Adolescent Girls in Crisis

Originally featured in Huffington Post here.

By Ambassador Melanne Verveer and Sarah Degnan Kambou

---

“I was in the field when they came. They came out of nowhere and they took me away, into the bush. I was just a child. They stole us away. They stole our innocence. They stole our lives from us.”

These are the words of Espérence, a girl taken from her family when war erupted in her village in the east of the Democratic Republic of Congo. And we know that there are tens of thousands more like her around the world. From villages in Northern Nigeria, to refugee camps in Jordan and Turkey, to communities fleeing their homes as a result of natural disasters, conflicts and crises are devastating the lives of men, women and children.

Conflict razes more than homes and cities. It dismantles social systems, leaving girls like Espérence particularly vulnerable to displacement and exploitation. In these settings, girls remain acutely vulnerable to physical and psychological abuse, rape, forced marriage, unwanted pregnancy and premature death. For adolescent girls living in these conditions, harassment and abuse are daily occurrences; basic safety is never taken for granted and fear is one of life’s few constants.

And yet, adolescent girls are powerful tools in building a better future. Ignoring or overlooking their rights and needs compromises any chance for long term sustainability and security. Joblessness, disrupted education, and untreated mental and physical wounds today are tomorrow’s peace and security problems. Moreover, we cannot possibly respond to these needs without talking with girls themselves.

We must shelve piece-meal approaches that neglect the expressed needs of adolescent girls and have subsequently proven to be woefully inadequate in mitigating their risk. Rather, the global community must move to a more effective approach – one that is girl-centric, comprehensive and integrated, and one that reduces risk and nurtures leaders for post-conflict societies.

Fundamentally, global leaders and policy makers must take a strong, principled stand against organizations, entities and individuals who are perpetrating violence, creating mayhem and devastating the lives of all citizens, but targeting adolescent girls in particular. Agencies entrusted with protecting civil society and the public good must condemn heinous, barbaric acts, such as forcing young girls to marry or act as sex slaves.

These global platforms are absolutely critical in focusing the world’s attention, and indeed resources, toward improving the lives of those living through conflict and crisis. But they are not enough. Above all, the global community must help societies marred by conflict and crisis to build up the community’s resilience to resist the further spread or a resurgence of a conflict.

What stands in the way of advancing a girl-centered strategy when responding to conflicts and crises? First, we lack critical information. Research documents how adolescent girls are faring globally, but these findings are reflective of more stable settings. Second, the media coverage of girls in crisis – from the Chibok Girls in Nigeria to girls in refugee camps in Jordan, to sex slaves held under ISIS – far too often sensationalizes coverage of girls’ horrific circumstances. Instead, the media must take a broader view of girls’ realities and report back on the rebuilding of lives and communities after the traditional media cycle for crises has ended.

Third, civil society groups, who are often frontline responders in crises, represent an under-tapped resource in building knowledge on how to address the needs of adolescent girls. Field staff trained to work in post-crisis settings can play an important role in facilitating critical reflection and documenting evidence that will inform policy and programs moving forward.

Fourth, those who have perpetrated violence against women and girls often emerge from conflict with impunity, or even as powerful leaders of new regimes. We must use law and policy tools at our disposal to ensure those who are responsible for perpetrating violence against girls are held to account. Moreover, we must pioneer new tools, which specifically advance the rights and lift up the voices of girls and women who have survived. We must work together to establish a new policy agenda for girls in crisis, which not only protects them from violence and exploitation in such instances, but also advance their rights.

In all spheres, let’s not move forward without the active involvement of girls themselves, who, through lived experience, are deeply familiar with difficult and dangerous times, and are knowledgeable about practical solutions that will meet immediate needs and prepare girls for the day when crisis abates and communities rebuild.

Each and every one of us has the power to say this is not the future we want for adolescent girls like Espérence. Let’s start today.

---

Ambassador Melanne Verveer is the Executive Director of the Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security, and former Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues.

