Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Securitizing Women's Rights and Gender Equality

2009; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 8; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/14754830802686526

1475-4843

Natalie Florea Hudson,

Global Peace and Security Dynamics

Abstract The field of international relations has long debated the meaning of security and its proper place in global politics (Ullman 1983 Ullman, Richard. 1983. Redefining security. International Security, 8(1): 129–153. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). In recent years, this debate has focused on what should be considered in the realm of international security, and many scholars have made a practice out of securitizing issues that are not conventionally seen as matters of security. Issues, such as the environment (Deudney 1990; Kakonen 1994 Kakonen, Jyrki, ed. 1994. Green Security or Militarized Environment, Aldershot: Dartmouth Publishing Company. [Google Scholar]; Litfin 1999 Litfin, Karen. 1999. Constructing environmental security and ecological interdependence. Global Governance, 5(3): 359–378. [Google Scholar]) and HIV/AIDS (Chen 2003 Chen, Lincoln, eds. 2003. Global Health Challenges for Human Security, Cambridge, Ma: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]; Elbe 2006 Elbe, Stefan. 2006. Should Hiv/AIDS be securitized?. International Studies Quarterly, 50(1): 119–144. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]; Price-Smith 2001 Price-SMITH, Andrew. 2001. The Health of Nations: Infectious Disease, Environmental Change, and Their Effects on National Security and Development, Cambridge, MA: Mit Press. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar]; Prins 2004 Prins, Gwyn. 2004. Aids and global security. International Affairs, 80(5): 931–952. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]), are some of the nonmilitary issues that have been—for better or for worse—framed as international security concerns in both academic and policy circles. But while the security debate, especially in light of human rights discourse, is engaging conceptually (and even a useful teaching tool), as responsible scholars we must ask ourselves how the application of this security framework affects policy and practice for these nontraditional security issues. In other words, does the security framework really help bring global attention to issues and groups of people that are normally marginalized? Has it meant more resources and more involvement by state and non-state actors? Or has it resulted in narrow, self-interested, and even militaristic responses to complex social problems? This article sheds light on these questions by analyzing women and the issue of gender equality as it has been securitized by UN Security Council Resolution 1325. Using the securitization theory put forth by Buzan, Wæver, and de Wilde (1998) Buzan, Barry, Wæver, Ole and Wilde, Jaap de. 1998. Security: A New Framework for Analysis, Boulder, Co: Lynne Rienner Publishers. [Google Scholar], it empirically explores the benefits and drawbacks of this process within the context of women's activism in the UN both in terms of political efficacy and normative implications. Natalie Florea Hudson received her PhD in Political Science from the University of Connecticut and is an assistant Professor at the University of Dayton. She specializes in gender and international relations, the politics of human rights, international security studies, and international law and organization. She is currently working on a book with Routledge entitled, Gender, Security and the UN: Security Language as a Political Framework for Women. Her work has appeared the following academic journals: International Journal, Simulation and Gaming, Global Change, Peace and Security, International Studies Quarterly, and International Studies Review (forthcoming). She also has a coauthored piece in the edited volume, The Political Economy of International Security. Notes 1. It is important to note here that no organization, governmental or nongovernmental, discussed in this paper is uniform in its beliefs and strategies. Interagency tensions exist and not all are in support of the security framework for women's rights. Many still prioritize a rights-based approach over a security-based approach. While this tension and its impact on policy is an important part of the larger project, it is not within the scope of this article. 2. See, for example, the debate on human security in Security Dialogue 2004, Vol. 35 (3). 3. Most interviews were conducted in New York during three separate trips in 2006. Interviewees included current and former UN personnel, staff from relevant NGOs, and scholars professionally affiliated with the UN. Several phone and e-mail interviews have been conducted in cases where interviewees were outside the United States. Interviewees represented a diverse group, ranging in nationality, gender, and status/experience within the UN. For the interview questions and basic format, contact the author. Using the “snowball sampling method,” the number of interviews exceeded 35 for this article (Ackerly, Stern, and True 2006 Ackerly, Brooke, Stern, Maria and True, Jaqui, eds. 2006. Feminist Methodologies for International Relations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar]: 11). 4. For more on this approach in the context of feminist International Relations, see Cohn (2006) Cohn, Carol. 2006. “Motives and methods: using multi-sited ethnography to study us national security discourses”. In Feminists Methodologies for International Relations, Edited by: Ackerly, Brooke A., Stern, Maria and True, Jacqui. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]. 