December, 01 2009, 03:13pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Diana Duarte, Media Coordinator,Phone: +1 212 627 0444,Email:,media@madre.org
Six Alternatives to a Troop Surge in Afghanistan
NEW YORK
Tonight, President Obama will tell us that he must
expand the war on Afghanistan in order to end it. He will say that
another troop surge is necessary to prevent al-Qaeda from using
Afghanistan as a base. What he won't say is that al-Qaeda is no longer in Afghanistan. He probably won't point out that international forces already outnumber the Taliban twelve to one.
And he's not likely to remind us that throughout history, from the
American Revolution to the Vietnam War, home-grown insurgencies like
the Taliban's ultimately ended when foreign troops withdrew.
More than 80 percent of Afghans don't want more US troops in their country.
One reason is that the US presence is strengthening the Taliban, which
most Afghans oppose. As the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
has found, "The mere presence of foreign soldiers fighting a war in
Afghanistan is probably the single most important factor in the resurgence of the Taliban."
Afghanistan's crisis is in part the result of 30 years of US intervention in the region, including the covert CIA campaign that created the Taliban (and al-Qaeda).
Having unleashed this violence, the US has a legal and ethical
obligation to the people of Afghanistan. That obligation will not be
met by putting more boots on the ground. Instead, we need policies that
address the grinding poverty, mass violence against women, predatory
government and ongoing warfare that plague Afghanistan.
Here are six things the Obama Administration must do to further the prospects for peace in Afghanistan:
1. Protect civilians from attacks
- This will be the third US troop surge in Afghanistan; the first two killed record numbers of civilians.
- In
2007, US/NATO troops were expanded by 45 percent and more civilians
were killed than in the previous four years combined. In the first 10
months of Obama's 2009 surge, more than 2000 civilians were killed-at a faster rate than any time since the war began. - The Taliban is known to attack villages where US soldiers have been. More US troops will make more civilians vulnerable to reprisal attacks.
- President Obama's expansion of the war into Pakistan has further endangered civilian lives. He has authorized as many drone strikes in less than ten months as George Bush did in his last three years in office.
The US should stop constructing military bases and waging air
strikes in or near civilian areas. President Obama must put a stop to
drone attacks in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
2. Uphold Afghan women's rights
- George Bush's lie-that the US is in Afghanistan to defend
women's rights-is now driving the idea that more US forces are needed
to protect Afghan women from the Taliban. - The problem with this argument is that the US has never prioritized women's rights-or anyone's rights-in Afghanistan.
- From
2001 to the present, the US has allied itself with warlords and
fanatical fundamentalists whose track record on women's rights is
virtually the same as the Taliban's. In the creation of Afghanistan's
Parliament, constitution and judiciary, the US has consistently traded women's rights for allegiance from warlords and reactionary clerics. - The
choice in Afghanistan is not between "winning the war" or "abandoning
Afghan women." Upholding women's rights in Afghanistan is not some
idealistic mission: the US is legally obligated to protect
internationally recognized human rights, including women's rights, in
every policy, foreign and domestic. Military force is about the least
suited instrument for securing human rights in any context. - Rampant abuses of Afghan women's rights cannot be eliminated by force.
Ultimately, an end to the armed conflict is a precondition for Afghan
women to create an environment in which they themselves can
successfully assert their rights.
The US should declare women's rights-and all human
rights-non-negotiable and end the US pattern of trading Afghan women's
rights for cooperation from warlords and armed groups.
US economic and political support to Afghanistan should be tied
to human rights improvements, including women's rights to healthcare,
education, employment, political participation and freedom from
violence.
3. Prioritize development and meet humanitarian needs
- Proponents of a troop surge argue that development cannot
be pursued without security; but the inverse is equally true. In a
country with the world's highest infant mortality rate, there can be no security without development. - The US is undermining development by militarizing humanitarian aid. The army's "Provincial Reconstruction Teams" blur the line between combat operations and aid delivery.
