At midnight, Riyadh erupts in cheers for a woman in car

Agencies
June 24, 2018

Riyadh, Jun 24: Every few metres someone -- a newlywed couple, a group of young girls with balloons -- stops Samar Almogren to cheer her on or flash her a thumbs-up.

It's midnight in Riyadh, and she's making her way across the city she was born and raised in, finally in the driver's seat of her own car.

Saudi Arabia's notorious ban on women driving ended today. After drinking tea and counting down the minutes, at midnight, Samar -- a TV anchor and mother-of-three -- went upstairs to kiss her four-year-old son Salloum goodnight.

She then put on a flowing white abaya, strode out of her front door, accompanied by her best friend, and walked towards a white GMC parked outside her house in the Narjiss neighbourhood in northern Riyadh.

Across the street, her neighbour had just arrived home with two bags of groceries. He paused, placed his shopping on the hood of his car, and watched her closely.

In her cateye glasses, wedge sandals and nose ring, she did not skip a beat. She smiled, climbed in, started the ignition and pulled out of her parking spot.

"I have goosebumps," she says as she turns onto the King Fahd highway, the main road in the Saudi capital.

She drives in silence for a few minutes, glancing up at the moon, then adds: "I never in my life imagined I would be driving here. On this road. Driving."

The question of whether Saudi Arabian society is "ready" for women to drive has been hotly debated in the kingdom.

In 2013, Sheikh Saleh al-Luhaidan, a notable Saudi cleric, announced driving could damage a woman's ovaries and push the pelvis up, thus leading to birth defects.

Resistance to the end of the driving ban still resonates across some segments of society, with songs titled "You will not drive" and "No woman no drive" popping up on social media in recent weeks.

But as she drives across Riyadh, men and women stopped Samar's SUV to congratulate her and voice their support.

A group of men in their 20s, waiting for the police assessment of a minor accident, spot Samar driving by. They smile and cheer. The policeman, too, looks up and smiles.

A man in a suit, smoking on a sidewalk, applauds her loudly. A young couple walking hand-in-hand -- him in a t-shirt and jeans, her in head-to-toe black abaya and niqab -- stop to flash her a thumbs-up and a victory sign.

"I'm proud, proud, proud," says one man driving by the scene. "It feels like a holiday".

"This is the society they say is not ready for women to drive," Samar says, visibly moved.

Samar, whose youngest son was born with Down's syndrome, has already decided where she will drive the next day.

"My first trip, tomorrow, is to take Salloumi to my mother's house," she says. "And then to take my mother wherever she wants."

For many, the end of Saudi Arabia's driving ban for women is a welcome step, but far from enough in a country that still has a guardianship system in 2018.

Under the system, women need the permission of their closest male relative -- husband, father, brother or even son -- for most facets of life, including travelling, enrolling in school and in certain cases receiving medical attention.

Samar says she is fully aware that her newfound freedom to drive was not the fruit of activists who have long fought Saudi Arabia's repressive gender policies -- some of whom were arrested just this month.

Decades of campaigning by activists failed to achieve what one stroke of the king's pen ended in a royal decree signed last year.

"This was a political decision," she says.

But the will for women to drive in Saudi Arabia -- like the will to dismantle the guardianship system -- goes back nearly two decades.

On November 6, 1990, 47 women drove themselves through the streets of Riyadh in an act of protest against, and in defiance of, the ban, stopping only when they were arrested.

Some lost their jobs. Others lost the support of their families. What was not lost was their cause.

One of the women, Faiza al-Bakr, now works with Samar at the national paper where she runs a twice-weekly column.

"It was them," Samar says of Bakr and the 46 others. "They're the ones who started it all for us. They're the ones who cut the yellow tape."

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 3,2020

Mar 3: Just hours after the ending of a week-long “reduction” in violence that was crucial for Donald Trump’s peace deal in Afghanistan, the Taliban struck again: On Monday, they killed three people and injured about a dozen at a football match in Khost province. This resumption of violence will not surprise anyone actually invested in peace for that troubled country. The point of the U.S.-Taliban deal was never peace. It was to try and cover up an ignominious exit for the U.S., driven by an election-bound president who feels no responsibility toward that country or to the broader region.

Seen from South Asia, every point we know about in the agreement is a concession by Trump to the Taliban. Most importantly, it completes a long-term effort by the U.S. to delegitimize the elected government in Kabul — and, by extension, Afghanistan’s constitution. Afghanistan’s president is already balking at releasing 5,000 Taliban prisoners before intra-Afghan talks can begin — a provision that his government did not approve.

