war

Women and War Presentation to the IAW Centenary Celebration - Berlin 2004 by Helen Self History As I am a historian I w...

2 downloads 368 Views 134KB Size
Women and War Presentation to the IAW Centenary Celebration - Berlin 2004 by Helen Self

History As I am a historian I will begin by taking a backwards glance at history and then concentrate upon more recent conflicts. If we look backwards, we see that women have always been disadvantaged by war. No surprise in that! One illustration of this is Ruben’s great painting of the rape of the Sabine women, reminding us of the long history of women as part of the spoils of war. They became trophies, gifts, slaves, concubines and sometimes a form of currency. A commodity or possession to be bought and sold or given away. Many of these features are still with us today. In more recent times the picture changes. During the 18th and 19th centuries many European countries established colonies in distant lands, the British Empire covering the largest area. This occupation required standing armies. In the British case, large forces of men, who incidentally, were not allowed to marry, were stationed in countries such as India, frequently living in poor conditions and with insufficient activity to occupy their time. Not surprisingly, it was considered essential for these men to have access to prostitutes in order to fulfil their sexual needs. However, the link between sexual intercourse and venereal disease had been established and the notion that access to women was necessary for the maintenance of a compliant and contented force was coupled with the fear of women as a the spreader of contagion. This led to measures for the establishment of brothels and the regulation of prostitutes through health measures, including special hospitals and regular medical inspection, reinforcing the earlier images of women as objects and suppliers of men’s needs. Moving forward to the twentieth century, the picture becomes more complicated. During the First World War many women in Britain supported the war, including the well-known British feminists, Millicent Fawcett and Emmeline Pankhurst. In Britain these women suspended feminist activity and threw themselves wholeheartedly into the war effort. White feathers were presented to men who were pacifist, branding them as cowards. Thousands of women took over heavy jobs in factories and on farms and enjoyed the financial independence and companionship that resulted. Needless to say, the men wanted to regain their jobs and their status when they returned home but nevertheless, women’s place in society improved and after the First World War women in Britain were granted the vote. Thus British women gained new freedoms as the supporters of war and were honoured with the franchise. However, many women around the world suffered in the usual ways, losing husbands, sons or sweethearts. One only needs to glance at a war memorial in any French village to be reduced to tears. And yet, it was partly because of these ambiguous experiences that a new and determined breed of independent professional women were born and flourished. In many ways the experience of the Second World War was similar to the first. Women’s participation in the conflict brought some gains, in that they emerged at the end with new skills and increased confidence. Indeed, in Britain, the 2nd World War saw an end to what was know as the servant classes, thus eradicating one aspect of female exploitation and obliging many better off women to do their own household chores, thus limiting their employment opportunities. This caused manufacturing industry to invent an endless supply of new labour saving devices, while the press and women’s magazines promoted housework as an attractive career. But for society in general both world wars had a profound influence on the class structure. One could, therefore, argue that women in general gained from this miserable experience.

World War II also introduced a new but now familiar phenomenon of women as combatants. For example, many British women joined the forces and, although not on the front line, they made a positive contribution towards hostilities. We now see women combatants in many countries, so it has become commonplace, if not acceptable to those of us who work in the peace movement. The ‘equality’ aspect should also give us cause for thought, as many of the women who join the forces actively campaign to be accepted as suitable for involvement in action which the military authorities are understandably cautious to grant them. (Fast Forward) Former Yugoslavia Bosnia, Croatia, Kosovo, Serbia, Slovenia, There are important contrasts to be drawn between the great wars and the conflicts of the last ten to fifteen years, of which nobody here can be unaware. In the Balkans, for example, the rape of women became more than a hidden consequence of liberated bestiality, but rather it became a strategic plan of campaign intended to undermine the cultural values of the enemy, shaming and demoralising the heads of families as well as punishing women. The rape of women was knowingly used as a way of destabilising society, with the added and deliberate consequence that many mixed blood children would be born. As we know, this strategy had far reaching consequences for countless women, both physical and psychological. So we can add to the list of abuses ‘the violation of women as a strategic weapon of war’. Sadly, this tactic has been repeated on the borders of India and Pakistan. And more recently Amnesty International has accused Sudan of the mass abduction of women and girls, stating that the regime was complicit in the use of rape as a weapon of war designed to expel black Africans from the Western province. In Rwanda the same thing occurred with even more devastating consequences, as the systematic rape of women became a conduit for the spread of HIV AIDS. It has been estimated that approximately 25, 000 women were raped and many are now slowly dying as a result of this dreadful scourge. One can only say that, belatedly, it led to a declaration of ‘rape’ as a war crime, but it seems with little impact upon events. Afghanistan Following what we now refer to as 9/11 the Americans and a coalition of supporters invaded Afghanistan in order to rout out terrorists. As always, innocent women and children were killed in the process. Other atrocities have happened since, many of which have had little coverage in the press. Afghanistan, which is one of the poorest countries in the world, provided the West with a new justification for conflict, the use of women’s oppression as an excuse for war. We know that the denial of the human right to education, health care, freedom of expression in dress and behaviour are aspects of the oppression suffered by the women of Afghanistan under the Taliban, but they are not rights which have been restored through conflict. Indeed, the feminist movement RAWA has revealed that the present conditions are in many way worse than before. In some areas of the country women risk being attacked and raped by armed factions, they cannot go out without being accompanied by a close male member of the family and one report told of the brutal beating inflicted upon a girl of eight who ventured to go to school. Sadly, this conflict, as with so many others, led to the displacement of thousands of people fleeing their homes. These were predominantly women and children, who are then condemned to the soulless life of a refugee through which they become prey to traffickers and other criminals. Now we can add to the list women as the unconsidered casualties of war. Women as refuse or disposable rubbish.

