Afghan men can starve their wives [Archive]

LOLseph Stalin

18th August 2009, 03:47

Well I stumbled across this and was throughly disgusted:

Afghanistan has officially made it law (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8204207.stm) that a Shia Muslim husband can starve his wife for refusing to have sex with him. International human rights groups are already speaking out vehemently against the law. The law is an amended version of one that caused controversy (http://carnalnation.com/content/4849/4/afghan-president-review-rape-law) earlier this year by compelling Shia women to have sex with their husbands at least four times a week. After receiving international condemnation, the law was temporarily suspended (http://carnalnation.com/content/4891/10/restrictive-afghanistan-law-put-hold). Rachel Reid, Human Rights Watch's Kabul representative, said that "There was a review process—Karzai came under huge pressure from all over the world to amend this law, but many of the most oppressive laws remain."
The passage of this new law comes right before the Afghanistan presidential elections, and is seen by most as an attempt by President Hamid Karzai to solidify his support among Afghanistan's fundamentalists. The law also gives fathers and grandfathers exclusive custodial rights over children and requires women to get permission from their husbands to work outside the home.

Link: http://carnalnation.com/content/20354/10/afghan-men-can-starve-wives-not-having-sex

This of course displays that Afghanistan really hasn't shown improvement despite how much Imperialist powers like to argue about it.

khad

18th August 2009, 03:50

Already posted a thread on this, and with more cogent analysis of Afghan politics:
http://www.revleft.com/vb/karzai-sneaks-revised-t115373/index.html

August 15, 2009
Karzai's secret U-turn on Afghan rape law

By Jerome Starkey in Kabul
President sneaks through legislation without approval of parliament

A law that lets Afghan husbands starve their wives if they refuse to obey their sexual demands has been quietly slipped into effect, despite promises from Afghanistan's President, Hamid Karzai, that it would be reviewed and rigorously debated in the country's parliament.

Women's activists have accused the President of abandoning human rights in a bid to appease hardline clerics who support the law, in exchange for votes in the presidential elections next week.

Mr Karzai ordered a wide-ranging review of the legislation after The Independent revealed that it negated the need for consent within marriage, effectively condoning rape. The law included a requirement that a wife have sex with her husband at least every four days, as well as a range of other measures that imposed drastic restrictions on the freedoms of Shia women.

The story caused international scorn, with President Barack Obama branding it "abhorrent," and Gordon Brown said Britain would "not tolerate" it. Other Nato countries threatened to withdraw their troops unless the legislation was drastically rewritten.

Human Rights Watch last night demanded that Afghanistan's international paymasters intervene to protect the country's oppressed women. "Karzai has made an unthinkable deal to sell Afghan women out in return for the support of fundamentalists in the August 20 election," said Brad Adams, the group's Asia director. "So much for any credentials he claimed as a moderate on women's issues."

Civil society groups, say the law, which regulates the personal affairs of Afghanistan's minority Shia community, still includes clauses which allow rapists to marry their victims as a way of absolving their crime. It also tacitly approves child marriage.

Hundreds of Afghan women took to the streets to protest against the legislation. They were met by mobs of angry men outside parliament who pelted them with spit and stones.

Mr Karzai is widely believed to support women's rights, but analysts fear his personal principles have been overruled by political ambitions. A new poll issued yesterday showed Mr Karzai with 44 per cent, and his nearest challenger, the former foreign minister, Abdullah Abdullah, on 26 per cent. That lead, if replicated at the ballot box next week, would not be enough for Mr Karzai to avoid a presidential run-off.

To try to shore up support, the incumbent has made a series of backroom deals with tribal leaders, pledging them jobs and concessions in exchange for the votes they control.

Most of Afghanistan's Shias are ethnic Hazaras. They are Afghanistan's third largest ethnic group, with about six million people, and like most Afghans, they vote according to orders from community leaders. With a roughly 50-50 split between Afghanistan's southern Pashtuns and the rest of the country, the Hazaras are seen as the kingmakers. Mr Karzai is understood to have promised their leaders five cabinet positions in his new administration in return for their backing,

The legislation that is causing offence was sent back to parliament last month, when the review finished, even though it still included clauses which let men deny their wives food if they refuse to have sex. It has still not been debated, but it has since been "gazetted", effectively making it law. Key is on the bold part. Invariably this entire issue boils down to disgusting opportunism on the part of the occupation puppet regime. Despite all the moral outrage and indignation on the part of Western observers, you can be assured that nothing will be done.

Because the USUK knows that without measures like these, the tenuous claim to national leadership that the puppet Karzai has will be undermined.

That is not to say that any leftist should think that the opposition candidate Abdullah Abdullah would be an improvement. Aside from the name, he is a virtual clone of Karzai. It goes without saying that you can expect a Massoudite Tajik chauvinist to be a right-wing neoliberal, just as neoliberal as Pashtun drug lords like Karzai. This election is not so much about the issues than about simple ethnic bickering.