By JANE PERLEZ and VICTORIA BURNETT
Published: December 28, 2007
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/world/asia/28bhuttocnd.html?bl&ex=1198904400&en=75a1ed1a5079493a&ei=5087%0A
Charismatic, striking and a canny political operator, Benazir Bhutto, 54, was reared in the violent and turbulent world of Pakistani politics and became the country’s and the Muslim world’s first female prime leader.
A deeply polarizing figure, the “daughter of Pakistan” was twice elected prime minister and twice expelled from office in a swirl of corruption charges that propelled her into self-imposed exile in London for much of the past decade. She returned home this fall, billing herself as a bulwark against Islamic extremism and a tribune of democracy.
She was killed on Thursday in a combined shooting and bombing attack at a rally in Rawalpindi, one of a series of open events she attended in spite of a failed assassination attempt the day she returned to Pakistan in October and of repeated warnings.
A woman of grand ambitions with a taste for complex political maneuvering, Ms. Bhutto was first elected prime minister in 1988 at the age of 35. The daughter of one of Pakistan’s most flamboyant and democratically inclined prime ministers, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, she inherited from him the mantle of the populist People’s Party, which she came to personify.
Even from exile, her leadership was virtually unchallenged. She staged a high-profile return to her home city of Karachi, drawing hundreds of thousands of supporters to an 11-hour rally and leading a series of political demonstrations in opposition to the country’s military leader, President Pervez Musharraf.
But in a foreshadowing of the attack that killed her, the triumphal return parade was bombed, killing at least 134 of her supporters and wounded more than 400. Ms. Bhutto herself narrowly escaped harm.
Her political plans were also sidetracked: she had been negotiating for months with Mr. Musharraf over a power-sharing arrangement, only to see the general declare emergency rule instead.
Her record in power, and the dance of veils she has deftly performed since her return — one moment standing up to President Musharraf, the next seeming to accommodate him — stirred hope and distrust among Pakistanis and Western officials who viewed her as a palatable alternative to the increasingly unpopular.
A graduate of Harvard and Oxford, Ms. Bhutto brought the backing of Washington and London, where she impressed with her political lineage and her considerable charm. But during her two stints in that job — first from 1988 to 1990 and again from 1993 to 1996 — she developed a reputation for acting imperiously and impulsively. She faced deep questions about her personal probity in public office, which led to corruption cases against her in Switzerland, Spain and Britain, as well as in Pakistan.
Ms. Bhutto often spoke of how her father encouraged her to study the lives of legendary female leaders ranging from Indira Gandhi to Joan of Arc and, as a young woman, closely observed his political maneuvering.
Despite casting herself as a savior of Pakistan’s millions of poor and disenfranchised, Ms. Bhutto grew up in the most rarefied atmosphere the country had to offer. One longtime friend and adviser, Peter W. Galbraith, a former American ambassador to Croatia, said he and Ms. Bhutto believed they first met in 1962 when they were children: he the son of John Kenneth Galbraith, the American ambassador to India; she the daughter of the future Pakistani prime minister. Mr. Galbraith’s father was accompanying Jacqueline Kennedy to a horse show in Lahore.
They met again at Harvard, where Mr. Galbraith remembered Ms. Bhutto arriving as a prim, cake-baking 16-year-old fresh from a Karachi convent.
After her father’s death — he was hanged by another general who seized power, Zia ul-Haq — Ms. Bhutto stepped into the spotlight as his successor. Ms. Bhutto called herself chairperson for life of the opposition Pakistan Peoples Party, a seemingly odd title in an organization based on democratic ideals and one she has acknowledged quarreling over with her mother, Nusrat Bhutto, in the early 1990s.
When Ms. Bhutto was re-elected to a second term as prime minister, her style of government combined both the traditional and the modern, said Zafar Rathore, a senior civil servant at the time.
But her view of the role of government differed little from the classic notion in Pakistan that the state was the preserve of the ruler who dished out favors to constituents and colleagues, he recalled.
As secretary of interior, responsible for the Pakistani police force, Mr. Rathore, who is now retired, said he tried to get an appointment with Ms. Bhutto to explain the need for accountability in the force. He was always rebuffed, he said.
Finally, when he was seated next to her in a small meeting, he said to her, “I’ve been waiting to see you,” he recounted.
“Instantaneously, she said: ‘I am very busy, what do you want? I’ll order it right now.’ ”
She could not understand that a civil servant might want to talk about policies, he said. Instead, he said, “she understood that when all civil servants have access to the sovereign, they want to ask for something.”
But until her death, Ms. Bhutto ruled the party with an iron hand, jealously guarding her position, even while leading the party in absentia for nearly a decade.
Members of her party saluted her return to Pakistan, saying she was the best choice against General Musharraf. Chief among her attributes, they said, was her sheer determination.
Ms. Bhutto’s marriage to Asif Ali Zardari was arranged by her mother, a fact that Ms. Bhutto has often said was easily explained, even for a modern, highly educated Pakistani woman. To be acceptable to the Pakistani public as a politician she could not be a single woman, and what was the difference, she would ask, between such a marriage and computer dating?
Mr. Zardari, who is 51, is known for his love of polo and other perquisites of the good life like fine clothes, expensive restaurants, homes in Dubai and London, and an apartment in New York.
He was minister of investment in Ms. Bhutto’s second government. And it was from that perch that he made many of the deals that haunted Ms. Bhutto, and himself, in the courts.
There were accusations that the couple had illegally taken $1.5 billion from the state. It is a figure that Ms. Bhutto has vigorously contested.
Indeed, one of Ms. Bhutto’s main objectives in seeking to return to power was to restore the reputation of her husband, who was jailed for eight years in Pakistan, said Abdullah Riar, a former senator in the Pakistani Parliament and a former colleague of Ms. Bhutto’s.
“She told me, ‘Time will prove he is the Nelson Mandela of Pakistan,’ ” Mr. Riar said.
27 December 2007
03 December 2007
Sudanese President Pardons British Teacher
This is unfortunate, but understandable. It would be like the outrage of people in the Bible Belt if someone allowed an entire class to use Jesus for a teddy Bear's name.
By JEFFREY GETTLEMAN
NAIROBI, Kenya, Dec. 3 — The British schoolteacher jailed in Sudan for allowing her 7-year-old pupils to name a teddy bear Muhammad was pardoned today by Sudan’s president. She was released to British authorities and will be sent back to England later today.
Sudan’s president, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, made the decision after a meeting this morning in Khartoum, Sudan’s capital, with two Muslim peers from Britain’s House of Lords, the upper house of Parliament.
Prime Minister Gordon Brown of Britain said he was "delighted and relieved" at the news and that "common sense had prevailed,” according to the BBC.
The schoolteacher, Gillian Gibbons, was sentenced to 15 days in jail last week for insulting Islam and was supposed to be released on Dec. 10. On Friday, hundreds of angry Sudanese in Khartoum protested what they considered to be a lenient punishment. Under Sudanese law, she could have been jailed for six months and received 40 lashes.
But meanwhile, British officials put heavy pressure on Sudan to release Ms. Gibbons, 54, saying that she had made an innocent mistake in allowing her students to give a class teddy bear the same name as Islam’s holy prophet. Muhammad also happens to be one of the most common names in the Muslim world.
In a way, Mr. Bashir was caught in the middle — or at least the Sudanese government tried to make it look that way. By letting Ms. Gibbons out early, he risks provoking Muslim hardliners in his country, who are among his key supporters.
But the case hit his desk at a time when United Nations officials and Western governments are increasingly complaining that Sudan is obstructing an expanded peacekeeping force for Darfur, the war-torn region of western Sudan.
Apparently, Mr. Bashir calculated that he didn’t need to isolate his government any further.
“This was all political,” said Kamal al-Gizouli, Ms. Gibbons’ defense attorney. “The government did this to show they are tolerant. They don’t need any more problems with the world and the international media.”
According to the BBC, Ms. Gibbons issued a statement today saying she was sorry for offending Muslims.
"I have been in Sudan for only four months but I have enjoyed myself immensely,” the statement said. "I have encountered nothing but kindness and generosity from the Sudanese people. I have great respect for the Islamic religion and would not knowingly offend anyone and I am sorry if I caused any distress.”
The teddy bear affair started in September when Ms. Gibbons, who taught at one of Sudan’s most exclusive private schools, began a project on animals and asked her class to suggest a name for a teddy bear. The class voted resoundingly for Muhammad.
As part of the exercise, Ms. Gibbons told her pupils to take the bear home, photograph it and write a diary entry about it. The entries were collected in a book, “My Name Is Muhammad.” Most of her students were Muslim and the children of wealthy Sudanese families.
The government said that when some parents saw the book, they complained to the authorities. Ms. Gibbons was arrested, and she went to trial last Thursday. After an all-day trial, the judge seemed to reach for a compromise by finding her guilty of insulting Islam but handing her a relatively light sentence.
That compromise seemed to please neither the Sudanese hardliners, nor the British. But Mr. al-Gizouli said he doesn’t expect further demonstrations.
“If the government doesn’t want people to go into the streets,” he said today, “they won’t go into the streets. That’s how it works here.”
After the pardon, Ms. Gibbons had been transferred to the British Embassy and was in its custody, before she was due to leave the country later today, Reuters reported.
By JEFFREY GETTLEMAN
NAIROBI, Kenya, Dec. 3 — The British schoolteacher jailed in Sudan for allowing her 7-year-old pupils to name a teddy bear Muhammad was pardoned today by Sudan’s president. She was released to British authorities and will be sent back to England later today.
Sudan’s president, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, made the decision after a meeting this morning in Khartoum, Sudan’s capital, with two Muslim peers from Britain’s House of Lords, the upper house of Parliament.
Prime Minister Gordon Brown of Britain said he was "delighted and relieved" at the news and that "common sense had prevailed,” according to the BBC.
The schoolteacher, Gillian Gibbons, was sentenced to 15 days in jail last week for insulting Islam and was supposed to be released on Dec. 10. On Friday, hundreds of angry Sudanese in Khartoum protested what they considered to be a lenient punishment. Under Sudanese law, she could have been jailed for six months and received 40 lashes.
But meanwhile, British officials put heavy pressure on Sudan to release Ms. Gibbons, 54, saying that she had made an innocent mistake in allowing her students to give a class teddy bear the same name as Islam’s holy prophet. Muhammad also happens to be one of the most common names in the Muslim world.
In a way, Mr. Bashir was caught in the middle — or at least the Sudanese government tried to make it look that way. By letting Ms. Gibbons out early, he risks provoking Muslim hardliners in his country, who are among his key supporters.
But the case hit his desk at a time when United Nations officials and Western governments are increasingly complaining that Sudan is obstructing an expanded peacekeeping force for Darfur, the war-torn region of western Sudan.
Apparently, Mr. Bashir calculated that he didn’t need to isolate his government any further.
“This was all political,” said Kamal al-Gizouli, Ms. Gibbons’ defense attorney. “The government did this to show they are tolerant. They don’t need any more problems with the world and the international media.”
According to the BBC, Ms. Gibbons issued a statement today saying she was sorry for offending Muslims.
"I have been in Sudan for only four months but I have enjoyed myself immensely,” the statement said. "I have encountered nothing but kindness and generosity from the Sudanese people. I have great respect for the Islamic religion and would not knowingly offend anyone and I am sorry if I caused any distress.”
The teddy bear affair started in September when Ms. Gibbons, who taught at one of Sudan’s most exclusive private schools, began a project on animals and asked her class to suggest a name for a teddy bear. The class voted resoundingly for Muhammad.
As part of the exercise, Ms. Gibbons told her pupils to take the bear home, photograph it and write a diary entry about it. The entries were collected in a book, “My Name Is Muhammad.” Most of her students were Muslim and the children of wealthy Sudanese families.
The government said that when some parents saw the book, they complained to the authorities. Ms. Gibbons was arrested, and she went to trial last Thursday. After an all-day trial, the judge seemed to reach for a compromise by finding her guilty of insulting Islam but handing her a relatively light sentence.
That compromise seemed to please neither the Sudanese hardliners, nor the British. But Mr. al-Gizouli said he doesn’t expect further demonstrations.
“If the government doesn’t want people to go into the streets,” he said today, “they won’t go into the streets. That’s how it works here.”
After the pardon, Ms. Gibbons had been transferred to the British Embassy and was in its custody, before she was due to leave the country later today, Reuters reported.
26 October 2007
Saudi King Tries to Grow Modern Ideas in Desert
JIDDA, Saudi Arabia, Oct. 25 — On a marshy peninsula 50 miles from this Red Sea port, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia is staking $12.5 billion on a gargantuan bid to catch up with the West in science and technology.
Between an oil refinery and the sea, the monarch is building from scratch a graduate research institution that will have one of the 10 largest endowments in the world, worth more than $10 billion.
Its planners say men and women will study side by side in an enclave walled off from the rest of Saudi society, the country’s notorious religious police will be barred and all religious and ethnic groups will be welcome in a push for academic freedom and international collaboration sure to test the kingdom’s cultural and religious limits.
This undertaking is directly at odds with the kingdom’s religious establishment, which severely limits women’s rights and rejects coeducation and robust liberal inquiry as unthinkable.
For the new institution, the king has cut his own education ministry out the loop, hiring the state-owned oil giant Saudi Aramco to build the campus, create its curriculum and attract foreigners.
Supporters of what is to be called the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, or Kaust, wonder whether the king is simply building another gated island to be dominated by foreigners, like the compounds for oil industry workers that have existed here for decades, or creating an institution that will have a real impact on Saudi society and the rest of the Arab world.
“There are two Saudi Arabias,” said Jamal Khashoggi, the editor of Al Watan, a newspaper. “The question is which Saudi Arabia will take over.”
The king has broken taboos, declaring that the Arabs have fallen critically behind much of the modern world in intellectual achievement and that his country depends too much on oil and not enough on creating wealth through innovation.
“There is a deep knowledge gap separating the Arab and Islamic nations from the process and progress of contemporary global civilization,” said Abdallah S. Jumah, the chief executive of Saudi Aramco. “We are no longer keeping pace with the advances of our era.”
Traditional Saudi practice is on display at the biggest public universities, where the Islamic authorities vet the curriculum, medical researchers tread carefully around controversial subjects like evolution, and female and male students enter classrooms through separate doors and follow lectures while separated by partitions.
Old-fashioned values even seeped into the carefully staged groundbreaking ceremony on Sunday for King Abdullah’s new university, at which organizers distributed an issue of the magazine The Economist with a special advertisement for the university wrapped around the cover. State censors had physically torn from each copy an article about Saudi legal reform titled “Law of God Versus Law of Man,” leaving a jagged edge.
Despite the obstacles, the king intends to make the university a showcase for modernization. The festive groundbreaking and accompanying symposium about the future of the modern university were devised partly as a recruiting tool for international academics.
“Getting the faculty will be the biggest challenge,” said Ahmed F. Ghoniem, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who is consulting for the new university. “That will make it or break it.” Professor Ghoniem has advised the new university to lure international academics with laboratory facilities and grants they cannot find at home, but he also believes that established professors will be reluctant to leave their universities for a small enclave in the desert.