5. Emma Rothschild (1995) draws this distinction between vertical and horizontal expansion of security in “What is Security?” Daedalus: Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 124. 6. Theoretical debates on human security are well established in the field and inform my larger research agenda; however, they are beyond the scope of this paper. For an excellent review of the various theoretical and policy perspectives on human security, see MacFarlene and Khong 2006 Macfarlene, S. Neil and Khong, Yuen Foong. 2006. Human Security and the Un: A Critical History, Bloomington, In: Indiana University Press. [Google Scholar]; Hampson 2004 Hampson, Fen Olser. 2004. A concept in need of a global policy response. Security Dialogue, 35(3): 349–350. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar]; Hubert 2004 Hubert, Don. 2004. An idea that works in practice. Security Dialogue, 35(3): 351–352. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar]. 7. Barry Buzan, Ole Wæver, and Jaap de Wilde are among the usual suspects associated with this constructivist theory of security. 8. For more on this theoretical paradigm, see Buzan 1983 Butler, Judith. 1997. Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative, London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]; 2004 Buzan, Barry. 2004. A reductionist, idealistic notion that adds little analytical value. Security Dialogue, 35(3): 369–370. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar]; Buzan and Wæver 2003 Buzan, Barry and Wæver, Ole. 2003. Regions and Powers: The Structure of International Security, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar]. 9. Gender-based violence also occurs publicly in many situations. Honor killings in Pakistan are a vivid example of this. But even public gender-based violence often silences its victims. 10. See Appendix A for a summary of Resolution 1325. 11. For more speeches using this framework, see the collection at http://www.peacewomen.org/un/8thAnniversary/8thAnniversaryindex.html. 12. For more on the monitoring of Security Council activity in terms of 1325, see 1325 Resolution Watch by Peacewomen.org at http://www.peacewomen.org/un/sc/1325_Monitor/thematicindex.htm. 13. Without a doubt, legal frameworks through international treaties and conventions do not guarantee the rights for anyone. Compliance and enforcement are huge obstacles, particularly for women, as the next section will demonstrate. “Nevertheless, the existence of human rights standards contributes in important measure to the recognition of rights. They provide a focus for efforts to obtain recognition of rights; to enhance respect for them; and to induce compliance with international obligations that have been assumed” (Martin and Carson 1996 Martin, J. P. and Carson, Mary Lesley, eds. 1996. Women and Human Rights: The Basic Documents, New York: Columbia University Press. [Google Scholar]: Preface). This recognition should not be overlooked. 14. While these National Action Plans can be seen as a result of SCR 1325, this group of countries have long been sympathetic and supportive to the UN's work on women's rights. Thus, it is not surprising that they were the first to develop such national policies, but SCR 1325 did give these countries the international mandate and organizing framework to put the policies into place. Austria, Switzerland, and Iceland have also recently published and released national action plans on 1325. These documents can be accessed at http://www.un.org/womenwatch/ianwge/taskforces/wps/national_level_impl.html. 15. Suggested accountability mechanisms include the designation of a SC member as a focal point or SC working group on women, peace, and security, performance measures and required reporting procedures for national governments, and the requirement of national action plans on 1325. 16. The larger research project further explores CEDAW as well as the way a rights-based approach continues to coexist with a security approach in the context of UNIFEM operations and programming, the UN's leading agency on women rights. 17. In short, this means consolidating the three existing UN gender entities into an enhanced and independent gender entity, headed by an Executive Director with the rank of Under Secretary-General, appointed through a meritocratic competition demonstrably open to those outside the UN. 18. It is worth noting here that both state and nonstate actors focused their concerns on implementation gaps and obstacles at the last three anniversary meetings for 1325, which included October 2006, 2007, and 2008. 19. The missions include East Timor (twice), Liberia, Côte d'Ivoire, Burundi, Haiti, and Sudan. 20. These indicators are far from perfect. As Sandra Whitworth (2004) Whitworth, Sandra. 2004. Men, Militarism, and UN Peacekeeping, Boulder, Co: Lynne Rienner. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar] points out in her research, it is one thing to establish a gender affairs unit; it's another thing to allocate such a unit the basic funding that it needs. 21. For a more detailed analysis on these “achievements” for specific countries, see N. F. Hudson (2005) Hudson, Natalie Florea. 2005. En-gendering Un peace operations. International Journal, 60(3): 785–806. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]. 22. As of January 2009, DPKO has a staff of seven within its gender unit. In contrast, the Office of the Special Advisor on Gender Issues (OSAGI) only has two staff members devoted to work on peace and security. 23. While UNIFEM has regional offices, it does not have a field presence in this same way. 24. For the full text of the checklist, go to http://www.peacewomen.org/un/ngoadvocacy/1325Tools/checklist.pdf.