day. There is always money in ample supply to go to war/Mars and Mammon/Wall St-banksters. This is an INSANE as well as IMMORAL set-up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

It's the culture!
Posted by: DrBrian on Jul 8, 2009 4:39 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
War cannot change culture, and misogyny is deeply rooted in Afghan tribal culture and fundamentalist Islam. Subjugation, and even abuse, are cultural norms that will, sadly, take generations to change.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's the culture! Posted by: sunnywater
» RE: It's the culture! Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: It's the culture! Posted by: Gabba_Gabba_Hey

Comments are closed-

The height of emperial hubris
Posted by: tedrowe on Jul 8, 2009 4:46 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What does it mean to liberate Afghanistan? It is the height of emperial hubris to believe that the people of a country want to be liberated from the status quo. All we have to do is consider the American invasion from their standpoint. Whether or not they support the Taliban, and undoubtedly many do, the people of Afghanistan can only see American troops as invaders and occupiers, just like the Soviets. And they resist the occupation just as an red-blooded patriots of any country would do. The Taliban arose in response to the excesses of the warlords, so it should come as no surprise that when we took them out, the warlords came back into power. The Taliban, while horrible in many ways, stopped the production of opium, and in general were no worse than the warlords, who kidnapped, murdered, and raped at will. It is extremely naive to believe that through the use of force, we can create a new cultural model in Afghanistan, one entirely alien to their traditions. You can't liberate people from themselves. Note that the Soviet Union did not fall through invasion and occupation. It collapsed from within. And despite the fantasies of the Reaganites, Western television probably had more to do with it than the arms race.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Bravo! Posted by: CRaPWHiSPeReR
» RE: The height of emperial hubris Posted by: sunnywater
» Imperial Posted by: leafsong1

Comments are closed-

The CIA is giving local heroin warlords Viagra
Posted by: PaulK on Jul 8, 2009 6:00 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Much of Afghanistan has shifted from growing wheat to growing opium poppies. I'm not exactly sure how heroin production liberates women.

Perhaps the Mexican smuggling cartels have set a good example recently in liberating women? Pay them a million dollars and they will set one kidnapped woman free? Have the cartels cut back on forced prostitution?

So, according to one story, a field agent successfully bought great loyalty from one local warlord by giving away a few Viagra tablets. Drugs for drugs! The warlord was completely satisfied with his four wives, and apparently all was happy in feminist Afghanistan.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Fortress Embassy
Posted by: dimityrose on Jul 8, 2009 6:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the U.S. planned on stopping the war ever they would NOT have built a fortress embassy for billions of dollars in Afganistan. War is there to stay, war is money and jobs now with the economy gone in the U.S. One look at the plight of woman in the U.S. and you see they are also under the stress of their families at war constantly. Woman sacrifice and are expected to do so, even in the so called free world. Free only if you have enough money, free to sell sex or give it away in marriage, free to work with no health care, no rest, no peace: only to have their home repossed by a bank that got government monies. Who thinks femininist can't be bought.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Fortress Embassy Posted by: Sister_Lauren

Comments are closed-

What about the kind hearted boys and men in Afghanistan?
Posted by: Benn_Miller on Jul 8, 2009 6:41 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For all the focus on women's suffering in Afghanistan, the least they could do is include the guys. Most males in Afghanistan don't approve of the oppression and suffering of women. Just because a minority of men give others a bad name doesn't give you the right to paint all males in Afghanistan as mean and oppressive to women. Until the plight of all Afghans regardless of gender is addressed, everyone there suffers

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Sonali Kolhatkar and Mariam Rawi - Thank you
Posted by: aahpat on Jul 8, 2009 7:02 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Seeing all of these things you reference in the media over the years I have always wondered why feminist organizations don't advocate for more and more creative alternatives to the chaotic and unstable status quo of making war. Afghanistan being simply the latest example of militarism invariably fosters oppression of women, children, the poor and nonaggressive elements of society.

As a wise man once sang:

War! What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing!

There are real solutions for Afghanistan that could lead to quick and significant positive change for the economy and thus the people of Afghanistan. Without firing a shot or putting another pair of boots on the ground we could cut as much as 70% of the Taliban's funding.

Poppy for Medicine

Is a program for diverting the opium, that farmers today are dependent upon for sustenance, to a legal medicine producing market.