“You have to create an environment where you can connect to the outside world,” said Professor Ghoniem, who is from Egypt. “You cannot work in isolation.”
He admitted that even though he admired the idea of the new university, he would be unlikely to abandon his post at M.I.T. to move to Saudi Arabia.
Festivities at the construction site on Sunday for 1,500 dignitaries included a laser light show and a mockup of the planned campus that filled an entire room. The king laid a crystal cornerstone into a stainless steel shaft on wheels.
Cranes tore out mangroves and pounded the swampland with 20-ton blocks into a surface firm enough to build the campus on. Inside a tent, the king, his honor guard wearing flowing robes and curved daggers, and an array of Aramco officials in suits took to a shiny stage lighted with green and blue neon tubing, like an MTV awards show. Mist from dry ice shrouded the stage, music blared in surround sound, and holographic projections served as a backdrop to some of the speeches.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/26/world/middleeast/26saudi.html?em&ex=1193544000&en=1a3b3c7393a9c040&ei=5087%0A
Between an oil refinery and the sea, the monarch is building from scratch a graduate research institution that will have one of the 10 largest endowments in the world, worth more than $10 billion.
Its planners say men and women will study side by side in an enclave walled off from the rest of Saudi society, the country’s notorious religious police will be barred and all religious and ethnic groups will be welcome in a push for academic freedom and international collaboration sure to test the kingdom’s cultural and religious limits.
This undertaking is directly at odds with the kingdom’s religious establishment, which severely limits women’s rights and rejects coeducation and robust liberal inquiry as unthinkable.
For the new institution, the king has cut his own education ministry out the loop, hiring the state-owned oil giant Saudi Aramco to build the campus, create its curriculum and attract foreigners.
Supporters of what is to be called the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, or Kaust, wonder whether the king is simply building another gated island to be dominated by foreigners, like the compounds for oil industry workers that have existed here for decades, or creating an institution that will have a real impact on Saudi society and the rest of the Arab world.
“There are two Saudi Arabias,” said Jamal Khashoggi, the editor of Al Watan, a newspaper. “The question is which Saudi Arabia will take over.”
The king has broken taboos, declaring that the Arabs have fallen critically behind much of the modern world in intellectual achievement and that his country depends too much on oil and not enough on creating wealth through innovation.
“There is a deep knowledge gap separating the Arab and Islamic nations from the process and progress of contemporary global civilization,” said Abdallah S. Jumah, the chief executive of Saudi Aramco. “We are no longer keeping pace with the advances of our era.”
Traditional Saudi practice is on display at the biggest public universities, where the Islamic authorities vet the curriculum, medical researchers tread carefully around controversial subjects like evolution, and female and male students enter classrooms through separate doors and follow lectures while separated by partitions.
Old-fashioned values even seeped into the carefully staged groundbreaking ceremony on Sunday for King Abdullah’s new university, at which organizers distributed an issue of the magazine The Economist with a special advertisement for the university wrapped around the cover. State censors had physically torn from each copy an article about Saudi legal reform titled “Law of God Versus Law of Man,” leaving a jagged edge.
Despite the obstacles, the king intends to make the university a showcase for modernization. The festive groundbreaking and accompanying symposium about the future of the modern university were devised partly as a recruiting tool for international academics.
“Getting the faculty will be the biggest challenge,” said Ahmed F. Ghoniem, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who is consulting for the new university. “That will make it or break it.” Professor Ghoniem has advised the new university to lure international academics with laboratory facilities and grants they cannot find at home, but he also believes that established professors will be reluctant to leave their universities for a small enclave in the desert.
“You have to create an environment where you can connect to the outside world,” said Professor Ghoniem, who is from Egypt. “You cannot work in isolation.”
He admitted that even though he admired the idea of the new university, he would be unlikely to abandon his post at M.I.T. to move to Saudi Arabia.
Festivities at the construction site on Sunday for 1,500 dignitaries included a laser light show and a mockup of the planned campus that filled an entire room. The king laid a crystal cornerstone into a stainless steel shaft on wheels.
Cranes tore out mangroves and pounded the swampland with 20-ton blocks into a surface firm enough to build the campus on. Inside a tent, the king, his honor guard wearing flowing robes and curved daggers, and an array of Aramco officials in suits took to a shiny stage lighted with green and blue neon tubing, like an MTV awards show. Mist from dry ice shrouded the stage, music blared in surround sound, and holographic projections served as a backdrop to some of the speeches.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/26/world/middleeast/26saudi.html?em&ex=1193544000&en=1a3b3c7393a9c040&ei=5087%0A
11 October 2007
The Crime of Honor - Chapter 1
PART I – ETHNOGRAPHIC RESEARCH
1 – The Crime of Honor
1 – The Crime of Honor
AMMAN — The criminal prosecutor on Monday charged a 68-year-old father
with the premeditated murder of his daughter for reasons the suspect claimed were
related to family honour, official sources said. The 26-year-old victim was shot six
times in the head and neck, reportedly by her father, at their family’s home on Monday
morning, one official source said. “When the police and criminal prosecutor arrived at
the scene, the father fired several rounds in the air, saying he was celebrating the killing
of his daughter,” the official source told The Jordan Times. “I have cleared the family’s
name and cleansed my honour. Let everyone in my town know that I killed my daughter
for this reason,” the official source quoted the suspect as saying. The victim was allegedly
involved in an affair with a married man, who sought her hand in marriage six months prior
to the incident, according to the source. The victim’s family refused because the man was
married, the source said, adding that almost two weeks ago, they discovered she was pregnant.
“The family took their daughter to a different city and arranged for her to undergo an abortion
and an operation to restore her virginity,” the source said. For the past two weeks, the
victim’s family locked her up in the house and on Monday they decided to kill her, the
source added. Pathologist Awad Tarawneh, who performed an autopsy on the victim,
removed four bullets from her skull and indicated that two other bullets penetrated and
exited her lungs, the source said. “Tarawneh also established that the victim underwent an
abortion and hymen- restoration surgery recently,” the source said. Coroners extracted bullets
from the floor and walls of the victim’s room, where the reported murder occurred. “It seems
the victim was run from one place to the other in an attempt to avoid the bullets, because coroners
found several bullets on the floor and other locations in her room,” the source said. There
was evidence that some rounds were fired while she was lying injured on the floor, the source
added. The victim became the seventh person reportedly murdered in a so-called honour crime
in the country since the beginning of the year, according to judicial and medical sources (Jordan Times 04/10/2007).
More than once experts[1] stressed that it was impossible to make generalizations in relation to honor crimes, but I found there were statements that came up time and again throughout the interview process. "These things happen in certain areas, among certain people. Usually the poor overcrowded places where word of mouth travels quickly; usually its uneducated people, unemployed mostly." Nonetheless, there are those who commit honor crimes where people can't believe they would. In one case a woman had decided to divorce her husband, so she sought the advice of an NGO. The social worker told her to give her husband a deadline of June 21st and if he didn’t agree to her demands, then to divorce him. The woman went home and repeated what she had been told to her husband. On the night of the 20th he bludgeoned her to death with a hammer. "He's a nice man. No criminal records and never in a fight on the street, so dealing with domestic violence is difficult."[2]
More than once experts[1] stressed that it was impossible to make generalizations in relation to honor crimes, but I found there were statements that came up time and again throughout the interview process. "These things happen in certain areas, among certain people. Usually the poor overcrowded places where word of mouth travels quickly; usually its uneducated people, unemployed mostly." Nonetheless, there are those who commit honor crimes where people can't believe they would. In one case a woman had decided to divorce her husband, so she sought the advice of an NGO. The social worker told her to give her husband a deadline of June 21st and if he didn’t agree to her demands, then to divorce him. The woman went home and repeated what she had been told to her husband. On the night of the 20th he bludgeoned her to death with a hammer. "He's a nice man. No criminal records and never in a fight on the street, so dealing with domestic violence is difficult."[2]
Nadia Shamrukh, executive director of the Jordanian Women's Union, expressed the opinion that these girls came from a family where there was "usually a history of violence." Girls whose families murder them are also in her view girls with a "bad reputation," and it may be a family’s last resort after less severe disciplinary actions to cleanse the family honor.[3]While this may be true of some cases there are many others where the woman will be killed for unsubstantiated rumors. "If they want to kill her they won't wait for the forensics report, they will kill her regardless," says Dr. Jahshan of the National Center for Forensic Medicine. In one case a teenage girl was sitting too closely to a male relative visiting from the city when her father came into the room. Seeing the situation he flew into a rage and beat her with a stick. When her suicide was later investigated and in addition to the bullet wound in her right fontal lobe they found bruising on her buttocks and legs her father confessed to beating her, but claimed he had not killed her. It was only after the forensic pathologist told the father that it was next to impossible for a teenage girl to shoot herself on the right side of the head with her left hand that the father confessed. He had been a police officer for a number of years, so he knew she needed residue from the gun on her hand to make it look like a suicide.[4]
There are a growing number of researchers who have begun to question the legitimacy of so-called female suicides. In response Dr. Jahshan stated emphatically "some researchers think we classify honor crimes as suicides, because we don't find it, but I take it as a personal offense to me, because it is my job as forensic pathologist to discover if it is suicide. I can't guarantee that occasional cases don't happen, but I can record them very easily. It's not a significant number." There was a case where the family claimed their daughter was having heart trouble and they could not get her to the hospital before she died. Their neighbor noticed a huge refrigerator truck running all night – They had put her in the truck, and then buried her the next morning. It was not until after the burial that the information got to the authorities, so they exhumed her body and discovered that she had been poisoned.
An estimated 95% of honor crime perpetrators receive the lowest sentencing available, which is between 6 months and 3 years. In the case that the judge is seeking to press for a harder sentence, 15 years to life imprisonment, 99% of the families will drop charges, so that the sentence will be reduced and they can have their sons, fathers, and husbands return home[5]. There has only been one recent case where the defendant received a harsher penalty; a man saw his sister who had run away from home 25 years previously. He went home and told his 20 year old son what she had done to the family and that he should go kill her for the family's honor. The young man got 10 years imprisonment for committing manslaughter[6].
Jweideh Women's Prison holds 30 to 40 women in protective custody who are seen to be at possible risk of an honor crime, in addition to convicted criminals. It is currently the only service in Jordan available to protect victims, but most advocates do not believe there is any legal ground for these forced detainments and a coalition has been formed to find a solution. Eva Abu Halaweh sees it as just being "easier to put victims in prison [when they should] try to put the father or brother in [prison]."[7] Others see this as impossible since they are threatened by the entire family so the 1953 Preventative Law, which is only used through an administrative decision, is the best protection available[8].
"This is a terrible issue. You know I'm a practitioner, so I examined a case
at 1am and a very nice woman police officer was talking with me. I ask after
my examination where are you taking her – she started crying- Not the woman,
the police officer! 'I don't know.' So if you don't have a choice, I'm not giving it
a reason, but at the same time we need to be realistic. I know if she stays with
her father and family she is at risk of being killed. So this is the only choice they
have, so they use it […] It is completely wrong to detain them, but if you don't
have a choice and you are in the middle of a problem a decision need to be taken."[9]
In another case a young girl had been raped when she was 14 by three men. A case was filed against them and they were sentenced to life imprisonment. When she was 17 she fell in love with her neighbor who was in his early twenties and he asked to marry her in the traditional way. His family visited her family and got the marriage contract signed and the wedding ceremony would be a few weeks later. Her new husband knew she was not a virgin, but after his family found out they wanted him to divorce her. He decided he would not and they ran away together. Legally they were married, but culturally they were not. After 3 weeks the police found her and she was examined for having sex with her husband. The governor decided to place her in Jweideh for her protection and for three weeks her family tried to get her out. Finally two uncles convinced the governor's office, they signed the papers and she was released. When she got out her father was waiting for her in the car and they all went to the family home for a celebration lunch. Afterwards he took her to the park and shot her.[10]
In another case a young girl had been raped when she was 14 by three men. A case was filed against them and they were sentenced to life imprisonment. When she was 17 she fell in love with her neighbor who was in his early twenties and he asked to marry her in the traditional way. His family visited her family and got the marriage contract signed and the wedding ceremony would be a few weeks later. Her new husband knew she was not a virgin, but after his family found out they wanted him to divorce her. He decided he would not and they ran away together. Legally they were married, but culturally they were not. After 3 weeks the police found her and she was examined for having sex with her husband. The governor decided to place her in Jweideh for her protection and for three weeks her family tried to get her out. Finally two uncles convinced the governor's office, they signed the papers and she was released. When she got out her father was waiting for her in the car and they all went to the family home for a celebration lunch. Afterwards he took her to the park and shot her.[10]
It is because of cases like these that the state continues to hold victims in detention. 90% of parents who bail their daughters out of Jewaideh do so with the intention of killing them.[11] Advocates are desperately pressing for the completion of a shelter to house these women, so that they do not have to suffer the indignity of being in prison and they also have the right to stay for as long as they feel they need the protection, regardless of their family's wishes. In the Sharia, if a woman needs to stay in a shelter (traditionally the tribal chief's house) her husband has no law over her and she is free to come and go at her will. In much more conservative countries like Saudi Arabia and Iraq there are numerous shelters for women who are in need[12].
[1] During my ethnographic period fourteen individuals were interviewed in addition to attending the kick-off for the 16 Day Campaign against Gender Based Violence, a short play performed by the Noor Al-Hussein Foundation, Performing Arts Center on domestic violence, and a tour of Dar Al-Wefaq Al-Usaree, the state’s pending women’s shelter.
[2] Dr. Hani Jahshan Interview, 12/03
[3] Nadia Shamrukh Interview, 11/29
[4] Dr. Hani Jahshan Interview, 12/03
[5] Rana Husseini Interview, 12/01
[6] Dr. Hani Jahshan Interview, 12/03
[7] Eva Abu Halaweh Interview, 11/29
[8] Enaam Asha Interview, 12/01
[9] Dr. Hani Jahshan Interview, 12/03
[10] Dr. Hani Jahshan Interview, 12/03
[11] Rana Husseini Interview, 12/01
[12] Dr. Hani Jahshan Interview
My Thesis - The Crime of Honor
I am going to post my undergrad thesis that I finished this past May. I have some ideas for adding onto it, changing it, extending it, etc. But as of now this is where it stands. If there are any questions just send out an email and I'll reply asap.
On top of this programming a cumulative independent study finished off the semester. A combination of what was learned through course work and field excursions, as well as three weeks of independent interviews and research with an advisor who was a specialist in our chosen field of research came together to form a 30-50 page ethnographic paper.
I chose to research the social phenomenon known as honor crimes or honor killing. Previously I had been involved with a domestic violence shelter as a volunteer Rape Victim Advocate, in addition to a number of other projects on campus and throughout the local community in Missouri that dealt with women’s issues, so this struck me as a natural fit.