One particularly cringe-worthy aspect: The agreement refers to the Taliban throughout  as “the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan that is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban.” This unwieldy nomenclature validates the Taliban’s claim to be a government equivalent to the one in Kabul, just not the one recognised at the moment by the U.S. When read together with the second part of the agreement, which binds the U.S. to not “intervene in [Afghanistan’s] domestic affairs,” the point is obvious: The Taliban is not interested in peace, but in ensuring that support for its rivals is forbidden, and its path to Kabul is cleared.

All that the U.S. has effectively gotten in return is the Taliban’s assurance that it will not allow the soil of Afghanistan to be used against the “U.S. and its allies.” True, the U.S. under Trump has shown a disturbing willingness to trust solemn assurances from autocrats; but its apparent belief in promises made by a murderous theocratic movement is even more ridiculous. Especially as the Taliban made much the same promise to an Assistant Secretary of State about Osama bin Laden while he was in the country plotting 9/11.

Nobody in the region is pleased with this agreement except for the Taliban and their backers in the Pakistani military. India has consistently held that the legitimate government in Kabul must be the basic anchor of any peace plan. Ordinary Afghans, unsurprisingly, long for peace — but they are, by all accounts, deeply skeptical about how this deal will get them there. The brave activists of the Afghan Women’s Network are worried that intra-Afghan talks will take place without adequate representation of the country’s women — who have, after all, the most to lose from a return to Taliban rule.

But the Pakistani military establishment is not hiding its glee. One retired general tweeted: “Big victory for Afghan Taliban as historic accord signed… Forced Americans to negotiate an accord from the position of parity. Setback for India.” Pakistan’s army, the Taliban’s biggest backer, longs to re-install a friendly Islamist regime in Kabul — and it has correctly estimated that, after being abandoned by Trump, the Afghan government will have sharply reduced bargaining power in any intra-Afghan peace talks. A deal with the Taliban that fails also to include its backers in the Pakistani military is meaningless.

India, meanwhile, will not see this deal as a positive for regional peace or its relationship with the U.S. It comes barely a week after Trump’s India visit, which made it painfully clear that shared strategic concerns are the only thing keeping the countries together. New Delhi remembers that India is not, on paper, a U.S. “ally.” In that respect, an intensification of terrorism targeting India, as happened the last time the U.S. withdrew from the region, would not even be a violation of Trump’s agreement. One possible outcome: Over time the government in New Delhi, which has resolutely sought to keep its ties with Kabul primarily political, may have to step up security cooperation. Nobody knows where that would lead.

The irresponsible concessions made by the U.S. in this agreement will likely disrupt South Asia for years to come, and endanger its own relationship with India going forward. But worst of all, this deal abandons those in Afghanistan who, under the shadow of war, tried to develop, for the first time, institutions that work for all Afghans. No amount of sanctimony about “ending America’s longest war” should obscure the danger and immorality of this sort of exit.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 12,2020

New Delhi, May 12: A total of 12 special evacuation flights from across the globe will bring home stranded Indians on the sixth day of 'Vande Bharat Mission' on Tuesday.

The special flights include Air India flight from Manila to Ahmedabad, London to Hyderabad, Newark-Mumbai-Ahmedabad, AI flight from Singapore to Delhi, AI flight from Dhaka to Srinagar, Dammam to Kochi, Kuala Lumpur to Mumbai, Manila to Delhi, Muscat to Chennai, Dubai to Kannur, Dubai to Mangalore and Singapore-Bengaluru-Kochi.

Amidst the coronavirus pandemic, India is conducting 'Vande Bharat' Mission -- its biggest ever repatriation exercise since independence -- to bring back stranded Indians from abroad, including from the US, the UAE and the UK.

On the fifth day of Vande Bharat Mission, as many as 1,667 Indian nationals were repatriated from different countries in eight special flights.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
May 22,2020

Riyadh, May 22: The family of murdered Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi on Friday said that they forgave his killers. Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, who had written columns critical of Saudi Arabia, was brutally killed in October 2018, allegedly at the behest of Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman.

“In this blessed night of the blessed month [of Ramadan] we remember God’s saying: If a person forgives and makes reconciliation, his reward is due from Allah,” Jamal Khashoggi’s son Salah Khashoggi said in a tweet. “Therefore, we the sons of the Martyr Jamal Khashoggi announce that we pardon those who killed our father, seeking reward [from] God almighty.”

The legal outcome of this announcement is not yet clear. Earlier, Salah Khashoggi said he had “full confidence” in the judicial system, and that the accused were trying to exploit the case.

Jamal Khashoggi’s body was said to have been dismembered inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and disposed of elsewhere, but his remains were never found.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.