A test for US allies: How they treat women

[Jenn! 918]

Maybe this can spark some good discussion?

By Matthew Mainen

Wed Jan 3, 3:00 AM ET

WASHINGTON - To win the war on terror, the US needs allies it can trust. Some countries deserve to be considered friends of the US, and some don't. A US ally should share the ideals of liberty and justice - or at least be moving toward the adoption of these values. And it is especially critical for America to know which countries it can depend on in the Muslim world.

The US considers both Pakistan and Saudi Arabia to be allies in the terror war. But only Pakistan is worthy of this status. A simple look at how each nation treats women reveals why.

There has been much talk about the recent steps Pakistan has taken to ensure that rape victims are able to properly seek justice. According to the former law in Pakistan, a rape victim was obligated to present four male witnesses to corroborate her story. Failure to do so could possibly lead to the victim's execution on charges of adultery. But a change to this law, enacted Dec. 1, was pushed hard by Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, who has struggled to subdue Islamic extremist movements throughout his country.

There have been times when some have questioned Mr. Musharraf's commitment to the war on terror and ending Islamic extremism as a whole, but this step toward equal rights suggests that Pakistan is on a progressive path.

Unfortunately, these accolades cannot be extended to Saudi Arabia. In mid-November, a Saudi woman who was gang raped by seven men was sentenced to 90 lashes for her participation in "adulterous relations." More telling of Saudi Arabia's justice system is the fact that, as of now, her sentence is harsher than those of some of her attackers. Although the Saudi government is aware of the case, it has made no attempts to intervene.

In fact, the Saudi monarchy's position on rape is much more troubling than its mere act of turning a blind eye to this case.

In June, Colorado resident Homaidan al-Turki was found guilty of sexually abusing an Indonesian maid and holding her as a virtual slave in his home. He was sentenced to 27 years to life in prison, pending an appeal. Soon after the sentencing, the attorney general of Colorado, John Suthers, was flown to Saudi Arabia at the behest of Saudi King Abdullah and with the compliance of the State Department. While in Saudi Arabia, high ranking officials, including the king, questioned Mr. Suthers about whether Mr. Turki - who is from a prominent Saudi family - had been treated fairly. The officials suspected an anti-Muslim bias against Turki.

The Turki case demonstrates that Saudi Arabia doesn't just willfully ignore rape; it seems to tacitly endorse it. To be sure, most Muslims do not believe that rape and slavery are authentic aspects of civilized Islamic culture. That the Saudi government would discount such offenses should insult devout Muslims - and the US.

It is outrageous that the State Department felt it necessary to send the attorney general of Colorado to explain the simple fact that, in the US, when one person rapes another, the assailant goes to prison. It is a bad sign for American democracy when the US government officially allows an absolute monarch to question a US court decision.

On the one hand, there is Pakistan's government, which is dealing with the threat of a popular uprising staged by the country's many extremist militias. Yet in spite of this, the government has had the courage to rebuke Islamic extremism and institute critical reforms dealing with the rights of women.

On the other hand, there is the stable Saudi monarchy, which has faced no serious threat of an extremist uprising in many years. The only entity preventing the emergence of women's rights in Saudi Arabia is the Saudi monarchy itself.

Year after year, the Saudi government has promised to enact reforms to elevate the status of women, but year after year, the State Department reports that the kingdom has made little, if any, progress.

Simply put, Saudi Arabia has not reformed because it does not want to make reforms.

It must be understood that today's war is on two fronts: The first is a battle against terrorism, and the second is a battle against ideology.

Fanatical ideology drives Muslim terrorists - not the other way around. Saudi Arabia's abhorrent position on the rape of women, and women's rights in general, are indicators of the country's general ideology. Until the Saudi monarchy changes its stance on these issues, the US has no good reason to consider Saudi Arabia a true ally.

Source

[Mrs. Forgetful 2]

*note to self: don't move to Saudi Arabia*

Good article Jenn. Don't really know where I stand though. I don't really get into all the political things, but the US must have some pretty good reason for having Saudi Arabia as an ally.

Edited January 3, 2007 by Mrs. Forgetful

[Ban Hammer 13,517]

*note to self: don't move to Saudi Arabia*

Good article Jenn. Don't really know where I stand though. I don't really get into all the political things, but the US must have some pretty good reason for having Saudi Arabia as an ally.

oil

[Mrs. Forgetful 2]

that makes sense. The US is an Oil craving country, then again, what country's not?

[Sofiyya 1,687]

In June, Colorado resident Homaidan al-Turki was found guilty of sexually abusing an Indonesian maid and holding her as a virtual slave in his home. He was sentenced to 27 years to life in prison, pending an appeal. Soon after the sentencing, the attorney general of Colorado, John Suthers, was flown to Saudi Arabia at the behest of Saudi King Abdullah and with the compliance of the State Department. While in Saudi Arabia, high ranking officials, including the king, questioned Mr. Suthers about whether Mr. Turki - who is from a prominent Saudi family - had been treated fairly. The officials suspected an anti-Muslim bias against Turki.

The Turki case demonstrates that Saudi Arabia doesn't just willfully ignore rape; it seems to tacitly endorse it. To be sure, most Muslims do not believe that rape and slavery are authentic aspects of civilized Islamic culture. That the Saudi government would discount such offenses should insult devout Muslims - and the US.

It is outrageous that the State Department felt it necessary to send the attorney general of Colorado to explain the simple fact that, in the US, when one person rapes another, the assailant goes to prison. It is a bad sign for American democracy when the US government officially allows an absolute monarch to question a US court decision.

This case is close to home. I know several people who know al-Turki, as he used to teach converts a form of Saudi Islam. Unfortunately, his case is not unusual; several other Saudis have been convicted of similar crimes against their household help.

Wealthy Saudis often employ young women from poor families; primarily, such servants are often Asian, and being non-Arab, they are considered to be inately inferior to Arabs. They are often abused, not paid as agreed, their passports taken away and their visas allowed to expire to control them and keep them in fear. What many people don't realize is that Saudi Arabia, as a nation, has only existed since the 1930s. It has gradually evolved from a feudal, tribal society into what it is today. It has been an ally of every modern American administration due to its oil wealth.

Until 1964, slavery was legal in the Kingdom. The attitude toward servants does not fall far from this era, and even today, there are Wahabi clerics who demand bringing it back as a tradition allowed by Islam (Islam did not encourage slavery, but it never abolished it either). Slaves, as property, are also considered to be sexually available and obligated to their male owner. So, none of this has ever surprized me. The difference is, abused servants in the US have recourse against their abusers. In the Kingdom, not so much.

Edited January 4, 2007 by szsz

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

oil is yum