Women of Iraq need change now

First Lady Laura Bush traveled to Afghanistan in March to highlight women’s rights in that country after the ouster of the Taliban regime.

“We want to encourage them to send their girls to school to get educated,” she said. “We are very, very interested in their well-being and then, of course, in the broader Middle East as well. I think it is a message to them that the United States stands with people who are building their democracies.”

The clock is ticking on the women of Iraq as that country tries to reach a Monday deadline for writing a governing constitution. Under ruling monarchies and even the corrupt, brutal dictatorship of Saddam Hussein, Iraq had the most liberal laws among Arab nations for women’s rights. Iraq was the first Arab nation to allow women to vote.

But one of the unintended consequences of the U.S. invasion is that religious laws that were repressed by Saddam are now repressing Iraqi women. It would be embarrassing for the United States and unjust for the women of Iraq, if the ouster of Saddam turned the clock back 50 years for one-half of Iraq’s citizens.

The Shiite majority on the committee drafting the constitution wants Islam to be the sole source of legislation in the country. If that happens, some women fear they will be treated as they are in Iran, Saudi Arabia and other theocracies.

For instance, Islamic law allows for polygamy and arranged marriages. Divorced women may be denied custody of their children. Inheritance laws award less to women. Women are required to wear headscarves, even if they are Christian.

There are competing constitutional provisions that make Islam one of the sources of legislation or not at all. The United States is throwing its influence behind these more liberal proposals because it does not want the nation to become another Iran. But U.S. leaders also are pressing drafters to finish their work on time.

The best time to address the issue of women’s rights in Iraq – and all of the other issues that are hanging up the process – is now. If that means busting the Monday deadline, so be it.

Our founding fathers felt they couldn’t resolve slavery and complete a constitution the states would ratify, so they pushed the issue aside. The principle of equality was contradicted by the fact that blacks were counted as three-fifths of a person when it came to apportioning congressional seats. Eventually, civil war broke out.

It’s wishful thinking to believe that a constitution can be produced now and that women’s rights can be dealt with later. The United States should stand with those who are trying to build a democracy the right way.