Two Aishas: two tragedies, one survivor
October 14, 2010 by Peter · 2 Comments
An Afghan woman whose ears and nose were cut off by her abusive husband as punishment for running away – and whose mutilated face was featured on the front of an international magazine – has undergone extensive plastic surgery.
Aisha was married to a Taliban fighter when she was aged just 12 when she and her sister were handed over in order to settle a family debt according to local custom known as baad. The girls reportedly endured many years of abuse, and were forced to sleep in a stable with the fighter’s family’s animals. Aisha was often beaten and her in-laws treated her and her sister like slaves.
Eventually Aisha ran from the house but her husband – who returned from fighting inside Pakistan in order to find her and restore “family honour” – tracked her down in Kandahar. He took her back to Oruzgan district where he lived and on the way he cut off her nose and ears. Essentially left for dead, she managed to crawl to the house of her uncle but he refused to help her. Eventually a relative took her to a US-operated hospital.
13-year old Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow was stoned to death in Somalia by insurgents because she was raped. Reports indicate that she was raped by three men while traveling by foot to visit her grandmother in Mogadishu. When she went to the authorities to report the crime, they accused her of adultery and sentenced her to death. Aisha was forced into a hole in a stadium of 1,000 onlookers as 50 men buried her up to the neck and cast stones at her until she died. A witness who spoke to the BBC’s Today program said she had been crying and had to be forced into a hole before the stoning, reported to have taken place in a football stadium. She said: ‘I’m not going, I’m not going. Don’t kill me, don’t kill me.’ “A few minutes later more than 50 men tried to stone her.” The witness said people crowding round to see the execution said it was “awful”.
Last February, I wrote about a young Turkish girl buried alive by relatives in a so-called “honor” killing that was carried out as punishment for talking to boys, referring to the males who commit these heinous deeds as monsters:
First, let me say this: the brutalization of women and girls cuts across all religious and cultural boundaries, so this isn’t just about dis-’honor’ killings, though few things are more heinous than a father murdering his daughter (after dispassionately discussing it with other family members). It’s about the things males do to females and will continue to do unless the outcry is loud enough that the world begins to take notice.
In a December post, I made a painfully easy prediction: women would have another horrible decade. I gave a few examples.
Like this:
Denis Mukwege, a Congolese gynecologist, cannot bear to listen to the stories his patients tell him anymore. Every day, 10 new women and girls who have been raped show up at his hospital. Many have been so sadistically attacked from the inside out, butchered by bayonets and assaulted with chunks of wood, that their reproductive and digestive systems are beyond repair. “We don’t know why these rapes are happening, but one thing is clear,” said Dr. Mukwege, who works in South Kivu Province, the epicenter of Congo’s rape epidemic. “They are done to destroy women.”
Here’s a BBC story from this morning:
A wealthy British landowner has been found guilty of murdering his estranged wife. Prout’s wife asked him for a divorce before she went missing…
Or this, from 2005, that uses a perfect word to describe the men who do these things:
When Amy Rezos went to meet her estranged husband to talk about a divorce, she never imagined what would happen next. When the couple separated, Chris got a hotel room. On July 2, 2004, Amy thought she was meeting him in the hotel to finalize the details of the divorce. Instead, she was walking into a carefully planned trap. As the couple argued over the custody of their two boys, Chris snapped. “I just remember seeing a look on him that I had never ever seen before in my life. It was a look … like a monster,” she said. Amy was savagely beaten. Someone in a nearby room heard the commotion and called the police. When officer Paul Lovett arrived, Chris Rezos tried to convince him that they were victims of a robbery. But Lovett didn’t buy it. “I could see a woman on the floor covered in blood. The bathroom was covered in blood. I was certain she was dying. I asked her to blink once for no, twice for yes,” Lovett said. As the 35-year-old woman lay near death, Lovett tried to speak to her, “I asked if your husband did this to you and blink once for no, twice for yes, and she blinked twice,” he said.
I could post thousands of these and it wouldn’t capture the depth and breadth of the problem. It comes down to this: there simply isn’t sufficient public outrage about gender-based violence to spur political action.
In the aftermath of Haiti, I asked a simple question: “If the World Can Mobilize Like This for Haiti, Why Not for Sexual Violence in Congo?”