The summer leading up to my study abroad experience I began to research honor crimes. I didn’t know the availability of internet in Jordan, and I wanted to get a large amount of preliminary information before I began my journey. I became disappointed as hours of work discovered only dismal amounts of usable information that was not steeped in shock value story lines. Very quickly it became evident that honor crimes were something that only a handful of people in academia had dedicated time to researching. The majority of information available came from stories in teen and women’s magazines looking only for a sensational story. There was extremely little available that relayed accurate information about the simple facts of women’s lives or what factors played into honor crimes without a thick layering of cultural bias.
At the time what I didn’t know was actually my largest stumbling block; without a general knowledge of the social workings of the Middle East it was next to impossible to find viable works on the subjects that I needed. I lacked the words to place in the search engines, and the experience to spot things that could have bearing on the subject from an indirect angle. There is little in Middle Eastern culture that is simply explained by its surface appearance. It holds varied cultures with numerous layers and connections that are dictated by countless rules and regulations that help keep the society functioning within its predefined boundaries and markers.
Without a doubt being female in the Middle East gave me the greatest advantage in learning about the lives of women. In a culture that is strictly gender segregated it would have been nearly impossible to have gained as much first hand knowledge had I been a man. Surprisingly, my second biggest asset was my nationality. When I first arrived and mentioned my intentions to my director and others that were interested I was immediately told that doors would be slammed in my face – This was not a subject to be discussed. Yet, the fact that I was young and foreign gave me an advantage over someone who may have investigated within their own community and gained the censure of everyone around them. I was not seen so much as meddling into other’s personal affairs, as a curious innocent who was merely trying to finish her required assignment.
Since my return to the United States I’ve discovered that despite all of the media exposure available there is still little knowledge as to what constitutes an honor crime or how widespread the phenomenon actually is throughout the world. While the media expressly focuses on the Middle East and Islamic traditions there have been cases of honor crimes covering the globe for as long as there have been structured culture and society. For example, Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), a practice that has ancient roots, falls into the category of honor crimes committed against women throughout Africa and the Middle East and is more widely recognized in the West, as such there have been great strides taken at education of villages and tribes to bring eradication of this practice.
INTRODUCTION
Dawn will come and the girls will ask about her
Where is she? And the monster will answer,
We killed her.
A mark of shame was on our forehead
And we washed it off.
Her black tale will be told by neighbors,
And will be told in the quarter even by the palm trees,
Even the wooden doors will not forget her,
It will be whispered even by the stones.
Washing off the shame… Washing off the shame.
O neighbors, O village girls,
Bread we shall knead with our tears
We’ll shear our plaits and skin our hands,
To keep their clothes white and pure,
No smile, no joy, no turn as the knife so waiting for us
In the hand of father or brother.
And tomorrow, who knows which desert
Swallows us, to wash off shame?
- al-Malaika (Lang 43)
My interest in this work initially began when I chose to study abroad throughout the fall of my junior year at Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri. After pursuing various opportunities I finally settled on a program through Student International Training (SIT) that was centered in Amman, Jordan and fanned out to cover the entirety of the country, as well as Syria. I chose this program, because it was one of only two offered in the region, and it was the only one that focused primarily on the social and economic aspects of the area. The work contained a variety of subjects that ranged from language (Modern Standard Arabic and dialect), to Islamic banking, to Royal NGOs, to minorities within the community, to Islamist social groups (such as the Muslim Brotherhood), to student organizations and religious movements/belief groups.
Dawn will come and the girls will ask about her
Where is she? And the monster will answer,
We killed her.
A mark of shame was on our forehead
And we washed it off.
Her black tale will be told by neighbors,
And will be told in the quarter even by the palm trees,
Even the wooden doors will not forget her,
It will be whispered even by the stones.
Washing off the shame… Washing off the shame.
O neighbors, O village girls,
Bread we shall knead with our tears
We’ll shear our plaits and skin our hands,
To keep their clothes white and pure,
No smile, no joy, no turn as the knife so waiting for us
In the hand of father or brother.
And tomorrow, who knows which desert
Swallows us, to wash off shame?
- al-Malaika (Lang 43)
My interest in this work initially began when I chose to study abroad throughout the fall of my junior year at Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri. After pursuing various opportunities I finally settled on a program through Student International Training (SIT) that was centered in Amman, Jordan and fanned out to cover the entirety of the country, as well as Syria. I chose this program, because it was one of only two offered in the region, and it was the only one that focused primarily on the social and economic aspects of the area. The work contained a variety of subjects that ranged from language (Modern Standard Arabic and dialect), to Islamic banking, to Royal NGOs, to minorities within the community, to Islamist social groups (such as the Muslim Brotherhood), to student organizations and religious movements/belief groups.
On top of this programming a cumulative independent study finished off the semester. A combination of what was learned through course work and field excursions, as well as three weeks of independent interviews and research with an advisor who was a specialist in our chosen field of research came together to form a 30-50 page ethnographic paper.
I chose to research the social phenomenon known as honor crimes or honor killing. Previously I had been involved with a domestic violence shelter as a volunteer Rape Victim Advocate, in addition to a number of other projects on campus and throughout the local community in Missouri that dealt with women’s issues, so this struck me as a natural fit.
The summer leading up to my study abroad experience I began to research honor crimes. I didn’t know the availability of internet in Jordan, and I wanted to get a large amount of preliminary information before I began my journey. I became disappointed as hours of work discovered only dismal amounts of usable information that was not steeped in shock value story lines. Very quickly it became evident that honor crimes were something that only a handful of people in academia had dedicated time to researching. The majority of information available came from stories in teen and women’s magazines looking only for a sensational story. There was extremely little available that relayed accurate information about the simple facts of women’s lives or what factors played into honor crimes without a thick layering of cultural bias.
At the time what I didn’t know was actually my largest stumbling block; without a general knowledge of the social workings of the Middle East it was next to impossible to find viable works on the subjects that I needed. I lacked the words to place in the search engines, and the experience to spot things that could have bearing on the subject from an indirect angle. There is little in Middle Eastern culture that is simply explained by its surface appearance. It holds varied cultures with numerous layers and connections that are dictated by countless rules and regulations that help keep the society functioning within its predefined boundaries and markers.
Without a doubt being female in the Middle East gave me the greatest advantage in learning about the lives of women. In a culture that is strictly gender segregated it would have been nearly impossible to have gained as much first hand knowledge had I been a man. Surprisingly, my second biggest asset was my nationality. When I first arrived and mentioned my intentions to my director and others that were interested I was immediately told that doors would be slammed in my face – This was not a subject to be discussed. Yet, the fact that I was young and foreign gave me an advantage over someone who may have investigated within their own community and gained the censure of everyone around them. I was not seen so much as meddling into other’s personal affairs, as a curious innocent who was merely trying to finish her required assignment.
Since my return to the United States I’ve discovered that despite all of the media exposure available there is still little knowledge as to what constitutes an honor crime or how widespread the phenomenon actually is throughout the world. While the media expressly focuses on the Middle East and Islamic traditions there have been cases of honor crimes covering the globe for as long as there have been structured culture and society. For example, Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), a practice that has ancient roots, falls into the category of honor crimes committed against women throughout Africa and the Middle East and is more widely recognized in the West, as such there have been great strides taken at education of villages and tribes to bring eradication of this practice.
22 August 2007
Muslim Women: My Headscarf is not a Threat
Editor's note: This is part of a series of reports CNN.com is featuring from an upcoming, six-hour television event, "God's Warriors," hosted by CNN chief international correspondent Christiane Amanpour.
(CNN) -- Last year at Christmastime, Rehan Seyam, a Muslim living in New Jersey, went to pick up some things at a local Wal-Mart. Seeing her distinctive traditional Muslim head covering called a "hijab," a man in the store, addressing her directly, sang "The 12 Days of Christmas" using insulting lyrics about terrorism and Osama bin Laden.
She was stunned.
"Do I look like a terrorist to you?" Seyam said she asked the man.
According to Seyam, the man replied, "What else does a terrorist look like?"
Such stories are not altogether uncommon for Muslim Americans. According to a recent poll by the Pew Research Center, 53 percent of Muslims living in America said it has become more difficult to be a Muslim in the United States since the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Fifty-one percent said they are "very worried" or "somewhat worried" that women wearing the hijab are treated poorly, according to the poll.
A simple headscarf generally used by women to hide the hair from view, the hijab has become so controversial among some that several countries have banned or considered banning Muslim women from wearing them in public places. In light of this contentiousness, why do Muslim women choose to wear the hijab? Watch the making of CNN's TV special "God's Warriors" »
Gayad al-Khalik lives in Egypt and says the hijab is a focus on inner beauty.
"I want to shift the attention from my outer self to my inner self when I deal with someone, I don't want them to look at me in a way that wouldn't suit me," she told CNN in an upcoming documentary called "God's Warriors."
Al-Khalik is fluent in English and German; studied in Europe; plays Western music on her guitar; and spent time working for a women's rights organization.
She wears the hijab -- and says it's not just for religious reasons.
"My own conclusion was it is debatable whether it is a religious obligation or not, but I chose to keep it on because I do believe in modesty and you shouldn't be showing off yourself," al-Khalik said.
The Quran calls for women to be modest in their dress but interpretation of the edict varies widely, according to religious experts who spoke with CNN. An author who has written widely on Islam told CNN the Quran does not require women to wear the hijab.
"There's nothing in the Quran about all women having to be veiled or secluded in a certain part of the house. That came in later [after Prophet Mohammed's time]," said religious historian and author Karen Armstrong.
For Seyam, the hijab is a religious duty. "It's God's wish," she said.
"It's a requirement by God. He wants us to cover. He wants us to be modest," Seyam said.
But as important as the hijab is to her, Seyam's decision to cover her face wasn't one she made easily.
"It was very dramatic for me. And I remember, even now thinking about it, it really does make my heart beat a little bit faster," she said, "I was making a decision I knew was permanent. You put on hijab, you don't take it off."
Through her childhood growing up in Long Island, New York, Seyam prayed with her devout Muslim parents, but says she was just "going through the motions." It wasn't until college that she decided to wear a hijab consistently.
Influenced by her more devout friends, Seyam decided being a good Muslim meant covering her head.
"My sole purpose is to be here for the sake of Allah, and I'm doing something that he specifically says that you should be doing."
Seyam said there were practical factors in her decision as well. "I'm sick of guys catcalling. It was just driving me crazy. I felt like a piece of meat."
But Seyam says she traded in catcalling for a different kind of negative attention. People "look at me as if I am threatening and I do not feel like I am threatening looking. I don't feel I should instill fear in anybody's heart, but I do feel like I get dirty looks," she said.
Still, Seyam says her faith sustains her and that wearing the hijab is an important part of that faith.
"I'm not here to live my life and do whatever I want. I'm here to worship God," Seyam said. "I don't think that everybody has that, and I think that I'm lucky for it."
By Brian Rokus CNN 08/21/2007
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/08/21/hijab.godswarriors/index.html
(CNN) -- Last year at Christmastime, Rehan Seyam, a Muslim living in New Jersey, went to pick up some things at a local Wal-Mart. Seeing her distinctive traditional Muslim head covering called a "hijab," a man in the store, addressing her directly, sang "The 12 Days of Christmas" using insulting lyrics about terrorism and Osama bin Laden.
She was stunned.
"Do I look like a terrorist to you?" Seyam said she asked the man.
According to Seyam, the man replied, "What else does a terrorist look like?"
Such stories are not altogether uncommon for Muslim Americans. According to a recent poll by the Pew Research Center, 53 percent of Muslims living in America said it has become more difficult to be a Muslim in the United States since the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Fifty-one percent said they are "very worried" or "somewhat worried" that women wearing the hijab are treated poorly, according to the poll.
A simple headscarf generally used by women to hide the hair from view, the hijab has become so controversial among some that several countries have banned or considered banning Muslim women from wearing them in public places. In light of this contentiousness, why do Muslim women choose to wear the hijab? Watch the making of CNN's TV special "God's Warriors" »
Gayad al-Khalik lives in Egypt and says the hijab is a focus on inner beauty.
"I want to shift the attention from my outer self to my inner self when I deal with someone, I don't want them to look at me in a way that wouldn't suit me," she told CNN in an upcoming documentary called "God's Warriors."
Al-Khalik is fluent in English and German; studied in Europe; plays Western music on her guitar; and spent time working for a women's rights organization.
She wears the hijab -- and says it's not just for religious reasons.
"My own conclusion was it is debatable whether it is a religious obligation or not, but I chose to keep it on because I do believe in modesty and you shouldn't be showing off yourself," al-Khalik said.
The Quran calls for women to be modest in their dress but interpretation of the edict varies widely, according to religious experts who spoke with CNN. An author who has written widely on Islam told CNN the Quran does not require women to wear the hijab.
"There's nothing in the Quran about all women having to be veiled or secluded in a certain part of the house. That came in later [after Prophet Mohammed's time]," said religious historian and author Karen Armstrong.
For Seyam, the hijab is a religious duty. "It's God's wish," she said.
"It's a requirement by God. He wants us to cover. He wants us to be modest," Seyam said.
But as important as the hijab is to her, Seyam's decision to cover her face wasn't one she made easily.
"It was very dramatic for me. And I remember, even now thinking about it, it really does make my heart beat a little bit faster," she said, "I was making a decision I knew was permanent. You put on hijab, you don't take it off."
Through her childhood growing up in Long Island, New York, Seyam prayed with her devout Muslim parents, but says she was just "going through the motions." It wasn't until college that she decided to wear a hijab consistently.
Influenced by her more devout friends, Seyam decided being a good Muslim meant covering her head.
"My sole purpose is to be here for the sake of Allah, and I'm doing something that he specifically says that you should be doing."
Seyam said there were practical factors in her decision as well. "I'm sick of guys catcalling. It was just driving me crazy. I felt like a piece of meat."
But Seyam says she traded in catcalling for a different kind of negative attention. People "look at me as if I am threatening and I do not feel like I am threatening looking. I don't feel I should instill fear in anybody's heart, but I do feel like I get dirty looks," she said.
Still, Seyam says her faith sustains her and that wearing the hijab is an important part of that faith.
"I'm not here to live my life and do whatever I want. I'm here to worship God," Seyam said. "I don't think that everybody has that, and I think that I'm lucky for it."
By Brian Rokus CNN 08/21/2007
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/08/21/hijab.godswarriors/index.html
10 August 2007
Jordan Yields Poverty and Pain for the Well-Off Fleeing Iraq
AMMAN, Jordan, Aug. 9 — After her husband’s killing, Amira sold a generation of her family’s belongings, packed up her children and left behind their large house in Baghdad, with its gardener and maid.
Now, a year later, she is making meat fritters for money in this sand-colored capital, unable to afford glasses for her son, and in the quiet moments, choking on the bitterness of loss.
The war has scattered hundreds of thousands of Iraqis throughout the Middle East, but those who came here tended to be the most affluent. Most lacked residency status and were not allowed to work, but as former bank managers, social club directors and business owners, they thought their money would last.
It has not. Rents are high, schools cost money, and under-the-table jobs pay little. A survey of 100 Iraqi families found that 64 were surviving by selling their assets.
Now, as a new school year begins, many Iraqis here say they can no longer afford some of life’s basic requirements — education for their children and hospital visits for their families. Teeth are pulled instead of filled. Shampoo is no longer on the grocery list.
