Iran is one of the world's worst offenders in allowing women to be sold into the sex trade, the United States said on Monday in a rebuke that may cloud US efforts to negotiate over Tehran's nuclear program.
In an annual report on trends involving up to 800,000 victims of human trafficking worldwide, the US State Department downgraded Iran into its worst category, which includes only 12 nations assessed to have done little to stop the trade.
The report cited how a 16-year-old girl trafficking victim in the Islamic republic was publicly hanged for having sex outside of marriage in a case where the local governor praised religious authorities for their "firm approach."
"We have received a number of reports that Iran imprisons or executes a significant number of trafficking victims," said John Miller, head of the State Department trafficking office.
But he said it was difficult for the United States to collect accurate information in Iran because diplomatic relations have been severed.
Miller acknowledged the rebuke could affect Iran's deliberations as it decides whether to take up a US offer to negotiate with Washington and European powers to curb its nuclear programs. But the two issues were unrelated for the United States, he said.
"We are concerned about human rights in Iran. We always have been and we are going to be concerned about human rights in Iran no matter what happens on the nuclear issue," he said.
The United States is leading an international drive to stop what it believes is Iran's pursuit of an atomic bomb. Tehran, an oil exporter, says it needs peaceful nuclear power to satisfy its growing population's energy demands.
Countries criticised in such US reports typically complain of hypocrisy and human rights groups say Washington has lost credibility in issuing rebukes because of abuse scandals involving Americans, like one at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison.
This year, for the first time, the annual report acknowledged that the United States had paid contractors in Iraq who were later found to have committed widespread abuse of labourers hired from abroad.
Rights groups and diplomats also say US blacklists sometimes appear politically motivated.
Friendly countries with major trafficking problems such as India, which has reached a nuclear cooperation deal with the Bush administration, avoided being placed in the worst category despite congressional pressure.
But US antagonists, like Syria - which was also downgraded this year - North Korea, Cuba and Venezuela are in the worst category for human trafficking and are typically rebuked in other annual reports such as on terrorism.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 34
Don't get me started, I'm sure I'd piss some people off.
Shit.
there is one, but good luck with getting us to agree to it.
it's hard to be righteous from the position our leaders have put us in.
Once again, I am deeply touched by the fantastic usage of our tax dollars by our beloved government. What can I say? Haliburton wins all ... again!
I, too, found the absence of any reference to UAE's ties to this problem rather peculiar. I wonder if the administration's business ties to that country could be a possible reason for such an obvious omission. But then again, our government would not possibly tolerate selective finger-pointing or name-calling based on certain officials' personal/business ties to certain oil-rich countries!!!!!!!!!!
The people serving this country (some of them) know that this is going on, and that the contractors are doing it, and it makes them angry and sick. The soldiers that I've spoken to have little use for the KBR employees they run into.(the Americans) These people are making big money as civilians, and are not required to stay if they decide they don't like it or can't hack it. They complain about how ungrateful the soldiers are to them, and brag about the money they are making. Not a good combination when you are dealing with people who are protecting your ass, from being killed.
They hardly see the people doing their laundry, cooking their food, or sorting their mail, but they know about this kind of stuff. It makes them sick, but there is not much they can do about it while in country. It's a horrible situation across the board. Once they are in country, the soldiers are stuck as much as the foreign workers. They serve at the whim of the commanders, and can't just leave because they dislike this adminstration's foreign policy, or lack of oversight.
The people over there in the armed forces are frustrated by the lack of oversight of the private companies for many reasons. The human trafficking is just one of the issues, but one that really disgusts the people I've talked to. It's hard to justify fighting for OUR liberty(theoretically) while taking the liberty of others from them. Add this to the civil war, that isn't going on, the prison abuse that is only a few bad eggs, the civilian deaths that are all misunderstood, and the constantly shifting reasons for us being there and you have a recipe for quagmire.
The truth is, Rumsfeld has set this whole sitation in motion, from the privatizing of services, and reconstruction, to the wink and nod to human rights abuses. Cheney and Rice are in on it too. Supporting our troops is not waving a flag and putting a sticker on your car. Supporting our troops is making sure they are fighting for something that is worth it, beyond each other.
On a side note. I personally think this is beyond reprehensible and have written letters and contacted every representative that I have access to. I give my money to groups like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and PBS (Frontline did a good program on this a few months ago) that try to keep this in the public eye. It disgusts me that people are so apathetic to it.
On the other hand, I have a son serving in Iraq at the moment, and my concerns for him kind of outweigh most other things. Life has become a balancing act on so many levels. But that's the way it is.
Thanks for the article, well done. Great discussion.
Some people do. Unfortunately none of them work in the White House.
Today, people are being slaughtered in the streets of Iraq for the crime of being homosexual, and our government does nothing to stop or condemn that practice. For all the moral bs emanating from the White House, this is clearly a war of political pragmatism, having nothing to do with freedom OR democracy. That we are allowing our sons and daughters to be slaughtered in the defense of this religious authoritarianism is indefensibly evil.
Oh, I absolutely agree. When it comes to foreign policies the green back still rules.
