Abstract
The symposium on which this collection of chapters is based brought together feminist scholars and activists with representatives of the military of both sexes. It seemed fitting in this concluding chapter to focus on achieving a productive exchange of ideas between these two seemingly disparate sets of viewpoints. Consequently, what follows primarily reflects a conversation between feminism and the military. It inevitably has somewhat of an international humanitarian law focus as both of the authors, one a feminist academic lawyer and the other a former naval legal officer and now an academic, specialise in this particular field.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
A. Scales, ‘Militarism, male dominance and law: Feminist jurisprudence as oxymoron’, Harvard Women’s Law Journal, Vol. 12 (1989) 25.
United States Department of the Army, The US Army/Marine Corps: Counterinsurgency Field Manual (Chicago: University Chicago Press, 2007).
S. Sewall, ‘Introduction to the University of Chicago print edition: A radical field manual’, in United States Department of the Army, Counterinsurgency Field Manual (Chicago: University Chicago Press, 2007) xxi, p. xxv: ‘The field manual makes securing the civilian, rather than destroying the enemy, their top priority’.
See, for example, J. Halley, ‘Rape at Rome: Feminist interventions in the criminalization of sex-related violence in positive international criminal law’, Michigan Journal of International Law, Vol. 30, No. 1 (2008) 1.
See, for example, K. Engle, ‘Feminism and its (dis)contents: Criminalizing wartime rape in Bosnia and Herzegovina’, The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 99, No. 4 (2005) 778, pp. 780, 794–797, 806–807;
K. Engle, ‘Judging sex in war’, Michigan Law Review, Vol. 106, No. 6 (2008) 941;
R. Kapur, ‘The tragedy of victimization rhetoric: Resurrecting the “native” subject in international/post-colonial feminist legal politics’, Harvard Human Rights Journal, Vol. 15 (2002) 1; and Otto’s critique of the thematic resolutions of the Security Council on women peace and security: ‘Power and danger: Feminist engagement with international law through the UN Security Council’, Australian Feminist Law Journal, Vo. 32 (2010) 97.
D.E. Buss, ‘The curious visibility of wartime rape: Gender and ethnicity in international criminal law’, Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice, Vol. 25, No. 1 (2007) 3; and Engle, ‘Judging sex in war’.
See, for example, C. Chinkin, ‘Feminist reflections on international criminal law’, in A. Zimmermann (ed.), International Criminal Law and the Current Development of Public International Law (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 2003) 125.
J. Gardam, ‘A new frontline for feminism and international humanitarian law’, in V. Munro and M. Davies (eds), The Ashgate Research Companion to Feminist Legal Theory (UK: Ashgate, 2013) 217.
S. Kouvo, ‘Taking women seriously? Conflict, state-building and gender in Afghanistan’, in S. Kouvo and Z. Pearson (eds), Feminist Perspectives on Contemporary International Law: Between Resistance and Compliance? (Oxford: Hart, 2011) 159, p. 162, discussing the concept of honour in Afghan tribal culture.
See, for example, D. Otto, A. Javate De Dios, V. Nainar and L. Vichuta, ‘Panel statement for the Asia-Pacific women’s regional hearing on gender-based violence in conflict’ (Phnom Penh, Cambodia, 10–11 October 2012), p. 6, referring to the ‘profound stigma that is often associated with being a survivor of sexual violence’.
See, for example, Kouvo, ‘Taking women seriously?’; M. Grahn-Farley, ‘The politics of inevitability: An examination of Janet Halley’s critique of the criminalisation of rape as torture’, in S. Kouvo and Z. Pearson (eds), Feminist Perspectives on Contemporary International Law: Between Resistance and Compliance? (Oxford: Hart, 2011) 109.
H. Charlesworth, ‘Talking to ourselves? Feminist scholarship in international law’, in S. Kouvo and Z. Pearson, Feminist Perspectives on Contemporary International Law: Between Resistance and Compliance? (Oxford: Hart, 2011) 17, p. 23.
R.C. Carpenter, ‘Innocent Women and Children’: Gender, Norms and the Protection of Civilians (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2006).
See, for example, J. Wheeler, ‘Take it like a man’, Washington Times (20 May 2004), http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/may/20/20040520-083647-9853r/?page=all (last accessed October 2013). For a feminist assessment, see C. Enloe, ‘Wielding masculinity inside Abu Ghraib: Making feminist sense of an American military scandal’, Asian Journal of Women’s Studies, Vol. 10, No. 3 (2004) 89.
For a feminist assessment, see C. Enloe, ‘Wielding masculinity inside Abu Ghraib: Making feminist sense of an American military scandal’, Asian Journal of Women’s Studies, Vol. 10, No. 3 (2004) 89.
See, for example, H. Charlesworth, ‘Not waving but drowning: Gender mainstreaming and human rights in the United Nations’, Harvard Human Rights Journal, Vol. 18 (2005) 1.
See generally D. Stephens, ‘Counterinsurgency and stability operations: A new approach to legal interpretation, in the war in Iraq: A legal analysis’, US Naval War College International Law Studies, Vol. 86 (2010) 289.
J. Gardam, ‘Gender and non-combatant immunity’, Transnational Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 3, No. 2 (1993) 345;
and J. Gardam and M. Jarvis, Women, Armed Conflict and International Law (The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 2001), pp. 117–122.
For an alternative reading, see L. Khalili, ‘Gendered practices of counterin-surgency’, Review of International Studies, Vol. 37, No. 4 (2011) 1471.
D. Otto, ‘Remapping crisis through a feminist lens’, in S. Kouvo and Z. Pearson (eds), Feminist Perspectives on Contemporary International Law: Between Resistance and Compliance (Oxford: Hart, 2011) 75, pp. 87–88.
‘Resolve’ is identified in many accounts of COIN as being the key counter-insurgent vulnerability. See, for example, J. Molan, ‘Thoughts of a practitioner’, Australian Army Journal, Vol. 5, No. 2 (2008) 215, p. 220.
A random sample includes G. Reynolds, ‘Embracing complexity: An adaptive effect approach to the conflict in Iraq’, Australian Army Journal, Vol. 3, No. 3 (2006) 129;
J. Kiszely, ‘Post-modern challenges for modern warriors’, Australian Army Journal, Vol. 5, No. 2 (2008) 177;
R. Noble, ‘“Beyond cultural awareness”: Anthropology as an aid to the formulation of military strategy in the twenty-first century’, Australian Army Journal, Vol. 6, No. 2 (2009) 65.
This appears to be the case with the Gender Adviser appointed under Bi-SC Directive 40–1 (NATO, 2009): J.M. Prescott, ‘NATO gender mainstreaming and the feminist critique of the law of armed conflict’, Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law, Vol. 14, No. 1 (2013) 83, p. 116 n. 242 and accompanying text.
Prescott, ‘NATO gender mainstreaming’, citing S. Dharmanpuri, ‘Just add women and stir?’, Parameters, Vol. 41, No. 1 (2011) 56, p. 56.
F. Hill, ‘How Resolution 1325 came about and what we hoped it would achieve: A retrospective view’ (Paper presented at the International Symposium on Peacekeeping in the Asia-Pacific: Gender Equality, Law and Collective Security, Melbourne Law School, 19–20 April 2012). See also F. Ruby, ‘Security Council Resolution 1325: A Tool for Conflict Prevention?’, in this volume.
H. Charlesworth, ‘Are women peaceful? Reflections on the role of women in peace-building’, Feminist Legal Studies, Vol. 16, No. 3 (2008) 347; O. Simić, ‘Increasing Women’s Presence in Peacekeeping Operations: The Rationales and Realities of “Gender Balance”’, this volume.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2014 Judith Gardam and Dale Stephens
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gardam, J., Stephens, D. (2014). Concluding Remarks: Establishing Common Ground between Feminism and the Military. In: Heathcote, G., Otto, D. (eds) Rethinking Peacekeeping, Gender Equality and Collective Security. Thinking Gender in Transnational Times. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137400215_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137400215_14
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-48608-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-40021-5
eBook Packages: Palgrave Intern. Relations & Development CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)