They use humanitarian aid as a bargaining chip to extort information
from civilians. The practice turns urgently-needed aid into a weapon of
war and endangers recipients by associating them with the US military.
The US should demilitarize aid operations and fund
community-based, Afghan-led reconstruction efforts to enable access to
food, clean water, health care and primary education. Aid should be
channeled through Afghan organizations to ensure that funds reach those
most in need instead of reverting back to private US-based contractors.
4. Address the underlying reasons for the resurgence of the Taliban
- Grinding poverty and a 40 percent unemployment rate are root causes of the insurgency. Most Taliban recruits join because they are paid a daily wage.
- The
Taliban is also strengthened by popular outrage and fear of US attacks,
the illegitimacy of the Karzai government and the support of Pakistan. - These
problems will not be solved with more troops. They are social and
political problems that must be addressed with development and
diplomacy.
The US should allocate funding for job training and creation
programs for Afghans. Currently, only 10 percent of US funding in
Afghanistan is earmarked for development; the rest is for military
purposes. Allocating more funds to combating poverty in Afghanistan
will weaken the Taliban without endangering civilians and help build
long-term security.
5. Support Afghan civil society
- Civil society, including the Afghan women's movement, is
the country's most moderating force and a vital resource for rebuilding
Afghanistan, advancing human rights and fostering peace in the region. - The
political spaces where civil society can flourish-including a free
press, progressive civic institutions, non-governmental organizations,
and schools and universities-are debilitated by an atmosphere of war
and militarism.
The US should hold consultations with Afghan civil society,
particularly women's organizations, to determine policies that can
support civil society as a critical counter-force to warlords, armed
groups and corrupt officials.
6. Advance diplomacy and peace building
- Ultimately, this war, like other armed conflicts, will end
through negotiations. Yet, compared to the resources poured into the
fighting, the US has barely begun to lay the groundwork for peace talks. - Negotiations
need to include local processes of reconciliation and peace building
and address key grievances of the Taliban without legitimizing their
cause. - A regional process should include Afghanistan's
neighbors and address disputes between India and Pakistan, which are
fueling violence in Afghanistan.
The US should support and facilitate diplomacy and peace
building while recognizing that ultimately, decisions about what
happens in Afghanistan must be made in Afghanistan and not in
Washington.
This resource is also available on MADRE's website: https://www.madre.org/index.php?s=4&news=247
MADRE is an international women's human rights organization that partners with community-based women's groups to advance women's human rights, challenge injustice and create social change in contexts of war, conflict, disaster and their aftermath. MADRE advocates for a world in which all people enjoy individual and collective human rights; natural resources are shared equitably and sustainably; women participate effectively in all aspects of society; and all people have a meaningful say in policies that affect their lives. For more information about MADRE, visit www.madre.org.
LATEST NEWS
Indigenous Brazilians Mobilize for Land Demarcation, Tribal Rights
Participants in the 20th Free Land Camp demanded that leftist Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva deliver on his promises to Indigenous people.
Apr 26, 2024
Thousands of people rallied this week in BrasÃlia for the 20th annual Free Land Camp—the largest gathering of Indigenous people in Brazil—where participants demanded that President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva's administration safeguard their lands and cultural rights
Organized by the Association of Brazil's Indigenous Peoples (APIB), the five-day Free Land Camp—in Portuguese, Acampamento Terra Livre (ATL)—wrapped up Friday after a week of solidarity and action. Activities included rallies and marches; events commemorating slain Indigenous activists; and plenary sessions on the climate emergency, education, mental health, and more.
Some participants criticized Lula—who was notably absent from this year's ATL after attending the previous two camps—for what they said was his failure to fulfill campaign promises to Indigenous Brazilians—although attendees also acknowledged that his administration has taken major steps toward tackling illegal resource extraction and demarcating tribal lands.
