Wendy McElroy used her August 20th Foxnews column for an attack on RAWA, the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan. According to McElroy, American feminist groups like the Feminist Majority Foundation (which McElroy mysteriously refers to as "FMN") "should be called to account for its role in funds directed toward the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan." That certainly sounds serious. So what has RAWA – know for running desperately-needed schools and hospitals for Afghan women – done, that’s so awful?
First, McElroy worries that RAWA lacks fiscal accountability. This is a fair concern- but McElroy, who has expressed this concern before, needs to display some journalistic accountability. In two columns attacking RAWA, McElroy doesn’t produce a shred of evidence to suggest that RAWA has ever misallocated funds. Isn’t it usual to have proof when demanding that people be "called to account"? Apparently, that’s not how journalism is done at Foxnews.
Although fiscal accountability is a legitimate concern, it’s one that probably can’t be resolved in the real world – not unless we refuse to support indigenous third-world organizations like RAWA. As McElroy probably realizes, third-world organizations don’t have the resources to document finances the way most U.S. charities do. Even the tiny nonprofit I work for (a local historic site) requires specialized software, Western-educated employees to run the software, and the services of two CPAs to keep our financial records straight. RAWA hasn’t had access to any of that; furthermore, RAWA has been working in the midst of violent suppression and a war. No reasonable person thinks RAWA can meet American standards of fiscal accountability.
Why donate to RAWA, then? It’s a tradeoff; donors lose some accountability, but gain the advantages of supporting an indigenous organization. Unlike any American organization, RAWA is Afghan women doin’ it for themselves; isn’t that better, in the long run, than Western NGOs doing it for Afghans? RAWA’s members know firsthand, in the way that no American can, where aid to Afghan women does the most good. And RAWA members, who have risked execution opposing the Taliban, have shown a commitment and (as even McElroy has admitted) heroism that cannot be matched.
McElroy ignorantly suggests accountability can be provided by "letter writing" – the model of charity suggested in late-night commercials starring Sally Struthers, asking us to "sponsor" a starving child, in exchange for the child’s grateful letters. However, the accountability of letter-writing is an illusion – as the Chicago Tribune, ABC News, writer Michael Marin, and others have shown, letter-writing didn’t prevent Save the Children from badly mismanaging funds and decieving donors.
Furthermore, as the New Internationalist (among other critics) argues, letter-writing is a fundimentally flawed approach to charity. It’s a fundraising gimmick that doesn’t benefit people in need. When Westerners "sponsor" a child or a teacher, the primary beneficiary is the Western donor, who gets an ego-boost; meanwhile, the supposed beneficiary – in this case, teachers – get a needless addition to an already huge workload. "However well-intentioned such aid may be, the kernel is the creation of a paternalistic relationship which is unnecessary and potentially harmful." Rather than forcing teachers to waste time and money writing fundraising letters to Americans, I’d prefer RAWA’s resources to be used actually helping Afghan women – and I doubt I’m the only RAWA donor who feels that way.
But don’t letters prove that some money is being spent in the right ways? Maybe. But better proof is already available, from Westerners who have seen RAWA’s operations firsthand, such as FemAid’s Carol Mann, the Guardian’s Natasha Walter, and University of Maryland professor Anne Brodsky. Is this accountability perfect? No, of course not; there is no absolute guarantee (with RAWA or any other charity) that no dollar has been misspent. But despite McElroy’s insinuations, there’s no evidence of RAWA misusing funds, and considerable evidence of the good RAWA does; for an American wanting to help Afghanistan women, donating to RAWA is a good bet.
McElroy has a couple of other complaints about RAWA. She claims that a "prominent RAWA member… blasted" Ms Magazine – but it seems extremely unlikely that Elizabeth Miller of Ohio is a member of RAWA, prominent or otherwise. (Fact-checking, like having evidence before implying misuse of funds, is apparently not a Foxnews staple.) (Speaking of fact-checking, McElroy claims that the Feminist Majority Foundation, which owns Ms, "has reacted with silence" to Elizabeth Miller’s letter – even though McElroy herself links to an article in American Prospect quoting the president of FMF’s reaction).
McElroy also complains that RAWA "is not, as it claims, apolitical." But when has RAWA ever called itself apolitical? McElroy doesn’t say, and a google search of RAWA’s website doesn’t find a single use of the word "apolitical." As McElroy knows, RAWA describes itself as "an independent political/social organization"; and RAWA openly states its political goals. So what mysterious "political" goal does McElroy fear RAWA is hiding?
McElroy’s purpose here, it turns out, is red-baiting. McElroy mentions that "Other political goals can be discerned from RAWA’s activities. For example, at its 2000 celebration of International Women’s Day, one of RAWA’s featured speakers was Afzal Shah Khamosh, the heads of Pakistan’s openly Communist Mazdoor Kissan Party." (A paragraph later, McElroy admits this is meaningless – so why did she say that political goals could be discerned from it?) McElroy also slips in that RAWA’s founder attended a French Socialist Party Congress twenty years ago; in last week’s Foxnews entry, McElroy brings up unsubstantiated accusations of Maoism. For her coup de grace, McElroy points out that RAWA has criticized the United States’ actions in Afghanistan (gasp!).
Does any of this add up to the slightest proof of impropriety? No, of course not; but McElroy is here for unsubstantiated insinuations, not evidence.
