In Part I of this blog I set the scene for the challenges ahead as societies continue to travel along the demographic highway. In this second installment I look at the novel solutions trying to add color to a greying democracy.

In a letter to the The Economist in January 2011, Reiko Aoki, Director of the Center for Intergenerational Studies at Hitotsubashi University in Tokyo, came up with an intriguing solution: give children a right to vote. In his proposal, Aoki argues for seriously considering giving children a vote… but: their parents would use it on their behalf (emphasis added). In this way, Japanese “parents with children under 18 would then control 37% of the vote.” It may be just the way it is explained, but to me however this seems less like giving children a vote than simply weighting the parents’ votes. Reading Aoki’s 2009 paper on the topic (available here), it becomes clear that this is what is intended: skewing the electoral system in the hope of boosting fertility rates.

The idea of giving children a vote can be traced to a paper written in 1986 by demographer Paul Demeny – leading to the coining of “Demeny voting” to describe the system. His aim was to promote pronatalist and family policies in order to try defuse the ‘demographic timebomb’ of aging. The point of the exercise therefore does not seem to actually politically empower those currently below the age of enfranchisement (the voting age being 18 in the majority of states, 20 in Japan, 21 in Singapore and 25 in Uzbekistan). It seems rather to pit generations against each other in the hope that those given a greater proportion of the votes through their children will automatically oppose policies designed to help their own parents. Politics would then present the ultimate moral dilemma; who do you love more, your parents or your children?

There are other possibilities than just simply changing the rules of the democratic game. The most obvious – though perhaps most challenging – would be to restructure the way the whole social welfare system is funded: away from the prevalent ‘pay-as-you-go’ system to a credible alternative. The complexities involved in implementing such a change would be immense, but not impossible – and possibly easier than the attempted demographic engineering taking place in certain states. Immigration presents another option. An increase in the working population would automatically lessen the burden on each member of that group. But what happens when these migrant workers retire?

Motivating those in the 18-30 age bracket to vote and become politically engaged seems the least ethically compromising solution. President Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign used social networking tools to successfully mobilize those sections of society not usually targeted by traditional election campaigns. Regardless of the greying of society, each citizen is supposed to be democratically equal – but research by David Nickerson argues that young citizens demonstrate low voter turnout precisely because they are ignored. It is widely assumed that because young people vote at low rates, efforts to boost their turnout will not be as cost-effective as campaigns targeting higher turnout age-groups. Issues affecting the youth demographic are therefore not central to campaigning, effectively alienating them from the political process – leading to low voter turnouts, and further sidelining. This vicious cycle needs to be broken – and though only gradually, in some countries steps are being made in the right direction.

Despite what cosmetic and pharmaceutical companies would like us to believe, aging cannot be prevented, and the slow inversion of the population pyramid looks set to test the democratic ideal of one person, one (equal) vote. Continuing to play the game but changing the rules to suit the players isn’t the way to deal with this situation. Societies need to think long and hard about the relationship between shifting demographics and politics. Perhaps this is the impetus needed for deliberative democracy to become a serious, viable choice.

—-
Image courtesy eagle.dawg/flickr, available here. Licensed via Creative Commons: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

image courtesy Ronn Aldaman/flickr

Whilst ‘growing up’ is admirable and desirable, ‘getting old’ is often framed in a more negative light. What words come to mind when you think about the elderly? Frailty, weakness, health problems? A burden to society? Or rather politically engaged, motivated and experienced? It is now these latter qualities that are a cause for concern in Western societies as medical advances have improved to deal with the former. What hasn’t advanced so much is the very structure of democracy, and demography is now placing pressure on this political ideal.

According to a 2008 US report into global aging trends (available here), Japan is demographically the oldest state. Over twenty percent of all Japanese are currently aged 65 or over, and by 2030 this could rise to over thirty percent. Fertility rates have long since fallen to below replacement levels. But Japan will not be alone in this situation for long. By 2040, other countries will be experiencing huge relative growth in the older age categories: Singapore’s older population is set to triple, and that of Malaysia, Costa Rica and India more than double. In an effort to counterbalance this ‘greying’ of society, Singapore, for example, has created the “Baby Bonus” scheme, where parents receive a cash gift of up to $4,000 for their first and second child, and $6,000 for their third and fourth. But what does this have to do with democracy?

