Feminist Peace Activism 1915 and 2010: Are We Nearly There Yet?

Abstract

In 1915, over one thousand women from warring and neutral nations met at The Hague to protest against the First World War. In 1919, some of them met again in Zurich to discuss ways of building a sustainable peace. Focusing on the concepts of human security and positive peace, this article compares these activists' vision of a gendered peace with the principles underlying UN Security Council Resolution 1325 (2000) and considers whether the barriers and obstacles to women's participation in formal peace negotiations have been overcome. It also considers whether the Hague women's work for peace was informed by a discourse of human rights. The comparison works to improve our historical understanding as well as revealing how attitudes to war, peace, and gender have developed over the intervening period. The experience since passage of UNSCR 1325 has shown that UN Resolutions alone do not guarantee women's effective inclusion in peacebuilding. The failure since 2000 to tackle gender‐based violence, sexual trafficking, and rape during and after conflict also shows the limitations of a human rights discourse that does not explicitly address the differences between men's and women's experiences.

The gender-resilience nexus in peacebuilding: the quest for sustainable peace

“…Women have a long-standing track record of global political activism in the field of war and peace (e.g. Cockburn 2008;Sharp 2013;Kaufman and Williams 2013). Yet, global politics has historically been the domain of men while women's participation has been marginalised by states.…”

Women, Peace and Security on the 15th Anniversary of Un Security Council Resolution 1325/ Ženske, Mir in Varnost Ob 15. Obletnici Sprejetja Resolucije Varnostnega Sveta Organizacije Združenih Narodov 1325

“…Therefore, "crucial aspects of feminist anti-war activism" were removed, and no paragraphs addressing the important underlying structural gender inequalities that can lead to conflict were left in (Otto, 2010). The vision of peace that had emerged at the Platform for Action in Beijing: "a sustainable peace based on gender equity, social justice, and respect for human rights" was therefore not entirely embraced in the final version of UNSCR 1325 (Sharp, 2013).…”

“…The language of UNSCR 1325 also uses 'gender' and 'women' interchangeably, which reinforces the incorrect belief that only women have 'gender' perspectives. Furthermore, the way that women are at times defined -as victims, vulnerable, and in association with children (Sharp, 2013), "is not only essentialist but undermines women's agency" (Puechguirbal, 2010, p. 172). However, contrary to the protective gender stereotypes, there are some more positive empowered representations of women in the Resolution (Otto, 2010).…”

“…There is an opportunity for the UN to strengthen the implementation of and demonstrate its commitment to UNSCR 1325 by passing a further Resolution that has strong language, accountability mechanisms and requirements for reporting. The existence of the UNSCR 1325 framework, and the seven other women, peace and security Resolutions, in itself has not proven sufficient to achieve the desired transformational change (Sharp, 2013). The UN could require that all Member States, when deploying on UN peacekeeping operations, commit and demonstrate their incorporation of UNSCR 1325 and mainstreaming gender in all areas of their peacekeeping operations.…”