Sexual Violence: A Global Human Rights Violation

The following post is the third in a series examining the causes and consequences of sexual violence in past and present conflicts throughout the world, as well as widespread sexual violence committed and/or sanctioned by governments through a lack of attention to the issue and a failure to punish perpetrators.

Sexual violence is pervasive throughout the world…Each year, hundreds of thousands of women are forced into prostitution, and thousands of young girls are genitally mutilated. In armed conflicts, countless women and girls are raped and sexually abused by security forces and opposition groups as an act of war, and often face additional violence in refugee camps. Government sponsored violence also exists in peacetime, with women assaulted while in police custody, in prison, and at the hands of any number of state actors.[1]

It is important to stress that sexual violence does not exist in isolation. It is part of a larger issue of discrimination against women and the acceptance of the violent use of women’s bodies for sexual gratification or to achieve political purposes.[2] In addition to rape, sexual violence encompasses actions including forced marriage, kidnapping and keeping women in sexual slavery, female genital mutilation, forced abortions, the trafficking of women for the purpose of sexual exploitation, and forced prostitution.[3] Further, women may be at increased risk for sexual violence based on additional factors including race, ethnicity, religion, class, caste, age, and socioeconomic status.[4] Women who live in conflict situations, female refugees, and women in police custody are often also at increased risk of sexual violence.[5]

In “Global Perspectives on Sexual Violence: Findings from the World Report on Violence and Health,” authors gathered research from over 160 experts from approximately 70 countries, as well as from published literature on violence. Consequently, this report discusses biological, social, cultural, economic, and political factors that influence the occurrence and prevalence of sexual violence in societies throughout the world.[6]

It is important to stress that despite the prevalence of sexual violence, it does not have to be an inevitable occurrence.[7] However, in light of the large number of women and girls who experience sexual violence every year, it is imperative that advocates and policy makers all over the world work together to develop solutions to eradicate this crime.[8]

War adds to the urgency. It not only ravages our world, people, and economies; war increases the risk of sexual violence. The needs and experiences of refugees and those that are trafficked illustrate the importance of building relationships and resources within a global community context.[9]

In order to eliminate sexual violence, it is important to first identify and address the individual and societal risk factors that increase the chance that men will commit acts of sexual violence.

Some of these risk factors include:[10]

• Using alcohol and drugs;
• Attitudes and beliefs that support sexual violence and are hostile towards women;
• Hanging out with other men who are sexually aggressive;
• Experiences of sexual abuse as a child;
• Strict and traditional gender roles where males are considered superior, thereby creating a situation of gender-based inequality;
• Environments where sexual violence is not recognized or punished due to absent or weak sanctions and/or social services;
• Societies where “concepts of male honor and entitlement are accepted;” and
• Violent conflict or war.

Due to the fact these factors have been identified as increasing the risk that men and boys will engage in acts of sexual violence, it is imperative that advocates, researchers, educators, medical personnel, the judiciary, and policy-makers work together to:[11]

• Research the causes, consequences, and ways to prevent sexual violence;
• Promote gender and social equality and equity in order to prevent violence;
• Increase the capacity to collect data on violence;
• Strengthen support services for sexual violence survivors; and
• Develop a national plan of action to work towards the elimination of this form of violence against women.

These steps are especially urgent considering the fact that hundreds of thousands of women in countries throughout the world, such as Rwanda, Liberia, the former Yugoslavia, Sierra Leone, Colombia, Sudan, the Central African Republic (CAR), Timor Leste, Uganda, Afghanistan, Burundi, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Chad, Peru, Chechnya, Somalia, Cyprus, Haiti, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) have experienced rape as a weapon of war in conflicts throughout the 20th century.[12]

Immediate action is also needed in light of the numerous physical, sexual, and psychological consequences of sexual violence. Physical injuries may include fractures, chronic pain, and cuts and bruises. Sexual and reproductive consequences may include unwanted pregnancy, pelvic inflammatory disease, gynecological disorders, unsafe abortions, complications with pregnancy and delivery, miscarriages, and sexually transmitted diseases and infections including HIV/AIDS. Women who are subjected to sexual and gender based violence (SGBV) may also experience psychological consequences including depression and anxiety, eating and sleep disorders, drug and alcohol abuse, post-traumatic stress disorder, self-harm, and poor self-esteem. Finally, suicide, AIDS-related death, and death during pregnancy or delivery may occur after a woman has experienced sexual violence.[13] In this way, the prevalence of sexual violence throughout the world and the consequences associated with this form of violence necessitate a thorough examination of this phenomenon, as well as coordinated efforts to develop policies and initiatives that get to the root causes of sexual violence throughout the world.

[1] “A Fact Sheet on Sexual Violence: A Human Rights Violation.” Amnesty International.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid. AND “Global Perspectives on Sexual Violence: Findings from the World Report on Violence and Health.” National Sexual Violence Resource Center (2004): 5.
[4] “A Fact Sheet on Sexual Violence: A Human Rights Violation.” Amnesty International.
[5] Ibid.
[6] “Global Perspectives on Sexual Violence: Findings from the World Report on Violence and Health.” National Sexual Violence Resource Center (2004) : 1.
[7] Ibid., 3.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Ibid., 7-9.
[11] Ibid., 14-15
[12] Jeanne Ward, “Broken Bodies-Broken Dreams: Violence against Women Exposed,” OCHA/IRIN (November 2005): 177-189. AND UNIFEM, “Facts and Figures on VAW,” http://www.unifem.org/gender_issues/violence_against_women/facts_figures.php?page=7 (accessed January 20, 2010). AND “Civilians in War Zones: Women and Children Worst," The Economist vol. 390 (February 21, 2009): 61. AND “Sexual Violence as a Weapon of War,” The State of the World’s Children 1996 – UNICEF, http://www.unicef.org/sowc96pk/sexviol.htm (accessed February 10, 2010).
[13] “Sexual and Gender Based Violence in Africa: Literature Review.” Population Council (February 2008): 7-8.

The Congo’s History of Violence and Exploitation

The following is the second in a series examining the causes and consequences of the widespread use of rape and other forms of sexual violence against women and girls as a strategy of war in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Before going into more detail, however, in discussing the factors that make rape such an effective weapon in the Congo, it is important to first briefly examine the Congo’s history of violence and exploitation in order to better understand the current political and military environment that allows sexual violence to flourish.

Since 1998, approximately five million people have died in the Congo due to fighting, poverty, and disease.[1] It is important to note, however, that violence, bloodshed and exploitation marked Congo’s history long before the recent conflicts, and it is within this context that rampant sexual violence is taking place.