Japan, as already discussed, is an aging society. In aging societies, disproportionately greater demands on social services and pension schemes come from older people compared to the rest of the population. The way these services are funded, however, means that the younger generations’ financial contributions are continually increasing in order to support the elderly – something perceived as not being particularly fair, almost like a social Ponzi scheme. So, how could this be changed?

In democratic societies, political responsiveness is mediated through the ballot box. Policy support is measured by the proportion of votes each party receives – so if a situation really is unfair, then it would be hoped that this would motivate people enough to cast their vote in such a way as to right the balance. When it comes to aging societies however, it is being realized that this may not actually work. As well as constituting an ever-growing segment of society, older people also are more likely to vote. So in terms of sheer numbers, they are a formidable political force; it is obviously highly unlikely that this group would actively support policies trying to reduce their welfare. Herein lies the rub. [to be continued...]

—-
Image via flickr here, licensed under Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

If you have not read Mona Eltahawy’s article, “Why Do They Hate Us?” published in the new edition of Foreign Policy – go do it now.

Maybe the Aztec prophecy that the end of the world is nigh is encouraging people to speak up, maybe enough is simply enough; whatever the reason, this week sees another provocative piece on deep-rooted discrimination (see my post last week on the Holy See). As Ms Eltahawy writes, “there is no sugarcoating it.”

She quickly moves beyond the standard excusatory trope of ‘the Western world is no better – has the US had a female president??’ rolled out by those trying to somehow justify women’s treatment in the Arab world. Fear and acculturation keep propagating what is an inexcusable state of affairs: “Name me an Arab country, and I’ll recite a litany of abuses fueled by a toxic mix of culture and religion that few seem willing or able to disentangle lest they blaspheme or offend” she challenges.

She takes aim at the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, a country where women cannot drive and are subject to male control over every aspect of their lives to highlight that whatever little “reforms” King Abdullah kindly hands out are frankly ridiculous. They should not be celebrated – they should be seen for what they are: placative measures designed to stem real progress for women. Even women in Yemen can drive.

Have the revolutions of the Arab Spring helped loosen the noose? Ms Eltahawy looks at the developments in the latter part of her article – and as could be expected what she finds is not particularly inspiring. But you could argue there is a pinpoint of light at the end of the revolutionary tunnel shining through – the social and political space slowly allowing women to shout, protest, contest and organize in a much more public way than before.

And lest we forget…Israel is not mentioned by the author. It should be – ultra-Orthodox Jews are also being criticized for their very similar attitudes (articles here and here).

Change is scary. It’s terrifying. Men of the Middle East: Get used to it.

—-
Image (via Flickr) available here

image lifted from http://cdnnews.onepakistan.com

Pakistan and the United States of America may seem like polar opposites, but when you push aside the semantics, you’ll find the same people everywhere: insecure, intolerant, injudicious and irrational.

In Pakistan:

The Domestic Violence Bill was first proposed in the Senate in 2009 and has since been lying dormant and the subject of much disapproval and suspicion. Members of the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F) [extreme-right-winged religious party] have said that the Bill was unislamic for promoting “western-style freedoms”. At first glance, the fact that the JUI-F are opposing something named Domestic Violence Bill seems to be self-serving.  Take a deeper look and you’ll find that they’re not wrong in opposing the bill as it is currently drafted – however, their grounds for rejection are more than flawed. Beside the abysmal state of drafting (e.g. the definition of “sexual abuse” contains the phrase “any kind of sexual abuse”), I have the following problems with the Domestic Violence Bill  as it is posed today and I’ll leave you to make up your own opinion on the matter.

First, its application seemingly is only in Islamabad Capital Territory – acts committed outside the jurisdiction are non-actionable under this Bill. Section 7 states that an “aggrieved person” shall not be evicted from the household without consent “whether or not he or she has any right, title or beneficial interest in the same.” Household is not defined.

