Gender Equality in Militaries: How Far We’ve Come and How Far We Have to Go

Just ahead of International Women’s Day, George Washington University’s Global Gender Program convened a panel discussion on gender equality in military operations. “What Works? Promoting Gender Equality and the Implementation of UNSCR 1325 in Military Operations” took place 25 February 2015, bringing together a distinguished group of experts that included Dr. Chantal de Jonge Oudraat (President, Women in International Security), Commandant Jayne Lawlor (Gender, Equality, and Diversity Officer, Irish Defense Forces), Charlotte Isaaksson (Gender Advisor, Supreme HQ Allied Powers Europe), Brenda Oppermann (Human Rights Subject Matter Expert), and Dr. Robert Egnell (Visiting Professor and Director of Teaching, Security Studies Program, Georgetown University) for a discussion moderated by George Washington University Professor Dr. Aisling Swaine.

This year will mark the 15^th anniversary of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 (UNSCR 1325) on Women, Peace, and Security, which affirms the critical roles of women in conflict and in rebuilding societies post-conflict. While the passage of UNSCR 1325 remains a watershed moment in incorporating women’s rights into national security, as Swaine noted, “we still have a long way to go in actually making progress in implementation…and one of the biggest areas where we see gaps are within militaries themselves.”

The Importance of Gender in Military Operations

In her opening remarks, Dr. de Jonge Oudraat identified a key question: Why should we talk about gender in military operations? She recalled that in 2000, when UNSCR 1325 was adapted, many of the peace agreements brokered by the UN were falling apart after just three or four years. There was a great deal of pressure from women’s groups to be at the peace table, which, at that point, “forgot about half the population.” Further, Dr. de Jonge Oudraat explained that this marked the era when the very nature of conflicts was changing, from wars between states to wars within them, drawing attention to the notion of human security.

Photo Credit: Turkish Naval Forces

Dr. Egnell echoed these statements, commenting that Women, Peace, and Security issues are both intrinsically important and necessary to increase military effectiveness. Comdt. Lawlor referred to her experience with the Irish Defense Forces as she explained that some elements of gender awareness were already present in the planning and execution of operations. For instance, it was common knowledge to have female soldiers instead of male soldiers search women, when necessary. Oppermann agreed and offered her perspective from working on these issues with the U.S. military. She noted that military officials realized the necessity of considering local women in the planning of raids. The challenge across the board, however, was identifying such practices as gender awareness and moving beyond these basic applications. A common theme in the discussion was the difficulty of departing from tradition and adopting new procedures and perspectives.

Practical Strategies for Incorporating a Gender Perspective into Military Operations

Though difficult, progress has been made on efforts to incorporate a gender perspective into military operations across the globe. In the Irish military, Comdt. Lawlor created an action plan, or, as she put it, “an idiot’s guide for implementing a gender perspective for soldiers.” She explained that this was an effort to infuse gender awareness training at multiple levels, from career courses to planning operations. Her efforts also included appointments of gender focal points at each level “so that at every stage, no matter what’s going on, someone there is thinking about gender,” and distributing information about local NGOs and civil society organizations poised to serve as further resources.

Isaaksson spoke of similar strategies in her experience at NATO. She emphasized the importance of “treating gender as a task” – outlining strategic and operational objectives as well as defining measures of effectiveness. She underscored that “we want to do gender as we do everything else – fully integrated, not something on the side or parallel.” Isaaksson noted, “I’d argue that [NATO has] been successful on the gender mainstreaming side” and that its approach was “very much about institutionalization.”

Oppermann described a more challenging context from her experience with U.S. Military operations in Afghanistan. She described gender as “not part of the military lexicon.” Oppermann emphasized that incorporating gender perspectives in the U.S. Military is “all about relationship-building.” She detailed steps forward on the ground in Afghanistan, including developing a gender annex as part of a regional order, which she called “a big win,” and female engagement team (FET) trainings. However, the panelists agreed that the U.S. has a long way to go on mainstreaming gender into operations as an institution.

Points of Entry and Points of Resistance

Each speaker emphasized the vital nature of entry points within the institution to produce real and sustainable change. Regarding whether bringing gender perspectives to military is a top-down or bottom-up process, Dr. Egnell argued, “if we want change, we have to affect it from both sides.” Indeed, Comdt. Lawlor highlighted that her institutional action plan gained traction when the IDF Chief of Staff signed onto it. This reiterated Egnell’s point that the way to mainstream gender is through developing incentives to support these issues. Therefore, the system through which one makes gains in salary and promotions has to reflect this perspective.

The discussion pointed to a main challenge in implementing a gender perspective in militaries: resistance to change. The panelists agreed that tradition proved to be a significant block to making progress on gender perspectives. Dr. de Jonge Oudraat affirmed that introducing a gender perspective is a highly political choice as “it is about the distribution of power in society, and people don’t give that up very easily.”

Dr. Swaine closed the discussion by thanking the panelists for sharing their experiences in implementing UNSCR 1325 in militaries, for including remarks both practical and strategic, and discussing points of entry and points of resistance. She emphasized the importance of taking what we know about weaving gender perspectives into military institutions and operations, and ensuring that it is translated into the armed contexts we facing today – contexts in which terrorism and non-state violence are growing threats.

---

Lara Sulzman is a graduate student in the Master of Science in Foreign Service program in the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. She focuses her studies on how best to address issues of gender, particularly gender-based violence, in humanitarian crises. She has worked in India, Thailand, and Jerusalem.

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.