An emerging tension characterizes conflict resolution practice: promoting power-sharing between ethnic groups while simultaneously mandating women's inclusion in peace processes and in post-conflict institutions. Scholars of ethnic conflict have not adequately theorized the gender implications of power-sharing, and practitioners have failed to implement mechanisms that would make power-sharing representative of constituencies beyond ethno-national cleavages. There is no substantive reason why the representation of women and ethnic groups should be in tension. Nevertheless, gender is often ignored in the power-sharing literature and gender-mainstreaming practices appear irreconcilable with power-sharing practice. Drawing on three cases of post-conflict power-sharingBosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, and Northern Ireland -this article identifies reasons why this tension remains in practice, especially the overriding emphasis in powersharing on ethno-nationalist elites and conflict protagonists.Over the last decade, conflict resolution scholars and practitioners have increasingly promoted power-sharing institutions in ethnically divided societies. Powersharing entails the participation and representation of all ethnic groups in conflict resolution and post-conflict institutions and, when confronted by ethnic conflicts, is favoured by international organizations including the UN. At the same time, international agencies and advocacy networks have been drawing attention to the role of women in peacebuilding. The UN calls for member states to increase women's participation in the negotiation and implementation of peace agreements. Drawing on UN Security Council Resolution 1325 (2000), on 'Women, Peace and Security' (WPS), feminist scholars and activists are carving out a role for women in conflict resolution and post-conflict peacebuilding. Yet a tension is evident: ethnic conflict scholars have yet to adequately theorize the gendered implications of power-sharing arrangements, while practitioners have yet to implement the kind of mechanisms that would make power-sharing constituencies representative beyond ethno-national-sectarian cleavages.This article examines three cases of ethnicized conflict in which power-sharing was implemented as part of a larger peace process. In two cases, Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) in 1995 and Northern Ireland in 1998, power-sharing was adopted prior to Resolution 1325. In a third case, Burundi, a transitional peace agreement was adopted in 2000, and power-sharing was constitutionally enshrined in 2005. The cases illustrate some of the challenges in reconciling the inclusion of women with the inclusion of ethno-national groups. The analysis is centred on Resolution 1325, given its specific emphasis on women's
A recent call by some feminist conflict mediation practitioners proposes to rename power-sharing: either by prioritizing sharing over power or by replacing ‘power’ with the word ‘responsibility’. The purpose of these discursive reformulations is to move beyond just adding women to power-sharing institutions; instead, these proposals signal a desire to promote inclusion through a feminist emphasis on sharing in power-sharing systems above a masculinist emphasis on power. Inspired by these proposals and reflecting on the experiences of gender mediation experts, I work through critical feminist theories of intersectionality and feminist empowerment to show how power-sharing theory can be reimagined so that power is not just understood as coercive or as a finite resource that can only be divided between a limited number of privileged groups; rather, power can also be productive, as well as a central feature of all hierarchical relationships. I also explore how a feminist care ethic can offer alternative ways of conceiving of sharing in governance. My objective is to demonstrate how feminist approaches can provide a new language of both power and sharing to illuminate pathways through the ‘exclusion amid inclusion’ dilemma in power-sharing theory.
No abstract
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.