Military experts say that the Taliban get as much as 70% of their funding to buy bullets, bombs and suicide bombers from the opium trade. Distribution and protection.

The medical diversion of opium is only half the issue. It will not succeed unless the nations of the world come together on a program to free the current global population of addicts from their dependence on the $ 320-billion global drug black market. The Taliban are only the supply. We need also to take the demand population of addicts away from the Taliban.

The fastest and most responsible way to take the addict population away from the Taliban, and other radical organizations that use illegal drugs to subsidize their violent anarchy, is to medically regulate addiction. The Swiss have a heroin maintenance program that takes addicts out of the black market economy altogether. Addicts no longer are the sales force to new potential addicts. Swiss heroin model reporting benefits

The current global black market for non-addictive substances could have the criminals, cartels and terrorists regulated out of them.

Regulated intoxicant drug markets would reduce crime victimization in poverty oppressed communities around the world. Fewer dollars would leave local economies making the communities stronger. Fewer children would have access to drug sales when sales are under responsible regulated adult supervision rather than the addict dealers and gangsters of today.

Taxes on these billions of dollars in consumer demand can go to adequately fund drug rehab.

Getting back to Afghanistan. Legal industrial hemp could give Afghan farmers 3-4 harvests a year quickly. This durable fiber plant would immediately supply the growth of the textile industry that has long existed in Afghanistan.

Rebuilding the Afghan economy is the best way to advance the rights of women and all the people. fighting to end the war on drugs is the best way to do that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

This campaign actually started during the CLINTON ADMINISTRATION
Posted by: Beck on Jul 8, 2009 7:08 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
BEFORE this current war started. You just know that when an article here has to have a question as a headline, it's not going to be journalism. I googled the campaign (it began in l997, for heaven's sake) and found out that almost everything about it was left out of this article, except that maybe the writers usurped the ideas in the campaign, then wrote an article criticizing it.. Here's a bit from the website:

"In 1997, The Feminist Majority launched the Campaign to Stop Gender Apartheid in Afghanistan to urge the US government and the U.N. to do everything in their power to restore the human rights of Afghan women and girls. Chaired by Mavis Leno, the Feminist Majority Foundation's campaign has brought together more than 200 leading human rights and women's organizations to condemn the Taliban's human rights abuses against women and girls and to put pressure on the US and UN to end gender apartheid in Afghanistan.

"The Campaign has been successful in increasing public awareness about the plight of women and girls in Afghanistan, preventing US and UN recognition of the Taliban, increasing the admission of Afghan women and girls as refugees, increasing humanitarian aid to the region and pressuring UNOCAL, a California oil company to abandon its plans for an Afghan oil and gas pipeline which would have produced over $100 million in royalties for the Taliban.

"With the fall of the Taliban regime, the Feminist Majority Foundation began working to convey to the world that women are an essential part of the solution for the future of Afghanistan . In 2002, the Feminist Majority Foundation intensified its nationwide public education campaign - renaming it the Campaign For Afghan Women and Girls - to win the full and permanent restoration of women's rights, promote the leadership of women in the planning and governing of post-Taliban Afghanistan, increase and monitor the provision of emergency and reconstruction assistance to women and girls, urge the expansion of peacekeeping forces, and support the Afghan Ministry for Women's Affairs, the Afghan Independent Rights Commission and Afghan women-led non-governmental organizations (NGOs)."


Just google these words :

Feminist Majority Foundation's Campaign for Afghan Women and Girls.

So "That is why it was so discouraging to learn that the Feminist Majority Foundation has lent its good name -- and the good name of feminism in general -- to advocate for further troop escalation and war."? yes, I guess the FMO "has lent" its good name, if you count something that began in the Clinton administration to respond to the Taliban as coming under the tense "has lent". That's not what the writers meant to imply, obviously. They meant this to appear as though this just happened, in support of THIS war and THESE forces. And they have to know that this is flat-out wrong.