The world’s response to Haiti is fully warranted – anything less would be reprehensible. But one thing about it frustrates me: why can’t we muster the same sense of urgency, the same focus, the same acceptance that other lesser activities must be temporarily set aside; why can’t we mobilize as quickly and react as fiercely and forcefully when it comes to similar calamities across the globe? Say, for instance, the monstrous sexual violence in Congo? When young girls are being gang-raped with bayonets and chunks of wood, their insides ripped apart, how can the world take it in stride? There’s simply no excuse for a muted response, let alone indifference. None.
Some readers said the global inaction with respect to Congo boils down to conflict mineral Coltan, and to some extent that’s true. But the bigger problem is apathy. Nick Kristof articulates it well:
Sometimes I wish eastern Congo could suffer an earthquake or a tsunami, so that it might finally get the attention it needs. The barbaric civil war being waged here is the most lethal conflict since World War II and has claimed at least 30 times as many lives as the Haiti earthquake. Yet no humanitarian crisis generates so little attention per million corpses, or such a pathetic international response.
‘Pathetic’ is an understatement.
Sometimes I feel like we were all born into an alternate universe, a psychotic, twisted, perverted version of what life should be. Our existence is marked by unimaginable violence, hideous acts of evil against the most innocent among us. It’s like living in a perpetual horror movie.
As I wrote recently, across the globe, women’s rights, their basic dignity, is under assault. It can manifest with physical violence, but it can also be part of a pervasive pattern of sexism and misogyny. Whatever form it takes, one thing is clear: there can be no justice on earth until there is justice for women.
UPDATE: More horrific details about Aisha’s ordeal:
Promised to a Taliban fighter by her father when she was 12 to satisfy an obligation, Aisha was married at 14 and had been used as a servant and forced to sleep in an outbuilding with her in-laws’ animals. When she fled their abuse, neighbors turned her in.
She was jailed briefly, and her father retrieved her and returned her to his in-laws, after being assured they would treat her better. Instead, her husband walked her into a mountain clearing and held her down while his brother chopped off her nose and ears as other Talib watched. Then they left her to die in the mountains where they’d disfigured her.
“I passed out,” she said in an interview with CNN’s Atia Abawi. ”In the middle of the night it felt like there was cold water in my nose.”
It was her own blood, so much of it, she told Abawi. “I couldn’t even see…”
Somehow Aisha managed to feel her way to her grandfather’s home, where she was hidden and then spirited away to a medical center run by the U.S. military, who eventually transferred her to a privately-run women’s shelter… After 10 weeks’ care, Aisha was stabilized enough to go to the Grossman Burn Center for a series of rehabilitative surgeries that the center had offered to perform pro bono.
The debate over Markos Moulitsas’ “American Taliban”
September 1, 2010 by Peter · Leave a Comment
A fascinating debate has broken out over Kos’s new book, American Taliban.
Jamelle Bouie sums up his critique and Digby’s rebuttal:
Today, I have a review up of American Taliban by Markos Moulitsas, founder of Daily Kos. You should read the full thing, but here’s the gist:
…ultimately, any similarities are vastly outweighed by incredibly important distinctions and vast differences of degree. I’m no fan of the right wing, but the only possible way it can be “indistinguishable” from the Taliban is if conservatives are stoning women for adultery, stalking elementary schools to throw acid in girls’ faces, and generally enforcing fundamentalist religious law with torture and wanton violence.
Taking issue with my review, Digby argues that in my attack on Kos’ book, I’m missing the big picture:
The inconvenient truth here is that these people are dangerous because their worldview is dangerous. Lethal even. And somebody has to have the guts and to call them on it in their own terms. This “tired genre” of “our opponents are monsters” has been decidedly dominated by one side and the consequences have been grave. We have a fight on our hands and the only real question left is whether anyone on our side is willing to wage it.
I haven’t read the book yet, so I don’t want to weigh in on the details, but it’s worth keeping in mind that just one facet of rightwing extremism, climate denial, could lead to death and destruction on a scale that dwarfs anything the Taliban can do. So there are deadly consequences to America’s rightward shift and I can see why Markos is illustrating it in such raw terms.
UPDATE: Here’s something I wrote about why the right always seems to set the terms of the debate and which might provide context for the dispute over Markos’ book:
There is a simple formula for rightwing dominance of our national debate, even when Democrats are in charge: move the conversation as extreme right as possible, then compromise toward the far right. Negotiation 101. And it’s completely lost on Democrats.