McElroy rightly criticizes RAWA for unfair attacks on other Afghan feminists, a legitimate point (albeit one swiped from The American Prospect). Unfortunately, like the Prospect, McElroy hypocritically does the same thing herself, quoting an anonymous wit who dubbed RAWA "the Talibabes." (Apparently unfair attacks by RAWA are bad, but unfair attacks on RAWA are cool). But that RAWA has unfairly maligned other women’s groups doesn’t erase the real good RAWA’s funding of schools and hospitals has done Afghan women.
All of McElroy’s concerns – name-calling and angry letters to Ms., the pathetic red-baiting, the desire for Afghan teachers to waste time writing letters – miss the point. The bottom line is, or should be, helping the women of Afghanistan. As eyewitnesses have verified, RAWA uses its resources to help; and as long as that remains true, donating to RAWA is a sensible choice for Westerners who want to help Afghan women.
* * *
For coverage of the RAWA flap worth reading, skip Foxnews and go to Noy Thrupkaew’s essay in The American Prospect. Thrupkaew argues that, in a post-Taliban period in which the goal is reconstruction rather than revolution, more moderate women’s groups can accomplish more than RAWA. This may be true, but it’s a little simplistic. Western feminist history shows that both moderates and "extremists" have been needed; during the fight for emancipation, for example, Alice Paul’s uncompromising dedication to absolute equality both laid ground for reforms beyond the vote and made feminists like Susan B. Anthony seem moderate and reasonable by comparison.
Of course, Afghanistan is not the pre-suffrage U.S., but it would have improved Thrupkaew’s essay if she had at least considered if a similar dynamic could be at work among Afghan women’s groups. It’s possible that RAWA, by demanding a level of women’s equality beyond what most Afghans are ready for, is creating more space in the national Afghan discourse for "moderate" reform groups like the Afghan Women’s Resource Center..
RAWA web site has an interesting response to the above-mentioned article:
http://www.rawa.org/wendy.htm
RAWA’s answer to Wendy McElroy
The answer was sent to Wendy McElroy, FoxNews and ifeminists.com on October 14, 2002, but they neither acknowledged its receipt nor published it though we resent it later. It appeared on EquityFeminism.Com on October 18, 2002.
Perhaps this is the season for senseless attacks on RAWA from so-called Western feminists. We hadn’t yet attended to Noy Thrupkaew’s article in The American Prospect Magazine (August 2002), when Wendy McElroy wrote an article about RAWA for ifeminists.com and Fox News on August 20, 2002.
McElroy’s name is not unfamiliar to us. She has previously written two articles that mentioned RAWA, the first (FoxNews, September 18, 2001), contained no criticism, but rather sentences like this:
“The deep suffering of Afghan women is becoming a matter of international protest, partly through the efforts of the Pakistani-based Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA). RAWA gives the silenced women a voice.”
But the second article contained sudden disapproval and inaccuracies.
We believe the root of McElroy’s criticism is her baseless imagination that the aid from the US and especially the aid collected by Feminist Majority and its 800 teams has all been given to RAWA and RAWA never presented transactional evidence!
McElroy wrote in her October 23rd 2001 article:
“Much of the money intended to help the women of Afghanistan has been steered towards a group called RAWA” and “Much of it (funds raised by more than 800 teams formed by Feminist Majority) apparently, is going to RAWA”.
Last year we didn’t pay much attention to McElroy’s incorrect understanding of the matter as we believed the fact that the Feminist Majority does not provide any aid to RAWA is a reality too obvious for a writer like her not to become aware of easily. But now, unfortunately, it looks as if her mind is still not cleared about this accusation against RAWA and that is why almost one year later, the same wrong idea is heard from her:
“FMF should be called to account for its role in funds directed towards RAWA.”
We could not criticize an inexperienced ordinary person for allowing him or herself to make such a baseless judgment but a writer like McElroy is not expected to talk about others so irresponsibly.
In our reply we openly and emphatically announce that RAWA has not received one cent from FMF since they contributed a mere $1000 to one of our events a few years ago. It goes without saying that considering the money they claim to have collected for Afghan women, this is a drop in the bucket.
Also, we ask FMF to attend to this matter and inform the American people, the world and especially McElroy about the myth of its help to RAWA.
For McElroy’s information we must say that as soon as RAWA came to know of Mavis Leno’s help to the Afghan women through the FMF, we tried to inform Leno and her supporters in the US that RAWA was not receiving any support from FMF.
McElroy should openly announce the reason and source of her absolutely wrong conception. Instead of accusing RAWA, it is better for her to carry out research on what she herself calls “a blitz of post-September 11 media” in which she writes that “RAWA became the sin qua non of Afghan women’s oppression.” If this is the case then why didn’t RAWA receive even a cent from the funds collected through FMF? We too wonder where did all that money go and how was it spent?
Now let’s look at some of her other complaints against RAWA, all of which are entirely based on things misconstrued by McElroy. She wrote:
“How were these (funds) -or the anonymous check for $100,000 mentioned on the AWM’s site ultimately spent? RAWA seems too busy to explain …”
Aside from our political activities, RAWA is administrating hundreds of schools, literacy courses, orphanages and income generation projects in Afghanistan and Pakistan without receiving any fees from the students. If RAWA had or has the financial opportunity, it would increase the number of these centers to thousands. Other than this, especially in the past two years, RAWA has had numerous foods and winter supplies distributions in Pakistan and Afghanistan and launched medical camps distributing free medicine. RAWA has been the only Afghan organization present at the earthquake stricken areas of Afghanistan and provided the victims with aid. RAWA is the only organization in the country, which in spite of heavy and numerous difficulties, launched a huge project for the welfare, medical care and betterment of our society’s most deprived and most oppressed group -prostitutes. RAWA is carrying out different projects in order to help the beggars and widows of Afghanistan as well as two hospitals in Pakistan that attend to 500 patients daily without any charges.
