Stasa Zajovic
The Concept of peace
The Right to Peace
The right to peace is among the third generation of human rights or solidarity rights. UNESCO—the UN Education, Science, and Cultural Organization—is one of the leading institutions that actively works to promote this right on the international level. In 1995, Federico Mayor Zaragoza, the UNESCO General Secretary at that time, made an international call for the proclamation of the right to peace. In 1997, a declaration was proposed to the General Assembly of UNESCO in which peace was announced as a human right. The proposal was defeated, but UNESCO still urged the acceptance of this right on the institutional level. In early 2001, the UN Commission for Human Rights accepted the Resolution on the Establishment of the National Right to Peace.
The Concept of Peace in Different Civilizations
In the pre-modern state and in the majority of civilizations (Greco-Roman, Jewish, Christian, Islamic and Japanese), peace meant harmony within a dominant hierarchy and controlling the outside world through military superiority. That is best expressed in the Latin saying “si vis pacem, para bellum” (if you want peace, make war).
However, in some other civilizations and religions, such as those in China and India, it proved more difficult to have interior harmony and outside peace. They clearly condemned war. For example, in India the word shanti (peace) means perfect mental order or mental peace. Gandhi created his philosophy and strategies based on his understanding of the call to ahimsa, which means “to restrain oneself from what is harmful.”
In the traditions of the Maya, peace was associated with prosperity and linked to the idea of perfect balance between the different spheres of life.
In the modern world, the idea of peace has changed. This is illustrated in a current saying: “isi vis pacem, para pacem” (if you want peace, make peace).
There are many definitions of peace. One of the most influential definitions emphasizes the difference between positive and negative peace. Its author is Johan Galtung, an internationally known Norwegian scientist and researcher of peace.
It is the following:
Peace as only the absence of war is negative peace.
However, according to Galtung peace is not perceived only as an absence of war but also as an absence of fear, death, poverty, and injustice. That is positive peace.
Positive peace means that there is no war or violent conflicts, and that there is equality, justice, and development.
Positive peace means that there is no direct or immediate violence (physical violence) and that there is not indirect or structural violence (in the forms of poverty, exploitation, injustice and tyranny).
We can condense these two concepts in the following manner:
No war = negative peace
No war + social justice + development = positive peace
No direct violence + no indirect violence = positive peace
Therefore, peace is not attained by ending war or armed conflicts or by the creation of peace agreements (a ‘cease-fire’ peace; peace is a constant process of uprooting war and the causes of war.
Security
Traditional concepts of security
Since the formation of the nation-state (in the last three centuries), the dominant concept of security can be reduced to:
• The capacity of the state to wage war: state ‘security’ hinges on the state’s capacity to wage war. War is, therefore, legalized and institutionalized. Frequent war influenced the evolution of social and economic structures; war is elevated in religious tradition and justified theologically. Science and the psychological paradigm through which we monitor human rights also contribute to the dominance of war in the state system.” (Betty Reardon)
• State security and protection for those who are in power.
• State/national security: ‘territorial security from foreign aggression, the power of national interests in international politics, or global security from the threat of nuclear catastrophe. The state system is more concerned with the security of the nation-state than with the security of its citizens…’ (UNDP).
• The militarization of all threats: all threats to peace and security are viewed as military threats and not considered from an ecological, economic, social, or cultural approach (according to the Contagious Utopia antimilitarist collective of Madrid) or “threats to human security differ from state to state and region to region. In Africa, for example, the biggest threat continues to be poverty, illness, and conflict. In many different countries threats come from drugs or organized crime” (Keizo Obuchi, the former prime minister of Japan).
• The militarization of society as a “process of insisting on military values, military politics and military readiness that often transfers civil functions to military control” (Betty Reardon) or as “a process by which military values and organization permeate all spheres of life: an antagonistic division of the world (such as us/them dichotomies), the appearance of enemies (discourse about constant conspiracies and threats), uniformity and homogenization of thoughts, the elimination of differences, control through fear and authoritarian organization” (the Movement for Conscientious Objection to Military Expenditures, Spain).
• The militarization of the economy: vast sums are spent on the military and the police, while much less is spent on social services and culture.
