How is it that women are routinely left out of this kind of decision making?

by MARC PURCELL & JULIE McKAY

Thirteen years ago something miraculous happened at the United Nations. For the first time, the highest decision-making body in the world – the UN Security Council – turned its attention specifically to the voices of the world’s women.

It was Halloween in America – 31 October, 2000 – when the UN Security Council unanimously adopted a Resolution that recognized women have a central role to play in creating peace and security.

It might seem like a no-brainer: how can peace and security reign after conflicts if women are routinely left out of the decision-making?

But the reality is that women are routinely left out. Since 1990, of the many peace agreements signed worldwide only 16 per cent either had a woman at the negotiating table or mentioned women at all in the content of the agreement.

In the minds of some, war is a realm that belongs to men. It took a coalition of over 200 non-government organisations, working with UN Women (then called UNIFEM) and a range of key influencers to finally convince the Security Council that the nuts and bolts of war and peace are also the realm of women.

The idea that women must have a seat at the table certainly seemed to have a lot of support at the United Nations that Halloween night, with reports of applause and euphoria breaking out in the chamber once the Resolution had passed.

But Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security – as it is now called – was a long time in the making. And thirteen years on, even some of the biggest supporters of the Resolution have faltered, leaving women out when it comes to negotiating peace and planning for the future after major conflicts.

Women are participants in war – they are soldiers as well as supporters of violence. They are also civilians at high risk of rape and physical violence – both during and after conflict. The current rape crisis in Syria is just one sobering example of this. After conflict, the return home of soldiers often means a heightened risk of violence against women. So the end of war, in reality, isn’t always the beginning of peace for women.

All of this means that for peace to reach a whole community women need to be included. Their voices need to be listened to and their security given priority.

As Australia and others are finalizing our withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan, it’s an important time to ask the question: are we leaving a more secure Afghanistan for the nation’s women? And – are women getting enough of a say in the nation’s future?

By many accounts, the answer would have to be no. The few female members of the Afghan Parliament that have now been elected have reported being shut out of peace negotiations. In 2010, no Afghan woman was invited to attend an international conference on Afghanistan in London, hosted by then UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown. Australia and many other nations attended. International NGO ActionAid has lamented the fact that at this conference, female Afghan activists had to speak to the media physically standing outside the conference proceedings.

Afghanistan is not the only conflict-affected country that Australia is currently withdrawing from. We have been working with the Solomon Islands since 2000, following the outbreak of civil conflict. The Regional Assistance Mission to the Solomons is now winding down. With the Solomons having one of the highest recorded rates of domestic violence in the world, the question again arises – has Australia done everything we could to ensure a peace process that included women’s voices and addressed their needs?

In 2000, when Australia hosted and helped to negotiate the Townsville Peace Agreement in order to end conflict in the Solomon Islands, women were not involved. To bring about that peace agreement, Australiaworked with three Government bodies and a range of cultural and social groups.

The agreement was signed by 15 different representatives and witnessed by a further 10. By any standards, this was an honourable diplomatic feat. But Australia should never again host such talks without women at the negotiating table.

Last year on International Women’s Day, Australia launched our own National Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security. Having such a plan is part of Australia’s obligations under the UN Security Council Resolution on Women, Peace and Security.

Australia’s National Action Plan commits us to including women in peace negotiations and upping women’s representation in our own armed forces. With Australia now sitting on the UN Security Council, we must ensure that Australia not only holds to our commitments, but also promotes women’s inclusion on the global stage.

This should be a fundamental part of Australia’s UN Security Council legacy.

The Australian Council for International Development is joining with the Australian National Committee for UN Women, the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom and the ANU Gender Institute on 15 April to hold the first Civil Society Dialogue on Women, Peace & Security. It will bring together representatives from the Australian Defence Force, Government, NGOs and universities.

The Dialogue on can be followed on twitter using the hashtag #UNSCR1325 on 15 April. 

Marc Purcell is Executive Director of the Australian Council for International Development (ACFID). ACFIDunites Australia’s non-government aid and international development organisations to strengthen their collective impact against poverty.

Julie McKay is Executive Director of the Australian Committee for UN Women. UN Women is the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women.