Lest you doubt the deep misogyny implicit in U.S. military policy despite more reports and commissions that supposedly address the issue than one can count, there is this account of a recent talk by Iraqi veteran Ethan McCord,
McCord knew he needed psychological help for his trauma. He approached a superior and told him about the emotional hell he was going through. He was told, “Get the sand out of your vagina!”
FPN Director Lucinda Marshall speaks about UNSCR 1325 (photo by Josh Cook)
On September 21, I had the privilege of making a presentation at Mount Mary College in Milwaukee, WI on the importance of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 as part of their celebration of the International Day of Peace. The presentation was co-sponsored by the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom as part of their Advancing Women As Peacemakers Program in conjunction with the 10th anniversary of UNSCR 1325. Below is a web-version of the material I presented on the importance and context of 1325. I am indebted to everyone who made this presentation possible.
———-
Resolution 1325 addresses for the first time the disproportionate and unique impact of armed conflict on women and recognizes the under-valued and under-utilized contributions women make to conflict prevention, peacekeeping, conflict resolution and peace-building as well as the importance of women’s equal and full participation as active agents in peace and security. It is binding upon all UN Member States.
Key Provisions of UNSCR 1325 include:
The passage of Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security by the Security Council of the United Nations 10 years ago was an historical accomplishment that resulted from the hard work, courage and determination of women throughout the world who insisted that we should have an equal role in bringing and maintaining peace in our global community.
While much work has been done to implement 1325, the results so far are discouraging. Since 2000, women averaged 7 percent of negotiators in five major U.N. peace processes. Fewer than 3 percent of the signatories in 14 peace talks were women. For a comprehensive look at efforts to implement 1325, please see this checklist on progress made on implementation of 1325.
To truly understand why 1325 is so important, we need to take a look at the impact of militarism from a gendered lens and ask what is it about military conflict that makes women particularly vulnerable?
———-
Several points to consider:
Wars are not fought on battlefields anymore–they are fought in cities and towns and villages. Civilian casualties now make up as much as 70% of the total casualties of any military action. Since women and children are the majority of these civilian populations, they make up the majority of civilian casualties.
In warfare, women’s bodies frequently become part of the battle ground over which opposing forces struggle. Their bodies are often considered the spoils of war, or invisibilized under the catchall euphemism, ‘collateral damage’.
It is important to understand the primary ways in which women are sexually victimized as a result of militarism, which include:
Other factors that make women particularly vulnerable include: the loss of homes, being separated from family (especially men who may have provided protection), becoming a refugee (and not surprisingly, the overwhelming majority of refugees from conflict are women), and loss of jobs and income leaving women to resort to desperate means such as prostituting themselves to put food on their family’s table.
Finally, it is important to remember that violence against women does not end when the fighting ends. We’ve all heard reports of rapes committed by U.N. peacekeepers, of soldiers who come home and assault or murder their wives and in a minute we’ll look at what this means in Iraq now that we’ve declared an end to combat operations.
———-
Before we go any further however, I want to talk about how I usually approach talking about militarism. When I talk about militarism, I tend to focus on U.S. militarism for 2 reasons. The first is because we have the biggest military in the world, so our actions rather literally pack the biggest punch.
Secondly, most of us are U.S. citizens, we live here, and it is important to look first at the impact of our own actions and how we can change them before examining those of others. So when we talk about 1325, we should consider that becoming more aware of its potential in addressing conflict and pushing for its use by the U.S. can have an enormous impact.
I do want to note however that it isn’t just us, although our inaction in conflicts such as Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Darfur, the DRC and so on makes us complicit in these atrocities.
In any case, it is precisely because of these incredible, large numbers of victims that we know that violence against women is systemic to militarism.
Two recent examples of how U.S. militarism impacts women are instructive.
———-
One of the justifications for our invasion of Afghanistan was to liberate Afghan women. As Human 
Rights Watch pointed out last year, that has been an abysmal failure. Today:
And in Iraq, again we used the justification of liberating women as a reason for war. And while we’ve declared an official end to combat there, for Iraqi women, the war is far from over:
———
But it is not only civilian women who are at risk.
According to several studies, 30% of women in the U.S. military are raped while serving, 71% are sexually assaulted and 90% are sexually harassed. It is believed that 90% of sexual assaults in the military are never reported. As one Congresswoman noted recently, women serving in the military are more at risk of being harmed by their fellow soldiers than by any enemy.
It’s also important to note that the problems described apropos of the military also apply to women working for private contractors such as KBR/Halliburton, Blackwater (now known as Xe), etc. which is very relevant since while we are officially withdrawing combat troops from Iraq, there are still many, many private contractors there.
