For those of you that read "The
Army Times", I have a letter to the editor in the January 2, 2012 edition. The
letter was shortened to conserve space but I feel that some salient points were
removed. At first blush it may appear that I am a bit of a sexist regarding the
use of women Soldiers and Marines in outreach programs in Afghanistan. Please
believe me that I feel strongly that women service members contribute a lot to
our efforts in that country. My point in the letter is that we need to take it a
bit more slowly in order to reduce the potential for retaliation against the
women in the villages and our civilians and Soldiers working in the remote
locations where most of this interaction takes place. The complete letter
follows - you decide:
"Here we go again. First we have "Female Engagement
Teams" and now "Cultural Support Teams" in Afghanistan (CSTs face combat to
'give Afghan women a voice' Army Times, December 5, 2011). Just as we're talking
about pulling out the bulk of our troops we start a program that is sure to
create another reason for us to stay and protect people caught up in something
we started. Girls schools we built; wells we have dug; roads and bridges we have
constructed – what will happen to them and the people that helped us build them
when we pull out? These are all reasons for the Taliban and insurgents to use us
as an example of outsiders messing around with the way they run their country.
When I was over there in 2006-07 we were told to avoid proselytizing about
religion for fear of offending the locals. In a theocracy like the Islamic
Republic of Afghanistan that rule extends far beyond just discussions about
comparative religion. Anything we do to change their culture is perceived as an
attack against Islam.
The article refers to a woman Soldier's attendance
at "three women's shuras". My question is who organized the shuras (is the Arabic term for an advisory council or consultative council attended by village elders)? It surely
was not the women in those villages - women don't have shuras. So we push them
into allowing their women to meet with our women to discuss quality of life
issues and then the Afghan women start to want a say in what is happening in
their lives. Are we going to leave the CSTs in place to protect them when we
leave? If not we should be prepared to try and defend our meddling around in the
way that they do their business. These people do not like or easily accept
change; especially from westerners. One sure way to turn them against us is to
provoke their women into becoming suffragettes and equals to their men. That
culture has existed that way for thousands of years and we need to recognize the
danger we are putting these women in when we start trying to propose a quick
change of that nature. Where was the MDMP on this suggestion when it was
suggested during a “good idea fairy” brainstorming session?
I am all for
showing the Afghans how women are an integral part of some western societies.
However, if we push too hard we are going too far. It needs to be gradual,
passive, and consistent. We cannot measure an Afghan’s reaction to this type of
program by how we would react if we didn’t like it. These people believe in
seriously punishing people that violate their culture because they tie their
culture to their religion. That includes government. Let them see women Soldiers
and Marines working with their male counterparts. Have them work MEDCAP (Medical Civil Affairs Projects) and
other outreach programs. But do not wade into a village with the sole intention
of organizing the women unless we are prepared to stay the requisite time it
will take for that major change to be accepted. I don’t think the president has
two or three generations in mind when he says we are trying to pull out.
Sarmajor
