Watch U.S. rhetoric, policy on women

Stefanie E. Nanes is an associate professor of political science at Hofstra University who focuses on the politics of the Middle East.

On Tuesday, the United States celebrated the 100th anniversary of International Women's Day by granting awards to 10 remarkable women, in a ceremony presided over by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and first lady Michelle Obama.

In her speech granting the International Women of Courage Awards -- for work including fighting drug cartels in Mexico and sexual harassment in China, and advocating for women's access to education in Pakistan -- Clinton announced that the United States intends to make women's empowerment a policy priority. She also congratulated Middle Eastern women for their activism in recent weeks, noting that the United States and the world would be watching Tunisia and Egypt to ensure that women take their rightful place at the table in remaking their countries' political systems and futures.

Clinton's statements reflect a point of view that has become a mantra of sorts in policy circles: that improving women's political, economic and social rights benefits society in all sorts of positive ways. In a profile of the secretary of state published in last week's Newsweek, Clinton asserts that the empowerment of women is not only a moral issue, but also a security issue. Extremist forces, she argues, are more likely to emerge and pose a security challenge in places where women are disempowered.

While there is good evidence that what's good for women is indeed good for society, it remains an open question whether external pressure, rhetorical or otherwise, is the best way to achieve that progress. You can agree with that basic premise, but still harbor concerns about how Clinton's comments will be received in the Arab world.

First, the United States might not always be in the best position to lecture other countries about women's rights. We've never had a woman in our top elected position (a situation of which, of course, Clinton is all too familiar) while at least a few countries in the Muslim world have had female executives, including Turkey, Pakistan and Indonesia. Women in the United States still suffer from employment discrimination (ask Lilly Ledbetter, who was paid substantially less than her male peers for years as a supervisor at Goodyear Tire and Rubber) and from higher rates of poverty than men. Their reproductive freedom is threatened in some places. The United States could honor International Women's Day by passing some pro-woman legislation.

What's more, calls from the United States for women's rights as human rights may ring a bit hollow in a region historically accustomed to witnessing U.S. support of repressive regimes or experiencing the direct effects of U.S. military occupation.

With the recent events in Egypt, Americans are more aware than ever of the gap between U.S. rhetoric supporting democracy and an actual policy of financial largesse to dictators. Finally, unwavering support for Israel as Israel expands its settlements in the West Bank also causes many Arabs who are sympathetic to the Palestinian cause to be wary of U.S. statements about human rights in their region.

But beyond the historic mismatch between U.S. rhetoric and policy, the most important problem is that calls from the United States on behalf of women's rights may run the serious risk of discrediting the very women and organizations that the administration wishes to support.

When there is the perception of heavy external interference, the struggle for women's rights comes to be seen as a "foreign implant," rather than the authentic expression of women's demands. In 1999, for example, a group of Jordanian citizens campaigned to repeal the law that exempts men who commit honor crimes from penalty. In an honor crime, men kill female relatives who have besmirched the family honor by engaging in, or being suspected of engaging in, sexual practices outside of marriage. In response to the campaign, the leader of Jordan's main Islamist party argued that women's issues were used by the West against Arabs and Muslims, "pushing Arab women to abandon their honor and values and start acting like animals."

Accusations like these ignore history; vibrant women's movements have emerged as active participants in national struggles for independence in most countries in the region. But the charge is still widely used to attack anyone seeking to challenge the status quo between men and women.

On the same day that Clinton gave her speech, Egyptian women held their own celebration of International Women's Day. They organized a demonstration in Tahrir Square to demand a greater role for women in the political system, buoyed by the political enthusiasm that is coursing through all of Egypt these days and their concern that women might get left behind. These concerns are warranted. The committee charged with rewriting Egypt's constitution contains neither a single woman nor any member with a known sensitivity to women's issues.

This omission, one that Clinton justifiably noted, is extremely troubling in light of Egypt's personal status laws, which reserve virtually all power to men and male relatives in questions of marriage, divorce and child custody. The women in Tahrir Square, peacefully demonstrating on behalf of their rights, were physically attacked by scores of men who accused them of working for a foreign agenda. Only shots fired into the air by the military dispersed the attackers.

Indeed, there will be a struggle over women's rights in Tunisia, Egypt and any Arab country that follows their lead. And it is worth keeping in mind that just as we have conservatives over here, there are conservatives over there as well. Many Arab citizens -- including some women -- may prefer the status quo or even seek to move in a more restrictive direction. Women themselves are divided on what kind of political change there should be and what role religion should play in the public sphere. This is a debate that Arab women and men will need to have as part of their organic political transformation, and they will need to have it on their own terms.

If the United States honestly wishes to help women in the region, it needs to be acutely aware of how its policy pronouncements could play right into the hands of opponents of women's rights. The United States should focus its policy and rhetoric on supporting genuine democratic transitions, which will allow women in the region the political space to pursue their own interests, however they define them.

Clinton's comments about women in the Middle East reflect a genuine commitment to women worldwide, and they were made at an event honoring women who fight for women's rights all over the world. The struggle for women's rights is a global one, it's not just in the Middle East.

As for whether Egypt or the United States will have a female president first, all bets are open.