Time Pictures Afghan Women, Obscures Realities of Endless War

[unhappycamper]

Time Pictures Afghan Women, Obscures Realities of Endless War
by Michelle Chen
Published on Wednesday, August 4, 2010 by ColorLines

Things aren't looking too bright for the Obama administration in Afghanistan. Media leakage has exposed holes in Washington's military adventures in a self-destructing nation, and the U.S. public has started wising up to the dilemma of an endless and pointless war.

So perhaps Time magazine was trying to boost the morale of its war-fatigued readers with a new cover photo showing the damaged face of a beautiful girl. Her piercing stare seems to beseech the earnest Americans pouring blood and treasure into their war-torn nation, the last hope for the forsaken masses. The caption below reminds us, "What Happens if We Leave Afghanistan." Don't dare debate the answer--the photo says it all: How could we be so savage as to turn our backs on Aisha and all the other girls destined for destruction at the hands of their backward patriarchs?

How could we turn away from this? Easy. We already have, and we've turned our guns on the women of Afghanistan instead. Activists have panned the cover as a reflection of imperialist arrogance. The "women's liberation" canard masks the ongoing, intensifying crises that women are truly facing: political oppression, economic destitution, and the social death of eternal warfare, Sonali Kolhatkar of the Afghan Women's Mission condemned the media's use of quasi-feminist rhetoric in justifying an unjustifiable war,

This is the same type of justification that the Soviets used (among others) to explain why they should remain in Afghanistan: to save Afghan women from the 'backward' fundamentalists. Foreign armies have always sought to protect Afghan women from violence by fomenting violence themselves. But in the end, just like the Soviets did backroom deals with radical misogynist groups, the U.S. has been empowering non-Taliban misogynist fundamentalists since the start of this war. There are incidents happening every day in Afghanistan of women and girls being harassed, raped, flogged and killed by pro-U.S. warlords and local commanders that are not working with the Taliban -- these incidents are rarely covered by the Western media. In many ways the U.S. occupation has actually made things worse for Afghan women. Afghan women activists I work with prefer to resist two threats to their security (the Taliban and the U.S.-backed central government) instead of three (the third being the U.S./NATO occupation) and have long called for U.S. forces to leave. Time magazine is playing to age-old racist stereotypes: that brown women need a foreign white army to save them from their men.

So maybe the White House can't hide behind the banner of "freeing Afghan women" any more. In light of Obama's botched plans to change course in Afghanistan, many pro-peace advocates for women's rights at Feminist Peace Network are appalled but not surprised:

[sarge43]

1. Deja vu all over again

We have to destroy the village in order to save it.

[unhappycamper]

2. 'Peace with Honor'

'Peace through Strength'

'Nobel Peace Prize'


Fighting for Peace is like fucking for virginity. :grr:

[sarge43]

3. Don't forget the ever popular "Light at the end of the tunnel".

I am wondering where is the outrage on the part of the men of Afghanistan. These women are their mothers, sisters, daughters, wives.

[stray cat]

4. Are people incapable of more than one thought at a time?

Life has nuance and usually multiple outcomes that must be weighed and considered. Life for Afghani women will likely get worse if we leave - but if we want to leave we have to consider them a sacrifice for the greater good for the US and it is their country and they can treat their citizens however they want.

[DirkGently]

5. I had the same reaction to the Time piece

We can support better treatment of Afghan women without attempting to rule Afghansitan in perpetuity. Suddenly all of these heretofore-unmentioned "reasons" for perpetual war are springing up like mushrooms. "Vast Lithium deposits!" didn't seem to do it, so now it's suddenly a war for human rights?

I don't buy it.

We should do MORE for human rights, including the treatment of women under extremist Muslim regimes and otherwise, but perennial war is the Middle East, Asia, or elsewhere is not the way to go about it.

The article really rubbed me the wrong way.