|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) finally updated its Strategic Concept in 2022, a few months after Russia invaded Ukraine. Although this document reaffirms the importance of collective defence and deterrence, it also identifies a range of other security challenges while describing the principles and values that shape the discussions at NATO and in the capitals of its member states. For the first time in its history, the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda is mentioned in NATO’s Strategic Concept. As discussed in my book Deploying Feminism: The Role of Gender in NATO Military Operations, the significance of diversity lies at the heart of NATO’s public diplomacy efforts. However, can these emerging norms have a tangible impact on the practices of an organization that remains predominantly male and militarized?
The standards derived from the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda are promoted by several international organizations (United Nations, European Union, African Union, etc.), including NATO, which develop initiatives aimed at increasing women’s participation – including in military operations – and conducting conflict analyses that are sensitive to gender issues. While feminist activism on the sidelines of world conferences on women has contributed to the emergence of these norms regarding the gendered dimension of conflict, it is through the Women, Peace and Security agenda that they have been institutionalized, an agenda that was initially adopted at the UN in 2000 with Security Council Resolution 1325. Beyond the diplomatic efforts that have endorsed these norms, the armed forces are often at the forefront of these changes in conflict zones, integrating gender considerations into the planning and execution of missions and training activities within the framework of peace operations.
For troops deployed as part of NATO missions, this often means actively seeking women as interlocutors in their area of operation to enhance intelligence-gathering activities. Within NATO, the achievements of the Women, Peace and Security agenda have been solidified through the creation of new positions and several policies, both on the civilian and military side. However, little attention has been paid to the relevance of these ideas for collective defence. This issue can be better understood by clarifying the context in which the Women, Peace, and Security agenda has been implemented within NATO and in the context of its operations.
NATO’s Women, Peace and Security Agenda
The Strategic Concept, a cornerstone document that identifies the Alliance’s threats and objectives, discusses “integrating […] the Women, Peace and Security agenda across all our core tasks”. This theme is also highlighted in the framework of cooperation between the European Union and NATO and in humanitarian challenges related to NATO’s activities. In another paragraph concerning resilience, the WPS agenda is also mentioned, along with the more specific objective of “advance[ing] gender equality as a reflection of our values.” While the immediate connection to resilience may not be clear, it is nevertheless fundamental. As the Alliance recognizes in the Strategic Concept that national and collective defence depends on the resilience of the entire society, women must necessarily contribute to defining security issues and participate in their resolution. As we have seen with the pandemic, resilience matters cannot exclude 50% of the population from the processes of developing equitable and sustainable solutions.
Returning to the Strategic Concept, the final highlighted WPS goal is conflict-related sexual violence. Ultimately, this document fairly accurately reflects the commitments of NATO members in various policies concerning diversity, integrating a gender perspective into military operations, and preventing sexual violence. That being said, how do NATO’s civilian and military actors implement these policies?
In Deploying Feminism, I trace NATO’s journey from its first WPS policy in 2007 to the daily work of gender advisors supporting NATO’s military commands at the strategic, operational and tactical levels. On the civilian side, NATO has established the position of Special Representative for Women, Peace and Security in its International Staff since 2012. The Office of the Special Representative remains underfunded. Still, it leads several initiatives within NATO, such as updating WPS policies and action plans, developing tools for civilian and military personnel like NATO’s Gender-Inclusive Language Manual, and a range of public diplomacy activities and consultations with civil society (specialized workshops, press conferences, annual meetings with civil society representatives, etc.).
Although, as noted in the Strategic Concept, NATO asserts that the Women, Peace and Security agenda must be an integral part of its three core tasks (deterrence and defence, crisis prevention and management, and cooperative security), it must be acknowledged that the implementation of the WPS agenda has primarily been associated with crisis management and cooperative security tasks. Conversely, the implications of the gender dimension for collective defence and deterrence have not been as well articulated. Yet, NATO’s experience (and that of many other international actors) in Afghanistan highlighted the importance of understanding the operational environment through a gender lens, as a lack of engagement with Afghan women had biased previous assessments. These initial deployments of gender advisors and all-female or mixed units have provided a better understanding of the differentiated impacts of conflict on the population and contributed to the refinement of NATO’s approach to gender issues in operational contexts. These examples have been echoed in high-level speeches and military training documents. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg even co-authored an op-ed with Angelina Jolie titled “Why Women Must Defend Women’s Rights,” in which they argue that “stronger awareness of the role that gender plays in conflict improves military operational effectiveness and leads to improved security.”