Anyhow, the "f" word in the title is going to please the advertisers. It gets lots of clicks.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You begin with a lie... Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: You begin with a lie... Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: You begin with a lie... Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: You begin with a lie... Posted by: EncinoM
» More lies and dishonesty.... Posted by: EncinoM
» Come on... Posted by: EncinoM

Comments are closed-

Women used to be big
Posted by: aahpat on Jul 8, 2009 7:11 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
in the peace movement but they shifted over to the feminist movement. Damned shame. Together, women and men ended wars and changed the world when women saw the bigger picture. Women's rights are human rights.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I'd ask what you mean Beck Posted by: aahpat
» RE: Women used to be big Posted by: laoma

Comments are closed-

"Women always disproportionately suffer the effects of war"
Posted by: Gabba_Gabba_Hey on Jul 8, 2009 7:34 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yeah right - except for the combat and stuff.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Let's sit around and talk about feminism. That'll work.
Posted by: Gabba_Gabba_Hey on Jul 8, 2009 7:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After reading this it's hard to see what WILL help the women of Afghanistan. When the U.S. leaves, feminists like these writers can no longer complain "the U.S. is doing X" (hypocritically), and Americans and Europeans will no longer be there to do anything at all, hypocritically or not.

There isn't even any economic leverage in this case, as there might be with most of the misogynist Muslim societies. Afghanistan has no oil and produces absolutely nothing that developed countries need or want, unless you count opium and heroin.

This is essentially a call for slavery without war.

But yeah, let's all sit around drinking herbal tea and talking about feminism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You miss the point. What WILL work? Posted by: Gabba_Gabba_Hey
» RE: You miss the point. What WILL work? Posted by: Gabba_Gabba_Hey
» RE: You miss the point. What WILL work? Posted by: Gabba_Gabba_Hey

Comments are closed-

Has anybody bothered to ask what the women of Afghanistan think?
Posted by: Defenestrator on Jul 8, 2009 8:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lots of Americans here debating... not one mention of polls in Afghanistan or Afghan womens' organizations, as far as I can tell.

RAWA opposes US occupation

Most polls show that Afghans want better government, but that they do not trust the US to "liberate" them without killing huge numbers of civilians.

There are ways to help that do not involve bombs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» It does not Posted by: mjglow

Comments are closed-

ANOTHER POINT OF VIEW
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Jul 8, 2009 8:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yesterday while the Michael Jackson's Three Ring Circus was seen all over the world and Sarah Palin was once again going nuts in public, we lost seven American soldiers, 2 British and one Canadian. That's ten. Then there were the two luckey ones, they each just lost both legs. If this is what it takes for a woman half way around the world to be allowed to 'show her face', well the price is WAY TOO HIGH! If the Afgan women really believe that anyone owes them this degree of sacrifice, they are being misled and lied to. I personally don't care what they wear. Fact is: the war has nothing to do with women, Afgans or Americans. It's about oil and natural gas pipelines. I'm tired of having the "Woman thing" shoved down my throat. It's insulting and patronizing to all of us. ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Bill Perdue
Posted by: donal1944 on Jul 8, 2009 9:19 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you really want to help women in Afghanistan immediately withdraw all US and satellite troops and arm women, trade unionists and GLBT folks with RPGs, machine guns and etc. plus a pair of surgical scissors to deal with Talibanistas ala Lorena Bobbitt.

And then tell them to go for it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Tsk, tsk. You are calling for WAR! Posted by: Gabba_Gabba_Hey
» Not at all Posted by: laoma

Comments are closed-

Sallyport
Posted by: sallyport on Jul 8, 2009 9:44 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is indeed dismaying that a supposedly savvy feminist organization should have swallowed the koolaid about our reasons for being in Afghanistan. We only go to war for profit & there is no profit for us in the rights of Afghan women. The idea that American military forces are a suitable instrument for protecting Afghan women stumbles a bit over the record of rapes within those very services. Perhaps the idea that we are out struggling for the rights of women halfway around the world is supposed to make us forget that here in the Enlightened USA we DO NOT HAVE an Equal Rights Amendment for women.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Well-intentioned lost cause
Posted by: Illiteratilumen on Jul 8, 2009 10:08 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The West, in my estimation, has no moral obligation to these women. They have the misfortune of being born into a backwards culture fueled by the ridiculous superstitions of Islam. People who advocate this sort of action with such a narrow justification are blinded by their own dogma.

We have no more of a moral obligation to these women than we do to make sure that every person in India wears his or her seatbelt. Surely many thousands of traffic deaths occur in India that could be easily prevented if we were to dispatch a safety patrol to that subcontinent and back them up with a few divisions of troops just in case the locals get unruly.

