When we think about gender equality, we usually just picture a government with an equal women-to-men ratio, or a world in which a young girl is not ostracized for wanting to play football instead of ballet. We all tend to have some preconceived notion that gender equality is an abstract concept that will magically enforce itself once a law is passed, but we often neglect to think about the more specific details, and what exactly it’ll take to get us to the point of having a more equitable society.
For the purposes of this article, let’s focus on the problem of gender inequality in politics, particularly with regards to diplomatic relations and decisions. Unfortunately, it’s no surprise that women have little to no say in such decisions in many war-stricken Middle Eastern and African countries run by Islamic republics, but we often underestimate the power of this underrepresentation, even in North American countries. A lack of women in decision-making with regards to peace policies and negotiations isn’t just a negative thing because it’s representative of inequality in the diplomatic field; it’s also significant because women play a vital role in maintaining a degree of sustainability in such decisions.
So why haven’t women already been invited to partake in such talks, since the benefits of their work is evident and quite necessary? The first plausible explanation being the negative preconceived notion that women are inferior to men and have pre-set roles in the home they should be taking care of, and that politics and policy-making is a men’s only field. The second is that many would argue that it takes too much effort to introduce and involve women in politics and diplomacy-related fields. The training and resources required to train women and bring them to such events and fields of work appears as a much bigger burden than having a male-dominated group, to many of those who are reluctant to involve more women in peace negotiations and policy-making. Many of these people fail to realize that women that are already ready to take on such positions, they only need to be given the opportunity to succeed. The third main reason is the argument that women shouldn’t be involved in peace negotiations because they weren’t directly involved in the fighting to begin with. This argument faces two main flaws: the first being that gender norms and sexism is the reason women weren’t directly involved in the first place, and the second being that women are often far more involved in conflicts and wars than many would assume, largely because their involvement isn’t always directly related to the fighting. Regardless of the many arguments that may arise against increasing the involvement of women in peace-making negotiations and politics in general, it has indeed been proven that an increased presence is in fact beneficial to maintaining sustainable and effective peace negotiations.
There are theories circulating that women are able to detect radicalization earlier than men, probably due to the amount of time they spend in the households and consequently, their increased capacity to recognize differences in behaviour and ideology among their family and friends. If in fact true, then women could play an integral role in the fight against terrorism, since one of the main successes of modern day terrorism is their capabilities with regards to recruitment and converting youth to radicalism.
Many may ask why it may be beneficial to include women (or more women) in peace-making negotiations, other than hoping to achieve gender equality. One of the main advantages to including women in negotiations is that, albeit due to somewhat sexist stereotypes, women are often trusted more and viewed as honest brokers. This also plays hand in hand with the fact that women are often not ‘directly’ involved in wars, which gives them some degree of objectivity that may be considered beneficiary in very intense post-conflict negotiations.
Furthermore, women, coming from a different standpoint than men, are able to use unique tactics to pressure leaders to recommit and hold to pacts, hence reinstating the sustainability of many potential peace negotiations. Women also raise issues in peace agreements that go beyond military decisions, things like employment, education, healthcare, etc., which are essential to a community rebuilding in a post-conflict situation, and also essential in maintaining peace and stability.
Especially with the current state of affairs in Syria and other regions overcoming severe conflict, it’ll be both interesting to note how and if women are involved in the peace-making negotiations, and whether or not this involvement or lack thereof will yield positive, sustainable results. Women play an integral role in the development of our society, whether it be in politics or in the field of science and medicine, and it’s about time they’re acknowledged as such and are further involved and engaged in areas of importance.
A very special thanks to the Munk School of Global Affairs and Professor Teresa Kramarz, and Dr. Kimberly Carter, for organizing the conference call with Jamille Bigio and shedding light on this important issue.
http://thewire.in/71452/syria-fighting-blogging-many-roles-women/