logo
Divorce in Asia: Women grapple with cultural, legal hurdles

Divorce in Asia: Women grapple with cultural, legal hurdles

Yahoo5 hours ago
Zoya Ahmed, 33, is going through a messy divorce in Karachi, Pakistan.
Her decision to end the marriage triggered a retaliatory campaign by her husband, who she said filed false police cases, including a criminal complaint alleging an extramarital affair, and triggered property disputes.
"This [extramarital affair case] is very anti-women. The kind of shame I have to face in the courtroom. Our courtrooms are full of men ... the way everyone looks at me, it's a different horror experience."
Ahmed said sexual incompatibility was one of the reasons why the marriage unraveled.
She noted that her husband mocked and weaponized her desire for intimacy to shame her socially, telling her: "You wanted sex. Now you'll get it."
Several of her male friends have been named in the extramarital affair case, further damaging her social standing, she said.
Divorce remains deeply stigmatized across Asia. Even as divorce rates rise in many countries across the region, including India, Pakistan and Indonesia, the fallout for women remains severe.
Financial insecurity and emotional toll
In Pakistan, for instance, divorce is allowed under Islamic law. Married women in the country can initiate divorce proceedings but in many cases they are required to forfeit or return their Haq Mehr (dower) to the husband as compensation for the dissolution of the marriage.
One 34-year-old woman, who asked not to be named, said her attempt at divorce became a prolonged battle after discovering that the khula clause — a legal process for Muslim women to seek divorce — had been removed from her marriage contract.
Even when women retain the right to initiate divorce, the emotional consequences remain dire.
Naveen Notiar, a 40-year-old Pakistani woman now living in the UK, recalled her parents' divorce.
Her mother had insisted on including the khula clause in the marriage contract.
"My grandmother had this conversation with my father's family about my mother being able to have a right to divorce at the time of when she signed her marriage contract, and my father's family was fine with it."
Her mother was later able to dissolve the marriage, but a custody battle followed.
"It's often believed that a custody battle, or children, is something people can fight over, and it can be used to make a woman's life hard," said Notiar.
A 2020 study involving 427 divorced women in Pakistan's Punjab province found that high rates of depression, anxiety, and stress were common among the women, largely driven by financial insecurity and family backlash.
Some argue that the most difficult part of divorce isn't always the separation itself, but what follows, particularly around child custody and access.
In Pakistan, legal custody is often granted to the mother, especially when children are young.
Fathers are expected to provide financial support, but visitation is typically left to the mother's discretion.
Abbas (name changed), a Pakistani father who pays court-ordered child support, said: "The mother and her family have completely cut off contact. It hurts that the children are deprived of the love of their paternal grandparents."
Divorce not legal
In contrast, the Philippines remains one of only two places in the world where divorce is illegal, the other being the Vatican City.
The only legal way for married couples in the Southeast Asian nation to end their union is through annulment.
Ana P. Santos, a Filipino journalist based in Berlin, spent four years seeking annulment. "I had the privilege to do so," she said, crediting her lawyer, but acknowledging that many women cannot afford the often lengthy and expensive process.
"I refused to pay anyone," she added, referring to bribes often used to speed it up.
Annulments require proof of fraud, mental incapacity, or impotence, forcing women to turn deeply personal experiences into legal performances.
"A woman is painted as the bad one just because she wanted to separate from her husband," Athena Charanne Presto, a Filipino sociologist, told DW.
Many women opt for informal separations, unable to bear the financial or emotional cost of annulment, said Presto.
Only 1.9% of Filipinos have obtained annulments, legal separations, or foreign-recognized divorces.
Collectivism vs. choice
In countries like Pakistan and the Philippines, financial dependence is one of the main reasons women stay in unhappy marriages.
Bela Nawaz, a gender researcher from Pakistan, argues that patriarchy isn't the only factor.
"It's not just patriarchy, it's collectivism. We exist as family units, not individuals. And that makes it incredibly difficult for women to make independent choices."
This mindset pushes women to prioritize family honor over personal well-being, she said.
Those who leave are often branded as selfish or immoral, cut off from their communities and support systems.
In the case of the Philippines, Presto said that "even before a woman seeks divorce, community elders and family members often step in to stop her from exercising her choice."
Experts say that without parallel progress in cultural attitudes and economic opportunities for women, legal reforms alone are unlikely to level the playing field.
In many parts of Asia, divorce remains a gendered process and for women, choosing to leave a marriage is seen as a radical act.
Edited by: Srinivas Mazumdaru
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Veterans' voices shape a report on the Afghanistan War's lessons and impact
Veterans' voices shape a report on the Afghanistan War's lessons and impact