If you want to stay on the subject of women's rights why don't we send the Marines in to occupy China or even the whole of southeast Asia to combat the rampant kidnapping and enslavement of women and girls in those areas? Surely that would be a just and noble action to further the cause of women's rights.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» As an added point... Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: Defenestrator
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: cplot
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: cplot
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: cplot
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: cplot
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: Defenestrator
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: Defenestrator
» RE: As an added point... Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» Afghanistan in the 70s Posted by: Defenestrator
» RE: Well-intentioned lost cause Posted by: trusetufree

Comments are closed-

Consortium of Pub-going, Loose and Forward Women's Support group
Posted by: Litt_Wmn1 on Jul 8, 2009 10:28 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First off, APOLOGIES for posting off topic. Also, this post is cross-posted to other comment threads - I'm really trying to attract knowledgeable and aware people to the group below. Please bear with me. Thanks!

I cordially invite those of you who can make the time to join the Facebook group: "Consortium of Pub-going, Loose and Forward Women's Support group." This group was originally formed in February this year to protest the beating of some women by Hindu right-wing extremists in India. These women were having a drink at a bar, and the righties felt that they were not being "good Hindu women" by consuming liquor.

The elitist leanings of some of the group members, however, has now begun to become apparent. When I fisrt started a thread called "U.S. Imperialism" I did not expect the vituperation, hostility and plain flat-out denial that have come my way. Some have called me a liar; others deluded; still others a Commie-lover. And bear in mind that these are not Americans saying these things, but Indians - who, we might have thought, would have some understanding, at least a historical consciousness, of what it means to live under colonialism.

Instead, here's what one of them, a well educated, intelligent and articulate young woman, had to say: she wd rather live under U.S. overlordship than under Russian or Chinese. She also claims that those who think the world wd be a better or "less heinous" place of the U.S. did not "intervene" are fooling themselves.


The reason I'm inviting you all to the group is not that I do not have answers for these people - but that it's too easy for them to write people like us off, if there are only one or two of us, as lunatics who are beyond the pale of reasonable argument. I am hoping that the intervention and addition of more knowledgable people - who seem to be in plenty here - can perhaps create more awareness in the Indian mind about the abuses of our colonial masters, old and new.

Alternet is not letting me post the link, but if you enter the group's name in your Facebook Search, it will come up. Thanks again and sorry for the distraction!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Leave Afghanistan to the Afghans
Posted by: tim_s_eb@yahoo.com on Jul 8, 2009 11:40 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dear readers,
I am an Afghan American and know my people and the Afghan history well enough to state that nether the US nor any other nation has the right to dictate to the people of Afghanistan how to conduct themselves. The American feminist movement is an angry, reactionary organization made up of mostly older careerist, childless, anti male members who are unable to make peace and live in harmony with others. Their contributions to women are limited and militant which is based on violence, killing and supporting of authoritarian tactics. This truly places them on equal standing with the Taliban they are complaining about.

The Taliban are actually freedom fighters these days and have every right and obligation to defend their nation and freedoms from the invading, brutal barbarian American forces who are drone rocketing their women and children on daily basis. The Taliban are no longer pursuing strict Islamic laws, besides what business of America is it to tell others how to live? This war just like the one on Iraq is about OIL. The Southern California based Unocal corporation wants to construct an oil and gas pipeline through Afghanistan. It is not about Al Qaeda, the Taliban or woman's rights in Afghanistan. The US wants to pacify the Afghan nation with an iron fist so the pipeline can be constructed from Uzbekistan through Afghanistan Into the Indian ocean for exports to South East Asia and Europe with huge profits to the American oil giant Unocal. I cannot believe the American feminists are so ignorant not to know or chose to ignore this fact about the oil/gas pipeline construction and tow the US government line of pure crap?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS FREEDOM WHEN US ARMY IS INVOLVED.
Posted by: brian boru on Jul 8, 2009 2:08 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All types of propaganda have been used over the generations to justify US military involvement overseas. As the mayor of Chicago mistakenly said once "The police are not here to create disorder, they're here to preserve disorder".

The same has to apply to the US military who have no interest in promoting feminine issues as they seem to struggle with this in their own organization.