Iraq During the past eighteen months, life in the UK has been over-shadowed by events in Iraq. Never before have I watched so much television news or read so many papers, sometimes buying two or three on one day in order to make comparisons or read particular correspondents. I do not intend to go over it here, or to look at the arguments for waging such an unnecessary conflict, but to examine one of the consequences which I find particularly disturbing, which demonstrates yet another way in which feminism is being undermined. The conflict itself has been portrayed from the beginning in the classic folklore terms of a war between good and evil. With the forces of evil being embodied in the satanic figure of Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction, while the forces of good are represented by George Bush under the banner of freedom and democracy. As I have already pointed out, women have been involved in conflict at varying levels for many years. But in Iraq something more has happened, to begin with we had the ‘derring-do’ story of Jessica Lynch who was caught by the Iraqis and then rescued from the gates of hell by the American’s during a filmed raid. It turned out that Jessica had not been ill-treated, nor had she experienced a ‘fate worse than death’. But she became the good girl. On the other side of the coin we have Lynddie English, whose photograph was beamed around the world leading a naked man on a lead whilst pointing laughingly at his genitals. This is not what usually comes to mind when we think of torture, but it is a demoralising, dehumanising and a perverted means for undermining a victims mental balance in ways from which he will probably never recover. Indeed some of these men have said that they could never return to their families. The shocking aspect of this event was, for most people, that a naked ‘male’ body, rather than a female was exposed to the public gaze. Women are so used to seeing offensive pictures of the naked female form that it arouses little comment. Do not underestimate the potency of these images. Like so many of the great icons of history they burn into the soul and remain there. What troubles me most is that the global revulsion and disgust which followed was heightened precisely because the perpetrator was a woman and her hands were holding the lead. So, here we have a woman as a symbol of sexual perversion which will endure for ever. You can forget about the argument of who gave the orders. Thus we have the age-old icon of women as good and evil, the familiar dualities of the two Mary’s, virgin and repentant Magdalene, ‘Madonna and whore’. Lynddie, becomes, like Eve, the symbol of sin in the world and consequently deflects our attention from real perpetrators. Yet in this case it did more, because it also proved to those who want to believe it that once women are given education and freedom they corrupt everything. Sadly, our hopes for the advancement of women in Arabic societies may have been setback for decades. Then we had the further revelation that a woman, Brigadier-General Janis Karpinski, was in command of the Abu Ghraib prison where these outrages occurred. In equality terms we could see her elevation as a triumph for feminism, on the other hand, if we believe that women are naturally peaceful then she has let us down. However you view her, or if you believe, as she claims, that she has been made a scapegoat, the net result is a weakening of the feminist cause since it portrays women as no better than anyone else in this sorry affair. ‘Peace’? Military bases and strategic planning: No one doubts that war is responsible for destabilising, and frequently impoverishing countries. This is a key part of the overall strategy which leaves the target country in a weaker position and no longer a threat. However, we have learnt that this is merely a dream. Economic sanctions, for example, are one of the favourite peacetime weapons which can have

