Asthe debate rages over the withdrawal of British and US troops in Afghanistan, there are those who argue that the appalling treatment of women under the Taliban is a peripheral issue. They claim that the fate of Afghan women such as 18-year-old Aisha, whose nose and ears were sliced off as retribution for running away from her husband’s home, is horrific, but irrelevant. They are wrong. Women’s equality must be at the front and center of the discussion if there is to be a hope of restoring peace and prosperity to war-torn nations such as Afghanistan.
The damaged but still hauntingly beautiful face of Aisha, which caused such a sensation when printed with the words “What Happens If We Leave Afghanistan” on the front of Time magazine, is a symbol of the brutalization of women, but it is also a symbol of a brutalized society: Her mutilation did not take place in a cultural vacuum. It is impossible to imagine a society that sanctions violence against women without also dehumanizing men.
When women are maltreated and when they are deprived of economic power, it creates a breeding ground for future terrorism. Zainab Salbi, an Iraqi-born campaigner on behalf of women in countries devastated by war, argues that if young men and their families are hungry, they will fight for whoever will pay them.
“Wars are not only about armies and bombs, but about economic instability,” Salbi said.
So long as Afghan women are kept in terrified servitude and poverty, peace for that country is likely to remain a pipe dream, let alone any hope of prosperity. However, it is not just Afghanistan; the same is true for women in other parts of the developing world. They are not all vulnerable to such hideous cruelty, but entrenched inequality is trapping families and communities in a cycle of dire impoverishment that has worsened as a result of the financial crisis.
More than two-thirds of the 1 billion people surviving on less than US$1 a day are female. The credit crunch, which in the West has barely curtailed our luxuries and our lifestyles, has had a devastating effect on farmers in the developing world and the majority of them are women. Female agricultural workers plant, harvest and process 60 to 80 percent of the food for those communities, mainly at a subsistence level.
These women, whose menfolk often leave to seek work or to join armed conflicts, have been hit by soaring fuel and fertilizer costs. They lack access to credit, they own only 1 percent of the land and, according to the UN, their subordinate role acts to “the detriment of their own development and that of society as a whole.”
In other words, female inequality results in less food being grown, less income and more hungry children.
The education of girls has been sacrificed in Afghanistan, and again, the problem is more widespread. The World Economic Forum (WEF) says girls are being pulled out of school and sent to work to earn money for their families as a result of the credit crisis. This is, as the WEF says, a disaster in the making for struggling economies.
Educating girls is an investment that continues to produce benefits down the generations. Mothers who have attended school are more likely to recognize the value of learning for their children, as well as being more aware of health and nutrition, leading to lower maternal and infant mortality rates. Investing in a girl’s education can produce exponential rewards, but a poor country with uneducated women is likely to stay poor.
Numerous studies point to a strong correlation between gender equality in developing countries and economic growth. Call it the female dividend: Money that finds its way into a mother’s purse is more beneficial to families and communities than the cash funneled into a male wallet.
Research by investment bank Goldman Sachs found that women tend to invest their income in their children’s health, education and clothing. Men, the bank found, usually preferred to spend it on themselves, buying cigarettes, alcohol or what it delicately terms “female companionship.”
Offering women more opportunity to earn a living could, Goldman Sachs said, push up income per head by 20 percent more than previous predictions in a clutch of emerging economies over the next two decades.
Its view is supported by other research: The World Bank says that the gender divide has imposed huge economic costs throughout the Middle East, where the gap in economic opportunity is the widest in the world.
The message is clear: Countries that deny fair opportunities to women are hampering their potential for development and growth. The struggles of a female subsistence farmer in Africa seem remote from our lives in the West, but empowering women in the developing world is in our interest. Societies where women are treated well are more likely to be peaceful and prosperous and, as growth slows in mature markets such as the UK, female consumers could play an increasing role in a new global middle class, which will open up opportunities for businesses everywhere to sell their goods and services.
Despite the continued debates about the under-representation of women on boards and the difficulties experienced by working mothers, developed economies like ours have already benefited from greater equality. As Cambridge economist Ha-Joon Chang says in his book 23 Things They Don’t Tell You About Capitalism, the washing machine may have changed the world more than the Internet has, because it freed legions of women to work outside the home.
Part of the reason we are blinkered about the struggles of women in poorer countries is that in the rich West, many battles have been won. We are fortunate in having access to education and employment that our great-grandmothers could only have dreamed about. Even the West, though, improving opportunities for women to work, and to progress up the career ladder if they wish, could boost productivity and growth. More female workers could even help head off the pensions crisis and the problems of an aging population.
The single biggest factor in the success of any business, or nation, is its human capital — the flair, talent and productivity of its workers. Women represent half of the world’s human capital and could be a powerful force for economic growth — perhaps even the most powerful force there is. They are being held back by a machismo founded on the fear that empowering women is somehow disempowering men. However, prosperity is not a zero-sum game: If a society cashes in on the female dividend to create more wealth, men and children share in the bounty. Everyone wins.
Healthy cultures respect women’s role in binding families and communities. Where they are condemned to subordinate status, subjected to violence, deprived of an education and debarred from earning a decent livelihood, those families and communities will unravel. Striving for equality is not just a matter of fairness — it is clever politics, clever diplomacy and clever economics.
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
RSS