The US has become a militaristic society where the majority of the population feels it has a divine right to invade poorer countries. Now even some of the feminist movement feels that they can look to the US military for moral guidance.

I do agree that careerists in feminist groups are responsible for this view just as women politicians become less pacifistic when they are rewarded with power. The Taliban may not be angels but they actually live in Afghanistan, unlike Americans who cannot understand the local languages or customs. They are part of the culture and it is only through information not bombs that they will change to something more amenable to women.

The US should get out of Afghanistan. It is the blood lust of the US military that stokes the flames of anger there as in many other parts of the world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

If we remove troops then there will be peace and love?
Posted by: gGreen on Jul 8, 2009 3:46 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I understand that Iraq was an illegitimate war. Bush lied. I know that this is not new news.

The war in Afghanistan was a legitamate war. We were attacked by the tyranical government in Afghanistan.

If there were not American soldiers fighting then the feminist progress that the two authors of this article have made will be gone. The Afghan Women's Mission, which Sonali Kolhatkar supports, would be illegal if there were no foreign soldiers.

The use of force to stop violent extremists is the only way that the will of the people of Afghanistan will shine through.

The only reason Ghandi was able to bring freedom to India was the same reason why OJ Simpson was found innocent. If Ghandi had died during one of his fasts in jail, then large violent riots would happen across India. Not peaceful protests, VIOLENT RIOTS.

Yes, there is antifeminist opression going on in Afghanistan. The only way to solve this, however, is to send more soldiers. Yes, the soldiers there are having trouble, but so would any fighting army if it had too few soldiers.

We gave peace a chance. Now let the millitary have a try.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Under Its Communist Government Afghan Women Advanced
Posted by: booboo on Jul 8, 2009 4:35 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Only to be undone by the violence of a U.S./Saudi created al Qaeda movement."

"Seems that Cold War concerns trumped women's rights."

"And so has the so-called War On Terror."

"The answer being?"

"Troops out now."

"And then what'll become of women's rights in Afghanistan?"

"That'll be up to its people."

"Anything else?"

"Power to the people."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Listen to Afghani feminist activists - RAWA
Posted by: zola77 on Jul 8, 2009 6:27 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wish activists, and this silly feminist group, would take the time out to find out about RAWA and their perspectives and demands for Afghanistan and Afghani women.

Set up during the soviet occupation of afghanistan it has a long and proud history. They want the Taliban and funamentalism out and democracy and womens rights in...but they say they need US imperialism OUT of afghanistan to acheieve those goals. The US occupation has NOT changed the sociopolitical climate.

They are an impressive group of activists and it is worth checking them out if you havent already.


http://www.rawa.org/index.php

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Afghanistan: Whose "Liberation" is it and from what?
Posted by: joboost on Jul 9, 2009 11:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We have been led by our noses like the chosen people for 40 years in Sinai:
Afghanistan was not a very democratic nor safe place before 1979. Then, the Soviets invaded. Why? Radical Islamists ("Taliban") were missioneering in the southern Soviet Republics with help from contries who liked anything to destabilize the "evil empire" (would that be the "Ungreedy Sunday-school of America"?).
As for Afghans, epecially Afghan women, schools opened, and professions - and bhurkas. Actually, the helicopter pilot that took some BBC reporters around the other day was ... a woman. And where/when did she learn it and get her license? In Soviet times.
Strange - it is that "evil empire" which gave women in Afghanistan such opening for the first time in the country's history - as had happened in Iraq - under the "evil dictator", Saddam.
And in both countries, now so "liberated", the occupation forces and "democracies" have killed, and are killing more people than Saddam and Soviets combined. And in both countries, now "liberated" with the support of NOW etc., women are worse off than before their "liberation".
And those "native liberators", Maliki/Karzai, are not able to walk a street alone among all those who should be so grateful - whether women, children, or men.
Let's face it: Such "liberation" is a shame. And that those "Women's Organizations" support it only shows how little those "Ladies" know about real women, and how even less they care.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Another disingenuous rouse they think we're stupid enough to get behind
Posted by: CRaPWHiSPeReR on Jul 13, 2009 3:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why not "liberate" the women in Darfur while they're at it?

Puhhh-thetic.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

 
Advertisement
From The Blog
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS