Helen Coskeran

Iranian women are a force to be reckoned with. Their various campaign groups, such as the One Million Signatures Campaign, are going strong and there are success stories which show the strength of their cause. Perhaps as a result, two disputed articles proposing a relaxation of the polygamy laws and discriminating against women who marry foreigners in the Iranian 'Family Protection Bill' have now been scrapped by the government. And rightly so. Those groups, aided by the involvement of high-profile figures like Shirin Ebadi, who have voiced concern about the bill, must be encouraged by this. So let's hope this brave, united and ongoing pressure on the government will encourage the removal of the remaining contentious articles and help to create a Family Protection Bill that does protect the family...

Helen Coskeran

This September marks the fourth anniversary of the establishment of the Control Arms Foundation of India (CAFI). But they'll not be celebrating that this Saturday. Along with other organisations concerned with arms (including the UK's Campaign Against the Arms Trade), they will be marking the Global Day of Action for Arms Trade Treaty in New Delhi. This is to demonstrate their belief that international law and UN legislation is not enough to control global arms trade. In 1995, a group of Nobel Peace Laureates developed a model Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) in order to regulate and standardise this trade. This Saturday, these organisations will push for this model to be adopted and for the recommendations in it (including a requirement for states to consider human rights and humanitarian concerns when transferring arms) to be put into practice.

CAFI believes that women have largely been left out of the international arms debates until now and should now take the lead in discussions. For this reason, women from all walks of life, among them survivors of incidents involving guns and other arms, will speak alongside men this Saturday. Members of CAFI will speak on the progress of their work to date and members of parliament, academics and journalists will give speeches and lead interactive debate and discussion with students, faith leaders, policy-makers and members of civil society.

It is fantastic to see members of a civil society organisation working together on this issue. And it is no wonder, for twelve people die through guns violence on a daily basis. India has also been shocked by a recent spate of school shootings - a horror previously associated with Western countries. One example of the action taken against arms violence was a ‘Day of Activism against Increasing Armed Gun Violence on Women in India' showing the gendered dimension of this violence; the highest number of war-time gun casualties are among women and children, and the North East India conflicts have also seen women as the most seriously affected victims - not only because some have been shot dead, but also the economic and social effects on women when their husbands, sons or brothers are shot. But it is tragic that this has become such a problem in the largest democracy in the world which, since 2007, is the globe's second most heavily armed country. Earlier this year, the founder of CAFI, Binalakshami Nepram spoke at a session on ‘The Impact of Guns on Women's Lives' and told of CAFI's demands that women in an Indian household must first consent to the purchase of a gun by their husbands, fathers or any other man. The idea is that, by giving women a say in the guns held under their own roofs (and assuming that their consent will not always be forthcoming), the flow of firearms into private hands will be reduced.

This work is positive. But that it is necessary almost defies belief. How can it be that the UN's first attempt at controlling arms trade ever, did not take place until 2001? How can it be that Binalakshami had to dedicate her speech to as many as 5000 female victims of gun violence in Manipur, where the annual death toll has now reached 300? There is a long way to go. And events like this Saturday's show the excellent work being done in increasing awareness and taking each small step towards an Arms Trade Treaty.

Helen Coskeran

It sometimes seems that human violence knows no bounds. Recent reports of the brutal honour killings of five Pakistani women have shocked the world. And the reactions from the Pakistani parliament do not do much to ease that shock. When a terrible event occurs, the world looks for explanations in order to begin to deal with it. And even then the shock, horror and disgust will remain, for this is a crime we will never be able to understand.

Honour killings have been a concern to human rights groups for several years. All these deaths are disturbing but these had a particularly cruel twist, with the woman being buried alive. Such inhumanity and disregard for human life suggests that the perpetrators felt these women did something terrible to deserve this punishment.

Their crime? Doing what women all over the world do every day; choosing their own husband to marry through a civil court, away from the traditions of their tribe. The tribal elders then ordered the abduction and shooting of these three teenagers and their two female relatives, who were then sent alive to their graves. And while a female politician attempted to bring the case to the government's attention, another spoke up in defence of the tribal chiefs who ordered it.

The mind boggles and the heart sinks. How could this be defended? And who would expect that the words to justify and explain this would come from a member of parliament? Pakistani teenage girls have long known that choosing independence could cost them their lives. And now they face the knowledge that their killers may be spoken up for at the highest level. Their families will be rendered helpless.

