As well as women in the higher professions than even the United States, there is a great deal of concern that given the control that conservative Muslim Clerics have in the interim Government, that women are now being banned from educational opportunities:
WORLD VIEWS: Were Iraqi women better off under Saddam?
With the increasing influence of Iraq's religious establishment weighing heavily on their concerns about work, family life, education and opportunities to take part in politics, many Iraqi women have been thinking -- and are now giving voice to -- the unthinkable: Could it be, some are asking, that they were better off under Saddam Hussein?
The main reason for their consternation lies in a decision made last December by Iraq's Interim Governing Council (IGC), which was then headed by the leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, "to scrap secular family laws and place them under Muslim religious jurisdiction." Those 1959 laws were "once considered the most progressive in the Middle East, making polygamy difficult and guaranteeing women custody rights in the case of divorce." (Al
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/gate/archive/2004/02/05/worldviews.DTLInformation and history of the rights of women in Iraq
Compared to women in neighboring Middle Eastern countries, women in Iraq have many rights and abilities. They have equal pay and the opportunity to work, they are able to drive legally, they can uncover their heads, and they are allowed to serve in the army. Still, women in Iraq suffer from honor killings, human rights violations, torture and execution, and political repression.
... and their rights are slowly deteriorating...
SearchWomen's Issues
Advertisement
Stay up to date!
Email to a friendPrint this page
Suggested Reading
Iraqi Women Resources
Elsewhere on the Web
Latest News on War in Iraq
Human Rights and Women in Iraq
Iraq Foundation
Recent Discussions
Dean for DNC?
Who did you vote for and why?
Supersize ME. What is your diet like?
Most Popular
Abortion Statistics
Roe vs. Wade - What You Nee...
Sex Sells - Using Sex in Ad...
Pro Anorexia Issue
Partial Birth Abortion Ban
What's Hot
Morning After Pill
Betty Friedan Biography
Image Gallery - Keep A Breast Campaign
Title IX - What You Need to...
Women Smokers - And the Campaign to Stop It
Women in Iraq - History and Current Status of Women in Iraq
From Nikki Katz,
Your Guide to Women's Issues.
FREE Newsletter. Sign Up Now!
Information and history of the rights of women in Iraq
Compared to women in neighboring Middle Eastern countries, women in Iraq have many rights and abilities. They have equal pay and the opportunity to work, they are able to drive legally, they can uncover their heads, and they are allowed to serve in the army. Still, women in Iraq suffer from honor killings, human rights violations, torture and execution, and political repression.
... and their rights are slowly deteriorating...
History of Women in Iraq
In the 1920s and 1930's, women in Iraq began working and accepting positions in the job market. In 1970, the Iraqi constitution, under Saddam Hussein, declared all women and men equal before the law. The 1970s and early 1980s were years of economic growth in Iraq and state-induced policies were formed to eradicate illiteracy, educate women and incorporate them into the labor force. Labor at that time was scarce and the Iraqi government chose to tap into its own human resources and hire women. Women in Iraq became among the most educated and professional in the entire region, and working outside the home became the norm. Women could find and retain jobs, obtain higher education, and receive extensive medical coverage. A working Iraqi mother received five years of maternity leave. In 1980 women could vote and run for election.
http://womensissues.about.com/cs/iraq/a/iraqi_women.htmSorry, but your friend is just plain wrong and a a result of overthrowing Saddam, and U.S. policy, political factions dedicated to removing woment from the public arena has bewcome a major consideration among the strongest political groups in Iraq. THe religious fundamentalists are now the strongest political block in Iraq. George Bush recently stated just before his re-election that he had no problem with Iraq electing a fundamentalist religious tgovernment in an Associated Press Interview"
Not only this, but education of BOTH SEXES through the age of 16 was COMPULSORY under Saddams regime, infuriating the fundamentalist majority in Iraq:
At one time, women in Iraq held an enviable status in the Middle East. In 1979, the Constitution of Iraq declared the equality of men and women. Compulsory education through age 16 led to greater opportunities for women, and in 1980, women were given the vote and the right to run for electoral office. By the early 1980s, women comprised 40 percent of the workforce and the Unified Labor Code mandated equal pay and benefits for men and women. Then began the erosion of women's rights, starting at around the time of the invasion of Kuwait and the Gulf War of 1991.