Though the wars themselves began in 1996, the seeds of Congo’s conflicts were sown in the late 19th century when European colonial powers arbitrarily divided Africa for their own benefit at the Berlin Conference of 1884-1885. The major powers of Europe demarcated the borders of African countries, including the Democratic Republic of the Congo, in ways that benefitted the colonizers “with no regard for existing tribal systems and linguistic groups.” These newly drawn borders created problems when they separated families or created nations that forced people together who previously had no contact with one another.[2]

Under the guise of a mission to Christianize and modernize the DRC, King Leopold of Belgium brutally exploited the country and its people in the late 1800s. He forced the civilian population to extract ivory and rubber, punishing anyone who could not meet his quotas with death or mutilation.[3]

The DRC became independent on June 30, 1960. During the five years after independence, chaos and disorder were prevalent throughout the Congo.[4] Mobutu Sese Seko then seized power and gained control of the country through a military coup in November 1965.[5] Though at first the population supported Mobutu because they yearned for peace and order, his rule ultimately ended up being “one of the most corrupt in the region’s history.” He exploited his own country’s resources, committed extrajudicial executions, and massacred civilians.[6] Mobutu also abolished parliament and all political parties except for his own.[7] During his 32 years in power, Mobutu brutally oppressed and exploited the population, collapsed the economy causing extensive poverty throughout the country, and “got extremely wealthy at their expense” as the population struggled with inflation, unemployment, illiteracy, and rapidly increasing infant mortality rates.[8] Though the Congolese elected a new government in 1990, Mobutu and his inner circle continued to control mineral resources, tax revenues, and the banking system until 1997.[9]

Throughout much of Mobutu’s reign, disagreements over land and struggles for power caused frequent clashes in eastern DRC.[10] In 1994, these problems were exacerbated by the Rwandan genocide and the introduction of a regional dimension in the conflict.[11] In the aftermath of the Rwandan genocide, the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), an armed group led by Tutsis, seized control from extremist Hutus. As a result, over one million refugees, including many high-ranking Interhamwe Hutu militia members who helped orchestrate the genocide, entered eastern Congo.[12] With this influx, fresh rivalries were also introduced into the country:

Indigenous Congolese groups of all stripes organized themselves into Mai Mai forces, and many allied themselves with the defeated Rwandan Hutus…The interests of Paul Kagame's newly empowered Tutsi government in Rwanda converged with those of the Congolese Tutsis. Both sides originally intended merely to protect their kinsfolk, but they quickly started using their military might to seize land or capture political power.[13]

Many of these Hutu refugees eventually formed the Democratic Liberation Forces of Rwanda (FDLR) and set up camps in North and South Kivu, where they harassed local Congolese Tutsis and launched attacks across the border designed to destabilize Rwanda’s new government.[14] This security threat was the main reason Rwanda invaded the Congo in 1998, but despite their efforts, they could not “eliminate the genocidaires.”[15]

The Congo’s conflicts are quite complicated and involve a large number of national and regional actors. They can however, be divided into two main wars by time period. The first war began in 1996 with the overthrow of Mobutu and the subsequent reign of Laurent Kabila and lasted until 1997; the second war began in 1998 and officially ended in 2003 with the signing of a peace agreement.[16]

In late 1996, a number of Congolese rebel groups called the Alliance of Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Congo-Zaire (AFDL), led by Laurent Kabila and with extensive support from Rwanda and Uganda, marched across the country, killing Hutu refugees and Interhamwe on their way to the capital.[17] The AFDL then set up a new government in May 1997, replacing overthrown Dictator Mobutu Sese Seko with Kabila.[18] Laurent Kabila was named the head of the DRC on May 16, 1997.[19]

Due to serious disagreements between his government and former allies, Uganda and Rwanda, including allegations that he would not address their security concerns, Kabila ordered Rwandan soldiers and all other foreign troops out of the Congo in 1998.[20] Rwanda and Uganda again supported Congolese rebel groups including the Movement for the Liberation of Congo (MLC) and the Rally for Congolese Democracy (RCD), comprised largely of Congolese Tutsis. Angola, Namibia, and Zimbabwe supported Kabila.[21] This conflict divided the country into three main areas. The Front de Liberation du Congo (FLC), with the support of Uganda, controlled the north; the RCD, supported by Rwanda, controlled the east; and the Congolese government, with the support of several foreign powers, controlled the south and western areas of the country.[22]

The involvement of neighbouring Rwanda and Uganda transformed the civil war into a regional crisis, pulling in troops from Angola, Chad, Namibia, Sudan, Uganda and Zimbabwe who, like so many plunderers before them, reaped the spoils of war, including massive pillage and rape of human and natural resources.[23]

A ceasefire was signed in July 1999 between several African nations, the MLC, and the RCD.[24] The United Nations deployed a peacekeeping force, MONUC, to help “implement the ceasefire, to oversee the withdrawal of foreign armies and disarm Congolese and foreign rebels.”[25] In 2001, President Laurent Kabila was murdered and succeeded by his son, Joseph, who “adopted a more flexible attitude towards conflict resolution.”[26] In part due to this new approach, most of the troops from Rwanda and Uganda left the DRC by late 2002.[27] The Inter-Congolese Dialogue in December 2002 led to the formation of a transitional government comprised of Joseph Kabila as president, along with four vice-presidents, including the two rebel leaders of the MLC and the RCD.[28]

After the ceasefire and peace agreement in 2002-2003, a process of disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration began with the support of the international community. During this process, former rebel groups and armed forces were integrated into the new Congolese army called the Armed Forces of the Democratic Republic of Congo (FARDC). While some groups mixed smoothly, some battalions, especially those belonging to former Congolese Rally for Democracy-Goma, “refused to be integrated with other forces.”[29]

As noted above, a war originally waged over security concerns in the wake of the Rwandan genocide soon evolved into a regional and national war that continues to be fought mainly for control of the Congo’s resources.[30] Even though Rwanda officially withdrew from eastern DRC after the signing of the peace agreement in 2003, part of the Rwandan administration “continued to unofficially provide financial, logistical, and military support to Congolese fighters of Rwandan origin there.”[31]

There are several additional factors that contribute to the continuation of violence. The 1998-2003 war destroyed much of the state’s infrastructure. The judicial system is extremely weak, there is very little rule of law in the east, and small arms are easily accessible throughout most of the country. There is also very little economic development in eastern DRC which means that “belonging to an armed group is one of few profitable occupations.”[32]

In the 2006 presidential run-off election, Joseph Kabila beat Jean-Pierre Bemba, the leader of the MLC.[33] Despite the peace agreement, official end to the conflict in 2003, and national elections, dozens of small wars continue to flare up on a regular basis in eastern DRC involving irregular militias who target unarmed civilians.[34] Pillage and gang rape are common and spread fear through communities.[35] By late 2008, fighting in North Kivu, political unrest, and human rights violations throughout the country continued despite the signing of the Goma peace agreement in January 2008 between rebels loyal to renegade General Laurent Nkunda, the government and the Mai Mai.[36]

According to Amnesty International, fighting persists in eastern DRC because the Congolese government, regional states, and the international community fail to address the root causes of the conflict. These factors include the continued presence of many Congolese and foreign armed groups, ethnic tensions, questions over land ownership and control of mineral and agricultural wealth, and impunity for those who commit human rights abuses and violate international humanitarian law.[37]

Finally, over a decade of war and political and economic crisis “deeply and permanently weakened the authority of the State” and caused the “complete breakdown of the security forces.”[38] This collapse also created a situation where the State has virtually no administrative control over entire regions of the country.[39] The resulting insecurity left civilians unprotected and led to serious human rights violations.[40] This lack of control and accountability are extremely important factors in explaining why the security forces and other armed groups continue to commit acts of severe sexual violence against civilians.

