 |
|
 |
|
|
Home
|
Audra Thomas Blog Essay 5: My Time In Washington When I first decided to do this internship I was excited and a bit nervous. I had wanted to do this for a long time but it was not until a few months ago that I realized I was finally ready to leave my bubble in Dallas. I knew that it would provide me a great learning experience and an opportunity to gain knowledge and perspective about the issues I am passionate about, but I had no idea how much I would grow intellectually and personally. For those of you who do not know me, I have a visual impairment that can kind of make adjusting to new situations a bit difficult. This was the primary source of my anxiety about moving out here. How would I get around? Would I get lost? And all sorts of questions like that. Luckily, I quickly made the adjustment, and I owe a great deal of that to my fabulous roommates provided by the WISH intern housing program. I lived with eight other interns, seven of whom worked on the Hill and another who worked at National Public Radio, who came from all over and brought with them different experiences, political views, philosophies about life. While there was occasionally tension in the house, we all seemed to generally respect one another and they helped orient me to the Metro and figure out directions to my events. They introduced me to many things about life and friendship and I am sure that without them I would have gotten lost more than I actually did. On the academic front, I attended many lectures and a few congressional hearings and met with a couple of individuals who introduced me to their professions. I did not really have a strong interest in the Middle East conflict, but I was immediately thrust into these issues during my first couple of weeks as I attended events discussing the prospects of peace following the Israeli-Hezbollah war during the summer. I then started dealing with Afghanistan. I attended a book launch for Sarah Chayse’s Punishment After Virtue, a house committee hearing on the state of the country five years after the fall of the Taliban and a couple of lectures dealing with women in Afghanistan and the post-Taliban situation. One of the most interesting and intense things I attended was the House International Relations committee hearing on the situation in Darfur. The room was packed and it was clear that all inside were very passionate about what is happening over there. I attended a few other congressional hearings, but because Congress was out of session for a good part of the time I was here, there wasn’t much going on. Once they came back at the beginning of December, though, I was able to attend the Gates confirmation hearing. I was expecting it to be a little more interesting than it was, but instead it just ended up being a pretty big love fest. There were moments where a senator would ask a really good question and the room would get a bit tense, but in the end nothing major happened. Even the protestors who were sitting in front of me didn’t seem to instigate anything, which was rather surprising considering they spent the first two hours of the hearing writing with Sharpie on their signs. At SAIS there were many events discussing development and emerging governments, especially in Africa, that were very interesting. The United States Institute of Peace (USIP) held meetings to discuss the progress of their working groups on Afghanistan and Iraq. Much of the discussion at these panels involved the rule of law and creating stable legal systems to facilitate the development of good governance in post-conflict zones. Some of this discussion also spilled over into a different lecture about post-conflict Liberia and the need to address certain things in the legal system under their new constitution so that peace and stability could be maintained after the current president leaves office in a couple of years. Elsewhere (namely Brookings and the New America Foundation) I went to events about the future of the United Nations, transatlantic relations and two large forums on economic security and progress in the U.S. I think that I probably found the most interesting discussions at The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. They held many events that included an overt gender perspective, which is perhaps what grabbed my attention the most. One of the best events that I attended was this viewing of a documentary series called Gender Montage that examines women’s lives in post-Communist countries. The films and discussion that followed were very moving and made me think a lot. There was also a very interesting panel of returned Peace Corps volunteers across the decades who discussed the work they did in improving maternal health and introducing family planning and reproductive health services into the communities where they served. Besides these lectures that I attended, I also had the opportunity to meet with individuals who gave me some insight into their professions. The first woman I met with worked at Chemonics, a private company that contracts primarily with USAID, and runs the women’s legal project that trains lawyers and judges in laws regarding women and women’s rights. I was introduced to her through one of my roommate’s friends and while I was there I was also able to speak with