Where most people seem to have taken issue is the clause defining Domestic Violence, to include “Emotional, psychological and verbal abuse” which is further explained as “repeated exhibition of obsessive possessiveness or jealousy constituting serious invasion of the victim’s privacy, liberty, integrity and security”.

The Bill means well – it aims to cover all forms of domestic violence, whether they relate to a married couple or an adopted child or a member of the family with special needs (coming under the definition of a “vulnerable person”). However, the potential that the Bill be misused and abused – as it is framed right now – is vast. It appears that it has been drafted on emotion and not on prudent understanding of the real issues. Much like the disinterest that was seen in Parliament during the passing of the Women’s Protection Bill (which has somewhat done away with the hudood ordinance backlash that left women at the mercy of the interpreters of the rape laws) – when female members of parliament were against this bill only because it was said to be against the injunctions of Islam. Why didn’t they take the time to do their job and understand the issue or even understand the purported injunctions of Islam that were the backing of such legislation? Because they were unfazed by its repercussions.

Similarly, those who have drafted this Bill, although meaning well, have not done so in the most sensible fashion. Legislation proposing to give the weaker members of society a voice is bound to be criticized and delayed; just like in the Acid Control and Crimes Act took a year to pass and the Anti-Women Practices Act which took three; it’s a shame reckless drafting is only further hampering the process.

In America:

The Violence Against Women Act is up for reauthorization. Since is enactment in 1994, there’s been a reported 50% fall in spousal abuse cases. The reauthorization would continue the current grants program, expanding efforts to reach the Native American Indian tribes and further allow safeguards to lesbian, bisexual and transgendered victims alike. In the words of Senator Patrick Leahy, “a victim is a victim.”

Some Republicans (or the American version of the JUI-F, however you wish to see it) think the reauthorization would widen immigration avenues (immigrant victims may claim battery) and “dilutes the focus on domestic violence by expanding protections to new groups, like same-sex couples”.  The NY Times reported that “the conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly called the Violence Against Women Act a slush fund ‘used to fill feminist coffers’ and demanded that Republicans stand up against legislation that promotes ‘divorce, breakup of marriage and hatred of men.’”

Vice President Joe Biden is pushing this re-authorization. “Imagine now the message it sends if [the law is] not reauthorized. Just ask yourself, what message would be sent to every one of our daughters, every one imprisoned in her own home?”

Granted, the debate in the U.S. Senate is on how much funding is going to be afforded to this program and who all shall be entitled to claim benefit under it, which is a step ahead of where Pakistan’s Domestic Violence Bill rests. The National Task Force to end Domestic Violence Against Women said that the reauthorization had been filed as “motion to proceed” in the Senate and is likely to be debated on the Senate floor next week.

Coming together:

An argument in the Pakistani Senate was that if the Domestic Violence Bill were passed, a spouse couldn’t question the other as to where they had been even if they come home at four in the morning, drunk. To this, Mr. Abbas Nasir, writer for a leading Pakistani newspaper said, “If his contention hadn’t been so sad, it would have been laughable. Doesn’t he know that if your spouse (man or woman) arrives home at four in the morning and you haven’t the foggiest where they have been and why, your relationship may well be over anyway and is best terminated?”

The president of Concerned Women for America, Penny Nance, wrote members of the U.S. Congress to oppose the Violence Against Women Act. “It pits husbands against wives,” said Janice Crouse, spokeswoman for the group. She said elements of the law were triggered by “very flimsy” claims of abuse. “A woman can, with the barest evidence and no evidence at all, claim abuse and get him out of the house.”

Moral of the story:

We’re all the same, save our preference for fashion.

Staircase at the Vatican, courtesy rbhamjee/flickr

When it comes to the Vatican, all eyes recently have been on Pope Benedict XVI’s tour to Mexico and Cuba, and the adulation that followed. In his Easter vigil mass he noted that “Today we can illuminate our cities so brightly that the stars of the sky are no longer visible…With regard to material things, our knowledge and our technical accomplishments are legion, but what reaches beyond, the things of God and the question of good, we can no longer identify.” Some would task that the Vatican itself has also lost sight of good.

In this regard, what has not made such a splash in the news is the Vatican’s sad record when it comes to gender apartheid — though an article by HdG, Amb. Maria St Catherine De Grâce Sharpe will certainly give you a taste. Ambassador Sharpe’s article really caught my eye as it covers a situation that seems on the one hand, blatantly obvious – does anyone really expect the Catholic Church to practice gender equality? – while also being shocking and leading me to think, “let me check my calendar…oh yes, we are in the 21st century…”

She takes aim at the Catholic Church’s hypocrisy in espousing anti-discriminatory rhetoric while simultaneously denying women the possibility of becoming paid, diplomatic-rank professional Holy See representatives. Ambassador Sharpe notes that the “Holy See is a sovereign moral authority at the UN promoting itself as a “friend of humanity” but does not see fit to allow women the right to represent the Vatican in a professional capacity. Her use of the term ‘apartheid’ may seem inflammatory and intended to provoke – this may indeed be the case.

It could also be argued that such an approach is necessary to draw attention to this issue and get it the same level of coverage as Saudi princess’ Basma Bint Saud Bin Abdulaziz’s piece last week for the BBC garnered.

In her article, Ambassador Sharpe also makes some quite radical proposals which she believes are necessary for the current situation to improve; by radical I mean declaring that the Holy See should have its membership of the UN as a Permanent Observer revoked. This would be a drastic step and one without precedent (I believe) but then again, actions speak louder than words.

The original article is available here.
The original image is available here.

progress, courtesy dingatx/flickr

The month of March is one of ups and downs – we should beware the Ides but then cut loose on St Patrick’s Day; remember victims of slavery and detained/missing UN staff members – and also celebrate women, women’s achievements and progress.

Women Deliver, an NGO working globally to generate political commitment and financial investment for fulfilling Millennium Development Goal #5 (to reduce maternal mortality and achieve universal access to reproductive health), released their “Women Deliver 50″ earlier this month. It’s a list of the 50 most inspiring ideas and solutions that are impacting the health, education and rights of girls and women – and demonstrates that powerful ideas have the potential to revolutionize the world.

It is great that these projects are being presented to a wider audience – please take a minute to go have a look at the list of nominees and winners.

A couple that stood out for me were “Schools for Husbands”, “Solar Sister” and “AfriPads”.

Schools for Husbands is an initiative aiming to improve reproductive health in Niger, where a woman dies every 2 hours in giving birth. Men are very much in control in Niger, so if something is to change, husbands, fathers and sons need to be targeted. The Schools are showing signs of success in altering attitudes toward maternity wards, and improving maternal health – an important step in development.

Based in Eastern Africa, Solar Sister (in their own words) “combine the breakthrough potential of solar technology with a deliberately woman-centered direct sales network to bring light, hope and opportunity to even the most remote communities in rural Africa.” Investors provide female entrepreneurs with a ‘business in a bag’ which allows enterprising women to spread solar technology throughout their communities and networks, replacing kerosene lamps, while earning commission to enable them to support their families.

The third project I want to mention caught my eye because I must admit, it deals with something which – living in Europe – I wouldn’t even think about. AfriPads is a response to the thousands of lost education-hours in Uganda due to menstruation: many girls in rural areas cannot afford mainstream sanitary products so cut school at that time of the month. AFRIpads are low-cost, reusable cloth sanitary pads which generate an income for the local Ugandan women who manufacture them, as well as helping schoolgirls keep on track.

There are many more incredible projects – go have a look and if one project grabs you, find out how you can help!

—
Flickr image available here.

Last year, a girl named Amina El-Filali was raped in her town of Larache, Morocco, where her parents filed a criminal complaint. The case was taken to court where, in accordance with Article 475 of the Penal Code the judge ordered the rapist to marry his victim, thereby absolving him of his crime. Since Amina was a minor, the court was required to obtain the consent of her parents before authorizing this marriage; Amina’s father now says he was pressured into agreeing to the marriage. Under the Family Code, once a decision is passed by the judge, it cannot be reversed.

Amina committed suicide last week. She was 16.