It’s what John Boehner knows that Obama and Democrats can’t seem to get a clue about:
House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) will call Tuesday for the mass firing of the Obama administration’s economic team, including Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and White House adviser Larry Summers, arguing that November’s midterm elections are shaping up as a referendum on sustained unemployment across the nation and saying the “writing is on the wall.”
In one fell swoop, this becomes the starting point of a conversation. For Democrats it would be an end point — if they ever reached it.
It’s no accident that in 21st century America, torture has been mainstreamed, climate denial has taken firm hold, book burning, racial dog whistles and brazen religious intolerance are part of our discourse and par for the course. This is how the right plays the game, using Limbaugh, Hannity, Fox, Drudge, blogs, chain emails, talk radio, etc. to shamelessly and defiantly drag the conversation as far right as possible.
My point is that the right has no scruples about using harsh, often inflammatory language strategically. It resonates emotionally and trumps any cerebral approach. Interestingly, Markos seems to have achieved his goal by making the debate about whether the radical right’s views and policies are equivalent to the Taliban.
UPDATE II: More from Digby:
Ok,I was going to drop this until I read the book because well — it’s stupid for any of us to be arguing a bout a book none of us have read. But I can’t let this one thing pass. Ta-Nehesi Coates and Matt Yglesias (both of whom I have great respect and even affection for) are being bizarrely literal about this subject.
Markos has written a polemic called “American Taliban” in which he draws an ironic comparison between the far right in American politics and the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He isn’t saying they are interchangeable. That’s ridiculous. Obviously, one exists within a secular Western democracy with a rule of law and the other well … doesn’t. And just as the American far right doesn’t require beards and pray to Mecca or speak Pashtun, neither do they execute women in the middle of sports stadiums for adultery. But that doesn’t mean they aren’t, in fact, repressive, authoritarian, theocratic, anti-feminist and (on the fringes) quite violent. (Abortion clinics have been under physical siege for decades by these people.)
Are they mirror images? Of course not. But it’s infinitely interesting to consider the ways in which they are alike and for a liberal writer to not be intrigued by the huge irony that these similarly anti-modern fundamentalists are now organizing themselves around the idea that the other is the devil just strikes me as inconceivable. I think it’s a fascinating and provocative observation. I mean, come on — just last week-end we watched a rally at the Lincoln Memorial where a bunch of conservative religious folks listened raptly to a loon talking up a black robed regiment of religious leaders as he decried the pending takeover of Sharia law! Setting aside the politics for a moment, what kind of writer doesn’t isn’t struck by that image?
Dozens killed in Iraq; Afghan girls poisoned; Marine general accuses Obama of “giving sustenance” to Taliban
August 25, 2010 by Peter · Leave a Comment
Here are the latest developments in the dual disasters of Iraq and Afghanistan:
Yesterday I wrote No justice on earth until girls are free from these horrors. Today the horrors continue unabated with a cowardly attack against schoolgirls:
About 40 schoolgirls became ill and were taken to hospital after a suspected gas poisoning in the Afghan capital on Wednesday, another apparent attack by hardline Islamists opposed to female education. The Taliban banned education for girls during their Afghan rule from 1996-2001, but have condemned similar attacks in the past. They have, however, set fire to dozens of schools, threatened teachers and even attacked schoolgirls in rural areas.
In Iraq, where “success” is now conventional wisdom, dozens of souls were snuffed out:
Suicide bombers killed more than 50 people in apparently coordinated attacks on Iraqi security forces in Baghdad and elsewhere on Wednesday, less than a week before U.S. troops formally end combat operations.
And incredibly, a top Marine general said the 2011 draw-down date is giving sustenance to the Taliban (note the ongoing campaign, spearheaded by Petraeus, to abolish that July deadline):
The top U.S. Marine general made a sharp departure from the White House’s talking points on Afghanistan, saying President Barack Obama’s promised July 2011 deadline to start withdrawing troops from the country had given “sustenance” to the Taliban.
We know the president was talking to several audiences at the same time when he made his comments on July 2011,” Gen. James Conway told reporters on Tuesday. “In some ways, we think right now it’s probably giving our enemy sustenance….In fact, we’ve intercepted communications that say, ‘Hey, you know, we only have to hold out for so long.’”
Even a leading conservative blogger realizes how outrageous this is:
I’d be angrier about this than about what Team McChrystal pulled a few months ago. Not that what Conway’s saying is surprising — this has always been the chief hawkish criticism of the July 2011 timetable — but to have one of your own top brass question the strategy publicly, especially in terms this explosive, is mind-boggling.
