Is a speedy peace agreement in Afghanistan more important than maintaining women's rights in the region? The United States seems to think so.
Afghani women are quickly losing their power and involvement in the peace talks. Their fear is that the rights that women have won since the Taliban regime fell in 2001 will be sacrificed so that there can be a quick peace. And progress has not been on their side - though the UN Resolution 1325 said that women must have "equal participation and full involvement", the current US plan only mentions a "meaningful" participation of women.
Habiba Sarabi has been one of four women at the peace talks in the past six months, and this past month, she was the only woman there at all. Out of 21 people, with 12 from the Afghan government and 10 from the Taliban, only one member was a woman. She alone advocates for women's rights, and fights for the end of the murdering of women by the Taliban.
Habiba Sarabi, representing all women at the peace talks.
Why the loss of power now? Last year Trump made a deal with the Taliban, in an effort to end the two decades of US presence in Afghanistan. Now the Taliban, a militant extremist group, feels that they have the lead role in the peace process. The US failed to ensure that this deal guaranteed the protection of women's rights, and with the Taliban's refusal to recognize the existing constitution, it seems likely that including them in the government will lead to a loss of women's rights.
Over 100 global leaders joined forces to draft a letter urging the Afghan government to create a lasting peace that includes women's participation throughout the process, and which would preserve the constitution's gender equality. However, with the US transition to Biden's presidency, change seems unlikely. Biden is also eager to bring the peace talks to a close, and seems willing to sacrifice women's interests in order to so. The US is placing expediency over their stated principles.
It has been proven that women's role in peace processes are essential. Between 1992 and 2019, women made up, on average, 13% of negotiators, 6% of mediators, 6% of signatories in major global peace processes. In previous peace talks, women constituted 33% of delegates in South Sudan, 20% of negotiators in Columbia (and 40% of their armed forces), and 25% in Kenya, just to list a few examples. It also has been shown that gender inequality brings instability and extremism, not peace.
Afghan women attending a consultative grand assembly, known as Loya Jirga, in April 2019
As Akbhar, chair of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, put it, "if you exclude women and you move to an Afghanistan where half the population is entrapped and regarded as half-human, you are signing up for an Afghanistan that is poor, less developed, and cannot compete with other countries. That is counterproductive for everyone."
If America stands for equality and women's rights, could they really sacrifice it for the sake of a speedy but insubstantial peace? Are they only willing to because it's a different country, and not their own? And will Afghani women stand up for their rights? Peace will only truly exist if they do.
Bigio, O., & Cleaveland, D. (2020, October 05). Opinion: Women should be at the center of Afghan peace talks. Retrieved April 07, 2021, from https://edition.cnn.com/2020/10/05/opinions/women-should-be-at-the-center-of-afghan-peace-talks-bigio-cleaveland/index.html
O’Donnell, L. (2021, March 30). Women cut out of the Afghan peace process. Retrieved April 07, 2021, from https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/03/30/afghanistan-women-taliban-peace-talks-biden/
Afghan peace summit includes just one female delegate. (2021, March 18). Retrieved April 07, 2021, from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/18/afghan-activists-warn-over-absence-of-women-in-peace-process
Including women at the peace table produces better outcomes. (n.d.). Retrieved April 07, 2021, from https://www.cfr.org/womens-participation-in-peace-processes/
No comments:
Post a Comment