But we must not lose heart. If politicians in Pakistan and other countries where honour killings are practiced, are forced by their own electorate and the west to stop explaining these away simply as ‘tradition', then these women can be given hope, and these shockingly brutal deaths will not have been in vain.

Helen Coskeran

Today’s globally aware digital generation is used to constant requests to sign online petitions on various issues of international concern. Sceptics aren’t sure how much good those few mouse clicks do – do those signing even know exactly what they’re signing for? Would other types of action, like demonstrations, be more effective in raising awareness for a particular cause? We’re all guilty of skipping the small print and preferring the comfort of our own laptops now and again.

Also in openDemocracy on the One Million Signatures campaign:

Roja Bandari, NWI Blog (May-June 2007)

Elahe Amani, “A rare victory for women’s rights in Iran” (28 March 2008)

But the One Million Signature Campaign is a far cry from these online drives for mouse clicks. It does not have the usual time limit, but the signatures it seeks are very specific: Iran’s women and men. This petition is not for Westerners but for those directly affected by the discriminatory family laws it works to change. And there is no running total on the website of the amount of signatures collected. Given the difficulty in collecting some written petitions, the organisers felt it would be unrepresentative to reveal the running total after one year.

And as the campaign approaches its second birthday on 27 August, the total is still unknown, but their work goes on. There is plenty of it. Whether a woman signs the petition or not, she is given information about the implications of Iranian family law on her individual situation. To date, over 1000 campaigners have been trained in educating others and collecting their signatures. And all this is not without risk. Activist after campaigner has been arrested or imprisoned for his or her part in the fight against laws which reduce women’s rights to divorce, limit freedom of expression, reduce restrictions on polygamy and divorce for men, give automatic custody to a father after divorce and even demand taxes on dowries, the one safety net for women considering divorce. And yes, you read that correctly – his or her part. Men who sympathise with and work for this cause are also being imprisoned; no one is safe.

But the campaigners are not giving up. Their website is blocked by authorities; they start another. Peaceful protests are broken up using violence and arrests; they organise another two years later. These women and men are truly an inspiration. They continue to work in the face of adversity, overcoming threats and challenges and persisting in their original aim to reach a million signatures and adding new aims along the way. And we in the West cannot email our MP, we cannot sort this one out with a few mouse clicks. We can only watch in awe and voice our solidarity with these brave people who will not let legislation violate their human rights. Happy birthday, One Million, and here’s to plenty more years of courage, education and progress.

Helen Coskeran

The attention of the international media to the Tibetan issue is set to continue for some time. But a part of the Chinese media and internet community has been sidetracked by a 21-year-old philosophy student in Hong Kong whom they have christened “Tibet Independence Girl”. Tibet Independence Girl (aka Christina Han Chau-man) was one of nine protestors arrested in China for wrapping a Tibetan flag around herself during the Olympic torch relay and has now sprung to internet fame – for all the wrong reasons.

Helen Coskeran

I have to agree with the BBC’s Kevin Connolly that Hillary Clinton’s ‘die-hard battling’ in West Virginia is something you can’t help but admire. However, I disagree with his speculations on the source of Clinton’s determination to stay in a race she is apparently losing. He offers three reasons for this hardcore campaigning where many would have given up long ago. A quick comment on each of these suggests there must be something more to it.

Helen Coskeran

Like many forms of modern technology, mobile phones can be both a useful tool and an unwieldy new weapon. The recording feature on mobile phones is a novelty which has yet to wear off. Just last summer, an Australian man was arrested for piracy after he recorded a whole film at the cinema with his. On the positive side, it has led to a crackdown on police violence and other crimes which can now be recorded at the push of a button. The threat of being so easily and imperceptibly caught on film can act as a deterrent.

Helen Coskeran

The Democratic presidential candidate race has not only torn the party in two but is increasingly highlighting weaknesses on both sides. A strident aspect to Hilary Clinton’s foreign policy appeared today, painting Barack Obama in the more mature light. When asked how she would respond to an Iranian attack on Israel, Clinton shockingly promised to "obliterate" Iran were she president. As Obama rightfully pointed out, using words such as "obliterate" "doesn’t produce good results". Not to be outdone, however, he did manage to add that he would deal with Iran ‘forcefully’ – let there be no fear of that.