WPU to Host Conference on Terrorism

From the WPU Press Office:

William Paterson University to Host Conference on Terrorism

A two-day international conference designed to open a discussion about the global effects of terrorism on democracy will be held on April 13 and 14 at William Paterson University on the campus in Wayne.
“Terrorism and Democracy,” begins with a keynote address by Ambassador Javier Ruperez, executive director of the United Nations Counterterrorism Committee, on Wednesday, April 13 at 7 p.m. in the Cheng Library Auditorium.

The conference continues on Thursday, April 14 with four panel discussions to be held in the Martini Teleconference Center. The morning’s events begin with a panel from 9:30 to 11 a.m. focusing on “Mapping Contemporary Terrorism: The Global Contours Post 9/11/01.” Panelists are Andrea Bertoli, senior research scholar and director, Center for International Conflict Resolution, Columbia University; Pascal Boniface, director of the Institute for International and Strategic Relations, and professor of international relations, Institute for European Studies, University of Paris; and Ambassador Augustine P. Mahiga, permanent representative of the United Republic of Tanzania to the United Nations.

“Contemporary Terrorist Movements: Latin America, the European Union, Russia and the Caucuses” will be held from 11:15 a.m. to 12:45 p.m. Panelists are Stephan Duso-Baudin, associate professor, St. Cyr Military Academy, Maitre de Conferences L’Institut des Sciences Politiques de Paris, and senior researcher at the French Army’s Centre de Doctrin d’Emploi des Forces, Ecole Militaire, Paris, France; Nina Krusheva, professor, Graduate Program in International Affairs, New School University and senior editor, Project Syndicate Association of Newspapers Around the World; and Martin Weinstein, professor of political science, William Paterson University.

The topic of the first afternoon panel, which will be held from 1:45 to 3:15 p.m., is “Contemporary Terrorist Movements: Israel, Lebanon and Palestine, Indonesia, South Asia, Africa.” Panelists are John Gersham, senior analyst, Interhemispheric Resource Center, Asia/Pacific editor, Foreign Policy in Focus; David Makovsky, senior fellow and director of the Project on the Middle East Peace Process, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, and adjunct lecturer in Middle Eastern politics, Johns Hopkins University; and Aaron Tesfaye, assistant professor, political science, at William Paterson University. Bertoli, Boniface and Makovsky will join Maya Chadda, professor of political science at William Paterson University, for the final panel, to be held from 3:15 to 5:15 p.m. They will discuss “Political Repercussions of the ‘Wars on Terror:’ The Domestic Impacts on Democracy, Human Rights and Peace.”

The program is sponsored by William Paterson University’s Department of Political Science, the Master’s Program in Public Policy and International Affairs, the Center for International Studies, and the Department of African, African American and Caribbean Studies. For additional information, please call John Mason, professor, political science department, at 973.720.3421.

Jane Fonda

Liz caught this article about Jane Fonda:

Fonda Says Vietnamese Visit Was a Betrayal
Thursday, March 31, 2005
(03-31) 10:27 PST NEW YORK, (AP) --

Jane Fonda says her 1972 visit to a North Vietnamese anti-aircraft gun site, an incident that brought her the nickname "Hanoi Jane," was a "betrayal" of American forces and of the "country that gave me privilege."

"The image of Jane Fonda, `Barbarella,' Henry Fonda's daughter ... sitting on an enemy aircraft gun was a betrayal ... the largest lapse of judgment that I can even imagine," Fonda told Leslie Stahl in a "60 Minutes" interview that will air Sunday night.

Fonda, whose memoir "Jane Fonda: My Life So Far" comes out next week, said she did not regret meeting with American POWs in North Vietnam or making broadcasts on Radio Hanoi. "Our government was lying to us and men were dying because of it, and I felt I had to do anything that I could to expose the lies and help end the war," she said.

Also on "60 Minutes," Fonda acknowledged that she had participated in sexual threesomes, at the encouragement of her first husband, French film director Roger Vadim. She said she consented because, "I felt that if I said no, that he would leave me and I couldn't imagine myself without him."

"Muslim Woman's Courage Sets Example"

Mirdita sends this to us:

I am doing research for one of my classes and came upon this article. After reading the article, I became totally outraged I knew that rape occurred in Middle Eastern/Asian countries but I thought it was done by the Taliban or extremists and not authorized by the government. Since March is Women's Month, I would like you to post this article on the superannuated blog. I think this article will spark some responses. Let me know what you think. Maybe you have heard of such savagery.

Mirdita

Muslim Woman's Courage Sets Example
March 16, 2005
by Wendy McElroy, wendy@ifeminists.net

Last week, Pakistan's Federal Shariat Court—the nation's highest Islamic court—vacated an appeals court decision that had outraged the world.

