F E AT URE
Women’s participation in peace mediation Zoom diplomacy has become a vital conflict resolution tool. But where are all the women? Mediation to end armed conflict has traditionally been dominated by men. With the conflict in Ukraine currently consuming global narratives on everything from human rights to defence of the so-called international rules-based order, the voices of women in this space remain, as is so often the case, eerily absent. In the more than 20 years since the UN Security Council’s landmark resolution on Women, Peace and Security affirmed the importance of shifting women’s roles from victims of conflict to participants in resolution, progress has been glacial. Estimates for the period from 1992 to 2019 report around seven out of ten peace processes had no women mediators or signatories. Most peace processes are premised on the assumption that the actors who pursued war, primarily men, will also act as the main agents for peace. The problem with this approach, eloquently argued by gender advocate Sanam Anderlini, is that
20
AUSTRALIAN PEACEKEEPER
“war-makers rarely have the requisite experience and expertise in peacemaking”. Where women do participate, their presence is often used in a “tokenistic” way to legitimate decisions taken, instead of giving women a voice in the process. This observation is supported by empirical research that has established a strong correlation between women’s participation and positive negotiation outcomes, such as implementation of agreements and durability of peace. At the same time, peace agreements seek not only to end violence, but they often function as blueprints for the country’s future political order. Exclusion from this process can have grave long-term consequences for the marginalised groups’ political, social and economic status. Barriers to women’s participation in peace processes abound. They include conservative gender norms and logistical problems pertaining to lack of personal security, transportation and childcare. Where women do participate, their presence is often used in a “tokenistic” way to legitimate decisions taken, instead of giving women a voice in the process. The Covid-19 pandemic has, however, changed the format of peace
mediation in a way that may have important implications for women’s participation. Although the growing emphasis on the use of technology in peace operations predates the coronavirus outbreak, the pandemic has significantly accelerated the adoption of digital technologies in peace processes as mediators have sought to maintain the momentum of peace talks. Traditional shuttle diplomacy, in which an outside party serves as an intermediary, has been complemented by virtual mediation in online platforms such as Zoom in conflict zones ranging from Syria, Iraq and Libya, to the Philippines, Afghanistan and Yemen. For example, the 2020 peace talks in Libya, which led to a ceasefire and the formation of a national unity government, were conducted partly through videoconferencing platforms. In Syria, the chief UN negotiator has used virtual platforms to consult with civil society actors. The virtualisation of peace negotiations enables women to take more active roles in the process. It offers the potential to widen participation by reducing the risks and costs associated with face-toface meetings, eliminating the need for costly and at times dangerous travel across conflict zones. Zoom diplomacy can also “equalise” interaction among participants by removing the gendered performances of power enacted through physical movements, body language and positions in the room. The use of virtual platforms in peace talks may also facilitate feedback between the high-level Track I negotiations (among government officials) and local, civil society-led Track III peace processes (among individuals and private groups) by providing a videoconferencing link between the groups. This is particularly important from the perspective of inclusivity,