It is not possible to give the details of all these projects here. But the fact is that the help we receive from the people of America and other countries is spent for these sole purposes. McElroy should know that the funds collected for RAWA through SEE/AWM are sent to us for specific projects and after a given period the aforementioned projects are studied and inspected by the representatives of SEE/AWM. It, however, has always been RAWA’s sincere request to the fund providers that should try, as much as possible, to travel and inspect our projects for themselves.
It wouldn’t be irrelevant to request McElroy and other interested parties to come to Pakistan and Afghanistan once, so that with the least acquaintance with RAWA’s activities they can come to know how RAWA spends the funds.
It is also worth mentioning that RAWA has sent detailed documents on how the funds were spent to many donors, whether they asked for such documents or not.
We are aware that by carrying out our work honestly and transparently, we will be able to attract more contributors. We consider ourselves responsible to our supporters. But we will also welcome you, Ms. McElroy, to Pakistan and Afghanistan because we are confident that after visiting us we will no longer read biased and imaginary articles from you about aid to RAWA, but articles based on reality. And after consequently the readers of your articles will be encouraged to further help the only anti-fundamentalist feminist organization in Afghanistan.
About the letter writing regarding TSP, we accept your suggestions for improvement. We never claim that all our work in other different fields is 100% efficient. However, the translation of the letters is a problem, so is the mail service and living in a society as ailing, non-secure and unstable as ours reduces the possibility of the teachers writing a letter, even if they desired earnestly to do so. The conditions in Afghanistan are incomparable to any country. Can we find the wildness of the Taliban and “Northern Alliance” type in any other part of the Globe?
And don’t forget the small problem that even our mail service is still not fully operational.
McElroy, in her October 23rd article pointing to the presence of Afzal Khamosh, general secretary of the Communist Mazdoor Kisan Party of Pakistan adds:
“In the fast-moving world of Islamic politics, such a connection may mean little and might be easily explained. But few people are asking RAWA difficult or probing questions. Even professional skeptics – that is, journalists – have done only softball interviews and articles in venues ranging from New York Times Magazine to Court TV.”
For the purpose of establishing a united anti-fundamentalist and pro democracy and women rights front, RAWA has tried to maintain friendly relations with all organizations and personalities who can be cooperative, despite some differences. We have attended their functions and invited them to our functions. We are democratic-minded Ms McElroy. Why should we be afraid of Afzal Khamoshs? Just to please some anti-democratic people in the West or countries like Iran and Saudi Arabia and get a tap on our back?
RAWA has NO connection with Mujahideen-e-Khalq, and we have certain crucial differences with them. However, we admire all Iranian organizations who are fearlessly fighting the fundamentalist regime. While RAWA does not condone any loss of innocent life, we would like to avail this opportunity to express our deep solidarity with all those Iranian women and men who are heroically fighting the infamous Islamic Republic of Iran inside the country.
RAWA has responded to every question related to this or other issues.
We are amazed that McElroy, as a “professional skeptic”, who accuses other of conducting “soft-ball” interviews with us has never seriously attempted to actually interview RAWA herself. RAWA is never intimidated by “difficult” interviews. In fact we would welcome it.
Now that nobody else is “asking RAWA difficult probing questions”, we invite McElroy to interview us on most “probing questions” she wishes. And we would appreciate her for that in advance.
McElroy complains about the busyness of RAWA’s members. But what can we do? It happens many times that those who know English have been heavily engaged. Please realize the condition of our work and life in Pakistan Ms. McElroy. And it is also true that no RAWA member lives in the US or Europe. Is it our crime?
And finally regarding the paragraph attacking us for criticizing American policies in Afghanistan. Can McElroy deny the fact that it was the US and not any other country that created the criminal Afghan fundamentalist bandits (Jehadis and Taliban) and CIA was working closely with Osama? If she dares to reject these facts, she not only stands in confrontation with RAWA but with many well-respected American and world scholars and analysts. By the way, if not the US, then who has so far supported the Northern Alliance, the fundamentalists more treacherous and traitorous than Taliban?
We wish to draw your attention to the sentences below, which might provide you some more knowledge about the truth of the matter:
India Abroad News Service, March 6, 2001:
“CIA worked in tandem with Pakistan to create the “monster” that is today Afghanistan’s ruling Taliban, a leading US expert on South Asia said.
“I warned them that we were creating a monster,” Selig Harrison from the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars said at the conference in London.”
Famous Pakistani author Hamid Mir writes in The News, Sept.11, 2002:
“American officials were trying their best to use Taliban for their oil games till December 1997 when Mullah Ghous was invited to America, State Department officials were not showing any interest in capturing or killing of Osama even at that time.”
“Mullah Omar in a meeting [with me] claimed that American diplomats are coming to see him and telling ‘you cooperate with us by assisting American Oil Company and we will cooperate with you.'”
Please let us know if you need more of such references.
Apart from our differences with the political and military decisions and actions of the US government, we have repeatedly said that the American people are a great people who can bring once again peace, development and beauty to mankind. Governments go but people remain.
