by Susie Burdett
Ok, so that sounds like some sort of thesis title and I really will try not to waffle too much with this, but let me explain a few things before I get going. I am currently writing (or should I say failing to write) a dissertation on the independence of Kosovo, and this introduced me to the idea of R2P.
R2P stands for Right to Protect, and is a set of principles (primarily in international relations and politics) that sees sovereignty not as a right but as a responsibility. I will explain the main principles shortly. I have been reminded about R2P by an article by the journal Foreign Policy about women in Afghanistan (discussing this report) and how the planned withdrawal of US involvement will end what little progress has been made here since the invasion. This article made me extremely angry. Read it. You'll see why. Though I fear that it may make me unable to write a clear blog!
I will now admit to some cheating. The following three bullet points have been lifted from Wikipedia(apologies, I know that this isn't always the most reliable source, but what it says does fall in line with what I have read about it...).
R2P can be thought of as having 3 main components:
1. A State has a responsibility to protect its population from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing (mass atrocities).
2. If the State is unable to protect its population on its own, the international community has a responsibility to assist the state by building its capacity. This can mean building early-warning capabilities, mediating conflicts between political parties, strengthening the security sector, mobilizing standby forces, and many other actions.
3. If a State is manifestly failing to protect its citizens from mass atrocities and peaceful measures are not working, the international community has the responsibility to intervene at first diplomatically, then more coercively, and as a last resort, with military force.[1]
According to the The Wall Street Journal, the US, along with many other UN countries, has supported the doctrine known as the Right to Protect. If this is the case, their own actions tell another story.
Whilst I am no advocate for military intervention, and certainly not the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, I do believe that if our governments, in their so called wisdom, choose to invade another country in the name of international security and use the excuse that they are doing so to improve the lives of the affected population, and then go on to use images that promote this idea (such as George Bush's use of images of women and girls going to school to "prove" that they have made a positive impression on the said invaded countries), they should take the responsibility to promote the policies, the structures and the mechanisms by which these war torn countries can strengthen the progress made and develop it further!
And yet the article from Foreign Policy (as well as numerous other articles I'm not going to even bother listing) highlights how little progress has actually been made, how the US, UK and their allies have failed to ensure the safety and security of Afghanistan's women, and have thus failed the whole population. The US (and their allies, I am not going to lay all the blame on one countries shoulders) blindness to continuing gender discrimination, violence and the violations of human rights in Afghanistan (and other countries) just highlights how the rhetoric spoken, and the policies pursued so frequently don't match up.
Surely if the UN members pursue the implementation of the norm of R2P and make it law, the UN members should pursue strategies that actually reflect it? Surely the member countries are therefore obliged to pursue the issue of gender discrimination in order to successfully implement the norm?
Surely we have enough evidence to show that unless gender discrimination is addressed and remedied then no state will protect it's population, nor be able to protect the population of another? Gender discrimination is so much more than an issue that affects women - it affects everybody.
Tuesday, 18 May 2010
Wednesday, 5 May 2010
Women's rights in Latin America
by Grace Barker
As I prepare to embark on my 2 month trip to South America, I thought now would be a good time to explore women's rights in the continent...
Women in all regions of the world suffer subordination to men, in economic, political and social life and in the home. Latin America is no different. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development data shows that violence against women is also a serious problem in Latin America, as it is in most of the rest of the world. Approximately one in three women in Latin America and the Caribbean has been a victim of sexual, physical, or psychological violence at the hands of intimate partners, according to survey data collected by the Pan American Health Organization in 2006.
Since the 1990s, a majority of the countries in Latin America have taken some action to outlaw violence against women. However, conservative courts often choose not to rule for women, especially in cases of domestic violence. Though international treaties on women's right are recognized in Latin America and laws are on the books, courts in Argentina, Chile, Columbia, Mexico and Peru don't always uphold them.
One court in Chile ruled that a female soccer referee couldn't continue working because her job was too dangerous. Another tribunal in Mexico made it logistically impossible for a raped woman to obtain an abortion because it is illegal in most of Latin America. In Peru a woman was refused a grant for divorce on the grounds of
abandonment, even though her husband had left her 10 years earlier. Pregnant woman in Chile are still occasionally expelled from school
and college because the relevant legislation
contains no effective sanctions for violating women's rights.
The good news is, according to the OECD, Latin American women suffer less total gender discrimination — in ownership rights, civil liberties, family codes and physical integrity — than other regions of the world. This is because times are changing and people are starting to realize slowly that real action needs to be taken. Women's rights groups like ONG Epikeia, meaning justice with equality, have strongly fought against government sponsored sterilization programs, which aimed to reduce the birth rate in poor communities where in some cases, sterilization was done without the woman's consent. What they are doing is so important and will eventually make a difference.
We can do our bit by wearing black on Thursdays to remind us and those around us that there is still much in the world that has to change. Please don't forget Thursdays in Black!
As I prepare to embark on my 2 month trip to South America, I thought now would be a good time to explore women's rights in the continent...
Women in all regions of the world suffer subordination to men, in economic, political and social life and in the home. Latin America is no different. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development data shows that violence against women is also a serious problem in Latin America, as it is in most of the rest of the world. Approximately one in three women in Latin America and the Caribbean has been a victim of sexual, physical, or psychological violence at the hands of intimate partners, according to survey data collected by the Pan American Health Organization in 2006.
Since the 1990s, a majority of the countries in Latin America have taken some action to outlaw violence against women. However, conservative courts often choose not to rule for women, especially in cases of domestic violence. Though international treaties on women's right are recognized in Latin America and laws are on the books, courts in Argentina, Chile, Columbia, Mexico and Peru don't always uphold them.
One court in Chile ruled that a female soccer referee couldn't continue working because her job was too dangerous. Another tribunal in Mexico made it logistically impossible for a raped woman to obtain an abortion because it is illegal in most of Latin America. In Peru a woman was refused a grant for divorce on the grounds of
abandonment, even though her husband had left her 10 years earlier. Pregnant woman in Chile are still occasionally expelled from school
and college because the relevant legislation
contains no effective sanctions for violating women's rights.
The good news is, according to the OECD, Latin American women suffer less total gender discrimination — in ownership rights, civil liberties, family codes and physical integrity — than other regions of the world. This is because times are changing and people are starting to realize slowly that real action needs to be taken. Women's rights groups like ONG Epikeia, meaning justice with equality, have strongly fought against government sponsored sterilization programs, which aimed to reduce the birth rate in poor communities where in some cases, sterilization was done without the woman's consent. What they are doing is so important and will eventually make a difference.
We can do our bit by wearing black on Thursdays to remind us and those around us that there is still much in the world that has to change. Please don't forget Thursdays in Black!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)