Los Angeles Times

timean hour ago

  • Los Angeles Times

Veterans' voices shape a report on the Afghanistan War's lessons and impact

COLUMBUS, Ohio — U.S. veterans of the war in Afghanistan are telling a commission reviewing decisions on the 20-year conflict that their experience was not only hell, but also confounding, demoralizing and at times humiliating. The bipartisan Afghanistan War Commission aims to reflect such veterans' experiences in a report due to Congress next year, which will analyze key strategic, diplomatic, military and operational decisions made between June 2001 and the chaotic withdrawal in August 2021. The group released its second interim report on Tuesday, drawing no conclusions yet but identifying themes emerging from thousands of pages of government documents; some 160 interviews with cabinet-level officials, military commanders, diplomats, Afghan and Pakistani leaders and others; and forums with veterans like one recently held at a national Veterans of Foreign Wars convention in Columbus, Ohio. 'What can we learn from the Afghanistan War?' asked an Aug. 12 discussion session with four of the commission's 16 members. What they got was two straight hours of dozens of veterans' personal stories — not one glowingly positive, and most saturated in frustration and disappointment. 'I think the best way to describe that experience was awful,' said Marine veteran Brittany Dymond, who served in Afghanistan in 2012. Navy veteran Florence Welch said the 2021 withdrawal made her ashamed she ever served there. 'It turned us into a Vietnam, a Vietnam that none of us worked for,' she said. Members of Congress, some driven by having served in the war, created the independent commission several months after the withdrawal, after an assessment by the Democratic administration of then-President Biden faulted the actions of President Trump's first administration for constraining U.S. options. A Republican review, in turn, blamed Biden. Views of the events remain divided, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered yet another review this spring. The commission wants to understand the bigger picture of a conflict that spanned four presidential administrations and cost more than 2,400 American lives, said Co-Chair Dr. Colin Jackson. 'So we're interested in looking hard at the end of U.S. engagement in Afghanistan, but we're equally interested in understanding the beginning, the middle and the end,' he said in an interview in Columbus. Co-chair Shamila Chaudhary said the panel is also exploring more sweeping questions. 'So our work is not just about what the U.S. did in Afghanistan but what the U.S. should be doing in any country where it deems it has a national security interest,' she said. 'And not just should it be there, but how it should behave, what values does it guide itself by, and how does it engage with individuals who are very different from themselves.' Jackson said one of the commission's priorities is making sure the final report, due in August 2026, isn't 'unrecognizable to any veteran of the Afghanistan conflict.' 'The nature of the report should be representative of every soldier, sailor, airman, Marine experience,' he said. Dymond told commissioners a big problem was the mission. 'You cannot exert a democratic agenda, which is our foreign policy, you cannot do that on a culture of people who are not bought into your ideology,' she said. 'What else do we expect the outcome to be? And so we had two decades of service members lost and maimed because we're trying to change an ideology that they didn't ask for.' The experience left eight-year Army veteran Steve Orf demoralized. He said he didn't go there 'to beat a bad guy.' 'Those of us who served generally wanted to believe that we were helping to improve the world, and we carried with us the hopes, values, and principles of the United States — values and principles that also seem to have been casualties of this war,' he told commissioners. 'For many of us, faith with our leaders is broken and trust in our country is broken.' Tuesday's report identifies emerging themes of the review to include strategic drift, interagency incoherence, and whether the war inside Afghanistan and the counterterrorism war beyond were pursuing the same aims or at cross purposes. It also details difficulties the commission has encountered getting key documents. According to the report, the Biden administration initially denied the commission's requests for White House materials on the implementation of the February 2020 peace agreement Trump signed with the Taliban, called the Doha Agreement, and on the handling of the withdrawal, citing executive confidentiality concerns. The transition to Trump's second term brought further delays and complications, but since the commission has pressed the urgency of its mission with the new administration, critical intelligence and documents have now begun to flow, the report says. Smyth and Aftoora-Orsagos write for the Associated Press.

'Hamas must give up control': Fatah official lays out vision for Gaza after war
'Hamas must give up control': Fatah official lays out vision for Gaza after war

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

'Hamas must give up control': Fatah official lays out vision for Gaza after war

Al-Hayek stresses that the Palestinian Authority should govern Gaza after the war and urges international backing for reconstruction. GAZA CITY - Munther Al-Hayek, spokesperson for the Palestinian Fatah Movement in the Gaza Strip, spoke with The Media Line about Fatah's vision for post-war Gaza. He described a future government under Prime Minister Mohammad Mustafa, the removal of Hamas from power, coordination with Arab states, and the role of the Palestinian Authority (PA). Discussing governance after the war, Al-Hayek said Gaza should be administered by a government headed by Mustafa and stressed that Hamas should be pressured to step down. He explained that Fatah is engaged in 'intensive and ongoing communications' with Egypt and other Arab countries about postwar arrangements. Al-Hayek pointed out that an Arab-Islamic plan—endorsed by both the Arab Summit and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation in Jeddah - calls for the PA to 'impose its legal jurisdiction over the Gaza Strip.' 'The day following the war must be distinctly Palestinian,' he told The Media Line, noting that Israel has rejected proposals giving the PA control. He added that the PA is 'the official and legitimate face of the State of Palestine.' According to Al-Hayek, Fatah believes the Mustafa government should take full legal authority in Gaza, backed by 'all political parties, including Fatah and the Palestinian factions,' so it can 'fulfill its administrative and governance responsibilities in Gaza, particularly the day after the war.' He said that afterward, the process should move toward 'legislative, presidential, and National Council elections, allowing the Palestinian people to choose their future leadership.' Ending war is immediate priority Ending the war, he continued, was the immediate priority. 'Right now, all we are thinking about is ending the war in the Gaza Strip,' he said, 'and then moving towards a political process that leads to the establishment of the Palestinian state and its embodiment on the ground in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with Jerusalem as its capital.' Al-Hayek made clear that Hamas should relinquish its governing role. 'We have requested Hamas to exit the governmental and administrative scene,' he told The Media Line. 'We have not asked Hamas members and their families to leave the Gaza Strip, as they remain an integral part of the Palestinian people. However, Hamas is now required to step back from this governing role.' He said Hamas 'currently finds itself in a difficult situation' and that 'all Palestinian factions desire nothing but to reach a clear and well-defined agreement' allowing the PA to take over governance in Gaza, as it already does in the West Bank. One reason Hamas must step aside, he argued, is that 'the situation after October 7 is entirely different from what it was before October 7.' The war, he said, has created 'complex security circumstances,' including the occupation of large parts of Gaza, demographic and geographic shifts, and 'the presence of occupying forces in the Strip.' 'To alleviate all the suffering and harsh pain endured by our people,' he said, 'Hamas must step aside and allow the Palestinian National Authority to assume responsibility.' Responding to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's remark that 'neither Fatahstan, nor Hamastan, nor the Palestinian Authority will exist in the Gaza Strip,' Al-Hayek cited international support for a PA role. He noted that when the European Union called for the PA's presence at the Rafah crossing, 'it meant the Palestinian Authority, regardless of the form or nature of its presence.' Turning to humanitarian concerns, Al-Hayek said Gaza will face an enormous task of rebuilding once the war ends. 'The Gaza Strip needs reconstruction. It needs the world to mobilize for food and reconstruction,' he said. But he added, 'this world will not mobilize, pay, or undertake reconstruction except through the legitimate body.' That legitimate body, he emphasized, is 'the Palestinian National Authority, which represents the Palestinians in the territories occupied in 1967.' He said there are ongoing contacts with 'the entire international community, the United Nations, and the European Union,' and added, 'There will certainly be contacts with the United States.' Speaking about Washington's role, Al-Hayek criticized the lack of American action so far. 'Unfortunately, up to this moment, the United States and the administration of President Trump—who personally spoke about extinguishing fires across the entire Middle East—have not yet acted regarding Gaza,' he said. 'We have not found any initiative from the United States to stop the war in Gaza.' He urged the US to recognize 'there was already a proposed solution on the table, which is the two-state solution.' Without it, he warned, 'hatred will persist within this generation that experienced the war of October 7. This generation will fully realize that if the Palestinian issue is not resolved, there will be neither security nor peace in the Middle East region, especially in Palestine.' 'Therefore,' he said, 'the United States is required to take a step forward—first to stop the war, then to assist the Palestinian people in obtaining their rights.' Those rights, he concluded, 'can only be achieved through the realization of a Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital—this is for sure.' The Fatah spokesperson also emphasized the importance of regional and global backing. 'We have experienced a war in the Gaza Strip that targeted our people. The international community, our Arab brothers, our friends, and the European Union must stand by the Palestinian people.' Asked whether Gazans would be allowed to leave, Al-Hayek was unequivocal. 'The Palestinian people do not want to leave Gaza,' he told The Media Line. 'We repeat each time: We will remain in Gaza until Judgment Day. Here we were born, and here we shall die.' He acknowledged that some residents might travel temporarily 'for leisure, education, or medical treatment,' but rejected the idea of permanent departure. To abandon Gaza, he said, in the way envisioned by 'Netanyahu's extremist government, along with Smotrich and Ben-Gvir—that is an illusion. We emphasize clearly: this is an illusion. We will remain in Gaza until Judgment Day.' 'We are the rightful owners of this land; we will build it, develop it, live upon it, and be buried beneath its soil,' he said. 'Some of us might leave temporarily due to difficult living conditions, for education or medical treatment. But to leave and abandon our homes, houses, history, and lives—that certainly is an illusion.' No Palestinian, he added, 'would accept leaving their property, life, and memories behind simply because of a war.' Only the National Security Forces, Al-Hayek said, should be deployed 'to protect public properties and the properties of citizens.' Any administrative or support committees, he argued, must 'be part of the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian government. We do not say 'coordinate' with the Authority, as 'coordination' is a vague term.' He called the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) 'the representative of the Palestinian people' and said it will determine Gaza's future. 'Whoever wishes to govern the Strip must go to the ballot box, because it is the Palestinian people who choose their future leadership,' he said. The spokesperson pointed to a 'clear plan proposed by Fatah' through Egypt that affirms 'on the day after, legitimacy belongs exclusively to the official body representing the Palestinian people.' He concluded by calling for a ceasefire 'at least during this phase' that would include 'the release of hostages from the Gaza Strip' and the release by Israel of prisoners who, he said, 'fought for freedom and independence.' 'Regarding pressure,' he finished, 'we have repeatedly demanded—and we demand once again for the thousandth time—that Hamas exit the governmental scene. Hamas must leave the Gaza Strip to the legitimate government, which represents Palestinian citizens in both the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.'

Veterans' voices shape a report on the Afghanistan War's lessons and impact
Veterans' voices shape a report on the Afghanistan War's lessons and impact

San Francisco Chronicle​

time2 hours ago

  • San Francisco Chronicle​

Veterans' voices shape a report on the Afghanistan War's lessons and impact

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — U.S. veterans of the war in Afghanistan are telling a commission reviewing decisions on the 20-year conflict that their experience was not only hell, but also confounding, demoralizing and at times humiliating. The bipartisan Afghanistan War Commission aims to reflect such veterans' experiences in a report due to Congress next year, which will analyze key strategic, diplomatic, military and operational decisions made between June 2001 and the chaotic withdrawal in August 2021. The group released its second interim report on Tuesday, drawing no conclusions yet but identifying themes emerging from thousands of pages of government documents; some 160 interviews with cabinet-level officials, military commanders, diplomats, Afghan and Pakistani leaders and others; and forums with veterans like one recently held at a national Veterans of Foreign Wars convention in Columbus, Ohio. 'What can we learn from the Afghanistan War?' asked an Aug. 12 discussion session with four of the commission's 16 members. What they got was two straight hours of dozens of veterans' personal stories — not one glowingly positive, and most saturated in frustration and disappointment. 'I think the best way to describe that experience was awful,' said Marine veteran Brittany Dymond, who served in Afghanistan in 2012. Navy veteran Florence Welch said the 2021 withdrawal made her ashamed she ever served there. 'It turned us into a Vietnam, a Vietnam that none of us worked for,' she said. Members of Congress, some driven by having served in the war, created the independent commission several months after the withdrawal, after an assessment by the Democratic administration of then-President Joe Biden faulted the actions of President Donald Trump's first administration for constraining U.S. options. A Republican review, in turn, blamed Biden. Views of the events remain divided, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered yet another review this spring. The commission wants to understand the bigger picture of a conflict that spanned four presidential administrations and cost more than 2,400 American lives, said Co-Chair Dr. Colin Jackson. 'So we're interested in looking hard at the end of U.S. engagement in Afghanistan, but we're equally interested in understanding the beginning, the middle and the end,' he said in an interview in Columbus. Co-chair Shamila Chaudhary said the panel is also exploring more sweeping questions. 'So our work is not just about what the U.S. did in Afghanistan but what the U.S. should be doing in any country where it deems it has a national security interest,' she said. "And not just should it be there, but how it should behave, what values does it guide itself by, and how does it engage with individuals who are very different from themselves.' Jackson said one of the commission's priorities is making sure the final report, due in August 2026, isn't 'unrecognizable to any veteran of the Afghanistan conflict.' "The nature of the report should be representative of every soldier, sailor, airman, Marine experience,' he said. Dymond told commissioners a big problem was the mission. "You cannot exert a democratic agenda, which is our foreign policy, you cannot do that on a culture of people who are not bought into your ideology,' she said. 'What else do we expect the outcome to be? And so we had two decades of service members lost and maimed because we're trying to change an ideology that they didn't ask for.' The experience left eight-year Army veteran Steve Orf demoralized. He said he didn't go there 'to beat a bad guy.' 'Those of us who served generally wanted to believe that we were helping to improve the world, and we carried with us the hopes, values, and principles of the United States — values and principles that also seem to have been casualties of this war," he told commissioners. "For many of us, faith with our leaders is broken and trust in our country is broken.' Tuesday's report identifies emerging themes of the review to include strategic drift, interagency incoherence, and whether the war inside Afghanistan and the counterterrorism war beyond were pursuing the same aims or at cross purposes. It also details difficulties the commission has encountered getting key documents. According to the report, the Biden administration initially denied the commission's requests for White House materials on the implementation of the February 2020 peace agreement Trump signed with the Taliban, called the Doha Agreement, and on the handling of the withdrawal, citing executive confidentiality concerns. The transition to Trump's second term brought further delays and complications, but since the commission has pressed the urgency of its mission with the new administration, critical intelligence and documents have now begun to flow, the report says.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store