Max Forte's Library tagged Stability → View Popular

Filter:
All
Annotated

25 Oct 09

Remember the Women?

www.thenation.com/...single - Preview

Afghanistan Karzai legitimacy stability women women's_rights feminism PRTs corruption

The Feminist Majority
recently backed off a call for more troops, but it continues to warn
against US withdrawal as an abandonment of Afghan women and girls.
Nearly everyone assumes troops bring greater security; and whether your
touchstone is military victory, national interest or the welfare of
women and girls, "security" seems a good thing.
38 more annotations...
- I've spent years in Afghanistan
  working with women, and I'm on their side
- Yet an unsentimental look at the
  record reveals that for all the fine talk of women's rights since the US
  invasion, equal rights for Afghan women have been illusory all along, a
  polite feel-good fiction that helped to sell the American enterprise at
  home and cloak in respectability the misbegotten government we installed
  in Kabul.
- That it is a fiction is borne out by recent developments in
  Afghanistan--President Karzai's approving a new family law worthy of the
  Taliban, and American acquiescence in Karzai's new law and, initially,
  his theft of the presidential election--and by the systematic
  intimidation, murder or exile of one Afghan woman after another who
  behaves as if her rights were real and worth fighting for.
- Why is this important? At this critical moment, as Obama tries to weigh
  options against our national security interests, his advisers can't be
  bothered with--as one US military officer put it to me--"the trivial
  fate of women."
- As for some hypothetical moral duty to protect the women
  of Afghanistan--that's off the table.
- Early on, Kofi Annan, then United Nations secretary general, noted that
  the condition of Afghan women was "an affront to all standards of
  dignity, equality and humanity."
- Annan took the position, set forth in 2000 in the landmark UN Security
  Council Resolution 1325, that real conflict resolution, reconstruction
  and lasting peace cannot be achieved without the full participation of
  women every step of the way.
- Karzai gave lip service to the idea, saying
  in 2002, "We are determined to work to improve the lot of women after
  all their suffering under the narrow-minded and oppressive rule of the
  Taliban."
- From the point of view
  of women today, America's friends and America's enemies in Afghanistan
  are the same kind of guys.
- In 2004 a new
  constitution declared, "The citizens of Afghanistan--whether man or
  woman--have equal rights and duties before the law." Westerners greeted
  that language as a confirmation of gender equality, and to this day
  women's "equal rights" are routinely cited in Western media as evidence
  of great progress.
- Yet not surprisingly, Afghan officials often
  interpret the article differently. To them, having "equal rights and
  duties" is nothing like being equal. The first chief justice of the
  Afghan Supreme Court, formerly a mullah in a Pakistani madrassa, once
  explained to me that men have a right to work while women have a right
  to obey their husbands. The judiciary--an ultraconservative, inadequate,
  incompetent and notoriously corrupt branch of government--interprets the
  constitution by its own lights.
- And the great majority of women across
  the country, knowing little or nothing of rights, live now much as they
  did under the Taliban--except back then there were no bombs.
- In any case, the constitution provides that no law may contravene the
  principles of Sharia law. In effect, mullahs and judges have always
  retained the power to decide at any moment what "rights" women may
  enjoy, or not; and being poorly educated, they're likely to factor into
  the judgment their own idiosyncratic notions of Sharia, plus tribal
  customary laws and the size of proffered bribes.
- Western legal
  experts who train Afghan judges and lawyers in "the law" as we conceive
  it often express frustration that Afghans just don't get it; Afghan
  judges think the same of them.
- The paper foundations of Afghan women's rights go beyond national law to
  include the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International
  Treaty of Civil and Political Rights, and the Convention on the
  Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). All
  these international agreements that delineate and establish human rights
  around the world were quickly ratified by the Karzai government.
- CEDAW,
  however, requires ratifying governments to submit periodic reports on
  their progress in eliminating discrimination; Afghanistan's first
  report, due in 2004, hasn't appeared yet.
- Karzai's
  sequestration of his own wife, a doctor with much-needed skills who is
  kept locked up at home.
- Some women members succeeded in getting the
  marriageable age for girls--age 9--revised to 16. Calling it victory,
  they settled for that.
- It also denies or severely limits women's rights to inherit,
  divorce or have guardianship of their own children.
- It legalizes
  marriage to and rape of minors.
- It forbids women to
  marry without permission and legalizes forced marriage.
- It denies women the right to leave home except for
  "legitimate purposes"--in effect giving men the power to deny women
  access to work, education, healthcare, voting and whatever they please.
- It gives men control of all their female
  relatives.
- It generally treats women as property, and it considers rape of women or
  minors outside marriage as a property crime, requiring restitution to be
  made to the owner, usually the father or husband, rather than a crime
  against the victim.
- In
  June, when a large group of women MPs and activists met with Karzai, he
  assured them the bill had been amended and would be submitted to
  Parliament again after the elections.
- Instead, on July 27, without public announcement, Karzai entered the
  SPSL, slightly revised but with principal provisions intact, into the
  official gazette, thereby making it law. Apparently he was betting that
  with the presidential election only three weeks away, the United States
  and its allies would not complain again.
- After all, they had about $500
  million (at least half of that American money) riding on a "credible"
  outcome; and they couldn't afford the cost of a runoff or the political
  limbo of an interregnum.
- Many women parliamentarians are mere extensions of the warlords who
  financed their campaigns and tell them how to vote: always in opposition
  to women's rights. Most non-Shiite women took little interest in the
  bill, believing that it applied only to the Shiite minority.
- Although
  Hazara women have long been the freest in the country and the most
  active in public life, some of them argued that it is better to have a
  bad law than none at all because, as one Hazara MP told me, "without a
  written law, men can do whatever they want."
- The human rights division of the UN's Assistance Mission in Afghanistan
  (UNAMA) published a report in early July, before the SPSL became law,
  documenting the worsening position of Afghan women, the rising violence
  against them and the silence of international and Afghan officials who
  could defend them.
- Other women targeted for attack are civil servants, employees of
  international and national organizations, including the UN, healthcare
  workers and women in "immoral" professions--which include acting,
  singing, appearing on television and journalism. When popular Tolo TV
  presenter Shaima Rezayee, 24, was forced out of her job in 2005, she
  said "things are not getting better.... We have made some gains, but
  there are a lot of people who want to take it all back. They are not
  even Taliban, they are here in Kabul." Soon after, she was shot and
  killed.
- Today, most American so-called development aid is delivered not by
  USAID, but by the military itself through a system of Provincial
  Reconstruction Teams (PRTs), another faulty idea of former Defense
  Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
- Soldiers, unqualified as aid workers and
  already busy soldiering, now shmooze with village "elders" (often the
  wrong ones) and bring "development," usually a costly road convenient to
  the PRT base, impossible for Afghans to maintain and inaccessible to
  women locked up at home.
- Recent research conducted by respected
  Afghanistan hands found that this aid actually fuels "massive
  corruption"; it fails to win hearts and minds not because we spend too
  little but because we spend too much, too fast, without a clue.
- US government
  investigators are looking into allegations that aid funds appropriated
  for women's projects have been diverted to PRTs for this more important
  work of winning hearts and minds with tarmac
- But the greatest problem
  with routing aid through the military is this: what passes for
  development is delivered from men to men, affirming in the strongest
  possible terms the misogynist conviction that women do not matter.
- So there's no point talking about how women and girls might be affected
  by the strategic military options remaining on Obama's plate. None of
  them bode well for women. To send more troops is to send more violence.
- In the 1960s and '70s,
  before the Soviet invasion--when half the country's doctors, more than
  half the civil servants and three-quarters of the teachers were women--a
  peaceful Afghanistan advanced slowly into the modern world through the
  efforts of all its people.

Afghan government ‘legitimacy’ is critical to U.S. imperialism « RAWA News

www.rawa.org/...rawanews.php - Preview

Afghanistan Karzai legitimacy stability surge Obama democracy

Bay Area Indymedia, October 23, 2009
Whether Karzai or Abdullah wins the upcoming election, it will make no difference to the Afghan people. They will still be victims in the war between the U.S. imperialists and the reactionary forces aligned around the Taliban and al Queda.
17 more annotations...
- By Kenneth J. Theisen
- But did the U.S. apply this pressure because its leaders have suddenly come to feel that the people of a country should choose its own rulers in fair elections? Or did the U.S. act to achieve its imperialist goals in Afghanistan that were jeopardized by such an obviously fraudulent election?
- To set the record straight, U.S. imperialism has a long history of fixing foreign elections or overturning fair elections by force when this has served imperialist interests.
- In both Italy and Japan, the CIA spent millions of dollars in several elections to guarantee that pro-U.S. parties achieved electoral victory. In Iran, Guatemala, and Chile, the U.S. sponsored coups to oust elected nationalist governments and installed imperialist subservient fascist governments in their places. In Vietnam in the 1950s the U.S. made sure there would not be a nation-wide vote because they knew anti-imperialist forces would win. The U.S. ignored the Geneva Accords which called for an election and the result was the killing of millions of Vietnamese.
- But the U.S. does need a “credible” election process in Afghanistan. It needs enough of the Afghan population to believe that “their” government is “legitimate.”
- It also needs to have Americans and others believe this as well if it is to achieve at least minimal support for its war of terror there.
- Obama has already drastically escalated the Afghan war since taking office. This has not been popular with the American public with polls showing the majority no longer support the Afghan war.
- His administration appears to be set to approve another large increase of troops to be sent there, but if the Karzai puppet government lacks credibility this will make the move much harder for the administration.
- This is why Obama’s administration put so much pressure on Karzai.
- Obama wants to pretend that his administration is really interested in establishing “democracy” while building the Afghan nation.
- the resulting Afghan government will still be a puppet government dependent on U.S. imperialism for its very survival. The strings will still be pulled in Washington and the government will act in the interests of U.S. imperialism. The credibility that the U.S. hopes to give to the Afghan government with elections is meant only to be an illusion that the Afghan government is independent, not to truly make it independent.
  - This might be a little too simplistic -- Karzai is a broker, a middle man, and he serves a variety of interests, including his own, and many of them do not sit well with Washington. He may turn out to be as much of a "puppet" as Saddam Hussein was. One need to be careful not to dismiss the fact that Karzai and the warlords who support them have their own agendas. - on 2009-10-25
  Add Sticky Note
- Karzai was handpicked by the U.S. and installed in Kabul shortly after the election. Since his installation he has received 24/7 protection from either U.S. forces or U.S. paid mercenaries.
- His government is composed of war and drug lords who rule various parts of the country as feudal fiefdoms.
- Karzai’s administration is so corrupt that even the U.S. State Department has had to admit this in its annual reports.
- His government’s human rights record is also the subject of condemnation from not only the State Department, but domestic and international human rights groups too.
- it is clear that the U.S. is intent on escalating the war there. It needs the Afghan government to appear to be legitimate in order to more efficiently carry out this war. This perceived “legitimacy” is critical to mobilizing support for the U.S. war in Afghanistan, in the U.S. and throughout the world. Whether Karzai or Abdullah wins the upcoming election, it will make no difference to the Afghan people.

10 Sep 09

Afghanistan's Abdullah warns of instability after poll | World | Reuters

uk.reuters.com/...idUKLA62691320090910 - Preview

Afghanistan election Abdullah fraud stability

The main challenger in Afghanistan's disputed election has accused the commission counting the vote of bias in favour of President Hamid Karzai.
Abdullah Abdullah said the Independent Election Commission was corrupt and helping to rig the vote in favour of Karzai.
2 more annotations...
- "It's not independent at all; it's on President Karzai's side," he said. "It has been corrupt, and their malpractice is now widespread.
- Western officials initially hailed the election as a success because the Taliban militants failed to scupper it.

25 Aug 09

Reality Is Its Own Caricature for U.S. in Afghanistan and Pakistan - FOX 17

www.fox17online.com/...a20090820aug20,0,2955859.story - Preview

Afghanistan election stability demonstration

The problem with U.S.-sponsored elections in Asia and elsewhere in the non-Western world, as in Afghanistan Aug. 20, is that they are sponsored by the United States primarily to legitimize its own presence in the country.
A poll sponsored by the Qatar-based satellite broadcaster Al Jazeera recently asked respondents in Pakistan to identify what they considered the greatest threat to Pakistan today
7 more annotations...
- Eleven percent said it was the Taliban militants
- 59 percent said that the United States was the biggest threat to Pakistan
- The new administration's under secretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs, Judith A. McHale, met a group of Pakistani journalists, including Ansar Abbasi, an important commentator critical of U.S. policy. She spoke warmly of U.S.-Pakistani relations, and Abbasi politely listened, thanking her for coming. He then, according to McHale afterward, said, "You should know that we hate all Americans. From the bottom of our souls, we hate you."
- Under Secretary McHale also reported that Abbasi went on to explain that Americans "are no longer human beings because (their) goal was to eliminate other humans." He said that "thousands of innocent people had been killed because (Americans) are trying to find Osama bin Laden."
- The New York Times report on this press conference was headlined "U.S. Turns to Radio Stations and Cell Phones to Counter Taliban's Propaganda," emphasizing what would seem to be a star project of Holbrooke's "counterinsurgency expert," Vikram Singh. It is to build a communications and media system that can reach into every Afghan village to deliver an anti-Taliban message.
- As Afghanistan is a very large and mountainous country, and one of the poorest in the world, one would like to know his plan for regularly delivering replacement batteries necessary to millions of peasants to power the new cell phones they have been given, as well as supplying guards (from Blackwater?) to protect from the Taliban the thousands or tens of thousands of satellite receivers or relay stations necessary to deliver the Voice of America into Afghan homes.
- Suppose the Taliban tap into the network and deliver their own messages? A learned friend of mine quoted Herbert Marcuse on this plan: "Reality is its own caricature."

Al-Ahram Weekly | International | Fixing up Afghanistan

weekly.ahram.org.eg/...in1.htm - Preview

Afghanistan election stability Taliban

We insult Afghans by calling their election a real success | Havana Marking | Comment is free | The Observer

www.guardian.co.uk/...a-marking-afghanistan-election - Preview

Afghanistan election fraud corruption security attacks success demonstration stability

The west's rose-tinted view of the events in Afghanistan on polling day threatens to undermine the democratic process and alienate locals
In the excitement of Afghanistan's elections last Thursday, there was a moment of clarity for me. At lunchtime, the news came that the UN was declaring the day a success. "I am pleased," said Kai Eide, the UN's secretary-general's special representative here. "In general, it seems to be working well."
14 more annotations...
- This was despite the fact that in Kabul alone there had been seven bomb attacks, two gun battles, the first allegations of fraud and a city-wide scandal about the so-called indelible ink used to ensure no one could double vote. And there were still four hours of voting to go.
- It became clear to me that whatever the outcome, whatever events unfolded, the UN, the EU, the US, the west in general, would declare the day an unmitigated success.
- he fact that reports were only just filtering in from the rest of the country, rockets were falling across the south and turnout was incredibly low clearly meant nothing to those in their bulletproof, dark-glass fortresses.
- This is insulting to Afghans and incredibly short-sighted. In their desperation to report a success to their superiors, the Afghan UN mission is undermining the fragile checks and balances that so need their support.
- It is undermining the process of democracy itself, adding to the perception that we are propping up a corrupt and ineffective government in Kabul and threatening to alienate huge numbers of Afghan voters for the future.
- We in the west are investing billions into Afghanistan; shouldn't we be supporting them rather than the "state"?
- the low voter turn-out, estimated to be around 30% in Kabul, 40% across the country
- voter apathy and disillusionment with the democratic government "we" support were just as important
- "This is a just a drama for you people in the west. Karzai will win and there will be no change."
- The buzz "question" of this election among the international community is just how much fraud is acceptable
- the problems of voter registration cards was so big (an estimated 3 million fakes are in circulation)
- Kai Eide went on TV –widely on the Afghan news – and stated that the ink would save the day.
- By 9am on Thursday, young men were bleaching their fingers and voting twice. We filmed a cafe full of young men laughing and deciding who they would vote for the second time.
- The UN/EU etc must not send out press releases declaring it a success to the international media before anyone has a moment to breathe and certainly not before they have spoken to Fefa, the Afghan body set up to check for a free and fair election.

Afghanistan: Did the Taliban Lose the Vote? / ISN

www.isn.ethz.ch/...Detail - Preview

Afghanistan Taliban attacks security demonstration stability

While Taliban threats did succeed in keeping vote counts down in many areas, voter turnout in remote districts of some of Afghanistan's most restive provinces is being taken by some observers as an example of how the Taliban ultimately lost its effort to derail the country's elections through violence and intimidation.
"we can say that Afghanistan's young state and democracy have emerged successfully from this test and trial. The Taliban has been defeated in the psychological war."
7 more annotations...
- ...Or did Afghans voters lose?
- Wahid Muzda, an independent Kabul-based analyst who lived for years in the capital when it was under Taliban control, doesn't go that far. Pointing to the low turnout in the southern Pashtun heartland, he notes that the Taliban effort did find some success.
- "It's true that the Taliban were unable to completely disrupt the elections, but they have largely been able to prevent elections that could have delivered a clear result," Muzda says. "When you look at the situation now, the front-runner and his rivals are compelled to strike a compromise."
- Muzda claims that the Taliban initially supported the election process by allowing people to register to vote. In some cases, even Taliban members received voter-registration cards.
- Muzda says the surge of U.S. troops this spring and summer and talk of taking back Taliban-controlled regions essentially turned the election process into a battleground between the Taliban and the U.S. led coalition.
- "This was a military contest and the election process turned into a battlefield," he says. "In the end neither the Americans nor the Taliban could win it, but the Afghan people were the main losers because they were deprived of freely choosing their leader with a clear majority."
- "There were attacks in 15 Afghan provinces. On the basis of reports from our Interior Ministry there were 73 [violent] incidents," President Hamid Karzai, the incumbent president who was favored to win a second term, said on August 20.

Abdullah Abdullah under pressure to concede to Hamid Karzai in Afghanistan - Telegraph

www.telegraph.co.uk/...mid-Karzai-in-Afghanistan.html - Preview

Karzai Taliban Abdullah intervention stability demonstration

Hamid Karzai's main rival has come under international pressure to accept defeat in the presidential elections, his main backer has said.
Ustad Atta Mohammed Noor, governor of Balkh province, said the international community feared a defeat for Mr Karzai would worsen violence in the Taliban heartlands.
7 more annotations...
- He said he and Abdullah Abdullah's campaign were being urged to making a deal with the president.
- He said: "They have come to the conclusion that if Mr Karzai doesn't win, insecurity will increase in the south.
- "Because of the insecurity situation, they are insisting we should go and work with the government. It's very difficult for us. They are saying we should not accept the will of the people."
- Mr Noor said he had met with Richard Holbrooke, US envoy to Pakistan and Afghanistan, on Sunday and been left with the "impression" he wanted the Abdullah campaign to accept defeat.
- A strong, credible result in Afghanistan's second presidential elections is a key plank in western efforts to stabilise the country.
- The United Nations and Barack Obama moved quickly to praise the poll on Thursday despite signs Taliban intimidation had scared off many voters.
  The European Union election observer mission declared the process generally "good and fair", though Afghan observers catalogued instances of multiple voting, intimidation and underage voting.
- Mr Noor added: "The government is corrupt, the opium is rife also, but unfortunately fraud and the view of the international community suggest otherwise."

