Afghan Military Scandal (big abuse trigger)

[Katy]

No, you missed my point. I'm saying changing the culture of this practice is the same as trying to change any other endemic cultural practice like the language that is spoken. It takes a huge cultural shift, the will to change, and probably a couple generations.

 

So perhaps the answer is keeping bases there for two generations and establishing our own human rights tribunals and vast media and public awareness campaigns to change things, to make it obvious that it won't be tolerated.  I know there's a hatred of the concept of colonialism in some areas, but frankly I don't care about preserving a culture.  Those kids have a natural right to not be violated.

[Guest]

Agreed, but why I bring it up is that it is so easy to simply "other" different cultures.

Oh I know, I just can't say anything about something like this without mentioning its so heartbreaking. Though it can, of course be left unsaid because its soo terrible.

[EmseB]

Bullcrap!

 

The rapists say it is their culture, but the rest of the country suffers under the oppression of these warlords who continue to be well-funded.

 

This is war culture. Saying "they like it" is disgusting. It is only the way of the warlords. That does not make it their culture.

So you think this only happens because of war? I disagree entirely.

 

I'm not saying the people subjected to it like it (um, yeah, that's disgusting), I'm saying those that do it have tradition and culture to back them up and no moral absolute which tells them it's wrong. They believe they have a right to those kids, similar to other groups who have held power who have taken it to mean God gives them certain rights to virgins or the "first night" or what have you. It takes massive cultural upheaval to change that sort of mindset.

[Katy]

So you think this only happens because of war? I disagree entirely.

 

I'm not saying the people subjected to it like it (um, yeah, that's disgusting), I'm saying those that do it have tradition and culture to back them up and no moral absolute which tells them it's wrong. They believe they have a right to those kids, similar to other groups who have held power who have taken it to mean God gives them certain rights to virgins or the "first night" or what have you. It takes massive cultural upheaval to change that sort of mindset.

 

They do have a moral absolute.  It's against Islam.

[EmseB]

They do have a moral absolute. It's against Islam.

 

The people who practice this do not hold to that morality. Their moral absolutes tell them it is their right to have access to young boys for their own pleasure. It's not taboo, it's not done behind closed doors, they do not have any moral standard that says it's wrong. If they did, they wouldn't flaunt it or claim it.

[Anne in CA]

They do have a moral absolute.  It's against Islam.

There is the rub, isn't it. They do know better, but they continue. 

[DesertBlossom]

One of the articles I read also mentioned a boy who was made to go live with his rapist. The same article said:

 

"Same-sex relationships between men and boys remain prevalent among the Pashtun tribe in Afghanistan...There are over 13 million Pashtun in Afghanistan with men making up just over 50 percent of the population. It is conservatively estimated that just over 40 percent of Pashtun males practice bacha bazi in some form." I wonder if that might be the statistic you are remembering?

 

If this is true, it would mean about 2.6 million men are involved in the practice. That's not 50% of the men in Afghanistan, it's 16%. That's still horrific, but a far cry from half the male population.

That wasn't an article I read, though others contained some of the same information. That article was really long and detailed... and depressing and sickening. So much wrong going on there.

[DesertBlossom]

There is the rub, isn't it. They do know better, but they continue.

In that article recently linked from ryot it says that sex with boys is considered a "misstep" while premarital sex with a woman has grave consequences. And apparently being raped (or on the bottom) is far worse than being the rapist.

 

So no, in their culture, it's not viewed as being all that bad.

[Chess Dad]

Ugh, what a despicable culture they must have over there. I'm so glad I was born here. Afghanistan sounds like hell on Earth to me.

:iagree:

 

I served in Afghanistan from 2010-11.  I spent most of my time in Bagram, but got to see a lot of the country.  I interacted with the local population on many occasions and they are truly a different culture.

 

The country is mostly nasty, but has some beautiful mountains.

 

As far as the Government goes it's very corrupt and there are very few, if any chain store type businesses.  Most our local.

