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]
- 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.
- The second explanation is based on gender inequalities and distorted gender norms.
- 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.
- 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.
No comments:
Post a Comment