[1] International Rescue Committee, “Crisis Watch: Special Report: Congo,” International Rescue Committee (2007), http://www.theirc.org/special-report/congo-forgotten-crisis.html (accessed May 14, 2009).
[2] Jennifer J. Ziemke, “Countries and their Cultures: Democratic Republic of the Congo,” http://www.everyculture.com/Bo-Co/Democratic-Republic-of-the-Congo.html (accessed February 19, 2010).
[3] Michael Deibert, “Congo: Between Hope and Despair,” World Policy Journal vol. 25, no. 2 (Summer 2008): 63. AND Jennifer J. Ziemke, “Countries and their Cultures: Democratic Republic of the Congo,” http://www.everyculture.com/Bo-Co/Democratic-Republic-of-the-Congo.html (accessed February 19, 2010). AND “Survey: Coping with Conflict.” The Economist vol. 370, no.8358 (January 17, 2004): 8.
[4] Christopher W. Mullins and Dawn L. Rothe, “Gold, Diamonds and Blood: International State-Corporate Crime in the Democratic Republic of the Congo,” Contemporary Justice Review vol. 11, no. 2 (June 2008): 89.
[5] Michael Deibert, “Congo: Between Hope and Despair,” World Policy Journal vol. 25, no. 2 (Summer 2008): 63. AND Christopher W. Mullins and Dawn L. Rothe, “Gold, Diamonds and Blood: International State-Corporate Crime in the Democratic Republic of the Congo," Contemporary Justice Review vol. 11, no. 2 (June 2008): 89.
[6] Christopher W. Mullins and Dawn L. Rothe, “Gold, Diamonds and Blood: International State-Corporate Crime in the Democratic Republic of the Congo," Contemporary Justice Review vol. 11, no. 2 (June 2008): 89.
[7] Jennifer J. Ziemke, “Countries and their Cultures: Democratic Republic of the Congo,” http://www.everyculture.com/Bo-Co/Democratic-Republic-of-the-Congo.html (accessed February 19, 2010).
[8] Michael Deibert, “Congo: Between Hope and Despair,” World Policy Journal vol. 25, no. 2 (Summer 2008): 63. AND Jennifer J. Ziemke, “Countries and their Cultures: Democratic Republic of the Congo,” http://www.everyculture.com/Bo-Co/Democratic-Republic-of-the-Congo.html (accessed February 19, 2010).
[9] Christopher W. Mullins and Dawn L. Rothe, “Gold, Diamonds and Blood: International State-Corporate Crime in the Democratic Republic of the Congo," Contemporary Justice Review vol. 11, no. 2 (June 2008): 90.
AND Jennifer J. Ziemke, “Countries and their Cultures: Democratic Republic of the Congo,” http://www.everyculture.com/Bo-Co/Democratic-Republic-of-the-Congo.html (accessed February 19, 2010).
[10] Severine Autesserre, “The Trouble With Congo: How Local Disputes Fuel Regional Conflict," Foreign Affairs vol.87, no.3 (May/June 2008): 94.
[11] Ibid.
[12] Michael Deibert, “Congo: Between Hope and Despair,” World Policy Journal vol. 25, no. 2 (Summer 2008): 64. AND Severine Autesserre, “The Trouble With Congo: How Local Disputes Fuel Regional Conflict," Foreign Affairs vol.87, no.3 (May/June 2008): 94.
[13] Severine Autesserre, “The Trouble With Congo: How Local Disputes Fuel Regional Conflict," Foreign Affairs vol.87, no.3 (May/June 2008): 94.
[14] Michael Deibert, “Congo: Between Hope and Despair,” World Policy Journal vol. 25, no. 2 (Summer 2008): 64. AND Severine Autesserre, “The Trouble With Congo: How Local Disputes Fuel Regional Conflict," Foreign Affairs vol.87, no.3 (May/June 2008): 94. AND Denis M. Tull, “Peacekeeping in the Democratic Republic of Congo: Waging Peace and Fighting War," International Peacekeeping vol. 16, no. 2 (April 2009): 216.
[15] Denis M. Tull, “Peacekeeping in the Democratic Republic of Congo: Waging Peace and Fighting War," International Peacekeeping vol. 16, no. 2 (April 2009): 216.
[16] Ibid.
[17] Michael Deibert, “Congo: Between Hope and Despair,” World Policy Journal vol. 25, no. 2 (Summer 2008): 64-65.
[18] Wairagala Wakabi, “Sexual Violence Increasing in Democratic Republic of Congo,” The Lancet vol. 371 no. 9606 (January 2008): 15.
[19] Jennifer J. Ziemke, “Countries and their Cultures: Democratic Republic of the Congo,” http://www.everyculture.com/Bo-Co/Democratic-Republic-of-the-Congo.html (accessed February 19, 2010).
[20] Nadine NP Puechguirbal, “Women and War in the Democratic Republic of the Congo,” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society vol. 28, no. 4 (July 2003): 1271. AND Denis M. Tull, “Peacekeeping in the Democratic Republic of Congo: Waging Peace and Fighting War," International Peacekeeping vol. 16, no. 2 (April 2009): 216.
[21] Denis M. Tull, “Peacekeeping in the Democratic Republic of Congo: Waging Peace and Fighting War," International Peacekeeping vol. 16, no. 2 (April 2009): 216 AND Michael Deibert, “Congo: Between Hope and Despair,” World Policy Journal vol. 25, no. 2 (Summer 2008): 65.
[22] Nadine NP Puechguirbal, “Women and War in the Democratic Republic of the Congo,” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society vol. 28, no. 4 (July 2003): 1271.
[23] International Alert, “Alert in the Democratic Republic of Congo,” International Alert. http://www.international-alert.org/drc/index.php (accessed May 14, 2009).
[24] “Timeline: Peace Deal Signed in DRC to End Years of Fighting,” Reuters (January 23, 2008), http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL2384461420080123 (accessed April 20, 2010).
[25] Denis M. Tull, “Peacekeeping in the Democratic Republic of Congo: Waging Peace and Fighting War," International Peacekeeping vol. 16, no. 2 (April 2009): 216.
[26] Ibid.
[27] Ibid.
[28] Ibid.
[29] Dylan Hendrickson and Missak Kasongo, “Security Sector Reform in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: Strategic Issues,” Center on International Cooperation, issue no. 4, p. 4.
[30] Severine Autesserre, “The Trouble With Congo: How Local Disputes Fuel Regional Conflict," Foreign Affairs vol.87, no.3 (May/June 2008): 94.
[31] Ibid.
[32] Ibid.
[33] Denis M. Tull, “Peacekeeping in the Democratic Republic of Congo: Waging Peace and Fighting War," International Peacekeeping vol. 16, no. 2 (April 2009): 216.
[34] Denis M. Tull, “Peacekeeping in the Democratic Republic of Congo: Waging Peace and Fighting War, International Peacekeeping vol. 16, no. 2 (April 2009): 217. AND “Survey: Coping with Conflict," The Economist vol.370, no.8358 (January 17, 2004): 8.
[35] “Survey: Coping with Conflict,” The Economist vol.370, no.8358 (January 17, 2004): 8.
[36] Denis M. Tull, “Peacekeeping in the Democratic Republic of Congo: Waging Peace and Fighting War," International Peacekeeping vol. 16, no. 2 (April 2009): 217. AND Human Rights Watch, “DR Congo: Humanitarian Crisis Deepens as Peace Process Falters,” Human Rights Watch (September 25, 2008), http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2008/09/25/dr-congo-humanitarian-crisis-deepens-peace-process-falters (accessed April 20, 2010). AND “Timeline: Peace Deal Signed in DRC to End Years of Fighting,” Reuters (January 23, 2008), http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL2384461420080123 (accessed April 20, 2010).
[37] Amnesty International, “Democratic Republic of Congo: North Kivu; No End to War on Women and Children,” Amnesty International Publications (September 29, 2008): 2-3.
[38] Dylan Hendrickson and Missak Kasongo, “Security Sector Reform in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: Strategic Issues,” Center on International Cooperation, issue paper no. 4, p. 5.
[39] Ibid.
[40] Ibid.

Why Has Rape Been Used As A Weapon In Wars Throughout History?

The following post is the second in a series examining the causes and consequences of sexual violence in conflict, as well as widespread sexual violence committed and/or sanctioned by the state through a lack of attention to the issue and a failure to punish perpetrators.

Traditional explanations of sexual violence in war are based on the beliefs that men commit rape for sexual gratification and that sexual violence is a “regrettable side effect” or natural by-product of war.[1] These biology-based theories assume that rape is “natural” for men because they possess “genetically wired instincts for sexual aggression that spew forth in the chaotic environment of combat.”[2] In other words, rape is explained by men’s need for sexual release combined with the chaos and stress they experience during combat situations.[3] Traditional depictions of war also often view rape as a way to reward or motivate troops.[4]

Few scholars today adhere to a strictly biological explanation for war rape. They also take into account social and cultural factors when attempting to understand the motivations for sexual violence in war.[5] Further, a biological explanation does not explain why there are many men who do not rape during times of war.[6] It is now also widely accepted that rape has more to do with power and the desire to humiliate and dominate victims rather than motivated solely by a desire for sex.[7]

Using the cases of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Rwanda, and Sierra Leone, Megan Gerecke categorizes four common theories of sexual violence drawn from the existing literature:[8]

1. In the first theory, sexual violence in war is caused by male desire and increased opportunities due to an increase in men’s access to women, social breakdown, and impunity for perpetrators of sexual violence.
2. The second explanation is based on gender inequalities and distorted gender norms.
3. Third, since women in many societies are often seen to represent the honour of their communities, rape may be used as a strategic weapon of war to bring shame to the enemy’s family and entire society.
4. A final explanation argues that certain aspects of the organization and structure of militaries and armed groups makes it more likely members will commit rape and other acts of sexual violence.

It seems likely that sexual violence in conflict occurs as a result of a combination of any number of the above factors. In today’s conflicts, numerous conditions exist that make the use of sexual violence more likely. For example, in countries that have been fighting for many years, violence may become normal to the young people who have only known war, basic social structures often break down, there is limited punishment for perpetrators of sexual violence leading to a culture of impunity, gender inequality is prevalent, and the structure and training of many militaries and armed groups encourage and/or condone violence.

There are several theories attempting to explain the use of rape in war. Further, in many conflicts, little progress has been made towards eradicating sexual violence. However, the fact that scholars are discussing this issue is a huge improvement from traditional understandings of sexual violence:

Throughout history, sexual violence in times of war has not been perceived as violence on the same level as for instance torture or killings. This perception has excluded the possibility that sexual violence can have a strategic purpose in a conflict situation. The wars in Bosnia and Rwanda have challenged us to think differently.[9]

Bosnia and Rwanda changed both international law and the way many in the international community viewed the use of sexual violence in war. Snyder et al. summarize the changes that occurred both in the literature and in international law after the events in Bosnia came to light:

The Bosnian conflict signaled the end of the invisibility of women who are raped in war. No longer could war rape be viewed as an unfortunate by-product of war. It was now clear that it was being used as an intentional strategy to achieve genocide.[10]

This realization and acknowledgment that rape was used as a systematic strategy during the war in Bosnia also ushered in a change in the long history of the international community’s inability or unwillingness to prosecute and punish perpetrators of war rape.[11]

In 2001, for the first time in history, the United Nations war crimes tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) ruled that war rape was a crime against humanity.[12] The Foca case led to the conviction of three former Bosnian Serb soldiers for running rape camps in the town of Foca during the Bosnian war. The three defendants were found guilty of crimes against humanity on the charges of enslavement, rape, and torture.[13] Their sentences ranged from twelve to 28 years in prison.[14] Inger Skjelsbaek argues that the level of domestic and international attention to sexual violence in the Bosnian war “led to a degree of openness about a phenomenon that has historically been hidden and ridden with shame.”[15] In this way, the events in Bosnia were the catalyst for increased international attention, prosecutions for crimes of sexual violence carried out during war, and changes to international law.

Finally, Bosnia ignited widespread concern and questions involving the use of sexual violence for two reasons. First, camps were set up in Bosnia for the express purpose of sexually abusing women, a strategy that indicated a clear intensification in violence against women.[16] Second, by the 1990s, the status of women, especially in North America, had changed compared to previous conflicts. Women now held influential positions in academia, politics, and the media, enabling them to bring public attention to sexual violence and question long held assumptions on this issue.[17]

Once an issue that was denied, minimized, silenced, and considered an inevitable by-product of war, rape in conflict is now seen as an issue that must be addressed under international law and is viewed as a weapon of war designed to spread terror among civilians.[18] This change in the way war rape is viewed and depicted in the media and literature is due in part to international media, feminist activists, and scholars who are now highlighting this issue and raising public awareness. Other changes are the result of women who organized and responded locally, regionally, and internationally to war rape through attracting media attention, providing care to survivors, fund-raising, and conducting advocacy and education campaigns.[19]

Beyond this new understanding of rape as a weapon of conflict, however, rape is now seen as an actual strategy of war:

As a strategy, it is a sanctioned, systematic means of attaining specific political objectives. Achieved by using war rape as an instrument of terror, domination, political repression, torture, intimidation, and humiliation, these objectives have at their heart control, compliance of civilians, and even genocide. Political ends include inciting ethnic hatred to accomplish ethnic cleansing and genetic imperialism as well as to destroy an enemy’s cohesion, spirit, and identity….Sexual violation of women erodes the fabric of a community in a way that few weapons can.[20]

It is important to note, however, that women in conflicts today and throughout history do not comprise one monolithic group. Each woman’s experience may be influenced by a combination of several factors including age, race, class, religion, ethnicity, and nationality.[21] As a result, researchers must consider these factors when interviewing female survivors of sexual violence and when they are attempting to develop and implement programs.