RAWA’s Answer to Nay Thupkaew (from http://www.rawa.org/thupkaew.htm)
The answer was sent to the American Prospect Magazine on September 18, 2002
but it was not published in the magazine. It appeared on EquityFeminism.Com on October 18, 2002.
It has been published in the American Prospect Magazine, a lengthy article by Nay Thupkaew’s on 26th Aug 2002:
This is not the first time RAWA is accused of, on the basis of which it is tried to go under question, and afterwards efforts have been made to taint the mind of its supporters and at the most deprive or at least decrease the sympathy and aids of thousand of its supporters in United States and other parts of the globe.
In Meena’s time fundamentalists even blamed us for having tie with the parties of “Khalq” and “Purcham”, until the time when Meena’s blood was shed, and then we from their point of view became “Maoist”! And this extremely evil period of being accused is still continuing. Therefore we have always repeated, there are no doubts as our struggle against fundamentalists and their alliances, and for the liberty of Afghan women and establishment of an international harmony with other feminist movements intensifies and becomes more powerful, the degree of these accusations amplifies. Therefore the shower of accusation on the only anti-fundamentalist organization in Afghanistan is something natural. The only problems are that we cannot attend to these accusations in detail as required, due to many preoccupations.
But Nay Thupkaew’s article contains different views and accusations some of which are very new. For the awareness of our sympathizers we did not prefer to give answer of that later.
In the article it has been said:
“With its confrontational, no-hold-barred language of allegiance to, bloodshed.”
This assault on its own contains answer to some of the questions.
By the way, why RAWA has earned a strong support in the west whereas any other organization has not?
Because first of all the ordinary people and not the governments and governmental institutions in the West, see the preciseness of RAWA’s analysis, policies and positions (confrontation with the fundamentalists) and also the rightness of the way of RAWA’s dealing. They observe contrary to other Afghan women organizations, RAWA is getting no support from any government or NGO and that is the reason they want to help. They share the difficulties and problems which are faced by RAWA and count every success of RAWA as their own. In this way a great harmony has been originated between RAWA and tens of feminist organization and hundreds of anti-fundamentalists and women rights personalities.
Most of the time they write to RAWA saying that their knowledge about the crimes of the fundamentalists comes from the RAWA website and that they are thankful to it. We wish N.P had put this question to Sima Wali, Shorish and etc that why people of world do not get access to the shocking realities about fundamentalists from their publications or sites (including “Northern Alliance”).
In the West people know that struggle against religious fascism is not possible by finding the middle ground and resorting to fundamentalists. That is why RAWA become a symbol of resistance and struggle against fundamentalism for them and other organizations symbol of giving in to surrender, insult and humiliation of fundamentalists’ forces. RAWA, as we said heedlessly and coercively faced the governments and movements in favor of fundamentalists and the rival organizations enjoy their support and sympathy. The former is the pioneer and leader of Afghan women liberty movements and a part of the whole pro-democracy struggle of people in Afghanistan and the world, while the later are puppets in the hand of this or that fundamental wing.
RAWA fights for freedom and secular democracy and was never annoyed that the Taliban and Northern Alliance considered these values as “the western feminist community’s own values” and are angered against RAWA. But it is surprising that why Nay Thupkaew favors such a backward and ostracized interpretation of fundamentalists? If democracy and women’s freedom is “western values” then why women in the East and especially Islamic countries are not burning forever, in the flames of religion, traditions and culture? Can in today’s “global village” these general and grand humanitarian values such as democracy, secularism and women’s freedom be devaluated -according to the fundamentalists- as “western values”? In our view as without air life cannot exists, without real democracy and women’s freedom, development and progress of a society is not possible.
Therefore this “radical and uncompromising nature” of RAWA could not and must not be its “dark side” but should be counted as its most glorious side. Let us see what the Nay Thupkaew’s arguments about the “dark side” of RAWA are:
“RAWA has denounced…political connections”.
Yes, this is absolutely right; we have denounced other organizations, not mainly “insufficiently” but unfortunately mainly because of lack of their position against the fundamentalists. Could it be any other way than this? RAWA blames itself for giving awareness about fundamentalism especially to women of Afghanistan and in this process how con it remain inattentive towards those organizations and personalities who want to purge this or that fundamentalist wing? Is this a sin? Is this against the culture of democracy? When we are exposing terrorist fundamentalists, then what reason can silence us from condemning those with neckties and lipsticks, supporting them.
RAWA believes that the women of Afghanistan in more then two last decades and especially from 1992 onwards were the worst victims of fundamentalists’ crimes. If they would have been united and weren’t betrayed by those of their own sex and had a much louder voice, perhaps they might have sacrificed less and the world would have come to know much earlier about the inhuman oppression and cruelty by the Jehadis and Taliban. RAWA welcomes women for agitated slogans and motto against misuse of religion and other then religion but other organizations and Afghan women who call this our “dark side”, invite women to obey and patronize to the power of men. But we are proud of that if we have uncovered their compromising polices. RAWA strongly believe to this saying of Martin Luther King: “The silence of good people is worse than the actions of bad people”.
Let us be called “Maoist”, “radical” and … once more now but we wish we shall never ever decline to set in the same table for negotiation with the fundamentalists. But what will be “RAWA’s own political connections”?
