by Jasmin Ramsey

This week was marked by Iraq war commentary, but the status of women in the country was noticeably absent on the 10th anniversary of the invasion. Enter the International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN), which released a brief on the topic — particularly relevant when [...]]]> via Lobe Log

by Jasmin Ramsey

This week was marked by Iraq war commentary, but the status of women in the country was noticeably absent on the 10th anniversary of the invasion. Enter the International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN), which released a brief on the topic — particularly relevant when considering how despite billions allocated for reconstruction, Iraq is reportedly suffering from greater poverty and corruption now than during Saddam Hussein’s reign. Although many will recall the fluttering banner of so-called women’s empowerment during the US occupation, ICAN points out that between 2003 and 2011 “much of the attention and funds dedicated to women was poorly targeted and often based on agendas imposed by outsiders.”

The brief highlights the perspectives of Iraqi women regarding losses and gains during the US intervention, evolving trends and the opportunities and difficulties that Iraqi women currently face. Following is an excerpt on the status of the most vulnerable women in Iraqi society.

Structural violence: early marriages, abandoned wives, invisible widows and unregistered children:

In addition to the war and occupation related security threats, many Iraqis, especially poorer women are still living with the consequences of the decade long sanctions regime. One of the devastating repercussions of the sanctions regime was that poorer Iraqis in central and southern areas were forced to give their daughters up for early marriage as a way of reducing the number of mouths to feed. For many the justification was that marriage would provide some security for their girls. The practice has continued, and the average age of marriage in some areas is now ten, even though the law states that girls must be at least 15 to marry.

Technically, the Iraqi civil code’s Personal Status Law offers clear protection for young girls by forbidding under-age marriage.10 Even girls and boys aged 15 through 18 must have the approval of their legal guardian and the judge before marrying. But local clerics often ignore the law. As a result an estimated six percent of marriages involve girls under the age 15 and 25 percent of marriages involve 15-18 year olds who may or may not be entering the relationship forcibly.11 Many of these girls are married under customary law, so while their relationships are seen as official at the community level and in religious settings, the union is neither registered nor recognized by civil law.

Even for women over age 18, the state will not recognize marriage if not registered by civil authorities (i.e. courts). Legally, therefore, girls and women married by clerics are considered to be single and have no protection, in the event of spousal abandonment. The Judiciary’s willingness and capacity to address these cases is limited. “They turn a blind eye because of the power of religion in Iraq,” says one peace and human rights activist, because they believe religious laws allow for early marriage.

Moreover, because men and women must show their marriage certificate to benefit from obstetric care according to the law, then the children of these marriages cannot be registered and do not receive birth certificates. These children are not recognized and thus are not eligible for state assistance including rations, health care or education.

Without the official marriage license, the mothers are deemed to be single. Their children are not recognized and thus are not eligible for state assistance including rations, health care or education.

Many women widowed during the war are not included in official figures. For example, 2008 data from the Iraqi Ministry of Planning references 900,000 widows. However, NGOs working in the most affected communities estimate the figures to be between 1 and 1.5 million. As a result, a population of women and children has emerged over the years that is not a priority for the government and is virtually ignored. There is no systematic data collection or analysis about their plight, vulnerability to risky survival methods (e.g. sex work) or recruitment into criminal and other violent entities. Organizations such as the Iraqi Al-Amal Association are reaching out to this sector, offering a mix of social counseling, legal support and health care. Yet the concern remains that this population—especially the children, boys and girls alike—are prone to exploitation, becoming both the fuel and fodder of extremist groups.

Photo: Iraqi women in ther kitchen preparing a meal for a luncheon her family is hosting for US Army personnel from Outpost Gator. Minari Village, near Iskandariyah, Babil Province, Iraq. Credit: James (Jim) Gordon.

