Showing posts with label SaudiArabia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SaudiArabia. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 20, 2012

LabourSaudiArabia: Women: The Saudiland workforce is 15% of the total, while 80% of female university graduates are unemployed

Beginning with sales work of lingerie, Saudi women progressed to jobs in health care professions and in teaching, but still compose only 15% of the workforce in Saudiland, among the lowest in the region; while unemployed women compose 80% of the university graduates in the country. But, says one labour official, "this meant that women no longer required their male guardians' approval to work.  On the job, however, they still are under a régime of strict sex segregation in many workplaces.  This is gradual, even agonizingly slow, change for women who want to use their skills to contribute to society and to have their own income, if the husband permits them to keep it.

— EconoMix, refWrite Frontpage columnist for economics, business and labour







CNN (Nov20,2k12)

Workplace battle continues for Saudi women

By Christoph Wilcke, Special to CNN
Editor’s note: Christoph Wilcke is senior researcher for Saudi Arabia at Human Rights Watch. The views expressed are his own.
Two Saudi women made Olympic history at the London Games, becoming the first female athletes from that country to participate. Back in Saudi Arabia, though, the sports ministry effectively bans girls and women from practicing sports. The government refused to approve a privately organized women’s Ramadan sporting competition, although organizers said that women participants would be modestly dressed, have their male guardians’ approval, and not mix with men – conditions the Saudi National Olympic Committee imposed for female participation in the Olympics.
Meanwhile, another battle over women’s rights has attracted little outside attention: The push to get women into the workforce, which religious conservatives are fiercely resisting. With four new Labor Ministry decrees in July, the number of jobs open to women has slowly increased, at least in theory. However, these decrees also gave conservatives a victory by reaffirming that strict sex segregation, loosened in 2005, applies to the workplace.
Saudi Arabia’s version of gender equality in Islam boils down to “different, but equal.” Women and men are  considered equal in the sum of their rights and duties, but according to a 2003 treatise by the Saudi religious scholar Dr. Rabee al-Madkhali, God endowed men and women with different rights and duties, men’s “appropriate to their manhood and their strengths and their minds and their willingness to face the dangers,” and women’s according to “what befits their femininity and vulnerability and lacking compared to men in mind, strength and vulnerability in the willingness to face the dangers and hardships.” Whereas men have a duty to provide for women, women in turn must obey their male guardians and care for house and children.
A working woman with her own income challenges that understanding of gender relations.
In the late 1990s, the Council of Senior Religious Scholars, the highest religious authority in the country, said that a woman’s place was at home, and that she should only leave the house in case of necessity.
Some things have changed since then. Women are allowed to own and operate businesses; they have even managed to do away with the male legal proxy that government offices required for female-owned businesses to handle all official interactions. Women have both been elected and appointed to the Jeddah and Dammam chambers of commerce. Since 2008, women no longer need a male guardian to stay alone in hotels.
Since assuming the throne in 2005, King Abdullah has pushed successive labor ministers to get women into the workforce, with some limited success. More than 60 percent of the kingdom’s university students are women, and since 2006, some universities have allowed women to study law. However, a plan proposed in 2009 to allow women to practice law has still not been put into effect.
Saudi women’s participation in the labor force has tripled, to close to 15 percent, over the past two decades, but is still among the lowest in the region. While most Saudi women with jobs work as teachers and in the health profession, the battle over increasing the female workforce actually began with lingerie. Conservatives opposed the king’s plan to replace foreign male sales clerks in lingerie stores with Saudi women. But in July 2011, Labor Minister Adel al-Faqih issued a decree requiring that lingerie stores be staffed only by Saudi women.
Under the decree, the shops could serve only women or families. If the shop is for women only, its windows must be covered; if serving families, they must be open.
This decree, and another issued at the same time that regulates women’s work in factories, contained an innocuous-sounding but revolutionary phrase: “Employing women in these shops does not require the permission of the Labor Ministry or any other party.” Labor officials told the media in May that this meant that women no longer required their male guardians’ approval to work.
Under the Saudi system of male guardianship, the guardians – a woman’s husband, father, brother, or even minor son – have power over their female relatives of all ages, approving or declining their travel, work, marriages, official business, or health care, almost at will.
The conservatives’ line of attack against these liberalizing measures was not about preserving guardianship power, however, but about preventing gender mixing. Muhammad al-‘Arifi, a prominent conservative cleric, warned that women shouldn’t work in places where they could mix with men, sometimes considered a crime in Saudi Arabia, where strict sex segregation still applies in most places.
Some supermarkets, like the Panda chain, had begun to employ female cashiers but were then forced to let them go under pressure from conservative clerics. Now a government agency has joined the opposition to women working. The July 2011 decrees give the Labor Ministry jurisdiction over all matters involving women’s employment. However, the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, the government morality watchdog with police powers, in June 2012 summoned a Mecca-based supermarket manager to upbraid him for employing female cashiers. The manager immediately fired the women, who had worked for less than a month.
In May, Saudi Arabia’s administrative court, the Board of Grievances, struck down the decree requiring lingerie stores to have women as clerks, on the basis that  serving of both men and women customers violated Islamic legal strictures on sex segregation.
In response, the Labor Ministry on July 18 issued four new decrees, in part to “correct some mistakes” in the application of the initial decrees that were seen as potentially leading to gender mixing. These new decrees, which apply to women’s work in clothing stores, amusement parks, food preparation, and as cashiers more explicitly spell out the business’s obligation to prevent the “mixing” of the sexes and the “prohibition of seclusion between the sexes,” referring to men and women being alone in a closed room. The decrees stipulate that women must have their own work area and rest rooms and may not interact with men, unless the men are part of their larger family group. If the enterprise also employs men, a minimum of three women must be hired.
A change in the labor law in 2005 removed strict gender segregation provisions, requiring only the more vague “compl[iance] with the dictates of Islamic law,” which leaves some room for interpretations about the exact nature of a woman’s work environment. The 2012 decrees are a step back in that they spell out and reinforce strict gender segregation in the workplace. However, this victory for conservatives has been offset by an increase in jobs now open to women.
These are baby steps, but important ones. Women’s unemployment is almost four times as high as men’s, according to government statistics. Close to 80 percent of unemployed women are university graduates, a 2010 study by Booz and Company, a global consultancy, found. The Saudi leadership is testing the waters, but the list of prohibited professions for women, from mining to construction, work in tanneries or electricity production or car repair shops, remains long.
But even with the government, religious and social hurdles, women are increasingly braving opprobrium to seek meaningful work, which is destined to challenge and perhaps ultimately undermine Saudi Arabia’s “different, but equal” façade.
Post by:
Topics: Human Rights • Middle East • Saudi Arabia • Women

Thursday, November 15, 2012

EconomicsOPEC/USA: Oil: USA will be a net oil exporter in 20 years, as well as a major consumer of petroleum products


Looking at the probability of changes 20 years from now is always risky, but the trends both economically and politically in the USA suggest that we'll be the leading oil producer globally.  Yet what chance have we of joining the big oil-producers club?

— EconoMix, refWrite Frontpage economics, business, and labour matters

Slate (Nov14,2k12)

Could the United States Join OPEC?

We’ll be a net oil exporter in 20 years.

Saudi's Oil Minister Ali al-Nuaimi, right, sits next to Oman's Oil and Gas minister Mohammad bin Hamad bin Saif al-Romhi.
Saudi's Oil Minister Ali al-Nuaimi, right, sits next to Oman's Oil and Gas minister Mohammad bin Hamad bin Saif al-Romhi at the opening session of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Oil Ministers' meeting in Doha in 2003.
Photo by Karim Jaafar/AFP/Getty Images.





















------------------


The United States will become the world’s biggest oil producer by 2020 and a net exporter of oil by 2030, according to a forecast released Monday by the International Energy Agency. Will the United State be able to join OPEC in 20 years?
Probably not. Countries seeking membership in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries must have a “substantial net export of crude petroleum” and “fundamentally similar interests” to the current members. The United States won’t satisfy the second requirement. Even if it becomes the world’s largest oil producer, the country will still be among the largest consumers of petroleum and wouldn’t be as interested in propping up the price of crude as are countries like Qatar. The United States’ membership petition would also face a significant political obstacle. Applicants must obtain the blessing of three-quarters of the existing members and all of the founding states, which include Venezuela and Iran. There’s no telling what those countries’ political conditions will be like in 20 years, but no [Hugo] Chavez- or [Mahmoud] Ahmedinejad-like governments would accept an alliance with the United States. A vote on U.S. membership might hold the potential for some significant diplomatic embarrassment, as even Saudi Arabia and Iraq could oppose American accession to OPEC.
The United States would have a hard time complying with OPEC rules, anyway. The organization influences oil prices by dictating how much crude member states produce in a given year. For countries like Saudi Arabia, which has a state-owned oil company, it’s easy enough for the government to enforce production quotas. But it has been decades since the United States had a legal mechanism to control domestic oil production.
Advertisement
Click Here
Joining OPEC also wouldn’t be in the United States’ interest. When OPEC cuts production, it affects global oil prices, not just the price of OPEC oil. (OPEC members currently produce 40 percent of world crude.) That means a country can benefit from the actions of the OPEC cartel without subjecting itself to production limits. Mexico, for example, has enjoyed inflated OPEC prices while still portraying itself to the United States as a reliable, independent producer. Russia, another OPEC abstainer, has used its vast energy resources and unfettered control over output as leverage in diplomatic relations with European countries. When China becomes the world’s largest consumer of oil, the United States might seek to leverage its oil reserves in a similar way.
At this point, the more pertinent question isn’t whether OPEC would accept a new member, but why a country would want to join. Membership means compromising national control over energy output, and it’s hard to imagine a major producer joining up in the foreseeable future. The organization has added only one new country in the past 40 years, when Angola joined in 2007. Angola probably sought membership to tighten ties with the wealthier members and signal greater independence from the United States, the largest buyer of the country’s oil. OPEC also agreed not to impose a quota on Angola for the first few years of its membership. The group has actually shrunk recently, with Gabon leaving in 1995 and Indonesia suspending its membership in 2009.
Got a question about today’s news? Ask the Explainer.
Explainer thanks Nathan Citino of Colorado State University and author of From Arab Nationalism to OPEC: Eisenhower, King Sa'ud, and the Making of U.S.-Saudi Relations, Charles Doran of the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, and Benjamin Zycher of the American Enterprise Institute.

Tuesday, April 24, 2012

JuridicsSaudiArabia: Human R+ts: Saudi activist imprisoned in Riyadh, on hunger strike

A week or so ago, the Gulf Center for Human R+ts alerted the news media to the dire straits of human r+ts defender Mohammed Albajady who has been secretly tried by Saudi Arabia and sentenced to four years in prison to be followed by a further travel ban, if he survives imprisonment, that will last another five years.



Mohammed Albajady, Saudi Arabian human r+ts defender now imprisoned


GCHR "works to strengthen support for human rights defenders and independent journalists in Bahrain, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Yemen. " I'll quote the full media statement by the Gulf Center below.

At present, the Saudi government seeks total containment of its tiny civil/political r+ts movement due to the Arab Spring, especially after the Shi'ite upraising in its vassal state, Bahrain.  Also, at the moment, the Saudi govt may seriously consider appeals from the media, non-government organizations, and individuals in its client-countries.  Countries that are customers of Saudi Arabian oil may have a bit of clout, especially Americans, due to the political opposition in the USA to further importation of Saudiland's oil products.  President Barack Obama's policy regarding the eventual disuse of Saudi oil is extremely long-term; it is further in delay mode due to the reliance on that commodity of many European states which are presently joining the USA-promoted sanctions against import of Iranian oil, sanctions which will be a boon to the market-share that may further turn to the Saudis.

But the Saudi's will note that the potential of a major human r+ts case to feed a political weapon to the American critics of the Obama-Saudi alliance.  These critics will underscore (hopefully) the ongoing failure of the Saudi régime to provide Saudi non-govt activists with basic human, civil, and political r+ts.  So refWrite calls upon Americans and all our other readers around the globe to write to the Saudi officials mentioned below, on behalf of the imprisoned Mr. Mohammed Albajady.  I propose this as a reformational political task.

— Lawt, refWrite Frontpage juridics columnist
 Beirut, 18 April, 2012 -- The Gulf Center for Human Rights (GCHR) has received information concerning the sentencing of human rights defender Mohammed Albajady in Saudi Arabia, to four years in prison followed by a five-year travel ban. The sentence was handed down following a secret trial in flagrant breach of fair procedures and in total disregard for his right to a fair trial. 
Mohammed Albajady co-founded the Saudi Civil & Political Rights Association (HSM), in October 2009. He was previously the host of a weekly on-line forum called “The citizen and his rights”. The GCHR issued an appeal on his case on 10 April 2012 (http://gc4hr.org/news/view/116). 
On 10 April 2012 the Special Criminal Court in Riyadh, established to try terrorism and security-related offences, reportedly held a secret session during which the four-year prison sentence was handed down. According to information received, soldiers in military uniforms and a representative of the governmental National Human Rights Commission attended the trial. However, neither Mohammed Albajady ‘s family nor his legal representatives were told of the court session. 
Read more ... 

Monday, February 13, 2012

PoliticsSyria: Transition: From peaceful protest to armed revolution ...

refWrite comment:  It looks like the Martin-Luther-King-style of protest, peaceful direct action, has only brawt a continuous slawter of Syrians opposed to the Alawite tyranny headed by Bashir Assad and his Baathist Party.  Finally, a rebel Free Syria Army, including increasing numbers of defectors from the regular Syrian Army, has emerged to visiblity — even in the suburbs of Damascus.  Jeremy Bowen and his Damascus team are digging up the facts "on the ground," as they say.  How much is the developing revolution, with Turkey's help but China's and Russia's resistance, following in the footsteps of the Egptian revoluttion? or the Tunian? or the Libyan? It is difficult to say, much less know, given the volatility of the situation/s in most of the Arab revolutionary states and rebellions where as yet control by the new forces is lacking, and the uniqueness of each.

What we do know of the Syrian uniqueness, Syrian exceptionalism (if you will), is its up-till-now connectedness with the Iran theocrats acting thru their allies in Lebanon, the Hesbollah Party there under Shia mullah, Nasrullah.  Insisting upon being in the governing coalition, Hezbollah has cultivated a parallel state (one m+t almost say).  Earlier Syria had cultivated it, now Syria is cultivated by it.  On the other hand, Turkey is sponsoring the Syrian Free Army, and Saudi Arabia as a good Sunni neibor which had opposed Hezbollah in Syria is now again a good Sunni neibor in Alawite-controlled Syria with its Baathist Party holding t+t to the reins of this now galloping steed.  A clan/tribe in Saudi Arabia is rushing assistance to its offshoot in sourthern Syria.

I think Syria will have its revolution, and Assad's tyrannous regime will be overthrown.  And from a long-term perspective I and refWrite can support it; what must come, must come.  But in the shorter term, it's provably most l+kly that the present tyranny of the minority will be replaced Egypt-style by a tyranny of the majority, most l+ly again a Sunni majority — or an alliance of Sunni and Shia l+n'd up against a minority consisting of Alawites, Christians, with splinters from the other main forces as well as secularists who want all sorts of religiously-motivated power configurations out of the way in the country's politics of the future.

Most distressing to me, is the report below carrying the sentence:  Assad "can still can count on most of the Alawite community he comes from - also on many Christians - and significant numbers of Druze and Kurds. "  But this was Assad's and his father's strategy all along — with %10 of the population belonging to the Alawite Muslim clans/tribes, and %10 of the population being Christians whose communities go back to the t+m of Saint Paul's mission to Damascus, to which total %20 was augmented by the communities of the Druze and the Kurds,  it only remained for the Alawite-dominated coalition to win to itself factions from the Sunnis and Shia.  The Shia as mentioned, already had linkages to Assad thru the Shi'ite Hezbollah in Lebanon, financed by the Shia mullocracy in Iran.  In this the Christians woud be ent+rly on the wrong s+d, except that some apparently are clearly on the s+d of the Syrian revolution, or woud l+k to be.  Hopefully, the revolution will turn nonsectarian tho united against Assad's Alawite Baathists; hopefully, the revolutionary forces will not freeze out the Christians, Druze, Kurds, and even some Shia, but instead welcome them.


— Politicarp, refWrite Frontpage political columnist


general editor, refWrite Frontpage





Syria rebels gain foothold 

in Damascus



Watch Jeremy Bowen's video reports from Syria over the past 10 days
When the BBC team approached a checkpoint set up by the rebel Free Syria Army in the suburbs of Damascus, masked men with Kalashnikov assault rifles and hand grenades moved towards us - a few of them offering dates and biscuits.
It is customary to give mourners something sweet, and a funeral was about to start that they said they were protecting.
I had no idea before I saw them with my own eyes that the Free Syria Army was so active in and around Damascus.
Read more ... click the t+m stamp below ...


The first time, in a small town called Zabadani, about half an hour from Damascus, it took a while for my brain to catch up with what I was seeing.
We went in there with an official from the ministry of information, who got us through the army cordon that surrounded the town.

“Start Quote

The Free Syria Army were only 30 minutes from the presidential palace in Damascus”
A truce had been negotiated with the Free Syria Army - the first time that the Assad regime had properly acknowledged that the loose groups of ill-equipped defectors from its own forces were at all significant.
Even so, when a man who said he was an anti-government activist walked up to us and offered to take us to see the rebel fighters, I couldn't believe my ears.
I thought he was some sort of regime stooge and was playing an elaborate trick. I hadn't realised that the army had pulled out of the town.
Our minder said later that he was horrified, and scared to see the rebel fighters close up, but he hid it so well that I thought he had organised some sort of hoax to discredit the BBC's reporting.
How wrong can you be? It was all real. The Free Syria Army were only 30 minutes from the presidential palace in Damascus.
Since then, I have seen their men in significant numbers inside Damascus itself. They are treated as heroes in the places they have appeared.
It is not exactly clear how long they have been out in the open, setting up roadblocks and building firing positions here in Damascus - but as far as I can tell, it is only the last week or two.
Losing ground
It took 10 months to get a visa to visit Syria for 10 days. Even though I thought I knew the country pretty well - I was a regular visitor before the uprising started last March and I've interviewed the president a couple of times - this trip has been full of surprises.
It has been hard to get out to report freely. But it has been possible, if occasionally hair-raising, and after 10 days I have a much better idea about what is happening.


First of all, it is not a matter of the regime against the rest. President Assad has significant support.
It is probably being eroded by the tide of blood, but he can still can count on most of the Alawite community he comes from - also on many Christians - and significant numbers of Druze and Kurds.
That could be as much as 40% of the population. The Alawites support him because of who he is.
The others believe he will safeguard minorities in a way that the mainly Sunni Muslims in the opposition and the free army would not.
What is also clear is that President Assad is losing ground in and around the capital. The poor Sunni suburbs - grim, poor tangles of concrete - are harbouring the free army.
They are not a match for the president's forces yet. But they are getting stronger.
Dark days ahead
The regime, and the people who want it overthrown, view what is happening here as a fight to the finish. For both sides, it is winner take all.
The fact that the country is splitting along confessional lines is dangerous. In Lebanon, next door, they had a sectarian civil war that pretty much destroyed the country.


In Syria it is not a war yet, but it is starting to look like one. Homs, the centre of the uprising in the north, is paralysed and battered. Deraa, where it started in the south, feels as if it is being patrolled by an occupying army.
There are questions I cannot answer. How much force does the regime hold in reserve? Will the president face a palace coup, perhaps from an Alawite general fearful that Mr Assad's stand will destroy their whole community? And will foreigners intervene decisively, as they did in Libya?
I cannot see how, in the long term, the regime can survive an uprising started by people who are so determined that they demonstrate even when they might get killed. But it will not go quietly.
Everyone I have spoken to here believes the worst days still lie ahead.