Hoping to broaden his support among the most retrograde elements in society, Saddam Hussein decided to permit tribal leaders to implement traditional tribal codes, invariably at the expense of women. In 1990, a new penal code was enacted which permitted honor killings of women. Under Article 409, men could murder with impunity female relatives who were suspected of engaging in adultery or premarital sex. Victims of rape could be -- and often were -- killed in order to clear a family's reputation.
http://www.swans.com/library/art10/iraq/elich.htmlIn fact it was the assault on Hussein during the Gulf war that began to lead to the erosion of the laws protecting women. In order to get support from the tribal chieftains, Saddam had to turn a blind eye to violations of the laws he passed requiring equal treatment of women under the law. Since 1991 Saddams agreement to allow the tribal areas to operate under their own traditional laws led to wom,enm in these areas being pulled from schools. Rape increased by massive increments in these regions. IN the areas that did not fall under tribal leadership. womens rights were still maintained. Unfortunately a U.S. policy based on ignorance allowed far more brutality to be comitted in Saddam's Iraq because of Saddams weakening position than had ever occured when Saddam was tightly in control of his country.
Other results, the wholesale slaughter aned attack of Iraqi Christians
since the overthrow of the Baathist Regime which was forbidden under Saddam and rather brutally punished. It was not a bad idea to brutally punish people who murder people of minority faiths in Iraq.
Many of the assaults on women and womens rights occured among the Americans favorites, the Kurds, as well as among the Shi'ites who are far less active in the insurgency.
How has life been for Iraqi Christians and other non-Muslims under Saddam Hussein?
With regard to Christians and churches, there's been peace with regard to his politics. There was no religious persecution; there was tolerance. The regime of Saddam Hussein has friendly relations with church leaders.
On the whole, relations between Christians and Muslims are OK. But especially in the north, in the Mosul area, there have traditionally not been good relations between Christians and Muslims. There's a sort of fanaticism.
But in general there are no problems. Saddam has specially favored the Christians with his generous initiatives towards churches.
So even though people think he's a bad ruler in other ways, you—and many other Iraqi Christians--approve of his position on religious tolerance.
Right.
When Saddam's record on human rights is so poor, why is he tolerant of Christians?
We don't fully know why he's retained this policy of tolerance towards Christians. Perhaps because it would help him gain the support and allegiance of Christians who come originally from the north of the country, because that's the Kurdish region. There's always been conflict between the Kurdish region and the Iraqi government, even before Saddam.
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/123/story_12341.htmlIn essence, findamentalist Muslims in Iraq were pissed at Saddam because in their opinion he was TOO tolerant of Christians.
To really understand this one has to look at the traditional and historical position of Christians in Muslim Society. Non-Muslims were tolerated, but had to pay a tax to retain their religious practice, which was usually a lower tax than theyt suffered under Christian rule, but they were prohibited from taking part in much of the governance of Muslim Societies, and in particular, thewy were completely prohibited from being part of the military. Until Secular Governments were formed in the mid east they could take no part in
the military at all. This varied as to the relative moderation of Muslim Caliphates, but by and large, it was rare for a high level official in any Islamic Society to reach a high political level, yjough there are some examples of both Christian and Jewish Viziers and heads of the treasury, these are the exception rather than the rule. Much osf the opposition to Saddam came from the religious right, and many of those people that are being dug up as evidence of Saddams brutality were people who intended their own brutality in opposition to Saddam's secular regime. Most of those 300,000 dead who are being thrown up as an example of saddam's brutality were essentially the nucleus of an Iraqi Taliban and it own nascent Al Qaeda. Saddam dealt with them as his culture demanded. They were essentially a reactionary force that opposed all of Saddams attempts to get rid of the old Islamic traditions that discriminated against women and other faiths. He wouldnt tolerate it, and handled it more like Stalin would rather than have let them vote on whetther they wanted women or christians and jews to be treated equally, being fairly aware that had such a vote occured, women would be enslaved again, and non-Muslims brutalized. much as Baha's are now brutalized in Iran. This is beginning to occur in Iraq as well where there was a Bahai community, but now they are being treated by the Shi'ites in a manner similar to the occurences in Iran. And the U.S. turns a blind eye to it.
In Iran, it is completely legal for a comminity to murder a Bahai neighbor, as they are considered apostate by the Shi'ites. In Iran, members of this religion have been doused with gasoline and forced to dance for their tormentors while burning to death. Such events are starting in Iraq, not only to Bahais but to Christians as well. The U.S. and the Interim authority are turning a blind eye, as long as the violence is not directed towards U.S. troops or government forces.
In essence, since the U.S. occupation of Iraq, sa much or more brutality has been allowed to occur than occured under Saddam.
Lets look at what the situation for women in the professional world was under Saddam, and what is starting to happen since his regime has been "changed":
Many women professionals in Iraq fear that the gains they made during the early years of Saddam Hussein's Baathist secular rule -- in education, the work place and marital status -- are at risk from rising Islamic conservatism.
"If we don't reaffirm our right now, we won't be able to do it later," said gynecologist Lina Abood, 28, whose father was an opposition activist against Saddam.
Despite living in a dictatorship, women in Saddam's Iraq had more rights than many in the Middle East. They could vote, attend school, hold public office and own property. The regime guaranteed a woman the right to prevent her husband from taking a second wife -- permitted under Islam.