 

The thing I remember mostly was how poor everyone was, how small everyone was, and I often wondered why anyone would want to live there.

 

Thank God I was born in America!  :patriot:

 

PS- If the American public knew all that was going on in Afghanistan...wow...They would be very upset.  I was....I was glad to leave and still wonder why we ever went in in the first place.

[Rosie_0801]

there are very few, if any chain store type businesses.  

 

Why is this important?

[Amira]

Afghanistan is a beautiful and complicated place, but I would very strongly disagree that it is mostly nasty. I promise that anyone who has only been in Afghanistan as part of the US military has only seen one small portion of the country, no matter how much terrain was covered. People who fought in Vietnam, Korea, Iraq and so many other wonderful places didn't get a chance to see the real country either.

 

People want to live in places that seem horrible to others because it's home, because they have family connections, because the country is much more than war and violence, because there are good people there, because so many other things. The main reason people want to leave a place like Afghanistan is because foreigners keep coming in and fighting battles there.

 

(And I also have to wonder why having few chain stores is a problem. I like places with no chain stores.)

[jeninok]

Seriously?

The country is nasty?

 

I imagine the endless war being fought has something to do with it.

 

Lack of chain stores?

People are small?

 

Poverty, small stature, lack of infrastructure, these are all direct consequences of the endless war and misguided foreign intervention going back to the war with Russia. The one where we armed and trained the side we liked.

 

I can't even.

 

:iagree:

 

I served in Afghanistan from 2010-11. I spent most of my time in Bagram, but got to see a lot of the country. I interacted with the local population on many occasions and they are truly a different culture.

 

The country is mostly nasty, but has some beautiful mountains.

 

As far as the Government goes it's very corrupt and there are very few, if any chain store type businesses. Most our local.

 

The thing I remember mostly was how poor everyone was, how small everyone was, and I often wondered why anyone would want to live there.

 

Thank God I was born in America! :patriot:

 

PS- If the American public knew all that was going on in Afghanistan...wow...They would be very upset. I was....I was glad to leave and still wonder why we ever went in in the first place.

[mathnerd]

I was glad to leave and still wonder why we ever went in in the first place.

 

 

"we" have been in Afghanistan far longer than you know - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Afghanistan

[jeninok]

Here is an article from Salon in 2010, none of this is new information.

Although both the FRC and Michael Savage chose to link it to gay people serving in the military this week.

http://www.salon.com/2010/08/30/afghanistan_women/

[poppy]

Seriously?

The country is nasty?

 

I imagine the endless war being fought has something to do with it.

 

Lack of chain stores?

People are small?

 

Poverty, small stature, lack of infrastructure, these are all direct consequences of the endless war and misguided foreign intervention going back to the war with Russia. The one where we armed and trained the side we liked.

 

I can't even.

 

 

Google says that Afghanistan has the highest rated of stunted growth in children under 5, well over half.  It's an absolute tragedy. 

 

I'm definitely glad I wasn't born in a battleground. But I sure don't feel superior to people who persevere while living with starvation, poverty, violence, displacement.  Decade after decade of war.  I can't put myself in those shoes.

 

But child rape.  Hearing children crying out for help in the night and not being allowed to respond.  It's not a cultural norm, at all.  Rape has been a weapon of war for as long as there has been war.

 

The issue of 'tea boys' as victims of warlords as a plot point in the book The Kite Runner, which was published 2003- it was extremely popular. Anyone interested in the topic from an Afghan's perspective could read that.

[QueenCat]

That is my feeling exactly. There is no winning for these poor guys. When you are in a situation where doing the right thing is wrong, how in the heck are you supposed to function. Blaming the soldiers for the disgusting, filthy conduct of others when they were not allowed to stop it is wrong.

