John Kerry: Up to Saudi Arabia to decide if women should be allowed to drive

[cali]

US Secretary of State John Kerry said it was up to Saudi Arabia to decide when the time was right to allow women to drive.

"It's no secret that in the United States of America, we embrace equality for everybody regardless of gender, race, or any other qualification," Kerry said at a press conference in Riyadh.

"But it's up to Saudi Arabia to make its own decision about its own social structure and other choices, and timing," he added.

Last week, the United States said it supports the "universal rights" of women to drive in Saudi Arabia, after an October weekend protest there saw several women defy the law by taking the steering wheel.

"We support the full inclusion of women in Saudi society. People throughout the world share the same universal rights to assemble and express themselves peacefully," said State Department spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki.

<snip>

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/saudi-arabia-must-decide/874378.html

[gopiscrap]

1. that'll drive the ethnocentrists crazy

[Dash87]

136. Women have a universal human right to drive. That's not ethnocentric at all.

[gopiscrap]

138. I agree that's part of my point (woman whould have every right a man has)

but what I was getting at was that the rednecks will pop a brain cell, because they feel they need to all up in every nations internal stuff.

[JNelson6563]

2. He's right, actually.

I mean, what is the alternative? Invade them, topple their government and grant women the right to drive?

Julie

[Matariki]

7. The alternative is public disapproval

and not treating women's human rights lik e some sort of 'cultural' thing.

[Beacool]

34. This.........

[get the red out]

56. Thank you

Absolutely agree!

[bluestate10]

122. So. What happens if the USA disapproves and leaders in Saudi Arabia still don't

allow women to drive, or make women first class citizens? Do we then bomb Saudi Arabia to save face?

[Iggo]

10. An alternative would be to treat them poorly until they treat their women well.

Ain't gonna happen, but it's be the right thing to do.

[karynnj]

61. What if we need them more than they need us?

[Iggo]

67. I said it ain't gonna happen.

What do you want?

[seveneyes]

14. Alternative? How about Isolate, Sanction and Blockade?

Along with every other country that abuses Women and minorities. John Kerry, of all people, should not be supporting this, or any other type of discrimination against Women. There should be a call for him to change his posture on this, or resign. I won't hold my breath.

[leftynyc]

44. That covers an awful lot of ground

You think we should have sanctions on EVERY country that has discrimination against women and minorities? How would that even work?

[seveneyes]

57. Countries that discriminate against women and minorities

At the very least, they should not get anything from us until they treat their people equally. I don't know how it would work, but it would be a start. Kerry should really be ashamed for not standing up a bit more strongly for Women in this case.

[leftynyc]

75. I agree with you

It would have been better to say nothing at all but that's an awful lot of countries that you're talking about. I've also found that sanctions often wind up hurting the ones we're trying to help - the leaders always get fed and medicine they need. Believe me, if I could figure out a way to get it done, I think it would be a great idea.

[Shrike47]

105. I think it's going to be hard to blockade and sanction ourselves. n/t

[Recursion]

142. How would we boycott ourselves?

That would be interesting

[get the red out]

58. I wonder if Secretary Kerry would care to tell us

How that Saudi Arabian ass tastes?

[karynnj]

64. John Kerry had a 100% rating on women's rights in the US Senate

His record even went back further than that - he was responsible for setting up the first rape counseling team in a DA's office in MA and he was responsible for hiring a large number of women prosecutors at a point where there were few.

He is NOT supporting SA's policy - he was simply trying to not make it an issue - at a point where he was sent to SA to soothe their anger over Iran, Syria and other issues.

Do you honestly think that a US SoS calling them out - standing with the Prince - would help the women get the rights they want. Note that HRC did NOT take such positions in joint conferences with the Prince - and this is a key issue for her.

His job is to be a diplomat.

[ecstatic]

71. Those are acts of war. nt

[loyalsister]

16. I agree

A lot of countries are critical of the fact that we have death penalty. And there's also the fact that we haven't ratified a number of human rights treaties..

The US has signed but not ratified the following treaties:

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) (signed but not ratified)

Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) (signed but not ratified)

International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (signed but not ratified)

Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (signed but not ratified)

We really aren't the best source of criticism.

[JNelson6563]

28. I think some don't realize this

[KamaAina]

40. CRPD is being heard in committee again today

We could have had it ratified last year, but the teahadists, led by ol' Frothy Mixture himself, started foaming at the mouth about losing sovereignty and black helicopters and banning homeschooling and stuff, so we didn't. Not even after Bob Dole asked them nicely.

[loyalsister]

116. There's also the "hidden abortion agenda"

I think it has more to do with fear of getting caught in our failures to walk the talk.

[HappyMe]

19. Good point.

We have issues here that need to be dealt with.

[NuclearDem]

33. No one ever invaded South Africa.

[ljm2002]

3. Disgusting...

...Secretary Kerry, I am ashamed of you.

Women's issues are always subsumed by the PTB under terms like "social structure", therefore sweeping abuses under the rug.

All I would have expected were a few pointed words to the effect that not allowing women to drive is a human rights violation and we expect our allies to do better.

But of course when you get right down to it, oil money trumps decency every time.

[leftyohiolib]

5. how do you know a few pointed words werent already said

[Fumesucker]

8. No one has yet posted those pointed words

We await your links..

[leftyohiolib]

12. what makes you think the words in any meeting had about this would be posted?

[Fumesucker]

15. If pointed words are uttered and there's no one there to hear them...

Were they really said?

[LeftOfWest]

37. Nailed it.

Great points here AND you made me laugh.

[TeamPooka]

31. because they would have been leaked and they were not.

[leftyohiolib]

50. yea sure ok

[karynnj]

65. Note what he did say

His first words indicated his position POLITELY - he is a diplomat.

I seriously think saying what you wrote would be seen as insulting the Prince who was standing there. Given that he was sent to "soothe" SA's anger over US policies - that we will not change - such as trying to deal with Iran via diplomacy. - that would seem to be a way to completely fail. Not to mention, it would gain nothing.