Sources:
[1] Ruth Seifert, “The Second Front: The Logic of Sexual Violence in Wars," Women's Studies International Forum vol. 19, no. 1-2 (Jan-Apr 1996): 35-36.
[2] Cindy S. Snyder, Wesley J. Gabbard, J. Dean May and Nihada Zulcic, “On the Battleground of Women's Bodies: Mass Rape in Bosnia-Herzegovina,” Affilia vol. 21, no. 2 (Summer 2006): 184.
[3] Christopher Mullins, “’He Would Kill Me With His Penis:’ Genocidal Rape in Rwanda as a State Crime,” Critical Criminology vol. 17, no. 1 (March 2009): 16.
[4] Cindy S. Snyder, Wesley J. Gabbard, J. Dean May and Nihada Zulcic, “On the Battleground of Women's Bodies: Mass Rape in Bosnia-Herzegovina,” Affilia vol. 21, no. 2 (Summer 2006): 184.
[5] Ibid., 185.
[6] Ibid., 185.
[7] Ruth Seifert, “The Second Front: The Logic of Sexual Violence in Wars,” Women's Studies International Forum vol. 19, no. 1-2 (Jan-Apr 1996): 35-36. AND Chloe Angyal, “Sex and Power, From North Carolina to Congo,” The Huffington Post (March 11, 2010), http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chloe-angyal/sex-and-power-from-north_b_495296.html (accessed April 20, 2010).
[8] Megan Gerecke, “Explaining Sexual Violence in Conflict Situations: Preliminary Findings from Bosnia and Herzegovina, Rwanda and Sierra Leone,” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the ISA's 50th Annual Convention “Exploring the Past, Anticipating the Future,” (New York, February 15, 2009).
[9] Inger Skjelsbaek, “Sexual Violence in Times of War: A New Challenge for Peace Operations?” International Peacekeeping vol. 8, no. 2 (Summer 2001): 71.
[10] Cindy S. Snyder, Wesley J. Gabbard, J. Dean May and Nihada Zulcic, “On the Battleground of Women's Bodies: Mass Rape in Bosnia-Herzegovina,” Affilia vol. 21, no. 2 (Summer 2006): 191.
[11] Ibid., 191.
[12] Institute for War and Peace Reporting. “Analysis: Foca's Monumental Jurisprudence.” Institute for War and Peace Reporting (November 11, 2005). http://www.iwpr.net/report-news/analysis-focas-monumental-jurisprudence (accessed April 20, 2010).
[13] ICTY, “Sentencing Judgement in the Kunarac, Kovac and Vukovic (Foca) Case,” International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (The Hague, June 12, 2002), http://www.icty.org/sid/8095 (accessed April 20, 2010).
[14] Ibid.
[15] Inger Skjelsbaek, “Victim and Survivor: Narrated Social Identities of Women Who Experienced Rape during the War in Bosnia-Herzegovina,” Feminism & Psychology vol. 16, no. 4 (November 2006): 373.
[16] Ruth Seifert, “The Second Front: The Logic of Sexual Violence in Wars,” Women's Studies International Forum vol. 19, no. 1-2 (Jan-Apr 1996): 35.
[17]Ruth Seifert, “The Second Front: The Logic of Sexual Violence in Wars,” Women's Studies International Forum vol. 19, no. 1-2 (Jan-Apr 1996): 35. AND Cindy S. Snyder, Wesley J. Gabbard, J. Dean May and Nihada Zulcic, “On the Battleground of Women's Bodies: Mass Rape in Bosnia-Herzegovina,” Affilia vol. 21, no. 2 (Summer 2006): 186.
[18] Nancy Farwell, “War Rape: New Conceptualizations and Responses,” Affilia-Journal of Women and Social Work vol. 19, no. 4 (Winter 2004): 389-403.
[19] Ibid., 390.
[20] Ibid., 394, 396.
[21] Cindy S. Snyder, Wesley J. Gabbard, J. Dean May and Nihada Zulcic, “On the Battleground of Women's Bodies: Mass Rape in Bosnia-Herzegovina,” Affilia vol. 21, no. 2 (Summer 2006): 184.

Sexual Violence in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

In war, rape accomplishes a number of objectives. It spreads fear, humiliates, terrorizes civilians for political purposes, obtains information, rewards soldiers, and can eliminate ethnic groups.[1] During the past two decades alone, women were raped in Rwanda, Liberia, the former Yugoslavia, Sierra Leone, Colombia, Sudan, Timor Leste, Uganda, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).[2] War rape is not a new phenomenon, but war rape was “documented with increasing regularity in the 20th century”[3] and statistics indicate it is increasingly prevalent, due in part to the fact that “the nature of warfare is changing, in ways that increasingly endanger women and girls.”[4]

The use of rape as a weapon of war is as old as war itself. While war rape is not unique to any particular country, region, ethnic group, religion or time period, the level of sexual violence reported in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) during the past fifteen years is extreme. Though it is difficult to determine the exact number of women and girls who have been raped and mutilated by armed groups, soldiers, and other civilians during this conflict, most experts working in the region believe the number has reached the hundreds of thousands.

Statistics reveal a serious problem exists in the Congo. From 1998 to 2004, a coalition of members of the Congolese government, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and the UN, called the Joint Initiative on the Fight against Sexual Violence towards Women and Children, recorded over 40,000 reported cases of sexual violence.[5] This number is only a small percentage of actual cases, however, since many women do not report rape because they fear abandonment by their families, rejection by their communities, and reprisals by their attackers.[6] These factors in turn impact the gathering of accurate statistics.

No one has been able to quantify the scale of what human rights groups call the “war on women” in eastern Congo. Tens of thousands of rapes have been recorded by the UN in the eastern provinces of North and South Kivu over the past year, but as only a fraction of the women assaulted make it to hospital there is little doubt that the total number of victims runs into hundreds of thousands in recent years.[7]

Despite the importance of gathering accurate data, statistics on the number of women impacted by sexual violence in conflicts around the world are difficult to collect. The chaos of conflict, the failure of humanitarian organizations to cooperate and coordinate, and the fear and shame surrounding sexual violence are factors contributing to the “great scarcity of data on the prevalence, circumstances, characteristics of perpetrators, and physical or mental health impacts” of sexual violence in conflict.[8] Even when faced with these obstacles, however, several national and international organizations collected statistics that highlight the severity, intensity, and prevalence of sexual violence in the DRC.

Working with Congolese human rights organizations, International Alert gathered statistics on the types of rape committed in this conflict through interviews with 492 survivors of sexual violence in different regions of the country. The organizations identified four main types of rape and concluded that “The rapes and sexual abuse were committed with unprecedented cruelty, the perpetrators having devised the most humiliating and degrading treatment they could inflict on their victims.”[9]

Individual rape was reported by 105 survivors (21.3%) and described as when a “single perpetrator rapes a single victim,” while 390 women (79%) reported they were raped by two or more attackers. A third form identified was family members forced to rape each other or to watch the attack on a family member, usually their mother or sister. The final category is rape where objects, such as sticks, bottles, bananas, pestles coated in chili pepper, and the butt of rifles are forcibly inserted into victims’ genitals; 61 women (12.4%) interviewed reported this.[10] Many women (71.7%) reported that they were tortured during or after the rape (especially if they resisted) and described being “beaten, wounded with machetes, or [having] their genitals mutilated or burnt with drops of plastic melted by a flame.”[11] These findings provide insight into the types of rape committed, while other organizations gathered data focusing specifically on the number of women and girls subjected to rape and other forms of sexual violence in the Congo.

