EL ESTADO DE LA CUESTIÓN

The rest of this study is about engendered security and, as will become evident in the next chapter, engendered security is very different from my conceptualization of feminist security, but this does not mean engendered security is not feminist. While engendered security is an important and significant step in promoting women‘s needs in post-conflict civil conflicts, as with any policy process, engendered security privileges some aspects of security over others that translate into a woman-centered though not a gender-centered norm of security. On the other hand, while it may not be transform gender relations, engendered security may help women in their everyday lives and elucidate the costs of their exclusion, which is a feminist endeavor.

The norm of engendered security includes four properties: representation, protection, incorporation and recognition. It is both woman-centered and gender- centered. While it is limited in addressing what causes women‘s insecurity in the first place (patriarchal, masculinist world system), and the invisibility of other intersectionalities like race, class and sexual orientation in defining security, it does seem to expand the concept of violence because it recognizes the importance of women in decision-making positions. On the other hand, as engendered security is about making post-conflict state-making better for women: thus, a major assumption underlying the norm is that war happens, which naturalizes and depoliticizes asking questions about why war happens in the first place.

As a major project of feminist security studies is to locate women‘s positions in the world, the subsequent chapters offer insights into how and why women have been included in formal peace processes and how that has changed over time. However, it is important to keep feminist security insights in mind as we subsequently explore the development of the norm of engendered security over the last twenty years. Importantly, the trade-offs political actors, especially women‘s peace activists have made to get any security recognition for women has come at the expense of more transformative approaches.

CHAPTER TWO:

ENGENDERED SECURITY: NORMS AND THEIR LIFECYCLES

2.1 Introduction

While my first chapter on feminist security is meant to elucidate all the ways in which scholars may think about violence, security and gender, the international community has yet to approach issues of conflict and peacebuilding using such a lens. This does not mean these actors have not engaged women and conflict, only that their ways of thinking and doing are not really feminist. This chapter will thus set forth a concept of engendered security, which better captures the ‗add-women-and-stir‘ understanding of gender and violence within the peacebuilding framework.

The play on words is important here, as engender means to ―bring into existence,‖6

and Resolution 1325 has brought into existence (formally) the importance of women in security. Additionally, critical theorists have also utilized the term engender in order to ―endow or create gender,‖ (Enloe 2000) which is important because of the distinct and problematic ways in which gender is (re)created within Resolution 1325 and the subsequent peace agreements. Engaging the concept this way is useful for two reasons: 1) it builds upon an existing international understanding of women and security that permits me to actually operationalize and assess its impact (and lack thereof); 2) the term engendered thus remains a politicized term. In other words, it can still be critically

assessed in relation to feminist security as it is about the process by which women are being brought into the security framework and functionings.

This chapter is organized as follows: I first expand upon the concept of engendered security and explain how Resolution 1325 is an important forum from which it has developed. I explain my conceptualization of engendered security and how it is operationalized. I then develop my norm lifecycle model and explain how engendered security is a norm regarding the inclusion of women and what sort of principles one looks for to indicate the norm exists.

2.2 Norms, Gender and Global Change

Norms are particularly important in international relations research (Finnemore and Sikkink 1998, 2001; Checkel 1998; Goertz 1992; Goertz and Diehl 1992; Mitchell 2002; Hermann and Shannon 2001; Keck and Sikkink 2001; Zurn and Checkel 2005). But often they are: under-theorized, used as a catch-all for behaviors one cannot easily operationalize, assumed away as important but irrelevant, and used inter-changeably with policies. One of the contributions of this study is to better elucidate how we theorize, operationalize and study norms by building a Three-Level Norm and Life Cycle Model that allows scholars to think through the complex relationship of norms and policies and better examine how these norms evolve over time. Norms are especially interesting for studying policy changes because they usually include some form of evolutionary properties—norms are not usually considered static, but are in and of themselves political

processes that shape and are shaped by political actors seeking to create sociopolitical change.

Before identifying the specific norm of engendered security, it is important to situate these gender-(or more generally woman) centered policies within a larger movement of gender inclusion. Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink, whose work I reference throughout my dissertation, specifically differentiate between norms and institutions according to aggregation: ―the norm definition isolates single standards of behavior, whereas institutions emphasize the way in which behavioral rules are structured together and interrelated (a ―collection of practices and rules‖)‖ (1998). The institution of gender inclusion is best understood as a set of policies meant to increase the inclusion of women in various forms of public life. Policies such as gender mainstreaming, gender quotas, and women‘s policy agencies are all examples of policies aimed at increasing the actual numbers of women or a women‘s perspectives in arenas historically exclusionary of women (see Squires 2007). These policies have been pursued in the last thirty years in an evolving global environment where women activists pursue political change through utilizing windows of opportunity such as post-conflict peace and democratic transitions. And there is overwhelming evidence that states and international organizations have and are responding to these policy measures (Ellerby 2009, Krook 2009, True and Mintrom 2001). As development and democratization have become a major priority for international actors, the relationship between women, security and development have become gained more public space for discussion (Neuwirth 2002, Tryggestad 2009). Ultimately it is within this institution of gender inclusion that the norm of engendered

security exists. In the next two sections I first set forth how to theorize and construct a three-level norm and its lifecycle.