 

The Obama administration covering it up is wrong, and it may be the thing they are remembered for when the dust of history really settles. DH and I were just having a discussion that Obama seems to have avoided a big moral scandal like Watergate, Iran Contra,  Lewinsky, ect, but if they are going to lay the blame on foot soldiers for their own policy of noninterference, then hopefully they will suffer the same fate as Joe Paterno. Because you can't allow this sort of thing and still be considered decent.

 

Sorry, but this was first known to Reagan, and every President afterwards...... but mostly, the blame lies with George W, as that is when it became much more widely known,  so start the blame there, where it belongs.

[jeninok]

I have had that on my should read list for ages.

I just haven't worked myself up to it.

[Tsuga]

It's not the way of the warlords. Up to 50% of men participate in the Bachi bazi. It's been going on forever. This is heir culture. Ironically, bachi bazi was forbidden under Taliban rule. For the Taliban, raping little girls and women was okay, just not little boys. But from I understand, the culture of Bachi Bazi goes back at least over 100 years.

 

I read another article about how soldiers were told to turn a blind eye to a lot of things- like men beating their wives in the streets, or boys beating another kid to a pulp.

 

Recently I read a book by a feminist muslim woman. She talked about during the "arab spring" women were taking part in these demonstrations, only to be raped by the men they were supposedly fighting along beside. The abuse and oppression of women and children is so engrained in their culture in general that ousting an oppresive regime does nothing to help women because whoever comes into power still behaves much the same way.

 

I don't know if there is a way to help these people. You can't establish any "semblance of democracy" when more than half of their people are systematically oppressed and abused.

I don't know where you are getting the 50% statistic. Most men cannot afford marriage or a boy.

 

And when I worked in Afghanistan, yes, we most certainly did make progress. It wasn't sudden and not everything got fixed. But I personally observed and monitored lessons on democracy. I personally have interviewed hundreds of Afghans at random on secret ballot voting. Don't tell me it's not possible. Those who want to make it happen make it happen.

 

Funny, but you make the same arguments the warlords make. "it's our culture. Don't change us. It's not your country. Things will never change."

 

To which I would say in my head--"f@&$ you, I am a woman and my culture is the culture of mothers and you can eat me but I will not ever stop working to educate girls. I will never give up."

 

And I have not. And I will not.

 

And I was not alone. Many afghan women were on my side. Many men, too. I have stories and stories of men risking their lives to save girls' schools, to advocate for women's right to vote.

 

You can give up and say it's normal for them. I think that is a moral cop out. It's wrong, it's wrong to them, and I think it is well worth stopping. I am proud of these soldiers for speaking out and they are in my thoughts.

 

I don't give up on humanity so easily, not in Kabul, not in Kandahar. Never. Why am I even alive?

 

EtA: child marriages and bride sales were common in Northern Europe at one time. Read Burns' "How Cruel Are the Parents". You see... We were once them. We are them. Do not give up on them. Don't leave them. We can do better. We have to try. There is no morality in dismissing people as incapable of humanity.

[Tsuga]

Sorry, but this was first known to Reagan, and every President afterwards...... but mostly, the blame lies with George W, as that is when it became much more widely known, so start the blame there, where it belongs.

Until the American public takes full non-partisan responsibility for our lack of participation in this Democracy, the crimes will pile on.

 

I am a socialist and I have no love for Bush or Cheney. But partisan bickering is precisely why we are in this mess--good guys vs. Bad guys, instead of humanity vs. idiocy, and it will get this thread closed, as well.

[Tsuga]

So you think this only happens because of war? I disagree entirely.

 

I'm not saying the people subjected to it like it (um, yeah, that's disgusting), I'm saying those that do it have tradition and culture to back them up and no moral absolute which tells them it's wrong. They believe they have a right to those kids, similar to other groups who have held power who have taken it to mean God gives them certain rights to virgins or the "first night" or what have you. It takes massive cultural upheaval to change that sort of mindset.

You know the Greeks--like, Plato--did this, right? That this was a tradition that extends deep into Western culture?