Sarah Degnan Kambou is the President of the International Center for Research on Women.

Protecting and Empowering Women And Girls In Situations of Crisis and Conflict

Since the mid-1990s, there have been significant increases in the recorded number of all disasters and in deaths resulting from those disasters, especially in low-income countries. Compounding these natural disasters are those of another sort, as conflicts and civil wars are increasingly afflicting individual countries and, more broadly, our sense of global security. In situations of both crisis and conflict, women and girls are often the most vulnerable and the most at risk of targeted violence. Indeed, women and children account for more than 75 percent of the refugees and displaced persons from war, famine, persecution and natural disaster. In cases of conflicts and disasters, existing social structures and networks that previously protected women are destroyed. In many circumstances, the socially determined roles and responsibilities of women cause gender-based inequalities in access to resources and decision-making power. And in conflict and crisis, the risk of sexual violence greatly increases.

Adolescent girls face even worse dangers. Girls lack social power and protection due to their age and gender. Adolescent girls often fall through the cracks of traditional child protection interventions in emergencies.

The problem of adolescent girls in crisis and conflict situations is gaining renewed momentum. On March 6^th, the Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security, the International Center for Research on Women, Plan International and the Women’s Refugee Commission partnered to convene a symposium to explore the status of girls in crisis settings and mobilize key stakeholders to take action in their interest. The key outcome of the symposium was the generation of recommendations across several domains – research, policy, programming and media – that will protect and empower the girls affected by conflict and disasters around the world.

This week, The Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation No Ceilings Initiative, The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and Data2X are releasing new data and a new Not There campaign on the connection between rights and opportunities for women and girls and prosperity, stability and security around the world. These efforts serve to emphasize the lack of data on the dangers faced by women and adolescent girls in crisis situations, and fill these existing gaps. Indeed, the limited evidence on violence against women and girls (VAWG) in conflict and humanitarian situations has prevented effective investment in VAWG programming in emergencies. To study the impact of natural disasters on these vulnerable groups, there is an urgent need for sex-disaggregated data on disaster-related mortality, morbidity and long-term health consequences. More data must also be collected on VAWG in conflict situations, specifically looking at rape, child marriage and other forms of gender-based violence.

There is no miracle solution to the problems facing adolescent girls in conflict and crisis. Women, especially young women, are the first to suffer the consequences of insecurity, poverty and disease. The situation is not entirely dire however: the resolution of disaster situations can often lead to a shift in gender roles, which can open up possibilities for positive social change, and give women and girls a chance to be active partners in changing their countries for the better. Finding solutions to the problems facing women and girls in crisis requires a multi-faceted approach, starting with the collection of qualitative and quantitative sex-disaggregated data on the field.

The solution to this issue requires a multi-faceted approach that engages all platforms and all actors across the spectrum. The domains discussed in the March 6^th symposium – media, policy, research and programming – are all crucial allies in preventing and responding to the needs of women and girls in crisis and conflict settings. But they face serious challenges as well. Media, for example, can be a tool for highlighting the needs of women and girls in crisis, but has increasingly been used as a tool for targeted violence against women. The UN Commission on Women stated in a recent report that new media is often a platform for the perpetuation of harmful masculinities and the objectification of women and girls. In addition, more data is needed in order to accurately assess and address area-specific violence against women and girls; the research sector needs to become more engaged in collecting this qualitative and quantitative data. Policy-makers and governments also face the challenge of formulating policies that address the issue in depth and effectively, as policies and programs to serve women or children oftentimes do not take into account the specific vulnerabilities and needs of adolescent girls.

However, adolescent girls in humanitarian settings should not just be seen as a vulnerable group – as victims – because girls possess enormous capacity to be a source of transformation in their families and communities. Research suggests that investing in girls’ economic and social empowerment can reduce their risks of being victims of violence and effectively encourages sustainable development. We must empower young girls to use their voices to guide future policies, research, programming and media campaigns around this issue and give them the opportunity to be a part of the solution.