Malteser International runs a medical-social support program for rape survivors in South Kivu. From 2005-2007 the organization registered 20,517 female rape survivors.[12] Since 2003, the International Rescue Committee has assisted more than 40,000 rape survivors in the country.[13] The number of survivors who came to Panzi Hospital in Bukavu to report rape and/or mutilation increased from 290 in 1999 to 1,289 in 2003.[14] According to data provided by local health centres, as of January 2007, an average of 40 women were raped daily in South Kivu; thirteen percent of these victims were younger than fourteen-years-old, three percent died as a result of the attack, and ten to twelve percent were infected with HIV/AIDS.[15] From January to September 2008, more than 3,500 cases were reported to the Joint Initiative on Sexual Violence in North Kivu.[16] At one hospital in Bunia, more than 7,400 rape victims were treated between 2003 and 2007.[17] According to Human Rights Watch, 16,000 rapes were reported in 2008 alone.[18]

These numbers indicate a serious problem, but they do not fully describe the extent of sexual violence in the DRC. Many survivors of sexual violence do not report the attacks due to fear of reprisal or ostracism, shame, and continued insecurity caused by ongoing violent conflict in the region.[19] Elisabeth Roesch, Gender and Advocacy Advisor for CARE in the DRC underscores this problem, “We know rape is typically under-reported, and feel that this number doesn’t even come close to reflecting the actual number of cases – the actual number is unimaginable.”[20] This sentiment was corroborated in a 2004 report from USAID:

It can be estimated, however, that based on the statistics presented by the two referral hospitals, a minimum tens of thousands of rapes and/or mutilations have taken place since 1996, and untold thousands more back to 1994.[21]

It is important to determine the reasons why rape is such a prevalent, severe, and effective weapon of war in the Congo. According to academic journal articles and reports from human rights organizations and governments, as well as interviews with survivors, humanitarian workers, doctors, and soldiers, sexual violence is used as a systemic and strategic weapon in the DRC because of its effectiveness in accomplishing economic and military goals, the Congo’s hostile political environment, perpetrators’ impunity, the large number of actors in the on-going conflict, and the many physical, psychological, and social consequences associated with rape that benefit perpetrators. Future posts will examine all of these factors in detail in order to better understand the causes and consequences of the widespread use of sexual violence that has been used as a weapon in the DRC for the past 15 years.

Sources:

[1] Amnesty International USA, “Stop Violence against Women: Rape as a Tool of War: A Fact Sheet,” Amnesty International USA (2007), http://www.amnestyusa.org/women/rapeinwartime.html (accessed January 26, 2010).
[2] Jeanne Ward, “Broken Bodies-Broken Dreams: Violence against Women Exposed,” OCHA/IRIN (November 2005): 177-189.
[3] Patricia Weitsman, “The Politics of Identity and Sexual Violence: A Review of Bosnia and Rwanda,” Paper prepared for the Annual Meeting of the International Studies Association (2007): 3.
[4] Jeanne Ward, “Broken Bodies-Broken Dreams: Violence against Women Exposed,” OCHA/IRIN (November 2005): 177.
[5] Watchlist on Children and Armed Conflict, “Struggling to Survive: Children in Armed Conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo,” Watchlist on Children and Armed Conflict (April 2006), http://www.watchlist.org/reports/files/dr_congo.report.20060426.php?p=11 (accessed January 17, 2010).
[6] CARE International, “Tens of Thousands More Women and Girls at Risk of Rape and Attack in DRC, Warns CARE,” CARE International (November 6, 2008), http://www.care-international.org/Tens-of-thousands-more-women-and-girls-at-risk-of-rape-and-attack-in-DRC-warns-CARE (accessed May 20, 2009).
[7] Chris McGreal, “Hundreds of Thousands of Women Raped for Being on the Wrong Side,” The Guardian (November 12, 2007), http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/nov/12/congo.international (accessed January 19, 2010). AND Watchlist on Children and Armed Conflict, “Struggling to Survive: Children in Armed Conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo,” Watchlist on Children and Armed Conflict (April 2006), http://www.watchlist.org/reports/files/dr_congo.report.20060426.php?p=11 (accessed January 17, 2010).
[8] Birthe Steiner, Marie T. Benner, Egbert Sondorp, K. Peter Schmitz, Ursula Mesmer and Sandrine Rosenberger, “Sexual Violence in the Protracted Conflict of DRC: Programming for Rape Survivors in South Kivu,” Conflict and Health vol. 3 (2009): 3.
[9] International Alert, “Women’s Bodies as a Battleground: Sexual Violence Against Women and Girls During the War in the Democratic Republic of Congo,” Réseau des Femmes pour un Développement Associatif (RFDA), Réseau des Femmes pour la Défense des Droits et la Paix (RFDP), International Alert (2004) : 33.
[10] Ibid., 33-34.
[11] Ibid., 34-35.
[12] Birthe Steiner, Marie T Benner, Egbert Sondorp, K Peter Schmitz, Ursula Mesmer and Sandrine Rosenberger, “Sexual Violence in the Protracted Conflict of DRC: Programming for Rape Survivors in South Kivu,” Conflict and Health vol. 3 (2009): 3.
[13] Wairagala Wakabi, “Sexual Violence Increasing in Democratic Republic of Congo,” The Lancet vol. 371 no. 9606 (January 2008): 15.
[14] Marion Pratt, Ph.D. and Leah Werchick, J.D. with Anaia Bewa, Marie-Louise Eagleton, Claudine Lumumba, Katherine Nichols, and Lina Piripiri, “Sexual Terrorism: Rape as a Weapon of War in Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo,” USAID/DCHA Assessment Report (March 18, 2004): 11.
[15] Claudia Rodriguez, “Sexual Violence: Weapon of War, Impediment to Peace,” Forced Migration issue 27 (January 2007): 45-46.
[16] CARE International, “Tens of Thousands More Women and Girls at Risk of Rape and Attack in DRC, Warns CARE,” CARE International (November 6, 2008), http://www.care-international.org/Tens-of-thousands-more-women-and-girls-at-risk-of-rape-and-attack-in-DRC-warns-CARE (accessed May 20, 2009).
[17] Wairagala Wakabi, “Sexual Violence Increasing in Democratic Republic of Congo,” The Lancet vol. 371 no. 9606 (January 2008): 15.
[18] Human Rights Watch, “Stopping Rape as a Weapon of War in Congo,” Human Rights Watch (September 18, 2009), http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/09/18/stopping-rape-weapon-war-congo (accessed January 5, 2010).
[19] CARE International, “Tens of Thousands More Women and Girls at Risk of Rape and Attack in DRC, Warns CARE,” CARE International (November 6, 2008), http://www.care-international.org/Tens-of-thousands-more-women-and-girls-at-risk-of-rape-and-attack-in-DRC-warns-CARE (accessed May 20, 2009).
[20] Ibid.
[21] Marion Pratt, Ph.D. and Leah Werchick, J.D. with Anaia Bewa, Marie-Louise Eagleton, Claudine Lumumba, Katherine Nichols, and Lina Piripiri, “Sexual Terrorism: Rape as a Weapon of War in Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo,” USAID/DCHA Assessment Report (March 18, 2004): 11.