2.3 Three-Level Norms

The most cited work on norms is Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink‘s norm dynamics model, presented in International Organization in 1998. In their article, ―International Norm Dynamics and Political Change,‖ they define a norm as ―a standard of appropriate behavior for actors with a given identity‖ (1998). Goertz and Diehl point out a fundamental aspect of norms however, in that they are ―normative‖: concerning ―issues of justice and rights of a moral or ethical character‖ (1992). Given these parameters for what a norm is, engendered security can be understood as a standard of appropriate behavior of all actors involved in conflict regarding women- specifically, women have a right to be present, in person and policy, throughout the peace process.

The definition of a norm as a standard of appropriate behavior, unfortunately, does not provide much guidance for study. Finnemore and Sikkink‘s framework does not identify a theoretical separation between policies and norms- they are essentially one in the same. Several questions thus remain about norms: How does one identify a norm? Is every behavior a norm if it‘s a standard of behavior? What is the relationship between a norm and a policy—are they the same thing? Are norms and policies constitutive and/or causal of one another?

To better elucidate the complex relationship between norms and policies, I have designed a three-level approach to norms that better enables scholars to not only link

ideas and policies, but also opens a space for discussion of the multiple and different policy approaches available for creating standards of behavior. I argue norms are better understood as prescriptions of behavior with three parts, interdependent and mutually constituted components- principles, properties and policies. Using this model, norms are thus defined as a system of values manifested through the mutually reinforcing components of specifying what behaviors embody this value and how the value should be enacted to shape/implement/change/diffuse the value (Ellerby 2009). Figure 2.1 illustrates these three levels.

The ‗top‘ level is the most abstract level and encompasses the word or words usually identified as the norm, which I call its principles. Words like ‗healthy,‘ ‗green,‘ ‗liberalization,‘ ‗gender inclusion,‘ and ‗engendered security‘ are common terms which encapsulate ideals of behaviors, or values of behavior upon which norms are organized. Because norms are ‗normative,‘ they are value-laden and have associative meanings, but when asked to describe or define these values and what they mean one uses its properties to do so. For example, to be healthy is a social value, it is a norm because it clarifies standards of appropriate behavior and/or a system of values. But if asked to define it, I will use its properties, things like exercise, diet and wellness to describe it. Exercise and diet, then, would be included in the middle level of the three-level norm.

Figure 2.1 Three-Level Approach to Norms

Policies

Properties

Principle

Over-arching ‘ideal’

Theoretical Categories

The middle level of the norm model includes the norms properties, or the theoretical categories that constitute a value. What sort of behaviors and ideas constitute certain values? As with the example of healthy, one looks to exercise, diet and wellness to identify if someone is actually healthy—so the meaning of healthy is its properties, as these constitute what the value actually means. Ultimately, to fulfill such properties, like exercise and diet, we must include one more level to a norm, which is the policy level, or the means to enact the properties of a norm that reflect specific values.

The bottom level, policies, includes the actions which shape/change/implement behaviors associated with the principle of the norm. To continue with the ‗healthy‘ example, one would identify the policies and concrete behaviors that embody and shape what it means to be healthy. So anti-smoking policies aim to increase wellness and mandatory nutrition facts on fast food menus are meant to shape and improve diet.

I have used an example that, though it includes political science and public administration, is not particularly helpful for discussions of women, gender and security. In figure 2.2 I present another example of the three-level norm approach, which builds upon the theme of gender inclusion, discussed above. In the figure, at the top level is ‗gender inclusion,‘ and though it really is about woman inclusion, that is not how the norm is usually named. Gender inclusion, specifically in the formal political realm, has become an increasingly important value to countries, especially democratic ones (how democratic are states that seem to systematically exclude women?) But what is gender inclusion exactly? When scholars discussion inclusion, it is usually in reference to two specific properties: political representation and participation (Young 1991; Phillips

1995). These properties help constitute what gender inclusion is, as it means women are represented and participate in politics. Finally, one can look to the policies meant to enact these properties, which includes women‘s suffrage, which increased women‘s representation via the right to vote and gender quotas, which are meant to increase women‘s formal participation in government. In other words, the norm of gender inclusion is about representation and participation and women‘s suffrage and gender quotas are the main policies meant to enact the norm.

This three-level approach to norms can be a useful tool for better specifying the link between the values societies, organizations, states, and other groups want to have and the actions they use to get them. Norms, in this sense, are more than just ideas or policies; they are the mutually-constituted means by which political (and social) behavior is shaped. This format allows scholars to study the links between multiple policies and their objectives as well as utilize different policy avenues to study similar values. For example, different countries may have different understandings of ‗green‘ and what that entails, so the properties and policies used to make a country ‗green‘ may be useful for comparison. Additionally, political actors may seek out multiple policy venues (state, local, organizations) to enact new norms, and this framework allows for such study. In the next section, I apply this framework to engendered security.