“My savings are finished,” said Amira, who is 50. “My kids won’t be in school this year.”
It is a painful new reality for an important part of Iraq’s population, the educated, secular center. They refused to take sides as the violence got worse. And their suffering augurs something larger for Iraq. The poorer they grow and the longer they stay away, the more crippled Iraq becomes. “The binding section of the population does not exist anymore,” said Ayad Allawi, a former prime minister, who now spends most of his time in Jordan. “The middle class has left Iraq.”
Iraqis streamed into Jordan and Syria in 2005 and 2006, with the professional class picking Jordan. The signs on the second floor of Al Essra Hospital, a private hospital in central Amman, display only Iraqi doctors’ names. The Jordanians have been relatively lenient, registering doctors in their medical unions and allowing the vast majority to live in their country without residency permits.
But by early this year Iraqis were weighing so heavily on this small country that the Jordanian authorities sharply reduced the numbers they accepted. (Rejections became so common that Iraqi Airways now offers a 30 percent discount to returning passengers who have been turned away.)
Many thought Jordan would be a stop on the way to Australia or Sweden, or a brief vacation from Baghdad’s inferno. But as the months wore on, it became clear that most countries were closed to Iraqis, the war was only getting worse, and families were left stranded, burning through their savings. The Australian authorities twice rejected Hassan Jabr, a Spanish teacher who left his elegant home and garden in Baghdad after his 12-year-old son was kidnapped and killed last year. Now, with his savings gone, badly dented before he left by a $10,000 ransom that he paid to try to get his son back, he is living off his family’s food ration cards that his mother sells in Baghdad.
“We saw reality in Amman and we were shocked,” he said, sitting in his spare one-room apartment in eastern Amman. “We planned for two months.”
Iraqis here have never been formally counted. A survey by a Norwegian group, Fafo, which has not been made public, is expected to report there are less than half of the 750,000 commonly estimated to be in Jordan.
But that is still 10 percent of the population of two million in Amman, where most of the Iraqis live, and aid agencies have stepped up activities.
This month the Jordanian government, under pressure from the United States, agreed to let Iraqi children without residency attend public schools, a right not extended to any other foreigners.
But the schools are crowded and the government has not yet prepared for the change, arguing that it should receive aid to accommodate it. United Nations agencies are asking for extra money to expand, at first by adding new shifts to existing schools.
Save the Children, a humanitarian group, says it has referred 4,000 Iraqis to schools recently, but the referrals do not guarantee acceptance. Amira went to the public school in her neighborhood, but was told that there was no room for her children. Private school cost her $5,000 last year, a third of her savings.
As the middle class becomes poor, new patterns form. Zeinab Majid’s okra stew no longer has meat. She buys her vegetables just before sunset, when the prices are the lowest. A stranger offered her the use of a washing machine, a gesture that nearly brought her to tears.
She came to Amman last September after her husband, a painter, had received two threats, and the studio he used had been bombed. They sold everything. Now her husband, a quiet man in small round glasses, spends his days jabbing paint onto small canvases while their boys, ages 7 and 4, watch cartoons on an old TV. “There are days when I’m penniless completely,” she said, serving juice to visitors. A Catholic relief organization, Caritas, helped pay for first grade for her older son last year.
The pain of the war closes people, and recent arrivals tend to live isolated lives, dividing the community into small, sad pockets. Amira moves mechanically through her days like a stunned survivor of a shipwreck. Tears come easily when she remembers the belongings she sold, the photo albums she did not take. Her husband, a Sunni, died five days after men in police uniforms took him from his shop last year. His face was bruised and his body broken. It was 22 years to the day since they first met.
“They were after the happiness,” she said, her face wet with tears. “They wanted to kill the happiness.”
The United States promised to increase the number of Iraqi refugees it takes, and the United Nations has referred 9,100 Iraqis to it this year. But so far fewer than 200 have arrived, according to the State Department. Several hundred more are expected to arrive in the coming weeks.
Running out of money is frightening, and some families choose to move to Syria, where things are cheaper, or, in some cases, back to Baghdad and the war.
Aseel Qaradaghi, a 25-year-old software engineer, was pregnant when she brought her small daughter here last summer after receiving threats from Islamic extremists. Her husband, a translator for a South African security firm, stayed in Baghdad to earn money. But when he did not call on her birthday, she knew something was wrong, and only after pressing his friends on a crackling phone line did she learn that he had been kidnapped.
Now, eight months later, she is earning a small wage at a nursery, but without his salary it is not enough, and she has applied for refugee status. If she is rejected, she will have to return to Baghdad. She does not know her husband’s fate, but worries that it will be the same as her brother’s, killed for working as a translator for the American military.
“I cannot allow myself to think about him,” she said, bouncing her baby boy on her lap. “The moment I start to allow feelings, my life will stop. I’m afraid of the moment that I collapse.”
Last week, Amira had a guest. Nada, a mother of three, whose husband worked as a deputy director of a prestigious social club in Baghdad, was preparing to move to Syria. The thousands of dollars from the sale of several cars and a house are almost gone.
“My daughter was second in her class,” Amira said, her words coming hard and fast. “I traveled all over the world. I want to tell the Americans what has happened to us.”
Yusra al-Hakeem contributed reporting. New York Times 08/10/07
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/10/world/middleeast/10refugees.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Now, a year later, she is making meat fritters for money in this sand-colored capital, unable to afford glasses for her son, and in the quiet moments, choking on the bitterness of loss.
The war has scattered hundreds of thousands of Iraqis throughout the Middle East, but those who came here tended to be the most affluent. Most lacked residency status and were not allowed to work, but as former bank managers, social club directors and business owners, they thought their money would last.
It has not. Rents are high, schools cost money, and under-the-table jobs pay little. A survey of 100 Iraqi families found that 64 were surviving by selling their assets.
Now, as a new school year begins, many Iraqis here say they can no longer afford some of life’s basic requirements — education for their children and hospital visits for their families. Teeth are pulled instead of filled. Shampoo is no longer on the grocery list.
“My savings are finished,” said Amira, who is 50. “My kids won’t be in school this year.”
It is a painful new reality for an important part of Iraq’s population, the educated, secular center. They refused to take sides as the violence got worse. And their suffering augurs something larger for Iraq. The poorer they grow and the longer they stay away, the more crippled Iraq becomes. “The binding section of the population does not exist anymore,” said Ayad Allawi, a former prime minister, who now spends most of his time in Jordan. “The middle class has left Iraq.”
Iraqis streamed into Jordan and Syria in 2005 and 2006, with the professional class picking Jordan. The signs on the second floor of Al Essra Hospital, a private hospital in central Amman, display only Iraqi doctors’ names. The Jordanians have been relatively lenient, registering doctors in their medical unions and allowing the vast majority to live in their country without residency permits.
But by early this year Iraqis were weighing so heavily on this small country that the Jordanian authorities sharply reduced the numbers they accepted. (Rejections became so common that Iraqi Airways now offers a 30 percent discount to returning passengers who have been turned away.)
Many thought Jordan would be a stop on the way to Australia or Sweden, or a brief vacation from Baghdad’s inferno. But as the months wore on, it became clear that most countries were closed to Iraqis, the war was only getting worse, and families were left stranded, burning through their savings. The Australian authorities twice rejected Hassan Jabr, a Spanish teacher who left his elegant home and garden in Baghdad after his 12-year-old son was kidnapped and killed last year. Now, with his savings gone, badly dented before he left by a $10,000 ransom that he paid to try to get his son back, he is living off his family’s food ration cards that his mother sells in Baghdad.
“We saw reality in Amman and we were shocked,” he said, sitting in his spare one-room apartment in eastern Amman. “We planned for two months.”
Iraqis here have never been formally counted. A survey by a Norwegian group, Fafo, which has not been made public, is expected to report there are less than half of the 750,000 commonly estimated to be in Jordan.
But that is still 10 percent of the population of two million in Amman, where most of the Iraqis live, and aid agencies have stepped up activities.
This month the Jordanian government, under pressure from the United States, agreed to let Iraqi children without residency attend public schools, a right not extended to any other foreigners.
But the schools are crowded and the government has not yet prepared for the change, arguing that it should receive aid to accommodate it. United Nations agencies are asking for extra money to expand, at first by adding new shifts to existing schools.
Save the Children, a humanitarian group, says it has referred 4,000 Iraqis to schools recently, but the referrals do not guarantee acceptance. Amira went to the public school in her neighborhood, but was told that there was no room for her children. Private school cost her $5,000 last year, a third of her savings.
As the middle class becomes poor, new patterns form. Zeinab Majid’s okra stew no longer has meat. She buys her vegetables just before sunset, when the prices are the lowest. A stranger offered her the use of a washing machine, a gesture that nearly brought her to tears.
She came to Amman last September after her husband, a painter, had received two threats, and the studio he used had been bombed. They sold everything. Now her husband, a quiet man in small round glasses, spends his days jabbing paint onto small canvases while their boys, ages 7 and 4, watch cartoons on an old TV. “There are days when I’m penniless completely,” she said, serving juice to visitors. A Catholic relief organization, Caritas, helped pay for first grade for her older son last year.
The pain of the war closes people, and recent arrivals tend to live isolated lives, dividing the community into small, sad pockets. Amira moves mechanically through her days like a stunned survivor of a shipwreck. Tears come easily when she remembers the belongings she sold, the photo albums she did not take. Her husband, a Sunni, died five days after men in police uniforms took him from his shop last year. His face was bruised and his body broken. It was 22 years to the day since they first met.
“They were after the happiness,” she said, her face wet with tears. “They wanted to kill the happiness.”
The United States promised to increase the number of Iraqi refugees it takes, and the United Nations has referred 9,100 Iraqis to it this year. But so far fewer than 200 have arrived, according to the State Department. Several hundred more are expected to arrive in the coming weeks.
Running out of money is frightening, and some families choose to move to Syria, where things are cheaper, or, in some cases, back to Baghdad and the war.
Aseel Qaradaghi, a 25-year-old software engineer, was pregnant when she brought her small daughter here last summer after receiving threats from Islamic extremists. Her husband, a translator for a South African security firm, stayed in Baghdad to earn money. But when he did not call on her birthday, she knew something was wrong, and only after pressing his friends on a crackling phone line did she learn that he had been kidnapped.
Now, eight months later, she is earning a small wage at a nursery, but without his salary it is not enough, and she has applied for refugee status. If she is rejected, she will have to return to Baghdad. She does not know her husband’s fate, but worries that it will be the same as her brother’s, killed for working as a translator for the American military.
“I cannot allow myself to think about him,” she said, bouncing her baby boy on her lap. “The moment I start to allow feelings, my life will stop. I’m afraid of the moment that I collapse.”
Last week, Amira had a guest. Nada, a mother of three, whose husband worked as a deputy director of a prestigious social club in Baghdad, was preparing to move to Syria. The thousands of dollars from the sale of several cars and a house are almost gone.
“My daughter was second in her class,” Amira said, her words coming hard and fast. “I traveled all over the world. I want to tell the Americans what has happened to us.”
Yusra al-Hakeem contributed reporting. New York Times 08/10/07
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/10/world/middleeast/10refugees.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
06 August 2007
Olmert, Abbas meet on Palestinian soil
Israeli PM is first to visit a Palestinian city since fighting began 7 years ago
JERICHO, West Bank - Ehud Olmert on Monday became the first Israeli prime minister to visit a Palestinian town since the outbreak of fighting seven years ago, meeting under heavy guard with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in Jericho to talk about the creation of a Palestinian state.
Olmert took a security risk in coming to the biblical desert town, but also gave a symbolic boost to Abbas, who stands to gain stature by hosting Olmert on his own turf.
Accompanied by two helicopters, Olmert arrived by motorcade at a five-star hotel just a few hundred yards from a permanent Israeli army checkpoint on the outskirts of Jericho.
The meeting was held in one of the West Bank’s most peaceful areas. However, it still posed a challenge to Olmert’s security detail, since the West Bank cities are controlled by Abbas’ weak police forces, which in June failed to prevent Hamas militants from seizing the Gaza Strip by force.
The meeting also tested renewed Israeli-Palestinian security coordination in the West Bank, following the fall of Gaza to Hamas. The Israeli army sealed checkpoints around Jericho, while Palestinian police blocked roads around the hotel.
Conflicting expectations
The Abbas-Olmert meeting is one in a series of sessions, meant to prepare for an international Mideast conference in the U.S. in November.
However, both sides appear to have conflicting expectations.
The Palestinians hope the two leaders will sketch the outlines of a final peace deal, to be presented to the U.S. conference, Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said Monday.
The four core issues of a future peace deal are the final borders of a Palestinian state, a division of Jerusalem, a removal of Israeli settlements and the fate of Palestinian refugees.
“What they need to do is to establish the parameters for solving all these issues,” Erekat said. “Once the parameters are established, then it can be deferred to experts” for drafting.
However, David Baker, an official in Olmert’s office, said the core issues would not be discussed now.
The leaders will discuss humanitarian aid to the Palestinians and Israeli security concerns, as well as the institutions of a future Palestinian state, Baker said.
Baker said the meeting is a signal of Israeli good will, adding that Olmert “intends for this to be a productive meeting to enable progress with the Palestinians.”
Effort to ease West Bank life
Both sides said the meeting also will deal with easing daily life in the West Bank, including the removal of some of the checkpoints erected after the outbreak of the second Palestinian uprising in September 2000.
Abbas and Olmert previously agreed to try to restore the situation to what it was before the uprising, including returning full Palestinian control over West Bank towns and cities.
However, the Israeli military has been slow to dismantle roadblocks or ease control over Palestinian towns, citing concerns that Abbas’ forces are not strong enough to prevent attacks on Israelis.
Illustrating the issue, Olmert’s motorcade passed through one of the army’s checkpoints, at the entrance to Jericho. The checkpoint was erected after the outbreak of the uprising, and has controlled Palestinian traffic in and out of the town ever since, often causing long delays for motorists.
Symbol of a bygone era of optimism
The Abbas-Olmert meeting place is surrounded by symbols of a bygone era of optimism, as well as the failures of peace talks. Across the street from the Intercontinental Hotel is the Aqabat Jaber refugee camp, a reminder of a problem that has festered for decades.
The hotel was built in the late 1990s, when peace between Israelis and Palestinians appeared close. The hotel is next to the Oasis Casino, which opened at the same time. The casino was hugely popular with Israeli gamblers until the Israeli military prevented all Israelis from entering West Bank cities at the start of the uprising. Palestinian militants later used the building for exchanges of fire with nearby Israeli troops.
The last meeting between Israeli and Palestinian leaders on Palestinian soil was in 2000, when then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak held talks with Abbas’ predecessor, the late Yasser Arafat, in the West Bank town of Ramallah.
Palestinians in Jericho appeared to have low expectations from Monday’s meeting.
Mahmoud Santarisi, 35, said he would be pleased if the meeting led to the removal of one Israeli checkpoint and allowed him to visit Jerusalem, off-limits because of Israeli security restrictions.
“We hope for a good life, to be able to go to Jerusalem, to make money, and live in peace together. But Israel and the Americans will never give us a state,” Santarisi said.
Flurry of peace efforts
Monday’s meeting is part of a recent flurry of peace efforts sparked by Hamas’ takeover of Gaza in June, after a five-day rout of Abbas’ Fatah movement. The Hamas victory led Abbas to form a moderate government in the West Bank which has received broad international backing, while Hamas remains largely isolated in Gaza.
In an effort to shore up Abbas, Israel has released 250 Palestinian prisoners, resumed the transfer of Palestinian tax money and granted amnesty to Fatah gunmen willing to put down their weapons.
The efforts have also seen a visit to the region by new international Mideast peace envoy Tony Blair, an unprecedented visit by an Arab League delegation to present an Arab peace plan to Israel, and the U.S. plans for a regional conference.
In Gaza, Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri criticized Abbas for meeting Olmert, saying the meeting was “aimed at beautifying the ugly image of the Israeli occupation before the world.”
“All meetings will be of no benefit to the Palestinian people,” Abu Zuhri said.
JERICHO, West Bank - Ehud Olmert on Monday became the first Israeli prime minister to visit a Palestinian town since the outbreak of fighting seven years ago, meeting under heavy guard with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in Jericho to talk about the creation of a Palestinian state.
Olmert took a security risk in coming to the biblical desert town, but also gave a symbolic boost to Abbas, who stands to gain stature by hosting Olmert on his own turf.
Accompanied by two helicopters, Olmert arrived by motorcade at a five-star hotel just a few hundred yards from a permanent Israeli army checkpoint on the outskirts of Jericho.
The meeting was held in one of the West Bank’s most peaceful areas. However, it still posed a challenge to Olmert’s security detail, since the West Bank cities are controlled by Abbas’ weak police forces, which in June failed to prevent Hamas militants from seizing the Gaza Strip by force.
The meeting also tested renewed Israeli-Palestinian security coordination in the West Bank, following the fall of Gaza to Hamas. The Israeli army sealed checkpoints around Jericho, while Palestinian police blocked roads around the hotel.
Conflicting expectations
The Abbas-Olmert meeting is one in a series of sessions, meant to prepare for an international Mideast conference in the U.S. in November.
However, both sides appear to have conflicting expectations.
The Palestinians hope the two leaders will sketch the outlines of a final peace deal, to be presented to the U.S. conference, Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said Monday.
The four core issues of a future peace deal are the final borders of a Palestinian state, a division of Jerusalem, a removal of Israeli settlements and the fate of Palestinian refugees.
“What they need to do is to establish the parameters for solving all these issues,” Erekat said. “Once the parameters are established, then it can be deferred to experts” for drafting.
However, David Baker, an official in Olmert’s office, said the core issues would not be discussed now.
The leaders will discuss humanitarian aid to the Palestinians and Israeli security concerns, as well as the institutions of a future Palestinian state, Baker said.
Baker said the meeting is a signal of Israeli good will, adding that Olmert “intends for this to be a productive meeting to enable progress with the Palestinians.”
Effort to ease West Bank life
Both sides said the meeting also will deal with easing daily life in the West Bank, including the removal of some of the checkpoints erected after the outbreak of the second Palestinian uprising in September 2000.
Abbas and Olmert previously agreed to try to restore the situation to what it was before the uprising, including returning full Palestinian control over West Bank towns and cities.
However, the Israeli military has been slow to dismantle roadblocks or ease control over Palestinian towns, citing concerns that Abbas’ forces are not strong enough to prevent attacks on Israelis.
Illustrating the issue, Olmert’s motorcade passed through one of the army’s checkpoints, at the entrance to Jericho. The checkpoint was erected after the outbreak of the uprising, and has controlled Palestinian traffic in and out of the town ever since, often causing long delays for motorists.
Symbol of a bygone era of optimism
The Abbas-Olmert meeting place is surrounded by symbols of a bygone era of optimism, as well as the failures of peace talks. Across the street from the Intercontinental Hotel is the Aqabat Jaber refugee camp, a reminder of a problem that has festered for decades.
The hotel was built in the late 1990s, when peace between Israelis and Palestinians appeared close. The hotel is next to the Oasis Casino, which opened at the same time. The casino was hugely popular with Israeli gamblers until the Israeli military prevented all Israelis from entering West Bank cities at the start of the uprising. Palestinian militants later used the building for exchanges of fire with nearby Israeli troops.
The last meeting between Israeli and Palestinian leaders on Palestinian soil was in 2000, when then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak held talks with Abbas’ predecessor, the late Yasser Arafat, in the West Bank town of Ramallah.
Palestinians in Jericho appeared to have low expectations from Monday’s meeting.
Mahmoud Santarisi, 35, said he would be pleased if the meeting led to the removal of one Israeli checkpoint and allowed him to visit Jerusalem, off-limits because of Israeli security restrictions.
“We hope for a good life, to be able to go to Jerusalem, to make money, and live in peace together. But Israel and the Americans will never give us a state,” Santarisi said.
Flurry of peace efforts
Monday’s meeting is part of a recent flurry of peace efforts sparked by Hamas’ takeover of Gaza in June, after a five-day rout of Abbas’ Fatah movement. The Hamas victory led Abbas to form a moderate government in the West Bank which has received broad international backing, while Hamas remains largely isolated in Gaza.
In an effort to shore up Abbas, Israel has released 250 Palestinian prisoners, resumed the transfer of Palestinian tax money and granted amnesty to Fatah gunmen willing to put down their weapons.
The efforts have also seen a visit to the region by new international Mideast peace envoy Tony Blair, an unprecedented visit by an Arab League delegation to present an Arab peace plan to Israel, and the U.S. plans for a regional conference.
In Gaza, Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri criticized Abbas for meeting Olmert, saying the meeting was “aimed at beautifying the ugly image of the Israeli occupation before the world.”
“All meetings will be of no benefit to the Palestinian people,” Abu Zuhri said.
15 July 2007
Children of Iraq
http://www.msnbc.com/modules/interactive.aspx?type=ss&launch=19714431,3042924&pg=8
I found this slide show on MSN and it really touched my heart. Nearly all of the children wanted to be doctors... It breaks my heart and I wish there was more I could do.
I found this slide show on MSN and it really touched my heart. Nearly all of the children wanted to be doctors... It breaks my heart and I wish there was more I could do.
30 June 2007
AIUSA MIDDLE EAST NEWSLETTER - Issue:2 June 2007
From the Editor
This newsletter is published by the AIUSA Middle East Coordination Group (the country specialists) for all the members of the AI local, student and MERAN groups that work on Action files , MERAN actions, or any other Amnesty work in the Middle East. We will feature regional background, news, and action. We hope this will help create a sense of community, the “big picture”, and that we are all in this together, as many of the issues and themes overlap the entire Middle East. We would also like the members to be able to share their successes, events, ideas with everyone. So, please email me and they will be in the next newsletter!
Pat Gerencser, Editor- pgerencser@igc
Israel/OPT: Forty years of occupation -- no security without basic rights
On the eve of the 40th anniversary of Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, Amnesty International today called on the Israeli authorities to end the land-grabbing, blockades and other violations of international law carried out under the occupation. These have resulted in widespread human rights abuses and have also failed to bring security to the Israeli and Palestinian civilian populations.A 45-page report published today, Enduring Occupation: Palestinian under siege in the West Bank, illustrates the devastating impact of four decades of Israeli military occupation. The report documents the relentless expansion of unlawful settlements on occupied land that deprives the Palestinian population of crucial resources and documents a plethora of measures that confine Palestinians to fragmented enclaves and hinder their access to work, health and education facilities. These measures include a 700km fence/wall, more than 500 checkpoints and blockades, and a complicated system of permits."Palestinians living in the West Bank are blocked at every turn. This is not simply an inconvenience -- it can be a matter of life or death. It is unacceptable that women in labour, sick children, or victims of accidents on their way to hospital should be forced to take long detours and face delays which can cost them their lives," said Malcolm Smart, Director for Amnesty International's Middle East and North Africa Programme."International action is urgently needed to address the widespread human rights abuses being committed under the occupation, and which are fuelling resentment and despair among a predominantly young and increasingly radicalized Palestinian population," said Malcolm Smart. "For forty years, the international community has failed adequately to address the Israeli-Palestinian problem; it cannot, must not, wait another forty years to do so."Amnesty International is calling for the urgent deployment of an effective international human rights monitoring mechanism to monitor compliance by both parties, Israeli and Palestinian, with their obligations under international law. This must be backed up with a commitment to investigate and prosecute, through the exercise of universal jurisdiction, those who commit war crimes or other crimes under international law."We do not underestimate the difficulties of establishing such an independent monitoring system, whether by the UN or another appropriate body, but it is vital that the international community should become more engaged in finding a solution, and in holding the parties to their obligations under international law," said Malcolm Smart.In its report, Amnesty International acknowledges Israel’s legitimate security concerns and the government’s obligation to protect the population within its borders, but says this does not justify blatant violations of international law, such as construction of much of the fence/wall inside the West Bank on Palestinian land."If the intention was simply to prevent Palestinian suicide bombers from entering Israel, the barrier would be located on the Green Line, the border between Israel and the West Bank," said Malcolm Smart. "Yet, the reality is that most of it is being built on Palestinian land, in defiance of the International Court of Justice, and is separating Palestinian towns and villages in the West Bank."In addition to the fence/wall, the movement of Palestinians is several constrained by a host of other restrictions, including over 500 checkpoints and blockades, and a network of roads for Israeli settlers to use and off-limits to Palestinians. The barrier, together with these roads and roadblocks, benefit continuously expanding but unlawful Israeli settlements and make them territorially contiguous with Israel."Harsh Israeli restrictions have caused the virtual collapse of the Palestinian economy and are exacerbating the increasingly fragile conditions in which Palestinians live and work -- resulting in levels of despair, poverty and food insecurity never before seen in the Occupied Palestinian Territories," said Malcolm Smart."Most Palestinians are now relying on aid for subsistence, with families reducing the quality and quantity of the food they consume and selling assets essential for their livelihoods."Amnesty International is calling on the Israeli authorities to:* lift the regime of blockades and restrictions on Palestinians in the OPT, which constitute collective punishment, and ensure that restrictions imposed in response to specific security threats only target the individuals concerned -- not entire communities.* halt the construction of the fence/wall inside the West Bank, and remove the sections already built there;* cease the construction or expansion of Israeli settlements and related infrastructure in the OPT as a first step towards removing Israeli settlements and "outposts";* cancel all demolition orders on homes in the OPT, and provide reparation to Palestinians whose homes and properties have already been destroyed.The organization is also reiterating its call on Palestinian armed groups to end immediately attacks on civilians and on the Palestinian Authority (PA) to take effective action to stop and prevent such attacks and bring to justice those responsible. To see a full copy of the report, please go to http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engmde150332007
Egypt Closes Door on AI Trial Observers
The Egyptian government June 3 refused to allow human rights groups to observe the military trial of 33 leading members of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, undercutting the government's claims that civilians will have a fair trial before military courts, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch said today. Along with mass arrests of political opponents and democratic activists in the days preceding the June shura legislative council elections, the closing of the military court trials is indication that human rights are moving in the wrong direction in Egypt.Amnesty International, the Arab Commission for Human Rights, the Egyptian Organization for Human Rights, and Human Rights Watch had sent observers to monitor the trial of 33 leading members of the Brotherhood. None of the groups was allowed to attend. Among the accused is Khairat al-Shatir, the organization's deputy supreme guide, who was arrested on December 14, 2006, along with 16 other prominent Muslim Brotherhood members in predawn raids. They were subsequently charged with membership in a banned organization, providing students with weapons and military training. On January 29, 2007, a Cairo criminal court dismissed all charges against al-Shatir and his co-defendants and ordered their immediate release. Security forces re-arrested the men moments after the ruling, and on February 4, President Hosni Mubarak, ignoring the court's verdict, ordered the cases, and those of 23 other alleged members of the Brotherhood, transferred to a military court. On May 8, a Cairo administrative court ruled that President Mubarak's order was invalid, but on May 14, the Supreme Administrative court reversed that decision after the government appealed. After the June 3 session, the court adjourned until July 15. "Twelve years ago the court granted me unfettered access when I observed the military trial of senior members of the Muslim Brotherhood," said Palestinian lawyer Anis Kassim, Amnesty International's senior trial observer. "I am extremely disappointed in the government's attitude this time." Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch said that trying civilians before Egyptian military courts flouts international standards for fair trials.
TAKE ACTION: Amnesty International Member Fighting Forcible Return and Likely Torture in Egypt
Time is running out for Amnesty International member Sameh Khouzam. Khouzam, an Egyptian native who faces forcible return to Egypt, has received a 12-day stay of deportation. This is due to expire on 18 June, leaving him at risk of torture or ill-treatment if he is then returned to Egypt.
Sameh Khouzam, who is currently a member of the AIUSA chapter in York, Pa., fled Egypt in 1998 after reportedly being tortured and ill-treated by the Egyptian police because of his Coptic Christian religious beliefs. He alleges that he and his family had been subjected to a sustained campaign of intimidation and abuse on account of his refusal to convert to Islam. On one occasion in 1997 he alleges that he was beaten and sexually abused in a police station. The Egyptian authorities have reportedly told the US State Department that he is wanted in Egypt on a murder charge.
Sameh Khouzam was held in US immigration detention until February 2006, when he was released on condition that he report regularly to the immigration authorities. However on 29 May 2007, he was taken into custody again and told that he could be returned to Egypt within days. He is believed to have received a letter from the US Department of Homeland Security stating that it had received diplomatic assurances from the Egyptian authorities that he would not be tortured on his return.
Amnesty International does not take a position on the murder charges. What does concern us is that a U.S. court ruling staying his deportation because of the torture concerns has been quietly overruled by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security without any public process. What does concern us is that the decision was based on diplomatic assurances from the Egyptian government that he wouldn't be tortured, assurances that Amnesty's documentation and the Department of State's own reports indicate can't be trusted. What concerns us is international and U.S. law says a prisoner cannot be returned to a country where it is likely he will be tortured.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Please send appeals to arrive as quickly as possible:
- welcoming the stay of deportation granted to Egyptian national Sameh Khouzam, but expressing continued concern that he may face torture or ill-treatment if returned to Egypt when the current order expires on 18 June;
- calling on the US authorities to halt his deportation;
- urging them not to rely on diplomatic assurances when deciding whether a person is at risk of torture or ill treatment if transferred to another country;
- calling on them to reaffirm the absolute nature of the obligation under international law not to transfer any person to a country where there are substantial grounds for believing that he or she would be in danger of being subjected to torture or other ill-treatment.
APPEALS TO:
The Honorable Condoleezza Rice
Secretary of State
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street, N.W.