• The militarization of science: “in our time, the lion’s share of scientific discoveries and technological growth is tied to expanding military potential and developing technologies for conducting war” (Betty Reardon).
• The absence of civil society in developing concepts and actions related to national and state security: the bringing together of citizen nationals and informants.
• The marginalization and victimization of women: women are considered powerless victims, the “weaker half” that those who are stronger (husbands, soldiers and police) must protect.
• The militarist colonization of women: women are visible exclusively as a function of national security: state, nation, church. This is most easily seen in propaganda against women's reproductive rights. Nationalist-militarist rhetoric is voiced in Serbia by politicians, demographers, and the media. They constantly state that Serbian women should have children not only to rescue the Serbian nation from “extinction” but that giving birth should be a part of national security 'because if we continue to leave space empty, it will be filled up by Albanians and Muslims,' according to the demographer Marko Mladenović.
Changes in the concept of security. How did it develop?
Unfortunately, the aforementioned idea and concept of security is dominant throughout the world. Nevertheless, at least at the level of theory, but in a certain view and practice, there have been specific changes in the accepted idea of security.
There are numerous explanations for why the idea of state security has been redirected to the people, that is, to individuals. Here are some of them:
• The end of the Cold War (which coincided with the fall of the Berlin Wall) and the disappearance of bloc politics that partitioned the world;
• The appearance of conflicts, including violent conflicts within one state (mainly of an ethnic character) that brought attention to the issue of states’ inability to maintain security through protecting its territorial integrity;
• States often present the biggest threat to the security of their citizens: David M. Law, Senior Associate for the Reform of the Security Sector at the Geneva Center for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces, presents four criticisms of the traditional concept of security from the viewpoint of human security. The first criticism is related to the fact that state security and human security are not synonymous. The USSR had secure borders and confronted threats to its territory, but its citizens were not secure. Another example is the genocide during the 1990s in Rwanda, which clearly showed that people were not secure even though state sovereignty was not endangered. The second criticism is related to the ineffectiveness of the state at investing in security. At the beginning of the twentieth century, the ratio of civilian victims of war to soldiers killed in conflicts was 1:1; at the end of the century, the proportion changed, so that in many parts of the world it is safer to be in the military than to be a civilian. The third criticism shows that the state sometimes is not a loyal protector of the citizens under its protection and can even be their biggest enemy. For example, in the former Yugoslavia, the central government was responsible for beginning the wars between the former Yugoslav republics. The fourth criticism is related to issues of extreme importance for the security of individuals and communities with which the state is not involved, such as climate change and AIDS.
• The privatization of military and police forces presents a very big danger for human security. “Typical forms of new war include a diversity of militant units, public and private, state and non-state, or units of heterogeneous type...Most often armed units are paramilitary groups, i.e. autonomous groups of armed people, mainly gathered around an individual leader” (Mary Kaldor). People are more endangered by the demonopolization of violence from the state monopoly. Now, private militias are sources of violence, as well as security firms and paramilitary units. By definition, these groups cannot be under democratic civil control.
• Changes to the idea of state sovereignty: the right to international intervention (primarily by the UN) on occasions of massive violation of human rights in some states has been instituted or ‘the job of international institutions is to ensure standards of international behavior, especially with regards to human rights and humanitarian law. As people accept that governments can intervene in family business to prevent domestic violence, so a similar principle ought to be applied globally’ (Mary Kaldor);
• Limiting state sovereignty: state signatories to international documents on human rights should place more importance on the interests of individuals than the interests of the state. That is, they must abdicate one aspect of their sovereignty if they wish to be part of the international community;
• The start of collective security measures (The UN Security Council, whose basic responsibility is to maintain international peace and security), the foundation of international justice institutions which prosecute genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity: The International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda (The Hague and Arusha tribunals) and the International Criminal Court.
The Concept of Human Security: What Does it Mean?
There are numerous interpretations and definitions of the idea of security. All of them have common elements. These are:
• The basic subjects of security are people and not the state: that is one of the basic contributions of the concept of human security.
• The state has the obligation to ensure the security of all of its citizens: states ought to use methods of security that provide security directly to people. There should not be repressive institutions (such as the military and police), but a guarantee that these institutions will care for and protect citizens.
• Reciprocal connection between people, interdependence of problems across state and all other borders: a large number of issues and problems in the contemporary world are connected. The poverty of developing states related to men and women in highly developed western societies; this is demonstrated by migration and diseases that do not respect or recognize borders. People who live in developing states are threatened by the industrial pollution from developed countries.
• Recognition of the knowledge of civil society, that is, non-state actors: international campaigns for mine-clearing are often mentioned as examples of effective initiatives of the civil society, including NGOs. Civil organizations demand the highest possibilities and the most responsibility when they promote human security. The best example of this is the methods used by the autonomous government of Catalonia in Spain. In July 2003, the Catalan Parliament passed The Law on Peace and Measures for Strengthening Peace. In the explanation of the law, it said that it was influenced by the ideas and practices of civil society ('our citizens and volunteers who work throughout the world and learned international solidarity'). The law incorporates concrete methods: respect for gender equality at all levels of decision-making; lawful methods to help immigrants; support for volunteer work; peace education as a required subject in school; working to demilitarize the media, i.e. spreading information about nonviolence, peaceful efforts and actions throughout the world and not only information about war and violence as the basic news.
• The globalization of justice and punishment – demanding the punishment of those who violate human rights and humanitarian law: the foundation of the International Criminal Court and the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda present an important advance in the field of promoting human security.
• Human security demands a multidisciplinary approach: it means collaboration and coordination between governmental and nongovernmental efforts and citizens. The emphasis is on intervention/persuasion/aversion from military force. ('Powerful ideas in place of powerful weapons.')
The Institutional Level of Human Security – The UN
The UN promoted a new view of human security. In 1992, General Secretary Boutros Boutros-Ghali emphasized that the threats to global security are not exclusively of a military nature in the UN Program for Peace; this statement can be considered the beginning of the demilitarization of threats on the institutional level. The document states that:
“The holes in the ozone layer could be a bigger threat to citizens than enemy armies. Drought and disease can destroy as mercilessly as weapons.”
The UNDP (The UN Development Programme) Human Development Report (1994)
Human security is comprised of two basic factors:
1. Freedom from threats to security (such as hunger, illness and repression).
2. Protection from sudden and painful changes in one’s daily life.
The UNDP Report establishes the following individual components of human security:
• Economic Security – guaranteed income
• An Adequate Amount of Food – physical and economic access to food
• Health Security – relative protection from illness and infection
• Secure Surroundings – access to a healthy source of water, clean air, and land
• Personal Security – security from physical violence and threats
• Community Security – a secure cultural identity
• Political Security – protected basic human rights and freedoms
Commission on Human Security
On the initiative of Japan, this commission was founded in January 2001. Its leaders are Sadako Ogata (the former UN High Commissioner for Refugees) and Amartya Sen, the winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics (1998). The three basic concepts that drive the commission are:
1. The concept of human security is based on civil values.
2. Human beings are the basic subjects of security.
3. Security cannot be reached through military means but through political dialogue and the fulfillment of basic needs.
This document was presented in May 2003 to Kofi Annan, the Secretary-General of the UN.
What else does the Commission's concept of human security imply? The following elements are also aspects of human security:
• The protection of civilians in armed conflicts,
• Constant effort to ensure justice, the rule of law, democracy and disarmament,
• The distribution of funds for human security in post-conflict periods,
• The promotion of fair trade and marketplaces which benefit society's poorest,
• A universal approach to health, the right to a basic education, health standards for all,
• Respect for the human freedom of all individuals to plural identities and choices,
• Protecting people from armed conflict and from illegal weapons trafficking.
The Tobin Tax
The Tobin Tax: James Tobin the winner of the Nobel Prize in Economic (1981) proposed the introduction of an international tax of 0.02% to 1% on all financial transactions, the proceeds of which would be dedicated to solving problems on the global level in the following way:
• Only 10% of the revenue collected would provide for the health needs of all people on the planet. It would be possible to eliminate all forms of malnourishment and build a system for clean drinking water throughout the world;
• only 3% of the tax revenue could halve the world illiteracy rate;
• This tax would generate around 2,000 billion Euros annually in the European Union alone.
