Burkas and bikinis

Time magazine’s cover is the latest cynical attempt to oversimplify the reality of Afghan lives

Reprising a legendary 1985 National Geographic cover, this week’s Time magazine cover girl is another beautiful young Afghan woman. But this time there is a gaping hole where her nose used to be before it was cut off under Taliban direction. A stark caption reads: “What Happens If We Leave Afghanistan”. A careful editorial insists that the image is not shown “either in support of the US war effort or in opposition to it”. The stated intention is to counterbalance damaging the WikiLeaks revelations—91,000 documents that, Time believes, cannot provide “emotional truth and insight into the way life is lived in that difficult land”. Feminists have long argued that invoking the condition of women to justify occupation is a cynical ploy, and the Time cover already stands accused of it. Interestingly, the WikiLeaks documents reveal CIA advice to use the plight of Afghan women as “pressure points”, an emotive way to rally flagging public support for the war. Misogynist violence is unacceptable, but we must also be concerned by the continued insistence that the complexities of war, occupation and reality itself can be reduced to bedtime stories. Consultation with child psychologists apparently preceded Time’s decision to run the image, but the magazine decided that in the end it was more important for children (and us) to understand that “bad things do happen to people” and we must feel sorry for them. The WikiLeaks revelations of atrocities and civilian deaths are evidence of some rather terrible things that are done to people but are bizarrely judged not to provide a “window into the reality of what is happening”. Time is not alone in condensing Afghan reality into simplistic morality tales. A deplorable number of recent works habituate us to thinking about Afghanistan as what Liam Fox, Britain’s defence secretary, called a “broken 13th-century country”, defined solely by pathologically violent men and silently brutalised women. While Afghans have been silenced and further disempowered by being reduced to objects of western chastisement, a recent judgment against Asne Seierstad’s The Bookseller of Kabul has raised the possibility of challenging their depictions. Based on her stay in the eponymous protagonist’s home, Seierstad’s memoir uses offensive commercial language to describe ordinary marital negotiations and refers to female characters as “the burka”. The tone implies even the most anti-Taliban Afghan men are irredeemably vicious patriarchs. Predictably, some critical reaction deemed Afghanistan a “horrible society”. While there exists a colonial tradition of relegating the non-west to the past of the west—and some suggest leaving it to rot in hopelessness—the trendier option involves incorporating Afghans into modernity by teaching them to live in a globalised present. In non-fiction bestsellers such as Deborah Rodriguez’s Kabul Beauty School, an American woman teaches Afghan women the intricacies of hair colour, sexiness, and resisting oppression. “To all appearances, there is no sex life in Afghanistan,” writes Rodriguez, obsessed—like Seierstad—with the nuptial habits of Afghans. Sex and the City in the Middle East may have tanked as a movie, but as ideology it has displaced meaningful global feminism. Acceptable Afghan-American voices such as Khaled Hosseini (The Kite Runner) and Awista Ayub (Kabul Girls Soccer Club) reiterate the notion that suburban America can “infuse” Afghans with freedom. Formulaic narratives are populated by tireless Western humanitarians, sex-crazed polygamous paedophiles (most Afghan men) and burka-clad “child-women” who are broken in body and spirit or have just enough doughtiness to be scripted into a triumphal Hollywood narrative. The real effects of the Nato occupation, including the worsening of many women’s lives under the lethally violent combination of old patriarchal feudalism and new corporate militarism are rarely discussed. The mutilated Afghan woman ultimately fills a symbolic void where there should be ideas for real change. The truth is that the US and allied regimes do not have anything substantial to offer Afghanistan beyond feeding the gargantuan war machine they have unleashed. And how could they? In the affluent west itself, modernity is now about dismantling welfare systems, increasing inequality (disproportionately disenfranchising women in the process), and subsidising corporate profits. Other ideas once associated with modernity— social justice, economic fairness, peace, all of which would enfranchise Afghan women— have been relegated to the past in the name of progress. This bankrupt version of modernity has little to offer Afghans other than bikini waxes and Oprah-imitators. A radical people’s modernity is called for—and not only for the embattled denizens of Afghanistan.

