Address to the Women’s Foreign Policy Group: The Critical Role Played by Women in Rebuilding Society after Crises
Kathleen Cravero,
Assistant Administrator UNDP and Director,
Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery
1 May 2008, New York
THE PROBLEM
There is no doubt that the adoption of Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security was a path-breaking event. It recognizes the role of women in the prevention and resolution of conflict and in peace building with unprecedented clarity. It calls for increased decision-making for women at all levels; enhanced participation in peace processes; and greater gender-sensitivity in mediation, training and protection measures. It calls for intensified efforts to reduce sexual and other violence against women and for an end to impunity for those who commit these crimes. It is a stronger and clearer call to action than we ever imagined possible just a few years ago.
So I thank the organizers of this event for allowing me to speak on how the UN – and UNDP in particular – can make Resolution 1325 real for the millions of women affected by conflict world wide. I thank them because the Resolution is so important. I thank them because this is an audience who can make a difference – through advice, policy, and resources. And I thank them because it allows me to express some of my most deeply held concerns.
The first of these concerns is the impersonal, distanced approach we take to the problem of women in war. Such large numbers of women experiencing such unspeakable violence. It’s overwhelming. Yet each one of these women is an individual with feelings, hopes and dreams. She is a mother, sister, daughter, friend – and she is mostly young and afraid. She is just like the women described in the seminal work by Elisabeth Rehn and Ellen Johnson Sirleaf entitled Women, War and Peace.
In that work, Rehn and Johnson Sirleaf examine a number of important issues, but they do so through the eyes of individual women: Lorenca, raped repeatedly in East Timor; Larissa, sold as a sex slave in Bosnia and Herzegovina; Lina, with no access to services in post-conflict Liberia; Sara, captured at 14 years old by the Revolutionary United Front in Sierra Leone, who said: “Every day felt like a year to me… I feel like an old woman now, no one will ever want me, I will never love.”
The second concern is best expressed by a quote by Mark Twain, a famous American writer and philosopher: "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." In other words, despite our best intentions, our efforts to address the problems of women in war and post-conflict may be missing the mark. We talk about what to do. We write about how to do it. But are we making a difference?
If the reports from Darfur, the DRC, Haiti and East Timor, for example, are even half true, I fear not. Gender-based violence is increasing, the peace dividend for women is decreasing and recovery is passing them by. By some accounts women feel worse off as a result of so-called reconstruction than they were before – or even during – the war. What is going on here? Why are we failing women and girls when they need us most?
The answer might lie in the wisdom of Mark Twain – maybe we are sure of what just ain’t so. Maybe we are operating on the basis of false assumptions. I would suggest, in fact, that there are at least five firmly–held myths that prevent us from moving forward. These five myths are the basis of the “misconstruction” that blocks us from addressing effectively the range of challenges facing women in post-conflict situations.
THE MYTHS
MYTH # 1: Gender-based Violence is an Inevitable Consequence of War
The chaos and disruption of war are unsettling. Gender violence often increases. Improving access to justice and helping survivors recover must continue to be priorities.
Yet the unprecedented levels of violence against women that has occurred in recent conflicts - described by some as reaching “epidemic proportions” - is not inevitable. We know that we can reduce gender-based violence; there are security and protection mechanisms that do protect women and girls. In Darfur, the joint patrols of the Sudanese police and the African Union troops that accompany women when they look for firewood have reduced the number of rapes. Recent reductions in the number of these patrols have led to increases in rape and gender-based violence. The relationship is clear.
Fuel-efficient stoves in IDP camps reduce the number of times women must leave the safety of the camps to forage for firewood. Alternative income-generating activities make collecting firewood less necessary, further reducing risk. Efforts like these make women safer by reducing rape and violence.
Security institutions matter. A police force trained to understand and respond to sexual violence will increase reporting and the enforcement of sanctions. Security forces that include women will have the same effect. India’s recent decision to deploy an all-female police unit to the UN Mission in Liberia will prove this once again.
Gender-based violence is not an inevitable consequence of war.
MYTH # 2: Women are Vulnerable and Need Help and Protection
Of course women and girls need help and protection. But if vulnerability was the defining characteristic of women, there would be a very few women left in post-conflict situations. The fact is that women play multiple roles during and after conflict - as combatants, supporters of armed groups, community peacebuilders and peace advocates.
Examples abound:
During the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, women drew maps to help each other locate community services, ran clandestine schools for girls, provided health care and set up home-based work to support their families.
In Serbia, women played a vital role in the overthrow of a murderous regime.
In post-genocide Rwanda, women organized a cross-ethnic women’s umbrella organization, worked on rebuilding communities and advocated for gender equality measures in the new Constitution.
In post-apartheid South Africa, women demanded comprehensive security sector reform, including civilian control over the military and affirmative action based on race and sex.
Women’s roles as positive forces of change are often over-looked and under-supported. Women are resilient; they are survivors.
While this does not mean that we should exploit their resilience, i.e., by assuming that women can cope so women can wait, but they do suggest that women are not primarily a vulnerable group – they can and must be mobilized in the cause of recovery and peace.
MYTH # 3: Seats at the Table Are Enough
Promoting women’s participation and leadership in peace agreements and post-conflict recovery is an important first step. The sheer presence of women can initiate profound change in certain situations. But, contrary to widespread belief, seats at the table are not enough.
Why? Because too often women lack the capacity to use these seats effectively. After decades of exclusion they need support to find their voice, to articulate positions, to mobilize constituencies. Women must be equipped to operate in this new and unfamiliar political “space”.