Female Genital Mutilation (FGM)

What exactly is meant by the term female genital mutilation (FGM)? Why is it practiced? What are the many documented effects of this tradition on women and girls?

Although female genital mutilation is recognized as a violation of fundamental human rights, the practice is still prevalent in many countries. It is estimated that between 100 and 140 million girls and women worldwide are victims of female genital mutilation, 92 million of them living in Africa…Although women of all ages are at risk for female genital mutilation, it is typically performed on girls between the ages of 4 and 12.[1]

Definition and Prevalence
FGM is the removal of part, or all, of female genitalia and can be divided into four main types.[2] Type I involves the removal of the clitoral foreskin. Type II is the removal of the clitoris as well as partial or complete cutting out of the labia minora. Type III or “infibulation” involves the removal of the clitoris and the labia minora and majora, followed by the sewing up of the orificium vaginae with only a small opening left for urine and menstruation blood to pass through. Type IV includes variations such as pricking, piercing, the stretching of the clitoris or vulva, or the scraping of the vagina.[3] According to recent estimates, around two million girls are circumcised or face the prospect of circumcision every year in at least thirty countries around the world, many of which are located in Africa.[4] In the Sudan, Mali, Djibouti, Egypt, Ethiopia, Somalia and Eritrea about 90% of women experience FGM.[5]

Immediate and Long-Term Effects
Due to the fact that FGM is often performed under unsanitary conditions by practitioners without medical training using instruments such as broken glass, tin can lids, blunt knives, scissors, or razors, girls who undergo this procedure regularly experience severe physical, sexual, and psychological side-effects.[6] These consequences include intense pain and bleeding, including the possibility of severe hemorrhaging causing death; pain during intercourse; and complications including back pain, kidney damage, severe cramping, and infertility due to the build up of scar tissue that blocks the urethral or vaginal opening leading to a buildup of urine and menstrual blood.[7] Women who have been infibulated must also be cut open before each delivery and then sewn up again afterwards, leading to the buildup of thick scar tissue, making childbirth extremely painful and dangerous as it lengthens labor, blocks the birth canal, and often leads to the mother experiencing perianal tears.[8]

According to the World Health Organization, the physical consequences of female genital mutilation may include severe pain, shock, heavy bleeding that may result in death, sepsis, the formation of abscesses, increased susceptibility to HIV/AIDS, pelvic inflammatory disease, infertility, painful periods, infection of the wound, fever, chronic bladder and urinary tract infections, cysts, and increased risk of complications during childbirth including prolonged labor and death of the newborn.

Justifications for FGM
Numerous “reasons” for FGM exist. Many have been passed down from generation to generation, often without practitioners questioning their validity, such as the belief that touching the clitoris during childbirth will result in the death of the baby.[9] In many societies, girls undergo FGM as a rite of passage that also includes the passing down of information on how to be a good wife and mother. Without undergoing this procedure, girls in societies where FGM is prevalent will not be able to get married due to cultural beliefs regarding purity, virginity, and fidelity. Girls who have been circumcised are considered “clean” while those who have not had the procedure performed are considered “unclean.” Most importantly, many of the justifications for FGM have at their root beliefs concerning the inferior status of women and a desire to control a woman’s body and sexuality to ensure submissiveness.[10] For example, as FGM often reduces a woman’s desire for sex, a girl or young woman who has undergone the procedure is less likely to have sex outside of marriage, thereby ensuring her chastity and marriage prospects. The latter is extremely important since in many societies that practice FGM, it is exceedingly difficult for an uncircumcised woman to be married, and in societies where women receive little education or professional opportunities, marriage is often the only means of survival.[11]

Other scholars also highlight the link between FGM and women’s subjugation and devaluation. Favazza asserts that FGM is an attempt to regulate female morality:

…an infibulated woman is a guaranteed virgin most of the time and is therefore marriageable. Excision, by removing the sensitive clitoral area, is thought to attenuate sexual desires in a woman, who, freed from personal lust, can concentrate solely on pleasing her husband.[12]

FGM is used in an attempt to control women’s sexuality and has persisted despite the numerous detrimental side-effects.

Why the Eradication of FGM is Vital to Development
In addition to the fact FGM often leads to so many horrific consequences for women, this practice is a hindrance to long-term development efforts in the Global South. For example, by 2015, many countries have pledged to reach the Millennium Development Goals; three of which are intrinsically hindered by the continuation of FGM. Based on these pledges, the international community has determined that the promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of women, the improvement of maternal health, and the combating of HIV/AIDS and other diseases are necessary for development.[13] It is clear, however, that FGM is linked to the subjugation of women rather than their empowerment, and complications of this practice include many negative ramifications for pregnant women, decreasing rather than improving maternal health. In addition, certain traditional cultural practices such as FGM have been linked to women’s increased susceptibility to HIV/AIDS.[14]

HIV/AIDS is transmitted between individuals through sexual intercourse, the transfer of the disease from mother to baby during childbirth, and the direct transfer of the virus, such as through a blood transfusion or sharing contaminated needles or sharp instruments.[15] Since many instances of FGM are performed by individuals without medical training in unsanitary conditions who reuse razors and other sharp instruments, the risk of transmitting diseases is quite high. This risk is exacerbated by the fact many African women are marginalized and powerless in traditional patriarchal societies, with little support to fight against powerful and deeply entrenched customs.[16] Women are extremely vital contributors to both their families and societies (though many of their contributions are not recognized), but it is illogical to expect women suffering from HIV/AIDS to be able to meaningfully contribute to their communities while battling constant sickness.[17] FGM makes women more vulnerable to HIV/AIDS and is indicative of deep discrimination.[18]

Focusing solely on the negative health effects associated with FGM, however, without a close examination of the root causes of this practice, mainly women’s inequality, is not an effective approach since “underscoring the negative health consequences does not effectively challenge the reasoning behind FGM and thus allows it to continue.”[19]

FGM is also widely considered (especially in Western nations) to be a serious human rights violation and can be understood within the framework of women’s social and economic powerlessness in many societies.[20] In other words, FGM is a “human rights abuse…intimately linked to the unequal position of women in the political, social, and economic structures of societies where it is practiced.”[21] It is also interesting to note that of the 28 countries in Africa that continue to practice FGM, 26 have ratified the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). This is an international treaty that includes obligations to prevent, investigate, and punish all forms of violence against women, a category which clearly encompasses FGM, despite the labeling of this practice as justified due to tradition, culture or religion.[22]

There are numerous reasons why the eradication of FGM is vital to improving development in the Global South. This practice violates women’s right to have a say in what happens to their own bodies and it involves numerous detrimental health effects for women, thereby severely limiting their ability to contribute meaningfully to their societies. It is also a reflection of the devaluation of women and girls in many cultures, confines a woman’s worth to the domestic sphere, and is a barrier to women’s full participation in society. For these reasons, eradication of FGM is necessary to ensure equality and development.