[bluestate10]

127. What would you propose? And do we Drone Saudi leaders when they ignore

our demands?

[ljm2002]

139. Nonsense...

...I said nothing about demands. I said, Kerry ought to have said where we stand on the issue, forcefully; he should have said something like "and we hope our allies will do the right thing like every other civilized nation and recognize the rights of their female citizens and allow them to drive"; and he should not have dismissed it as just an internal cultural issue. Women's issues are always framed as cultural issues, it is one of the ways the patriarchal structures maintain control over women, within and among different countries -- and it is very harmful to the human rights of one half of the human race.

The fact that the Saudis are deemed our allies is in itself disgusting when you get right down to it. Theirs is a brutal and backwards regime that has been directly responsible for financing terrorism and the training of terrorists, including what happened to us on 9/11/2001, yet we remain allies with them, because, you know: oil, money, realpolitik.

[frylock]

4. can't say anything that would upset our good buddies..

whether they're funding men to drive planes into skyscrapers, or preventing women from driving cars.

[Matariki]

6. BULLSHIT

Why is it always 'up to a culture' when it comes to women's rights? If this was an ethnic group that wasn't allowed to drive, or travel without being accompanied by a member of the prevailing ethnic group, or flogged for being raped, the whole world would be outraged.

[Ikonoklast]

13. If it was Whites Males not being allowed to drive, the bombs would already be falling on Riyadh.

[leftyohiolib]

18. omg

[HappyMe]

20. What?

[closeupready]

29. Can I haz cheezburger?

[RZM]

46. Nonsense

If that were the case Robert Mugabe would have been gone a long time ago.

[tblue]

78. It's not up to the women.

They have no say. So Kerry's is not a valid point AT ALL. He's just placating the entrenched patriarchal misogynists who, by the way, sit on tons of oil wealth that we value oh so much.

[Dash87]

132. It's different when they have oil. Then we let them do whatever they want.

[Purveyor]

9. Well isn't that special...?

[851-977]

11. So Russia has a choice when it comes to gay rights?

Kerry wouldn't say that, because Russia is not our ally.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

17. Time to post this again

[Zorra]

22. holy shit...that's really clever and well done.

Thanks.

'hawks 8 - 1!

[treestar]

42. That was interesting!

Couldn't tell if they were agreeing with it or protesting but nice imitation of reggae.

"you feet are your only carriage," lol, that was a line in the original IIRR.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

102. I believe it's satire

There are other videos on You Tube where the guy who did this is interviewed.

[TBF]

21. Typical. Hillary Clinton on the other hand -

has been working tirelessly on this issue for decades:

"As first lady, Clinton declared in the 1995 speech that "women's rights are human rights." She said Wednesday during the Clinton Global Initiative meetings that despite progress, women are a "long way from the goal of full and equal participation.""

Much more here --> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/25/clinton-to-evaluate-women_n_3989306.html

[Whisp]

23. in 1995 Bill was making a lot of women and childrens lives in Iraq

unbearable.

History Rewritin'.

[TBF]

24. Did I mention Bill?

No I did not. Reading comprehension is your friend.

[Whisp]

25. where was Hillary and her humanitarian words then?

when they were most needed and she had inflluence?

When she speaks on this subject she makes it all a mockery because of this.

Sorry this makes you uncomfortable, but it's the truth. If amnesia makes you feel better, that's up to you.

[TBF]

36. She didn't speak to each country independently -

that does not make her words a mockery.

Your hatred is telling though.

[reddread]

43. loved em to death

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctions_against_Iraq

[Whisp]

51. Peace and Prosperity. From your link:

The overall literacy rate in Iraq had been 78% in 1977 and 87% for adult women by 1985, but declined rapidly since then.[citation needed] Between 1990 and 1998, over one fifth of Iraqi children stopped enrolling in school, consequently increasing the number of non-literates and losing all the gains made in the previous decade. The 1990s also saw a dramatic increase in child labor, from a virtually non-existent level in the 1980s.[citation needed] The per capita income in Iraq dropped from $3510 in 1989 to $450 in 1996, heavily influenced by the rapid devaluation of the Iraqi dinar.[27]

Iraq had been one of the few countries in the Middle East that invested in women’s education. But this situation changed from the late eighties on with increasing militarisation and a declining economic situation. Consequently the economic hardships and war casualties in the last decades have increased the number of women-headed households and working women.[27]

==

steam coming out of my ears that people just don't want to believe this because Hillary is all for the rights of humans. DISSAPPOINTED!

[AtomicKitten]

53. Saddam Hussein petitioned the UN for permission

to repair/rebuild the water purification plants that our sorties destroyed. The US and UK vetoed the request. As a result, hundreds of thousands of Iraq children died of dysentery.

Unnecessary cruelty in my opinion.

[Whisp]

54. It was a horrible horrible time for Iraq, and a long string of horror after that.

I was a Clinton supporter during that early time of his Presidency. It took me a while to understand what was really happening and it took a lot of people showing me the truth and finally I got it. Bush Senior's wasn't the only devil's work in Iraq. And then Junior comes in with his spurs and finishes them off. It was all a big plan.

[Whisp]

47. how is it hatred to ask why it's okay to kill Iraqi's

if it's a Clinton that did that. I know it would be well received if I called bush and his people out on that.

and then make speeches about human rights.

One may think they are through with the past, but the past may not be through with them.

I happen to remember some of the past and it saddens me that so many don't because it's the ends justify the means thing all over again. Different rules if it happens to be someone you like - change is not going to happen if this is allowed, no way. all the same shit, rinse and repeat if you don't even have a memory.

[boston bean]

41. She was in Beijing giving a historic speech, that wasn't very welcome!

Watch it. It's one of the greatest speeches she has ever given.

[reddread]

144. did it end or begin with those three little words?

Most Favored Nation?

[AtomicKitten]

38. "working tirelessly" vs. "just a speech"

I can't help marveling at the juxtaposition of Obama's 2002 anti Iraq war speech dubbed "just a speech" by the Clintonsphere, yet when Hillary gives a speech it is dubbed "working tirelessly." Funny how that works.

HRC: "I have a lifetime of experience that I will bring to the White House. I know that Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience that he will bring to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech he gave in 2002."

added back in:

[Whisp]

48. ''John McCain opposes a woman's right to choose

and voted against an equal pay bill.'' Is a pop up note on that vid.

Now whatta guy to support. It would take a caring feminist like Hillary to root for this guy and denigrate Obama.

jeeze.

[AtomicKitten]

49. by any means necessary ...

[TBF]

69. Don't even start -

I was a co-precinct captain working on the Obama campaign in 2008. I supported him because I thought he could win. Capitalism is not going to give us candidates that vary widely on economic issues in my experience, but sometimes they vary widely on social issues. If Hillary is the candidate in 2016 I will support her. So don't even try to turn this into Obama vs. Clinton.

[AtomicKitten]

84. You didn't explain why a speech by Hillary

is deemed "working tirelessly" and a speech by Obama is deemed "just a speech."

It's the difference between opportunism (any speech by HRC who is on record taking both sides of many issues, i.e., pro-DOMA/anti-DOMA) and taking a bold position (O's 2002 anti Iraq War speech).

[TBF]

85. Why should I explain that? I didn't make that claim -

you did.

[AtomicKitten]

87. The claim that by virtue of making a speech

Hillary is "working tirelessly" is nonsense. More accurately, it's horseshit. She is a phony and an opportunist. You can expect pushback if you continue to peddle that mythical creature.

[TBF]

98. I'll check back with you when she's the nominee. nt

[AtomicKitten]

100. Headed straight for coronation again, eh?

How'd that work out in 2008?

[TBF]

108. You're having some reading comprehension problems dear -

I explained in my very first post to you that I worked on Obama's campaign in 2008. I thought he had a better chance to win than she did. I was wrong in Texas though - Hillary won our primary. Her support was from labor and they did not forget how she has supported them through the years.

She did a great job at State and yes I think she'll get the nomination if she runs. She's got some great folks to tap as potential VPs - but she is the one who has the name recognition, experience and charisma for 2016.

[Beacool]

101. The mythical creature is the one that lives in the heads of people like you.

You have made a caricature of a woman who has accomplished more in a lifetime than most people would in 10 lifetimes. Opportunist my ASS!!!!!!

She is more than qualified to hold the office of president, if she chooses to run in 2016. And if she does, it will please no end to see the angst around here.

Of all the unmitigated BULLSHIT that one has to read..................

[AtomicKitten]

107. Horseshit.

The grotesque exaggerations will be corrected.

For instance, as I wrote below

her tenure as SOS was confined to flying around gladhanding, stupid shit like the Russian reset button (and she got the translation wrong on that), and pushing the TPP. More serious and capable people handled Afghanistan, Iraq, and the ME in general. SOS Kerry was trusted with that authority and hit the ground running.

[Beacool]

112. Let me be the first one to inform you that the 2008 campaign finished over 5 years ago.

[Whisp]

193. so then the speech she gave in 1995 shouldn't come into play either

if you are putting a line on time of what is acceptable to talk about and what is not.

how does that work again?

[Whisp]

117. How did she get her daughter to play along with that grotesque exaggeration?

Did Chelsea volunteer: Hey, Mom, I can help you with that. What's the story again?

or not:
Chelsea dear, I have something to ask of you. It will be good training for your political future. It's called Bullshitting to the Idiots.

[Beacool]

99. Same B.S. coming from the same haters.

I don't know if it's ignorance on your part or just not willing to give credit where credit is due. If you think that the extent of Hillary's involvement with women and girls' rights was her speech in Beijng in 1995, then try doing some research and become informed.

[AtomicKitten]

104. Keep embellishing her resume and you can

expect people to correct the BS.

For example, you've written many times that she is a ferocious children's advocate. The truth is she worked for ONE YEAR right out of college in children's advocacy, her ONLY nonprofit job. Doesn't sound nearly so awesome when the truth comes to light, does it?

Expect illumination on the snowjob you and the Clintonsphere are mounting.

[Beacool]

109. Keep denying that she has an enviable resume, you're only making a fool of yourself.

Again, do some research before writing nonsense. Better yet, go to the Children's Defense Fund site and see what Marian Wright Edelman thinks of Hillary.

Here, let me help you:

“CDF is pleased to recognize Hillary Rodham Clinton, who has been a tireless voice for children. She’s brilliant. She cares deeply about children. She perseveres. She’s an incredibly hard worker, and she stays with it. She’s done extraordinarily well in everything she’s ever done. and I’m just so proud of her,” said Marian Wright Edelman, President of the Children’s Defense Fund.

http://www.childrensdefense.org/newsroom/cdf-in-the-news/press-releases/2013/hillary-clinton-tribute-video.html

[AtomicKitten]

111. ONE YEAR right out of college - her ONLY nonprofit job.

you were saying?

[Beacool]

113. Listen genius, she continued her advocay in Arkansas,

in Washington, as SOS and now at the Clinton Foundation.

Your refusal to give the woman credit for anything is tiresome. You are now boring me.

Ciao..........

[Beacool]

62. Just as significant is her LGBT speech while serving as SOS.

When Hillary delivered her historic speech on women's rights in Beijing, some members of her husband's administration didn't want her to deliver it. That speech is still significant.

Here's a State Dept. video that they made using portions of her LGBT speech.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/29/hillary-clinton-gay-rights-speech-music_n_1174623.html

Here's the full speech.

[karynnj]

66. Kerry's record on women's rights equals Clintons

The fact is that even Hillary never brought up women's rights when speaking to the Prince in SA.

Even this article notes the difference in when HRC spoke - http://swampland.time.com/2013/11/05/kerry-takes-softer-line-than-hillary-on-saudi-women-drivers/

[Beacool]

106. Yes, she did. She spoke to the Saudis in private

before making her public statement. Women and girls' rights are something very important to Hillary.