The US-led sanctions regime isn’t directly targeting Iran’s healthcare system but reports continue to suggest that critically-ill Iranians are being affected. The Al Jazeera English clip above squares with Najmeh Bozorgmehr’s Financial Times article from September about how  sanctions on Iran’s Central Bank are preventing critically-ill patients from getting crucial medical aid:

Writing for the Financial Times the talented Iranian journalist, Najmeh Bozorgmehr, reports on how US-imposed sanctions on Iran’s Central Bank are preventing critically-ill patients from getting crucial medical aid:

The government of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says international sanctions have had little impact on the country and insists that its nuclear program [...]]]> via Lobe Log

Writing for the Financial Times the talented Iranian journalist, Najmeh Bozorgmehr, reports on how US-imposed sanctions on Iran’s Central Bank are preventing critically-ill patients from getting crucial medical aid:

The government of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says international sanctions have had little impact on the country and insists that its nuclear program should continue. It has launched a public relations campaign stressing that 97 percent of Iran’s medicine is produced domestically — a clear attempt to prevent panic that medical supplies could be at risk.

However, Ahmad Ghavidel, head of the Iranian Hemophilia Society, a nongovernmental organization that assists about 8,000 patients, says access to medicine has become increasingly limited and claims one young man recently died in southern Iran after an accident when the blood-clotting injection he needed was not available.

“This is a blatant hostage-taking of the most vulnerable people by countries which claim they care about human rights,” Ghavidel said. “Even a few days of delay can have serious consequences like hemorrhage and disability.”

In July Iran scholar Farideh Farhi informed us about an important report by the International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN) that details the negative impact of sanctions on ordinary Iranians. Farhi’s article provides useful context and analysis for Bozorgmehr’s piece. She writes:

If ICAN’s analysis is accurate, it also foretells harsher economic realities for the most vulnerable elements of Iran’s population, a harsher political environment for those agitating for change, and a more hostile setting for those who have tried to maintain historical links between Western societies and Iranian society.

Sanctions impact calculations, but usually not in the intended fashion.

The International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN) has published a useful brief aptly subtitled “Killing them softly” about the impact of sanctions on the lives of ordinary people who live in Iran, particularly women and other vulnerable groups such as Afghan refugee women and children. I recommend [...]]]> via Lobe Log

The International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN) has published a useful brief aptly subtitled “Killing them softly” about the impact of sanctions on the lives of ordinary people who live in Iran, particularly women and other vulnerable groups such as Afghan refugee women and children. I recommend it to everyone who thinks that sanctions can be potential instruments for positive change in Iran.

To be sure, most individuals and organizations that push for “crippling” sanctions do so in the name of Israeli security and/or non-proliferation with little or no regard for the resulting impact on the Iranian population and civil society. In a world where economic warfare is considered diplomacy, more sanctions will apparently be the name of the game “until Iran begins to negotiate seriously” or “chooses a different path” — whatever that means. Pretensions or hope regarding the utility of blunt and wide-ranging sanctions for changing the way the hardline leadership in Iran treats its population, or, even better, for bringing about a change of regime in a “peaceful” way, are also out there.

The ICAN brief, while using the words of activists in Iran, does a good job of explaining how draconian sanctions imposed by the United States and the European Union ultimately harm Iranians who are caught in the middle of a battle that has very little do with their dreams of living decent lives and impacting their government’s policies through civil activism.

This is not to suggest that the Iranian government has escaped the impact of sanctions unscathed. The leadership is held responsible for the mishandling of an economy which, by all accounts, is faced with both stagnation and hyperinflation. And, if we take at face value the words of parliamentary speaker Ali Larijani, 20 percent of Iran’s current problems can be attributed to sanctions that have limited Iran’s access to the foreign exchange needed for the import of strategic goods from abroad due to the reduction of oil exports and Iran’s inability to acquire exchangeable currency for the exported products. Larijani attributed the remainder of the problems, mostly related to rampant inflation, to the poor implementation of a subsidy reform plan that did not give enough attention to production in both industry and agriculture.