Figure 2.2 Three-Level Approach to Gender Inclusion

Policies

Properties

Principle

Gender Inclusion

Political

Participation

Women’s Suffrage

Political

Representation

Gender Quotas

2.4 The Norm of Engendered Security

Engendered security is meant to address the fact that women (and girls) face distinct security threats because of their gender. This verity has led to the international community promoting a value that, because conflict-related gendered violence exists, specific means and measures should be taken that explicitly target the forms of violence, inequality and exclusion women face during and after conflict. This norm, unlike the ones I discussed above, emerged out of a specific mandate on women and security: United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325. The Resolution begins by ―[r]eaffirming the important role of women in the prevention and resolution of conflicts and in peace-building…‖ (Security Council 2000). UNSC 1325 spells out how women are supposed to be included in peace processes, so it is a self-contained norm because it includes all components of the three-level approach. Below I explore the levels of engendered security and how they were identified and organized.

Engendered Security has four main components, all tied to varying ways in which women can be targeted for inclusion during peacebuilding: representation, incorporation, protection and recognition. These are the properties of engendered security because they are the means for embodying the normative value of engendered security. To identify these properties, I extrapolated the ways inclusion was identified in the text. To do this I looked for common terms and ideas. These common terms exhibited qualities of different theoretical and practical ways to include women. It was only after I grouped the points along their similar ideas that I named them, and I built upon theoretical work on inclusion to do so (Pitkin 1967; Phillips 1995; Young 1991). As I mentioned, four ways

of including women emerged from the text, and these ways of inclusion, these properties, are useful for connecting principles and policies of security for women. The theoretical and practical distinctions between these different forms of inclusion may be useful for scholars working within other areas of gender and/or other forms of group inclusion/exclusion. Table 2.3 lays out the properties of engendered security derived from Resolution 1325 and their corresponding property names.7

Representation includes points 1, 2 and 3 in Resolution 1325; Point 1 calls for increased representation of women at all decision-making levels (national, regional and international) that deal with conflict. Point 2 calls for increased participation of women at decision-making levels in conflict resolution and peace processes. Point 3 calls for more women as special representatives and envoys. The importance of decision-making and access to formal bodies of government, leadership and peacebuilding committees are what distinguish ‗representation‘ as a form of inclusion.8

This next form of inclusion is categorized as incorporation as it is address the ways in which women are incorporated into the existing bureaucracy and peacebuilding bodies, but not as decision-makers or in positions of authority. Measures of incorporation deal with the lack of women within the day-today activities of peacebuilding and government functions. Incorporation builds upon Points 4, 8(b) and 15 in Resolution 1325. Point 4 focuses on expanding women‘s presence in field

7

Many of the clauses within Resolution 1325 are directed at the Secretary-General and Member States, while others are directed specifically at parties to the armed conflict. I have extrapolated from these clauses to create four categories of inclusion to encapsulate the ways in which women can be included that would reflect the priorities of 1325. Thus, I am not specifically looking for mentions of the Security General or even the United Nations within peace agreements; rather I am looking for the same priorities within peace agreements as represented in 1325.

8_{While these clauses explicitly call for such measures in conflict, measures that address women‘s formal} representation in national and transitional governments are also included.

operations, like peacekeeping, police and other peacebuilding-related personnel. These are important, but non-decision-making positions, which is why they are considered presence. 8(b) and 15 call for measures that support and involve local women‘s peace initiatives. Such references are important in the category of representation as well, but to be classified within incorporation means women‘s groups are consulted, but do not necessarily serve on committees. For example, the Chapultepec Agreement for El Salvador calls for more recruitment of women to the police. It does not specify women as heads of police, but that there must be more women within the general police body.

The third form of inclusion is protection which includes clauses dealing with violence, discrimination and identification of rights of women. This category includes stipulations addressing direct forms of violence, including physical harm and sex-based discrimination as well as language regarding limited access to economic/political/social resources. This category builds upon Points 6, 8(c), 10, 11 and 12. Point 6 calls for guidelines and materials pertaining to protection, rights and particular needs of women. Point 8(c) calls for, ―Measures that ensure the protection of and respect for human rights of women and girls, particularly as they relate to the constitution, the electoral system, the police and judiciary.‖ While this Point is also relevant for representation, the language here relates to the protection of human rights and implicitly, the need to address discrimination that limits women‘s access to such rights in the first place. Points 10 and 11 deal specifically with protecting women and girls from gender-based violence and the need to prosecute such crimes. And finally, Point 12 calls for respect for refugee camps,

including identifying the needs of women and girls in the design of camps, and it references Resolution 1208, which identifies the importance of protecting refugees.

The final form of inclusion is recognition, which identifies provisions that call for