[karynnj]

119. Link to her saying that that she said this to the Prince

Note also that it had no effect. (Not to mention, she was in agreement with the Saudis on other issues - especially on Syria. )

[blm]

89. What did she say to Saudis as Sec of State?

She was a pretty passive Sec of State for the most part, though she did touch on some women's rights issues - on women driving she was publicly prodded to speak out. She was definitely not pro-active in terms of heavy lifting diplomacy in the hot spot regions like Kerry is, and which the corpmedia ignores.

2011: Clinton Opts for 'Quiet Diplomacy' on Saudi Women Driving Standoff

Spokesperson: "I think she is making a judgment on how best to support universal human rights for women. There are times when it makes sense to do so publicly and there are times for quiet diplomacy."

[AtomicKitten]

97. Her tenure as SOS was confined to

flying around gladhanding, stupid shit like the Russian reset button (and she got the translation wrong on that), and pushing the TPP. More serious and capable people handled Afghanistan, Iraq, and the ME in general. SOS Kerry was trusted with that authority and hit the ground running.

[Beacool]

110. At this point, what you write is just risible and has no basis in facts.

[AtomicKitten]

158. Your position is emotional fluff and distortion of facts. nt

Last edited Wed Nov 6, 2013, 12:17 PM - Edit history (1)

[Jesus Malverde]

26. Kowtowing to monarchs that suppress their populations is unseemly.

The Saudi's have a long list of human rights violations, we'll add their treatment of women to the long list of murderous behavior.

[reddread]

27. good thing they arent in Burkhas

that would justify some MOABs at the very least.

[Jesus Malverde]

32. hijab

Some Muslims believe hijab covering for women should be compulsory as part of sharia, i.e. Muslim law. Wearing of the hijab was enforced by the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, and is enforced in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and in the Islamic Republic of Iran. The Taliban's Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan required women to cover not only their head but their face as well, because "the face of a woman is a source of corruption" for men not related to them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab

[bluedeathray]

39. It's funny to watch Arab women

Go into a jet's lavatory in traditional garb and emerge with blue jeans and western tops.

The alcohol starts pouring too. For the men at least.

[NuclearDem]

30. There are some things that argument works for.

Food, alcohol laws, age of adulthood.

It most definitely does NOT work for a system of second class citizenry.

But I'm not surprised. Unless we're looking for a justification for war, we've routinely showed that we couldn't give two shits about human rights in that part of the world.

[get the red out]

59. That's about right

This country doesn't give a damn about anything but keeping that oil flowing.

[bluedeathray]

35. Just keep shipping that oil...

And hold hands with the BFEE!

[Beacool]

45. I thought that our foreign policy position on this issue had changed.

By Richard Wolf, USA TODAY
6/21/11

Responding to pressure from a coalition of human rights activists, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton today endorsed the right of women in Saudi Arabia to drive.

"We have made clear our views that women everywhere, including women in the kingdom, have the right to make decisions about their lives and their futures," Clinton said. "They have the right to contribute to society and provide for their children and their families. ... Mobility, such as provided by the freedom to drive, provides access to economic opportunity, including jobs."

Her comments marked a departure for the Obama administration, which has not singled out Saudi Arabia for much criticism even as officials have condemned repression in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Bahrain and elsewhere in the Middle East and North Africa.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/06/hillary-clinton-supports-saudi-womens-right-to-drive/1

Prior to that public support, she had been talking privately with the Saudis regarding this issue. She reiterated her position last month in London.

Hillary Clinton Backs Saudi Women Defying Driving Ban

LONDON -- LONDON (AP) — Hillary Rodham Clinton has supported Saudi women who this week defied their kingdom's ban on female driving.

The former U.S. secretary of state told an event in London: "I'm all for it. It is an issue that is symbolic." She added that the ban is "hard to even rationalize" in today's world.

Clinton was speaking at London's Chatham House international affairs think tank on Friday. The organization awarded her its annual Chatham House Prize to recognize her contribution to international diplomacy and her work in furthering gender equality.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/11/hillary-clinton-saudi-women-driving-ban_n_4086382.html

I'm sorry to hear that we reverted to our previous position of noncommittal and mild rebuke.

[TBF]

52. I argued about this up-post a bit

but anti-Clinton folks showed up immediately to cast negativity. Still trying to figure out how that happens on a board that supposedly supports all democrats.

[Beacool]

63. It's always the same crowd and they are tiresome.

They will never give the Clintons credit for anything. The hell with them!!!

[Whisp]

55. what were Hillary's plans to actually Make That Happen?

how was she going to change the Law in Another Country? Invasion? Pretty speeches, how?

I don't exactly like how Kerry did his phrasing either, but the reality is, reality.

[karynnj]

72. Note that she said that in LONDON to a group that was happy to hear it

She was Secretary of State then and traveling extensively. Did she go to Saudi Arabia and try to lobby for change? Would she have said with the Prince standing there that he needed to change the policy? We know only that it didn't happen.

Notice that Kerry did NOT change the US policy - he stated our position. Part of diplomacy is focusing on what you are trying to achieve. Kerry is working on three things that Obama listed as his top FP goals - Israel/Palestine, a diplomatic solution to Iran and to Syria. SA is a player in the region and can affect all three.

This is not to say that women's rights are not important, but that it is not clear that speaking out in front of the Prince would help the women get rights - it in fact would be more likely to hurt. (In fact, the best he could do is raise the issue privately in a non confrontational way - which I assume would have been what HRC would have done in his shoes.)

Kerry's goal was to soothe the relationship with SA that is troubled because of substantive US actions that they do not like. Things like working to have a diplomatic solution to Iran.

[Beacool]

94. Hillary spoke to the Saudis in private before making her public statement.

No need to reflexively come to Kerry's defense. It was not an attack on him. The London event was last month, but the first article was from when she was the sitting SOS.

[karynnj]

124. In neither case was she in Saudi Arabia, standing next to the Prince

That makes a huge difference. I doubt she would have NOT been diplomatic if she were standing with the leader of the country. (Not to mention, it is just stating realty that SA will decide the issue - and they ignored Clinton's public (and from your post, private) recommendation to change the policy.)