The fight to protect and empower women and girls in situations of conflict and crisis is far from over. It is important to take stock of the progress made, and also acknowledge opportunities for future progress. Not only can girls’ voices bring innovative and creative solutions to the debate, but their empowerment can also transform entire communities for the better. It is time that we listened.

---

Annabelle Timsit is the undergraduate Research Assistant at the Institute for Women, Peace and Security. She is a second year student in the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, and is majoring in International Politics with a concentration in Foreign Policy. She has worked on issues of women’s political participation, education and reproductive justice in Washington D.C., France and Guatemala, and spent a gap year working with female political asylum seekers in Paris.  

 

When One Man’s Peace is Another Woman’s Trap

Any views or opinions represented in this blog post are personal and belong solely to the blog author and do not represent those of people, institutions or organizations that the owner may or may not be associated with in professional or personal capacity, unless explicitly stated. 

---

Standing in Nevruz Park in Diyarbakir, Turkey last March, I was immediately and acutely aware of the magnitude of the event playing out before me. Two years ago marked the first time Kurds could legally gather to celebrate the Persian New Year. This year, Kurdish vendors came prepared with traditional foods and merchandise for sale. Eager to capitalize on the spirit of the day, men solicited grilled meats and peppers, circled families with trays of traditional simit, and manned tables stacked rows-deep with t-shirts, flags, and scarves – some boasting the traditional colors of Kurdish nationalism, others boldly featuring Abdullah Ocalan’s profile. Visions of red, yellow and green were woven together by the sound of women ululating in unison over rhythmic drumbeats, a combination that evoked a sense of communal celebration.

To understand the significance of the event, it is critical to establish some context around Turkish-Kurdish relations over the past several decades. In 1974, Abdullah Ocalan organized Kurdish resistance to Turkish rule by issuing a clarion call to action that, up until recently, argued for a separate and unified Kurdish state encompassing Kurdish communities living in Iraq, Syria, and Iran. Over the past 40 years, the Turkish government and the PKK, or Partiya Karkeren Kurdistan – the group of armed insurgents that formed around the charismatic leadership of Ocalan – have participated in on-again, off-again periods of intense military engagement. Since 1984, the conflict has racked up severe costs, both human and financial: 30,000-40,000 lives and $300 billion-$450 billion have been claimed over four decades of fighting. By all accounts, the Turkish-Kurdish conflict has defined several generations of Kurds living in Turkey, and has served as a template from which offshoots of the PKK in Syria and Iraq have mobilized for greater autonomy within their own national contexts.

But since 2013, Ocalan, with the support of PKK leadership in the Qandil Mountains of Iraq, has engaged directly with the Turkish Government in high-level peace talks, even though both sides are careful to frame the discussion in terms of “seeking a solution” rather than “building peace.” The talks are in the very early stages, with the government only having released its vision of a six-phase road map last summer. In addition to the slow pace of progress, many observers express concerns that ISIS’ sustained attack on the Syrian-Kurdish town of Kobane and the Turkish governments’ posture toward intervention threaten to derail the positive developments of the past few years.

In Diyarbakir, I was awestruck listening to Ocalan’s message – recorded prior to the start of the festival from his prison on Imrali Island in the Marmara Sea – permeate the air, reminding his followers to tread the path of peace and avoid a return to violence. Even more strikingly, I was amazed to see how many young girls took center-stage in the celebrations. In conversations with Turkish friends, I was told that Kurdish women suffer a great deal under the burden of an oppressive patriarchal structure, further stressed by decades of conflict, poverty and neglect. But at the celebration, the energy on the ground suggested something very different. I noted an equal number of women dressed in long, sequined gowns as I did women dressed in the infamous green fatigues of PKK mountain fighters. I quickly lost count of the number of young girls I saw, ages 10 and younger, dancing with their elders, clad head to toe in the olive green of the Kurdish insurgency. So even as Ocalan was speaking to a peaceful and prosperous future, it was clear that the allure of rebellion still held powerful sway over some of Turkey’s youngest women.

There is limited scholarship outlining the conditions under which women leverage violence to effect political change, but some anecdotal evidence suggests that, at least in the case of Kurdish women electing to join the insurgency, women take up arms to “escape poverty. They flee a conservative society where domestic violence is common and there is little opportunity.” These motivating factors could help explain why Kurdish women have been attracted to the organization since it was formed in the late 1970s.

But women’s representation in the struggle for Kurdish self-determination is not just limited to the PKK. In the political wing of the Kurdish movement, the Peace and Democracy Party (BDP), women are guaranteed a participation threshold of 40 percent and the party is presided over jointly by both a male and female representative at all times. There is historically a strong commitment to elevating women to key positions as both political actors and combatants. This is true at least in terms of theory and what is visible to an outside world, whose capacity to understand the PKK might be influenced by factors such as the U.S. State Department’s 1997 listing of the PKK as a terrorist organization.

Turning again to the ongoing peace negotiations between the Turkish government and the PKK, a workable plan that facilitates the disarming, demobilization and facilitated reintegration (DDR) of Kurdish combatants is a hotly contested topic. One often-ignored aspect of DDR in this context is how demobilization will impact on the Kurdish women who have made their mark in the decades-long insurgency. If it is true that significant numbers of women have joined the ranks of the PKK over the past four decades as a means of pursuing empowerment and social status through military engagement, any sort of demobilization and reintegration scheme will have to comprehensively map out mechanisms through which returned combatants can return to civilian life without sacrificing perceived gains in self-actualization. A report by International Crisis Group suggests, “Any amnesty or reintegration mechanisms must make sure not to exclude women and girls who are combatants or otherwise associated with the insurgency.” In view of women’s long involvement with the insurgency, simply ensuring that we do not exclude women does not evoke a strong image of a plan that accounts for women’s active roles in the group.

Rather than limit the focus on how not to exclude women from DDR programming, a successful post-conflict strategy must think more proactively about how to prioritize the women being asked to disarm. There must be compelling incentives to return to civilian life that are driven by an understanding of the gendered pathways to combat that brought women into the military theatre to begin with. If the aim is to present a peaceful alternative to the militant nature of the past 40 years, any durable peace deal cannot afford to ignore the factors and structures that pushed Kurdish women into combat; it cannot risk implementing DDR protocol and programs that do not expressly appeal to female combatants. Parallel political, economic and social development programming must be sensitive to the ways in which Kurdish women’s realities are differently gendered, and must offer enticing and appropriately tailored incentives to female combatants being asked to demobilize.

The most enduring memory of my March afternoon in Diyarbakir was not dancing chapi, and it was not moving freely through a dense crowd wrapped in a scarf emblazoned with the colors of Kurdistan, an act that would otherwise garner unwanted attention everywhere else in Turkey. The moment I will never forget unfolded when I looked into the eyes of a little girl waiving a flag with Ocalan’s face on it and wondered if she would be afforded the chance to grow up in a Turkey where her interests would be represented democratically, equitably and without the echo of gunfire in the background.

---

Amanda Jessen is a graduate student in the Conflict Resolution program in the Department of Government at Georgetown University, focusing her studies on women and violent extremism. She spent 11 months in Turkey as a Boren Fellow, where her work centered on researching Turkey’s role in providing humanitarian relief to Syrian refugees.

The Great Unfinished Business of the Beijing Platform for Action

This essay by Ambassador Melanne Verveer was originally included in a publication by the Wilson Center’s Women in Public Service Project entitled Beijing+20: Looking Back and the Road Ahead, Reflections on Milestones in Women’s Leadership in the 21st Century.

---

Twenty years ago, I joined then-First Lady Hillary Clinton on a trip to Beijing for the Fourth World Conference on Women. It was there that she declared, for all the world to hear, that “human rights are women’s rights, and women’s rights are human rights.”