We never expected a propagator of “Northern Alliance” to criticize RAWA more seriously than this. However whether there was expectation from N.P to have taken notice of that reality by itself and then explained it in the language of Northern Alliance that: It is not important that who and from which angle condemn fundamentalists crimes, what is important is that they “Northern Alliance” if can, should proceed to reject it no matter whether it is from for example Taliban side or so called “Maoist” side. Although they are capable to discuss this and that issue successfully with their brother in thought and action Taliban but when they find themselves in front of RAWA’s allegation regarding shocking crimes of “Northern Alliance” from 92 to 96 they render helpless and seek shelter in this way: “RAWA is “Maoist”! In reality the people in Northern Alliance means: It is right that we have committed the worst kind of crimes, but RAWA is Maoist! If this is clearly said by RAWA’s opponents then we are thankful to them. Otherwise these furious men and women in defense of “Northern Alliance” should come forward and prove it that their hands are not weltering in the blood of hundreds and thousands of innocent men and women of Afghanistan and the people of Afghanistan and the world should think about considering RAWA ” Maoist” a great danger.
We have declared this so many times that if our policies, position and activities against the cancer of fundamentalism and for the liberty of Afghanistan are “Maoism”, then in that case we accept it warmly and with great interest that we are “Maoist”. In addition once again we state, whenever RAWA would come to a conclusion that “Maoism” is a better solution for the freedom of women then the step we have already taken, without any hesitation will announce it and especially we will try to inform the local opposition as soon as possible so that we could see whether their accusation and insults are getting more bitter then now.
It is very interesting that the men and women loyal to “Northern Alliance” while calling RAWA “Maoist” want to show their weakness in front of our arguments, at the same time the garrulous and disgraced “Maoists” are calling us “Right” and condemning RAWA for not standing against Islam in general and just concentrating on its fundamentalism. And some others show their disapproval with RAWA that why it is not considering armed struggle a better choice!
We have already answered these questions and point of views in Payam-e-Zan and there is no point in repeating them here. But we want to clear just this point to the “Holy Alliance” the opposition to RAWA, that struggle against all fundamentalist groups and for a secular and democratic Afghanistan is more vital, thorny and bloody that we hardly can or want to dedicate our time for Maoism.
In our view an important point in calling RAWA “Maoist” is a description of having no faith in democracy and its most important pillar secularism. Our opponents are enemies of democracy or very little concerned about it, that is why they call us “Maoist” 1) to show RAWA’s struggle for democracy “dreadful” and to beef up their support for “Northern Alliance” 2) to hide their backwardness, indigence, unimportance of their activities in front of uncompromising struggle of RAWA against fundamentalism and for democracy and women rights 3) and want to take advantage out of the sensitiveness the West is showing towards the reforms of “Maoism” and prove their loyalty with those governments and governmental institutions – whose sensitiveness towards Maoism is very well known- and at the same time want to make themselves a warm candidate for getting credits and their official support.
We have never lay blame on someone without any reason. The actions of men and women against RAWA are proving the above claim. All those women against RAWA who have been quoted, without saying anything about durable struggle against fundamentalists have got famous under the name of “activists” or the representative of the women of Afghanistan, living a luxurious life in the West and have been granted awards as well. Among the men with the same thinking and position, as said above regarding the women, is Latif Pedram, a poet and special writer of Burhanuddin Rabbani (don’t know how Nay Thupkaew has forgotten him), not only a massive propaganda has taken place for him but also he has been awarded the Human Rights prize. Till the last moment when he was in Afghanistan, was a special agent of Iranian regime and Rabbani. He was one of the important factors of Human Rights violation and women rights during the government of Najeebullah and later on from 92 to 96, he is the one who has used the worst kind of abuses against RAWA and even its martyred leader Meena.
Another source which is famous for taking side against RAWA is “Omead”, a magazine published in America which like “Radio Azadi” is the most important voice of Jamiat Islami in America and has passed Sharahi (Islamic) decree for the murder of RAWA’s members. (See the supplement in the end of this document)
Nay Thupkaew should have asked the above people: RAWA welcomes the human rights day by holding demonstrations and releasing articles and while doing this even had come across fundamentalists attack but how come this and that award goes to you Sirs and Madams who are far away from struggle and its main battleground Afghanistan?
Nay Thupkaew should have asked this too, why those Sirs and Madams just know how to talk about Taliban but do not speak a ward about fundamentalists “Northern Alliance” whose criminal cases are thousands time horrible then the Taliban?
Action and intentions of RAWA should not cause doubt in anyone’s mind that they are interested in getting awards. In our view the awards should be given to those who really deserve it. We had said many times that instead of giving the awards to the women named by N.P, it would have gone to those Afghan women who have worked for raising political awareness and education either inside the country or among our miserable refugees in Pakistan, not only it would have made us happy but also we would have sent our thanks to the sources responsible for giving the awards.
In reality RAWA has no other “sin” except confronting the fundamentalists. And those who are unable to work with RAWA are terrified not from any other thing but just due to its bold and uncompromising nature in exposing fundamentalists by using any available opportunity.
Nay Thupkaew has been quoted by Syed Sahibzada, who has worked with more than 40 Afghan women led NGO’s: “I have not heard one group that goes along with RAWA…” they say, if there is a RAWA participant in training, we are not going to participate.
It would have been better that Mr. Sahibzada had put some reasons forward too. However according to our experience and perception as we have said already the reason lies not anywhere else except RAWA’s inflexible attitude towards terrorist fundamentalists, that naturally individuals or particular NGO’s due to shame and feeling despise for not taking side against fundamentalists do not want to be present where RAWA is present.