22 Aug 09

BBC NEWS | South Asia | Obama praises Afghans for voting

news.bbc.co.uk/...8215425.stm - Preview

Afghanistan election success stability Taliban

"Over the last few days and particularly yesterday we've seen acts of violence and intimidation by the Taliban and there may be more in the days to come," Mr Obama said.
"We knew that the Taliban would try to derail this election.
3 more annotations...
- The counting appeared to be completed by Friday lunchtime, with official returns due over the weekend
- America, he added, would work with Afghanistan "to strengthen Afghan security, governance and opportunity".
- "Our goal is clear - to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-Qaeda and their extremist allies," he said.

Alive in Afghanistan | UN praises elections as an achievement for Afghans

www.aliveinafghanistan.org/aiablog - Preview

Afghanistan elections UN success stability

The United Nations top official in Afghanistan Thursday described the conduct of presidential and provincial council elections as an achievement for the Afghan people.
“I would like to pay tribute to all the Afghans in the Independent Election Commission (IEC) and the security forces and all the others who participated throughout this process for the achievement we can see today,” he said.
3 more annotations...
- The security situation, in general, allowed people to take part in the elections, he noted.
- Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon also congratulated the Afghans on the elections, saying they demonstrated again their desire for stability and development in their country.
- The US Embassy in Kabul said: “The American people congratulate the people of Afghanistan as this Election Day concludes, on the historic occasion of your nation leading for the first time, democratic elections for president and provincial councils.

21 Aug 09

Obama lauds Afghan vote, warns of more violence - AP

news.yahoo.com/...us_us_afghanistan - Preview

Afghanistan election propaganda stability

"This is an important step forward in the Afghan people's efforts to take control of their future even as violent extremists are trying to stand in their way," Obama said at the White House
- Comical, the foreign invader talks about Afghans taking control, in the face of "violent extemists" standing in their war. Hopefully he meant the U.S. - on 2009-08-21
Add Sticky Note
Obama said it was the first democratic election run by Afghans in more than three decades. The 2004 election that put President Hamid Karzai in power was run by the United Nations
4 more annotations...
- "Our goal is clear: to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-Qaida and their extremist allies," he said. "That goal will be achieved, and our troops will be able to come home as Afghans continue to strengthen their own capacity and take responsibility for their own future."
- "The fact that security was more of a concern during this election than the 2004 election obviously says a lot about what's occurred here over the last five years," Corker said in an interview from Pakistan. He was referring to the deterioration of security as the Taliban has gained strength in some areas.
- "There's no question that more of the polling stations were open than one had anticipated, given the threats and the violence from the Taliban," said Mark Schneider, senior vice president of the International Crisis Group, which advises governments and international organizations.
  
  James Dobbins, who was the Bush administration's special envoy to Afghanistan in the early years of the war, said that from available information it appeared the election should be considered successful in the sense that it was a genuine political contest between viable candidates.
- "Just holding the election is an important sign — if not of progress, then at least of sustained effort toward that end state of a democratic Afghanistan," said Daniel Markey, a Central Asia expert at the Council on Foreign Relations. "But in the near term, the best that we can hope is that they don't prove to be even more disruptive and provide even more propaganda value to the insurgency."

19 Aug 09

Afghans go to the polls tomorrow

www.pajhwok.com/viewstory.asp - Preview

Clinton stability democracy violence

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said it was the right of the people to pick their leaders. "With respect to Afghanistan, we have made a number of statements over the last several days supporting the electoral process, speaking out against the uptick in violence.
Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini
1 more annotations...
- for the consolidation of internal security