 

It persists in Afghanistan in spite of widespread disapproval because of lack of rule of law, caused by the power vacuum created by war.

 

It really is war that has facilitated the persistence of such widespread practice of rape.

 

Obviously war is neither necessary or sufficient cause for rape, though. I did not mean to say that. War helps a lot though.

[livetoread]

So I ask this not to be snarky at all, but because my problem-solving abilities are coming up blank. What should we have done about it?

 

I can see forbidding it on our bases. But we never occupied the country and we were never "in charge" to the point we ran things. We were limited in our influence and we were finally asked to leave. We were allowed into certain places to fight and later to train, but it was not open-ended. Karzai's gov't wanted our help, but did not want us to have much power or influence. I can't imagine that we could have arrested these guys, even if we wanted to.

 

Could we have stated that it is a nonnegotiable part of arming and training that it not happen around our soldiers? Should we have stated we won't deal with anyone who does it? What if they agreed and then did it anyway (very likely)? What should our response have been? Leave the area and possibly expose other soldiers to more risk? Would it have been worth it to reduce our effectiveness in fighting the Taliban to do so? Should that have been a line in the sand, and if so, why that and not other equally bad atrocities towards women and girls?

 

War is hell partly because of situations like this. Ends justify the means. That doesn't mean anything goes, but it means you can't be morally unsullied and still win. I am not trying to defend our position necessarily, because I am not starry-eyed in the least about our own capacity for wrong-doing. But my outrage isn't sure where to go here, except towards the men raping those poor boys. I don't know what we should have done about it.

[poppy]

Until the American public takes full non-partisan responsibility for our lack of participation in this Democracy, the crimes will pile on.

 

I am a socialist and I have no love for Bush or Cheney. But partisan bickering is precisely why we are in this mess--good guys vs. Bad guys, instead of humanity vs. idiocy, and it will get this thread closed, as well.

 

I do think it is fair to say this is not an Obama administration issue.  It's not partisan bickering, it's acknowledging that these issues, and  US culpability, goes much father back.

[livetoread]

First step might be dealing with U.S. contractors who used it as a recruiting tool. That was part of the Wiki-leaks data -- at least one of the companies we sent to recruit and train police threw parties for recruits and provided drugs and boys. It was a Texas-based company. That isn't just turning a blind eye to local customs.

Seriously? 😳 Just when I think I couldn't be more disillusioned...Did anything actually happen to the company? Perhaps at least their contract wasn't renewed? I just...ugh. So, so wrong.

 

Edited to add further research shows this is DynCorp and they are big league. So no, nothing much happened. They also have sordid records in other countries, including an under-aged sex ring in Bosnia. Sure, let's privatize our military stuff as much as we can. It'll save money and what can go wrong?

[EmseB]

I think maybe my meaning was lost. My comments were not in any way meant to imply that the situation is hopeless. Saying that it's a cultural issue is not, to me, a cop out. It's a starting point that recognizes that simply going in and trying to enforce a moral standard that is not theirs will not work in the long term. If there's anything we should have learned as a nation in the last decade+, it should be that we can't just come in and tell people how to do things according to our norms and ideals and expect it to have lasting cultural change in a positive way.

[Guest]

I think it's perfectly fair to hold people to a standard that includes not violating the human rights of others.

 

I am not suggesting that I know what is actually to be done, with hands and feet and speeches, etc.

 

But I definitely do not think we need to (or should) start from a place of "they are different than us" when the "difference" in question is RAPE.

 

When the "norm" (which, as pointed out several times, it's not REALLY the norm because there's **so** much violence in the world all over) is NOT RAPING PEOPLE, yeah, it's OK to tell people they should do things according to that ideal, and try to figure out how to make that their ideal too. In the case of violent criminals (known rapists!) I couldn't GAF less how that's accomplished.

