5.1. Gender and Women, Peace and Security in the CSDP (Taina Järvinen

5.1. GENDER AND WOMEN, PEACE AND SECURITY IN THE CSDP

by Taina Järvinen

European Union/EUPOL Afghanistan

Societies with a high level of gender equality tend to be more stable than those with a wide gender gap.

Women, men, girls and boys experience and are affected by armed conflicts differently. Violence, displacement, disruption of support services, economic insecurity and the unravelling of social structures and judicial and security institutions are some of the long-term consequences that people in post-conflict settings have to endure, and each has a gender dimension.

International interventions, in the form of crisis management missions or post-conflict reconstruction programmes, need to be implemented in a gender-sensitive manner, so as to ensure that the measures in question are non-discriminatory and do not exacerbate existing inequalities but benefit both men and women. DEFINITION OF GENDER

Gender refers to the social attributes and opportunities associated with being male and female and the relationships between women and men and girls and boys, as well as the relations between women and those between men. These attributes, opportunities and relationships are socially constructed and are learned through socialisation processes. They are context- and time-specific, and changeable.

(European Institute for Gender Equality, EIGE).

European Union/EULEX Kosovo, Enisa Kasemi

The ultimate objective of the CSDP gender mainstreaming policy is gender equality, one of the core values of the European Union.

THE EU’S GENDER POLICY

The EU’s gender policy in the area of crisis management is based on mainstreaming, i.e. systematically integrating a gender perspective in all areas of the CSDP, from planning and implementation of missions and operations to reporting, evaluation, training and lessons. The ultimate objective of the CSDP gender mainstreaming policy is gender equality, one of the core values of the European Union that is enshrined in the Treaty on European Union. The EU’s external actions, including the CSDP, are guided by the Union’s core values and principles.

Promoting gender equality contributes to stability. Studies show that societies with a high level of gender equality tend to be more stable than those with a wide gender equality gap. Similarly, gender inequality is closely associated with armed conflict. For example, all but one of the ten lowest-ranking countries in the UN Development Programme’s gender inequality index (GII) were either experiencing or emerging from conflict (HDR 2015). GENDER MAINSTREAMING

Gender mainstreaming is also applied for reasons of operational effectiveness. The underlying reasoning is that applying a gender perspective will increase the EU’s crisis management capacity by mobilizing additional resources and exploiting the full potential of the available human resources, and will make the missions more effective in terms of establishing peace and security and strengthening democratic values (11932/2/05). Other pragmatic reasons include improving situational awareness and reaching out to the host civilian population, in particular on issues such as conflict-related sexual violence or gender-based violence.

A new key document, which provides a comprehensive policy framework for gender equality and women’s empowerment in the EU’s external activities, is the EU Gender Action Plan (GAP) for 2016-2020. It renews the EU’s commitment to gender equality, human rights, the empowerment of women and girls and the eradication of gender-based violence.

Gender balancing in CSDP missions

by Maline Meiske

In October 2015, the UN Security Council conducted a High-Level Review aiming at assessing progress in the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 (2000) on women, peace and security. The Review provides an opportunity to take a closer look at the developments and progress made in the context of the CSDP. Ensuring women’s participation in CSDP crisis management operations is still a major challenge, particularly in military operations. Endeavours at the EU-level alone, however, are insufficient, and can only succeed in conjunction with member states’ efforts. The EU has increasingly recognised that conflict and crisis management are not gender-neutral affairs and has introduced numerous gender policies and initiatives to forward the aims of UNSCR 1325. The key phrase is ‘gender mainstreaming’ – the process of assessing the implications of any planned action for men and women, which includes the proportional representation of both genders in conflict resolution and crisis management operations (also referred to as ‘gender balancing’). Boosting women’s participation began as an equal rights issue, but it has developed into a functionalist argument about improved operational effectiveness of crisis management and sustainability of conflict resolution. Adequate representation of female personnel is thought to help combat sexual violence, promote gender awareness among the host nations’ populations, and improve relationships between peacekeepers and local citizens.

With the gradual release of gender-disaggregated data on women’s participation in crisis management operations, research on gender balance and the impact on operational effectiveness is on the rise. EEAS data on 16 civilian CSDP missions between 2007 and 2013 reveal an increase in women’s participation, suggesting that gender policies and initiatives have had some success. Overall, the proportion of women participating in civilian CSDP missions rose from 20% to 26% and the absolute number of female civilian personnel increased from 240 to 869.

For CSDP military operations, no gender-disaggregated data is retained – a shortcoming that is in the process of being addressed. The EU Military Staff, however, estimates that only 3%-8% of the deployed personnel in CSDP military operations are female.

Mind the gap

To understand why women remain underrepresented in CSDP missions and operations, the methods of recruitment must be examined. Personnel are mainly supplied through national secondments, meaning that the decision-making authority in the allocation process lies with each member state. The underlying characteristics of each state thus determine women’s participation in

European union institute for Security Studies november 2015 1

Full article see: http://www.iss.europa.eu/publications/detail/article/ gender-balancing-in-csdp/

UNSCR 1325 WOMEN, PEACE AND SECURITY

The United Nations Security Council’s adoption in 2000 of the landmark Resolution 1325 on women, peace and security highlighted women’s rights and gender equality for the first time as key factors in establishing international peace and stability. This was followed by Resolution 1820 (2008), which focused on sexual violence as a tactic of war and a possible war crime.

Since then the UN Security Council has adopted six more resolutions: 1888, 1889, 1960, 2106, 2122 and 2242. The women, peace and security agenda is based on these eight resolutions.

The European Union is a strong supporter of the women, peace and security agenda. The Union has consistently called for its full implementation, stressing the need to combat violence against women in conflict situations and to promote women’s equal and meaningful participation in the prevention and resolution of conflicts, peace negotiations, peace-building, peacekeeping, humanitarian response and post-conflict reconstruction.

IMPLEMENTING THE WOMEN, PEACE AND SECURITY AGENDA

The key EU document for implementing the women, peace and security (WPS) agenda is the ‘Comprehensive Approach to the EU Implementation of UNSCRs 1325 and 1820 on Women, Peace and Security’ (15671/1/2008).

This document offers a holistic approach, which recognises the close links between peace, security, development and gender equality and lists a range of EU external action instruments. The guiding document ‘Implementation of UNSCRs on women, peace and security into CSDP mission and operations’ (PSC document 7109/2012) focuses on the implementation of the WPS agenda in CSDP missions.

In 2010, the EU adopted 17 indicators to identify both progress and gaps in implementation based on the Comprehensive Approach; five of these indicators focused specifically on the CSDP.

The indicators were revised in 2016 (12525/16) and grouped under four thematic headings: prevention, participation, protection, and relief and recovery.