my roommate’s friend who had been working there for just a couple of years. In my last essay I discussed my meeting with Ambassador Steiner. Both of these meetings were very insightful and gave me a greater understanding of what exactly I am interested in and possible career paths. I met with Shelly virtually every week to discuss both my weekly activities and to discuss graduate school and career plans as well. My time up here helped me find confidence in myself and helped me figure out what I want to do with my future. I experienced new things and learned a whole lot. I was introduced to topics that I had never really thought about and I gained a deeper understanding of issues that I have been interested in for a long time. Shelly helped me understand the connections between seemingly unrelated topics and to learn how to make professional contacts for the future. This internship was a valuable learning experience for me and I highly recommend spending a semester here in DC to anyone that wants to become involved in public service or just change the world somehow because the opportunities that this city offers are immense and you will gain a great perspective of life and what you want to do with it. Essay 4: Women in Afghanistan and Iraq The Office of International Women’s Issues in the State Department is an evolution of the President’s Interagency Council on Women established by the Clinton Administration in 1995. During the 1990s, the Council was focused on implementing the Beijing Platform for Action, but under the Bush Administration its scope has changed. It is now under the auspices of the Undersecretary for Democracy and Global Affairs where its primary mission is to ensure that women’s rights are integral in all parts of United State’s foreign policy. The Office does work on human trafficking, violence against women and increasing women’s legal and property rights, but most importantly it has been the steward of U.S. policy regarding women in Afghanistan and Iraq. In November I sat down with Ambassador Steve Steiner, director of the Office of Women, for a conversation revolving mostly around U.S. policy regarding women in these two conflict zones, and have written this essay with information learned from this conversation and through my own research. In Afghanistan, one of the most significant achievements have been the establishment of seventeen women’s resource centers open throughout the country’s thirty-four provinces. Their main functions are to provide literacy programs, employment counseling and child and maternal health programs to Afghan women. These resources are vital to increasing the status and empowerment of women within the country. The U.S.-Afghan Women’s Council has been and integral part of improving the lives of women in Afghanistan. Because the Office receives no direct funds for projects in Afghanistan, the Council, a public-private partnership, is tasked with “[mobilizing] private resources to ensure Afghan women gain the skills and education deprived them under years of Taliban misrule” (About the U.S.-Afghan). Through this partnership, Western donors have supported the construction of the resource centers, the establishment of microfinance lending institutions and the creation of a teacher-training institute at Kabul University. The Council has also assisted in training women judges and lawyers about civil procedure, women’s legal rights and international conventions on human rights. The situation in Iraq is different. Unlike in Afghanistan, the Office has received direct funds from Congress to institute projects on the ground in the country. Most of these projects revolve around economic empowerment, political training and media training. Of the $4.5 billion dollars received last year, Ambassador Steiner explained that much of it went to increasing women’s economic status through encouraging entrepreneurship and providing microfinance programs. It is done this way because the Office believes that economic empowerment and political empowerment go hand in hand. The funds are dispersed as grants to U.S.-registered NGOs (like the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute, the Independent Women’s Forum, the American Islamic Congress, International War and Peace Reporting and the U.S. Institute of Peace) who may then award subgrants to selected Iraqi NGOs. Much attention has been paid to democracy and political training in both Iraq and Afghanistan. In Iraq, the State Department launched the Iraqi Women’s Democracy Initiative which trained women for the elections, leadership roles, party and coalition building and NGO outreach. Media training programs were also included. Similar initiatives, mostly under the guise of the U.S.