Two-thousand and nine is a year for some important global anniversaries: #40 for the Apollo moon landing, #20 for the fall of the Berlin Wall, and #30 for the United Nations' adoption of CEDAW. Unfortunately, while most Americans are familiar with the first two, they probably have no idea what "CEDAW" stands for.
"CEDAW" stands for the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. It is the only human rights treaty in history that, if fully ratified and enforced, would ensure the civil, reproductive, and social rights of women all around the world. Its ultimate goal is to obtain complete legal and political rights, healthcare, and social justice for all women -particularly those areas in which they are seen and treated as second class citizens.
The need for such a treaty ought to be obvious. Women's rights have been set on the world's backburner for too long, especially in countries in Africa and the Middle East. Despite much progress, there is still a great deal of violence against women in the name of religion and tradition in many parts of the world. This violence includes the forced abortions and sterilization of women in China, and nearly no personal independence for women in Saudi Arabia and other fundamentalist Muslim nations.
However, these are far from the only reasons for CEDAW. As the experts at the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) argue persuasively, there is a need for application of the treaty in numerous areas, including education, healthcare, public safety, paid and unpaid work, corporate and military practices, housing, environmental policy, and childcare; the prime reason for this treaty is to promote and assure basic human rights, not to force them on anyone.
At this point, only a small handful of countries around the world have failed to ratify the treaty. They include Sudan, Qatar, Iran…and the United States. Wait, what's the deal here?
As happens with so many good ideas these days, the treaty has stirred up a great deal of controversy with members of the conservative right. According to far right groups like the Heritage Foundation, for instance, U. S. ratification would give too much power to the international community, and federal law would somehow be superseded by the treaty.
The fact is, however, that the treaty complies fully with our domestic laws and the Constitution. As has been patiently explained by experts at the American Bar Association, if differences between the two ever arose, the treaty outlines the steps to promote the importance of nondiscrimination. No international government is going to force the U.S. to do anything.
Furthermore, as a practical matter, the United States would have much more international credibility as a defender of women's rights. We currently do not have much room to criticize other countries in that realm because we have not stepped up to the plate of women's rights.
Another boogeyman that has reared its ugly head repeatedly is the contention that CEDAW will somehow destroy the "traditional family structure" and reassign gender roles within America's families. What this ignores is that the privacy of family life is protected by the U.S. Constitution. All the treaty seeks to do is to ensure that women are not forced into a narrow version of domestic life (i.e. the tiny sphere of nurturer and homemaker) against their will.
Yet another right-wing complaint is that CEDAW somehow promotes abortion because it supports access to "family planning" resources. However, CEDAW doesn't once mention abortion rights, and countries where abortion is illegal (such as Ireland and Rwanda) have long since ratified the treaty.
Unfortunately, however strained or inaccurate the right's arguments, they have been successful in capturing the public's attention. For many years, former Senator Jesse Helms helped block U.S. Senate ratification and today, many years after his departure from the scene, the treaty remains stalled. This ought to be an embarrassment to the nation that likes to think of itself as the beacon of freedom in the world.
Ultimately, it seems that most CEDAW opponents see themselves as defenders of "tradition." They claim that patriarchal tyranny is God's "command."Such claims, however, ought to be dismissed for what they are: a façade designed to hide fear, uncertainty, and a blatant refusal to move forward and accept that the world's gender roles have evolved.
In short, for most people of the planet, the old, burned-out story of how God wants women under men in the hierarchy is a tired tale that no longer makes any sense. Let's hope that 2009, the 30th anniversary of CEDAW, is the year that America finally and formally acknowledges this reality.
Anna Boyer is a Public Policy Intern at N.C. Policy Watch and a rising sophomore at Salem College in Winston-Salem