Two big issues at this year's ATL—whose theme was "Our Existence is Ancestral: We Have Always Been Here!"—were the demarcation of Indigenous lands and opposition to proposed Amazon megaprojects, especially the plan to build the EF-170 railway through the heart of the imperiled rainforest in order to boost mining, logging, agribusiness, and other resource extraction and exploitation.
Last year, Brazilian lawmakers overruled Lula's partial veto of the highly contentious "Marco Temporal" law, which effectively paused demarcations and potentially opened more Indigenous lands to exploitation.
Demarcation confers legal protections against the illegal logging, mining, and ranching that have plagued rural Brazil for generations. On April 19—Indigenous Peoples Day in Brazil—Lula touted his government's demarcation of Aldeia Velha, land of the Pataxó people, in the northeastern state of Bahia, as well as the territory of the Karajá people in Cacique Fontoura, Mato Grosso.
Lula has acknowledged that his administration is falling short of its own demarcation pledges to Indigenous people and has promised to do more.
Alessandra Korap Munduruku, a member of the Munduruku people and a 2023 winner of the prestigious Goldman Environmental Prize, criticized the demarcation delay.
"Twenty years of resistance struggle by the Terra Livre camp. For 20 years we've been coming to BrasÃlia, occupying and seeking our rights," she said. "This year, we're waiting for the government to demarcate all our lands. But the government is letting the [state] governors decide for us."
"This is not what we expect. It's not the governor's decision to make. It's the federal government's," Korap Munduruku added. "This is written in the Constitution, and we see that we are being used."
Brazilian and international agribusiness interests, including commodity traders like U.S.-based Cargill, are pushing Lula's administration to proceed with EF-170—commonly called the Ferrogrão—over the objections of Indigenous peoples. Kayapó leader Doto Takak-Ire warned last year that the Ferrogrão threatens the survival of no less than 48 native peoples, calling the project "the railway of Indigenous genocide."
Earlier this year, Brazilian Transport Minister Renan Filho said that building the Ferrogrão is a top administration priority, sparking widespread disappointment and anger among the Kayapó and other Indigenous people who say they'll be adversely affected by the railway.
ATL participants on Thursday led a "train of death" through BrasÃlia's Esplanade of Ministries, a greenway bisecting numerous government buildings, to draw attention to the project's perils.
"Ferrogrão is the train of death, of deforestation," Korap Munduruku said Thursday.
"The railroad is not going to carry people, as they claim, but grain production of international companies that are financing this project," she continued. "It's a project that will affect not only Indigenous people, but also traditional communities and the people who live in the towns alongside its route."
"In addition, it is a project that will affect people all over the world because it would exacerbate climate change with the massive deforestation it would cause," Korap Munduruku added.
APIB executive coordinator Kleber Karipuna said the government did not adequately consult Indigenous peoples when planning the Ferrogrão.
"Hearings have only been held in cities, none in Indigenous villages," the Karipuna tribal leader said. "Once again, we demand that the protocols for consulting Indigenous peoples be respected. Additionally, the absence of a consultation protocol should not be used as an excuse to deny consultation of peoples affected by the project."
Takakpe Tapayuna Metuktire of the Raoni Institute, which promotes Indigenous rights and sustainability, warned that "Ferrogrão represents the death of kilometers and kilometers of forest."
"While we should be thinking about how to preserve what remains and think about alternative infrastructure projects that respect our rights, nature, and Indigenous and traditional peoples," Tapayuna Metuktire asserted. "We are fighting to prevent yet another project of death and destruction from prevailing in the Amazon. With Ferrogrão all that will be left is scorched earth."
Keep ReadingShow Less
UN Warns of 'Catastrophic' Imminent Escalation in Sudan
Warring factions in North Darfur state must "avoid locating military installations within or near densely populated areas, including towns and camps for internally displaced people," said one U.N. official.
Apr 26, 2024
The United Nations' top humanitarian affairs officials on Friday called for an immediate deescalation of hostilities in Sudan, where rival factions in the military government have been fighting for a year and where an attack on the city of El Fasher is reportedly imminent.