-Afghan Women’s Council, occurred in Afghanistan as well. The women that participate in this training, some of which bring women to the U.S. for meetings with government and business leaders, are carefully selected with the aim that they will go home and act as multipliers of their knowledge. In both countries this training has left its mark with women being elected to parliament (and in Afghanistan’s case nineteen over the established quota) and appointed to cabinet positions. Additionally, women’s NGOs, activists and journalists have reaped the benefits by learning how to organize more effectively to convey to women their rights and resources available under the new governments. My conversation with Ambassador Steiner was very insightful. At one point when I started asking many questions about Afghanistan he was kind enough to bring in his colleague, Siria Lopez, who was more knowledgeable about the details of the Office’s work in that country. Prior to my meeting with him I read through information online to get a better feel of what the situation is like for Afghan and Iraqi women. I then developed questions, one of which centered on how the security situation affects women’s daily lives, economic enterprise and political involvement. The answer I received was somewhat disheartening. I say this because, while the status of women has certainly improved since the fall of the two regimes, the lives of women and girls, especially in rural areas, are still difficult. In Afghanistan, parents, teachers and girls themselves still face threats for seeking out, teaching and receiving educations for their daughters or themselves. In communities where there is violence, insurgency or other instability women have been precluded from operating their businesses or going to work because of the dangerous security situation. In politics and activism while there has been significant headway made, women still face much discrimination based on traditional and/or religious beliefs. Societal, cultural and religious beliefs have been, in fact, great barriers to women achieving true equality because it is much easier to change a law/write statements directly into a new constitution than it is to change individual minds about the role of women and their important contribution to all facets of life. I do not believe, however, that equality is elusive. I believe, instead, it will require time, security, understanding, much work and much activism to change the attitudes and beliefs that disadvantage women and girls. Works Cited “About the U.S.-Afgan Women’s Council.” U.S.-Afghan Women’s Council. 30 Nov. 2006 http://usawc.state.gov/c7527.htm “Building A New Iraq: Iraqi Women Step Forward in Partnership.” U.S. Department of State. 27 Sept. 2004. 28 Nov. 2006 http://www.state.gov/g/rls/rm/2004/36654.htm “Founding Mothers-Next Steps In Post-Election Afghanistan and Iraq.” U.S. Department of State. 8 Mar. 2005. 27 Nov. 2006 http://www.state.gov/g/wi/43196.htm “International Women’s Issues Newsletter, Fall 2006.” U.S. Department of State. Oct. 2006. 31 Nov. 2006 http://www.state.gov/g/wi/74751.htm
“Women In Iraq: New Beginnings.” U.S.
Department of State. 11 Mar. 2004. 28 Nov. 2006
Essay 3: The Effect of Population
on Human Security At an event sponsored by the Environmental Change and Security Program at the Woodrow Wilson Center, I picked up some literature regarding population and security. This, coupled with some recent reading for my independent study, led me to further investigate the relationship between the two. Population and security have a unique and complex relationship consisting of two parts: traditional security and human security. Traditional security encompasses the internal peace and control of external threats to a country. Human security is the security of the individual and emphasizes sustainable development, economic development and female empowerment. The Malthusian belief that rapid population causes environmental scarcity resulting in violent conflict is one view in population, environment and security studies, but this notion has been under increasing scrutiny. Henrik Urdal, a researcher at the International Peace Institute in Oslo, recently conducted a study that found that population growth, land scarcity and urbanization do “not greatly influence patterns of war and peace” (ECSP 5) since the 1970s. I think that while environmental scarcity does play a role in some conflicts, especially in matters of intensifying and worsening them, I believe even more that underlying social problems such as poverty, unemployment, lack of educational opportunities and the devaluation of women and girls in rapidly growing populations are perhaps more to blame for the roots of conflict because of their close connection with the maintenance of human security. I cannot go any further without first explaining the meaning of human security. The Commission on Human Security has defined it as “protecting fundamental freedoms…protecting people from critical (severe) and pervasive (widespread) threats and situations…creating political, social, environmental, economic, military and cultural systems that together give people the building blocks of survival, livelihood and dignity” (Human Security Now 4). In short, human security seeks to secure the freedoms and rights of an individual. Unfortunately, however, when we fail to provide this security to all individuals equally, conflict emerges. In rapidly growing populations, people, especially young men, feel disenfranchised without political or economic power so they see instigating or participating in conflict as the means of achieving more security and opportunity for themselves, consequentially rocking the internal peace and stability of a country in their quest to attain it. In recent years much attention has been paid to the “youth bulge” and its effect on