 

"We" in the general American sense, can agitate for policies that result in non-participation, though. Looking the other way is participation. Employing the vile private contractors mentioned upthread is participation. Blaming it on the religion of billions of people (instead of blaming it on individual human cruelty/lawlessness) is participation.

 

No one has acquiesced to put me in charge, yet, though, which is kind of weird.

[poppy]

I think maybe my meaning was lost. My comments were not in any way meant to imply that the situation is hopeless. Saying that it's a cultural issue is not, to me, a cop out. It's a starting point that recognizes that simply going in and trying to enforce a moral standard that is not theirs will not work in the long term. If there's anything we should have learned as a nation in the last decade+, it should be that we can't just come in and tell people how to do things according to our norms and ideals and expect it to have lasting cultural change in a positive way.

 

I agree that cultural change  takes time. I don't agree that rape and slavery is normal, acceptable, fine with Afghans.   Men with power have sex slaves. Families do not have a way of protecting themselves from that.

 

And it's not like we're going into private homes and trying to dictate how people live. The charge isn't that the United States looked away from human rights abuses.  The abusers are the people we are training, paying, and putting into positions of power. 

[livetoread]

I think maybe my meaning was lost. My comments were not in any way meant to imply that the situation is hopeless. Saying that it's a cultural issue is not, to me, a cop out. It's a starting point that recognizes that simply going in and trying to enforce a moral standard that is not theirs will not work in the long term. If there's anything we should have learned as a nation in the last decade+, it should be that we can't just come in and tell people how to do things according to our norms and ideals and expect it to have lasting cultural change in a positive way.

 

That's true. I'm not sure it is clear though, that it is not a moral standard of most of the people. A warlord or a police chief could get away with it there because those under them have fewer options of recourse than we do here. It is illegal, which suggests it is not generally approved of. People appealed to the U.S. to do something about it, which suggests they knew it was wrong and wanted it stopped.

 

If the mayor of my city tries to take my kid for such purposes, I have options. I'm not so sure that a woman or even a man over there would have enough options to effectively stop it. The warlord might do it openly simply as a way to flaunt his power and rub it in other people's noses, not because it is socially acceptable.

 

I don't know enough to say, but I think it is dangerous to assume that it is culturally acceptable. It is true that it happens more there than here, and it's true that there is more of a history there than here. But looking at the situation now, there are certainly things that suggest it is not culturally acceptable but might be happening (now at least) more because those in power are able to get away with it. The fact that it is boys more than girls and there is less stigma to it being boys rather than girls seems cultural to me, but the fact that it happens at all is probably due more to fewer options for recourse than cultural beliefs. If that is the case, then outside help is still tricky (because you must side with the powerless rather than the powerful), but not as tricky as trying to impose an unwanted cultural change.

[Pam in CT]

JodieSue, I think I understand what you're getting at... it's neither straightforward as a tactical matter, or even defensible as an ethical matter, for the US to seek to impose our values wholesale on another culture.  I agree.

 

 

This particular issue is a narrower question, though.

I agree that cultural change  takes time. I don't agree that rape and slavery is normal, acceptable, fine with Afghans.   Men with power have sex slaves. Families do not have a way of protecting themselves from that.

 

And it's not like we're going into private homes and trying to dictate how people live. The charge isn't that the United States looked away from human rights abuses.  The abusers are the people we are training, paying, and putting into positions of power. 

 

This is coerced systemic institutionalized rape.  It's much closer to the recent stories about ISIS and their use of (female) sex slaves as a tool for recruitment and retention -- which rightly evoked pretty much universal horror across the board .  Except that in Afghanistan, US policy has, for a very long time, been complicit.  We've fed this monster.

[Amira]

I completely agree that it's important to be aware of how difficult it is to go into another country and try to change cultural practices.  But in the end, this isn't about culture in Afghanistan.  It's not a widespread trend and most people hate it.  Despise it.  Wish it would never happen again.  