The right or wrong belief that better economic management can help Iran overcome the impact of sanctions perhaps explains why internationally imposed draconian pressure has not led to a change in the leadership’s calculations regarding the nuclear program. In fact, according to Iran’s Leader Ali Khamenei, Western governments

…openly say that it is necessary to force the Iranian government officials to revise their calculations by intensifying pressures and sanctions, but looking at the existing realities causes us not only to avoid revising our calculations, but it also causes us to continue the path of the Iranian nation with more confidence.

In other words, instead of a recalculation on the part of the Iranian government, the Iranian population is going to have to get used to a “resistance economy”. What does that entail? Mr. Khamenei’s answer:

Putting the people in charge of our economy by implementing the general policies specified in Article 44 of the Constitution, empowering the private sector, decreasing the country’s dependence on oil, managing consumption, making the best of the available time, resources and facilities, moving forward on the basis of well-prepared plans and avoiding abrupt changes in the regulations and policies are among the pillars of an economy of resistance.

Considering how these objectives have been in the books since at least 2006 when privatization, empowerment of the private sector and efficiency became official policy — and produced little in the way of concrete results — it’s not clear what an administration that is working through its last year can achieve beyond perhaps “managing consumption.”

A few steps have already been taken towards that goal. This week, several economy-related ministers as well as the head of the Central Bank of Iran (CBI) met with members of parliament in a closed session. Parliamentary meetings are by law open and publicly broadcasted. Article 69 of the Constitution only allows for closed sessions under “emergency conditions, if it is required for national security”. This closed meeting and Khamenei’s words clearly suggest an understanding of the emergency situation that Iran is facing.

The first decision that resulted from this meeting was the CBI’s elimination of what is called “travel currency”. Until now, Iranians could get $1,000 a year at the lower government exchange rate of 12,260 Rials per dollar for their trips abroad (the lower $400 per year for pilgrimage travel to Iraq and Saudi Arabia was maintained). According to the head of the Majles’ Economy Commission, Arsalan Fathipour, the $10 billion worth of travel currency that leaves the country every year has no economic justification and has been halted. Travelers now have to rely on an unofficial, but not illegal, floating market rate that has hovered between 19,000 and 20,000 Rials per dollar during the past couple of months.

The lower official exchange rate will remain for the import of basic and strategic goods from abroad in order to limit spiraling inflation. But everything else will probably be imported at the higher rate. As pointed out by Virginia Tech economist Djavad Salehi Isfahani, this multiple exchange rate system, despite inefficiencies, makes some sense when a country is being denied access to global markets, provided action is also taken to:

…minimize misallocation and corruption, for example by publishing a complete list of all official foreign exchange sold to private importers along with the list of the items they import.  The alternative, which is to sell all currencies at the rate set in the parallel market, is to give too much influence to sanctions and to sentiments that underly capital flight.

Whether these steps will also be taken is yet to be seen. Another announcement after the close of the Majles meeting was that some sort of command center comprised of representatives from of all branches of government has in effect been created for the resolution of economic problems and will soon gain implementation powers through legislation. According to Donyaye Eqtesad, the country’s most influential economic daily, the push by some influential MPs is for this command center to have “special powers so that in the coming year it can take the necessary steps for the implementation of the strategy of resistance economy.”

To my mind, this also means that there is not much confidence among the Iranian political class in the Ahmadinejad Administration’s ability to steer the country in a positive direction during the last year of its tenure. This political class holds President Ahmadinejad responsible for his incompetent handling of the country, but due to the urgency of the escalating sanctions regime, no longer considers challenging him and his ministers a useful way of expending their energy. Talk of “working together” and “unity” has permeated the language of the conservative and hardline politicians who are currently running Iran. This language is not meant to extend to the reformist and even centrist politicians and technocrats who have been essentially purged since the 2009 presidential election, but does indicate a closing of ranks among an even narrower circle of politicians in the face of adversity and in the name of resistance.

If ICAN’s analysis is accurate, it also foretells harsher economic realities for the most vulnerable elements of Iran’s population, a harsher political environment for those agitating for change, and a more hostile setting for those who have tried to maintain historical links between Western societies and Iranian society.

Sanctions impact calculations, but usually not in the intended fashion.