dinsdag 7 april 2009

Nederland en Afghanistan 199

Silence Meets Despair of Afghan Women
By Marie Cocco
Wat doen die Nederlandse troepen toch in Afghanistan? Waar sterven die jongens voor? Waarom worden er honderden miljoenen aan belastinggeld besteed aan krijgsheren die schatrijk worden aan de opiumhandel? Zijn ze in Den Haag nog wakker?

Afghanistan’s women are no longer in vogue.

It was only a few years ago that Laura Bush, who normally shied from causes that could be considered controversial, took up their banner. “The brutal oppression of women is a central goal of the terrorists,” the first lady said in a radio address shortly after President Bush launched the U.S-led invasion to overthrow the Taliban following the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. “The plight of women and children in Afghanistan is a matter of deliberate human cruelty, carried out by those who seek to intimidate and control.”

That was then. This is now: Afghan President Hamid Karzai has just signed a law that forces women to obey their husbands’ sexual demands, keeps women from leaving the house—even for work or school—without a husband’s permission, automatically grants child custody rights to fathers and grandfathers before mothers, and favors men in inheritance disputes and other legal matters. In short, the law again consigns Afghan women to lives of brutal repression.

“This is really, really dangerous for everybody in Afghanistan,” Soraya Sobhrang of the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission said in a telephone interview from Kabul. Noting that violence against women already is rampant, Sobhrang said the new law effectively “legalizes all violence against women in Afghanistan.”

The legislation zoomed through Afghanistan’s parliament. Karzai, who faces elections in August, signed it in an apparent effort to placate conservative religious forces that are said to hold the balance of power in his re-election bid. The United Nations Development Fund for Women is still analyzing a final version of the legislation but says it is “seriously concerned.” The law appears to contradict both the Afghan constitution, which guarantees equal rights for men and women, and international conventions on human rights.

The U.S. State Department has had no comment.

Afghanistan’s women are, apparently, the latest casualty of the Obama administration’s tilt toward realpolitik: ignore human rights violations—whether they’re in China or Russia or in the quiet misery of an Afghan villager’s home—in pursuit of larger foreign policy goals.

This contradiction between political rhetoric and policy reality has often been the American way. But now we have Hillary Rodham Clinton as secretary of state. When she was first lady, she championed the rights of women oppressed by the Taliban long before most Americans had ever heard of that radical regime. Clinton took the helm of the State Department vowing to elevate the cause of human and economic rights for women and girls—a pledge she made again in The Hague this week at the end of a major conference on Afghanistan that was aimed at securing greater international cooperation on the desperate and disparate crises there.

“My message is very clear. Women’s rights are a central part of American foreign policy in the Obama administration; they are not marginal, they are not an add-on or an afterthought,” Clinton said in response to a general question about the situation confronting women in Afghan society. “You cannot expect a country to develop if half its population [is] underfed, undereducated, under-cared-for, oppressed, and left on the sidelines.”

The secretary was not asked specifically about the new law. Among its other provisions, it guarantees that married men can have sex once every four nights and wives must submit. In effect, it legalizes marital rape. Sobhrang worries there may be worse to come. “They are talking about child marriage,” she says.

Without pressure from the foreign powers that hold so much sway in Afghanistan, there was little that even the women in the country’s parliament could do. Sobhrang faults those who were quiet in the face of the clear effort by a religious faction to reimpose medieval mores on a country that is in many ways a ward of the contemporary international community.'
Lees verder: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090401_silence_meets_despair_of_afghan_women/

2 opmerkingen:

yelamdenu zei

Eén van de redenen dat Nederlandse soldaten daar zitten is het beschermen van de opiumproductie/heroïnehandel, natuurlijk indirect - i.e., het behouden van de status quo in Afghanistan die gunstig is voor de CIA.
De CIA is immers nog steeds de grootste drugssmokkelorganisatie wereldwijd.
Dan hebben we nog olie/gas.
De strategische ligging aan de westpoort van China, dat geen bedreiging mag vormen voor het Empire. Deels ook w.b. Rusland. En deze aanwezigheid bedreigt meteen Iran.
Superhandig hoor, zo in Afghanistan zitten als Empire zijnde.
Ja ik wist dat het een retorische vraag was Stan. :-)

Lucas zei

Israel is to fund a rare genetic study to determine whether there is a link between the lost tribes of Israel and the Pashtuns of Afghanistan and northern Pakistan.
Historical and anecdotal evidence strongly suggests a connection, but definitive scientific proof has never been found. Some leading Israeli anthropologists believe that, of all the many groups in the world who claim a connection to the 10 lost tribes, the Pashtuns, or Pathans, have the most compelling case. Paradoxically it is from the Pashtuns that the ultra-conservative Islamic Taliban movement in Afghanistan emerged. Pashtuns themselves sometimes talk of their Israelite connection, but show few signs of sympathy with, or any wish to migrate to, the modern Israeli state.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jan/17/israel-lost-tribes-pashtun

"Israel is burning children alive"

Khalissee @Kahlissee "Israel is burning children alive" "You are destroying this country shame on all of you" Ex U.S. ...