 

Instead, it's about corruption. Corruption is about a lot more than paying bribes- it's about a certain segment of the population not having to follow the rule of law.  If foreign institutions come in and support that system of corruption rather than trying to enforce the rule of law, they are only making things worse.

 

The US government does not have to support corruption and it should make sure the companies it contracts understand that there are things that can never be tolerated. There is absolutely no question that there are many times when it is pretty much impossible to get things done in some other countries without being involved in corruption, but foreign entities (military forces, NGOs, adoption agencies, educational institutions, companies, whoever) need to be honest with themselves and their constituents in deciding how they'll deal with it.  It shouldn't be at all a question, EVER, whether a practice like child rape should be ignored so that you can achieve your business or military interests.  Babies should never be sold to adoption agencies and have the practice justified because they're saving children.  Educational institutions shouldn't only make it possible for children from certain types of families to attend their schools in order to keep their schools open and then pat themselves on the back for expanding educational horizons in other places. NGOs need to make sure that the money they are spending to help people actually does help people instead of feeding into the system of corruption that's keeping people from changing their lives. 

 

It's hard to do.  It's hard to work with corrupt systems and Afghanistan's is complicated by too much foreign intervention.  But even though the system is corrupt, there are things we do not ever have to do.

[EmseB]

I think it's perfectly fair to hold people to a standard that includes not violating the human rights of others.

 

I am not suggesting that I know what is actually to be done, with hands and feet and speeches, etc.

 

But I definitely do not think we need to (or should) start from a place of "they are different than us" when the "difference" in question is RAPE.

 

When the "norm" (which, as pointed out several times, it's not REALLY the norm because there's **so** much violence in the world all over) is NOT RAPING PEOPLE, yeah, it's OK to tell people they should do things according to that ideal, and try to figure out how to make that their ideal too. In the case of violent criminals (known rapists!) I couldn't GAF less how that's accomplished.

 

"We" in the general American sense, can agitate for policies that result in non-participation, though. Looking the other way is participation. Employing the vile private contractors mentioned upthread is participation. Blaming it on the religion of billions of people (instead of blaming it on individual human cruelty/lawlessness) is participation

But that's my point, sort of.

 

If they see it as their right, then us agitating for human rights makes little sense to the people who are actually doing this. The term rape, to them, is a non-issue. They are owed these boys as a result of their positions. If it was wrong, or shameful, or dishonorable in their culture to do this, they wouldn't be doing it in broad daylight with no consequence. They have power, sure, but there are plenty of people in power in other cultures who could not get away with this because the culture days that using children for pleasure is wrong and shameful and horrific. It is not a reward or result of having power.

 

If someone in power in the U.S. is found to be doing something like this, they are publicly shamed, humiliated, and their career is ruined. We have a culture that says it is rape. As Tsuga pointed out, that has not always been the case for western civilization. But all of that shame and humiliation and ostracism in our culture says nothing of the legal consequences, because the laws come from the culture that says it is wrong, not the other way around.

 

What is inexcusable to me in this whole thing, from a U.S. perspective, is top level diplomats and commanders going along to get along and ordering troops to do the same. That is an atrocity, and I honestly am really sickened that more troops did not refuse to obey those orders.

 

Me saying that cultural change is what is really needed in no way means I think we should have tacitly approved of this in order to create peace with the warlords. I think I said as much in my first post in this thread.

 

I do think, given the right circumstances, one or two generations can be all it takes to change societal views and pressures when it comes to this sort of thing. And I also think it takes a sort of societal empowerment to where the jeering and shame of society means something to those who would be doing this sort of thing. How to do that in Afghanistan at this point? I'm not sure, but I think the kind of work Tsuga was talking about is vital.

[Guest]

They have power, sure, but there are plenty of people in power in other cultures who could not get away with this because the culture days that using children for pleasure is wrong and shameful and horrific. It is not a reward or result of having power.