However, with the collapse of Saddam's nominally secular regime the influence of Islamic traditionalists has grown, especially in the majority Shiite community but also among the minority Sunnis.
Secular figures such as Ahmad Chalabi, a Westernized Shiite backed by the Pentagon, are widely perceived as losing ground to religious leaders such as Shiite Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Husseini al-Sistani. Many clerics have close ties to Iran where they spent years in exile under Saddam.
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=2739Saddam was in some way, a brutal dictator, but to be honest no more brutal than many of the leaders and governments that we supported in the region, such as in Egypt and in Saudi Arabia.
RAther than look at the situation from the viewpoint of the right wing consevative in the U.S. look at it this way, no matter how brutal Saddam was, it is a rare dictator who begins to give rights and equality to groups that had been oppressed for centuries. As a dictatorm he certainly didnt have to do this. He could have kept all of the oil welath to himself, for his own purposes, For some reason he spent money on mandatory education for all, for universal heqlth care for all, and for food and housing subsidies for all. Did he have to as a dictator. No. did he do it, yes.
So 400,000 innoculations were given. Lets compare this to what Iraqi's had under Saddam:
SUSAN DENTZER: Today the country still bears the scars, not just of Saddam's despotism, but also of wars and international sanctions. Iraq's infant mortality rate, at more than one death for every ten live births, is on a par with many poor African nations.
Until recently, most of Iraq's roughly 4 million children under age 5 had never been immunized against common diseases. Last year, Saddam's government spent just over $16 million on health care, a meager 65 cents for each of Iraq's 25 million citizens. And after widespread looting last spring, many of the nation's 240 hospitals and 1,200 primary health clinics were in shambles.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/health/july-dec03/iraq_12-31.htmlThe article above points out the deterioration of the health system in Iraq AFTER the Gulf War.
Again. conditions for Women in Iraq before the U.S. Gulf War:
Introduction
Women have played important roles throughout Iraq's history. It was in the early years of secular Baathist socialism and early in Saddam Hussein's rule that women's status and rights were formally enshrined in legislation and treaties. In 1970, a new constitution nominally made Iraqi women and men equal under the law (although family law continued to favour men). Under Saddam Hussein, women's literacy and education improved, and restrictions on women outside the home were lifted. Women won the right to vote and to run for political office, and they could drive, work outside the home and hold jobs traditionally held by men. Before 1991, female literacy rates in Iraq were the highest in the region, Iraq had achieved nearly universal primary education for girls as well as boys, and Iraqi women were widely considered to be among the most educated and professional women in the Arab world...
http://www.womenwarpeace.org/iraq/iraq.htmThis article points out that since the U.S. takeover womens rights have been places under religious control, rather than secular control"
Under Saddam, 93 percent of the population had free access to health care (prior to U.S. sponsored sanctions).
A number of studies have noted that, contrary to Sabah A. Salih's claims, Iraq invested heavily in social and economic development before the Persian Gulf War, even during the Iran-Iraq War. In 1980, Iraq initiated a program to reduce infant and child mortality, which, according to a 1990 UNICEF report, rapidly and steadily declined as a result. According to the World Health Organization, prior to the Gulf War, 90 percent of Iraqis had access to safe water and 93 percent had access to health care. According to academics and humanitarian agencies, there was nearly universal access to primary-school education, Iraq won international recognition for its literacy campaign in the 1970s and 1980s, and the vast majority of households had access to electricity. Whatever the government's reasons for these measures, the results were impressive and tremendously beneficial.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1111/is_1833_306/ai_98923238The demise of the Iraqi health care system, which left far fewer people without health care than the U.S. actually does (& opercent of Iraqi's without health care before the sanctions compared to almost 20 percent of Americans without health care in the U.S> iunder George W. Bush)...
Just because we are doing less than Saddam did prior to sanctions which made it almost difficult for Saddam to provide the levels of social benefits that he did prior to the fist U.S. invasion of Iraq, 12 years of economic sanction, and a second invasion of Iraq does not mean we are doing better than Saddam. In fact, the sanctions have been found to have been responsible for the deaths of over 1.5 million Iraqis since 1991, which is fifteen times as many deaths as attributed to Saddams brutal regime.
This is the typical Republican argument. They virtually destroyee Iraqs infrastructure by placing sanctions on Iraq, and then actually destroyed it during ths recent invasion, and then brag that things are getting better. Had Saddam been left alone, and the situation handled diplomtically, while Saddams regime might have killed a few hundred thousand more during the time it would have taken for huis regime to collapse, the number of deaths would have been far fewer than those caused by sanctions and the recent war.
The accusations are much like saying that things in Hiroshima and Nagasaki got better when the Japanese surrendered after we droppeed the nuclear bombs.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