Washington DC 20520, USA
Fax: 1 202 261 8577
E-mail: secretary@state.gov
Salutation: Dear Secretary of State
The Honorable Michael Chertoff
Secretary of Homeland Security
US Department of Homeland Security
Washington DC 20528, USA
Fax: 1 202 456 2461
Salutation: Dear Secretary Chertoff
Women in Iran have been at the forefront of the human rights movement in that country, advocating on a broad spectrum of issues, such as for reforms in the legal system that would revise provisions that hamper women’s rights, for an end to execution by stoning, and for better pay and working conditions for teachers and others. Although their advocacy has consisted of peaceful activities such as participating in non-violent demonstrations and circulating petitions, they have been met with harsh repression from the Iranian government, as part of a recent pervasive crackdown on a wide range of activists, who have suffered arrest, detention, torture and ill-treatment, imposition of prison sentences and fines. As one activist Jila Baniyaghoub told the Associated Press, over the past year, the Iranian security forces have "become more and more aggressive even as women's actions have become more peaceful and more tame.”
Amnesty International is concerned that Minister of Intelligence Gholam Hossein Mohseni Ejeie has publicly accused the Iranian women’s movement and student activists of being part of an enemy conspiracy for a “soft subversion” of the Iranian government on 10 April 2007. Despite the repressive conditions and real threats to their safety, fearless women activists persevere in their human rights work. Amnesty International has been working to support the many initiatives taken by these brave Iranian women.
One campaign spearheaded by Iranian women is the “Campaign for Equality,” also known as the “Million Signatures Campaign,” which seeks to reform the Iranian legal system. Although women in Iran have achieved success in education and in many professions—the majority of university students in Iran, for instance, are women—they are subject to discriminatory family laws involving divorce, inheritance and custody rights. Women activists launched the campaign in August 2006 and have been circulating petitions with the goal of collecting at least a million signatures calling for an end to these inequitable laws. Their campaign involves going door to door and talking to other women in their homes, in schools and universities and in factories. They have also held peaceful demonstrations and have been active on the Internet, setting up a number of Web sites dedicated to women's issues. Amnesty International is supporting this campaign and issued a joint statement calling for equal rights for women in Iran on International Women's Day on 7 March 2007 with Iranian lawyer and prominent human rights activist Shirin Ebadi, the 2003 Nobel Peace Prize Laureate.
One of the leading activists in this campaign has been Zeinab Peyqambarzadeh. She was arrested on 8 May 2007 for her participation in a peaceful protest on 4 March 2007. She had reported to the Revolutionary Court after receiving a summons and was then arrested and sent to the notorious Evin Prison in Tehran. Her family and lawyer attempted to post bail but the court would not authorize her release. Five other women active in the “Million Signatures Campaign” had been arrested on 2 April 2007 while collecting signatures. Three were released after one day in detention, but Mahboubeh Hossein Zadeh and Nahid Keshavarz were taken to Evin Prison and were released on bail on 15 April 2007. They were reportedly accused of “acting against state security through propaganda against the system.” And on 10 June 2007 Ehteram Shadfar, a 62-year-old member of the Women’s Cultural Center, who has been active collecting signatures for the campaign, was arrested and taken to Niloufar police station and then transferred to the Vozara Detention Center, where they are believed to be still held. No charges are known to have been brought against them, but activists believe they have been detained in connection with their collection of signatures for the campaign.
Two women who had been prosecuted for their participation in a peaceful demonstration on 12 June 2006 calling for equal rights for women were sentenced to prison terms on 18 April 2007. That June 2006 demonstration had been violently dispersed by security forces who arrested at least 70 people. Fariba Davoudi Mohajer was sentenced to four years, three of which were suspended, and Sussan Tahmasebi was sentenced to two years, eighteen months of which were suspended. The two are currently free pending an appeal of their sentences. Also on 18 April, Behareh Hedayat, a university student, was tried, without the presence of her lawyer, on charges of “acting against state security”, “participating in an illegal demonstration on 12 June 2006” and “disturbing public order”. Earlier, on 11 April, Azadeh Forghani, a university student, was given a two-year suspended sentence in connection with the same demonstration. Several days later, she was summoned to court where she was questioned and informed that she was facing new charges in connection with a peaceful gathering on 4 March 2007 held to protest against the prosecution of five other activists in connection with the demonstration in June 2006.
Over 30 women activists were arrested on Sunday, 4 March 2007 while staging a peaceful demonstration in Tehran. The arrests were apparently intended to deter activists from organizing events to mark International Women's Day on 8 March. The women were arrested outside Tehran's Revolutionary Court, where they had gathered to protest at the trial of five women charged in connection with a demonstration held on 12 June 2006 to demand that women be given equal rights with men under the law in Iran."Rather than arresting peaceful demonstrators, the Iranian authorities should be taking seriously women's demands for equality before the law and addressing discrimination against women wherever it exists in the Iranian legal system," said Irene Khan, Amnesty International's Secretary General.” In their joint statement of 7 March 2007, Shirin Ebadi and Irene Khan stated, “as long as women are denied human rights, anywhere in the world, there can be no justice and no peace. Recognizing women's equal rights, therefore, is an essential requirement for the creation of strong, sustainable and stable societies and ensuring that women enjoy equality with men in all areas of life is a key step to making human rights a universal reality.” Unfortunately, due to the failure of the Iranian government to recognize the basic human rights of its citizens, as noted by Shirin Ebadi in an interview with SPIEGEL ONLINE, "harassment is a fact of life for someone pursuing human rights in Iran."
Appeals to be sent to:
Leader of the Islamic Republic
His Excellency Ayatollah Sayed ‘Ali Khamenei, The Office of the Supreme Leader
Shoahada Street, Qom, Islamic Republic of Iran
Email: info@leader.ir
istiftaa@wilayah.org
Salutation: Your Excellency
Head of the Judiciary
His Excellency Ayatollah Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi
Ministry of Justice, Park-e Shahr, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran
Email: Please send emails via the feedback form on the Persian site of the website: http://www.iranjudiciary.org/contactus-feedback-fa.html
Salutation: Your Excellency
President
His Excellency Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
The Presidency, Palestine Avenue, Azerbaijan Intersection, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran
Fax: + 98 21 6 649 5880
Email: dr-ahmadinejad@president.ir
(Or via website) http://www.president.ir/email
SAMPLE LETTER
Dear:I am writing to you to express my deep concern about the prison sentences recent imposed on a number of women activists as well as the arrests and harassment of a number of other women in the last few months, including students, teachers, and academics—some of whom had been involved in peaceful demonstrations calling for reform. I am particularly worried that those arrested could face torture or ill-treatment while in detention.
Zeinab Peyqambarzadeh, an activist involved in the “One Million Signatures” campaign calling for reform of discriminatory legislation regarding women, was arrested on 8 May for her participation in a peaceful protest on 4 March 2007. Five other women active in the “Million Signatures Campaign” had been arrested on 2 April 2007 and Ehteram Shadfar was arrested on 10 June 2007 while collecting signatures. Three were released after one day in detention, but Mahboubeh Hossein Zadeh and Nahid Keshavarz were taken to Evin Prison and were released on bail on 15 April 2007. They were reportedly accused of “acting against state security through propaganda against the system”.
Two women who had been prosecuted for their participation in a peaceful demonstration on 12 June 2006 calling for equal rights for women were sentenced to prison terms on 18 April 2007. Fariba Davoudi Mohajer was sentenced to four years, three of which were suspended, and Sussan Tahmasebi was sentenced to two years, eighteen months of which were suspended. The two are currently free pending an appeal of their sentences. Also on 18 April, Behareh Hedayat, a university student, was tried, without the presence of her lawyer, on charges of “acting against state security”, “participating in an illegal demonstration on 12 June 2006” and “disturbing public order”. Earlier, on 11 April, Azadeh Forghani, a university student, was given a two-year suspended sentence in connection with the same demonstration. Several days later, she was summoned to court where she was questioned and informed that she was facing new charges in connection with a peaceful gathering on 4 March 2007 held to protest against the prosecution of five other activists in connection with the demonstration in June 2006.
The right to engage in peaceful activism is enshrined in a number of international treaties, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. I urge your government to cease arresting and detaining those who participate in non-violent protests and human rights activism. I also call on you to release those currently held in detention for their peaceful activism and to reverse the sentences of Fariba Davoudi Mohajer, Sussan Tahmasebi and Azadeh Forgani.
Thank you very much for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
This newsletter is published by the AIUSA Middle East Coordination Group (the country specialists) for all the members of the AI local, student and MERAN groups that work on Action files , MERAN actions, or any other Amnesty work in the Middle East. We will feature regional background, news, and action. We hope this will help create a sense of community, the “big picture”, and that we are all in this together, as many of the issues and themes overlap the entire Middle East. We would also like the members to be able to share their successes, events, ideas with everyone. So, please email me and they will be in the next newsletter!
Pat Gerencser, Editor- pgerencser@igc
Israel/OPT: Forty years of occupation -- no security without basic rights
On the eve of the 40th anniversary of Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, Amnesty International today called on the Israeli authorities to end the land-grabbing, blockades and other violations of international law carried out under the occupation. These have resulted in widespread human rights abuses and have also failed to bring security to the Israeli and Palestinian civilian populations.A 45-page report published today, Enduring Occupation: Palestinian under siege in the West Bank, illustrates the devastating impact of four decades of Israeli military occupation. The report documents the relentless expansion of unlawful settlements on occupied land that deprives the Palestinian population of crucial resources and documents a plethora of measures that confine Palestinians to fragmented enclaves and hinder their access to work, health and education facilities. These measures include a 700km fence/wall, more than 500 checkpoints and blockades, and a complicated system of permits."Palestinians living in the West Bank are blocked at every turn. This is not simply an inconvenience -- it can be a matter of life or death. It is unacceptable that women in labour, sick children, or victims of accidents on their way to hospital should be forced to take long detours and face delays which can cost them their lives," said Malcolm Smart, Director for Amnesty International's Middle East and North Africa Programme."International action is urgently needed to address the widespread human rights abuses being committed under the occupation, and which are fuelling resentment and despair among a predominantly young and increasingly radicalized Palestinian population," said Malcolm Smart. "For forty years, the international community has failed adequately to address the Israeli-Palestinian problem; it cannot, must not, wait another forty years to do so."Amnesty International is calling for the urgent deployment of an effective international human rights monitoring mechanism to monitor compliance by both parties, Israeli and Palestinian, with their obligations under international law. This must be backed up with a commitment to investigate and prosecute, through the exercise of universal jurisdiction, those who commit war crimes or other crimes under international law."We do not underestimate the difficulties of establishing such an independent monitoring system, whether by the UN or another appropriate body, but it is vital that the international community should become more engaged in finding a solution, and in holding the parties to their obligations under international law," said Malcolm Smart.In its report, Amnesty International acknowledges Israel’s legitimate security concerns and the government’s obligation to protect the population within its borders, but says this does not justify blatant violations of international law, such as construction of much of the fence/wall inside the West Bank on Palestinian land."If the intention was simply to prevent Palestinian suicide bombers from entering Israel, the barrier would be located on the Green Line, the border between Israel and the West Bank," said Malcolm Smart. "Yet, the reality is that most of it is being built on Palestinian land, in defiance of the International Court of Justice, and is separating Palestinian towns and villages in the West Bank."In addition to the fence/wall, the movement of Palestinians is several constrained by a host of other restrictions, including over 500 checkpoints and blockades, and a network of roads for Israeli settlers to use and off-limits to Palestinians. The barrier, together with these roads and roadblocks, benefit continuously expanding but unlawful Israeli settlements and make them territorially contiguous with Israel."Harsh Israeli restrictions have caused the virtual collapse of the Palestinian economy and are exacerbating the increasingly fragile conditions in which Palestinians live and work -- resulting in levels of despair, poverty and food insecurity never before seen in the Occupied Palestinian Territories," said Malcolm Smart."Most Palestinians are now relying on aid for subsistence, with families reducing the quality and quantity of the food they consume and selling assets essential for their livelihoods."Amnesty International is calling on the Israeli authorities to:* lift the regime of blockades and restrictions on Palestinians in the OPT, which constitute collective punishment, and ensure that restrictions imposed in response to specific security threats only target the individuals concerned -- not entire communities.* halt the construction of the fence/wall inside the West Bank, and remove the sections already built there;* cease the construction or expansion of Israeli settlements and related infrastructure in the OPT as a first step towards removing Israeli settlements and "outposts";* cancel all demolition orders on homes in the OPT, and provide reparation to Palestinians whose homes and properties have already been destroyed.The organization is also reiterating its call on Palestinian armed groups to end immediately attacks on civilians and on the Palestinian Authority (PA) to take effective action to stop and prevent such attacks and bring to justice those responsible. To see a full copy of the report, please go to http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engmde150332007
Egypt Closes Door on AI Trial Observers
The Egyptian government June 3 refused to allow human rights groups to observe the military trial of 33 leading members of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, undercutting the government's claims that civilians will have a fair trial before military courts, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch said today. Along with mass arrests of political opponents and democratic activists in the days preceding the June shura legislative council elections, the closing of the military court trials is indication that human rights are moving in the wrong direction in Egypt.Amnesty International, the Arab Commission for Human Rights, the Egyptian Organization for Human Rights, and Human Rights Watch had sent observers to monitor the trial of 33 leading members of the Brotherhood. None of the groups was allowed to attend. Among the accused is Khairat al-Shatir, the organization's deputy supreme guide, who was arrested on December 14, 2006, along with 16 other prominent Muslim Brotherhood members in predawn raids. They were subsequently charged with membership in a banned organization, providing students with weapons and military training. On January 29, 2007, a Cairo criminal court dismissed all charges against al-Shatir and his co-defendants and ordered their immediate release. Security forces re-arrested the men moments after the ruling, and on February 4, President Hosni Mubarak, ignoring the court's verdict, ordered the cases, and those of 23 other alleged members of the Brotherhood, transferred to a military court. On May 8, a Cairo administrative court ruled that President Mubarak's order was invalid, but on May 14, the Supreme Administrative court reversed that decision after the government appealed. After the June 3 session, the court adjourned until July 15. "Twelve years ago the court granted me unfettered access when I observed the military trial of senior members of the Muslim Brotherhood," said Palestinian lawyer Anis Kassim, Amnesty International's senior trial observer. "I am extremely disappointed in the government's attitude this time." Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch said that trying civilians before Egyptian military courts flouts international standards for fair trials.
TAKE ACTION: Amnesty International Member Fighting Forcible Return and Likely Torture in Egypt
Time is running out for Amnesty International member Sameh Khouzam. Khouzam, an Egyptian native who faces forcible return to Egypt, has received a 12-day stay of deportation. This is due to expire on 18 June, leaving him at risk of torture or ill-treatment if he is then returned to Egypt.
Sameh Khouzam, who is currently a member of the AIUSA chapter in York, Pa., fled Egypt in 1998 after reportedly being tortured and ill-treated by the Egyptian police because of his Coptic Christian religious beliefs. He alleges that he and his family had been subjected to a sustained campaign of intimidation and abuse on account of his refusal to convert to Islam. On one occasion in 1997 he alleges that he was beaten and sexually abused in a police station. The Egyptian authorities have reportedly told the US State Department that he is wanted in Egypt on a murder charge.