 

If someone in power in the U.S. is found to be doing something like this, they are publicly shamed, humiliated, and their career is ruined

 

 

False. Please look up the VERY RECENT pedophilia investigation by Scotland Yard in Britain. And then resist the urge to say that Britain's "culture" is different than American "culture.

 

If you keep saying "their culture" but trying to divorce that phrase from "the culture of violence and power" endemic in the situation, people are going to keep telling you why you're wrong about "their culture."

 

People keep saying that it's NOT "largely accepted in their society," and I don't know why you think they are mistaken about that.

 

The Viet Cong did this....the boy rape slaves....and the Vietnamese people at-large absolutely did not think it was A-OK okie dokie because CULTURE.

[Lady Florida.]

We did it in Cambodia, we did it in Vietnam, even in Korea--that was not a Democracy. Whom did we prop up in Iran? The goddamned Shah!

 

 

 

Don't forget Batista. Our support of his regime is in large part, the reason Fidel Castro was able to come to power (with a little help from his Soviet friends of course). 

 

And in the Phillipines it's a wonder they didn't turn against us because of our support for Marcos. 

[DesertBlossom]

False. Please look up the VERY RECENT pedophilia investigation by Scotland Yard in Britain. And then resist the urge to say that Britain's "culture" is different than American "culture.

 

 

I spent a few minutes googling this as I've never heard of it before. I agree that there are some similarities, in that high-level officials are allowed to do whatever they want. However, there are still many differences that you can't really compare British and Afghan culture. (And as some have pointed out, it is more specifically Pashtun culture within Afghanistan)

 

For starters, there are stories of Afghan children being raped and then sent to live with their rapists because of the shame they brought to their families. That's a culture problem unheard of in Britain or the U.S. I know we have an issue with blaming victims, but not to that degree. Nobody in the U.S. would ever send a child (or adult) to live with or marry their rapist.

 

The article linked earlier mentioned how their culture of separating men and women in everyday society contributes significantly to this culture of Bachi Bazi because normal, healthy male/female relationships just don't happen. (There was a story in there of a man who couldn't figure out why his wife wasn't getting pregnant and it turns out he only knew about anal.) It's a much bigger issue than just a few high-level perverts not being prosecuted.

[Pam in CT]

Re: power, entitlement and rape:

But that's my point, sort of.

If they see it as their right, then us agitating for human rights makes little sense to the people who are actually doing this. The term rape, to them, is a non-issue. They are owed these boys as a result of their positions. If it was wrong, or shameful, or dishonorable in their culture to do this, they wouldn't be doing it in broad daylight with no consequence. They have power, sure, but there are plenty of people in power in other cultures who could not get away with this because the culture days that using children for pleasure is wrong and shameful and horrific. It is not a reward or result of having power.

 

By definition, all rape is rooted in power and a corresponding belief in entitlement.  Wherever it occurs.  That's what it means, for one person to force another.  I can do this and I will.  The first part describes the objective power relationship (whether that power is rooted in physical strength, or a group of many on one, or access to weapons, or a differential in age / institutional power whatever)... and the second part the individual choice of the rapist.  Because not all people in a position of power, anywhere, choose to rape.  Thankfully, most people, everywhere, recognize it for the horror it is.

 

And obviously rape occurs in all countries and cultures, including the US.  I agree with you that here, we have better accountability (though we still have work to do)....

If someone in power in the U.S. is found to be doing something like this, they are publicly shamed, humiliated, and their career is ruined. We have a culture that says it is rape. As Tsuga pointed out, that has not always been the case for western civilization. But all of that shame and humiliation and ostracism in our culture says nothing of the legal consequences, because the laws come from the culture that says it is wrong, not the other way around.

... but the principal difference is not that we have a "culture that says it is rape"; the difference here is that we have a system that provides rights to other people than just the warlords.  The power is not locked up here.  That system of laws and rights and accountability and power-sharing is immensely more relevant than how the respective societies view rape.  We are a young country, but our commitment to Rule of Law (as opposed to rule of warlord) goes back considerably further than our willingness really to look at rape as a problem we're willing to face.  

