Women and Conflict Resolution: Feminism, Peace-Building, and Politics in the European Union Erin Currier George Washington University
Presented at “When Women Gain, So Does the World,” IWPR’s Eighth International Women’s Policy Research Conference, June 2005
Abstract: This paper is an investigation of international and grassroots efforts to include women in peace-building and political leadership, with a focus on European Union (EU) member states. It seeks to explore and analyze ways in which women are organizing themselves globally as agents for peace and change, to report on the work international leadership bodies are doing to promote women’s continued participation in peace-building and politics, and to realistically examine what these actions are doing to promote women’s rights as political equals to men before, during, and after violent conflict. The analysis is framed by focusing on two recent peace agreements in Europe: the Dayton Peace Accords (Bosnia and Herzegovina) and the Good Friday Agreement (Northern Ireland). This combined research and analysis will be used to determine where the EU’s efforts at equal inclusion have succeeded, and where there is still work to be done.
Introduction: The occurrence of women’s leadership and civic engagement has historically led to positive and progressive social change for all people in a community. Women’s participation in decision-making is particularly crucial in war-torn communities, both during and after conflict. When women’s voices are heard and recognized as valuable, more sustainable economic and social stability is achieved. Several international declarations have affirmed a woman’s right to participate in politics, peace-building, and economic development of their societies, but nonetheless, women continue to be systematically excluded from peace talks, decision-making, and societal change; this negates a democratic process, and prevents women from participating in events that directly impact their security and leadership options. This paper is an investigation of international and grassroots efforts to include women in peace-building and political leadership, with a focus on European Union (EU) member states. It seeks to explore and analyze ways in which women are organizing themselves globally as agents for peace and change, to report on the work international leadership bodies are doing to promote women’s continued participation in peace-building and politics, and to realistically examine what these actions are doing to promote women’s rights as political equals to men before, during, and after violent conflict. The analysis is framed by focusing on two recent peace agreements in Europe: the Dayton Peace Accords (Bosnia and Herzegovina) and the Good Friday Agreement (Northern Ireland). This combined research and analysis will be used to determine where the EU’s efforts at equal inclusion have succeeded, and where there is still work to be done. Women as Unofficial Peace-Builders: Despite their exclusion from official peace-building and conflict resolution efforts, women in war-torn countries organize themselves in many “unofficial” ways, through participation in non-profit organizations, support groups, and grassroots activism in their communities. The group Mothers Against Silence formed in Israel in the 1980s, using motherhood as a political tool to express the personal loss that resulted from conflict. The Saturday Mothers emerged in Turkey in 1995 when women gathered in the center of Istanbul every weekend to urge the state to find over 300 sons and relatives who had “disappeared” after being in police custody, most of whom had been engaged in political activism against the state itself. The group Women in Black was created in Israel after the Intifada began in 1988, but has emerged in countries worldwide as a way for women to peacefully protest war. These grassroots women’s groups succeed in delivering a message, speaking directly to their leaders in ways, which are impossible to ignore. For decades, their activism has served as the forum in which they participate in politics. Nonetheless, community activism cannot be the only way women participate in political leadership. Actions from International Leadership Bodies:
2
Within the past decade in particular, there has been significantly more attention paid to the role of women in armed conflict from international leadership bodies like the United Nations (UN), the EU, and the International Criminal Court (ICC). On the one hand, these bodies have recognized that as non-combatants in conflict situations, women and children are not only caught in the crossfire of violence, but are also specifically targeted by armed groups as a way of destroying the social, economic, and emotional defenses of their opponents. On the other hand, these international bodies are recognizing women as crucial players in the area of conflict resolution, noting the positive impact diversity has on a nation’s sustainable peace and economic development. At the 4th UN World Conference on Women in 1995, the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action