"Any Government Formation in Afghanistan will have to ensure the Participation of Women"

Mary Robinson, United Nations Commissioner for Human Rights, discusses with Rinku Pegu the issue of rights in Afghanistan and elsewhere, and maintains the uncompromising stand that human rights are non-negotiable. She says that now is the time for the international community, and particularly women, to rally for the implementation of a just world order Mary Robinson, United Nations Commissioner for Human Rights and former president of the Republic of Ireland, received the Indira Gandhi Prize for Peace, Disarmament and Development for 2001 on November 19, the birth anniversary of Indira Gandhi.

Robinson has, in the recent years, emerged as the suave but firm face and voice of human rights across the world. At the Durban Conference against Racism, in response to loud Arab protests against Israelis and Zionists, she had asserted, "I am a Jew" because she felt that the Jewish delegates were being obstructed and intimidated by the protestors. She has traveled to trouble spots like Kosovo, and to conservative countries like Iran to discuss human rights.

The Revolutionary Association of Women in Afghanistan (RAWA) has demanded that individuals and factions of the Northern Alliance (NA), responsible for the 1992-96 atrocities in Afghanistan, should first be absolved by the international community before participating in any government formation in Afghanistan. In such a context, what role do you envisage for UNHCR?

I would be open to such a process as I am very keen to have accountability. I am also aware that Afghanistan has been in a very difficult situation. For the past many years, our colleagues inside Afghanistan have been consistently reporting about the extent of human rights abuse to the UN
General Assembly, again and again, first by the Taliban, then by the Northern Alliance, and again by the Taliban. We did not care about them. Here we have to be very honest with ourselves in acknowledging the fact that how little we care about civilians in Afghanistan.

Now is the time to care about the long-term (situation of the) Afghans. We have to address the issue of accountability, and we have to do it in a way that makes sense. We have to acknowledge the need for accountability, but also acknowledge that human rights violations were tolerated in the past by the international community. What I am more concerned about is that from now on there are no more massacres, no more rapes of women, no more pillaging of property, no more bullying because you are the strong guy in the town (or the) city.

What about the political will to make it happen? We can do that if we wish. The military campaign in Afghanistan cost billions and summoned extraordinary resources. My contention is we can have the same resources build-up for the people in Afghanistan, for their homes, for their future and their country. That's what we should be concerned about doing now.

What specific framework do you have in mind? It goes without saying that any government formation in Afghanistan will have to ensure the participation of women, who form 60 per cent of the population. They have to have access in governance. Women there are definitely not in positions of power. This is obvious because they cannot turn themselves into warlords or power brokers. But we have to identify 30 to 50 Afghan women to be given responsibility of governance in any power structure for stability and peace.

Right now, I am not saying that the UN has geared itself both in the Executive Committee on Peace and Security and in the core Special Council in the road map that is presumably being laid out for the Security Council. But in the choice of person by the Secretary General to head the UN-led reconstruction in Afghanistan is a clear indication of the priority UN is giving. And the UN is forcefully saying that it wants an Afghan approach to any government formation, which is the only way forward in terms of a solution in a country like Afghanistan, one that will be able to govern
the country effectively.

In that context, today in New York there is a meeting about Afghan women. And I will be participating in a major conference in Brussels early next month that will highlight the issues of Afghan women. These might seem far away, but there is no doubt that there is an alliance of women's groups worldwide forged for our sisters in Afghanistan. From a human rights perspective, what is the most worrying aspect about India? What concerns me most about India is the condition of the girl child, one which is nurtured by family values in the different reception it gives to the male and girl child. While the male child is welcomed, the girl is ignored, something which ahs been clearly reflected by the Indian census. Such an imbalance in the male-female sex ratio (men outnumber women) will have long-term adverse implications for the country in terms of
advancement and empowerment of women.

The women's movement in India needs to keep in mind that it has to be an inclusive one. It is important for women to feel that they have not been bypassed by the movement. For instance, I had the opportunity to get a first hand knowledge from Dalit women as to how they are discriminated against because of their birth. Indeed, in my interaction with the National Commission for Women (NCW), we talked at length about women and terrorism. I have urged the NCW to play a proactive role for forging alliances with women in the South Asian region.

Consequent to September 11, several democratic countries, including India, are implementing strong legislations that militate against the basic tenets of human rights. How do you combat such deviations? I agree that we have to combat terrorism. But, in such a context, it is incumbent upon all democratic nations to balance antiterrorist measures with the implementation of the pledges of anti-discrimination taken at the recently concluded Conference against Racism held at Durban. We must take care to remind our selves of the fact that the attacks of September 11 happened because our laws (democratic) and the ideas behind those laws have not been implemented to the very deep extent that is required. With regard to POTO (Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance) in India, the measures will be closely monitored by our office as well as the final outcome. If need be, we will take up the matter with the government.

http://www.tehelka.com/channels/currentaffairs/2001/nov/19/ca111901mary.htm