Women globally have made significant progress in the last 20 years: more girls are in school than ever before, maternal mortality is decreasing, and women’s economic participation is growing. Laws have been enacted to combat violence against women, but, still too often, they are not enforced and policies are not implemented. Women are also frequently shut out of political leadership. Despite the undeniable progress, much remains to be achieved for women and girls to enjoy full equality—not just on paper, but in reality. This discrepancy that divides rhetoric from reality is not just a women’s issue. Research and experiences show that when women and girls progress, all of society progresses.

Our world is plagued by dozens of armed conflicts that threaten the safety and security of millions of men, women, and children on a daily basis. Women and girls bear a disproportionate toll. Rape is a strategic tool of war, and women are sidelined in the processes where decisions are being made about them and their families. It is essential that women have a place at the table in peacemaking and that they actively participate in peacebuilding.

We also know that economic prosperity is critical to peace and security. Women represent 80 percent of the global purchasing power, and investing in women helps to grow economies and stabilize communities. Our economic progress as a global community will stagnate if women remain disempowered, disenfranchised, and excluded from decision making positions in governance and the economy.

Including women’s voices and perspectives in peacemaking ultimately helps entire societies reconcile, rebuild, and achieve a just and lasting peace. Yet, women are consistently underrepresented in peace processes. Of some 39 active conflicts over the past 10 years, women have made up only 4 percent of peace negotiation teams. Moreover, only 16 percent of some 585 peace treaties drafted in the past 20 years contain  references to the critical role of women. This exclusion is not only shortchanging women, but also undermining peace and security.

As we mark the 20th anniversary of the Platform for Action adopted at Beijing in 1995, and the 15th anniversaries of the passage of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 and the establishment of the Millennium Development Goals, let us renew the commitment to women’s progress and a better world that these pronouncements represent. We have yet to fully realize their objectives and so we must seize the moment to do more.

Growing women’s political decision-making capacities and opportunities, especially in conflict-affected and post-conflict settings, remains the great unfinished business of the Beijing Platform for Action. This will require innovation, collaboration, and determination, but I believe that by working together—in government, civil society, and the private sector – we can create progress and level the playing field. It is our collective responsibility to fulfill the promise we made 20 years ago, that women’s rights are human rights, once and for all. We cannot settle for anything less.

---

Ambassador Verveer is the Executive Director of the Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security. She served as the first Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues with the U.S. Department of State.

Smart Power through Inclusivity in an Increasingly Volatile World

Originally posted on Huffington Post here.

---

The brutality of ISIS, Russia’s aggression in Ukraine and the Ebola epidemic are issues that give us the sense that we are returning to a harsher and more violent world of “realpolitik” than what we have witnessed during the last couple of decades. Decision makers are constantly faced with the difficult task of how to most effectively use resources to maximize national security and enhance international peace. But, when the world is on fire, is there really room to ignore the role of women in peace and security?

The answer is no! Focusing on women, peace and security does not mean shifting focus from “hard” to “soft” issues. Women constitute half the world’s population. Incorporating their perspectives is not merely the right thing to do, it is also the smart and strategic thing to do. Ensuring women’s participation is at the heart of better understanding and dealing with the threats that we face with the right instruments, and in the most effective manner possible. This agenda serves as a critical instrument in the work to prevent armed conflict, create peace where violence has broken out, and support reconciliation and reconstruction processes after war.

At a recent speech at Georgetown University on inclusive security, former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton noted that when women participate in peace processes, “overlooked issues such as human rights, individual justice, national reconciliation, and economic renewal are often brought to the forefront.”

The backdrop for these issues is the United Nations Agenda for Women, Peace and Security, which was codified in the landmark Security Council Resolution 1325 (2000), as well as a number of subsequent resolutions that build upon this foundation and lay out steps for implementation. Many countries have already started grappling with these issues by writing National Action Plans on Women, Peace and Security, and by implementing these perspectives within military, diplomatic and development operations.