Development Aid
In 1970, the UN recommended development aid at the level of 0.7% of gross national product. Only five countries in the world contribute that percentage—the Scandinavian countries. If that percentage was paid by all developed countries, it would annually generate approximately 300 billion dollars for alleviating global poverty.
Human Security Network
The Human Security Network was founded in May 1998 on the initiative of Canada and Norway in order to unify the actions of the government and academic research institutions. The network includes governments and experts from 12 countries in its work. The Network offers the following definition of human security:
“Human security is protection from violence and all other threats. Human security is a state which implies freedom from constant threats to human rights, including the elementary human right – the right to life."
The Network is involved in actions against the use of antipersonnel mines, provides for refugees and their return, destroys weapons, struggles against the misuse of children in war, advocates for human rights and the involvement of international institutions in the prevention of war. The Network carries out its work in the name of development aid (UN).
Personal Security and The European Convention on Human Rights
The right to freedom and personal security is protected in Article 5 of The European Convention on Human Rights. The importance of this article can be seen in the enormous number of petitions and appeals made to the Council of Europe, located in Strasbourg. A third of the first 10,000 cases were related to individuals deprived of freedom. This article includes the protection of physical freedom, especially freedom from arbitrary imprisonment or arrest. It includes respect for basic procedural rights, such as:
• the right to information about the reason for one’s imprisonment;
• the right to be brought to court immediately after one's arrest;
• the right to legal procedures through which the validity of the arrest or continued imprisonment can be resolved in court.
UN Security Council Resolution 1325
The Antecedents of the Resolution
• The UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948: presented the first international instrument which acknowledged human rights, but without any emphasis on the gender dimension or including the experiences of women.
• The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), 1979: 174 countries signed the convention and accepted 'laws on the rights of women.' The part of the document about armed conflict emphasized that conflicts produce the greatest violence against women; armed colficts lead to the growth of prostitution, trafficking of women and the sexual abuse of women. State signatories to the Convention must observe its terms.
• World Conference on Human Rights, Vienna, 1993: this was the first conference in which, beside government representatives, activists from civil society participated. Thanks to their efforts, the rights of women were acknowledged as human rights.
• The Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, 1995: this was enacted at The Fourth UN Conference on Women and signed by more than 180 countries. At this conference, leaders agreed to the participation of women in positions of power and decision-making and adopted a minimal quota for women of 30% of these positions. However, this most often not followed. For example, women are only 5.4% of the ambassadors to UN agencies where decisions on peace and security are made. Women comprise only 7% of the delegations. In peace negotiations, women are either an insufficient proportion or entirely absent.
• The Hague Tribunal/The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, founded in 1993: for the first time in history, humanity defined rape in war as a war crime. The first verdict was handed down in 2001 against three men of Serbian ethnicity (the Foča case). It is important to mention that The Hague Tribunal also charged Slobodan Milošević with this crime as well as other defendants active in the wars in Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo.
• The Rome Statue of the International Criminal Court, 1998: This document’s view towards violence against women in war and in peace had historic importance. It included crimes of sexual violence and violence on the basis of gender identity. It was the first time that some of these crimes were codified in international agreements. The Rome Statute includes the crimes of rape, sexual slavery, forced prostitution, forced pregnancy and the use of sterilization. These crimes are quoted as crimes against humanity and as war crimes during armed conflict. Beside these main crimes of sexual violence and gender-based violence, prosecution on the basis of gender identity is codified as a crime against humanity. Human trafficking, with a specific emphasis on the trafficking of women and children, is also codified as a crime against humanity. The Rome Statute demands that states punish all perpetrators of crimes against humanity and war crimes, including crimes which are related to sexual violence against women. The Rome Statute states that all perpetrators of sexual violence and crimes against women should not be granted any form of amnesty.
• Women's Tribunals: Women’s tribunals are a form of an alternative justice system. They do not have legislative power, but they have tremendous moral significance and point out the defects of the institutional justice system. Civil society assumes the responsibility for justice. The most famous women's tribunal is the Tokyo Tribunal, which occurred in 2000. It tried the Japanese Army for its sexual maltreatment of more than 200,000 women during the aggression of the Japanese Army in Asia (1931-1945). Women's tribunals have been organized around twenty times in different countries. They were concerned with different forms of violence against women (war, family, fundamentalist and others).
Resolution 1325
The UN Security Council passed this resolution on October 31, 2000; it was the first time that the Security Council advocated on such a high level for the inclusion of civil society, primarily women, in peace processes and peace negotiations.
Resolution 1325 concentrates of four areas:
1. The participation of women in peace processes and in decision making about peace.
2. The inclusion of a gender perspective in peace processes and training on a gender perspective in peace missions.
3. The protection of women in armed conflicts and in the post-war period.
4. The introduction of a gender dimension and perspective in UN reports and in the mechanisms for the implementation of peace agreements.
From Rhetoric to the Realization of the Prescriptions of Resolution 1325: How Far Has it Come?
• There is only one woman among the approximately 50 special representatives of the UN General Assembly and special emissary: the head of the UNOMIG mission in Georgia is a woman.
• Only five peace missions have personnel who work on issues of gender: East Timor, Kosovo (UNMIK), Cote d’Ivoire, The Congo and Sierra Leone.
• Even though training on a gender dimension is necessary for all participants in peace missions, the length and quality of this training is entirely dependent on the political will of each mission; in some cases, it means the training lasts only two hours.
• Despite the document’s urging of UN Security Council delegations to meet with women's groups during visits to peace missions, the delegations have consistently ignored this directive (i.e. the case of The Kosova Women's Network during the visit of the UN Security Council in December 2002).
What are the basic problems and responses of Resolution 1325?
• Men in all positions of power want women to be invisible in the public sphere. They see women only as objects of male violence and as passive victims of the military and all other forms of violence.
• The marginalization of women continues. Patriarchal men experience women as a threat and think it is dangerous when women step out of the patriarchal gender system to become active subjects of their own lives, actors in peace initiatives and defenders of human rights.
• Women retreat from pressure, nearly all of which comes from the patriarchal triad: sexism, nationalism and militarism. Women are useful when they fight for 'higher national interests,' but when they fulfill this 'national patriotic duty,' leaders demand that they return to the kitchen and the private sphere.
• Women often extend hands and strengthen movements for national liberation or political parties. They do not work autonomously and in harmony with the needs and the interests of civil society.
• There is a shortage of resources and support from international foundations for autonomous women's peace initiatives.
• Additionally, Resolution 1325 has many loose ends and generalizations (in the style of 'it is asked,' 'it is expressed,' and 'it is emphasized'). In short, there is not a mechanism for implementing the prescriptions that the Resolution requires.
What is the Global Evaluation of the Impact of Resolution 1325 on Women?
Some examples:
• During peace negotiations in Burundi, Unifem (the UN agency for women) formed a coalition with local women's groups and organized a women's peace conference. Nineteen recommendations from that conference were included in the final peace agreement.
• In Liberia, Unifem helped women's groups make a declaration which was presented to the negotiating teams and regional and international actors.
• In the Congo, Unifem helped organize trainings for officials about disarmament, demobilization and reintegration that a gender dimension.
• Unifem helped to facilitate the inclusion of statements about gender equality in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Sierra Leone, which made it possible for victims of gender-based violence to testify.
• In Afghanistan, Unifem works to make plans that include women in reconstruction and works with The Commission for Gender Equality.
• In Columbia, it works with civil society and trains women to build peace.
What is the position of feminists and antimilitarists towards Resolution 1325?
When approached from the basic antimilitarist position that 'no army can make or protect peace,' Resolution 1325 is controversial.
Feminists are divided about the issue of the involvement of women in the armed forces:
• For some feminists, women’s participation in the armed forces signifies gender equality, expanded employment possibilities and equal access to power. They support the thesis that the 'democratization' of the army is a form of women’s 'emancipation.'
• Feminist antimilitarists are against the participation of women in armed forces and alliances. The participation of women does not decrease the militarist and oppressive character of the army. It is only 'equality’ in killing and violence.
• Feminist antimilitarists have still not clearly spoken out about Resolution 1325. Even though they agree with the necessity of redefining security, it is controversial those who support the UN Resolution are those that produce global militarization (The World Bank, The IMF, the most developed western countries). Therefore, it is necessary to create a feminist and antimilitarist alternative “and not only criticize” (Sian Jones).