PRIYAMVADA GOPAL
The Guardian

People against people

Dr. Celayne Heaton Shrestha

A student of civil society, I was enthralled by the developments of 2005 and 2006 – the massive citizens’ assemblies across the capital, including Basantapur, where seas of people would cover the steps of the square’s landmark temples. As a researcher, I delighted in firsthand accounts of the programs featuring speeches, songs, poetry recitals and drama, uniting a broad swathe of the population in the critique of an authoritarian regime that had brought neither peace nor prosperity. Civil society, which came forward to lead a democratic movement when political parties were not able to do so, claimed to be ‘the voice of the people’, bearing ‘people’s agendas’ and following ‘the people’s philosophy’. In 2005 and 2006, there seemed little reason to doubt these claims.

Following the historic people’s movement of April 2006, civil society was to be ‘dormant’ for a good four years. At least, it adjusted its approach and we were not to witness assemblies and programs on the scale of those of 2005-6 till last week. The press coverage of last Friday’s program in Basantpur, the ‘peace assembly’, seemed to bring back those times: the artists were there, the seas of people were there. But rather than a cause for celebration, I found myself disturbed by the way the program unfolded. Two aspects, in particular, alarmed me, as a civil society enthusiast.

First, despite the proferred agenda of the assembly to ‘put pressure on political parties to forge a consensus’, the rumours had already circulated within the public domain (electronic and face to face) that the assembly was ‘against the bandha’. During the program itself, similarly, alongside statements that political parties should come to a consensus within two days, noted artistes called upon the UCPN-Maoist to ‘withdraw the strike, violence and protests’. In these highly politicised times, this could easily be interpreted as a move against one single party, namely UCPN-Maoist. Such an interpretation was further supported by developments later in the day. Indeed, the assembly of tens of thousands was then to turn into a ‘peace rally’, during which less savoury slogans were heard (‘hang Prachanda’, ‘death to YCL’). This was, moreoever, against an informal agreement concluded between the organisers of the assembly and UCPN-M leaders the day prior to the rally, that the peace assembly would not march. Unsurprisingly, as the peace rally ran into maoist protest marches, confrontation ensued. What is disturbing here, is not so much the politicisation of civil society, which occurred as soon as it pitched itself against a single party (though this may not have been intended by the peace assembly organisers). I have said in the past (The Kathmandu Post, June 2009) that civil society could and should rethink its role in new Nepal – and that acting as political party or closeness with political parties could be a positive development for Nepali political culture. The blurring of civil society and political society is not uncommon in post-conflict transition contexts and not necessarily dangerous or harmful. What is disturbing, rather, is that instead of pitching people against the state, as we have come to expect of civil society worldwide, Friday’s events pitched people against people. And rather than a counterweight to the state, ‘civil society’ helped to protect the state by countering UCPN-Maoist’s bid to challenge and transform it. This seemed a violation of the very raison d’etre of civil society and of the support that has been extended to civil societies globally by the international community.

A second, most disturbing development was the use of the image of ‘civil society’ in this project of protecting the state. The term ‘civil society’ has significant appeal still today worldwide. In Nepal the protests of 2005 and 2006 did much to increase its credibility. The format of the programme in Basantapur last Friday was clearly meant to evoke the civil society programs against the autocratic regime of ex-king Gyanendra, in a bid to imbue it with legitimacy and power. In the assembly and the hours that followed, however, the image of ‘civil society’ was put to use in a regrettable manner. There, statements were made to the effect that change comes after intellectuals and professionals come to the streets, as were suggestions that ‘the people’ were those assembled in Basantapur. These were widely quoted and proved highly controversial, as was the representation of the hundreds of thousands of protestors on the streets as ‘merely Maoist cadres’, who did not belong to that abstract entity ‘the people’. Articles in the press promptly highlighted the very different class backgrounds of the ‘peace assembly’ on the one hand and the protestors on the other. The privileged position of the middle classes in civil society has been noted in published studies in Nepal and elsewhere, and again, is not a problem in itself. In 2005 and 2006, these classes found common cause with the less privileged and could then reasonably said to represent ‘the voice of the people’. But here, this priviledged group used its status and power in society, as well as the power of the image of ‘civil society’, to delegitimise the agendas and grievances of other social classes. It turned against society itself, rather than the state.

In other words, last Friday, privileged groups in society used the label of civil society in support of a political project that can hardly be seen as falling within the role we have come to expect of ‘civil society’. Drawing on the symbolic power of ‘civil society’, they sought to defend, rather than challenge the state. This latter manifestation of civil society (as defender of the state) is not at odds with theory: indeed, civil society has also been conceived as the site where the state constructs its own hegemony (eg in Gramsci). Others such as noted Indian political scientist Neera Chandhoke, have pointed out that the space of civil society is highly divided and conflict-prone. But the question is, is this the kind of civil society that we want in Nepal? Is it not a violation of the history of the citizens’ movement of recent years? And what might be the consequences of last week’s events, for civil society’ future? My request is that the press, responsible civil society leaders and others be vigilant, so that the image of civil society is not misused and mobilised in support of initiatives that create rather than solve conflicts. For I fear that this might damage the very image and name of civil society and render its ability to gather support against authoritarianism in the future, nil.

(Celayne Heaton Shrestha is a visiting research fellow at the University of Sussex. She is working on a research project exploring Nepal’s civil society during the years of the conflict. This project is part of a research programme directed from the London School of Economics, UK and is supported by the UK’s Economic and Social Research Council.)

रक्षा देऊ, नत्र राजीनामा

सञ्चार उद्यमी जमिम शाहको हत्या भएको एक महिना नबित्दै अर्का उद्यमी अरुण सिंहानिया सोमबार जनकपुरमा मारिएका छन् । मंगलबार साँझ राजधानीमा मेडिकल व्यवसायी नागेन्द्र पाम्पटीमाथि गोली हानिएको छ । यसबीच पत्रकार एवं व्यवसायीहरूलाई मार्ने धम्की दैनिकजसो आइरहेको छ । को, कहाँ, कति बेला मारिन्छ भन्ने खालको सन्त्रास समाजमा छाएको छ । लोकतन्त्रमा नागरिकले राज्यबाट खोज्ने न्यूनतम अपेक्षा भनेको सुरक्षाको प्रत्याभूति हो । तर बाँच्न पाउने आधारभूत अधिकारबाट समेत जनता बञ्चित हुन थालेका छन् ।
आम नागरिकको अन्तिम आड भरोसा सरकार हुनुपर्ने हो । आफ्ना जनतालाई सुरक्षित राख्नु सरकार प्रमुखको मुख्य दायित्व हो । तर मंगलबार उद्योगी व्यापारीसँगको छलफलमा प्रधानमन्त्री स्वयंले वर्तमान बेथितिप्रति लाचारी व्यक्त गरेका छन् । सरकारी सुरक्षा व्यवस्थाप्रति भर पर्न नसकेर उद्योगीहरूले आत्मसुरक्षाका लागि निजी सुरक्षाकर्मी वा हतियार माग्नुपर्ने स्थिति आएको छ । राज्य व्यवस्थाप्रति नागरिकको भरोसा उठ्न थाल्नु र सत्ता सञ्चालकहरू लाचार देखिनु गम्भीर दुर्घटनाको सूचक हो ।
पछिल्ला घटनाक्रमको सन्देश हो, कोही कहीं सुरक्षित छैन । जमिम शाह राजधानीको सबभन्दा सुरक्षित मानिएको ठाउँमा मारिए । अरुण सिंहानियाको हत्या त्यसैगरी व्यस्त चोकमा निधारमै गोली हानेर गरियो, त्यो पनि तराईको सबभन्दा ठूलो पर्व होलीका दिन । अनि भोलिपल्ट काठमाडौंमा भारतीय व्यवसायीको हत्याप्रयास भयो । यी घटना एकअर्कासँग जोडिएका छन्/छैनन् प्रस्ट छैन, तर यसले मुलुकमा बढ्दो अपराध शृंखलालाई प्रतिविम्बित गर्छ । यी घटना राष्ट्रको भूगोल छिचोलेर अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय चासोका विषयसमेत बनिसकेका छन् ।

प्रहारको मुख्य निसाना सञ्चार र उद्योग व्यवसाय भएका छन् । संविधानसभा निर्वाचनयता २७ व्यवसायी मारिइसकेका छन् भने ६७ जना अपहरणमा परेका छन् । २०६३ सालयता सञ्चार जगतका छ जना

-वीरेन्द्र साह, जगत जोशी, उमा सिंह, प्रकाश ठकुरी, शाह र सिंहानिया) को हत्या भइसकेको छ । यी र यस्ता घटनासँग सम्बन्धित समाचार नलेख्न थुप्रै पत्रकारलाई दबाब एवं धम्की आएको छ । पत्रकारहरू नै त्रास मनोविज्ञानबाट गुज्रनु परेपछि आम नागरिकका आवाज दब्दै जाने खतरा हुन्छ । त्यसको सिकार अन्ततोगत्वा नेपाली आवाज र नेपाली लोकतन्त्र हुने प्रस्ट छ । त्यसैले अहिले राजनीतिज्ञहरू रमितेजस्तो भूमिकामा देखिनु उनीहरूकै निम्ति पनि आत्मघाती छ ।

जस्तोसुकै सुरक्षा कवचले पनि सबै अपराधलाई रोक्न सक्दैन । तर

मुख्य कुरा भइसकेको अपराधको अनुसन्धान कसरी गरिन्छ, अपराधी पक्राउ पर्छन्/पर्दैनन् भन्ने हो । पछिल्ला घटनामा त्यस्तो तदारुकता देखिएन । एकपछि अर्को हत्या हुनु, मुख्य अभियुक्तहरू नसमातिनु र सरकारले यस्ता रहस्यमयी घटना किन भइरहेका छन् भन्ने कारण नबताउनुले जनतामा संशय बढाएको छ । सरकारका प्रवक्ताले जमिम हत्या भारत-पाकिस्तान द्वन्द्वको परिणाम भनेर गरेको टिप्पणीलाई सरकारले ँनिजी धारणा’ मात्र भन्यो, आफ्नो आधिकारिक

निष्कर्ष सार्वजनिक गरेन, न त खास अभियुक्तहरू समातिए । सायद जमिमका हत्यारा समातिएका भए सिंहानियामाथि हात हाल्ने दुष्प्रयास हुँदैन थियो कि ? अथवा सिंहानिया हत्यामा सरकार तत्काल गहिराइसम्म पुग्न सके हत्या शृंखला रोकिएला कि ? मुलुक दण्डहीनताबाट गुजिररहेका कारण यस्तो भएको हो । मान्छे मार्दा पनि केही हुँदैन’ भन्ने मनोविज्ञान बढाउनमा प्रहरी वा कर्मचारीतन्त्रभन्दा राजनीतिक नेतृत्व सम्हालेको सरकारको सुस्तता, निष्त्रिmयता र लाचारी बढी जिम्मेवार छ । खेलाँचीजस्ता लाग्ने यस्तै घटनाक्रमबाट विश्वका विभिन्न मुलुक द्वन्द्व, असफलता वा अराजकताको दलदलमा धकेलिएको दृष्टान्तलाई प्रधानमन्त्री माधवकुमार नेपालले राम्रोसँग मनन गर्न सकेको देखिन्न । उनले यो विशेष कालखण्डमा पाएको ऐतिहासिक भूमिकालाई पनि गम्भीरतापूर्वक लिन सकिरहेका छैनन् । प्रस्ट छ, जारी शान्ति प्रक्रियालाई टुंगोमा पुर्‍याउन सके उनी इतिहासका नायक हुनेछन्, नत्र धेरैले सराप्ने खलनायक । मुलुकलाई बर्बादीको खाडलमा जाकेर बदनामी कमाउने या ँहिरो’ बन्ने, त्यो धेरै हदसम्म उनकै हातमा छ । त्यसैले उनले परिस्थितिसँग सम्झौता गरेर लाचारी व्यक्त गर्न सुहाउँदैन, जनताले सुम्पेका न्यूनतम जिम्मेवारी पूरा गर्न सक्नुपर्छ । त्यो भनेको शान्ति प्रक्रियालाई टुंगोमा पुर्‍याउने र आम नागरिकलाई सुरक्षाको प्रत्याभूति दिने हो । यदि उनी स्वयंलाई  यति पनि गर्न सक्दिनँ भन्ने लाग्छ भने प्रधानमन्त्रीको कुर्सीमा बसिरहन सुहाउँदैन । राष्ट्र कसैको अक्षमताको बन्दी बनिरहन सक्दैन ।

विशेष सम्पादकीय

फाल्गुन १८ Kantipur

 

विवाहमण्डपबाटै खोसिइन् बेहुली

विवाहमण्डपमा जब बेहुलाले बेहुलीको सिन्दुर रंगाउन हात उठाउँछ, एकाएक अर्को व्यक्तिको प्रवेश हुन्छ, जसले बिहे रोक्छ र बेहुलीलाई उठाएर लैजान्छ　।

फिल्ममा थुप्रै देखिने यस्तो दृश्य बुधबार कपिलवस्तुमा प्रत्यक्ष देखियो　। विवाहमण्डपबाट बेहुलीलाई उनका प्रेमीले उठाएर लगे भने बेहुलीको सिन्दुर रंगाउन ठीक परेका बेहुला रित्तो हात फर्के　। कपिलवस्तुको पत्थरदेइया-५ चौवाका रामबहादुर सुनारकी छोरी मञ्जुको रूपन्देहीको रुद्रपुर-८ का कुलबहादुर विकसित बिहे हुन लागेको थियो　। जन्तीसहित बेहुली लिन आएको विक परिवारले फिल्मी शैलीमा बेहुली अर्कैले लैजाँदा हेरेकोहेर्‍यै हुनुपर्‍यो　। मञ्जुको घरदेखि डेढ किलोमिटर टाढा पत्थरदेइया-४ अमलवानिवासी मधु गौतमसित दुई वर्षदेखि प्रेमसम्बन्ध रहेको खुलेको छ　। बेहुलाकै पहिरनमा हुर्रिंदै आएका मधुले बेहुली लगेमा जन्ती फर्किन नदिने चेतावनी दिएपछि खाली हात फिर्ता पठाएको मञ्जुका बाबु रामबहादुरले बताए　। उनका अनुसार मञ्जुले आफ्नो थर फेरेर घिमिरे लेख्दै आएकी थिइन्　।

'उसको अर्कैसित लभ परेको रहेछ, हामीलाई थाहा भएन,' रामबहादुरले भने　। उनका अनुसार मञ्जुले कुलबहादुरसित बिहेका लागि सहमति जनाएकी थिइन्　। तर, विवाहमण्डमा सिन्दुर लगाउने वेला अर्का बेहुला प्रकट भएपछि सबै चकित परेका थिए　। मधुले धम्की दिन थालेपछि केही समय तनाव उत्पन्न भएको थियो　।

बेहुला रूपन्देही रुद्रपुरका विकले आफूलाई खालीहात पठाएर इज्जतमाथि दाग लगाइएको आरोप लगाएका छन्　। जन्ती खाली हात फर्किएपछि घरमा अशुभ हुने भन्दै बेहुला विक परिवारदेखि टाढा गएका छन्　। परम्परागत मान्यताअनुसार बिहेका लागि लगनगाँठो कसेपछि बेहुली नआए अर्कै भए पनि बेहुली भित्र्याउनैपर्छ　। यता, मञ्जु र मधुलाई लिखित कागज गराएर बिदा गरिएको छ　। बिहेपछि मञ्जुले आफ्नो नाटकका कारण विक परिवारलाई दुःख पर्न गएकोमा आत्मग्लानि महसुस गरेको बताएकी छिन्　। यता, मन पराएकी बेहुलीलाई श्रीमतीका रूपमा पाउँदा खुसीको सीमा नै नरहेको मधुको प्रतिक्रिया छ　। 'यस्तो बिहे कहिल्यै देखेको थिइनँ,' स्थानीय उमेश पौडेलले भने　। 

प्रकाश पन्थी

नयाँ पत्रिका

कपिलवस्तु, १३ फागुन

दुइवोटा नेपाल : कोहीलाई उपचार गर्न इर अम्बुलेंस कोहीलाई नाइलनको डोरी

उपचार गर्न नसक्दा सामूहिक आत्महत्या

उपचार खर्च जुटाउन नसक्दा रुकुमको एक विपन्न परिवारकी छोरी र उनका वृद्ध आमाबाबुले सामूहिक आत्महत्या गरेका छन् ।
भलाक्चा १ का ७० वषर्य दलबहादुर ओली, उनकी ६८ वषर्ीया श्रीमती कली र २७ वषर्ीया छोरी तुलसाले आइतबार बेलुका झुन्डिएर सामूहिक आत्महत्या गरेका हुन् ।तुलसा लामो समयदेखि छारे रोगबाट पीडित भएको र उनको उपचारमा धेरै खर्च भएपछि ऋण तिर्न नसकेर आत्महत्या गरेको गाउँलेले बताए । आमा कली पनि पटकपटक बिरामी हुने गरेको र आर्थिक अभावकै कारण उपचार गर्न नसकिएको छोरा देविलालले बताए । 'स्थानीयस्तरमा धेरै उपचार गरियो तर सञ्चो हुन सकेन । उपचार गर्दागर्दै धेरै खर्च भएपछि जिल्लाबाहिर जान सक्ने अवस्था थिएन,' छोरा देविलाललाई उद्धृत गर्दै रुकुमका प्रहरी नायब उपरीक्षक होमजंग चौहानले भने, 'बेलाबेला यस्तो अवस्था हुनुभन्दा मर्न पाए हुन्थ्यो भन्थे । हामीहरू घरमा नभएको मौका पारी यस्तो गरेछन् ।' स्थानीय भागिमान बुढाथोकीका अनुसार छोरी तुलसाको उपचारमा यो विपन्न परिवारले एक लाख रुपैयाँभन्दा बढी रकम खर्च गरिसकेको थियो । तैपनि उनलाई निको नभएकामा बाबुआमा निकै पिरोलिएका थिए । उपचारका लागि धामीझाँक्रीदेखि सबैखाले उपाय गरिसक्दा पनि प्रयास व्यर्थ भएपछि ओली दम्पती विक्षिप्तजस्तै बनेको उनले बताए । 'छोरीको उपचार गर्न नसकेका कारण उनीहरू पागलजस्तै भएका थिए,' स्थानीय कली ओलीले भनिन्, 'केही गर्दा पनि निको नभएपछि आज यस्तो गरेछन् ।'
कलीका अनुसार तुलसाका बाबु एक साताअघि छोरीलाई भारतको दिल्ली लैजाने तयारीमा थिए । त्यसका लागि उनी आफ्नो घरमा पैसा सापटी माग्न आएको उनले बताइन् । छारे रोगकै कारण तुलसाको बिहे हुन नसक्दा आमाबुबा निराश भएको देविलालले बताए ।
तीनै जनाले घरनजिकैको चिउरीको रूखमा झुन्डिएर आत्महत्या गरेका थिए । आमाछोरी नजिकैको हाागामा एउटै खाले भिमलको डोरी र बुबा अलि माथिल्लो हाागामा छुट्टै खाले डोरीमा झुन्डिएको प्रहरी नायब उपरीक्षक चौहानले बताए । 'आमाछोरीले पहिले र बाबुले पछि आत्महत्या गरेजस्तो देखिन्छ,' उनले भने, 'अन्य चोटपटकको कुनै संकेत छैन ।'
पाँचजनाको यो परिवारका माहिलो छोरा आर्थिक अभावकै कारण रोजगारीका लागि भारत गएका थिए । जेठो छोरा देविलाल ससुरालीमा गएको मौका पारेर तीन जनाले आत्महत्या गरेको छिमेकीहरू बताउँछन् । उनीहरूले यसअघि पनि पटकपटक आत्महत्या प्रयास गरेको थाहा भएको छ ।
तीनै जनाको शव सोमबार जिल्ला अस्पताल सल्लेमा पोस्टमार्टम गरी छोरा देविलाल र छिमेकीहरूलाई बुझाइएको छ । उनीहरूले दाहसंस्कारका लागि शवहरू आफ्नै गाउँतर्फ लगेका छन् । घटनाको थप अनुसन्धान भइरहेको प्रहरीले जनाएको छ ।