A bill was first introduced into the Moroccan legislature in 2008 to amend this law, but has been shelved since. Legislation, much like rape, is a power game. Since those who have the authority and power to change this law are unaffected by it, they do not pursue it with urgency. Requiring a woman to marry her rapist is telling her that her being is restricted to the honor (or dishonor) it brings to the family. No longer a virgin, she would only bring shame, so transfer her legal status to the man that started this mess to begin with – she’s his problem now. A hand-me-down.

It is this chauvinistic mentality that led to the creation of a law in Pakistan that required a woman to produce four witnesses before she could accuse someone of rape. This was the law of the land for some 27 years before it was amended in 2006. There were numerous movements in Pakistan throughout the years to change those laws, but they were always debated out of Parliament and vetoed by female parliamentarians just as much as men. Why? These women were from affluent families that remained sheltered from such crimes and they were told by clerics that changing this law (that was introduced in the garb of a religious mandate) would be against Islam – and these women blindly agreed.

Various countries have a law similar to Morocco, where the rapist gets away by marrying his victim. The fact that most of these countries are predominantly Muslim is often cited to be the reason for such codification; it is becoming a fad to blame all ill on Islam. I find no such injunctions in the Qur’an, and even though rape is not specifically mentioned, the Bible does address sex outside of the marriage contract:

“And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife. If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins.” (Exodus 22:16-17 – similarly, see Deuteronomy 22:25-30)

Whether based on religion or not, there is no argument for forcing a girl to marry her offender (or forcibly marrying anyone, for that matter – but that’s another debate all together) for shame of “losing her honor” for no fault of her own.

It wasn’t until 1991 that the English courts recognized marital rape as a crime; before such time, consent to sex was implied in a marriage. The House of Lords unanimously threw out this principle, calling it a “common law fiction” which was “absurd”. Many countries now recognize marital rape as a punishable criminal offense; many still, do not.

Moroccan women have taken to the streets to push the bill from 2008 into law. Let’s hope it doesn’t take the life of another Amina before we can discard these incongruous laws world over; because in the words of the House of Lords, they really have “no useful purpose to serve”.

Swaziland (CIA World Factbook)

Last year, I traveled to Swaziland, a country roughly the size of New Jersey surrounded by South Africa and Mozambique. Swaziland has about 1 million people, and has the unfortunate distinction of having the world’s highest rate of HIV/AIDS, 25.9%, and therefore a life expectancy of 48 years of age. I met an amazing cross section of young leaders, women leaders and civil society leaders, and spoke with them about best practices in communication and advocacy. They were energetic, engaged and involved in making Swaziland a better place.

And so, I was very interested to read about a campaign launched by Crossroads International this International Women’s Day, March 8 to benefit girls’ empowerment clubs in Swaziland. Crossroads is a Canadian non-governmental organization with more than 50 years of experience working in Swaziland. The group is asking Canadians to contribute enough money to fund 200 new spaces in these girls’ empowerment clubs, to help prevent abuse and the spread of HIV by building girls’ self-confidence, educating them about their rights and showing them where to turn for help. The campaign has already attracted some high profile supporters, namely Lawrence Hill, award-winning Toronto-based author of The Book of Negroes, and his wife Miranda Hill.

These girls’ empowerment clubs were launched with the support of Crossroads International, and the clubs are run by women teachers who volunteer their time to help girls acquire leadership skills and recognize and stop abuse. I am hopeful that some of the young women and girls I met in Swaziland can take advantage of these types of clubs and gain valuable self-confidence and skills.

CEDAW – trashed? courtesy mejillahyde/flickr

The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women – shortened to CEDAW – celebrates its 31st birthday in September 2012 (counting from when it entered into force). If you happen to be in New York City before March 2012, you have the opportunity to experience ‘international law as art’ at Croatian artist Sanja Ivekovic’s exhibition, “Sweet Violence“, at MoMA.

Where does CEDAW fit in? For the exhibition, Iveković has produced Report on CEDAW U.S.A., an installation based on a communiqué drawn from Amnesty International’s literature on CEDAW. As of May 2011 the United States is still among the minority of countries, including Iran and Sudan, that have not yet ratified CEDAW. Women’s rights are discarded on the floor ‘like trash’, until visitors pick them up and read them – and then perhaps discard them again. The MoMA website describes the installation as “Iveković pressur[ing] us to respond and take responsibility for society’s progress, or lack thereof, in eradicating persistent forms of gender violence.”

