No one said that
Staffan de Mistura’s job is easy. As UN Special Envoy, de Mistura has been tasked with seeking a peaceful resolution to the war in
Syria. But
all of his hard work to restart the negotiations will be for nothing if he
doesn’t include women.
Syrian women peace advocates, UN Women press conference, Geneva, January 2014. Photo: UN Women.
The process to
this point has been plagued by breakdowns and delays. The most recent postponement
earlier this week resulted from a last minute maneuver by Russia and Iran, supporters of the Syrian government, alleging that
some opposition representatives are members of terrorist organizations. Opposition groups responded by demanding their
own concessions prior
to negotiations.
The dispute over
which opposition members should be allowed in the negotiations has nothing to
do with finding a genuine peace settlement, nor is it about safeguarding the
ban on participation by terrorist groups. For
Russia it serves as a useful stall tactic and leverage for its own opposition
picks – including the PYD Kurdish militia members – which Turkey has, in turn, labeled as terrorists. For Western allies, it’s about expediting a regime change in Syria.
Last month, the UN Security Council rushed to pass a
unanimous resolution setting out a peace process that
includes a series of international talks. Beyond humanitarian aid and a ceasefire,
the resolution also commits to a political
transition process that includes removing Assad from power. At
the vote, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon called on all parties invested in the peace process to ensure
the participation of women in the intra-Syrian talks. Several states echoed his
sentiment.
Moving from
ceremonious speeches to concrete action isn’t easy. De Mistura’s team has been public in its efforts to
include women in the talks. But their participation has been conflated with that of the
opposition and relegated to vague promises that women will most likely be
included on the government side as well.
What’s missing?
From
the beginning, Syrian women peace advocates have made clear their intent to be
included as a civil society
third party to the negotiations. This is a distinct
departure from the prevailing assumption among heads of states, that the role
of local women’s groups in conflict is limited to that of caretaker for those
left vulnerable. Some have gone as far to dismiss women as too
“emotional.” Such speculators fail to recognize
the critical work of these same women’s rights groups in community-level peace
building. Consequently, and very often at critical policy moments, women’s
voices representing civil society’s concerns in conflict resolution are
assigned a “second-tier” status, based on the notion that other “hard” security
issues are a “prerequisite” for human rights and must take precedence. This
leads to the conclusion that, if there is to be women’s participation at all,
it should come from female members of warring parties. For Syria, it has led to
the presumption that women peace advocates are necessarily part of a
particular, definable opposition.
Strategies for change: Iraqi and Syrian women's rights activists. WILPF. All rights reserved
While
many Syrian women's rights activists do oppose the Assad regime, and were critical
actors in the initial peaceful uprising against his government, the Syrian “opposition”
has come to mean different things to different geo-political actors. Lumping
women into the opposition does not do justice to the difficult peacebuilding
and gender rights work they have been conducting throughout the conflict and
across battle lines.
Unfortunately,
de Mistura’s success isn’t being measured by his realization of a sustainable
peace agreement to the Syrian conflict; it rests on whether he can bring two warring
parties to the table. With the renewed negotiations, his team now says members
of the Syrian
Women’s Initiative for Peace and Development, a group of
Syrian women’s organizations representing a broad range of women’s civil
society voices for the negotiations, can participate as civil society “consultants”
who may advise the Special Envoy. However, participation as an independent
third party actor is simply not possible.
If
the goal were sustainable peace, the conveners of these negotiations would look
to expand the participation of civil society, not sideline it.
Syrian peace advocates with UN Women Executive
Director, Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, and
UN-Arab League Joint Special Representative for Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi. Geneva, 2014. Photo: UN Women
Syrian
women's organizations have been working on local peace measures and advocating
for inclusion in the peace process since the 2012 Geneva Communiqué,
which first called for a transitional government. By
2013, with the help of international organizations such as the Women’s International
League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF), later joined by MADRE and CUNY Law School they started meeting with each other across battle and sectarian lines to formulate their demands. Last year,
they started working with Iraqi and other women affected by ISIS to develop joint strategies for change.
Sustainable
peace requires inclusivity. Research
shows peace negotiations that meaningfully involve civil society greatly reduce
the risk of failed peace agreements. Women raise critical issues in peace
processes that affect all of civil society. They contribute practical
solutions, from law reform and implementation to rebuilding a more just and
sustainable society. But this has only been the case when civil society
negotiators have been given meaningful opportunities to engage and bring their
issues to the agenda. To ensure the space for these contributions, those
organizing peace talks must refrain from merely ticking the gender representation
box and move instead towards real inclusion of women and larger civil society.
Despite
the recognized importance of including women in peace talks, they are rarely
included in either formal or informal peace processes. They are underrepresented,
whether as civil society participants or as representatives of warring factions.
An assessment conducted by UN Women of 31
major peace processes demonstrated that women represent a
strikingly low number of participants—only 4% of signatories to the peace
agreements and 2.4% have been appointed chief or lead
mediators.
So
how can we achieve meaningful representation that takes into consideration the
peace work already in motion on the local level? We
know the consequences of failing to do this. The cantons set up for Bosnia resulted from viewing stakeholders at the peace
negotiation solely through the lens of religious or ethnic identity. That
proved to be fatal, resulting in a peace agreement that institutionalized a permanent
state of ethnic division in an impossible constitution. They failed to include local women peace activists
or other representatives of civil society. Only warlords
were invited. Now warlords
have been invited to the Syria
talks.
A Syrian woman stands in the rubble of her house in al-Qsair. Freedom House/Flickr. Some rights reserved
We
need a peace process rooted in a gender perspective that honors the efforts of local
Syrian activists who are crossing sectarian lines and working towards
real, achievable peace. Expanding civil society representation
to include those working on the ground would preserve and build on the nuanced
work these activists have carried out for the last four years. It would protect
local agreements from the dangers of outside interests and more faithfully
represent a ground-up approach, which nurtures sustainability. It also gets to
the heart of Security Council Resolution 1325 and its predecessors, which
require women's involvement in peace processes. This is the proposal of the
Syrian Women’s Initiative – the very same representatives of women’s civil
society organized under the auspices of UN Women.
De Mistura has his work cut out for
him. Last month, Russia’s targeted airstrikes on Syria – which constituted its
biggest intervention in the Middle East in decades – killed Zahran
Alloush,
lead rebel commander and a peace
negotiator for the opposition. The Kurdish
PYD, the political wing of their armed militia, has formed a front that
controls about 15% of the country. While excluded from the invitation
list for this first round of “proximity” discussions, they continue to demand a
seat in the negotiations table.
What must not be
lost in the geopolitical wrangling is that the most viable solutions lie within
Syrian civil society, and in particular amongst the organised base of Syrian
women’s groups. Given the current armed violence and political instability in
Syria, it’s critical to strengthen the voices of Syrian women in advocacy to
lay the foundation for building community resilience and ending impunity for
human rights violations. It is precisely this approach that will help weave
solutions out of uncertainty and build more equitable foundations for peace in
the long term.