 

It's the differences in how power is distributed and in institutions supporting Rule of Law that differentiate us, not how we view rape.  Both cultures say it's wrong (and both cultures struggle with shame and blame issues to face it openly... we may be a bit farther along on that journey, but we too still have much work to do.)

 

 

 

What is inexcusable to me in this whole thing, from a U.S. perspective, is top level diplomats and commanders going along to get along and ordering troops to do the same. That is an atrocity, and I honestly am really sickened that more troops did not refuse to obey those orders....

I do think, given the right circumstances, one or two generations can be all it takes to change societal views and pressures when it comes to this sort of thing. And I also think it takes a sort of societal empowerment to where the jeering and shame of society means something to those who would be doing this sort of thing. How to do that in Afghanistan at this point? I'm not sure, but I think the kind of work Tsuga was talking about is vital.

 

I agree that is sickening.  It is unconscionable that our soldiers are put in such a position to begin with.  I cannot imagine the bind they must find themselves in, at such a young age.  I don't think we can expect anyone to be a hero in such untenable circumstances, particularly when they are so young and have been so relentlessly trained to obey orders. 

 

Our system is pretty clear about lines of accountability.  The buck does not stop at the troop level.

 

 

I truly, truly hope you are right about real change occurring in another one or two generations.  I will die a happy woman if it turns out to be true!

[EmseB]

False. Please look up the VERY RECENT pedophilia investigation by Scotland Yard in Britain. And then resist the urge to say that Britain's "culture" is different than American "culture.

 

If you keep saying "their culture" but trying to divorce that phrase from "the culture of violence and power" endemic in the situation, people are going to keep telling you why you're wrong about "their culture."

 

People keep saying that it's NOT "largely accepted in their society," and I don't know why you think they are mistaken about that.

 

The Viet Cong did this....the boy rape slaves....and the Vietnamese people at-large absolutely did not think it was A-OK okie dokie because CULTURE.

I'm not sure how what you're saying contradicts what I'm saying. The circumstances and societal dynamics where pedophilia takes hold are going to be different in each case. The case of the Viet Cong is not going to have the same dynamics as the UK, as Afghanistan,etc, etc. I would venture there are at least a few members of the U.S. legislative body who currently abuse minors, but must do so in secret or face disgrace. Human corruption knows no regional boundaries, but that didn't mean the circumstances or solutions are going to be identical. The only thing I can see *really* stopping it is societal pressure from within. In the case of Afghanistan, the culture is such that the offense is not so bad that it can't be overlooked with a bribe. We have, to our shame, contributed to this. If the warlords keep out the Taliban, provide information, etc, we'll overlook their indiscretions.

 

There are cultures where having a harem of young children is a status symbol. This culture clearly exists in Afghanistan (and other places)". There can exist, in that very same country or region, a group of people who think it's gross and horrible and work fervently for it to be stopped. What is needed is for the latter group to be the dominant voice in society, so that, for instance, the governing body of the country feels inclined to use their law enforcement to investigate pedophilia rings and the trafficking and using of children for pleasure and then punishing those people accordingly. Said law enforcement has to be incorruptible in the sense that they will not accept bribes in order to overlook offenses. In which case, the offense has to be viewed as so horrible that it cannot be overlooked, no matter how high the bribe. In this particular case we probably could, in theory, simply start rounding up these warlords and prosecuting them for child rape. Is that what people are suggesting? We (international partners) could send in UN troops to do this, too, although their record in this area tends to be not so reliable.

[Anne in CA]

I cant imagine UN troops being helpful for anything at all, but  I would like to see US military bases  be a place where a young person (or anyone really) could ot be raped. I really don't think it is okay to have children on the bases who are not direct descendents of people there, and they should be treated well when they are there. And hiding what has gone wrong is just as bad as doing the deed.