things ranging from terrorism to the spread of HIV/AIDS. The world’s rapidly growing youth population, especially in Africa and the Middle East, is an important component that leads to the degradation of human security because many developing countries have been caught unprepared for the consequences of so many young people. This has resulted in significant strains on the healthcare and education infrastructures and, most importantly, the labor market. In countries with little economic opportunity, young men are facing increased frustration and discontent with the system that they view as oppressing them, so they often view conflict as an “appealing option” (ECSP 13). If you combine these feelings with other seeds of conflict, like deep ethnic divisions or intense religious fundamentalism, the effect is perhaps even more amplified because then it is not just the citizens in conflict with the government, but it often results in citizens being in conflict with fellow citizens. It appears that the youth bulge cannot be stopped for the next twenty years, but things can be done now to help alleviate its affects and prevent future population surges. Sarah Staveteig, a doctoral candidate at UC Berkeley, suggests using international aid to create internal volunteer corps to provide opportunities for young people (ECSP 17). I find this idea to be very interesting and innovative because it will allow people to use their education, learn skills and prepare their country for the next generation, all while (hopefully) improving the present economic and political circumstances. I also agree with some of the more traditional proposals that recommend governments offer incentives to employers to hire entry-level workers (even in developed countries like France), expand access to secondary and higher education and to maintain fair and transparent political systems; this can be achieved by incorporating proposals into broader development plans where funding can be allotted either by governments or donor nations, NGOs/IGOs can provide technical assistance and all involved can expect accountability. The relationship between gender balance and conflict is traditionally an overlooked aspect of security studies, but it is increasingly becoming apparent that the two are very connected. There is presently a large number of missing women and girls in Asia, especially in India, China and Pakistan, that has created a gender imbalance in the population. Valerie M. Hudson, professor of political science at Brigham Young University, and Andrea M. den Boer, a research fellow at the University of Kent at Canterbury, suggest that this phenomenon has the potential to breed conflict in the coming years. Married men are seen as “social protectors,” but if the ratio imbalance continues there will no longer be enough women to marry, leaving many men single and ripe for participation in violence. They argue that the imbalanced male-female ratio will create large numbers of men who are unable to marry, which will result in their being “poorer, less educated, less skilled and less likely to be employed” (ECSP 22). They offer consequences similar to those provided in the earlier discussion of the youth bulge: these single men that lack opportunity will see violence and conflict as their only means of attaining power and change. With this in mind, maintaining a gender balance within societies is crucial if conflict is to be avoided. While imbalance may not directly cause conflict, the importance of a balanced sex ratio is definitely important because it will lend itself to supporting greater human security for all. In some parts of Asia, girls are devalued and seen as a burden; in creating a more balanced ratio we will improve the lives of girls who would otherwise just vanish. To do this, cultural practices, like dowries, need to be altered and governments need to create incentives for parents to raise their girls. For men, their human security will improve because they will have more potential for marriage, leading them to experience greater economic prosperity and the role as “social protector,” both of which will lessen their likelihood to join or instigate conflict. The link between population growth and security is strong. Human security is vital to preventing conflict, but when a country experiences a surge in population, the drain on infrastructure and opportunity surmounts, leaving many people, especially young men, feeling disenfranchised and angry. If traditional security is to be maintained in these environments ripe for conflict, we must do something to address the needs of human security in these rapidly growing populations. The gender imbalance must be corrected. Finding these missing women and girls is an essential component of this, as is educating and changing attitudes about women and girls within societies. Addressing the youth bulge is even more important. While we cannot stop it from happening in the immediate future, we can implement programs to build social infrastructures and provide economic opportunities to mitigate some of its effect in the years to come; additionally, we can develop strategies and education programs to reduce the possibilities of another such population surge. Taking the pessimistic route, I do not find it realistic to believe that we will ever get rid of all conflict, but I do believe that if we focus on issues related to increasing development and opportunity and equality I think that individuals will feel more secure in their rights and their being, leaving fewer seeds for conflict to arise from. Works Cited Conant, Eve. “What Carried the Girls Away.” New York Times 12 Feb. 2006. 