———-
So that gives you some context about why 1325 is so important. Before I close I do also want to note that in addition to 1325, there are a number of other vehicles that in part address the impact of militarism on women and the need to include women in conflict resolution. They include:
CEDAW (1979) which stands for The Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women and defines violence against women as a violation of women’s human rights and is often described as an international bill of rights for women. As of August, 2009, 185 countries had ratified CEDAW. The United States is one of the few that have not yet ratified it, along with countries such as Iran and Sudan.
Resolution 1820 (2008), urges all parties to armed conflicts to immediately stop acts of sexual violence against civilians and calls for the protection of women and girls from all forms of sexual violence.
We also have the International Criminal Court which was created in 1998. It classify sexual violence as a war crime and provides a means by which perpetrators can be held accountable. The U.S. however, opposes the ICC and does not participate.
And finally, here in the U.S., the bipartisan International Violence Against Women Act (IVAWA) was reintroduced in Congress last February. It would be the first of its kind to comprehensively incorporate US foreign assistance programs to help stop gender-based violence and poverty, promote economic opportunities for women, halt violence against girls in schools, and ultimately empower women.
———
Those are some of the tools available to us on an international and national level, but you and I—we’re not members of Congress or delegates to the United Nations. So the thought that I want to leave you with is what we—those of us here today—can do to change this paradigm. I like to frame this in terms of what I call the Peace Agenda, not the War Agenda, because after all, isn’t peace what we say we are trying to achieve?
Make Violence Against Women a Part of the Peace Agenda:
We need to make a fundamental paradigm shift away from Power Over thinking and move towards partnership thinking. Rather than seeing others as adversaries, let’s look at how can we partner to create solutions and make meaningful and just relationships. Then we will be truly empowered.
It is crucial that we look at conflict resolution from a gendered lens. When we discuss the impact of militarism and how to end it, we are simply not looking at the full picture unless we include the ways it affects women and also listen, really listen, to women’s voices when we look towards resolution of conflict and the creation of peace and I believe that 1325 is one of the best tools we have for truly creating a women-inclusive peace and am grateful to the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) for all their work in working towards its implementation.
———
For a further discussion of 1325 particularly in the context of U.S. strategy in Afghanistan and Iraq, here is the interview I did on these topics on Pacifica’s KPFK’s Feminist Magazine.
Also, to learn more about 1325 and the organizations that are working to promote its implementation, the following links may be useful.
This year marks the 10th anniversary of the adoption of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 which provides a,
legal and political framework that acknowledges the importance of the participation of women and the inclusion of gender perspectives in peace negotiations, humanitarian planning, peacekeeping operations, post-conflict peacebuilding and governance.
Key provisions of 1325 include:
On September 21, I’ll be giving a presentation titled, Towards a Women-Inclusive Peace: Why 1325 is the Crucial Number at Mount Mary College in Milwaukee, WI at their International Day of Peace celebration, co-sponsored by the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom.
I’m very excited to be speaking about 1325, which is something I regularly address when talking about the impact that militarism has on women’s lives. It is particularly timely now that we’ve officially declared an end to combat missions in Iraq. But just saying it’s over doesn’t make it over if you are a widow without any substantive means of support or of you are a mother living as a refugee in Syria or Jordan forced to prostitute yourself to feed your children. These examples point to why it is so important to consider the needs and listen to the voices of women when resolving conflict.
I’ll post the text and slides from the presentation after the event but in the meantime, here are some links for learning more about 1325.
If your school or organization would be interested in a presentation about how militarism impacts women’s lives and this very important resolution, please contact me at lucindamarshall @ feministpeacenetwork.org.
Pretty statement, too bad it is a crock of window dressing–from Critical Role of Women in Peace and Security, an address given by Melanne Verveer, Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues on July 27, 2010:
President Obama’s National Security Strategy recognizes that “…countries are more peaceful and prosperous when women are accorded full and equal rights and opportunity. When those rights and opportunities are denied, countries often lag behind. Furthermore, women and girls often disproportionately bear the burden of crises and conflict. Therefore the United States is working with regional and international organizations to prevent violence against women and girls, especially in conflict zones. We are supporting women’s equal access to justice and their participation in the political process…”
And, Secretary Clinton has often said: “Women’s rights and women’s issues cannot be an afterthought in our foreign policy; they must factor centrally in how we look at the world. We have made women a cornerstone of our foreign policy not only because we think it’s the right thing to do, but also because it’s the smart thing to do.”
Well yes, it is the right thing and the smart thing to do, but a cornerstone of our foreign policy? Who knew. Seems to me that is only true when it is expedient.
The President’s and Secretary’s words are matched by actions.
Really, do tell:
Let me focus on Afghanistan. I want to welcome and recognize Palwasha Hassan, who is here from Afghanistan and who has been a leader in her country. She participated in the Kabul Conference, and we look forward to hearing from her.
At the International Conference on Afghanistan, in London earlier this year, Secretary Clinton emphasized that women need to be involved at every step of the way in the process of building Afghanistan’s future; and she introduced the Women’s Action Plan, which is incorporated into our U.S. Afghanistan and Pakistan Regional Stabilization Strategy. As Secretary Clinton said, “the plan includes initiatives focused on women’s security, women’s leadership in the public and private sector; women’s access to judicial institutions, education, and health services; and women’s ability to take advantage of economic opportunities, especially in the agricultural sector.” This is a comprehensive, forward-looking agenda. She also emphasized the role that women must play in the reintegration and reconciliation process as it goes forward.
That’s nice that Clinton said that, but,
Afghan women were not included in the Afghan Government’s official delegation to the London conference and only one Afghan woman was permitted to speak on behalf of civil society as part of the official conference program.
Meanwhile in the U.S. peace movement…David Swanson has a lengthy summary of the recent peace strategy conference held in Albany, NY. There are 24 points in the summary but the one that caught my eye was this,
21.We call for the equal participation of women in all aspects of the antiwar movement. We propose nonviolent direct actions either in Congressional offices or other appropriate and strategic locations, possibly defense contractors, Federal Buildings, or military bases in the U.S. These actions would be local and coordinated nationally, i.e., the same day for everyone (times may vary). The actions would probably result in arrests for sitting in after offices close. Entering certain facilities could also result in arrests. Participants would be prepared for that possible outcome before joining the action. Nonviolence training would be offered locally, with lists of trainers being made available. The message/demand would be a vote, a congressional action to end the wars: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan. Close U.S. bases. Costs of war and financial issues related to social needs neglected because of war spending would need to be studied and statements regarding same be prepared before the actions. Press release would encourage coverage because of the actions being local and nationally coordinated.
One line that doesn’t seem to have any connection whatsoever with the rest of the item somehow doesn’t speak equality or an understanding of of the issue to me. As those of you who were here when this network began know, my motivation for starting this forum was to provide women with a safe and nuanced space to fully empower their voices in the peace movement. If this summary of the Albany conference is indicative of where the peace movement is, devoting one disconnected afterthought of a line to the role of women in the peace movement should tell us that spaces such as the Feminist Peace Network are still badly needed and that we have a long way to go in truly critiquing the peace movement from a gendered lens.
When military conflict occurs, just because the fighting ends does not mean the war is over for the people who live there as these two articles about Iraq so sadly illustrate:
Three decades of wars, massacres and sectarian killings have left Iraq with as many as a million widows, by Iraqi government
count…
…In 2008 the government set up the Directorate of Social Care for Women that is now gradually taking over the payment of stipends from the Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs, which was widely accused of inefficiency and corruption.
However, Hameed, the directorate’s chief, complains that she lacks the funds to efficiently serve areas beyond the capital and lacks the authority to introduce reform and eradicate corruption in the ministry departments handling widows…
…poverty is driving some Iraqi women into prostitution, both in Iraq and in neighboring Jordan and Syria, home to the Arab world’s largest Iraqi refugee communities.
“Many of Iraq’s neighbors are exploiting Iraqi women,” said activist Suzan Kazim Kashkoul.
Also, she and other advocates say, the post-U.S. invasion violence has shrunk the pool of potential husbands for widows as well as single women over 30, and in the sectarian-charged postwar atmosphere, Sunni-Shiite marriages have become rare. The economy is in trouble yet the housing market is hot, making housing unaffordable for many.
And then there is this horrific study documenting what activists have feared in the aftermath of the use of toxic weaponry:
Results of a population-based epidemiological study organized by Malak Hamdan and Chris Busby are published tomorrow in the International Journal of Environmental Studies and Public Health (IJERPH) based in Basle, Switzerland. They show increases in cancer, leukemia and infant mortality and perturbations of the normal human population birth sex ratio significantly greater than those reported for the survivors of the A-Bombs at Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.
Results of a survey in Jan/Feb 2010 of 711 houses and more than 4000 individuals in Fallujah show that in the five years following the 2004 attacks by USA-led forces there has been a 4-fold increase in all cancer. Interestingly, the spectrum of cancer is similar to that in the Hiroshima survivors who were exposed to ionizing radiation from the bomb and uranium in the fallout. By comparing the sample population rates to the cancer rates in Egypt and Jordan, researchers found there has been a 38-fold increase in leukemia (20 cases) almost a 10-fold increase in female breast cancer (12 cases) and significant increases in lymphoma and brain tumours in adults.
Based on 16 cases in the 5-year period, the 12-fold increases in childhood cancer in those aged 0-14 were particularly marked. The cancer and leukemia increases were all in younger people than would normally be expected. Infant mortality was found to be 80 per 1000 births which compares with a value of 19 in Egypt, 17 in Jordan and 9.7 in Kuwait. An important result is that the sex-ratio, which in normal populations is always 1050 boys born per 1000 girls was seriously reduced in the group born immediately after 2005, one year after the conflict: in this group the sex ratio was 860.