However, implementation is slow and, in many cases, accompanied by strong resistance and lack of understanding. By building the knowledge and capacity of those designing and implementing national action plans, we can ensure that progress quickens on women, peace and security around the globe. According to Secretary Clinton, we must begin “shifting from saying the right things to doing the right things, putting into action the steps that are necessary not only to protect women and children, but to find ways of utilizing women as makers and keepers of peace.”

We know that women are uniquely and disproportionately affected by armed conflict, climate change and natural disasters. We also know that women are oftentimes marginalized. Accountability for harms suffered – such as sexual violence – is bargained away during negotiations to end hostilities. The same is often true after a peace agreement is signed. Is it really any surprise then that half of all peace agreements fail within the first five years of being adopted?

Policies and practices to protect women during conflict and ensure their participation in the resolution of those conflicts rely on an understanding of women’s roles within society. Ine Eriksen Søreide, Minister of Defence of the Kingdom of Norway, reminds us, “women are not only the victims – they’re also important actors.” Grassroots women are, more often than not, mobilized for peace, but they rarely receive the recognition they deserve from national and international authorities. Their voices do not always carry over into the halls of power.

Focusing on advancing women’s roles in peace and security efforts, including military operations, is not only about women’s rights, but also about increasing operational effectiveness. Missions in Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan have clearly demonstrated that military operations often require a gender perspective in order to be effective – whether for intelligence gathering, stabilization mandates, or training and equipping local forces. Jens Stoltenberg, Secretary General of NATO has argued, “integrating gender perspectives into our activities makes us a more modern, ready, and responsive alliance…it allows us to respond better and smarter to the many complex security challenges we face today.” Major General Adrian Foster, Deputy Military Adviser for the United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations similarly argues that “gender is no longer an optional-add on; it is an operational necessity.”

The security threats and challenges we face, most often, result from a failure to address the root causes of conflict. The women, peace and security agenda sees a broader scope of security issues, which can help decision makers to recognize and deal with the underlying causes of problems and the instruments needed for dealing with them – preferably before armed conflicts or terror attacks occur. According to Staffan de Mistura, United Nations Special Envoy for Syria, “In no place have I not seen women being major a player in helping…to produce a peaceful solution to a conflict.”

A solid foundation of research and experience shows us that gender equality, women’s participation and the implementation of gender perspectives lead to increased effectiveness in our aspirations for peace, security and human rights – locally, nationally and globally. It is certainly not a “silver bullet”, nor the answer to every problem. However, dealing with the complex security challenges facing our world indeed requires incorporating women into peace and security operations for greater effectiveness.

---

Co-authored by Ambassador Melanne Verveer and Dr. Robert Egnell. Ambassador Verveer is the Executive Director of the Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security. She served as the first Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues with the U.S. Department of State. Dr. Robert Egnell is the Senior Faculty Adviser for the Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security, and is the founding Director of the Stockholm Center for Strategic Studies.

Moving the Needle Forward on Women’s Rights in Afghanistan

This article by Ambassador Verveer was originally posted on The Huffington Post here.

This weekend, policy and thought leaders gathered in Norway for the Oslo Symposium on Advancing Women’s Rights and Empowerment in Afghanistan, which was co-sponsored by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Afghanistan and the U.S. Department of State, along with the Afghan Women’s Network, the Peace Research Institute of Oslo, and the Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security. The symposium brought together government leaders, civil society representatives, Afghan and international experts, and an impressive Afghan delegation led by First Lady Rula Ghani to discuss ways Afghans and the international community can continue to work together to sustain and advance gains made by women and girls in Afghanistan.

There is growing momentum in Afghanistan today. Millions of Afghans voted in the presidential elections, and the new unity government is enjoying strong support. On December 4, at the London Conference on Afghanistan, the Afghan government is expected to set out its vision for reform, and the international community is expected to demonstrate its continuing support for Afghanistan.