The Concept of Human Security from a Feminist Standpoint
Before redefining the traditional concept of state/national security, feminist researchers had the following experiences:
• State and national security is not in the interest of women because instead of prosperity, it produces more local and global militarization driven by the needs of profit and capital, not the civilian population. Such militarized economics lead to deeper insecurity for everyone because it increases economic vulnerability in local communities and men's surroundings, which most endangers women and children.
• Women are not only victims of this traditional system of national and state security. Women organize nonviolent opposition in their local communities and across state and national borders and divisions; women offer an alternative to the traditional concept of security and build international networks.
Feminist Antimilitarist Security also Includes
• The visibility of women's experience in international security policies;
• A reexamination of the concept of 'protection' that the state extends to women in periods of war as well as peace and everyday insecurity of women in the local and global patriarchal system (Eric Blanchard);
• Demilitarization on all levels: more arms does not mean more security. When military expenditures increase, security decreases;
• Insistance on the elimination of all forms of private or privatized armed groups;
• The just distribution of resources: “security can only exist if the national wealth is used—not for guns and bombs—but for health and the wellbeing of people throughout the world” (Women in Black—Belgrade). “Security is developing a concept that understands security as protection from hunger, repression and unexpected and painful changes in people's lives” (Likhaan, The Philippines);
• Joint work of women against militarism across state and national borders with the goal of creating a world without military violence (soldiers who practice violence at the front and in military bases where they were station, become more violent towards their female relatives. Therefore, it is necessary to employ the framework of the continuum of violence in the private and public sphere, as well as in the local and international sphere– Pacific Women's Antimilitarist Network).
The first creative approach to security was presented by the German group Scheherazade, which was founded in 1991 as a protest against The Gulf War and as an expression of respect towards the wisdom of Scheherazade, their spiritual precursor who knew that telling stories prevented killing and the deaths of the innocent. The Seherazde Group proposed the foundation of The Women’s Security Council (WSC), a non-parliamentary organization. It was supported by Javier Pérez de Cuéllar the Secretary-General of the UN at that time.
Scheherazade delivered to the UN signatures of 50,000 women from throughout the world as part of the campaign for a global plebiscite on war.
Scheherazade constantly repeats their demands:
• The veto of all UN General Assembly or Security Council decisions that endanger world peace and human rights. This was a direct reaction to the Security Council resolutions that approve of military actions and interventions (the first of which was the intervention of coalition forces in the Gulf in 1991). The Scheherazade group denounced this action of the Security Council as an instrument in the hands of large armed forces.
• The WSC demands the control of men who are not capable of living in peace;
• By the proposal of Scheherazade, the WSC would have around thirty women who emphasize the struggle for peace on the regional and global level. They would react on the spot, as soon as the danger of war arises.
Useful Literature:
Kompas: prirucnik o odgoju i obrazovanju mladih Vijece Evrope, Evropski dom, Slavonski Brod, 2004.
Betty Reardon, Sexism and The War System, Teachers College, Columbia, New York, 1985.
Ljudska bezbednost/Human Security, II/1, The Department of Civil Defense of the University of Belgrade, Center for Research of Human Security, 2004.
Ljudska bezbednost/Human Security, II/2, The Department of Civil Defense of the University of Belgrade, Center for Research of Human Security, 2004.
Utopia contagiosa- Colectivo antimilitarista, Cuadernos, Madrid 2001. (Contagious Utopia – Antimilitarist Collective, Madrid, Notebook 2001.)
Ženska mirovna agenda, 2004. Zena u crnom, Beograd. (Women’s Peace Agenda, 2004. Women in Black—Belgrade.)
Mary Kaldor, Novi i stari ratovi-organizovano nasilje u globalizovanoj eri, Beogradski krug, Beograd 2005. (Mary Kaldor, New and Old Wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era, Stanford University Press.)
Suocavanje s prosloscu-feministicki pristup, Zene u crnom, Beograd, 2005. (Dealing with the Past—A Feminist Approach, Women in Black, Belgrade, 2005.)
Eric M. Blanchard, Gender, International Relations, and the Development of Feminist Security Theory. School of International Relations, University of Southern California
IFOR (International Fellowship of Reconciliation), Netherlands, May 2005.