However, gender issues often remain confined to such examples as Afghanistan or Iraq. When addressing a threat like Russia, there are very few details in the document – published in 2018 – NATO/EAPC Women, Peace and Security Policy and Action Plan to shed light on the matter. There are three main points under the banner of collective defence, as quoted below:
“Nations have the primary responsibility for ensuring the implementation of the UNSCRs on Women, Peace and Security and gender equality. The provision of trained troops and experts on gender issues, as well as a better gender balance in NATO-led forces depend entirely on national decisions.”
“Nations are, however, encouraged to make WPS an integral part of their defence and security policies and activities.”
“National initiatives, including through the development and implementation of National Action Plans (NAPs) and other strategic national initiatives, are essential for making progress in this regard.”
It is clear that this excerpt from NATO’s Women, Peace, and Security policy does not provide any clear directive on how to make the agenda relevant to the logic of collective defence and deterrence. Nevertheless, these issues have become much more apparent with the Russian invasion in 2022.
A Gendered Analysis of the Russian Invasion
NATO was established in 1949 as a military alliance to ensure collective defence and deterrence against the Soviet Union. Even in the post-Cold War era, as countries on the Eastern flank were concerned about Russia’s resurgence, it was within the context of increased great power competition, which could threaten their territorial integrity over time. This competition, however, was governed, if not constrained, by several confidence-building and security measures, bilateral and multilateral treaties, and common diplomatic engagement platforms like the NATO-Russia Council. Russia was seen both as a partner and a potential adversary but distant from other threats that proliferated in the 1990s and 2000s related to intra-state conflicts, terrorism, and rogue states. Now, given Russian President Putin’s attempts to redraw international borders through force, his frequent use of poison against political opponents, and his policy normalizing rape and other forms of conflict-related sexual violence, it is time to recognize that the post-Cold War principles that underpinned diplomatic dialogue between Russia, the United States and NATO are outdated. A gender-based analysis is necessary to understand better the dynamics of the ongoing war, a necessity acknowledged by the Ukrainian armed forces, which are also deploying gender advisors.
First, let’s acknowledge that the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 led to a massive mobilization of Ukrainian men to fight on the front lines. Still, it also resulted in a dramatic increase in the participation of women in the armed forces, including 5,000 in combat roles. Due to this existential threat, the door to military service suddenly swung open for women. Even in 2016, when they were on the contact line in Donbas, women took up arms without any official recognition of the risks they were undertaking. By 2022, the proportion of women in the Ukrainian armed forces had risen to 22%, while the average within NATO countries is only 12%. However, women also make up 90% of those who have left the country, as men are required to stay in Ukraine due to the martial law imposed following the Russian invasion. The military and humanitarian assistance offered by NATO countries must consider these socio-demographic realities to be effective.
On the Russian side, the gendered implications of the war are also evident and significant for the training activities that NATO countries undertake with Ukraine. Not only is Putin attempting to redraw international borders through force, but he also employs rape and other forms of conflict-related sexual violence as tools of war, with long-term repercussions for civilian and military populations in Ukraine. On the national level, feminist and LGBTQ groups advocate against the war in Ukraine and find themselves even more vulnerable than before, targeted by a violent repression orchestrated by Vladimir Putin. The Putin regime, which has decriminalized domestic violence, presents itself as a defender of traditional and patriarchal values, going so far as using this stance as a casus belli in Ukraine and a mantra in its propaganda efforts that are also targeting NATO.
NATO’s WPS Policy: An Essential Tool
It is essential to uphold the norms that underpin the Women, Peace and Security agenda, not only because Russia threatens them but also due to the undeniable link between gender equality and peace. As stated in NATO’s Official Policy, there is “a strong correlation between gender equality and a country’s stability.” This empirical analysis is demonstrated, notably, in the work of Valerie M. Hudson. Just as Russia’s male-dominated and patriarchal model causes insecurity within and beyond its borders, it also causes disorder on a global scale. This model is profoundly ineffective across the board. In fact, as discussed in the latest book by Hudson, Bowen and Nielson: “The general subjugation of women also means men have to live in societies that, generally speaking, are violent, dysfunctional, insecure, unstable, and poor.” Gender equality is the cornerstone of lasting security, necessary for achieving greater stability on regional and international scales. While far from perfect, NATO’s Women, Peace and Security Policy represents an indispensable reference tool for addressing the increasing threats outlined in the new Strategic Concept.
Comments are closed.