Friday, October 9, 2009

A Sad Day for Afgani Women

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091009/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_us_afghanistan

I simply cannot believe it. I read this article in something of a state of shock.

"The administration is prepared to accept some Taliban role in parts of Afghanistan, the official said. That could mean paving the way for Taliban members willing to renounce violence to participate in a central government — the kind of peace talks advocated by Afghan President Hamid Karzai to little receptiveness from the Taliban. It might even mean ceding some regions of the country to the Taliban."

In those regions of the country--a country far away, so no one has to care about it, really--what is going to happen to the women living there? Obama wants to work with 'moderates' in the Taliban. Moderates in what way? Where do the women stand?

Well, here. Or here, if you will.

Do I support a US war in Afganistan? Honestly, I do not follow US news enough to know at this point. But the thought of millions of women being tossed to the wolves as part of an exit strategy is both horrifying and heartbreaking. There is right and there is wrong...this cannot possibly be right.

Let's face it--apart from (often very brave) human-rights activists, pretty much no one gave a rats ass about the women under Taliban rule until 9-11. Not the Right and not the Left. The Afgani women suffered alone. But 9-11 did happen, and the word did get out and (I thought) people started to pay attention, and to care.

What sort of policy is this? Stay away from our buildings, and you can do whatever you want to your womenfolk?

Oh G-d, no. What sort of America is this? I will not give credit to Bush where it is not due--he also cared nothing about Afgani women, until 9-11. But all of you who voted for Obama in the hope that he would signal a more just America, a more caring America and a more peaceful America...will you be silent now? Is this peace? Is this caring? Is this justice?

Some things are worth fighting for.

8 comments:

Mike said...

Gila, this is the America that the French are calling sissies, and Russia is warning us about the dangers of nationalizing industry. Our leaders are ignoring the historic consequences of appeasement, and we are truly alienating our best allies in the (sic) hope of gaining some cooperation from our worst enemies. America has never been pro-active in human rights issues, but in the case of Afghanistan, we had another reason to go there. I didn't vote for BHO, I don't care if we're liked or not (haven't been in my lifetime, only hated, or ridiculed). And I'm doing everything I can to salvage the country I was born in. And I won't even start on the farce NPP.

Mongrel said...

Gila, allmost nobody appreciates my comments, what do I do wrong?

The word verification is abled, is this a sign?

Mike said...

P.S. Shouldn't your sidebar title now read "Message From The Bombing Victim QT"?

Sarah said...

Apparently huMAN rights do NOT include women. Reading the links you posted was eye-opening as I knew some of it but having it in a list like that really brought home how horrible the situation of women is there. Forget about a woman being accepted as a person with the right and ability to make choices for herself, even the most basic level of health care was completely inaccessible for the VAST majority of women in Afghanistan. Totally pathetic. Makes me sick to think that the man who just won the Nobel Peace prize (oh what a crock) is saying he advocates accepting the purveyors of this horror back into the Afghan government. :(

Mia said...

Like Sarah I guess I've know about this but those two sited are shocking. Seling that list infront of you is very difficult to ignore. Think of having to be "taken" to a doctor when you need medical attention. Think of there being no Professional women to care for womens issues. These women are Totally Dependent on men who completely Disregard them.

Tzipporah said...

In practical terms, the empowerment of women will aiddemocracy, economic stability, and (thus) political stability in Afghanistan.

Imagining that you can negotiate in any way with the Taliban is ludicrous.

But conceding some parts of Afghanistan to Taliban rule is pragmatic, if appalling. After all, the whole notion of "Afghanistan" as a unified country is a farce.

The issue is, what are the US tactical goals in Afghanistan? If it's to stop al-qaeda, well, shit, we're out of luck there so long as we ignore Pakistan. Not to mention as long we are friendly with Saudi Arabia. Because that's where the money and training come from.

But if our goal is to create a strong country that will police itself and stop the thugs, we do need to rout out the Taliban from the majority of the country and get women in charge of their economic and political fate. It may be easier to do that in pieces.

SnoopyTheGoon said...

One can console himself by the knowledge that the chances of Taliban renouncing violence are non-existent.

Mo-ha-med said...

"There is right and there is wrong...this cannot possibly be right."

Absolutely.