But in our belief this is not RAWA’s fault for not preferring to go backward and showing the real face of fundamentalists to the world. RAWA has no doubt that its struggle finally will raise awareness and change the attitude of particular women associations regarding fundamentalists. We also recognize the fact that if Afghan women associations do not give the first priority to struggle against Taliban and Jehadi fundamentalists, their need of existence will definitely goes under question.
Certainly, we have great respect towards those NGO’s which are working for all people and not for any particular ethnic group, honestly, without any bias or tie with the fundamentalists and away from widespread corruption unfortunately which has befell in many Afghan NGO’s. Our disapproval is with those factions who are claiming for being political, although under the name of woman, children and health…Afghanistan. However they would like or not, they have the scar of embarrassment for doing business with the fundamentalists on their foreheads and there is no surprise to condemn RAWA by thousand languages.
Majority of them sum up their non-political nature by insulting RAWA or not working with it or not speaking against “Northern Alliance”, although they do not want anyone to put finger on their direct or indirect contact with fundamentalists as a sign of their political nature!
However those NGO’s which are considering themselves alien to politics, if they would have discipline they should have not allowed themselves to present their point of view against political RAWA but in order to be loved by the fundamentalists they express themselves against their own sisters who have given sacrifices for a honorable cause. They never ask themselves that when they prefer to be silence in front of criminal fundamentalists, then why condemn RAWA which has shown great courage while facing them and in the result have woke up the people of Afghanistan and the international community.
Mr. Sahibzada and his 40 NGO’s should not expect that like them RAWA would be silent in front of Fundamentalists and in the result would be accepted by NGO’s or United Nation because for RAWA struggle against fundamentalists is the main reason of its existence and if the people and the great mass of women will not be united against the cancer of fundamentalism, there will be no news of real democracy, nor guarantee of women’s rights Or Human Rights.
Let those pro-fundamentalist NGO’s be not ready to work with RAWA, this is not fundamental, what matters is that RAWA should not be deprive of the work and sympathy of oppressed women of Afghanistan. Apart from many achievements, establishment of hundreds of literacy course, and schools by RAWA throughout the country and in Pakistan for our refugees is a cause of our joy.
N.P has quoted Masooda Sultan as such:
“Most Afghan women do not feel that RAWA represents them because of the group’s revolutionary rhebvic and alleged ties to Maoism.”
Nay Thupkaew must have put this question to Madam Sultan that on the basis of which research and review you have passed this judgment?
If RAWA is so much “lone-wolf” and famous by the name of “Maoist” in the society, then how come keeping in mind its financial resources, it can draw together thousands of women to demonstrations and can make thousands of women to come to literacy courses or organize big functions which is unique in the history of Afghanistan?
And it is good to repeat here that if RAWA would have one tenth of the facilities of one of the fundamental groups, it would have changed this world with its activities and the power of women to hell for the fundamentalists.
Can we ask this from Madam Masooda Sultan, Sima Wali, Sima Samar, Shorish and others that why you along with your financial backup and truly very much “people loving faces” and “pro-Islamic” and “anti-Maoist” and “anti-radical” and with compromising slogans could not and can not organize a small demo of hundred people?
Is it not a little pitiless and even disgusting that N.P has observed that RAWA is struggling for the freedom of women of Afghanistan from the paws of fundamentalism but the “activist” women along with their respective organizations is not interested to organize demonstrations, functions and even publish their publications in the West where there is no danger of fundamentalism like Pakistan but even then they like to keep their propaganda on against RAWA?
Masooda Sultan very interestingly says: “Lauds RAWA’s long and committed history of bravery.”
Correct, we want heartily to give this message to women and women organizations that they should be “committed” and “brave”, but while they are not they attack RAWA from right and left, is it not our right to unveil them as obedient servants of “Northern Alliance” and ask them to take a bold stand against those criminals if they want to have our co-operation and support?
We hope Masooda Sultans should agree with us that it is necessary for women and women organizations to learn a little “bravery” and “commitment” from RAWA and do not hope contrary RAWA should learn the lesson of compromise against fundamentalists from them. Is this very much a “Maoist” and “radical” demand?
One of the activists shamelessly calls RAWA the “Talibabies’ because of it’s fiercely judgment attitude.”
We announce once more that if our allegation against anyone proved to be baseless, we will apologize in any way he or she wants.
But let’s see what we have said:
We have claimed that Madam Seema Wali is buried deep in reconciliation with the fundamentalists. In the Afghan Women’s Meeting for Democracy in Belgium she was present as the spokesperson for Burhan-uddin Rabbani and read his message. Reading the message of a criminal fundamentalist leader in our opinion, is the harshest torture and humiliation to the women of Afghanistan. We can never have a “common agenda” with the fundamentalists. Is this a “fiercely judgment attitude”? Seema Wali believes that we should “transact our differences and work together”. We ask how is it possible to work with terrorists who have killed Dr. Abdul Rahman and Haji Abdul Qadeer, and are threatening opposition ministers in a very rude manner? Likewise the reconstruction of Afghanistan with the fundamentalists in power would only mean refilling the pockets of the fundamentalists.
When Madam Fatima Gilani instead of exposing the criminals ruling Kabul, occupied the seat of Burhan-uddin Rabbani’s ambassador in China, we exposed her so that the women of Afghanistan and the world should know that in this fundamentalist-terrorist blighted country an organization exists which is not at all ready to compromise with the fundamentalists. Is this a “fiercely judgmental attitude”?