Sameh Khouzam was held in US immigration detention until February 2006, when he was released on condition that he report regularly to the immigration authorities. However on 29 May 2007, he was taken into custody again and told that he could be returned to Egypt within days. He is believed to have received a letter from the US Department of Homeland Security stating that it had received diplomatic assurances from the Egyptian authorities that he would not be tortured on his return.
Amnesty International does not take a position on the murder charges. What does concern us is that a U.S. court ruling staying his deportation because of the torture concerns has been quietly overruled by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security without any public process. What does concern us is that the decision was based on diplomatic assurances from the Egyptian government that he wouldn't be tortured, assurances that Amnesty's documentation and the Department of State's own reports indicate can't be trusted. What concerns us is international and U.S. law says a prisoner cannot be returned to a country where it is likely he will be tortured.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Please send appeals to arrive as quickly as possible:
- welcoming the stay of deportation granted to Egyptian national Sameh Khouzam, but expressing continued concern that he may face torture or ill-treatment if returned to Egypt when the current order expires on 18 June;
- calling on the US authorities to halt his deportation;
- urging them not to rely on diplomatic assurances when deciding whether a person is at risk of torture or ill treatment if transferred to another country;
- calling on them to reaffirm the absolute nature of the obligation under international law not to transfer any person to a country where there are substantial grounds for believing that he or she would be in danger of being subjected to torture or other ill-treatment.
APPEALS TO:
The Honorable Condoleezza Rice
Secretary of State
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street, N.W.
Washington DC 20520, USA
Fax: 1 202 261 8577
E-mail: secretary@state.gov
Salutation: Dear Secretary of State
The Honorable Michael Chertoff
Secretary of Homeland Security
US Department of Homeland Security
Washington DC 20528, USA
Fax: 1 202 456 2461
Salutation: Dear Secretary Chertoff
Women in Iran have been at the forefront of the human rights movement in that country, advocating on a broad spectrum of issues, such as for reforms in the legal system that would revise provisions that hamper women’s rights, for an end to execution by stoning, and for better pay and working conditions for teachers and others. Although their advocacy has consisted of peaceful activities such as participating in non-violent demonstrations and circulating petitions, they have been met with harsh repression from the Iranian government, as part of a recent pervasive crackdown on a wide range of activists, who have suffered arrest, detention, torture and ill-treatment, imposition of prison sentences and fines. As one activist Jila Baniyaghoub told the Associated Press, over the past year, the Iranian security forces have "become more and more aggressive even as women's actions have become more peaceful and more tame.”
Amnesty International is concerned that Minister of Intelligence Gholam Hossein Mohseni Ejeie has publicly accused the Iranian women’s movement and student activists of being part of an enemy conspiracy for a “soft subversion” of the Iranian government on 10 April 2007. Despite the repressive conditions and real threats to their safety, fearless women activists persevere in their human rights work. Amnesty International has been working to support the many initiatives taken by these brave Iranian women.
One campaign spearheaded by Iranian women is the “Campaign for Equality,” also known as the “Million Signatures Campaign,” which seeks to reform the Iranian legal system. Although women in Iran have achieved success in education and in many professions—the majority of university students in Iran, for instance, are women—they are subject to discriminatory family laws involving divorce, inheritance and custody rights. Women activists launched the campaign in August 2006 and have been circulating petitions with the goal of collecting at least a million signatures calling for an end to these inequitable laws. Their campaign involves going door to door and talking to other women in their homes, in schools and universities and in factories. They have also held peaceful demonstrations and have been active on the Internet, setting up a number of Web sites dedicated to women's issues. Amnesty International is supporting this campaign and issued a joint statement calling for equal rights for women in Iran on International Women's Day on 7 March 2007 with Iranian lawyer and prominent human rights activist Shirin Ebadi, the 2003 Nobel Peace Prize Laureate.
One of the leading activists in this campaign has been Zeinab Peyqambarzadeh. She was arrested on 8 May 2007 for her participation in a peaceful protest on 4 March 2007. She had reported to the Revolutionary Court after receiving a summons and was then arrested and sent to the notorious Evin Prison in Tehran. Her family and lawyer attempted to post bail but the court would not authorize her release. Five other women active in the “Million Signatures Campaign” had been arrested on 2 April 2007 while collecting signatures. Three were released after one day in detention, but Mahboubeh Hossein Zadeh and Nahid Keshavarz were taken to Evin Prison and were released on bail on 15 April 2007. They were reportedly accused of “acting against state security through propaganda against the system.” And on 10 June 2007 Ehteram Shadfar, a 62-year-old member of the Women’s Cultural Center, who has been active collecting signatures for the campaign, was arrested and taken to Niloufar police station and then transferred to the Vozara Detention Center, where they are believed to be still held. No charges are known to have been brought against them, but activists believe they have been detained in connection with their collection of signatures for the campaign.
Two women who had been prosecuted for their participation in a peaceful demonstration on 12 June 2006 calling for equal rights for women were sentenced to prison terms on 18 April 2007. That June 2006 demonstration had been violently dispersed by security forces who arrested at least 70 people. Fariba Davoudi Mohajer was sentenced to four years, three of which were suspended, and Sussan Tahmasebi was sentenced to two years, eighteen months of which were suspended. The two are currently free pending an appeal of their sentences. Also on 18 April, Behareh Hedayat, a university student, was tried, without the presence of her lawyer, on charges of “acting against state security”, “participating in an illegal demonstration on 12 June 2006” and “disturbing public order”. Earlier, on 11 April, Azadeh Forghani, a university student, was given a two-year suspended sentence in connection with the same demonstration. Several days later, she was summoned to court where she was questioned and informed that she was facing new charges in connection with a peaceful gathering on 4 March 2007 held to protest against the prosecution of five other activists in connection with the demonstration in June 2006.
Over 30 women activists were arrested on Sunday, 4 March 2007 while staging a peaceful demonstration in Tehran. The arrests were apparently intended to deter activists from organizing events to mark International Women's Day on 8 March. The women were arrested outside Tehran's Revolutionary Court, where they had gathered to protest at the trial of five women charged in connection with a demonstration held on 12 June 2006 to demand that women be given equal rights with men under the law in Iran."Rather than arresting peaceful demonstrators, the Iranian authorities should be taking seriously women's demands for equality before the law and addressing discrimination against women wherever it exists in the Iranian legal system," said Irene Khan, Amnesty International's Secretary General.” In their joint statement of 7 March 2007, Shirin Ebadi and Irene Khan stated, “as long as women are denied human rights, anywhere in the world, there can be no justice and no peace. Recognizing women's equal rights, therefore, is an essential requirement for the creation of strong, sustainable and stable societies and ensuring that women enjoy equality with men in all areas of life is a key step to making human rights a universal reality.” Unfortunately, due to the failure of the Iranian government to recognize the basic human rights of its citizens, as noted by Shirin Ebadi in an interview with SPIEGEL ONLINE, "harassment is a fact of life for someone pursuing human rights in Iran."
Appeals to be sent to:
Leader of the Islamic Republic
His Excellency Ayatollah Sayed ‘Ali Khamenei, The Office of the Supreme Leader
Shoahada Street, Qom, Islamic Republic of Iran
Email: info@leader.ir
istiftaa@wilayah.org
Salutation: Your Excellency
Head of the Judiciary
His Excellency Ayatollah Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi
Ministry of Justice, Park-e Shahr, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran
Email: Please send emails via the feedback form on the Persian site of the website: http://www.iranjudiciary.org/contactus-feedback-fa.html
Salutation: Your Excellency
President
His Excellency Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
The Presidency, Palestine Avenue, Azerbaijan Intersection, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran
Fax: + 98 21 6 649 5880
Email: dr-ahmadinejad@president.ir
(Or via website) http://www.president.ir/email
SAMPLE LETTER
Dear:I am writing to you to express my deep concern about the prison sentences recent imposed on a number of women activists as well as the arrests and harassment of a number of other women in the last few months, including students, teachers, and academics—some of whom had been involved in peaceful demonstrations calling for reform. I am particularly worried that those arrested could face torture or ill-treatment while in detention.
Zeinab Peyqambarzadeh, an activist involved in the “One Million Signatures” campaign calling for reform of discriminatory legislation regarding women, was arrested on 8 May for her participation in a peaceful protest on 4 March 2007. Five other women active in the “Million Signatures Campaign” had been arrested on 2 April 2007 and Ehteram Shadfar was arrested on 10 June 2007 while collecting signatures. Three were released after one day in detention, but Mahboubeh Hossein Zadeh and Nahid Keshavarz were taken to Evin Prison and were released on bail on 15 April 2007. They were reportedly accused of “acting against state security through propaganda against the system”.
Two women who had been prosecuted for their participation in a peaceful demonstration on 12 June 2006 calling for equal rights for women were sentenced to prison terms on 18 April 2007. Fariba Davoudi Mohajer was sentenced to four years, three of which were suspended, and Sussan Tahmasebi was sentenced to two years, eighteen months of which were suspended. The two are currently free pending an appeal of their sentences. Also on 18 April, Behareh Hedayat, a university student, was tried, without the presence of her lawyer, on charges of “acting against state security”, “participating in an illegal demonstration on 12 June 2006” and “disturbing public order”. Earlier, on 11 April, Azadeh Forghani, a university student, was given a two-year suspended sentence in connection with the same demonstration. Several days later, she was summoned to court where she was questioned and informed that she was facing new charges in connection with a peaceful gathering on 4 March 2007 held to protest against the prosecution of five other activists in connection with the demonstration in June 2006.
The right to engage in peaceful activism is enshrined in a number of international treaties, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. I urge your government to cease arresting and detaining those who participate in non-violent protests and human rights activism. I also call on you to release those currently held in detention for their peaceful activism and to reverse the sentences of Fariba Davoudi Mohajer, Sussan Tahmasebi and Azadeh Forgani.
Thank you very much for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
26 March 2007
For every soldier or Marine who dies in Iraq, at least 20 Iraqis are killed. Some of their stories.
By Rod Nordland and Babak Dehghanpisheh
Newsweek
April 2, 2007 issue - Describing Jalal Mustafa to a reporter, the first thing his family mentions is "that long love story of his." The young mechanic's dream was to wed his fiancée, Laila, and "have as many kids as they could." But running a small auto-repair shop, it took Mustafa a long time to save up enough for the wedding, let alone a house. On Feb. 4, he finally went to the courthouse to apply for a marriage license. As he was walking through the gates, a car pulled up next to the building. Before the vehicle came to a full stop, the driver detonated a suicide bomb. Four bystanders died, including Mustafa: burned over much of his body, a piece of shrapnel lodged in his head. The bombing didn't even make the news; it was an ordinary day in Baghdad.
For each U.S. service member killed in Iraq, at least 20 Iraqis die violently. Feb. 4 was no exception. That day in Baghdad, roadside bombs killed four Iraqi policemen in one incident and two soldiers in another, and an Army colonel lost his life to assassins in the southern suburbs. But most of the day's 81 victims of violent deaths—about the usual daily toll this past winter—were civilians like Mustafa, the softest of soft targets. Forty-two of them were gunned down execution style, many of their corpses bearing signs of torture: hallmarks of Shia death squads. Most of the other deaths appeared to be the work of Sunni and Al Qaeda extremists. NEWSWEEK talked to the families of four of the Feb. 4 victims. Among them were a street vendor, a former TV journalist and a truck-parts dealer. Two were Shia, and two were Sunni. And in each case their families lost not only loved ones but breadwinners. None of their killers has been identified:
Jawad Jasem, 44, was serving a customer at his pushcart outside the courthouse when the bomb exploded. The son of a poor Shia farmer, Jasem had wanted to be an engineer. When he was 18, family friends got him into the Air Force, where he earned good money working on jets—until the Army, desperate for infantrymen in the war with Iran, sent him to the front. He was wounded four times. He was not allowed to return to civilian life after the war, even though he had a wife and five children. "He used to tell everyone that the last day of his military service would be the happiest day of his life," says his younger brother, Kareem, a shopkeeper. "He said he'd celebrate with a great party in which he would make a feast for the entire city."
It didn't turn out that way. His last day of duty was April 8, 2003, when U.S. troops entered Baghdad. Jawad was among thousands of Iraqi soldiers who stripped off their uniforms and fled.
He started over, buying his pushcart and setting up in front of the courthouse. He built a good business. It was a predominantly Shia neighborhood, but the bomber killed members of both sects indiscriminately. "Evil has no eyes," says Kareem Jasem. "Jawad's shop had turned into just a big hole ... and his body was smashed into a wall."
Abdul Salam, 47, was a pious Sunni who believed in sectarian harmony. The father of six, he had refused to join Saddam's Army, and worked instead in defense factories. After the invasion, he started a truck-parts business; he hired two Shia apprentices and set up shop in Al Yousifiyah, a mostly Sunni suburb. Driving home from work one night with his two assistants, Salam stopped at a police checkpoint. A van full of gunmen pulled up and abducted all three. Shia friends tried to intercede for Salam at the local Mahdi Army office, but on Feb. 4, Salam's corpse was found dumped in a field a few miles from his home, shot repeatedly in the head and chest. His Shia apprentices were freed. "He was beloved by his friends, colleagues and all of his neighbors, most of them Shiites," says Salam's brother, Naser Zaidan. "He used to say Islam is the unifier of Iraqis."
For Suhad Shakir, 36, her new job was a dream come true. She had always wanted to work with Americans, and she loved helping people. Last September she quit her post as a journalist at state-owned TV and jumped at an opening with the Iraqi Assistance Center, a Coalition-run office in the Green Zone that works with U.S. and Iraqi agencies to provide social services. It seemed safer than reporting, and it paid better.
On Feb. 4 she was on her way to work, waiting in the queue at a checkpoint near an entrance to the Green Zone which is often targeted by suicide bombers. Shakir was in the slow lane, for Iraqi cars that are subject to careful searches. A convoy of armored vehicles came roaring up and got stuck at the checkpoint. One of the bodyguards in the first vehicle threw a bottle of water at the driver in front of Shakir to signal him to move. The driver panicked and backed into Shakir's car. She tried to get out of the way but backed into the car behind her. Someone aboard the fourth vehicle in the convoy, seeing Shakir's sudden move, opened fire, hitting her once. The vehicle slowed and a goateed Westerner in khaki leaned out his window and shot her again in the face at close range. Then the convoy raced off into the Green Zone.
Iraqi cops think Shakir's killer mistook her for a suicide bomber, but they say they're continuing to investigate. "It is very important I know why she is killed and who killed her," said Shakir's mother, Salima Kadhim, dressed in black a month after her daughter's death. Like many Iraqis, she still waits.
With Salih Mehdi and Ahmed Obeidi in Baghdad
Newsweek
April 2, 2007 issue - Describing Jalal Mustafa to a reporter, the first thing his family mentions is "that long love story of his." The young mechanic's dream was to wed his fiancée, Laila, and "have as many kids as they could." But running a small auto-repair shop, it took Mustafa a long time to save up enough for the wedding, let alone a house. On Feb. 4, he finally went to the courthouse to apply for a marriage license. As he was walking through the gates, a car pulled up next to the building. Before the vehicle came to a full stop, the driver detonated a suicide bomb. Four bystanders died, including Mustafa: burned over much of his body, a piece of shrapnel lodged in his head. The bombing didn't even make the news; it was an ordinary day in Baghdad.