The entire thread is a an attack on Kerry, who was doing his job as a diplomat trying to rescue a very angry relationship. Saudi Arabia is angry that the US opted to use diplomacy to get rid of chemical weapons rather than bombing.

[blm]

103. London, England is NOT Saudi Arabia

Clinton Opts for 'Quiet Diplomacy' on Saudi Women Driving Standoff

Spokesperson: "I think she is making a judgment on how best to support universal human rights for women. There are times when it makes sense to do so publicly and there are times for quiet diplomacy."

What did she say DIRECTLY to the Saudis? Her speeches around the world have been pretty consistent towards women's rights. It's what she says TO the Saudis as Sec of State that matters.

I don't fault her gingerly approach on this. It's tricky territory when you're in the middle of a hotbed of Islamist fundamentalism and the WH is working to get cooperation that includes targeting Islamic extremists and terrorists.

[Beacool]

115. Having a problem reading?

She talked privately to the Saudis about this issue in 2011 when she was SOS. She then made a public statement about it. The comments in London were last month. She was at the Chatham House to receive an award.

Hillary has no problem speaking her mind. She was in Pakistan when she told them to their face that certain people in the country knew where Bin Laden was hiding.

[karynnj]

128. Speaking privately to them is NOT the same as stating that position to the press

while standing with the Prince.

As to Pakistan, she managed to completely anger them throughout her trip - even though the trip was set up for her to deliver big dollars for several projects designed to improve the lives of the people. (Note that it was Kerry who was sent to Pakistan after Raymond Davis, a CIA asset, killed 2 Pakistani and they wanted the US out and him tried - a few months before OBL was killed and again after OBL was killed -- why not SoS Hillary? )

Some times speaking out is not the best way to be diplomatic.

[Beacool]

175. In Pakistan she was being honest with them.

She may have angered some factions, but she gained respect from the populace. She sat down with the media, also with regular people at a townhall, and every question was allowed. People respect straight talk. One of Conde Nast Travel magazine's editor when on one of their trips. He retold how the traveling press described the reactions she received as she traveled. One of the things they pointed out was that she was very popular, not just with people, but with most of the rulers that she encountered and they included Pakistan (with the added notation that "Pakistan hates Americans&quot . Her style was to be personable, but also to talk straight.

I know that you are a big Kerry supporter, but this is not a competition. Hillary has her style and Kerry has his.

[karynnj]

176. Conde Nast????? Wonderful source - not

As I said, who did President Obama send when he NEEDED Pakistan's approval?

As to why, here is a NYT magazine article. As a NY area resident, you know that the NYT was never big on Kerry and adored Hillary.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/17/magazine/john-kerry-our-man-in-kabul.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Here is the quote I refer to:

More important, Kerry had earned goodwill as one of the backers of the legislation authorizing $7.5 billion in civilian assistance to Pakistan over five years and also as an emissary during the floods in the summer of 2010. And Pakistanis appreciate Kerry’s humility. Haqqani told me that Kerry is one of the very few senior American officials who doesn’t approach Pakistan like “a viceroy.”

[blm]

172. Privately....yet, some are attacking Kerry when they haven't a clue what is going on

behind closed doors....privately.

I give her the out, here. And I stated my reasons why she deserved the out on this. The claim that she had set a different policy publicly for the US on this than Kerry is what I am highlighting.

[Beacool]

173. Personally, I never criticized Kerry over this issue.

My only point is that the US, through its then SOS, had already spoken publicly about supporting the women's cause in Saudi Arabia. When she made a public statement supporting the women's driving protest in 2011, it was mentioned that she had at first had talks in private with the Saudis.

[karynnj]

177. "It was mentioned" where???

[Beacool]

195. In the articles that came out at the time that she made the public statement.

It was sometime in 2011.

[blm]

184. Kerry didn't change policy - that's the point. It's absurd to imply he did.

.

[karynnj]

60. What exactly wquld you prefer the US's top diplomat say?

He SAID what the US position is --- he is there because they are very angry on things the US will also not change their position on - including the goal of dealing with Iran diplomatically and NOT bombing Syria.

This was a hot potato issue he handled well. Do you think the US SoS defending women's right to drive more explicitly would have made them more likely to say that they were ok with it? What leverage do you think the US has with SA?

Although it is despicable that women have no rights there, Kerry saying so more explicitly than he did would simply anger them and likely make them less likely to change.

[cali]

68. I would prefer that he echo the line that's been expressed by the SD over

the last couple of years and that's contained in the article posted.

do you actually believe that being a diplomat means invariably going along with repression and human rights abuses if they come from a supposed ally? (and just where did the 9/11 bombers come from?)

How deeply disturbing that people think like that.

[karynnj]

73. He actually did that in the first sentence

[cali]

76. He certainly did NOTHING OF THE KIND

He qualified his statement with the phrase "In the United States we support...."

If JK told you the sky was emerald green you'd nod your head.

[karynnj]

83. What are you speaking of - he said that is what we support

The fact is that NO American diplomat has argued for women's rights standing next to the Prince. That includes Hillary Clinton.

Do you seriously think that a foreign diplomat calling out the leader of the country over a position while standing next to him would have been helpful to the women? It would seem more likely to backfire - both against the US/SA relations and against the women. Give me ONE example where a country changed after such a thing happened.

[bluestate10]

129. The far Left has it's rose colored glasses on. Kerry clearly said that Saudi women

should be given full rights in the first words out of his mouth. But the far Left wants Kerry to demand. What happens when Saudi leaders, feeling pressured publicly dig in their heels? Do we engage in acts of war then?

[karynnj]

134. Not to mention angering the Prince on this would defeat the entire reason he was there -

and could set back the slim chance the women have of change.

[NuclearDem]

194. Right, and we should suck up to Russia so they don't get more angry at LGBT Russians

Sorry, but fuck that. Appeasing human rights violators is weak sauce.

[Violet_Crumble]

151. Uh, it's the sentence that starts with 'But' that should be an issue for everyone...

He said: 'But it's up to Saudi Arabia to make its own decision about its own social structure and other choices, and timing.' That's the bit that's the problem...

