Opinions
A Kurdish woman takes part in an independence referendum rally in the town of Bahirka, north of Erbil, September 2017. File photo: Safin Hamed / AFP
Whenever we wish to discuss Kurdish women’s visibility and participation in politics, we are often dismissed with a well-rehearsed one-liner: ‘this is not the right time.’
It begs the question – when exactly is the right time for women to raise long overdue criticism of institutional failures?
Two forums on the theme of peace in the Middle East took place this month. Both hosted the same leaders, bouncing back and forth to discuss the same the issues, in more or less the same tone.
Women’s calls for greater representation are not taken seriously because we are largely used as political props or window dressing to make the governing establishment look more progressive and in touch with its constituents.
In reality, women play a small, almost insignificant role in the region’s lawmaking. The region may well have three female ministers, something that all women have welcomed, but these count for little in practice.
We don’t want women to be brought forward as token moderators as we have seen at the Middle East Research Institute of Kurdistan (MERI-K) and the Middle East Peace and Security Forum (MEPS) in Duhok. Both events were dominated by male politicians and academics.
To the credit of Dr. Dlawer Allaadin, the MERI-K event had one panel session composed entirely of women, discussing issues that were perceived to be for women. But creating a panel for women exclusively on women’s issues only further highlights their exclusion from the core business.
Women should not be confined to topics relating to domestic violence and abuse in such public forums. They should be included in discussions pertaining to governance, lawmaking, policy-formation, and the regional crisis.
There are hundreds of women in the Kurdistan Region with the qualifications and expertise to discuss governance, regional security, and to be part of the discussions that will shape future policy-making.
Why are their voices stifled and excluded from the mainstream discussion? Is it because those behind MERI-K and AUK value male commentators more, especially those with prestigious titles?
These institutions represent patriarchy and male dominance in the Kurdistan Region. They exist for the sole purpose of perpetuating and peddling the same narrative we have heard in the last half-decade. They have all failed to bring the region tangible results.
More than ever, we need these institutions to have prominent female voices to confront these crises. After all, it was the male-dominated order that got us into this mess – perhaps women are better equipped to get us out.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of Rudaw.
Comments
Rudaw moderates all comments submitted on our website. We welcome comments which are relevant to the article and encourage further discussion about the issues that matter to you. We also welcome constructive criticism about Rudaw.
To be approved for publication, however, your comments must meet our community guidelines.
We will not tolerate the following: profanity, threats, personal attacks, vulgarity, abuse (such as sexism, racism, homophobia or xenophobia), or commercial or personal promotion.
Comments that do not meet our guidelines will be rejected. Comments are not edited – they are either approved or rejected.
Post a comment