|
THE
INDEPENDENT, Letters
Sir: Anne McElvoy's dismissal of antiwar sentiments hides the fact that the majority against the war are women, who welcome the Liberal Democrat MP Jenny Tong's call for groceries instead of bombs (`Against the war? So what would your alternative be?", 26 September). Women know all too well the connection between poverty, starvation, war and other desperate measures. Women do two thirds of the world's work, mostly
unwaged, and after every disaster, death, destruction and brutalisation
it's women who help people recover and rebuild their lives. But because
this work is unwaged and invisible our voices .are largely ignored. Women
and children are also 90 per cent of those killed or wounded in armed
conflicts, and 80 percent of refugees worldwide. Mothers everywhere
struggle to raise children only to see them slaughtered as cannon fodder. The demand that the $800bn spent worldwide on military
budgets be redirected into women's and children's hands is growing. Bush
got $40bn for a "war on terrorism", on top of $500bn already
committed to Star Wars. Why not allocate the $40bn to women and children,
beginning in Afghanistan? This would prevent the destruction of more
innocent lives and strengthen women's opposition to the Taliban. Ms McElvoy asks, "What would you do?" Stop
war, poverty and starvation by putting military budgets into women's and
children's hands. KAY CHAPMAN
|
THE GUARDIAN, Letters
Bush got $40bn for a "war on terrorism", on
top of $500bn already committed to Star Wars. But just $80bn would provide
everyone with the essentials of life. Instead of bombing a, country seeded
with tom landmines, where 5m people face starvation, why not allocate the
$40 billion to women and children, beginning in Afghanistan? Kay Chapman Wages for Housework Campaign, London
|