[karynnj]

165. That's just reality

Social change in any country occurs when its people's opinions changed - and it is a gradual thing. The change will have to come through changes within their own culture.

It is ironic that many of the same people who speak of the evils of colonization do not understand that a Western diplomat lecturing on superior moral values in a country with a colonial past will probably cause a backlash that hurts what he/she wants to help.

[Comrade Grumpy]

187. What do you mean by "the far left"?

People who want the US to take a more aggressive stance toward SA on this issue?

Marxist-Leninists?

What?

It seems that the term "far left" is out of place here.

[phleshdef]

150. Yea? So? Diplomats are suppose to speak diplomatically when addressing such issues.

That's kind of their fucking job, you know?

[ecstatic]

70. I hope anyone who disagrees with Kerry's approach will explain how we can force

them to do things our way. Another war, perhaps? More drones?

[get the red out]

77. No one suggested "forcing them to do things our way"

It would just be nice if Kerry wasn't French kissing that Saudi misogynist ass with such intensity.

It's not news that the Saudi government is a piece of shit on human rights; some people just expect a bit more out of John Kerry.

[karynnj]

86. Kerry simply avoided insulting the Prince

The reason might well be the reason he made the trip was to soothe a relationship going very sour. I doubt he wanted to make it worse.

So far, Kerry has been pretty successful in getting various groups to speak together and find common ground. This is what a diplomat does.

At another point in his life he was an activist. As an activist, you do speak truth to power. As a diplomat, sometimes you need to pick your issues.

[get the red out]

91. Of course!!!

How silly of me. Women's rights can never be an issue, I need to go find my fucking way to the damned kitchen now.

I hope the good Secretary enjoyed the taste of royal ass.

[cali]

79. uh, no one is fucking talking about "forcing"

It's about forcefully and respectfully saying we believe in full equal rights for women everywhere.

And that has been the SD's official line for the past couple of years re women in SA. It's right in the article.

[get the red out]

80. That's always the claim though, isn't it?

That people want some kind of WAR when anyone anywhere mentions wanting our government to give a little pro-women's rights verbiage to extremist nations like Saudi Arabia. It's obviously meant to be "thought stopping" and end all conversation on the matter.

[scheming daemons]

95. thats exactly what he said in his first sentence

[NuclearDem]

82. Sanctions and boycotts.

We never had to invade South Africa for apartheid to collapse.

[bluestate10]

133. South Africa didn't have the world economy by the balls the way Saudi Arabia

does. If we sanction and boycott the country, it stops shipping oil to the USA or reduce production. Would you then support tar sand use to make up the oil difference? Decisions have consequences, that is something that I don't think the far Left seem to fucking get.

[NuclearDem]

140. I never said it was going to happen, and the state we're in

is all about our dependence on Saudi oil.

So, no, not going to happen, but ideally...

[tblue]

74. It was up to South Africa to decide if black people had any rights.

So, I call BULLSHIT.

[scheming daemons]

88. ultimately, it didnt change until the South Africans changed it

.

[Matariki]

114. The global pressure did a LOT to make them change.

[Gravitycollapse]

149. That's a gross understatement.

[Gravitycollapse]

148. The anti-apartheid movement was one of the largest anti-racist movement in human history.

Also one of the most successful.

[Bluenorthwest]

81. Hey John, is that what you said about South African apartheid as well? 'It's up to them!!!!'

He would have played Sun City.

[blm]

92. You are a poor student of history.

.

[scheming daemons]

93. ultimately, it was up to them

Apartheid didn't go away until South Africa made the change themselves.

[ancianita]

167. "It was up to them" covers up the fact that they lost a LOT of disinvestment money over apartheid.

THAT's what influenced the 'them' it was supposedly up to. "Up to them" presupposes they just up and changed their minds one day. It didn't happen that way.

[scheming daemons]

90. we better sever ties with Ireland too, while we are at it

Since abortion is illegal there.


All we can do is strongly suggest how a country behaves.

We can no more tell Saudi Arabia how they should be treating their women any more than some other country can tell us to abolish the death penalty.

Either countries are sovereign or they're not.

Kerry stated that it is our position that women in Saudi Arabia should have equal rights. That is all that is in his power to do or say.

[Fumesucker]

121. He could call for sanctions or an embargo

You know, like Cuba and South Africa and Iraq and Iran and N Korea and FSM knows who else.

[scheming daemons]

123. exactly. we need to sanction Ireland.

[Fumesucker]

125. I wouldn't have a problem with that

Would you?

[JI7]

155. after what happened with SAnctions in Iraq i would be careful with that

[Fumesucker]

160. Why then are they not being "careful" with sanctions against Iran?

I see little difference between Saudi Arabia and Iran.

Well, other than the fact that Iran is at least nominally democratic and Saudi Arabia is monarchist.

Oh, and the fact that the US has already overthrown the democratically elected government of Iran before.

[JI7]

161. they should be careful , and the sanctions are because of the nuclear program, but at least

it looks like the Obama administration is working towards some kind of relationship with them unlike before.

[Fumesucker]

162. Sanctions against South Africa weren't because they had a nuclear program

Although South Africa did indeed have a nuclear program.

http://web.wm.edu/so/monitor/issues/08-1/4-adams.htm

[karynnj]

135. That would be a great way to improve our relations with them - which is why he was there

[Fumesucker]

159. They seem to think sanctions will improve relations with Iran

I fail to see why sanctions are called for in one case and not in the other.

[karynnj]

163. N they don't think that sanctions will improve the relationship with Iran

They were punishments and they were because the US and other powers wanted to get them to not become a nuclear nation. Read some of the hearings etc - the alternative that the neo-cons pushed was war. Sanctions only work if they are international. There is no way that the rest of the world would consider sanctions over this. ( In fact, with a different country, a possible response could be a consumer boycott. Boycotting SA consumer goods and travel is not possible as they are almost non existent.)

Here, Obama and probably the entire national security team want SA to not oppose us in the Middle East. Look at what Obama cited as his goals as the UN.

