“Ultimately…women must be involved in the peace process not only because they suffer disproportionately, or because they have previously been excluded, but because their contribution to the world is invaluable.” –Felicity Hall and Mikele Aboitiz, Women for Afghan Women. 

 The United State’s misadventure into Afghanistan has been described as a “feminist mission”, typifying the Afghan women as passive damsels in distress and the United States as a knight errant. Nothing could be further from the truth both in the rescue scenario of the Bush administration and in the perceived helplessness of the women themselves. 

When the Taliban seized power, the Afghan women did what women caught in war have always done—take care of the children and their communities. With the support of their Afghan men, these brave women went underground, providing schools for all children in their own homes at great personal risk, helping the war traumatized and the displaced. Further, these women prepared themselves for public life so that, when the loya jirga convened, they were able to press for language in the Afghan constitution enshrining women’s rights as human rights and claim more parliamentary seats than any Western nation. How did this remarkable transformation from powerlessness to ascendency occur? More importantly, how did this grand effort fail? 

Globally, women’s potentially phenomenal agency for peace and reconstruction is recognized on the highest level with the adoption of Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security (October 31, 2000) which reaffirms “the important role of women in the prevention and resolution of conflicts and peace-building, and stressing the importance of their equal participation and full involvement in all efforts for the maintenance and promotion of peace and security, and the need to increase their role in decision-making with regard to conflict prevention and resolution.” International organizations (The European Women’s Lobby, Equality Now, V-Day, The Center for Strategic Initiatives of Women, The Feminist Majority, the Secretary-General’s Gender Advisor, and UNIFEM) supported and empowered the Afghan women to build their own capacity to press for change. Driven by the recognition that the immediate post-conflict period represented a window of opportunity to remake the torn fabric of society into something new and grand, gender mainstreaming was posited as the best method to accomplish peace and reconstruction. 

Not well known is the fact that when the United States invaded Afghanistan, only Kabul was occupied by a mere 5,000 troops under NATO. The vast majority of the country, where 85 percent of the Afghan women live, was controlled by the warlords who received handsome monthly stipends from the United States to retain their draconian hold on the country. These warlords were well known to military and diplomatic United States’ organizations from our past involvement in the Afghan/Soviet Union war, and it was natural to reestablish a relationship with these fellow warriors. What this meant to the Afghan populace is demonstrated by the July 2003 Human Rights Watch report, “Killing You is a Very Easy Thing for Us”, which described in chilling detail a continuation of the Taliban’s ideal of the most draconian interpretation of Shari’a law. Lacking basic security, Afghan women still pressed their case for peace in the face of death threats and assassinations.   

When the loya jirga convened, delegate Malalai Joya (who has rightfully been called the bravest woman in Afghanistan) courageously stood to denounce the inclusion of the warlords in the assembly, blaming them for the continuing violence and disruption of society. Under shouted death threats, Joya was taken under the safekeeping of the United Nations. Joya has not been silenced evidenced by her suspension from the Afghanistan parliament in 2007 on the grounds that she had insulted fellow representatives in a television interview.  

Sima Wali, the outspoken Director of the Refugee Women in Development (RefWID) organization, described being “singled out” by extremists and targeted for her advocacy of women’s right to be included in the redevelopment of their country. Wali called for increased security, identifying it as the “precursor to reconstruction”, further stating that “women need to feel safe and secure to participate in the political process, [for] young girls to go to school, and [for] the Ministry of Women’s Affairs [to effect] building and staffing of the women’s centers in the provinces.” Security was never effected despite a joint Department of Army and Center for Strategic Studies Afghanistan reconstruction plan which identified security as the number one priority for success. The withdrawal of resources from the Afghanistan theater to the Iraqi theater placed security in the hands of the warlords and out of reach for the Afghan people. 

Despite international calls for the inclusion of women, little was done to accomplish the participation of Afghan women. Reconstruction money flowed in well-rutted male channels. NATO’s only nod to the SC 1325 call to “…take into account gender considerations and the rights of women, including through consultation with local and international women’s groups” was to establish a two-person office which dealt only with women in service to NATO, not those Afghan women who should be served.   

Dr. Sima Samar, President of the Afghan Human Rights Commission and the former minister of the Afghanistan Women’s Affairs, wrote a letter to the United States State Department requesting that the United States ratify the 1979 United Nations international Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). The CEDAW is one of the most widely embraced of all international treaties with more than 90 percent of member states participating. The United States is the only developed nation that has signed but not ratified this treaty, placing the United States in the company of Somalia. In her request, Samar wrote: “I cannot overstate to you how important it will be for me and other Afghan women if you do take this step. We will then be able to tell our countrymen that the United States, where women already have full legal rights, has just seen the need to ratify this treaty. This treaty will then truly be the international measure of the rights that any country should guarantee to its women.” This request was met with silence. 

Explicit in the United States’ reasons for invading Afghanistan was the rescue of the Afghan women from the cruelest form of extremists’ misrepresentation of Shari’a law. This promise remains unfulfilled. When women like Malalai Joya, Sima Wali, and Sima Samar continue to lay their lives on the line, how can we turn away?