UN Security Council Resolutions 1325 and 1820: constructing gender in armed conflict and international humanitarian law

Abstract

While the Geneva Conventions contain gender-specific provisions, the reality of women's and men's experiences of armed conflict have highlighted gender limitations and conceptual constraints within international humanitarian law. Judgements at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) ad hoc tribunals have gone some way towards expanding the scope of definitions of sexual violence and rape in conflict. More recent developments in public international law, including the adoption of Security Council Resolutions 1325 and 1820 focused on women, peace and security, have sought to increase the visibility of gender in situations of armed conflict. This paper highlights important developing norms on women, peace and security. Although these norms are significant, they may not be radical enough to expand constructions of gender within international humanitarian law. This leaves existing provisions open to continued scrutiny.

Post‐9/11 Masculinist Incursions in Iraq and Afghanistan: Women’s Bodies as Bullets in Imperialist Agendas

“…Its chief goal has been to reinforce and implement additional measures for the empowerment and protection of women and girls during and after regional and international armed conflicts (Nduwimana, ). It certainly is a fact that “[m]ore recent developments in public international law suggest that armed conflict and its significant impact on women, during and after armed conflicts, is increasingly recognized” (Barrow, :226). However, there is a contradiction in intentionally launching a ravaging war on a particular geography, while simultaneously claiming to protect one gender against the outcomes of that war (such as epidemics, famine, massive destruction of infrastructures, blind bombings, family disenfranchisement, and displacement).…”

“…Other critical perspectives, in which this article is equally interested, caution that “international humanitarian law does not address male rape directly; it focuses primarily on rape as … an act that can only be carried out by men against women” (Barrow, :225). Indeed, sexual violence as a war strategy largely targets men, too, (Massad, ), but somehow “[g]overnments, aid agencies and human rights defenders at the UN barely acknowledge its possibility” (Storr, :para.1).…”

Women, Peace and Security – Negotiating in Women's Best Interests

“…Resolution 1325 is aimed broadly at empowering women in relation to issues of conflict prevention, conflict resolution and reducing gender based violence through mainstreaming gender‐specific concerns in peace and security policy considerations (Barrow, ). It recognizes that an ‘understanding of the impact of armed conflict on women and girls, [and] effective institutional arrangements to guarantee their protection and full participation in the peace process, can significantly contribute to the maintenance and promotion of international peace and security’ (Resolution 1325 Preamble, 2000, p. 1).…”

Have Debates on Global Justice Ignored the Politics of Gender?

“…A typical DDR process may include HIV/AIDS testing, skills training, and some monetary compensation in exchange for a weapon. Recognition of women combatants, irrespective of whether they carry arms openly or not, may allow for their greater inclusion in DDR processes (Barrow, 2010;O'Gorman, 2011). Women are marginalised in the peace building and state building processes that are very often tied to peace agreements brokered with militias, warlords, and others who must be appeased and given power and roles in the new order (O'Gorman, 2011).…”