Saturday, February 22, 2014

[batavia-news] A precarious time for Afghan women

 

 

A precarious time for Afghan women

Ghazalan Koofi, 26, waits for a ride to work as her brother-in-law Shafiq Azizi holds her baby, Ahmad, 11 months. Despite growing up under Taliban rule, Koofi was able to graduate from high school, and is now studying literature in college. More photos

Since the Taliban's fall, women have seen fitful gains. But those with access to education and work fear the U.S. troop departure will erode their freedoms.

Feb. 4, 2014

Ghazalan Koofi loves her mother but not the life her mother has been compelled to live.

The older woman, her face cloaked in a shawl, had an arranged marriage at age 11. She didn't go to school and spent her life raising seven children with little help from her husband.

Today, at 50, Shahgol Shah still obeys mahram, the Afghan custom that forbids women to leave home without a male relative. She wears a burka in public. "That's our tradition," Shah says.

Koofi, 26, lives a life her mother could never have imagined. She leaves home unescorted every day, working at a government ministry and attending university classes at night. She speaks fluent English and has never worn a burka. She dresses stylishly but modestly, her wavy black hair peeking from a head scarf.

She chastises sexist male colleagues and demands their respect. She insisted on a seat at a recent tribal gathering dominated by white-bearded men in turbans. She treasures her "love marriage" with Shoaib Azizi, 27, a police department employee who calls his wife "a very brave woman." He helps with housework and caring for their infant son, a radical act that some male friends consider weak and shameful.

Koofi came of age after the U.S.-led military invasion toppled the repressive Taliban government in 2001. She has benefited from 12 years of slow, fitful gains for Afghan women. But with U.S. combat troops leaving Afghanistan at the end of this year, Koofi and other Afghan women worry that their freedoms will begin to erode.

"We are entering a very dangerous period for women," Koofi says. "I'm very worried that we will return to those terrible days when the only place for a woman was in the home, doing housework and serving the men."

Koofi and her mother play with her 11-month-old son, Ahmad, inside the family's tidy concrete home on a hillside overlooking smoggy west Kabul, two generations filled with equal parts hope and fear about the future of the next one.

Across Kabul, Shukriya Matin also belongs to that vulnerable generation of women who have become adults in a world of new freedoms — and fear a future without them.

Matin was in grade school when her family fled the Taliban in 1996; she was twice beaten on the street for not properly covering her hair. For six long years, she was a low-paid child carpet weaver in Pakistan after her family fled the Taliban.

She returned to Kabul after the U.S.-led invasion and earned a high school degree and a midwife's certificate. Now, at 28, she directs a private hospital program in Kabul that provides maternal care to illiterate villagers.

Shukriya Matin, left, directs a private hospital program in Kabul that provides maternal care to village women. More photos

Inside the neat, sparsely decorated home she shares with her husband and 3-year-old daughter, Sitayesh, Matin describes her sense of dread about the future.

"Only God knows what will happen to women after 2014," she says in lightly accented English as her daughter plays on the floor, watched over by her parents.

The arc of Afghanistan's recent history can be traced through the three generations of Matin's family.

Her mother, Zahra Matin, 52, was engaged at 9 and married at 13. She is illiterate; she spent her life working at home so that her children could attend school. Now she dreams of her granddaughter attending college.

The older woman dreads the departure of foreign troops and worries that the Taliban — "They are criminals," she says harshly — will quash her dreams, and the dreams of her daughter.

But she also has faith that Afghanistan will continue to allow women to break free of the past. "For myself," she says, "I'm still hoping to take literacy classes and finally become an educated woman."

Her daughter sits on the floor and cradles young Sitayesh. She plans to send the girl to school and ultimately to college, but she fears she may have to go abroad to do so.

"Some people are saying the Taliban might come back, and we'd all have to flee to Pakistan again," she says, stroking the girl's hair. "I don't want that life for my daughter."

The gains Afghan women have made since 2001 are under threat. A recent United Nations report said a landmark 2009 Afghan law on violence against women has been ignored or poorly enforced; a human rights commissioner appointed by President Hamid Karzai wants to repeal the law entirely. The report described "fears and anxiety" among Afghan women about a swift reversal of gains after 2014.

Heather Barr, a senior researcher in Afghanistan for Human Rights Watch, warned in December: "Signs are everywhere that a rollback of women's rights has begun." The Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission reported in January that violent crimes against women reached record levels last year, rising 24% over 2012.

 

Afghanistan is still a deeply conservative Islamic country where some village girls as young as 9 or 10 are forced to marry older men, and some women's groups estimate that at least half of all marriages violate the Afghan legal marriage age of 16. Some women and girls who flee arranged marriages are hunted down by their fathers and brothers, beaten and sometimes killed. The practice of baad, or giving away a young woman as payment to settle debts or atone for family crimes, is illegal but still prevalent in rural areas.

Traditions still require burkas in public for millions of provincial women, but also in cities such as Kabul or Jalalabad. It is not uncommon, even in Kabul, to see women packed into the backs of station wagons or the open trunk of a car.

There are undisputed gains: Women now have the right to vote and some serve in parliament, the army and the national police force. There are 150 female judges. Yet the percentage of women in the government workforce has actually decreased by 4% since 2004.

Under the Taliban government, the only education for girls was in clandestine home schools. Today, 3 million girls attend school, but that's still only 40% of all school-age girls. Because of family or economic pressures forcing girls to work or marry, the dropout rate for girls remains much higher than for boys.

Taliban extremists in remote districts still throw acid in the faces of schoolgirls, burn down girls' schools and attack female polio vaccination workers. In the last six months, four Afghan policewomen have been assassinated. Prominent female politicians are routinely threatened or slain by insurgents.

Last year, the acting head of women's affairs in eastern Afghanistan was killed by a bomb placed in her car. A few months later, her replacement was shot to death on her way to work.

"The situation for women is very fragile," says Fawzia Koofi, an outspoken member of parliament who taught at an underground home school for girls during the Taliban era. The lawmaker, who is Koofi's aunt, has been trailed by gunmen and threatened with death by the Taliban. Yet she intends to run for president in 2018.

In her spacious Kabul home, where two feminist books she has written are on display, she says, "Our gains could easily be reversed, and we'd have to start from scratch for the simple right to work outside the home or go to school."

Shukriya Matin, 28, right, and her sister Fatima, 25, cook lunch for their family in Kabul. More photos

Shukriya Matin's father, police Col. Ismail Matin, 58, promises his daughter that he'd die before he'd allow the Taliban to return.

"We're ready to shed our blood to defend the life we have now," the colonel says, dressed in a gray wool police uniform.

He spent his life savings to free his oldest son, Nayeem Matin, from Taliban custody (for not growing a beard) and send him to Australia on a rickety refugee boat. The son, now 31, is a warehouse manager in Melbourne who visits Kabul often because his Afghan-born wife, Hosnia, 26, is homesick.

Nayeem Matin, still clean-shaven, has seen remarkable advances for women since he fled Afghanistan 14 years ago. Still, he's not ready to bring his wife back to a country where he fears a Taliban resurgence or civil war after foreign troops leave.

His sister says she never imagined, when she was weaving carpets in Pakistan, that she would one day be an educated woman who operates an ultrasound machine. But Afghan custom still requires her to cook, do housework and care for her daughter after a long day's work in rural clinics.

"Even if you're a professor, a woman must do her job at home — cooking and cleaning," she says. "If my husband asks me for money, I say, 'I'll give you money when you help at home.'"

She glances at her father, who is grinning. "This is a joke, of course," she says.

Ghazalan Koofi has just returned from a day's work at the Economy Ministry and is preparing for night literature classes at a local university. She is still smarting from her daily confrontations with male colleagues. They tell her that women don't belong in the workforce and should stay home. They make crude sexual comments about other women.

"It hurts me a lot to hear this," she says.

It is all the more painful because the men are young and well-educated. Koofi is the only woman on a six-member team that evaluates nongovernmental programs, some designed to expand women's rights.

"But I'm not surprised," she says. "This is Afghanistan. It's still a traditional country."

Most Afghan women don't push hard enough for their rights, she says. She often asks women who have worked for years in low-level government jobs why they don't apply for management positions.

"They say they aren't capable," Koofi says. "I tell them they need to become capable. They need to believe in their own abilities."

Her sister Oranous, 16, says Afghan women still have a long way to go. She points to her own marginalized life: She wears trendy jeans but follows Afghan custom and covers her hair. She attends high school, but the classes are girls-only. She will not be required to enter an arranged marriage, but she and her sisters must follow tradition and marry in order of age.

"Girls in Afghanistan still cannot live the life they want," Oranous says in English.

Ghazalan's husband, Azizi, is concerned that the end of the U.S. combat mission will allow the Taliban to regain power.

Ghazalan Koofi was the only woman hired out of 150 applicants to work on a Ministry of Economics team. Her computer and English skills and job experience helped her land the position. More photos

"If we go back to the way it was under the Taliban," he says, "women will suffer the most."

Azizi is a short, slender man with a quiet demeanor. But he becomes agitated when discussing the Taliban claims that educating women is "against Islam."

"Our prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, says you should give freedom to women and they should be educated," he says. "That's what our prophet says, and that's what I believe."

It is not anti-Islamic for a man to help with housework and child care, he says. His father, a police commander, did it, and he'll teach his son the same respect for equality.

"We can never go back to the days when a woman could only be a homemaker and nothing more," he says.

His mother-in-law, Shahgol Shah, says her own husband is "a traditional man" and has never helped with housework or child care. But he did recently relent and allow her to take literacy classes and to teach a class in sewing for women.

She peers from beneath her head scarf and smiles. "Life is changing," she says. "My daughter has a much better life than I had, a more modern life. And I still dream that life for my granddaughter will be even better."

Contact the reporter

Follow David Zucchino(@davidzucchino) on Twitter

Follow @latgreatreads on Twitter

__._,_.___
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/batavia-news
to Subscribe via email :
batavia-news-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
----------------------------------------
VISIT Batavia News Blog
http://batavia-news-networks.blogspot.com/
----------------------------
You could be Earning Instant Cash Deposits
in the Next 30 Minutes
No harm to try - Please Click
http://tinyurl.com/bimagroup 
--------------
.

__,_._,___

[batavia-news] Dangers of an Iraqi-Iranian border deal

 

 
 
Issue No.1185, 20 February, 2014      19-02-2014 03:00PM ET

Dangers of an Iraqi-Iranian border deal

A new border treaty with Iran has come as a test for Iraq's leaders, writes Salah Nasrawi

Dangers of an Iraqi-Iranian border deal
Al-Qaeda fighter stands guard after setting fire to an Iraqi police truck in front of the provincial government headquarters in Fallujah, Iraq (photo: AP)
 

Iraq and Iran have been holding talks behind closed doors on a new border agreement that the two countries hope will end a decades-long dispute amid fears that Tehran holds the upper hand because of Baghdad's weakness and Iran's strong influence in the war-battered country.

The talks are also being held at a time when events in the Middle East have benefited Iran and helped the largely Shia nation to bolster its regional position at the expense of its mostly Arab Sunni neighbours.

Officials have said secret bilateral negotiations have been going on for months in order to reach a deal on the demarcation of the 1,400km long joint border, including key oil fields and the strategic waterway of the Shatt Al-Arab.

The first news of the contacts came last month when Iran's Foreign Minister Mohamed Javad Zarif announced during a visit to Baghdad that "a significant deal" would be signed on the border with Iraq "within the coming two weeks".

"The ground for the expansion of cooperation is well prepared despite existing threats and challenges," Zarif was quoted as saying by the official Iranian Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA).

Zarif said Iraq's Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari would travel to Tehran to sign the deal. IRNA, however, reported during Zarif's visit to Baghdad on 14 January that the two ministers "discussed implementing an agreement that has already been signed between Iran and Iraq on broadening cooperation on border issues."

Iraq's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, meanwhile, announced last week that technical teams from both sides were "making progress" in the negotiations on the demarcation of the land and river borders.

In a statement, the ministry confirmed that Zebari would visit Tehran soon for further talks.

With the talks shrouded in secrecy, the full picture of the anticipated deal remains unclear, spurring growing concerns about the Iraqi negotiators' ability to push an agenda that is in line with Iraq's national interests on a range of issues.

Because of its Shia allies in the government, many Iraqis fear that Iran may be pushing for a resolution to the long-standing border dispute to make territorial gains and settle scores in the historic rivalry between the two nations which have fought wars and competed for regional supremacy.

In November, Zebari acknowledged that he had tried to derail previous Iranian attempts to open discussions on the Algiers Treaty, the last boundary agreement concluded in 1975 that was later abrogated by former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein.

In a lengthy interview with the London-based Al-Hayat newspaper, Zebari said he had warned Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki and his predecessor Ibrahim Al-Jaafari against making any commitment to Iran regarding the Algiers Agreement.

"This agreement was signed on the body of the Kurdish people and the body of the Iraqi [anti-Saddam] opposition at that time, and it divided the Shatt Al-Arab," said Zebari, a former guerrilla in the anti-Baghdad Kurdish insurgency.

Zebari did not elaborate, but he was apparently referring to one of the major purposes of the Algiers Agreement, which was to stop Iran from supplying the Kurds with arms in their struggle against Saddam's regime, eventually leading to the collapse of the Kurdish insurgency.

It is not surprising, therefore, that the idea of re-negotiating the border issue with Iran should now fuel fears among many Iraqis who feel their country is ill-prepared to deal with such a major diplomatic challenge while it is enmeshed in an ever-deepening ethno-sectarian struggle. 

The border conflict between Iraq and Iran is deeply rooted in history and regional geopolitics, and its last bloody manifestation was during the 1980-1988 War which left some one million people dead, wounded or disabled. Collateral damage to the economy of the two countries was also immense.

The dispute goes back to the 17th century, when in 1639 the former Ottoman Empire, in control of Iraq at the time, signed the first of a series of treaties with Persia to ease territorial disputes.

A protocol was signed in 1913 that established the land boundary, detailing the border between Iran and Iraq and defining the thalweg principle, or the deepest point in the river, as the border line in the Shatt Al-Arab.

In 1937, the two countries signed a treaty under which Iran clearly recognised modern Iraq's claim of sovereignty to almost the entire Shatt Al-Arab with the exception of areas around certain key Iranian port cities.

The then shah of Iran, Mohamed Reza Pahlavi, abrogated this treaty in 1969, triggering a standoff followed by a severe deterioration in bilateral relations.

Iraq has always maintained that the Shatt Al-Arab, which represents its only true outlet to the Arabian Gulf, is a vital artery for its communications. Iran, on the other hand, has argued that the thalweg principle should be applied to the entire length of the Shatt Al-Arab.

In 1975, the then shah and Saddam signed the Algiers Agreement under which Iraq finally conceded to Iran's long-standing demand that the thalweg principle be used to delimit the border in the Shatt Al-Arab.

However, following the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979 and the opening of a new chapter of antagonism between the two countries, Saddam declared the 1975 Treaty abrogated.

He claimed that the Islamic regime's frequent violations of the accord had necessitated the abrogation, setting off a bloody war lasting eight years.

The border zone is also known for its extensive oil fields, and many of these are in disputed areas. Since the ouster of Saddam in the US-led invasion in 2003, Iranian soldiers have temporarily occupied the oil wells several times. In December 2009, Iranian troops seized an oil field in a desert area south of Baghdad and raised the Iranian flag.

They withdrew a few days later.

Reports in the Iraqi media have repeatedly claimed that Iran is stealing large amounts of oil from Iraqi fields and making profits of billions of dollars a year.

Some of the oil is believed to be drilled from horizontal wells on the disputed border.

Iraq's territorial borders with its neighbours have long been the source of bitter disagreements. Last year, Iraq and Kuwait completed the demarcation of their border under a UN Security Council resolution more than 20 years after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990.

Since the modern state of Iraq came into being in 1923, successive Iraqi governments have not accepted the British-drawn borders that established Kuwait as a separate sheikhdom after the First World War.

Many Iraqis have remained opposed to the demarcation agreement, saying that the new border has robbed them of property, territory and oil fields. Many of the country's MPs have also blamed the government for signing the deal from a point of weakness and called for the re-negotiation of the border deal.

The construction of a new giant Kuwaiti port on Boubyan Island on the Khor Abdullah Waterway, which is the only strategic access to the sea for Iraq, has also raised concerns about Iraqi access to the sea.

For now, as officials in both Iraq and Iran remain tight-lipped about the details of their negotiations, there are a lot of questions about the timing of the process and its intentions as Iraq sinks deeper into political and sectarian conflicts that threaten its very existence as a state.

The lack of transparency and the absence of parliamentary discussion and public debate about the negotiations only increases suspicions and will not create the climate needed to find a national consensus on any possible deal.

Fundamentally, the long-standing territorial dispute with Iran is a major diplomatic challenge for Iraq that the country's Shia-led government may not be well suited to handle.

Since the US-led invasion in 2003, Iran's influence has steadily grown in Iraq, and many Iraqis now fear that their country has become a de facto client state of Iran.

Moreover, the country is mired in sectarian violence and an acute political crisis. The Iraqi government is dysfunctional and it cannot task itself with negotiating such a huge undertaking and commitment.

On the other hand, efforts to settle the dispute are unlikely to be effective unless they are based on the broad perspective of the entire Middle East and Gulf region. Iran is in a much stronger position due largely to its recent nuclear deal with the West, and it could now work out an agreement that would give it more leverage in the region.

All this should remind the Iraqi leadership of the country's national interests and of the complexities associated with the border problems when its negotiators sit down with their Iranian counterparts to strike a deal

__._,_.___
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1)
Recent Activity:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/batavia-news
to Subscribe via email :
batavia-news-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
----------------------------------------
VISIT Batavia News Blog
http://batavia-news-networks.blogspot.com/
----------------------------
You could be Earning Instant Cash Deposits
in the Next 30 Minutes
No harm to try - Please Click
http://tinyurl.com/bimagroup 
--------------
.

__,_._,___

[batavia-news] 'Don't Be a Doormat' Russia Warns Cash-Starved Kiev

 

'Don't Be a Doormat' Russia Warns Cash-Starved Kiev

Reuters
Activists paying their last respects to protesters killed in clashes with riot police in Kiev after a brief truce between both sides was broken Thursday.
Efrem Lukatsky / AP

Activists paying their last respects to protesters killed in clashes with riot police in Kiev after a brief truce between both sides was broken Thursday.

Russia warned Ukraine's president not to let opponents walk over him "like a doormat," its strongest signal yet on Thursday that Moscow wants order on the streets before handing over more cash to stave off bankruptcy. In an increasingly bitter struggle for influence in Ukraine between Russia and the West, Moscow upped the ante by directly linking the delivery of $2 billion in loans to the end of protests, which Moscow portrays as led by dangerous extremists.

The warning came as fresh fighting flared in central Kiev, shattering a truce declared by Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, as the Russian-backed leader met European ministers demanding he compromise with pro-European Union opponents.

A Reuters photographer saw the bodies of 21 dead civilians in Independence Square, a few hundred meters from where the president met the EU delegation, after protesters who have occupied the area for almost three months hurled petrol bombs and paving stones to drive riot police from the plaza.

In a sign of dwindling support for Yanukovich, his hand-picked head of Kiev's city administration quit the ruling Party of the Regions in protest at bloodshed in the streets.

The foreign ministers of Germany, France and Poland spent much of the day in Kiev, meeting at length with Yanukovych and extending their stay to talk to opposition leaders.

They sent an interim report to EU colleagues in Brussels, who were meeting to decide on targeted sanctions against those deemed responsible for the worst bloodshed in Ukraine since it left the crumbling Soviet Union 22 years ago.

Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said Russia could deal only with "legitimate and effective authorities — a leadership which people are not wiping their feet on like a doormat."

It was a powerful image of how far the Kremlin feels Yanukovych may have dithered into losing control to crowds who have held their ground in central Kiev, driving back riot police who have taken hundreds of casualties.

President Vladimir Putin's spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, put it even more bluntly — the Kremlin's priority was now conflict resolution and only after order was restored could there be "a peaceful, constructive dialogue," he told Ekho Moskvy radio.

On Thursday evening, Putin decided to send an envoy to Ukraine, at the request of Yanukovych, to try to mediate talks between the government and opposition, Russian news agencies quoted Peskov as saying.

"Putin decided to send [Russian] human rights ombudsman Vladimir Lukin on this mission," RIA Novosti quoted Peskov as saying.

The decision came amid reports that Ukrainian anti-government protesters were holding 67 policemen hostage in the capital.

The Ukrainian Interior Ministry said on its website that "Berkut" riot policemen had been armed with combat weapons, an attempt to regain control of violent protests in which at least 50 people have died since Tuesday.

"To free the hostages police have the right to use their weapons," the ministry said in a statement posted to its website.

A further three policemen were unaccounted for, it said.

REUTERS
A protester shooting an improvised weapon during clashes with police.

Yanukovych on Wednesday warned Ukrainians that "advisers" were urging him to crack down and that he would end a policy of restraint if opposition leaders did not distance themselves from radical, armed elements on the streets.

Sources with close knowledge of arrangements to provide Ukraine with the second tranche of a $15 billion funding programme said the decision was now out of the Finance Ministry's hands and had become a political one.

"Given the way the situation has developed, we've put the brakes on. We've called it off for now. But that does not mean that the process cannot resume. The situation has to become clearer," a source familiar with the situation said.

"It is a political decision," another source said.

Russia promised Ukraine the $15 billion bailout and reduced gas prices in December, seen by some commentators as a reward for Yanukovych's decision to scrap plans for trade deals with the EU.

Russia bought $3 billion worth of Ukrainian Eurobonds soon afterwards. The release of the $2-billion second tranche of the bailout had been expected by the end of this week, but the timing is now unclear.

Yanukovych's spurning of the trade and political deal with the EU marked a turn towards reviving ties with Russia, sparking protests in Kiev, where demonstrators seeking to oust Yanukovych are barricaded behind burning tires and fighting riot police.

More than 40 people have been killed.

 
Yannis Behrakis / REUTERS

An anti-government protester holding up a Ukrainian flag while he walks through scorched barricades in Kiev.

Russia has denied it is "buying" the former Soviet republic with the financial aid, portraying it as an "act of brotherly love" towards its Slavic, Orthodox Christian neighbor, a country which many Russians see as an extension of their own.

But with more fighting this week in central Kiev, officials in Moscow have abruptly changed the tone, making clear Yanukovych's earlier assurances that he was in control of events were ringing hollow.

The language used by U.S. and Russian officials has become sharper in the past 24 hours, highlighting the increasingly fraught geopolitical battle that is under way between East and West which is reminiscent of the Cold War.

Russian state television showed a constant loop of pictures of protesters throwing petrol bombs and wielding metal piping and wooden sticks at riot police while Russian commentators lamented the state of the Ukrainian capital.

Putin, who has said little in public about at least four meetings he has had with Yanukovych over the past six months, appears to have given the green light to his long-time political ally, Medvedev, to speak out more firmly on Ukraine as well as his foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov.

"We will try to fulfil all our promises that we made … at the same time for this to happen it is necessary for our partners themselves to be in good shape and for the authorities in Ukraine to be legitimate and effective," Medvedev said.

"We adhere to all agreements but at the same time we [believe] that the authorities must focus on protecting the people and the law enforcement structures that are defending the interests of the state ... only in this case is it possible to develop full economic cooperation," he told Rossia 24 television

__._,_.___
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/batavia-news
to Subscribe via email :
batavia-news-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
----------------------------------------
VISIT Batavia News Blog
http://batavia-news-networks.blogspot.com/
----------------------------
You could be Earning Instant Cash Deposits
in the Next 30 Minutes
No harm to try - Please Click
http://tinyurl.com/bimagroup 
--------------
.

__,_._,___