In essence, the appeals court had acquitted five of the six men convicted in the 2002 "honor rape" of Mukhtar Mai. Her ongoing story may well foreshadow the future of Muslim women who suffer under tribal law and other oppressive traditions. Hers is a savage tale of brutalization and courage, with confusing twists and a resolution that is uncertain. But it is a story of hope, which provides reason for optimism.

In it, the West provides an invaluable voice of conscience and compassion. But the story's ultimate message may be that Muslim women must stand up for themselves and say 'no.'

In the summer of 2002, a panchayat court (or village council) sentenced Mukhtar to be gang-raped by four men. The sentence was not to punish Mukhtar for wrongdoing. Rather, her 14-year-old brother was accused of associating in public with a girl from a rival and more powerful tribe; her rape was meant to punish the family for his transgression.

Gang-raped, beaten, and thrown naked into the street, Mukhtar was forced to walk home through her village. The public nature of the punishment ensured she was an outcast and unmarriageable. Mukhtar was expected to kill herself, but a suicide attempt failed. Her family revived her, and the support of her loved ones deterred her from making future attempts.

Her story grabbed the media's attention. Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times visited her home and observed, "a girl in the next village was gang-raped a week after Ms. Mukhtaran, and she took the traditional route: she swallowed a bottle of pesticide and dropped dead."

By contrast, Kristof wrote, Mukhtar survived and propounded "the shocking idea that the shame lies in raping, rather than in being raped."

In rural Pakistan, as in many remote Muslim areas, tribal courts often take precedence over the law of the land on matters of family and "honor." Indeed, when human rights organizations express outrage over ritualized violence against women in Islamic cultures, it is often the panchayat tribal courts toward which they point an accusing finger.

For example, Pakistan is notorious for "honor killings." This is the practice by which women are murdered, usually by male relatives, for sexual 'improprieties' such as having sex outside of marriage. Mukhtar's story is an international indictment of that system.

However, in recent years—largely due to its alliance with and dependency upon the United States—Pakistan's national government has been trying to reform how women are treated in their country. President Musharraf has declared an agenda of "enlightened moderation" that sets his more Western version of society at odds with tribal traditions.

In Mai's case, the first "official" encouragement came from a local imam (an Islamic cleric) who called for her attackers to be brought before a civil court. (The importance of calls of reform and rebellion originating from within the society itself cannot be overstated.)

Soon, international opinion took up the cry and Pakistan's authorities reacted quickly. A special anti-terrorism court sentenced the four accused rapists as well as two members of the panchayat court to death. Musharraf presented Mukhtar with approximately $8,300 in compensation and ordered the police to protect her.

Mukhtar used the money to open schools for children in her village.

Sarwar Bari of Pattan—a non-governmental organization that supports Mukhtar—states, "A lot of people would have taken the money and run away, tried to forget, but Mukhtaran has not only stayed but has launched a visible challenge to the feudal landlords to change the status quo."

And, then, a slow and boring appeals process ensued. And, then, world attention shifted focus.

Some of that shift was the natural consequence of a fast-moving world. Some was encouraged by Pakistan's government to mute global criticism. Clearly, the Pakistani government was not pleased with reporters like Kristof.

Last September, Kristof reported, "relatives of the rapists are waiting for the police to leave and then will put Ms. Mukhtaran in her place...I walked to the area where the high-status tribesmen live. They denied planning to kill Ms. Mukhtaran, but were unapologetic about her rape."

And while the world shifted focus, the appeals court set her rapists free.

Early this month, Kristof published an op-ed in the N.Y. Times entitled, "When Rapists Walk Free." There, Kristof commented, "I had planned to be in Pakistan this week to write a follow-up column about Mukhtaran. But after a month's wait, the Pakistani government has refused to give me a visa..."

But now that the higher court has overturned those acquittals, global attention is again on Mukhtar.

On a website about her ordeal, Mukhtar, a small, soft-spoken women in her 30s, says of the attention: "My legal name is Mukhtaran Bibi, though I have become known in recent years as Mukhtar Mai. The local media here in Pakistan gave me that name, meaning 'respected big sister,' after my story first became national news."

But what the world sees upon refocusing on Mukhtar is a woman who has stood strong for two years and become a lightning rod around which other women gather to march and protest.

One official reaction: a contempt plea has been filed against 14 people, including Mukhtar, for making statements critical of the court to the press. Liberalizing the treatment of women and moving too openly against tribal courts obviously places Musharraf in an uncomfortable position.

Yet change is coming. Mukhtaran has said. "It's more than I would have thought possible two years ago."

Imagine what might be accomplished if the world pays attention for the next two years.

Copyright © 2005 Wendy McElroy.