a devastating effect upon the poor of a country, especially women and children, without achieving the desired aims. We have seen this in Afghanistan, Cuba, Libya, Iran and Iraq. Whereas, to neglect a country following hostilities, as we have done in Afghanistan, has equally negative consequences. This country is now producing 70% of the world’s opium. Indeed, for most farmers there is little choice, since much of their poor soil and arable land has been rendered useless by minefields. The poppy brought in $2.5 billion dollars in 2003, which represents half the Afghan economy. In addition to this the warlords are reverting to their old ways, and quite possibly harbouring and training new terrorists. Indeed, this country is now so dangerous that even the aid agencies are pulling out. We must realise that ‘Peace’ is as much a forum for military strategies and strategic goals as war-time. And again, we know that the United States has encircled the globe with its military bases. These include army, navy, marines and air force. They protect Western interests which may at some time be threatened, making future military strikes easier and, therefore, more likely. Still more frightening is the plan to take exclusive possession of space to engage in what the USAF Space Command calls “instant engagement anywhere in the world”. Military bases, now as in colonial times, accommodate large numbers of servicemen who are temporally separated from their wives and partners. These men, who are frequently bored but flush with money, become the main source of clients for sex workers. Off duty leave is defined as leisure time known as R&R or rest and recreation, which is then seen in terms of access to women. In the Philippines, for example, this has given rise to a massive increase in prostitution, sex tourism, paedophilia and ultimately the production of a skewed economy in which the sex industry becomes a significant contributor to the gross national product and consequently may be seen as indispensable by the state. Trafficking In more recent times there have been many stories of trafficked women being bought and sold by UN peacekeeping forces. Amnesty International has accused NATO and the UN of trafficking women and fuelling their exploitation. The Times reported recently, that the porous borders of Kosovo, Serbia, Albania and Macedonia, facilitate the organised crime which now dominates much of the Balkan economy, where there are now 20,000 NATO peace-keepers. This calls into question the accountability of occupying forces after conflict, when the rule of law breaks down. You might think that laws and conventions make a difference, but prostitution in all its forms is illegal in Kosova. So something different is needed. However we cannot and must not be naive. When you have the devastation of war, the destruction of economies, occupying forces or peacekeeping troops, then you also have impoverished women and ‘inevitably’ you will have prostitution and trafficking. The stories of trafficking are the same now as they were in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. They involve criminal gangs, abduction, deception, confiscated passports, imprisonment, beatings and rape, followed by sexual slavery in order to repay debt. This is undoubtedly true in some cases, but it is not whole story. Destabilisation, whether it be through war or peace-time tactics (such as Ronald Reagan’s Star Wars project or the oil for food for scandal), result in many thousands of people, both women and men, becoming trapped in impossible situations, often without employment or shelter. A proportion of these people find ways, through family, friends and chance acquaintances, to move away towards more successful countries where the economy flourishes and hope beckons. As they are frequently illegal immigrants they enter informal economies. Some will become maids and cleaners, others will work in the catering industry, yet more will join the armies of agricultural workers, while some will take their chance and move into the sex industry. Virtually all of them will be exploited in one way or another, and many will be exploited sexually. Signing conventions and deploring such behaviour may make us feel better, but in the long run this is marginal, because it does not attack the root causes. The worst, and in my opinion the most shameful level of moral disintegration has happened

in places like Uganda and the Congo were genocidal policies have led to the militarisation of children. Orphaned children have been rounded-up in parts of Africa, then made to perform atrocious crimes before being turned into child soldiers and prostitutes. The infamous military Youth Training Camps in Zimbabwe are equally dreadful. This practice is destructive on many levels as some children have reported enjoying the fighting and missing it when it is finally replaced by the routine occupations of peacetime, such as schooling and football. Human Rights? One would naively imagine that we have a basic human right to live and not be destroyed by war. But even this statement can be skewed by politicians. For example, Britain is to lift its ban on selling arms to China, which was imposed after the Tiananmen Square massacre, in order to improve human rights. I leave you to work out the logic of that one! I could, of course, go on and on with one harrowing example after another until we all disintegrate, especially as a third of the world is currently said to be in conflict. Sadly, the politics of hatred has no limits. However, we need to come to some consensus, and I hope that I have shown that even with this depressing issue there is no easy solutions or any overarching ideology which one can apply to the situations which arise. I heard a learned professor, a few months ago, tell us that war was an inefficient means for killing people; pestilence and disease were far better. But war does far more harm than just kill people. It redefines borders, destroys economies, wastes resources, shatters lives, leaves behind toxic waste capable of injuring and deforming future generations, and stacks up bitterness and hatred for centuries to come. Frequently, many people loose their homes and flee, becoming refugees or misplaced people—thus law-abiding citizens are transformed into illegal immigrants and asylum seekers in other countries. In its wake anarchy reigns, disease and criminality flourish, drug dealing, arms dealing, and trafficking in all its form are rife. This is the lesson of Northern Ireland, the Balkans, Afghanistan, Iraq and many other parts of the world. Germany and Japan, and in a different way South Africa are, on the other hand, shining examples of the ability to surmount misfortune and emerge triumphant. So, what do we say to our leaders? Like Marlene Dietrich, I ask myself ‘when will they ever learn’?