1 Nov. 2006. ECSP Report 11. Ed. Environmental Change and Security Program. 2005. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. 30 Oct. 2006. Human Security Now. New York, 2003. Commission on Human Security. 2003. 31 Oct. 2006. “Q&A on Human Security.” OCHA. UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. 27 Oct. 2006. “The Security Demographic.” Population Action International. 1 Nov. 2006. Sen, Amartya. “More Than One Hundred Million Women Are Missing.” New York Review of Books 20 Dec. 1990. 28 Oct. 2006. Essay 2: Sudan and the Conflict in Darfur Over the past few years I have developed an interest in Africa that has greatly determined my course of study. It began by studying the HIV/AIDS pandemic on the continent, which subsequently led me to discover the issues of women and gender how they intersect with the development process. Though I am especially interested in the status of women and how education access to healthcare and increased political equality can improve this, warfare and its affect on women is also an important issue that I believe cannot be ignored. The genocide in Darfur has greatly impacted women, and when I attended the House International Relations subcommittee hearing on the conflict much attention was paid to Darfuri women. The representative from USAID, Michael Hess, discussed the security situation for women (both Darfuris and aid workers), and the actress Mira Sorvino heavily discussed the impact war was having on women, paying special attention to rape being used as a weapon of war. The following essay is provides a history of the current conflict, actions the international community has taken and steps that I believe need to be taken in order to end the genocide. For the last two and a half decades, Sudan has been under siege. First, a civil war ravaged the country for twenty-one years, and then in 2003 conflict in the western region of the country, Darfur, erupted between the government, Arab militias and rebel groups. This latest conflict turned into a genocide that has only recently come to be recognized as an international humanitarian crisis. This neglect of another warring part of Africa is ironic because following the atrocities in Rwanda, the world said “never again”. Yet, we have let it happen again. We have let the violence progress from simple conflict to grave genocide, where hundreds of thousands have been killed and millions have been displaced. In 1989 a military coup brought the National Islamic Front (NIF) and General Umar al-Bashir to power. The NIF is a rather violent and oppressive regime that, according to David Winter is “guided by radical ideology, access to riches and thirst for personal power”[1]). It allowed a civil war between the Arab north and African south to continue for twenty-one years because it could not agree on the imposition (or lack thereof) of Islamic law in the South. Finally, in 2005, a comprehensive peace agreement (CPA) was reached between the government and the Sudanese People Liberation Movement/Army (SPLMA). The CPA called for the withdrawal of troops from the South, repatriation of refugees and the establishment of an interim power-sharing government; however the most pertinent requirement to this discussion is that the CPA demanded the government, SPLMA and the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) cease the emerging conflict in Darfur. The violence in Darfur began in early 2003 when Sudanese Liberation Army (SLA) and JEM rebel groups began attacking government interests in the western region of the country because they were dissatisfied with the government’s supposed neglect of the region. The government interpreted these attacks as an offensive action against the regime, and, in response, supplied Arab militias in Darfur with material and financial resources to fight the rebels. One group, however, that the government refuses to admit to supporting, despite much evidence to the contrary, is the Janjaweed – the most notorious and violent of the Arab militias. According to Darfuri refugees, the Janjaweed rush into villages (that have usually experienced air raids just moments before) on horses and kill the men, rape the women and loot whatever possible. The conflict between these rebels, the Janjaweed and the government has created a grave humanitarian crisis in Darfur that gains increasing international attention as the days pass on and more people are slaughtered, uprooted and suffer for no reason. As of 8 September the UN estimated that there were two million internally displaced people (IDP) within Darfur and 200,000 refugees in neighboring Chad[2]; the official death toll has been difficult to assess, but many estimates put it into the hundreds of thousands. Safety in the IDP and refugee camps has been deteriorating over the past months, bringing greater risk to both the Darfuris and the thirteen thousand humanitarian workers. IDP camps are at constant