was drafted and ratified by 189 countries. The overriding message of the Declaration was that recognizing gender-based inequalities is not enough to inspire change; rather, governments were called upon to take direct action and initiative to support, promote, and equalize women, particularly in the area of decision-making. The document calls women “a fundamental force for leadership, conflict resolution and the promotion of lasting peace at all levels.”1 Five years later in 2000, the twenty-third Special Session of the UN General Assembly titled “Women 2000, Gender Equity, Development and Peace for the Twenty-First Century” (also known as “Beijing + Five”), reiterated the ideals and goals of the Platform for Action in their Committee Report, including sections on women and armed conflict. In October 2001, the UN Security Council signed Resolution 1325 on Women’s Role in Peace-Building and Security, reaffirming the necessary role of women in conflict resolution, and specifically calling for their increased participation in decision-making, peace negotiations, and government representation. Most recently, from Feb 28 – March 11, 2005, the tenth anniversary of the Fourth UN World Conference on Women (known as “Beijing + Ten”) took place in New York City to reevaluate the goals and progress of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action. Nevertheless, these strongly-worded resolutions and publications are only effective if action is taken as a result of their creation, and women’s organized inclusion in peace-building and conflict resolution remains at unacceptably low levels. Case Studies Case studies within recent European history demonstrate the ongoing struggle women are waging to be included in peace-building and conflict management. Using the resolutions passed by the EU and UN as fuel, multitudes of women participating in NGO’s, community organizations, grass-roots campaigns, and official government offices are working to force the issue of female inclusion and leadership. As is demonstrated by the Dayton Peace Accords and
Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, Fourth World Conference on Women, 9/15/95. University of Minnesota Human Rights Library. Available from http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/e5dplw.htm.
1
3
the Good Friday Agreement however, women’s inclusion at all levels of leadership and decisionmaking is easier said than done. Dayton Peace Accord The Dayton Peace Accords were adopted in Paris on December 14, 1995, after being negotiated in Dayton, Ohio by the leaders of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, and the Federation of the Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY).2 The agreement marked the end of official conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Although it was the first peace agreement to be drafted and signed after the Beijing Declaration was adopted, the Dayton Peace Accords failed to recognize the criticality of women’s inclusion in negotiations, and no women were present during its creation. There were no Bosnian women present at the documents signing in Paris either; the only female signature belonged to Pauline Neville-Jones, the head of the British negotiation delegation. Perhaps not surprisingly then, women’s rights, needs, and experiences were also ignored in the document itself, to the detriment of post-conflict Bosnia and Herzegovina. For example, unlike the Beijing Declaration, the Dayton Peace Accords do not mention any measures for the inclusion of women at high levels of power and decision-making, and there is no discussion of proactive measures to promote women in electoral lists. As a result, when the fighting ended women’s participation in Parliament actually decreased from pre-war levels. There are currently no female representatives in the Council of Ministers, nor are there any female ministers in the Government of the Federation. Further, the Dayton agreement does not mention sexual or domestic violence against women, training police to deal with the human rights of women, or victim protection, all of which were discussed in the Platform for Action. In fact, the Accords never mention the word “rape” at all, a particularly shocking exclusion given that cases of sexual violence during the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina were the impetus behind the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia declaring rape a crime against humanity.3 Without systems in place to support women in need, support hotlines across the former Yugoslavia have seen large increases in calls from women reporting domestic violence, some noting that weapons left over from the war are being used against them and their children. Finally, the Dayton agreement’s section on refugees does not mention any specific concerns of women; gender as a factor in refugee issues is ignored in relation to rights of return, medical assistance, shelter, and food. There was also no attempt made to include women on the nine-member Commission for Displaced Persons and Refugees.4
2 3
Ibid. Ibid. 4 Ibid.
