An incomplete narrative

The US ensured removal of all references to sexual and reproductive health from a UNSC resolution on ending sexual violence in war.

The omitted phrase stipulated: “Recognizing the importance of providing timely assistance to survivors of sexual violence, urges United Nations entities and donors to provide non-discriminatory and comprehensive health services, in line with Resolution 2106”. This was removed even though the US had already ensured that the more detailed description of health services “including sexual and reproductive health, psychosocial, legal and livelihood support” had already been removed from the text of the resolution.

This move by the US is nothing short of an open declaration of hostility towards women worldwide, particularly considering the fact that women and children are most vulnerable to abuse and exploitation in conflict/crisis situations. This reality has been recognized in UNSC Resolution 1325 on ‘Women, Peace and Security’, which acknowledged the need to understand the consequences of armed conflict on women so as to develop and strengthen institutional arrangements safeguarding their life and security, as well as their effective participation in the peace process.

Following UNSC Resolution 1325, the International Committee for the Red Cross published a report in which it stated: “the effect of war on women is not only determined by the character and stage of the conflict, but also by the particular role of each woman caught up in it”.

In other words, “it is vital to respond to women’s particular needs – be they combatants, persons deprived of their freedom, refugees, IDPs, mothers and/or members of the civilian population”. This is pertinent because it recognizes that different women will be vulnerable in distinct ways, for instance women impregnated as a consequence of rape who then have to raise children on their own (children who will often be stigmatized and ostracized by societies that are particularly conservative).

Here, the concept of double victimization becomes extremely crucial to understand, ie the trauma of survivors of sexual violence, first from the attack by a perpetrator itself, and second stemming from societal or state reactions to the act. This is, in part, why it was so important for this UNSC resolution to safeguard the right of women to non-discriminatory and comprehensive health services in the event that they are subjected to sexual violence.

At present, it is not just state armies around the world but even the UN that evades liability for perpetrating sexual abuse and exploitation against women in conflict zones. There was a piece published in the ‘Washington Post’ in February 2016, which shared an interview with a survivor of sexual abuse by UN peacekeepers, in which the victim of abuse disclosed how she had been impregnated. She said: “Sometimes when I’m alone with my baby, I think about killing him… He reminds me of the man who raped me”.

Such is the plight and desperation of women in conflict zones, abused with impunity, their lives forever altered with no hope for support from society at large, let alone accountability of those who committed these heinous crimes. To give a context of the problem, specifically with regard to UN peacekeepers, it is estimated that around 24,500 babies were fathered and abandoned by peacekeepers in Cambodia alone, while 6,600 children faced a similar fate in Liberia.

These figures are only representative of the girls and women who came forward to acknowledge what had happened to them. Can we begin to imagine the scale when we include those who did not come forward, and/or those who have been victims of sexual violence at the hands of state forces?

Unfortunately, due to the inherently flawed structure of the UNSC itself, the shape and form of the resolution advanced ensures that victims of sexual violence will remain without a remedy or prospect of justice. From Kashmir to Peru to Rwanda, women around the world are in immense pain due to conflicts fuelled largely by men. Sexual violence, as a weapon of war, will continue to be used against vulnerable women in conflict zones till decisive action on this front is finally taken.

When Michelle Bachelet was the head of UN-Women, she gave a statement in 2012, part of which read: “Wherever there is conflict, women must be part of the solution”. This recent UNSC resolution was a half-hearted attempt at finding a solution, all the while neglecting the urgent needs of women in conflict zones, particularly those subjected to the most intrusive violations of their bodily integrity.

The writer is a lawyer.

Email: imaanmazarihazir@gmail.com