Earlier in the week, the Asia Foundation released its annual Survey of the Afghan People for 2014, giving us up-to-date insight on what Afghans believe to be the biggest areas of progress and the serious challenges that still remain in their country. This year’s survey included interviews of more than 9,000 citizens from all 34 of the country’s provinces. This is a critical time to reflect on the significant progress that has been made by and for the Afghan people, and to listen to the priorities of women in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan has changed significantly since the fall of the Taliban, and the ways in which Afghans view themselves and their country continue to evolve. As we see in the Asia Foundation survey, Afghans are more optimistic and hopeful about the future. Afghans are showing greater support for the Afghan Army, as well as support for the international role in providing technical and advisory assistance to the army and police. Afghans claim being Afghan as a defining feature of their identity.

Although change in some of these areas remains challenging, the progress is well-documented. According to the survey, Afghans perceive some of the biggest problems facing their country to be insecurity — some 65% are concerned about security — unemployment and corruption. These are challenges that both men and women in Afghanistan confront, but women face an additional set of challenges — and successes — that are specific to them. Women want greater opportunities for education and employment, as well as protection from violence. Domestic violence continues to be pervasive.

An interesting change that has come about in recent years is that women are seeking employment in steadily increasing numbers, and are demanding greater opportunities for education as well. This indicates that women are no longer seeing their place in society as solely within the home; many Afghan women see themselves as needed breadwinners who have the right to work. This shift in mindset is a marked contrast from a decade ago. Women are also reporting instances of domestic violence at higher rates, which suggests that women are now recognizing domestic violence as a crime that they feel able to report. The fact that Afghan women are prioritizing these issues is an indicator of the societal shifts that are taking place in large measure because of women’s leadership and engagement.

Many women fear that any future negotiations with the Taliban could lead to a reversal in the gains they have made. Numerous human rights violations continue to be committed against women and girls in Afghanistan on a regular basis. Women’s full participation in the decisions of their government, including in any future negotiations to end the conflict, is essential if Afghanistan is going to solidify the gains that have been made and build a better future.

When women progress, all of society makes progress. That is true in Afghanistan and around the world. The message out of Oslo this weekend was that we must continue to enable and empower the women of Afghanistan, who, as Mrs. Ghani noted, have a significant role to play in “returning peace and prosperity to Afghanistan.”

Ambassador Verveer is the Executive Director of the Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security. She served as the first Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues with the U.S. Department of State.

An Interview with May Sabe Phyu, Women’s Activist in Myanmar

May Sabe Phyu, or Phyu Phyu as she is affectionately known, is a devoted advocate for women’s empowerment and peacebuilding in Myanmar.

She is a Director for the Gender Equality Network in Myanmar. In this role, Phyu Phyu facilitates dialogue between civil society, government stakeholders and parliamentarians through meetings and workshops on gender equality as a means of shifting policy.

When asked how she became an activist, Phyu Phyu said, “It’s a good question! I started my career as a humanitarian worker, a social worker.” She worked to provide care and support for people living with HIV/AIDS for more than 10 years. She states that before she considered herself an activist, she was “just an ordinary mother and housewife doing social work serving [her] own community.”

She cites watching the documentary film “Pray the Devil Back to Hell” as being a transformational experience. “This really made me change – it made me think and reflect on our situation for women [in Myanmar]. It made me want to work on women, peace and security issues.”

Phyu Phyu co-founded the Kachin Peace Network and the Kachin Women Peace Network to work toward inter-ethnic cooperation. She has worked to prioritize the needs of women through these networks, specifically focusing on security and protection issues, while advocating for greater inclusion of women in peace processes in Myanmar.

She states “the topic of gender was very sensitive in our country before.” But due to the progress made in the country and the efforts of the Gender Equality Network and others, groups working on issues related to gender are able to do so with less stigma. This allows the Network to advocate for policies in support of women’s rights.

For Phyu Phyu, making a difference in her own community was a key motivation for becoming an activist. “What made me become an activist was [wanting to] reduce conflict in Kachin State.” She notes that before she got involved, she thought of politics as dirty. “Politics seemed like a man’s game – like it has nothing to do with us women. But politics itself is not dirty at all. It is because of the people who are involved in the politics – they make politics seem dirty.”