Situations of crisis often lead to an increase in sexual and gender-based violence, and unsurprisingly, it is women who bear the brunt. New York University’s Robert F Wagner Graduate School of Public Service have a podcast examining the phenomenon. Part of their ‘Conflict, Security and Development’ series, the speakers assess whether there is a connection between such violence and access to food and water in crisis situations – shifting perspectives from raising awareness (hopefully this has been achieved) to helping examine root causes so we can move toward prevention.

On a more lighthearted note, artist Jocelyn Grivaud has taken what some consider to be a symbol of impossible (Western) feminine beauty – Barbie – and created imitations of famous classic paintings; Barbie as “The Girl with the Pearl Earring“, or the “Venus de Milo“.

Members of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces

Things have gone from bad to worse for Egyptian civil society since I last blogged about the bleak short term outlook for the sector back in October. This week, the government shut down the Cairo offices of seventeen international human rights and pro-democracy NGOs, which the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces has accused of fomenting the country’s recent unrest. According to the official MENA news agency, “The public prosecutor has searched 17 civil society organisations, local and foreign, as part of the foreign funding case. The search is based on evidence showing violation of Egyptian laws, including not having permits.” As was the case under Mubarak, government regulations concerning NGOs are vague and convoluted enough that it is always easy to find a pretext for the prosecution of any organization.

International condemnation has been swift and emphatic. After the Konrad Adenauer Foundation was shut down, Germany summoned the Egyptian ambassador in protest, while UN high commissioner for human rights spokeswoman Ravina Shamdasani described the shutdown as “unnecessarily heavy-handed”, and “clearly designed to intimidate human rights defenders who have long been critical of human rights violations in Egypt, including under the previous regime.” U.S. officials have publicly and privately voiced similar complaints. “Suffice it to say we don’t think that this action is justified,” said State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland. “We want to see the harassment end,” she added, calling the raids “inconsistent with the bilateral cooperation we’ve had over many years.” Another senior administration official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that in private channels, the United States had sent an even stronger message: “This crosses a line.”

The SCAF has accused foreign NGOs of attempting to provoke a “conflict between the military and the Egyptian people”, but the Egyptian military is clearly less worried about outside interference when it accepts $1.3 billion in annual military aid from the United States. In reality, the SCAF sees the emergence of a strong civil society as the greatest threat to its control over Egypt, and the foreign interference argument is merely a convenient pretext for shutting down a number of “pesky” organizations.

It is still unclear whether or not the strong internal and external condemnation — particularly from the U.S. — will influence Egyptian policy, but the revolutionary slogan, “the people and the army are one hand” has been shattered for even the most optimistic veterans of Tahrir Square. Any illusions that the SCAF would impartially usher in a new, free, and democratic Egypt have been thoroughly dispelled. Inclusion is not part of the SCAF’s modus operandi, perhaps most evidently demonstrated by its repeated attempts to marginalize women in the Egyptian political scene — including through the use of vile tactics of intimidation and humiliation like the so-called “virginity tests”.

In the US and throughout the West, the pressing question about Egypt has long been, “what will the ascent of the Muslim Brotherhood and other more extreme Salafi groups mean for the future of Egyptian politics?” But perhaps the better question is, “will the military actually cede power and allow a democratically elected civilian government to rule in any meaningful sense, regardless of its composition?”

The WIIS Switzerland Board plus speakers at the 2011 launch event

The field of foreign policy has been described as a ‘city of men’- but as can be imagined, it is not the only discipline where a gender imbalance has been noticed. I asked Patricia Moser, President and one of the founders of WIIS Switzerland, about the situation with respect to international security and security studies.

1. A few months back, there was an article on foreignpolicy.com which called the foreign policy sphere, ” A City of Men“. I’m going to hazard that the field of international security is similarly populated?