The strengthened capacity of women must be complemented by institutional change – from political parties to ministries to parliaments. We need to make post-conflict institutions “gender-friendly” and supportive of a wider range of actors, including women.
Leadership is key. It was President Kagame’s personal commitment to gender equality that helped translate Rwandan women’s activism, a volcanic force post-genocide, into meaningful political participation. This led to gender-sensitive policies, budgeting and services.
So yes, women need seats at the table. But they also need help in using these seats in government institutions that are able and willing to deliver for all their citizens.
MYTH # 4: Justice Reforms Will Benefit Women
Restoring the rule of law in the aftermath of conflict is a critical first step to delivering justice. But the approaches used in this effort – rather than the effort itself - will determine its impact on women.
What would it take to ensure justice to the women I mentioned earlier? What would constitute “access to justice” for Lorenca and Sara, whose lives were destroyed first by war then by rape?
The study by Rehn and Johnson Sirleaf documents how women survivors of violence were scorned and laughed at by judgesduring the Arusha hearings in 2001 and how a judge in Bosnia ridiculed a trafficking victim, asking if she was a virgin. This treatment makes a mockery of otherwise important reforms.
Women face special obstacles when it comes to accessing justice. Their rights are often missing from legal frameworks. Even when recognized these rights are often ignored by justice officials or traditional justice systems.
In the words of Janet from Liberia: “I work this land every day. I know each and every hill and rock as well as I know my children. How dare anyone tell me that this land belongs to my dead husband’s brother?”
A comprehensive set of interventions is required. Women need to know what their rights are, e.g., through legal aid and literacy. They need to be able to access legal systems, e.g., through free legal services. They need to be able to enforce laws that protect their rights and, once enforced, they need to be able to live in their communities without harassment and retribution. In the case of Janet, she needs to know that she has a right to her land; she needs affordable, accessible legal help in defending this right; the ruling of the court needs enforcement; and she needs to be able to live on her land once justice is served.
So justice reforms are important but they won’t necessarily reach or help women, unless they are expressly designed to do so.
MYTH # 5: Peace Will Ensure Gender Equality
Peace agreements represent unique “windows of opportunity” – for inclusiveness, for democratic reform and, not least, for gender equality. But opportunities must be seized; potential must be realized.
The first step is to include gender provisions in peace agreements, as has been done in Burundi, Guatemala, Liberia, Somalia.
The second harder but more significant step is to make these provisions real. The National Charter of Somalia is a best case example in terms of women’s rights. But most of the commitments in the National Charter remain empty promises. We face the same problems in Guatemala, where the coordinator of the National Union of Guatemalan Women says that “the majority of the commitments referring to women in the peace accords have not been implemented”.
So, yes, we must bring women to the peace table. We must support and promote women’s activism both in informal dialogue and in peace processes. But we must also recognize that the implementation of peace agreements is what makes this participation meaningful. Only then can peace move us closer to gender equality.
THE WAY FORWARD
If these five myths are blocking progress, how do we get past them? With the help of a group of world-class experts, UNDP developed an eight point agenda to ensure gender equality in crisis prevention and recovery.
First, because gender-based violence can be prevented, we will:
Strengthen Women’s Security in Crisis
We will do this by reducing personal and institutional violence against women, strengthening the rule of law, increasing the gender responsiveness of security institutions, and assuring that women are included in disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration initiatives.
Second, because women face special obstacles in accessing justice, we will:
Advance Gender Justice
We will do this by promoting women’s economic, social, political and cultural rights, facilitating access to justice when these rights are denied and supporting gender-sensitive security sector reforms.
Third, because women can help transform societies, we will:
Expand Women’s Citizenship, Participation and Leadership
We will do this by building women’s skills and confidence, supporting women’s representation in the social, political, and economic spheres and developing women’s networks and institutions.
Fourth, to realize the potential of peace agreements to advance gender equality, we will:
Build Peace with and for Women
We will do this by ensuring women’s meaningful participation in formal and informal peace processes and by integrating gender perspectives into the design and implementation of peace missions and peace agreements.
Fifth, because women have unique needs in the context of natural disasters, we will
Support women and men to build back better
We will do this by ensuring women are included in any analyses of disaster risk and post disaster risk assessments.
Sixth, because conflict affects women and men differently, we will:
Ensure Gender-Responsive Recovery
We will do this by infusing gender analyses into all post-conflict planning tools and processes, promoting social protection and sustainable livelihoods and prioritizing women’s needs in key sectors such as transportation, shelter and health care.
Seventh, because seats at the table are not enough, we will:
Transform Government to Deliver for Women
We will do this by building capacities and promoting accountability within government institutions, engaging women and men to foster gender-equitable relations and ensuring gender-sensitive resource mobilization, aid coordination, budgeting and funds allocation.
And eighth, to ensure that both men and women can fulfill their potential as positive forces for change, we will:
Develop Capacities for Social Change
We will do this by building the skills and the will of men and women to prevent and respond to violence, to achieve equitable post-crisis reconstruction, and to build social cohesion.
So this is our pledge to Lorenca, Lina, Sarah, Janet and Immacula, who ran next to me as we escaped an ambush in Burundi: we will not view sexual violence as inevitable, we will not take justice for granted and we will not accept less than full engagement in peacebuilding and recovery. We will advocate – and, more importantly, we will act – to mitigate their suffering, address their concerns and build their resilience. Because these are in fact the choices we face: courage vs. fear; action vs. paralysis; hope vs. despair. We hope that the right choicesare as clear to you as they are to us: COURAGE, ACTION, HOPE.
Thank you.
|