Two other claims of Seema Wali are false where she says:
“RAWA has a very westernized radical approach. They are revolutionary. The Afghan people are saying we don’t need a revolution, we need a democracy.”
First Madam Wali shouldn’t forget that it is her who has been staying in the West under the most suitable conditions for more than 20 years. Therefore if there is someone who has been westernized, it’s her not us.
Secondly if by being “westernized radical” she means our disunity with the fundamentalists, and our demonstrations and other activities, yes we do have a “westernized radical” approach and are proud of it. We have learnt from the West the struggle against fundamentalism, the vital importance of democracy and freedom, and equality of women but her and many others like her, only learnt wearing dark make-up and the latest fashionable clothes in and showing off in America. We have learnt from the West that the liberation of the women in Afghanistan -a land where creatures like the Taliban and “Northern Alliance” appear, is a real “revolution”. According to Ms. Jackman it is a country where giving a pencil and a book to a girl is a revolutionary act. We must remain inside the country and begin this revolution, but Madam Wali and the like are used to the life in the West so much that they can’t stand the life in their country even for a month, and still dare to tour America and Europe as the “representatives” of Afghan women and receive awards!
It might be favorable to Seema Wali and the like that if they like clothes, computer, airplanes and cellular-phones, would never call them “Western” and throw them away, so they should consider the great universal values such as democracy, secularism and feminism cherished a thousand times more and stop making excuses to abide from the struggle for these values by saying they are “Western”. This kind of hypocrisy should be left to the fundamentalists who are interested heartily in receiving weapons from the “West” but seem hysteric against its democracy and secularism. This can be the least example of learning positively from the West.
The women of Afghanistan comprise half of the population. If they are given awareness, will very simply realize the reality that their rights are not given to them, but they will have to obtain them, and if they are organized, will be ready for any sacrifice in their struggle for freedom and democracy.
The enemies of RAWA are interested to attach the sticker of “radical” and “fiercely”… without paying attention to the fact that the history and the current situation is a slap in their face:
RAWA was named “radical” at the time of Taliban too, but can we ask all the enemies that our “irreconcilable” and “radicalism” was ignored but when the Taliban regime was defeated by the US bombardment and with the sacrifice of many of Afghan’s innocent lives. Then the was correctness of RAWA’s “radical” and “revolutionary” approach towards the Taliban proved or the “pliability”, “conciliation” and “diplomacy” of Madam Seema Wali and the like??
If at a time, an American administration, other than the current government, disregard the “Northern Alliance”, no doubt Madam Seema Wali and the like, will accept it and make RAWA’s “radicalism” and being “revolutionary” their occupation, however nobody will pay any attention to them at that time.
The Taliban used to say that now the conditions are not suitable for the education of women and now Seema Wali says “it’s not time yet”! This time will never come if we didn’t begin the struggle in the past or begin right now. Is it not that Madam Seema Wali and the like-minded are waiting for a favor from the “Northern Alliance” so that they have an intention, and than start working on it?
Let’s consider that Seema Wali and the like-minded wish for “democracy” and not “revolution”. Is it possible to think about democracy without wiping out fundamentalism (which is a revolutionary action)? Is democracy in a country like Afghanistan, available without a hard struggle with sacrifices? However, needless to say the “democracy” that the “Northern Alliance” is trying to show is a painful clown of that democracy and is only there in order to empower their religious rule.
For Seema Wali and others who don’t have the courage of struggling for democracy and liberation of women and have always tried to prove themselves harmless to the fundamentalist terrorists, it is not right to propagate against RAWA who has devoted itself in this struggle dedicatedly.
Isn’t it better that Madam Seema Wali, Shoresh and others should be bold enough make half as much efforts as they are making in propagating against RAWA, in exposing the crimes of the “Northern Alliance” and the need for our women’s struggle against them. Who is going to benefit from this indefatigable other than the “Northern Alliance” and their associates?
Maybe she and her like-minded, being unaware of the throbbing pains of our people from the crimes of the “Northern Alliance”, do not consider joining hands with them.
We wish these attacks on RAWA would have remained limited and the “anti-RAWA” sensitivity wouldn’t have included Eve Ensler who has committed no “sin” other than taking interested in our anti-fundamentalist struggle, for the liberation of Afghan women within a wave of accusations and propaganda, but in the meantime, tried to recognize many organizations and provide them with V-Day’s help. Instead, unlike what Seema Wali said, she never tried to bring The Vagina Monalagues to Pakistan and Afghanistan. She came to Pakistan and Afghanistan many times, but never gifted us even a single copy of her book or spoke a word about it’s Persian or Pushto translation to us, and even if she did, she wouldn’t have committed a crime.
Eve Ensler not only in words but also practically and with intense interest wants to help the Afghan women’s movement. During her trip to Afghanistan, she allotted a notable amount of aids to groups and women, and we hope that due to lack of anti-fundamentalist struggle and practical work, the wishes of the world’s women’s movement are not turned into despair.
The thinking of Seema Wali and other like her is interesting: Eve Ensler is not good because she helps RAWA too, FM is good because it refuses to help RAWA in any way!
