The article titled “Whose Security” in The Nation is an impassioned essay about the ineffectiveness of national security post-9/11 to protect the human rights of women internationally or to allow the voices of international women’s rights supporters/activists in the U.S. to be heard. Ironically, though the war in Iraq was touted as an effort which would also address Afghan women’s rights, it is clear that this cause was abandoned early on so the issues were in some cases exacerbated, not quelled. Unfortunately, women in other nations do not realize that there are U.S. women advocating for their rights because men in politics and the military dominate war conversations and political discourses. This makes it difficult to form international alliances and collaboration between women on a global scale. After 9/11, national security became solidified and the emphasis on the nation, territories, and borders overpowered any emphasis on individuals. It is impossible to hear all the voices and serve all the needs of individuals when often ill-defined national issues are prioritized. Thus, women’s voices aren’t heard when national security issues are at stake. Human rights have lost their prevalence in the national discourse, and voices that support human rights are quickly silenced, like UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson, who “suggest[ed] that these acts of terrorism be prosecuted internationally as crimes against humanity rather than used as a call for war” (Bunche 4). If women’s voices are not prioritized on the international scale, women can work domestically to ensure “that U.S. policies and corporate forces based here stop harming women elsewhere” (Bunche 5), like the labor practices and subcontracting we talked about in class. Bunche also advocates for bringing the international and domestic spheres together so that efforts at home can have impact abroad.
Abu-Lughod writes about how people in the U.S. should approach discussions about Afghan women and how Afghan women can best be served, not through an attitude of “we will save them” but rather through an attitude of appreciating their differences and the forces that influenced their development as individuals and groups, and considering how we are implicated to address global human rights injustices. Abu-Lughod smartly points out that media forces often try to define Muslim women with broad generalizations that would never be applied to women in dominant religious sects in the U.S. Also, by framing information about women as potential clues to understanding acts of terrorism, human rights violations against women are largely ignored. Muslim women are further “othered" and the hope for international efforts for women’s rights is lost. She moves on to the issue of the burqa and the frequent cries of Americans that Muslim women should remove their constraining veils now that they are no longer forced. However, these complaints do not take into account the reasons and cultural practices behind wearing a veil, such as protection from unrelated men and maintaining a respectability expected of women in their culture (though some may argue that women should not have to be respectable, it is a socially constraining expectation). As Abu-Lughod points out, “veiling itself must not be confused with, or made to stand for, lack of agency” (786). By imposing our cultural norms upon Afghan women, we limit what we think is acceptable for them and diminish what they value as important. It could even be regarded as a supremacy crime for Western powers to attempt to change the lives of Afghan women by claiming that their goals for these women are supreme or superior over what the women might deem as significant.
The chapter in Leading the Way titled “Living While Muslim: Human Rights Advocacy in the Post-9/11 Era” shows that women’s voices are being heard about issues in Iraq affecting women. The writer, Arwa Ibrahim, explains the conflict she experiences: being an American citizen when the United States inflicts damage upon Iraqi citizens daily in wartime. Ibrahim found that her individual actions contributed to a larger movement to inform others of human rights violations in Iraq. She interviewed Iraqi youth and wrote a widely circulated news article. From their testimonies, Ibrahim realized the “general lack of security” (43) and gained information that she could share with an American audience, breathing life and humanity into the experiences of Iraqi citizens and allowing their voices to be heard. Her own family’s experience with racial profiling and illegal detainment, interrogation, and searches in an American airport led her to speak in television press conferences about discrimination against individuals who are from other nations (or even U.S. citizens) who may appear to be of Middle Eastern descent. Her small actions contribute to global and domestic efforts to protect the rights of women and citizens of all nations more generally. She does not allow a single national identity to define her and seeks to inform people to stop “othering" people they may not know.
No comments:
Post a Comment