forced marriage – USA Gov Policy

An EMS worker in Bronx, New York recently informed the New York Analysis of Policy & Government that he been driving his ambulance to the scene of suicide attempts by young women in neighborhoods with recent Moslem immigrants, who seek to kill themselves rather than submit to forced marriages.

The problem appears to be growing quickly, but little is being said or done about it, and government and social welfare organizations appear to be unprepared to deal with it. The National Organization for Women, NOW, does not even mention the issue on its website.

A report by Aljazeera notes “While forced marriage may sound like the concept of arranged marriage — with parents playing matchmaker for their children — the element of coercion when a marriage is forced often leaves women feeling ‘like slaves,’ according to Tanya McLeod, senior campaign organizer at the Voices of Women Organizing Project (VOW), an organization dedicating to providing help and resources to victims of domestic violence in New York… In June 2012 the United Kingdom announced it would criminalize forced marriage, following the lead of Norway, Denmark, Austria, Germany, Belgium, Cyprus and Malta. In 2012 alone, the U.K. Forced Marriage Unit noted 1,485 cases related to possible forced marriage. Curtis said that current research only scratches the surface of a problem he suspects is more widespread but largely hidden from public view…. the fact that forced marriage falls outside the scope of New York and federal laws makes the issue hard to define and prosecute.”

PDE 5 inhibiting hence provide penile erection in just about 30-45 minutes. levitra cialis viagra can provide appropriate erection on full sexual confidence for a moment frame of four to six hours after it becomes active, which is more than sufficient to engage in fulfilling sexual intercourse. You need to consume one Shilajit ES capsule daily two times for three to four months to produce more seminal fluid naturally and the quality sperm count naturally. sildenafil in canada Otherwise, your ability to get an erection order levitra online may be compromised. This shall be outdated since you will have all the solutions you need to make your sexual life interesting. generic viagra buy The AHA Foundation, a non-profit founded by women’s rights activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali, estimates that “1,500 individuals, most of them girls and women, are forced into a marriage in the US – every year. And the law on this harmful practice is still predominantly silent: the vast majority of states in the US do not forbid forced marriage. Only 10 states and territories have stood up and made forced marriage illegal. It is also shocking that according to Unchained at Last, marriage records show that tens of thousands of children, as young as 12, were married in the US in the last decade. All that is needed to marry off an underage girl in the majority of states is her parents’ or judicial approval…Marriage records in New Jersey show that more than 160 minors between the ages of 13 and 15 were married off in this state alone from 1995 to 2015. Nearly all were girls, the majority married to older men.”

A study by the Tahirih Justice Center reports that forced marriage is a problem in the united states, “with as many as 3,000 known and suspected cases identified by survey respondents in just the last two years. The fact that potentially thousands of young women and girls from immigrant communities may face forced marriages each year in the United States is alarming and demands attention. Just as alarming: community-based service providers working on the frontlines are struggling with how to recognize and handle forced marriage cases, and how to offer a lifeline to an individual who may have only one chance to reach out for help. Other key findings from Tahirih’s survey include: Forced marriage is being seen in immigrant communities from 56 different countries… Two out of three respondents (67%) felt that there were cases of forced marriage not being identified in the populations with which they work—this finding suggests a significant population of ‘hidden victims’ beyond the potentially 3000 cases identified through Tahirih’s survey. Less than 10% of respondents said they had a working definition of forced marriage at their agency, and less than a quarter of respondents (22%) said their agency’s screening and referral process enabled them to identify cases where forced marriage may be of concern…Less than one in five respondents (16%) said that their agency was properly equipped to help individuals facing forced marriage. Almost half of respondents (46%) who provided information on particular tactics used against victims reported that victims had been subjected to actual physical violence. 13 respondents also reported murder attempts among the forced marriage cases they encountered, and 1 respondent reported an actual murder. 42 respondents reported that they had encountered forced marriage victims who had contemplated or attempted suicide. These and other survey findings suggest that we are seeing just the tip of the iceberg on this problem—that thousands of individuals in the United States may be threatened with forced marriage each year, and yet at present, victims have little hope of finding the protection and assistance they need.”

A petition has been posted on the Change.org site, urging that the U.S. adopt a strategic and national action plan to combat forced marriage.

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.