For each U.S. service member killed in Iraq, at least 20 Iraqis die violently. Feb. 4 was no exception. That day in Baghdad, roadside bombs killed four Iraqi policemen in one incident and two soldiers in another, and an Army colonel lost his life to assassins in the southern suburbs. But most of the day's 81 victims of violent deaths—about the usual daily toll this past winter—were civilians like Mustafa, the softest of soft targets. Forty-two of them were gunned down execution style, many of their corpses bearing signs of torture: hallmarks of Shia death squads. Most of the other deaths appeared to be the work of Sunni and Al Qaeda extremists. NEWSWEEK talked to the families of four of the Feb. 4 victims. Among them were a street vendor, a former TV journalist and a truck-parts dealer. Two were Shia, and two were Sunni. And in each case their families lost not only loved ones but breadwinners. None of their killers has been identified:
Jawad Jasem, 44, was serving a customer at his pushcart outside the courthouse when the bomb exploded. The son of a poor Shia farmer, Jasem had wanted to be an engineer. When he was 18, family friends got him into the Air Force, where he earned good money working on jets—until the Army, desperate for infantrymen in the war with Iran, sent him to the front. He was wounded four times. He was not allowed to return to civilian life after the war, even though he had a wife and five children. "He used to tell everyone that the last day of his military service would be the happiest day of his life," says his younger brother, Kareem, a shopkeeper. "He said he'd celebrate with a great party in which he would make a feast for the entire city."
It didn't turn out that way. His last day of duty was April 8, 2003, when U.S. troops entered Baghdad. Jawad was among thousands of Iraqi soldiers who stripped off their uniforms and fled.
He started over, buying his pushcart and setting up in front of the courthouse. He built a good business. It was a predominantly Shia neighborhood, but the bomber killed members of both sects indiscriminately. "Evil has no eyes," says Kareem Jasem. "Jawad's shop had turned into just a big hole ... and his body was smashed into a wall."
Abdul Salam, 47, was a pious Sunni who believed in sectarian harmony. The father of six, he had refused to join Saddam's Army, and worked instead in defense factories. After the invasion, he started a truck-parts business; he hired two Shia apprentices and set up shop in Al Yousifiyah, a mostly Sunni suburb. Driving home from work one night with his two assistants, Salam stopped at a police checkpoint. A van full of gunmen pulled up and abducted all three. Shia friends tried to intercede for Salam at the local Mahdi Army office, but on Feb. 4, Salam's corpse was found dumped in a field a few miles from his home, shot repeatedly in the head and chest. His Shia apprentices were freed. "He was beloved by his friends, colleagues and all of his neighbors, most of them Shiites," says Salam's brother, Naser Zaidan. "He used to say Islam is the unifier of Iraqis."
For Suhad Shakir, 36, her new job was a dream come true. She had always wanted to work with Americans, and she loved helping people. Last September she quit her post as a journalist at state-owned TV and jumped at an opening with the Iraqi Assistance Center, a Coalition-run office in the Green Zone that works with U.S. and Iraqi agencies to provide social services. It seemed safer than reporting, and it paid better.
On Feb. 4 she was on her way to work, waiting in the queue at a checkpoint near an entrance to the Green Zone which is often targeted by suicide bombers. Shakir was in the slow lane, for Iraqi cars that are subject to careful searches. A convoy of armored vehicles came roaring up and got stuck at the checkpoint. One of the bodyguards in the first vehicle threw a bottle of water at the driver in front of Shakir to signal him to move. The driver panicked and backed into Shakir's car. She tried to get out of the way but backed into the car behind her. Someone aboard the fourth vehicle in the convoy, seeing Shakir's sudden move, opened fire, hitting her once. The vehicle slowed and a goateed Westerner in khaki leaned out his window and shot her again in the face at close range. Then the convoy raced off into the Green Zone.
Iraqi cops think Shakir's killer mistook her for a suicide bomber, but they say they're continuing to investigate. "It is very important I know why she is killed and who killed her," said Shakir's mother, Salima Kadhim, dressed in black a month after her daughter's death. Like many Iraqis, she still waits.
With Salih Mehdi and Ahmed Obeidi in Baghdad
05 March 2007
Statement at CSW by the Middle East Caucus
Speaker: Amal Mahmoud FayedWhen: Friday, March 2, 2007What time: 3:00 – 6:00 pm, General DebateOrganization: Middle East Caucus (Amal Fayed herself is from the Forum for Women in Development and Karama Arab Group for Ending Violence Against Women)
Topic: Arab Women's Suffering Under Armed Conflict, Economic and Political Situation Threatening Women's Dignity
We are the women in the Middle East Caucus participating in the CSW sessions from Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Morocco, Palestine, Sudan, Tunisia, Yemen.
We consider women's dignity to be the essence of a woman's right and a woman's life. In Arabic, this word for dignity is 'Karama.' We believe the elimination of discrimination and violence against women is a reclamation of dignity and a defense of human rights.
We urge the formal government delegations at CSW to place a greater focus on prevention of violence against women and protection for children from violence, and conflict resolution in the Middle East region. War brings the maximum escalation of violence into human lives and the greatest violations of human rights and women's rights. War brings obstacles that affront the development process, which enacts a double form of violence against women: 1) traditional practices based on cultural heritage, 2) practices of the occupation force against local women, including rape, prostitution, economic exploitation, and violence.
Women from Palestine, Iraq, Sudan, Lebanon, and Somalia are experiencing the height of victimization by armed forces at war in their countries. Yet there exists no international convention that explicitly protects the rights and safety of women within armed conflict zones, and their survival. Neither is there questioning of those responsible for this military and gender violence in our region.
The cost of war to women and its exponential harm is our concern. To eradicate the roots of war in our region, we must also transform the abuse of global media which stereotypes Arab women as passive, oppressed, and incapable of self-determined rights and liberties. These stereotypes in the global media are used to market so-called democratic reforms as a justification for military action. The democratic reforms do not arrive, instead women and their families suffer increasing injustice and loss of human rights living under armed conflict.
We ask the CSW and UN to focus their efforts to solve the special problems for women and girl refugees, to protect them from the violence and discrimination they face in escaping war and in the countries to which they flee. The resources for UN ANWRA should be increased to offer necessary services and additional program to serve and protect women and girl refugees. They live as some of the most vulnerable and unprotected people in the world.
The World Bank policies such as structural adjustment and privatization in the Middle East are dramatically increasing poverty and economic deprivation and violence, with an exaggerated burden falling on women and their children. Economic crisis makes women more vulnerable and exposes them to many forms of abuse, especially sexual abuse. We demand review of all of these economic policies and insist on a special convention on the economic empowerment of women and girls.
We also take into consideration on our region the position of immigrant women, who suffer double dimensions of violence and violations of their rights: economic violence, sexual violence, psychological violence, and abuse of their civil status and rights in the host country where they have immigrated, as well as male domination and forms of discrimination suffered in their country of origin. We urge a Special Protocol to protect immigrant women in whatever nations they live, and to ensure their rights despite any disparity between the laws of their country of residence and the laws of their country of citizenship/origin.
Violence against women is a crime against all humans. UN member nations and governments must protect all women, and punish those responsible for committing the violence. We want to see the Declaration to End All Forms of Violence Against Women transformed into a UN Convention banning gender violence, to which governments sign their commitment and monitor compliance in their countries.
Because of the expansion of all forms of violence against women and girls in the Middle East in the private sphere, public sphere, or by states, we request a policymaking process with outcomes that are more concrete, more committed, and more enforced with laws, programs, and resources to integrate gender perspective in all institutions, agencies, and governments.
We urge the private sector to implement international criteria and standards for ethics to protect women and girls from exploitation and abuse in workplaces, employment, services, and industry.
We urge the partners in the 1999 UN Global Compact on Corporate Leadership in the World Economy, which upholds social responsibility and human rights principles across the private sector, to implement and enforce these international ethics and criteria that protect women and girls from economic abuses. We encourage national authorities and local governments to impose penalties on any private sector entity that commits violence or discrimination against women and girls.
In the Middle East and around the world, we regard the civil society organizations as essential partners with national and local government bodies in their strategic decisionmaking and policymaking to eliminate violence and discrimination against women and girls. This partnership will ensure that the national and local governments will have strategies that are more diverse, representative, and stronger in their protection of women and girls.
We support the effort for UN reform of the gender architecture to achieve equality and to end all forms of discrimination against women in the UN structure. We call on all UN agencies to support, implement, and integrate the work of UNIFEM, OSAGI, and the Division for the Advancement of Women, and to significantly increase their budgets.
We recommend that UN agencies and member nations invest a greater commitment and more resources to offer shelters and welfare for women victims of violence, to establish legal procedures that protect these shelters and those who work at them, defending women from violence.
We urge UN member nations to enact equality for women and men in both word and deed, enforcing it in the written laws and in the application of the laws, especially in criminal law which has biases that favor men and allow the trafficking and abuses of women.
We need to raise the legal age for marriage to 18 years in all countries, for women and for men, in order to stop violence and forced marriage of girls underage.
It is a necessity to ensure girls' rights to have their mother's citizenship, especially to ensure the mother's right to pass her nationality to her children. We highlight especially the Palestinian women's suffering from Israel Family Unification Law, which denies citizenship and permanent residency to any Palestinian from the Occupied Palestinian Territories who marries an Israeli citizen, a right available to spouses from every other country in the world.
The Secretary General's report on Violence Against Women should follow up with more attention to specific populations of women and girls who suffer double dimensions of discrimination and violence: on one level as women and then again as women with disabilities, girls in armed conflict, women detained or in prison, women suffering mental health disabilities.
http://www.vday.org/contents/vday/press/release/0703011
Topic: Arab Women's Suffering Under Armed Conflict, Economic and Political Situation Threatening Women's Dignity
We are the women in the Middle East Caucus participating in the CSW sessions from Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Morocco, Palestine, Sudan, Tunisia, Yemen.
We consider women's dignity to be the essence of a woman's right and a woman's life. In Arabic, this word for dignity is 'Karama.' We believe the elimination of discrimination and violence against women is a reclamation of dignity and a defense of human rights.
We urge the formal government delegations at CSW to place a greater focus on prevention of violence against women and protection for children from violence, and conflict resolution in the Middle East region. War brings the maximum escalation of violence into human lives and the greatest violations of human rights and women's rights. War brings obstacles that affront the development process, which enacts a double form of violence against women: 1) traditional practices based on cultural heritage, 2) practices of the occupation force against local women, including rape, prostitution, economic exploitation, and violence.
Women from Palestine, Iraq, Sudan, Lebanon, and Somalia are experiencing the height of victimization by armed forces at war in their countries. Yet there exists no international convention that explicitly protects the rights and safety of women within armed conflict zones, and their survival. Neither is there questioning of those responsible for this military and gender violence in our region.
The cost of war to women and its exponential harm is our concern. To eradicate the roots of war in our region, we must also transform the abuse of global media which stereotypes Arab women as passive, oppressed, and incapable of self-determined rights and liberties. These stereotypes in the global media are used to market so-called democratic reforms as a justification for military action. The democratic reforms do not arrive, instead women and their families suffer increasing injustice and loss of human rights living under armed conflict.
We ask the CSW and UN to focus their efforts to solve the special problems for women and girl refugees, to protect them from the violence and discrimination they face in escaping war and in the countries to which they flee. The resources for UN ANWRA should be increased to offer necessary services and additional program to serve and protect women and girl refugees. They live as some of the most vulnerable and unprotected people in the world.
The World Bank policies such as structural adjustment and privatization in the Middle East are dramatically increasing poverty and economic deprivation and violence, with an exaggerated burden falling on women and their children. Economic crisis makes women more vulnerable and exposes them to many forms of abuse, especially sexual abuse. We demand review of all of these economic policies and insist on a special convention on the economic empowerment of women and girls.
We also take into consideration on our region the position of immigrant women, who suffer double dimensions of violence and violations of their rights: economic violence, sexual violence, psychological violence, and abuse of their civil status and rights in the host country where they have immigrated, as well as male domination and forms of discrimination suffered in their country of origin. We urge a Special Protocol to protect immigrant women in whatever nations they live, and to ensure their rights despite any disparity between the laws of their country of residence and the laws of their country of citizenship/origin.
Violence against women is a crime against all humans. UN member nations and governments must protect all women, and punish those responsible for committing the violence. We want to see the Declaration to End All Forms of Violence Against Women transformed into a UN Convention banning gender violence, to which governments sign their commitment and monitor compliance in their countries.
Because of the expansion of all forms of violence against women and girls in the Middle East in the private sphere, public sphere, or by states, we request a policymaking process with outcomes that are more concrete, more committed, and more enforced with laws, programs, and resources to integrate gender perspective in all institutions, agencies, and governments.
We urge the private sector to implement international criteria and standards for ethics to protect women and girls from exploitation and abuse in workplaces, employment, services, and industry.
We urge the partners in the 1999 UN Global Compact on Corporate Leadership in the World Economy, which upholds social responsibility and human rights principles across the private sector, to implement and enforce these international ethics and criteria that protect women and girls from economic abuses. We encourage national authorities and local governments to impose penalties on any private sector entity that commits violence or discrimination against women and girls.
In the Middle East and around the world, we regard the civil society organizations as essential partners with national and local government bodies in their strategic decisionmaking and policymaking to eliminate violence and discrimination against women and girls. This partnership will ensure that the national and local governments will have strategies that are more diverse, representative, and stronger in their protection of women and girls.
We support the effort for UN reform of the gender architecture to achieve equality and to end all forms of discrimination against women in the UN structure. We call on all UN agencies to support, implement, and integrate the work of UNIFEM, OSAGI, and the Division for the Advancement of Women, and to significantly increase their budgets.
We recommend that UN agencies and member nations invest a greater commitment and more resources to offer shelters and welfare for women victims of violence, to establish legal procedures that protect these shelters and those who work at them, defending women from violence.
We urge UN member nations to enact equality for women and men in both word and deed, enforcing it in the written laws and in the application of the laws, especially in criminal law which has biases that favor men and allow the trafficking and abuses of women.
We need to raise the legal age for marriage to 18 years in all countries, for women and for men, in order to stop violence and forced marriage of girls underage.
It is a necessity to ensure girls' rights to have their mother's citizenship, especially to ensure the mother's right to pass her nationality to her children. We highlight especially the Palestinian women's suffering from Israel Family Unification Law, which denies citizenship and permanent residency to any Palestinian from the Occupied Palestinian Territories who marries an Israeli citizen, a right available to spouses from every other country in the world.
The Secretary General's report on Violence Against Women should follow up with more attention to specific populations of women and girls who suffer double dimensions of discrimination and violence: on one level as women and then again as women with disabilities, girls in armed conflict, women detained or in prison, women suffering mental health disabilities.
http://www.vday.org/contents/vday/press/release/0703011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
