Women soldiers fighting for women’s rights in Iraq

Jump to Comments

I just read an interesting article in the Boston Globe that was written in 2005 about the interplay between American female soldiers and female Iraqis. The article brings up a titilating point, which is that female soldiers are not only fighting on behalf of the American government, but also have a strong attachment, as female soldiers who have themselves benefited from equal treatment by their own government, to the idea that the war with Iraq will result in increased freedom for females in Iraq.

At the beginning/middle of the war, the Bush adminstration floated the notion that one of the reasons we went to war with Iraq was to free Iraqi women from the Islamic law and from their backwards, unequal standing in the Iraqi society. Of course, now we know that perhaps this was one of the governments desperate attempts to create a reason after the fact for our invasion. However, this article seems to be saying that women in the American army, or at least Condoleeza Rice, do feel a strong attachment to this notion of liberating their fellow women. Rice occupies an unique position, and at that time, had the ability to spin her own position as a women, to the advantage of the Bush administration by being able to assert on behalf of all women in the army, that “…of course, we’re going to stand and stand strongly for the rights of women” and to be believed because she was a woman, and she should know. The article is skeptical of the prospect for female equality in Iraq, as it asserts that women under the Iraqi constitution will still lack privilages because the government will continue to operate under Islamic law.

One of the female soldiers states that the women ‘’seem to pay more attention to us than the men. They seem so shy and scared. And they see us and give us the thumbs up and smile. The little girls especially. They wave and smile and will point us out to their mothers and grandmothers. I think their equality is going to come. It’s just a matter of time.” This quote, of course, is an incredibly great PR plug for the Bush camp. But, I think that this quote says something important about the need for a female role model, and of the woman as a symbol of possible unity. This quote makes me feel warm and fuzzy at first (and perhaps this is just what the Bush people would like). That women can connect with each other, have tea and gossip, no matter what nationality, resonates strongly in this statement. And in a lot of ways, I actually believe this. Perhaps this will seem anti-fem to some readers, but I believe that there is a lot more universality among women then there is among men. Culture affects men more than it does women. Also, this is an interesting moment of self-recognition in the other. The female soldier identifies with the child and the mothers, and she in turn feels that they recognize themselves in her. This recognition on both ends provides the possibility for unity between the two sides. Gender here becomes a powerful way to sell the Iraq war, and also to a way to signify democracy and equality. Women signify union between the self and the other.

Here is the link to the article:

1 Comment

Filed under Boston Globe, U.S. Military, female soldiers, rape, women in the military