4
As was stated by the Balkans-based women’s organization Kvinna till Kvinna, “The Dayton peace negotiations were a dialogue of men, often with purely militaristic overtones.”5 Women and gender, as they relate to conflict situations, were never a political priority in the peace process, and thus were undefined and ignored in the final peace agreement. The focus was on the military, political borders, and establishing an end to conflict; it focused on the present alone, and missed its valuable opportunity to shape the future for the good of all citizens and for lasting, sustainable peace and development. The Good Friday Agreement On February 28, 1996, the British and Irish governments announced that multi-party talks on the future of Northern Ireland would take place on June 10 of the same year, with elections determining which political parties would participate in the talks. Recognizing their unique opportunity to participate in the shaping of their government, a group of women in Northern Ireland formed their own political party, the Northern Ireland Women’s Coalition (NIWC), and began organizing and campaigning to take part in the talks. The NIWC developed a party platform, recruited 70 women to run for office, and wrote a manifesto and fourteen policy and briefing papers. Taking into consideration the Beijing Platform written the year before, these documents stressed three themes that would become the party’s credo: inclusion, equality, and human rights. Although the formation of an all-woman political party was met with discouragement, mocking, and criticism from many sources, the NIWC received enough votes to be represented by two delegates. For two years after the election, the NIWC participated in both the multi-party talks and the Northern Ireland Forum for Political Understanding and Dialogue. During both, the group fought for inclusion of all political parties throughout the process, police reform, and an independent review of the criminal justice system as a whole. They made other parties aware of women’s issues, such as health and domestic violence, as well as women’s necessary inclusion in government and leadership at all levels. Needless to say, the NIWC was a unique player among the political parties represented in the talks, with many of their opinions seemingly in the minority. However, when the draft peace agreement was released for comment and revision by the government, the NIWC’s issues and opinions on victim’s rights, policing, release of political prisoners, creation of a Civic Forum, and the relationships between Britain, Ireland, and Northern Ireland were included. So was the phrase, “the right of women to full and complete political participation,” inspired directly by the Beijing Declaration. On Good Friday, April 10, 1998, at twenty minutes after 5 p.m., all participating political parties in the talks were asked formally whether they accepted the peace agreement they had been working for two years to create. Each party accepted the agreement in turn, and the members of the Northern Ireland Women’s Coalition were the only female voices to do so.
5
Ibid.
5
Conclusion A brief look into the current examples of the Dayton Peace Accords and the Good Friday Agreement demonstrates that significantly different and often more equitable outcomes result from the inclusion of all voices. The presence of women in the Good Friday talks dramatically and positively altered the outcome of the agreement, as well as the face of politics in Northern Ireland. Conversely, there are marked sections of the Dayton Peace Accords, which ignore the unique needs, and experiences of women, failing to ensure security and stability for all people post-conflict. Although the UN and EU have encouraged world governments to promote women’s inclusion, responsibility also rests with individual governments on local, state, and national levels to ensure that gender is considered in all aspects of development and democracy. World governments, local governments, and town election committees alike must begin to recognize women’s value as political leaders and citizens in order for lasting change to occur. In the meantime, women worldwide can remember the Dayton Peace Accords and the Good Friday Agreement, to see what can achieved be as opposed to what is often accepted. *This is an abbreviated version of the paper. For the original, full-length document, please contact the author at ecurrier@womenwork.org. References Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, Fourth World Conference on Women, 9/15/95. University of Minnesota Human Rights Library. Available from http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/e5dplw.htm. Fearon, Kate. Women’s Work, The Story of the Northern Ireland Women’s Coalition. Blackstaff Publishing. 1999. Hunt, Swanee. ‘More women to the peace table.’ Christian Science Monitor, May 2001, Vol. 93, Issue 123. Lithander, Anna, ed. ‘Engendering the Peace Process, A Gender Approach to Dayton – And Beyond.’ Kvinna till Kvinna Foundation, Sweden 2000. Moghadam, Val. ‘Globalization, Militarization, and Women’s Collective Action.’ NWSA Journal, Volume 13, Issue 2, 2001. Nakaya, Sumie. ‘Women and Gender Equality in Peace Processes: From Women at the Negotiating Table to Postwar Structural Reforms in Guatemala and Somalia.’ Global Governance, Oct-Dec 2003, Vol. 9, Issue 4. Pankhurst, Donna. ‘The ‘sex war’ and other wars: toward a feminist approach to peacebuilding.’ Development in Practice; May2003, Vol. 13 Issue 2/3.
6
Rt. Hon. Patten, Christopher. ‘The Role of Women in Conflict Resolution.’ Speech delivered at World Women Lawyers Conference, 06/30/03. Soderberg Jacobson, Agneta. ‘Rethink! A Handbook for Sustainable Development.’ Kvinna till Kvinna Foundation, 2004. United Nations Security Resolution 1325. Annotated version available from http://www.womenwarpeace.org/toolbox/annot1325.htm.
7