About 800,000 people in the city, the capital of North Darfur state, are in "extreme and immediate danger," U.N. aid operations director, Edem Wosornu, told the U.N. Security Council earlier this week, as she reported that clashes between the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a paramilitary group, and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) are nearing El Fasher.
Fighting between the two groups has intensified in recent weeks, forcibly displacing an estimated 40,000 people.
The U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs said Friday that the security situation in North Darfur has left more than a dozen aid trucks with relief supplies for 122,000 people stranded in neighboring Northern state, unable to proceed into the only capital city in Darfur that is not controlled by RSF.
"A patchwork of armed actors, including the Darfur Joint Protection Forces, the SAF, and the RSF control different parts of the El Fasher area," Human Rights Watch reported this week. "Tense calm alternating with episodic fighting has prevailed for months."
Since April 14, when RSF began to push into El Fasher, at least 43 people—including women and children—have been killed due to fighting between the SAF and RSF.
"Civilians are trapped in the city, afraid of being killed should they attempt to flee," said Seif Magango, spokesperson for the U.N. high commissioner for human rights, Volker Türk. "This dire situation is compounded by a severe shortage of essential supplies as deliveries of commercial goods and humanitarian aid have been heavily constrained by the fighting, and delivery trucks are unable to freely transit through RSF-controlled territory."
The lack of humanitarian aid in North Darfur has pushed the state toward a famine, with one child dying of starvation every two hours, according to a February report by Doctors Without Borders.
In December, the U.S. State Department announced an $85 million sale of radar and other military equipment to the United Arab Emirates (UAE), which The New York Times reported last year has been covertly supporting the RSF.
U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) proposed a joint resolution to block arms sales to the UAE in January, in light of its support for the paramilitary group.
Omar was among several lawmakers who wrote to President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken earlier this week, urging them to "deliver urgently-needed humanitarian assistance" and to help end the hostilities.
Sudanese-Australian writer Yassmin Abdel-Magied urged Americans on Friday to pressure lawmakers and the White House to take more action.
"There is a tiny window of opportunity for us to find a way to get the UAE... to make the RSF to stop in their tracks," said Abdel-Magied. "Maybe there's a way that we can avoid this massacre."
OCHA called on the warring parties to "take constant care to spare civilians and civilian objects in the conduct of military operations."
"They must, to the extent possible, avoid locating military installations within or near densely populated areas, including towns and camps for internally displaced people," said the office. "It is also imperative that the parties allow safe passage for civilians to leave El Fasher for safer areas."
Keep ReadingShow Less
With US Workers on the March, Southern States Take Aim at Unions
GOP leaders in the region are "truly astonished that workers might not trust their corporate overlords with their working conditions, pay, health, and retirement," said one critic.
Apr 26, 2024
Since six Southern Republican governors last week showed "how scared they are" of the United Auto Workers' U.S. organizing drive, Tennessee Volkswagen employees have voted to join the UAW while GOP policymakers across the region have ramped up attacks on unions.
The UAW launched "the largest organizing drive in modern American history" after securing improved contracts last year with a strike targeting the Big Three automakers—General Motors, Ford, and Stellantis. The ongoing campaign led to the "landslide" victory in Chattanooga last week, which union president Shawn Fain pointed to as proof that "you can't win in the South" isn't true.
The Tennessee win "is breaking the brains of Republicans in that region. They're truly astonished that workers might not trust their corporate overlords with their working conditions, pay, health, and retirement," Thom Hartmann wrote in a Friday opinion piece.
"The problem for Republicans is that unions represent a form of democracy in the workplace, and the GOP hates democracy as a matter of principle."
"The problem for Republicans is that unions represent a form of democracy in the workplace, and the GOP hates democracy as a matter of principle," he argued. "Republicans appear committed to politically dying on a number of hills that time has passed by. Their commitment to gutting voting rolls and restricting voting rights, their obsession with women’s reproductive abilities, and their hatred of regulations and democracy in the workplace are increasingly seen by average American voters as out-of-touch and out-of-date."