The proliferation of human and sex trafficking industry in Iran is a product of the Islamic regime's endorsement of temporary marriages, in addition to significant control and operation of the industry by Islamic officials and Mullahs themselves. I have written about that aspect in the past, and those who have commented here seem to have read my or other writings on the topic. That is why I chose the title that I did for this article, and that is where Allah comes into play in this context.
In all parts of the world where the sex trade happens, in its many forms, there are people who gain from other people's misery.
In my view, these sick "human abusers" should be served their own medicine. Power to the people, not just a small elite.
I'm just not sure what to do to help...
I just saw an article in the Nation, Lily, of which I will submit the first few paragraphs, that is in accord with your dim view of women's rights in Islamic countries. Good luck with your campaign to focus awareness on the most relevant issues in US foreign policy, as well as your activism on behalf of women's progress, freedom and rights.
The Missionary Position
by LAILA LALAMI
[from the June 19, 2006 issue]
These days, being a Muslim woman means being saddled with what can only be referred to as the "burden of pity." The feelings of compassion that we Muslim women seem to inspire emanate from very distinct and radically opposed currents: religious extremists of our own faith, and evangelical and secular supporters of empire in the West.
Radical Islamist parties claim that the family is the cornerstone of society and that women, by virtue of their reproductive powers, are its builders. An overhaul of society must therefore begin with reforming the status of women, and in particular with distinguishing clearly their roles from those of men. Guided by their "true" interpretations of the faith, these radicals want women to resume their traditional roles of nurturers and men to be empowered to lead the family. If we protect women's rights in Islam, they assure us, the umma, the community of believers, will be lifted from its general state of poverty and backwardness.
Sayyid Qutb (1906-66), the Egyptian writer and activist who has exerted such a powerful influence over the radical Islamist movement, fervently believed that Muslim women belonged in the home. In his 1964 book Ma'alim fi al-Tariq (Milestones), Qutb wrote that "if woman is freed from her basic responsibility of bringing up children" and, whether on her own or by pressure from society, seeks to work in jobs such as "a hostess or a stewardess in a hotel or ship or air company," she will be "using her ability for material productivity rather than the training of human beings." This, he claimed, would make the entire civilization "backward." The misogynistic philosophy has proved enticing, finding advocates among Muslims throughout the world. Between 1989 and 1991, for instance, Abbassi Madani, the red-bearded founder of the Algerian Islamic Salvation Front Party (FIS), often referred to women who refused to cover themselves with a hijab as "sparrow hawks of neocolonialism." His co-founder, Ali Belhadj, claimed that there was a simple solution to the country's high unemployment rate: turn over the jobs of working women to idle men. Madani summarized his program: "The system is sick; the doctor is FIS; and the medicine has existed for fourteen centuries. It is Islam." Reducing Algerian women to birds of prey, and their faith to a pill: These are good indicators of the depth of intellect within the leadership of the FIS.
Meanwhile, the abundant pity that Muslim women inspire in the West largely takes the form of impassioned declarations about "our plight"--reserved, it would seem, for us, as Christian and Jewish women living in similarly constricting fundamentalist settings never seem to attract the same concern. The veil, illiteracy, domestic violence, gender apartheid and genital mutilation have become so many hot-button issues that symbolize our status as second-class citizens in our societies. These expressions of compassion are often met with cynical responses in the Muslim world, which further enrages the missionaries of women's liberation. Why, they wonder, do Muslim women not seek out the West's help in freeing themselves from their societies' retrograde thinking? The poor things, they are so oppressed they do not even know they are oppressed.
First, let me address the following part of your comment: "Negotiations, in my view, with Iran are at a stalemate until the Iranian populist president stops performing for his own audience in Iran" -- I hope that you realize that the Iranian President's audience is comprised of Islamic fundamentalists, NOT the vast majority of Iranians currently living under Ahmadinejad and crew's brutality and insanity.
As for the rest of what the Islamic rulers wish to do to women in their respective societies, all I can say is that their actions and beliefs are the precise reasons why I, personally, believe women should turn their backs to Islam in its entirety.
Being born into a Muslim family in a Muslim country, witnessing the events of the Islamic revolution in Iran first hand, as well as the events following the change of regime in Iran, including the BRUTAL execution of a number of my family members and family friends by members of the Islamic regime, being personally brtualized as a child by Pasdars who believed a girl of 7 should not show her hair, her ankles or her wrists, not to mention the continuing threats directed towards members of my family and their associates, I can assure you that I know PLENTY about Islam!!! In fact, a great portion of my undergraduate studies, as well as my Master's program before receiving my doctorate degree focused on Islam and its political impact around the world. My familiarity with, knowledge of, and experience with Islam and its effects on women is far more substantial than you will EVER realize. Accordingly, I suggest that you get YOUR facts straight before you make statements such as those in your latest comment. You are clearly in the dark about my background, personal experiences, education, and knowledge of certain topics and issues.
Based on over 20 years of studying Islam, I can confidently say that yes, I really do attribute those problems with the doctrine.
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474976761903
Before I take the time out of a lucrative day job involving fairly important matters to go through one of the longest articles I have come across on this site, I would like to ask YOU the following question: What is YOUR affilliation with Islam? How many years of YOUR life have you spent in an Islamic society? How many years have YOU spent studying the Quaran, the Arab culture that fostered its teachings, the life of Prophet Muhammad's and his practices, the actions of the Khalifehs, Imams and Mullahs that took charge after the death of the prophet? What is the difference, in YOUR view between Shi'ites, Sunnis, and Suffis? And what has Islam done to promote the rights and accomplishments of women? And last, but CERTAINLY not least, why are YOU so intent on defending this particular religion?
I would encourage you to read that article when you have the time.
In this instance I feel that my comment was over the top and potentially unacceptable. I should not have accused you of knowing nothing about Islam. That said, I don't think that affiliations or life experience with Islamic extremists grants you a somehow superior view of the doctrine itself. You'll note that I asserted you knew little about it, I did not ask (as many on Gather do) for your credentials. My experience is limited to my Islamic friends and contacts and reading translated Qu'ran. My perception has thus far remained the same, however. You do not address the doctrine, only modern practices committed by those who act in its name. You dodge questions and assertions related to the doctrine and you publish articles with sensational titles that feed the current American xenophobia. Citing personal experience is valid, but if you know the doctrine claiming that "Islam" is responsible for all of these atrocities and that women are mistreated by it in isolation is not only a flagrant lie but irresponsible. Women and other minorities have suffered terribly under other religions as well, almost entirely due to the regimes that use them as a tool.
Yes, women have suffered tremendously under Christianity and other religions as well, absolutely right about that. But for some reason these religions have had to catch up with modern day society and have evolved and changed their ways and interpretations.But with Islam, this has not happened, only perhaps in the most modern Muslim countries, the more evolved if you like, one can find a bit more tolerance regarding women.
The fact that in Islam, their priests also have the power of law...says a lot.
If they decide that a woman has violated the Koran, they have the power to ask for her execution in no time...
Would you like to live such a life, where you wouldn't know whether you live or die and that your life is in the hands of a 'priest' who 'applies' justice of this kind?
Please make yourself a favour and do what I suggested above.Walk in their shoes for a few years first.
Because quite frankly this won't be just ridiculously naive, but downright criminally stupid!
What can I say that you already did not? When I read Cat's unabashed comment to me saying how could I portray Islam in a negative light when I "clearly" know nothing about it, I almost fell off my seat from astonishment! Had I not posted on this very network or had failed to provide comments that revealed the depth and extent of my knowledge of Islam as a religion, as a cultural foundation, as a political tool, etc., Cat's hairbrained commentary would not have been so utterly out of line.
As a life-long feminist, writer, scholar, and world-traveller, I have a fairly decent grasp on this particular subject. For someone like Cat, a college student who clearly has years of learning, studying, and experiencing ahead of her, certain realities can not exist because she, herself, has never been exposed to them. Notice she never responded to my questions about her personal first-hand experiences with Islam!
I feel very sorry for what happened to you and yur family during the revolution. Not only Iranians have suffered because of it but also various nieghbouring countries suffered as it created alots law and order problems for them.
But You must keep your biased veiws limited to Iran donot malign Islam.
It is unfair to treat a doctrine that beleives in absolute peace because of the action of few. All you have written has nothing to do with Islam. As to the issue of temporary marriage you should mention the Shias as it is only practiced by the shia not by all muslims.
I am delighted that you live in a society where you are free to convert to another religion without facing criminal punishment, death sentence, or threats on your life.
As for the sale of women for sex, I assure you that the practice is not limited to Iran. Pakistan and UAE are two of the most active participants in this particular industry, along with other countries in the Persian Gulf region. As such, the practice is not limited to only Shiite Muslims, as Wajid suggests.
(As to the issue of temporary marriage you should mention the Shias as it is only practiced by the shia not by all muslims.)
Temporary marriages are forbidden by Sunnis and are only practiced by Shias.
(As to the issue of temporary marriage you should mention the Shias as it is only practiced by the shia not by all muslims.)
Temporary marriages are forbidden by Sunnis and are only practiced by Shias.
Allow me to qoute:
Lured by traffickers who prey on their dreams of employment abroad, many of the women are then kidnapped and "exported" to Europe, the Middle East, the United States and elsewhere. During this process, they may be sold to pimps, locked in brothels, drugged, terrorized and raped repeatedly. In Eastern Europe, since the fall of communism, sex trafficking has become the fastest growing form of organized crime, with Moldova and Ukraine widely seen as major suppliers of women into the global sex trade.
And
Although the U.S. State Department report is the most exhaustive attempt at quantifying the problem of global trafficking, anti-trafficking advocates have criticized the yearly reports for not addressing government corruption and complicity in trafficking and for failing to evaluate the effectiveness of the programs that exist to help victims. Some critics charge that the report is inconsistent in how it ranks countries into tiers, and they complain that since the State Department did not publish the methodologies used to generate the statistics, it's impossible to evaluate them. The United States itself is not examined in the report.