Efforts by NGOs to Eradicate FGM
Numerous non-governmental organizations (NGOs) throughout Africa have developed strategies for eradicating FGM in a culturally sensitive manner that also links to wider development goals. For example, activists in Sierra Leone have discovered that mass literacy campaigns, education, providing practitioners with alternative forms of income, and raising public awareness concerning the detrimental effects of FGM are effective in the struggle to change people’s thoughts and deeply held traditional and cultural beliefs.[23] One activist underscored this point when she said, “Educating people is empowering them. It is only through their minds that you can change the attitude of people.”[24]

Many NGOs also started seeing increased success in their work at eradicating FGM when they began attempting to understand the practice instead of condemning it, resulting in a more positive response from communities.[25] One of the most important factors that has contributed significantly to various successes of NGOs working towards FGM eradication involve recognizing that indigenous knowledge has value in solving local problems; this results in an increased sense of control and ownership among local populations.[26] A specific project that incorporated many of the above factors is a rural village empowerment program involving formal education and literacy in Senegal.[27] Although FGM was not singled out as a specific topic of discussion during the 18-month curriculum that focused on human rights, women’s health, and sustainable resource management, after women joined the literacy programming, they “never stopped thinking of how to make their lives better.”[28] Ultimately they identified FGM as one of their biggest concerns and then mobilized in order to work towards its elimination. They garnered national media attention, organized international forums, implemented a declaration for entire communities to abandon the practice, and then eventually developed similar programs in other countries.[29] Further, it is generally believed that this project was so successful because “its approach was collective, grounded in the local context, and empowering.”[30]

One of the most important strategies developed by NGOs in their work to eradicate FGM is to question deeply held beliefs and the reasons behind them. In other words, some NGOs attempt to get people thinking about why they believe what they believe and why they do what they do through asking questions involving perceived benefits, traditional gender roles, and religion, always using a frame of reference that is familiar to participants.[31] According to an activist who regularly utilizes this approach:

We may not be able to convince our audiences to stop circumcision with our first conversation, but at least they begin to realize certain contradictions, and they start to rethink the “facts” as they understood them. It is a slow process of change, but arguments supporting FGM can be dismantled with persistent questioning.[32]

In this way, change will not happen quickly, but when it does ultimately occur, the improvements to women’s lives will be tangible and sustainable. Further, instead of focusing on human rights declarations and treaties (which may be of little relevance to local communities), effective approaches to eradicating FGC are informed by local cultural and religious beliefs of common sense, justice and dignity.[33] “Without an understanding of indigenous cultures, and without a deep commitment from within those cultures to end the cutting, eradication efforts imposed from the outside are bound to fail.”[34]

As NGOs work to improve development throughout the Global South, including efforts to increase women’s access to education, opportunities, equality and participation, the likelihood that FGM will be eradicated, thereby removing a major barrier to development, increases as well. Studies have shown that the level of women’s education is directly correlated with their level of willingness to have their daughters circumcised; the more education, the less willing.[35]

When African women have taken their rightful places in the various spheres of life, when they have gained social equality, political power, economic opportunities, and access to education and health care, genital mutilation will end. Women will make sure of that.[36]

Sources:
[1] “Female Genital Mutilation Fact Sheet.” World Health Organization (Fact sheet no. 241) (February 2010).
[2] “Women’s Human Rights,” Amnesty International, http://www.amnestyusa.org/violence-against-women/female-genital-mutilation--fgm/page.do?id=1108439 (accessed April 8, 2009).
[3] I. Utz-Billing, and H. Kentenich, “Female genital mutilation: an injury, physical and mental harm,” Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics and Gynecology vol. 29, no. 4 (2008): 225-229.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ibid.
[6] “Women’s Human Rights,” Amnesty International, http://www.amnestyusa.org/violence-against-women/female-genital-mutilation--fgm/page.do?id=1108439 (accessed April 8, 2009).
[7] Rogaia Mustafa Abusharaf, "Unmasking tradition: a Sudanese anthropologist confronts female 'circumcision' and its terrible tenacity," The Sciences vol. 38, no. 2 (March-April 1998): 22-27.
[8] “Women’s Human Rights,” Amnesty International, http://www.amnestyusa.org/violence-against-women/female-genital-mutilation--fgm/page.do?id=1108439 (accessed April 8, 2009).
[9] Ibid.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Ibid.
[12] Favazza, Armando R., M.D. Self-Mutilation in Culture and Psychiatry: Bodies Under Siege. (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987), 162.
[13] “Millennium Development Goals,” Amnesty International, http://www.amnestyusa.org/demand-dignity/millennium-development goals/page.do?id=1041190 (accessed April 8, 2009).
[14] E.A. Uwe, E.E. Ekuri, and P.N. Asuquo, “African women and vulnerability to HIV/AIDS: Implications for female related cultural practices.” International Quarterly of Community Health Education vol. 27, no. 1 (2006): 87-94.
[15] Ibid.
[16] Ibid.
[17] Ibid.
[18] Ibid.
[19] Nadia Wassef, “Ending Female Genital Mutilation without Human Rights: Two Approaches – Egypt,” Carnegie Council (August 6, 2000).
http://www.cceia.org/resources/publications/dialogue/2_03/articles/631.html (accessed April 8, 2009).
[20] “Women’s Human Rights,” Amnesty International, http://www.amnestyusa.org/violence-against-women/female-genital-mutilation--fgm/page.do?id=1108439 (accessed April 8, 2009).
[21] Ibid.
[22] Ibid.
[23]Liliane Bitong, “Fighting genital mutilation in Sierra Leone,” Bulletin of the World Health Organization vol. 83, no. 11 (November 2005): 806-807.
[24] Ibid.
[25] Asma Mohamed Abdel Halim, “From Bagadadji to Abu Hashim: New Approaches to Combat Female Circumcision,” Review of African Political Economy vol. 34, no. 114 (December 2007): 719-756.
[26] Ibid.
[27] Peter Easton, Karen Monkman and Rebecca Miles, “Social Policy from the Bottom Up: Abandoning FGC in Sub-Saharan Africa,” Gender-Based Violence (2007): 70-85.
[28] Asma Mohamed Abdel Halim, “From Bagadadji to Abu Hashim: New Approaches to Combat Female Circumcision,” Review of African Political Economy vol. 34, no. 114 (December 2007): 719-756. AND Peter Easton, Karen Monkman and Rebecca Miles, “Social Policy from the Bottom Up: Abandoning FGC in Sub-Saharan Africa,” Gender-Based Violence (2007): 70-85.
[29] Peter Easton, Karen Monkman and Rebecca Miles, “Social Policy from the Bottom Up: Abandoning FGC in Sub-Saharan Africa,” Gender-Based Violence (2007): 70-85.
[30] Ibid.
[31] Nadia Wassef, “Ending Female Genital Mutilation without Human Rights: Two Approaches – Egypt,” Carnegie Council (August 6, 2000), http://www.cceia.org/resources/publications/dialogue/2_03/articles/631.html (accessed April 8, 2009).
[32] Ibid.
[33] Ibid.
[34] Rogaia Mustafa Abusharaf, "Unmasking tradition: a Sudanese anthropologist confronts female 'circumcision' and its terrible tenacity," The Sciences vol. 38, no. 2 (March-April 1998): 22-27.
[35] I. Utz-Billing, and H. Kentenich, “Female genital mutilation: an injury, physical and mental harm,” Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics and Gynecology vol. 29, no. 4 (2008): 225-229.
[36] Ibid.