Just before voting began in Chattanooga, GOP Govs. Kay Ivey of Alabama, Brian Kemp of Georgia, Tate Reeves of Mississippi, Henry McMaster of South Carolina, Bill Lee of Tennessee, and Greg Abbott of Texas claimed that "unionization would certainly put our states' jobs in jeopardy" and the UAW is "making big promises to our constituents that they can't deliver on."
The next nationally watched UAW vote is scheduled for May 13-17 at a Mercedes-Benz plant in Vance, Alabama.
"Workers at our plant are ready for this moment," Mercedes employee Jeremy Kimbrell said last week. "We are ready to vote yes because we are ready to win our fair share. We are going to end the Alabama discount and replace it with what our state actually needs. Workers sticking together and sticking by our community."
As workers gear up for the election, the Alabama House of Representatives on Tuesday voted 72-30 for a bill that would withhold future economic incentive money from companies that voluntarily recognize unions rather than holding secret ballots. The state Senate previously passed a version of the legislation but now must consider it with the lower chamber's amendments.
The Associated Pressnoted that "Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp signed similar legislation on Monday" and that Tennessee already has one on the books.
With his signature on Senate Bill 362, "Kemp's aim is to thwart future organizing attempts by workers at automotive plants in Georgia, such as those operated by Hyundai Motor Group," according toThe Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
As the newspaper detailed:
Georgia has been a right-to-work state since 1947, when Congress passed the Taft-Hartley Act, allowing workers to refuse to join a union or pay dues, even though they may benefit from contracts negotiated by a union with their employer. Just 5.4% of workers in the state belonged to a union in 2023, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
But the National Labor Relations Act of 1935, also known as the Wagner Act, protects the right for workers to form a union and collectively bargain for better wages and working conditions.
The new Georgia law is expected to be challenged in court, labor experts have said.
Acting U.S. Labor Secretary Julie Su told the AP on Thursday that she is not sure if the department will challenge the laws, given the National Labor Relations Board's responsibilities, but she stressed that "there are federal standards beneath which no worker should have to live and work."
In terms of joining a union, "that choice belongs to the worker, free from intervention, either by the employer or by politicians, free from retaliation and threats," Su said. "And what we are seeing is that workers who were thought to be too vulnerable to assert that right are doing it, and they're doing it here in the South."
The U.S. labor chief also slammed "unacceptable" union-busting efforts by companies and suggested that protecting the right to unionize is part of President Joe Biden's "promise to center workers in the economy."
"He has said he's the most pro-worker, pro-union president in history, and we are going to make good on that promise. And that includes making sure that workers have the right to join a union," Su said of the president.
Biden's commitment to workers and unionizing rights has caught the attention of GOP leaders. The governors' joint statement nodded to the UAW's January endorsement of the president, who is seeking reelection in November, and South Carolina's leader attacked the administration earlier this year.
During his January State of the State speech, McMaster declared that "we will not let our state's economy suffer or become collateral damage as labor unions seek to consume new jobs and conscript new dues-paying members. And we will not allow the Biden administration's pro-union policies to chip away at South Carolina's sovereign interests. We will fight. All the way to the gates of hell. And we will win."
News From the Statesreported Friday that "of all the foreign-owned automakers in South Carolina, BMW would be the most likely mark in the near term if enough of its workers show interest. The massive plant near Greer—the manufacturer's only U.S. production facility—employs some 11,000 people, twice the number of workers at Volkswagen in Tennessee and Mercedes in Alabama. It has operated in the Upstate for nearly 30 years and is in the process of adding electric vehicle lines."
However, a UAW spokesperson told the outlet that they don't yet have the numbers for the BMW and Volvo facilities in the state, and Marick Masters, a Wayne State University professor who studies the union, said: "I don't think they're writing anybody off but they know the history of unionization. And I would say South Carolina is a very inhospitable place for unions."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular