Should the State Always be the Focus of Security Politics? Sexual Abuse as a Weapon of War

TW: Discusses issues of sexual abuse during war.

This essay will aim to discuss whether the state should always be the focus of security politics. The essay will begin with analysing the need to expand issues of security further than the state through the lens of security as emancipation and sexual violence towards women during wartime. I will argue here that traditional realist notions of power and order are not sufficient security foci, as they do not necessarily equate to the genuine security of many individuals. The essay will then move on to look at security through the lens of securitisation, whilst still using the case study of sexual violence during wartime. Here, I will argue that the securitisation of rape during war and its subsequent international security measures, has not proven to be an effective way of combatting this act. Contrarily, in some circumstances its securitisation has been at a detriment to those it has aimed to protect and also other members of the affected communities. The essay will conclude with the decision that rape during wartime is an act that cannot be ignored. Therefore, it does need to be the focus of security policy in some form. However, I will argue that its international securitisation and the current measures in place are not effective and other solutions should be explored.

The traditional, realist view of security is a widely-acknowledged standard of security politics which exists between states. It focuses on power and order between states in an anarchical system (Bromley, 2014). I wanted to focus on alternative perspectives to security and explore their plausibility.

I believe the question is asking whether other factors, rather than solely the security of the state and its borders, should be recognised as a security issue by political entities. I have interpreted ‘security politics’ with quite a broad scope. This could include issues that are recognised and confronted by various organisations or institutions but with a focus on governmental institutions and international organisations as a starting point.

The various potential security issues that are prominent and contemporary was my starting point for unpacking the question. I considered what other issues the term ‘security’ may relate to such as global warming, immigration, the security of women, and drugs along with a few other subjects. I wanted to choose one issue to focus on to investigate its validity with regards to security politics. Whilst focusing on only one issue does not help one to decide which matters should be the focus of security politics, if I could demonstrate that this issue should be a matter of security politics then I felt the question as to whether the state should be the only focus of security politics would be answered.

I decided to focus on the security of women with regards to sexual violence during wartime. I chose this empirical study because firstly, it was something that particularly interested me when reading Block 5 of ‘International Relations: Continuity and Change in Global Politics’ (Brown, Corry and Czajka, 2014). I considered how other issues may be securitised when in fact they are not a definite danger. For example, the security risks of immigration are often contested. I felt personally, before investigating the issue in more depth, that the statistics displaying how many women are raped during times of war display that this is a definite problem which has a direct negative effect on many. Whether rape during wartime should actually be a focus of security politics would then be discussed in the essay.

I feel that my sub-questions have still maintained a reasonably broad scope. They are: ‘should sexual violence towards women be a security focus at an international/governmental level’, and ‘has the apparent international securitisation of sexual violence during wartime dealt with this issue effectively?’.

I chose security as emancipation as one of my theoretical approaches. I wanted to use this as an explanatory reasoning to argue that the state should not be the only focus of security politics. I chose to use the theory of securitisation as an exploratory approach. I wanted to explore whether making rape during wartime an issue of security politics has made progress towards reducing its incidence/eradicating it.

The central argument that I will put forward in this essay is that statistics prove that sexual violence during wartime is an issue for those that it effects and from a security as emancipation perspective it requires security politics to address and combat it. However, I counter balance this point by arguing that its securitisation, and subsequent international policies developed to combat it are not an effective measure to deal with the problem.

Security as emancipation theorists argue that security means the absence of threats and that the focal point of security politics should be freeing individuals from any constraints that prevent them from carrying out their lives in the way they wish. Its advocates argue that the actual emancipation of individual humans from these threats brings true security (Booth, 1991, p. 319).

Security as emancipation is a branch of Critical Security Studies (CSS). It argues that the referent objects of security politics should be human beings and not the state (Huysmans and Conway, 2014, p. 256). CSS aims to evaluate how other securities besides the traditional, realist view of state security can and should be considered.

Advocates of security as emancipation would argue that the tradition of states being the referent object of security actually increases some individual’s insecurity. (Huysmans and Conway, 2014, p. 256). Booth (1991, p. 320) makes the analogy of the upkeep of a house versus the security of its inhabitants. If the majority of a budget is spent on maintaining a house and its upkeep to the detriment of its inhabitants, this is nonsensical. In this sense, Booth argues that ‘states should be a means to an end and not the ends’ (Booth, 1991, p. 320).

For Booth, the traditional practice of heavy military spending has not equalled a corresponding increase in human security. He does argue, however, that the arsenal of appropriated military capabilities has increased destructive powers and imposed a heavy economic burden on states who partake in extreme military expenditure (Booth, 1991, p. 318). Furthermore, advocates for security as emancipation would argue that most threats to individual human security derive from issues such as crime and disease, overpopulation, the destruction of nature and the policies of their own state (Booth, 1991, p. 318). The last threat mentioned reaffirms Booth’s argument that state security should not be the referent object of security politics if it then fails to protect the individual humans that live within it.

Advocates for security as emancipation would argue that the power and order that traditional state centred security seeks will always come at another individual’s expense. This therefore brings perpetual instability. For Booth, true stability can only be obtained when it does not deprive others of their security (Booth, 1991, p. 319). The fundamental processes in the quest for security as emancipation is mobilising individuals politically so that they are able to claim their human rights and needs (Huysmans and Conway, 2014, p. 258).

From an emancipation perspective, the security of women with regards to sexual violence during times of war would be one of the foci of security policies above that of state security. Sexual violence and rape during times of war has been an occurrence for thousands of years (Johnston, 2002). During the Second World War, there was an estimated 100 000 to 2 million women raped and an estimated 500 000 during the Rwandan genocide (1994). There have been large numbers of women who have suffered rape and sexual abuse in many other wars such as the Bosnian war (1992-1995) and the Sierra Leone civil war (1991-2002) (The Economist (2011) cited in Conway (2014) p. 216). These rapes have occurred not only at the hands of insurgents, but also by state soldiers. (Conway, 2014, p. 216).

Feminist campaigners have battled to have sexual violence during wartime recognised as a security issue and a weapon of war. Through their work, various national and international security agendas such as that of the United Nations, now recognise rape as torture and a weapon of war and have the ability to prosecute its perpetrators (Conway, 2014, p.221).

From the statistics presented, it is clear that from an emancipation perspective, sexual violence during war is an issue that must be addressed. Sexual violence during times of war does not just have the impact of physical damage on a woman. The damage caused permeates through whole communities. It can have lasting effects on women’s mental health. It creates children born through rape who, together with the female victims, suffer stigmatization and being shunned by their communities. Women often lose their land and subsequently their livelihoods and stability (Clark, 2014, pp. 146-169). These factors severely effect an individual’s agency to carry out their lives as they wish and their vulnerability and constraints are greatly increased.

From a security as emancipation perspective, sexual violence during wartime is a prevalent issue that needs to be recognised by security politics and measures must be taken to address the problem. These methods would include efforts to change ‘economic, social and political order’ (Huysmans and Conway, (2014) p. 256).

Securitisation, presents a slightly different perspective to that of security as emancipation. It argues that security issues are not ‘a given state of affairs’ (Huysmans and Conway, 2014, p. 258). Instead, that matters become the referent objects of security politics by a political process. A process that involves figures with political influence addressing something until it becomes a security issue. Issues will be defined and treated as security issues until they become just that (Huysmans and Conway, 2014, p.259). Once an issue has been ‘securitised’, those with political influence are able to take exceptional measures to combat the issue.

The second part of this essay aims to demonstrate that making sexual violence during times of war the subject of security politics and a securitised issue, can potentially have detrimental effects to the women it purports to protect.

International Criminal Tribunals for various countries and the International Criminal Court have tried cases on the basis of rape as a war crime. The United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 1820 in 2007, which recognises sexual violence as a weapon of war (Merger, 2016, p. 149). However, sexual violence during times of war is still endemic in areas that have experienced, or are still experiencing war, such as the DRC and Syria (Proudman, 2013). Despite international efforts to prosecute the perpetrators, it was estimated that 48 females were raped every hour/420,480 per year in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) in 2014 (Cannon, (2014) p. 478), which at this time was still plagued by continuing effects of the 1994–2003 war (BBC, 2016). While it is very difficult to ascertain exact figures due to factors such as the nonreporting of rape, these statistics demonstrate higher levels of rape during times of war, in 2014, than the Second Sino-Japanese war, the Second World War, the Bangladesh war of secession, the Bosnian war and the Sierra Leone civil war; all of which occurred before the securitisation of sexual violence during war. This does not confirm that securitisation increases the prevalence of rape, but it does suggest that prosecuting this sexual violence under international security regimes has not deterred the perpetrators.

Merger (2016, p. 155) believes that there are other negative consequences related to the securitisation of sexual violence during war. She argues that its securitisation has caused rape to become an effective bargaining tool, where combatants have chosen to rape women in the hope of achieving notoriety through the media and therefore potential political advantage. She also argues that the international focus and securitisation skews aid towards rape victims, which causes other victims of war to lose out on potential aid. Women who may not be rape victims are forced to use the accusation of rape as a commodity that enables them to access healthcare that they otherwise would not receive. Those who have not been raped are often unable to access various facilities.

The point that Merger raises about the securitisation of sexual violence during war time skewing aid can be related back to security as emancipation. If the securitisation of sexual violence during war has caused those who have not been raped to suffer also, then security as emancipation has not been achieved by making it an issue of the international security agenda, as by attempting to address the vulnerabilities and constraints of one social group, risks and constraints for other groups have been created.

To conclude, this essay has aimed to discuss whether the state should always be the focus of security politics. By analysing this question first through the lens of security as emancipation, the essay aimed to argue that traditional realist notions of power and order, and security of the state as the primary concern, does not necessarily provide security for individuals. Therefore, from an emancipation perspective it is important to focus on other issues, with the aim of bringing emancipation to human beings through political mobility; as freedom from constraints and threats is what equates to the ultimate security. The essay then moved on to discuss securitisation in relation to sexual violence in times of war. It highlighted the fact that securitisation through international regimes has done little to curb the incidence of rape during wartime. It was also argued that its securitisation may have increased the incidence and created struggles for other groups of people who have not been the victims of rape. From the statistics presented displaying the extreme prevalence of rape during wartime, and the explanation that this abuse has catastrophic consequences for not only the women effected, but whole communities and later generations, it is apparent that sexual abuse during wartime is an extremely serious issue that cannot be ignored. However, the international securitisation of this issue and the subsequent establishing of international laws to prosecute perpetrators does not appear to have been an effective method of healing those who have suffered, neither does it necessarily bring future security to those who are vulnerable to the reverberating effects. The findings of this essay are that the state should not always be the sole focus of security politics. However, it is apparent that security solutions other than those currently in existence need to be sought.

Word count: 2400.

REFERENCES

· BBC (2016) Democratic Republic of Congo profile – Timeline [Online]. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-13286306 (Accessed 26th March 2017).

· Booth, K. (1991) ‘Security and emancipation’, Review of International Studies, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 313–326 [Online]. Available at: https://www-cambridge-org.libezproxy.open.ac.uk/core/journals/review-of-international-studies/article/div-classtitlesecurity-and-emancipationa-hreffn01-ref-typefnadiv/7E14C05AF6C58871908F9D48D2F7D973 (Accessed 26th March 2017).

· Bromley, S. (2014) ‘Security among states’, in Brown, W; Corry, O. and Czajka, A. (eds) International Relations: Continuity and Change in Global Politics, Milton Keynes, The Open University, pp. 171-207.

· Brown, W; Corry, O. and Czajka, A. (2014) International Relations: Continuity and Change in Global Politics, Milton Keynes, The Open University, pp. 171-283.

· Cannon, P. (2012) 'A Feminist Response to Rape as a Weapon of War in Eastern Congo', Peace Review, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 478-483 [Online]. Available at: http://web.a.ebscohost.com.libezproxy.open.ac.uk/ehost/detail/detail?vid=5&sid=fd6853b8-43e0-4b84-9c8b-1f67fde1c4c5%40sessionmgr4006&hid=4107&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#db=a9h&AN=83703116 (Accessed 27th March 2017).

· Clark, JN (2014) 'A Crime of Identity: Rape and Its Neglected Victims', Journal Of Human Rights, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 146-169 [Online]. Available at: http://web.a.ebscohost.com.libezproxy.open.ac.uk/ehost/detail/detail?vid=1&sid=2a1f3e8f-f511-442e-88d2-4dda210c1565%40sessionmgr4008&hid=4107&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#AN=96223240&db=a9h (Accessed 27th March 2017).

· Conway, D. (2014) ‘Chapter 16, Whose security? Gender and war’, in Brown, W; Corry, O. and Czajka, A. (eds) International Relations: Continuity and Change in Global Politics, Milton Keynes, The Open University, pp. 213-247.

· Huysmans, J. and Conway, D. (2014) ‘Chapter 17, Theoretical reflections: critical security studies and feminism’, in Brown, W; Corry, O. and Czajka, A. (eds) International Relations: Continuity and Change in Global Politics, Milton Keynes, The Open University, pp. 253-283.

· Johnston, P. (2002) A brutal weapon of ancient and modern warfare, The Telegraph [Online] Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/1382563/A-brutal-weapon-of-ancient-and-modern-warfare.html, (Accessed 26th March 2016).

· Merger, S. (2016) 'The Fetishization of Sexual Violence in International Security', International Studies Quarterly, vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 149-159 [Online]. Available at: http://web.a.ebscohost.com.libezproxy.open.ac.uk/ehost/detail/detail?vid=3&sid=2a1f3e8f-f511-442e-88d2-4dda210c1565%40sessionmgr4008&hid=4107&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#AN=117242482&db=a9h (Accessed 25th March 2017).

· Proudman, C.R. (2013) War rape: The forgotten pandemic sweeping Syria, The Independent [Online]. Available at: http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/war-rape-the-forgotten-pandemic-sweeping-syria-8460566.html (Accessed 25th March 2017).

· The Economist (2011) ‘Violence against women: war’s overlooked victims’ in ‘Whose security? Gender and war’, in Brown, W; Corry, O. and Czajka, A. (eds) International Relations: Continuity and Change in Global Politics, Milton Keynes, Open University, p. 216.