threat of being forcibly destroyed and relocated, and the twelve refugee camps on the Chad-Sudanese border have recently experienced an alarming spillover of violence. Access to food aid is an increasing problem, not for lack of it, but rather lack of security in the distribution process. The security of humanitarian workers has been steadily decreasing, causing twelve aid workers to be killed in the last three months (which is more than the past three-plus years combined) and leading some organizations to pull out of the region. Like with wars elsewhere, the conflict in Darfur places a special burden on women. Women are often left with the difficult and dangerous task of moving their families to IDP and refugee camps because their husbands have been killed by the Janjaweed. Once inside these camps, they are left with the responsibility of creating and maintaining the semblance of some sort of home while having minimal resources and space; additionally, they must also play the role of nurturing mother in this tumultuous time of their children’s lives. The threat of rape is a constant one for Darfuri women. Rape is recognized as a “weapon of war” and the Janjaweed utilize this despicable tactic against women when they charge the villages and when women are merely seeking out ways to provide for their families. The most common occurrence of rape in Darfur happens when women leave the relative safety of the camps and go on searches for firewood or water. On these trips, where security is usually not available, they have to go progressively further to find what they seek, putting them at greater and greater risk of being attacked. When they are attacked, they are beaten, raped and usually marked so that others may know a Janjaweed has touched them. Then, when the women return to their camp or village they experience an absolute ostracism and disowning by their husbands and families, especially if the rape results in pregnancy. The international community has been debating the genocide in Darfur since the negotiations of the CPA. While Secretary of State, Colin Powell took a fact-finding mission to Sudan in 2004 and soon afterwards became the first U.S. official to publicly recognize the tragedy in Darfur as “genocide,” but it wasn’t until a year later that President Bush publicly used the word. An African Union (AU) peacekeeping force was deployed into the region in 2004 to monitor a ceasefire; unfortunately, this ceasefire did not hold and the conflict intensified, leading to an expansion of the AU peacekeeping mandate. (The mandate has recently been extended until the end of the year in hopes that a new, more equipped international force can take its place.) In March 2005, the UN Security Council passed a series of resolutions that established the UN Mission in Sudan (UNMIS), criticized the Sudanese government and rebels for continued violence and human rights abuses and referred the International Criminal Court to take jurisdiction of claims of war crimes and crimes against humanity. In May 2006, a peace agreement was signed by some of the rebel forces (which are now various factions of the SLA and JEM), but in the late summer the peace greatly deteriorated. The deterioration of security and the growing humanitarian crisis led the UN Security Council to finally pass (despite abstentions from both Russia and China) Resolution 1706, which calls for an international peacekeeping force to be deployed. Though the Sudanese government has rejected the resolution citing sovereignty issues, the international community is planning the logistics of such a force and is developing harsher sanctions that they are threatening to impose on the Sudanese government, militia leaders and rebel leaders if the Bashir government does not accept an unconditional acceptance of S/Res 1706. The Sudanese government has thus far proven to be uncooperative in addressing the situation in Darfur. They have pledged to disarm the Janjaweed, but that is unlikely to occur anytime soon because the Janjaweed are supported by the Bashir regime and utilized as an official counterinsurgency force. The government and the warring militias have defied peace agreements and international mandates, and the international community has done little to show their disapproval of this behavior. At the hearing, it was clearly stated that one of the reasons the conflict has continued is that we have failed to follow through on our threats of action. We have not enforced the UN-mandated no-fly zone, implemented strict economic sanctions or even seriously discussed the creation of an international peacekeeping force until late this summer. In order to start seeing change and progress toward stopping this genocide we must start taking action. We must deploy an international peacekeeping force as passed in S/Res/1706 even if it means doing so without the complete cooperation of the Sudanese government. We must develop targeted sanctions, a blockade and enforce a no-fly zone (like provided in S/Res/1591) that will allow for humanitarian exemptions. We must support the International Criminal Court (ICC) or a similar tribunal to prosecute war crimes, including the crime of rape, against the perpetrators on all sides. We must provide appropriate support to the U.S. Special Envoy so