The reality described in the article is also true for the field of international security. Women who made it to the top leadership positions in organizations in the security policy field – be it in  government, academia or the private sector – are still regarded and celebrated as exceptions. If we look at Swiss-based organizations working in the security policy sector and the Swiss government for example, women are in the minority on management boards or in leadership positions. The Federal Council is a rare exception as women are currently in the majority – leading to the Council often being cited as an example of equal representation. However, one exception should not be confused with balanced representation more broadly: women are still a minority in parliament.   

2. You are President and one of the founders of Women in International Security (WIIS) Switzerland – what prompted you to take action?

The idea of founding a branch of WIIS in Switzerland is actually a few years old. It came up after one of my WIIS colleagues met a representative of WIIS Germany at a conference. The motivation to found WIIS Switzerland this year is mainly based on personal experience gained from years working in a security policy environment. The field is male-dominated, not only when it comes to those with influential voices but also in a day-to-day work environment. Only a few outstanding women have been able to establish themselves in Switzerland – Barbara Haering, Micheline Calmy-Rey or Heidi Tagliavini for example.

There are, however,  many other capable and enthusiastic women outside of this prominent circle. So last year we joined forces with interested colleagues from Geneva in order to build up a Swiss affiliate of WIIS with the express aim of connecting and promoting women (and men supporting our cause) in the field. A network holds immense power and can help effect change. We aim to attract and also promote younger experts in the field, allowing them to break into the established circle and improve the environment. Being a female expert in the security field should not be viewed as a rarity anymore.

3. Is the underrepresentation of women in Switzerland tied up with ignorance do you think (on both sides), or does it go deeper than that? (and why?)

In this respect, my arguments are very much in line with the reasons explaining the gender gap outlined in the article City of Men. We at WIIS Switzerland strongly believe that underrepresentation cannot and should not be blamed on either men or women. And it definitively goes deeper than ignorance. The situation could be characterized as a combination of, in order of priority: a close-knit network of well-established men; a still-traditional allocation of roles in Swiss families and, potentially, a certain reluctance on the part of women to immerse themselves in the field of security studies. The work of WIIS Switzerland (and the WIIS network more generally) hopes to alter this (im)balance, encouraging and supporting women in their chosen career path.  

4. Are women congregating in specific areas of (international) security policy and practice?

This is very difficult to determine, as this has not been reliably assessed as of yet. My initial reaction would be to suggest that women tend to predominantly work in the ‘softer‘ areas of security policy like development or human rights. This suspicion is based on the belief that the social and cultural system is steering women to the more  “female” areas of security. It could, however, very well be that the talented women tend to go unnoticed in more male-dominated fields like homeland security, as Heather Hulbert argues in her reply to ‘City of Men’. I am convinced that if we took a closer and unbiased look at women working in the security field, we would reach surprising conclusions.

6. WIIS Switzerland is one branch of the transnational WIIS network; can these informal setting really hope to effect change in the field?

Certainly. I honestly think that it is a necessity for initiating change in the field of security – and policy and academia can only gain by also including women’s’ voices. As mentioned, networks can hold a lot of power and bring lasting changes. WIIS Germany is currently working on connecting the international affiliates more closely; new affiliates are continually being founded in various countries (Israel, Sweden). While the work of each affiliate is country-specific due to cultural and political reasons, the international network helps transfer knowledge and lessons learned. It is then the task of the national WIIS organization to adapt them to local circumstances. The transnational nature of the global organization combined with the freedom given to national affiliates is of key importance to its success.

7. In one to two sentences, how would you like the field of international security to change in the next ten years?

I personally would hope for the field to shift towards a balanced representation of men and women in leadership positions, at conferences, as voices in the media etc. On the other hand, I would also wish for the field to become more interdisciplinary and interconnected so that findings and recommendations from related social sciences – as well as less related but still relevant areas such as neuroscience – are acknowledged and used to improve policy and academic work.

8. Do you have any advice to women hoping to “break into” international security?

If we had a handbook providing a step-by-step guide, an organization like WIIS would not be needed. My advice would be to be open-minded, learn from one’s own experience as well as from colleagues and superiors, and grow based on these lessons and from knowledge gained. Of equal importance is not being afraid of taking risks, being open to taking on responsibilities, and believing in one’s own capabilities. Being a young manager myself, one key lesson I learned a few years ago is to be always true to myself and remain focused on my goals, which is especially difficult for a woman in a male-dominated field. Finally, to ‘break into’ international security, as you term it, people have to become engaged and take action. A first step towards establishing oneself is connecting with like-minded people in organizations such as WIIS.

So, instead of spending Thanksgiving weekend watching the Macy’s Parade, eating turkey and shopping (my usual Thanksgiving activities), I was in Amsterdam and London for meetings on fighting human trafficking. Human trafficking, or modern day slavery, is an enormous global criminal and human rights problem. It’s worth setting out the basics. “Human trafficking” is an umbrella term for the issues of forced labor, sex trafficking, bonded labor, debt bondage among migrant laborers, involuntary domestic servitude, forced child labor, child soldiers, and child sex trafficking. Human trafficking can happen anywhere, including the US. Estimates of how many people are trafficked each year vary from 2.4 million to 25 million, and it’s a business worth more than $50 billion a year. For more, see:

http://tinyurl.com/d266fy5

Now over 15 years later, and as the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton again made a compelling case for women’s rights. This time she was speaking at the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Women and the Economy Summit in San Francisco, and this time she was addressing the importance of women to global growth and innovation. To read more, go to

http://tinyurl.com/63zz644

Afghan Taliban Fighters, photo courtesy of isafmedia/flickr

This past fortnight seems to have been full of surprises – Australia, for example, introduced a third gender category for passports, beyond the tradition male/female dichotomy. And fittingly, there have also been two stories in the media that demonstrate that subversion of this “either/or” set-up isn’t limited to the West: women in Afghanistan and Libya are also pushing against the boundaries created to constrain them.

Former mujahedin Abedo is the 70-year-old leader of a militia in Helmand, Afghanistan. She has nine children and protects her district again the Taliban. Held in high esteem due to her experience and skill, she presents a stark contrast to the typical image of an Afghan woman, shrouded head-to-foot in a burqa. Speaking like a veteran, Abedo notes that, “Modern-day youngsters in the police and army don’t have experience, and it’s easy for them to get killed in combat because they don’t know how to fight.”

In Libya, it is these boundaries and set expectations that enabled a woman – codenamed ‘Nomidia’ – to play a key role in helping NATO support the Libyan rebel forces in their fight against the Qaddafi regime. She passed on vital information on weapons depots and bases in Tripoli even though this meant the regime would hunt her and her family down. She understandably still does not want to reveal her identity. As Nomidia tole Reuters, she felt less conspicuous “…it was almost impossible [for Qaddafi loyalists] to think that a girl was doing all of this.”

First up, Caitlin Boyce is heavily critical of the process surrounding rape trials in her article on the recently dismissed Dominique Strauss-Khan case. As she notes, the person bringing the rape charge is very often subject to character assassination – but as she then highlights, “When a robbery is reported, one can’t imagine the police waiting to investigate until they have established whether your past boyfriends have ever been in trouble with the law, or whether you’ve ever lied on an insurance application form.”

Next up is a BBC article that looks into the claim, “I’m not fat, I’m pregnant!” It may seem to be at the ‘fluffy’ end of the news spectrum, but also serves to highlight the huge disparity in maternal health care; while women in the UK are told not to be so greedy, expectant mothers in South Africa are simply aiming to survive.

With Gaddafi in the headlines as the rebels take Tripoli, it is very easy to caricature and lampoon the man with the traveling tent. In an audio interview, Jane Kinninmont of Chatham House, and Nabila Ramdani, a freelance journalist, discuss the (future) role of women in Libya – pointing out that while Libya has the highest female literacy rate in North Africa, respect is still lacking.

As the US Presidential Race gathers momentum, focus is on Romney, Newt, Obama and Huntsman – what about the whirlwind of the last election, Sarah Palin? She has reporters devoted to her every move but has not yet declared herself… will she? Should she? The members of the ‘Palin Industrial Complex‘ care a lot. Should you?

…and finally, just for the title: “Turkmenistan: Famous Melons Named for President.” Available here.