1) Find a diplomatic path with Iran - to end the almost a decade of being near a war.
2) Israel/Palestine
3) Find a diplomatic path for Syria

Note that 1 and 3 differ 180 degrees with the neo-cons and note that IF Obama succeeds, there is the possibility of really stopping the neo con agenda.

Each one of these goals is a tough challenge - but each is worth working as hard and as well as they can for succeeding. Do you think that adding to the difficulty of doing this to make a rhetorical statement in SA would be a good idea? (Not to mention, a rhetorical statement by ANY US SoS would if anything have hurt the women's movement in SA.)

[Fumesucker]

164. Evidently you think threatening people is not an optimum way to get them to do things

Except of course when it is..



As I pointed out in another post, South Africa had nuclear weapons but that's not the reason sanctions were levied on South Africa.

[karynnj]

166. No, I pointed out there are a multitude of things the US wants from SA

Most of which we need their good will to get. Applying sanctions to address what they rightly would consider an internal law would destroy any hope on everything else - and it would NOT work. Sanctions never work when applied unilaterally - and the rest of the world would not follow.

[truebrit71]

96. You are wrong Mr. Secretary.

...but thanks for playing...What a fucking sellout this guy is...

[jsr]

118. Scaredy–cat bullshit.

[bluestate10]

120. So, what is wrong with letting a country make that decision?

One doesn't have to agree with the decision. As Kerry did, we should clearly state our views and values, but in the end, we have no standing in the internal affairs of sovereign nations.

[Gravitycollapse]

147. What beautiful ignorance of reality. We let Saudi Arabia do whatever they want because we need...

their resources.

You think Kerry gives a shit about SA's sovereign autonomy? Let's be real here. When a diplomat like Kerry travels to Saudi Arabia, he's there to kiss their feet.

[ancianita]

169. We "let" as far as it is profitable.In SA's case, we didn't impose sanctions; major groups here dis-

invested in world companies there that propped profitable apartheid that existed to oppress the vast majority of its population.

If we tried other means -- not just double talk -- that cut into the economic well being of resource-rich countries, like Saudi Arabia, on behalf of HALF their populations, that would indicate a fairer international stand. I've heard of trade increases based on "benchmark" social changes within other societies. So, if they were to want more international trade profit, they can make structural changes that give half their populations more equal mobility and opportunities that come from that.

Profit and market control are the foundation arguments -- seldom voiced, publicly -- for keeping down whole populations that can provide "free" or "cheap" goods and services -- like half these sovereign countries' populations.

[Aerows]

126. During times like this

I am both saddened and relieved that Kerry never got to be President. Saddened, because he would have been better than Bush, but relieved, because as a Democrat he causes enough damage saying shit like this that the party is better off without him.

*shakes my head in disgust*

[ProSense]

137. Does anyone really care

what Kerry is doing related to women's issues? I mean, are people seriously trying to make the OP comment a controversy?

http://www.state.gov/s/gwi/index.htm

Secretary Kerry Announces New Initiative to Address Gender-Based Violence in Global Humanitarian Emergencies

Media Note
Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC

September 23, 2013

Secretary of State John Kerry announced Monday the provision of $10 million in funding for a new U.S. initiative, Safe from the Start, to prevent and respond to gender-based violence in humanitarian emergencies worldwide. Secretary Kerry emphasized that in the face of conflict and disaster, we should strive to protect women and girls from sexual assault and other violence.

Safe from the Start’s initial commitment of $10 million will allow the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), and other humanitarian agencies and organizations to hire specialized staff, launch new programs, and develop innovative methods to protect women and girls at the onset of emergencies around the world. The United States will also coordinate with other donors and stakeholders to develop a framework for action and accountability to ensure efforts to address gender-based violence are routinely prioritized as a life-saving intervention along with other vital humanitarian assistance.

This initiative builds on the framework established by the U.S. National Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security and the U.S. Strategy to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence Globally. It will be led by the State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Bureau of Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance.

As part of the unveiling of the initiative, PRM Assistant Secretary Anne Richard and USAID Assistant Administrator for Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance Nancy Lindborg will host a roundtable briefing on Tuesday the 24th with non-governmental and international organization representatives to urge others to make specific commitments as part of the Safe from the Start framework.

For media inquiries, please contact State/PRM Public Affairs Advisor Dan Langenkamp at [e-mail], 202-453-9939.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2013/09/214552.htm

[ancianita]

170. Why is the liberal desire of half this country's population controversial when it comes to a SoS

asserting our values regarding half the population of other countries, and that how they treat that population does influence how we will relate with their male-dominated economies? Why should women's freedoms be labeled controversial if their freedoms result in greater economic growth all countries? Isn't hiding this issue just propping the inequitable basis of male-dominated economies? Shouldn't our SoS be better than that?

[ProSense]

179. Spare me,

Why is the liberal desire of half this country's population controversial when it comes to a SoS asserting our values regarding half the population of other countries, and that how they treat that population does influence how we will relate with their male-dominated economies? Why should women's freedoms be labeled controversial if their freedoms result in greater economic growth all countries? Isn't hiding this issue just propping the inequitable basis of male-dominated economies? Shouldn't our SoS be better than that?

...Kerry made an innocuous comment that doesn't run counter to U.S. policy or his efforts on women's issues.

The fact that some are trying to make it controversial is beyond silly. It's like somehow this negates everything he has done or is doing in terms of advancing women's rights.

[ancianita]

182. Some? This is another convenient wall of diminishment that reveals subtle sexism.

It's a controversy just because it's not from "some." Call it a false controversy if you don't want to address it. But it won't go away. Women aren't loud mouthed whiners. But that doesn't mean that they're not paying attention to how their interests play out in American diplomacy.

" Spare me." Heh heh. Yeah, sure. We shouldn't take his neglecting the interests of half of any sovereign nation's citizens as anything but "innocuous."

[ProSense]

183. I'm a woman, and your comment is absurd. n/t

[Recursion]

141. What would people rather he say?

"We disapprove but we're not going to sanction them" has been the US line on Saudi Arabia since, well, it became Saudi Arabia, really.