Although Ms. Smeal was once kind enough to speak at a RAWA demonstration in Washington but her argument about “omission” of RAWA from the MS Magazine on the basis that “The omission of RAWA was not political, we felt everyone knew RAWA” is fake. She does not pay attention that at that time the world media was able to project Seema Samar, Sohaila Siddiq and Seema Wali to a large extent. Seema Samar along with her appointment as a minister, had received an award from Canada. In short the mentioned women had earned a lot of wider publicity than RAWA and there was no need for the help of Ms Magazine in this regard. On the other hand, if RAWA was mentioned, would it loose the importance of the three women? Does Ms Smeal have any appointed limits for the introduction of organizations?
Moreover, what can be Ms Smeal’s answer about considering RAWA as an exception in receiving aids from the FM? Why should Seema Samar, in spite of receiving millions of dollars from the US, Canada, UN etc. be in the top list of the FM aids, while RAWA having more schools, courses and other social activities than any other organization, be deprived of it?
Ms. Smeal is again mistaken by considering the “Northern Alliance” better than the Taliban. In our opinion only paying attention to the crimes of the “Northern Alliance” against the women and raping of pregnant women and making them give birth to their babies in front of the fundamentalists and the presence of mass-graves, is enough to realize the deepness of their cowardness more than the Taliban. Maybe we will have to prove many facts but the stain of blood on the faces of the “Northern Alliance” is a reality that needs not to be explained much. In the best conditions, comparing the “Northern Alliance” with the Taliban is like wild wolves and dogs. If Ms. Smeal has borrowed this realization from Afghans, she should know that a great number -not all- of men and women living in the US consider the “Northern Alliance” “better” in order to speak in favor of the policies of the US – that is the defender of the “Northern Alliance”- without caring about the future of freedom and democracy in their devastated country.
But the issue of Sima Samar’s link with the “Hezb-e-Wahdat” is not created by RAWA.
The membership of Seema Samar in the leadership committee of “Hezb-e-Wahdat” has been mentioned in at least two issues of the party’s publication and also a film showing Samar while receiving a gift from her leader Khalili explains the ties between her and the party. Giving 2001 John Humphrey Freedom Award and any other award to her or the silence or anger of Jackman etc. cannot falsify this reality. A reality which cannot be denied even by Seema Samar herself.
But among these issues, is the anger of Shorish-Shamley after seeing RAWA’s letter to Seema Samar. Why Ms. Shorish does calls the “accusation” of Seema Samar’s attachment to the Wahdat Party, “vicious”? Does it show her hatred towards the notorious party? If so, she should kindly expose the mentioned party as part of the “Northern Alliance” and the puppet of the Iranian regime. Otherwise, her claims are unreliable. She can’t be “angry” about Seema Samar’s links with the Wahdat Party fundamentalists nor can she consider her concerns about the “Northern Alliance”, shameful.
Anyway, we don’t want to say against Seema Samar because she is being threatened by the Rabbani-Massoud “Northern Alliance”, which raises our support to her, and which we have already announced to her. But hope that she never takes refuge in “Hezb-e-Wahdat’s” side in order to prove being anti-fundamentalist. Actually it would have been great if she opposed the accusation against her about her link with “Hezb-e-Wahdat” in a statement as a cowardly accusation, and prove her struggle against fundamentalism in Afghanistan.
Onwards, RAWA has a firm wish to form a wide union with the democratic and anti-fundamentalist personalities and organizations on the way to freedom and flourishment; wishes to create an anti-fundamentalist women’s front that should have a wide effect on the political scene of Afghanistan.
As soon as the day comes when all personalities and organizations who have been mentioned in the NP article, take a step forward in the struggle for democracy and against any type of fundamentalism;
-the day when they, along with opposition of the Khalq and Parcham and Taliban, take a stance against the criminal heads of the “Northern Alliance” and want their elimination as war criminals;
-the day when they consider the possibility of women’s liberation only in the total elimination of the “Northern Alliance” as a military force and refuse to give any type of support to them, RAWA will be the first organizations to rush to their help.
We all must try our best to bring the reality of Northern Alliance being the enemy of democracy and liberation of women, to our people at any price and as said by Bertolt Bricht, we should neither be stupid nor criminals.
“That who doesn’t know and doesn’t say is stupid and that who knows and doesn’t say is criminal.”
Supplement:
In the weekly “Omid” (issue 410) under the title of “The conflict between two cancerous germs and a warning to Afghan people” Mohammad Iliass Izid Panah writes: “RAWA and Asre-Jadid are two nauseating and bastard twins which must be eliminated from the scared Islamic nation of Afghanistan. All religious Ulema, intellectuals, scholars, and particularly Islamic congregation anywhere in the world are requested to fulfil their Islamic obligation. By dealing with these two dangerous phenomena according to Islamic dictation…Otherwise all of us will be responsible (answerable) before the god and His chosen prophet. The soil of scared homeland must be cleansed from the filth of home-made Salman Rushdies.”
In reality RAWA has no other “sin” except confronting the fundamentalists. And those who are unable to work with RAWA are terrified not from any other thing but just due to its bold and uncompromising nature in exposing fundamentalists by using any available opportunity.
Samad, I think you are absolutely right.
Thank you for these amazing posts. I will study them and then do all that I can to get this information disseminated to as many feminists and feminist organizations as possible. RAWA’s work inspires me every single day of my life. May your strength and integrity sustain you in the face of the ignorance of western women like Wendy McElroy and propaganda machines like Fox news. I will do whatever I can, limited as it may be, to support you.
In solidarity and in sisterhood,
Cheryl Lindsey Seelhoff
(Heart)
http://www.womensspace.org
http://www.womensspace.wordpress.com
http://www.offourbacks.org