they may fully utilize U.S. resources to address security and humanitarian aspects of the conflict. And finally, more pressure must be applied to China because they hold many interests in the country and can put diplomatic pressure on the Bashir regime. The Darfur Peace and Accountability Act, that recently passed Congress and is currently awaiting President Bush’s signature, is an important step that the U.S. has taken individually; however, the final version excluded an important section on divestiture, which has historically proven to greatly impact the continuation of a regime and its ability to continue oppressive and criminal practices. Attending this subcommittee hearing was an extraordinary experience. I knew about Darfur, but I did not know a lot of the details and proposals that existed to find a solution to this genocide. In his testimony, Michael Hess said that “hope is not a plan.”[3] He is right. We cannot just hope that the situation will resolve itself. Instead, our leaders must muster the political will to take decisive action and stand up to the Sudanese government because the government in question fails to address the atrocities that, in many instances, they are committing against their own people. We say “never again,” but it is happening again, and, as global momentum for stopping the genocide gains ground we must take a leading role after neglecting it for so long. Works Cited
Bureau of African Affairs. “Background Note:
Sudan.” U.S. State Department. Jan. 2006. 25 Sept. 2006 Cooper, Helene. “Rice Says Sudan Could Face More Sanctions Over Darfur.” New York Times 28 Sept. 2006. 30 Sept. 2006 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/28/world/africa/28diplo.html Frotline/World: Sudan - The Quick and the Terrible. 2006. WGBH. 28 Sept. 2006 http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/sudan/thestory.html “Hearings/Meetings.” Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights and International Operations. Sept. 2006. Committee on International Relations, U.S. House of Representatives. 28 Sept. 2006 http://wwwa.house.gov/international_relations/afhear.htm “Worsening Darfur crisis threatens entire region, Guterres warns.” Chad/Darfur Emergency. 8 Sept. 2006. UN High Commission for Refugees. 29 Sept. 2006 http://www.unhcr.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/chad?page=press&id=45012ab52 “Q&A: Crisis in Darfur.” Human Rights Watch. 2006. 27 Sept. 2006 http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2004/05/05/darfur8536.htm “Q&A: Sudan’s Darfur Conflict.” BBC News. 29 Sept. 2006. 29 Sept. 2006 http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/africa/3496731.stm “UN approves Darfur peacekeeping force.” CNN. 31 Aug. 2006. 28 Sept. 2006 http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/africa/08/31/un.sudanvote/index.html [1] Testimony before the House International Relations Subcommittee on Africa, Global HR and IO on 20 Sept 2006. [2] In a press release by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees dated 8 Sept 2006. [3] Testimony before the House International Relations Subcommittee on Africa, Global HR and IO on 20 Sept 2006.
Essay 1:
Women and Nonviolent Movements During my first week interning at the Osgood Center, I attended a number of hearings and presentations. One lecture at the United States Institute of Peace examined the best practices of “people power” movements, particularly in Eastern Europe. That session inspired this essay as a further exploration of such movements elsewhere in the world and the impact of women’s activism in people power movements. Throughout the twentieth century, the practice known as “people power” and its component of nonviolent conflict arose in societies around the world. The primary aim of people power is to bring about institutional political change through nonviolent means such as strategic political organizing, peaceful protest, strikes and similar practices[1]. People power has seen success around the world from the Philippines to South Africa, and in all of these instances women’s involvement in the movements were the key to their success. With the success of these movements and their ability to bring peace elsewhere in the world, it is intriguing to explore why few movements have occurred in the Middle East and why, when people power does exist in the Middle East, women tend to be a driving force behind it. In 1986 a highly successful people power movement called the Epifanio de los Santos Avenue (EDSA) Revolution, came to pass in the Philippines. Demonstrations lasted for three days and resulted in the overthrow of the authoritarian regime of Ferdinand Marcos and the installation of a more democratic regime headed by the country’s first female president Corazon Aquino. As demonstrated by this new president being female, women were key participants in the revolution itself; additionally, they participated heavily in building the new government, advocating that gender concerns be included in the new constitution and for the creation of a development plan that specifically addressed women’s issues. The movement against apartheid in South Africa was often publicly led by women, which was noticeably different from other nonviolent movements occurring elsewhere on the continent. Trade