As she got more involved, she realized that “outside of Yangon, they don’t have any idea what’s really happening in Kachin state.” She wanted to play a role in working to raise awareness about the needs of women and girls and the people of Kachin state, “otherwise our people will suffer violently.”

Phyu Phyu played an essential role in developing the country’s National Strategic Plan for the Advancement of Women. She says that prior to working on the Strategic Plan, there was no trust built between the civil society groups and the government. “Developing the National Strategic Plan was a starting point for seeing how we can work together.” They are now working to draft Myanmar’s first law on violence against women. “It will be the first law protecting women from different kinds of violence in our country. It will be a kind of model process for how government can involve civil society.”

Phyu Phyu shares that the process has not been quite so seamless for the Kachin Peace Network. “Because of the long conflict in Kachin State and the long suffering of the Kachin people, trust has been broken. There’s a lot of inter-ethnic tension for the Burmese people.”

An important piece of this work to build trust has been documenting the advocacy that is taking place. “We brought a lot of media with us for this peace advocacy trips so that the media can record and document the real situation on the ground.”

Phyu Phyu has also been working to advocate for the rights of internally displaced persons (IDPs) in Myanmar. She says, “nearly half of the IDPs are in government-controlled areas and 50 percent are living under Kachin ethnic arms groups controlled areas. The difficulties and living conditions of those two areas are quite different.” She also noted the challenges for IDPs along the China border. She states, “the camps along the China border are not government-controlled, and there’s very little humanitarian assistance from the international community…they are running with very limited resources.”

The Kachin Women Peace Network worked with the Gender Equality Network to conduct an assessment of 17 camps and the specific needs of women living in those camps. “There are a lot of issues that are not addressed and are not getting any attention from humanitarian actors. Women have to live in tents with no privacy. Violence happens in the camps with no reporting mechanism. And there is no separated latrine or water source. There are a lot of women-specific issues there.”

Phyu Phyu has also been an advocate against the Interfaith Marriage Bill in Myanmar, which would impose restrictions on inter-faith marriages. If passed, the bill would require Buddhist women to seek permission from authorities before marrying outside their faith. “A few women leaders released the very first statement against the Interfaith Marriage Bill. We gather frequently and discuss how to address it before we submit it to the parliament.” She and other women’s rights activists have been vocal in their opposition of the bill because it limits women’s rights to make decisions.

The leaders of the 97 women’s and civil society groups who released a statement opposing this bill started receiving death threats and sexual harassment threats as a result of their advocacy. Despite these threats, 166 civil society groups have joined the coalition. Phyu Phyu also helped to organize a variety of workshops outlining reasons for opposing the Interfaith Marriage Bill, and these workshops included groups like the UN and international nongovernmental organizations.

She stresses the importance of including these groups, noting, “Without the international community’s support, we are under threat…we do not have any protection.” She also acknowledges the need to include the media in these workshops and in the movement. She credits the movement with positive outcomes for this Bill. “We strongly believe that, because of our movement and our mobilization…we may delay the process of the Interfaith Marriage Bill.”

In September 2012, Phyu Phyu was charged during a peaceful demonstration calling for an end to civil war in Myanmar. Over the 14 months that followed those charges, she and her fellow co-organizer made 124 appearances in six courts before their charges were dismissed under presidential amnesty. She says, “being charged in six different courts for peaceful demonstration has made us real activists.”

For Phyu Phyu, women’s rights and peace in Myanmar are intertwined. When asked how she defines peace and security, Phyu Phyu says, “To me, peace is equality and justice. If there is no equality and justice, there will not be peace. When I say equality, it’s across everything – it’s across women and men, it’s ethnic and religious differences, it’s across nationality – if we are able to live equally in our society with fairness and justice, this is what we call a peaceful society.”