[Barack_America]

145. War! Drones!

[ForgoTheConsequence]

153. No.

War and drones are what we to FOR Saudi Arabia not against Saudi Arabia. Maybe at the very least we could stop selling them weapons and fighter planes?

[struggle4progress]

143. The reporter who asked his take "on women driving in Saudi Arabia" was grubbing for a headline

Kerry's SoS, and the press conference was in Riyadh

Kerry's job as SoS has a large diplomatic component. When the SoS visits a country, he doesn't bring his whole wishlist with him: he brings a list with a few items on which he hopes to make some progress, some easier, some harder, and he studies those items to be able to discuss them with intelligence and sensitivity to the nuances

No diplomat of sound mind creates needless and pointless incidents. The SoS lecturing the Saudis on women and driving, while in Riyadh, would have produced an entirely needless and pointless incident: it would have had no impact whatsoever on Saudi policy, except possibly to give the hardliners in Saudi Arabia a nationalist excuse to insist all the more on their current position

[Gravitycollapse]

146. So basically what you're saying is his job as SoS is to be a lapdog for whoever he's visiting.

We have to prostitute out our highest political leaders to get their sweet, sweet oil.

[karynnj]

181. That is not at all what this means

Did you read any of the articles on the purpose of Kerry's trip? I suspect not - as it likely didn't interest you as it was just foreign policy. The goal was to soothe some of the anger various ME countries that were our allies. This is needed to have any chance to accomplish any of Obama's stated goals:

- To deal with Iran diplomatically - when SA and Israel would prefer a more military option.
- Israel Palestine
- To resolve Syria's civil war diplomatically -- when SA prefers we fight.

Kerry having any success in Egypt, SA, or Israel was very remote - but not going would likely guarantee things get worse.

Speaking out - stating what we know he and every American think on this more than he did - would destroy any chance he has to make the ME better. All for something that would not help the SA women - but would gain him praise on the left!

[karynnj]

178. You stated this far better than any of my attempts - Thanks nt

[ForgoTheConsequence]

152. At the very least we could stop selling them weapons......

Hillary had guts. Kerry? Not so much.

it's up to Saudi Arabia to make its own decision

By "it's up to Saudi Arabia" he meant "it's up to Saudi Arabian men".

[Gravitycollapse]

154. Stop selling them weapons? That would require a conscience.

Something the United States abandoned long ago if we were ever even truly in possession of one.

We are the chief exporters of death throughout the world. We don't give a shit about anyone but ourselves.

[karynnj]

168. What did Hillary do that showed guts?

Kerry and Obama are disagreeing with SA on Syria, where Hillary and Petraeus were supporting their goals. SA's anger on Syria is one reason Kerry is there.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

192. Here.

Hillary Clinton backs Saudi women defying driving ban

London: Hillary Rodham Clinton has supported Saudi women who last week defied their kingdom’s ban on female driving.
The former US secretary of state told an event in London: “I’m all for it. It is an issue that is symbolic.” She added that the ban is “hard to even rationalise” in today’s world.

http://gulfnews.com/news/gulf/saudi-arabia/hillary-clinton-backs-saudi-women-defying-driving-ban-1.1242231

[karynnj]

196. IN London - as a private citizen -saying something close to 100% of Americans agree on?

[ancianita]

171. In classic male diplomaticspeak, yes. When thought is given to half the populations' struggle there,

it's called "issue grubbing." I disagree.

[Luminous Animal]

156. How manly of him.

[TwilightGardener]

157. Diplomat is diplomatic.

Not really news.

[ancianita]

174. Read: Male diplomat is diplomatic to male-dominated resource control within and across countries.

It IS news to half the population of this country that this SoS doesn't care to prioritize the development of other -- namely HUMAN -- resources as part of international diplomatic relations. He breezily passes over the work that Hillary was, in part -- and wearily, I could tell -- trying to do on behalf of those populations.

The bar is pretty damned low these days for what's considered "diplomatic." Women in this country are not impressed with him for damned good reasons, and oversimplifying this flawed diplomat's "diplomacy" doesn't help.

[ProSense]

180. What the hell are you talking about? n/t

[ancianita]

185. More diplomatic pressure than Kerry gave. What the hell do you think I'm talking about.

Should I echo, "No, he's not ready. No, the time's not right. No, there are no ways and means to scale up the pressure. No, he's doing just fine, overall?" My opinion rests on a desire to see a Democrat in this position push for more liberal behavior from so-called allies. More. That's what the hell I'm talking about.

[ProSense]

186. No, you're talking nonsense and playing ignorant, but of course

this is expected of someone hyping Hillary:

"He breezily passes over the work that Hillary was, in part -- and wearily, I could tell -- trying to do on behalf of those populations."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023981992#post174

LOL!

[ancianita]

189. Maybe. I can't say that she'd have said anything different, but I still say he was remiss in letting

sovereignty trump a diplomatic goal of pressuring on behalf of Saudi women. I'd hardly call my interpretation of her SoS work hyping.

[Mosby]

188. The Most Unfair Countries For Women

10. Saudi Arabia
9. Mali
8. Morocco
7. Iran
6. Ivory Coast
5. Mauritania
4. Syria
3. Chad
2. Pakistan
1. Yemen

http://247wallst.com/special-report/2013/10/30/the-most-unfair-countries-for-women/

What do all but one of these countries have in common?


http://widgets.weforum.org/gender-gap-heat-map/

[Comrade Grumpy]

190. They are all Middle Eastern or North African?

Seriously, I wonder how much the patterns of the treatment of women in the region predate Islam. Did Islam codify existing practices or did it create them?

[Mosby]

191. Fair questions

I imagine a lot of the behavior predates Islam but why do so many Muslim leaders encourage and perpetuate sexism and gender inequalities today?

[treestar]

197. Which one is different?

Is one of them not predominantly Muslim? That seems to be the commonality.

[Mosby]

198. Ivory Coast

Muslim 38.6%, Christian 32.8%, indigenous 11.9%, none 16.7%

The other nine have a Muslim majority.

[treestar]

199. Thanks.