unions gave women an opportunity to train as political leaders and learn new methods of organizing political action; when the apartheid government declared unions and strikes by Africans illegal, this training enabled African women to effectively continue organizing. Women, especially African women, were the first to respond with boycotts against the apartheid transportation, education and “pass” policies because they saw them as “an attempt by the government to destroy their family structure and with it the basic fabric of their respective societies”[2]. They formed the Federation of South African Women, and when that was no longer effective following the forced undergrounding of the ANC, the Black Women’s Federation (BWF) was founded. The BWF was eventually banned, but women still participated in the anti-apartheid movement. Once it became apparent that a new democratic South Africa was possible, they demanded (and received) a voice at the negotiating table, with Mandela himself publicly recognizing that “freedom [could not] be achieved unless the women [were] emancipated from all forms of oppression”[3]. Today in the Middle East, women are taking an active role in the quest for conflict resolution. In Israeli and Palestine, the conflict has greatly impacted the daily lives of families, leading women on both sides of the border to work together to advocate for peace, human rights and the improved status of Palestinian women. The Jerusalem Link is a partnership between two organizations, Bat Shalom (Israeli) and the Jerusalem Center for Women (Palestinian), established by peace activists to represent women’s interests for the respective sides of the dispute. Another component of women’s activism is the newly created International Women’s Commission, founded in 2005 by UNIFEM, whose sole goal is to seek implementation of the various UN resolutions and reach a final two-state solution, all while ensuring the inclusion of women at the negotiating table so a gendered perspective may be considered from the beginning of a new Palestinian state. The women of Afghanistan have experienced an interesting history in their quest for peace and regime change. The largest and most persistent organization is the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA), established in the late 1970s to advocate for women’s rights, democracy, and (when the Soviet occupation began) resistance efforts and a lasting peace. Following the Taliban’s ascendancy to power, women were precluded from participating in public life, but their desire to change the political atmosphere and improve their status within society still existed. With the installation of a new more democratic regime following the NATO action after 11 September, women activists were heavily involved in the creation of the new government and demonstrated their desire for change through nonviolent political participation of which they had been denied for so long. With the many authoritarian, dictatorial and oppressive regimes in the Middle East today, there are many aspects of life that individuals seek to change, including, but not limited to, increased political rights. As proven elsewhere in the world, changing political systems can be achieved through nonviolent means and people power movements. When such movements occur, many times women are key to their success, whether or not they receive recognition at its conclusion. Behind the veil of oppression in many Middle Eastern countries, like elsewhere in the world, women often form their own unique bonds based on their common desire to preserve their families and provide opportunities for their children. With these goals in mind, it is evident that women have the desire to bring about revolution. Works Cited “About RAWA.” RAWA. 2006. 13 Sept 2006. http://www.rawa.org/rawa.html “The Jerusalem Link: Who We Are.” Jerusalem Link. Bat Shalom. 14 Sept 2006. http://www.batshalom.org/jlink_about.php “The Filipino Women’s Movement in Contemporary Times.” October 2001. Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. 14 Sept 2006. http://library.fes.de/fulltext/iez/01109005.htm "The Role of Women in the Struggle Against Apartheid, 1980." United Nations in the Struggle Against Apartheid. 29 Mar. 2001. ANC. 13 Sept. 2006 http://www.anc.org.za/un/womenrole.html Zulu, Lindiwe. “Role of Women in the Reconstruction and Development of the New Democratic South Africa.” Feminist Studies 24.1 (Spring 1998): 147-157. JSTOR. JSTOR. 15 Apr. 2006 http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0046-3663%28199821%2924%3A1%3C147%3AROWITR%3E2.0.CO%3B2-N [1] It is also occasionally used to combat systemic oppression, like patriarchy, however achieving success through these means is much more difficult than overcoming institutional oppression. [2] "The Role of Women in the Struggle Against Apartheid, 1980." United Nations in the Struggle Against Apartheid. 29 Mar. 2001. ANC. 13 Sept. 2006 http://www.anc.org.za/un/womenrole.html [3] Zulu, Lindiwe. “Role of Women in the Reconstruction and Development of the New Democratic South Africa.” Feminist Studies 24.1 (Spring 1998): 147-157. JSTOR. JSTOR. 15 Apr. 2006 http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0046-3663%28199821%2924%3A1%3C147%3AROWITR%3E2.0.CO%3B2-N |
|
© 2008 Osgood Center |
|