On the 31 October 2000 UNSC Resolution 1325 was adopted. The resolution provided for a range of measures aimed at the inclusion of women in the prevention, management and resolution of conflict. In particular, several of the resolution's provisions addressed the role of women and gender in peace negotiations and agreements. This article examines whether and how Resolution 1325 has impacted on the drafting of peace agreements. We analyse explicit references to women and gender in peace agreements from 1990 to 2010, providing a quantitative and qualitative assessment of the extent to which women and gender are addressed. We conclude by using our findings and analysis to address the relationship of feminist intervention to international law, and debates around the strategies and trade-offs which underlie feminist promotion and use of UN Security Council Resolutions in particular.
1 For description of the rise in peace agreements, the reasons linking it to the end of the Cold War, and the scale of the phenomenon, see C Bell, On the Law of Peace: Peace Agreements and the Lex Pacificatoria (OUP, Oxford, 2008).
2 N Reilly, Women's Human Rights: seeing Gender Justice in a Globalising Age (Polity, Oxford, 2008); see also, A Boyle and C Chinkin, The Making of International Law (OUP, Oxford, 2007) ch 2.
3 The limitations of this approach, namely, that even where gender goes unmentioned it is relevant, are acknowledged and discussed in II A and VII D below. A fuller explanation of our coding of ‘women’ and ‘gender’ for the purposes of the quantitative study is set out in Section III.
4 See International Peace Institute forthcoming project on ‘Understanding Compliance with UN Security Council Resolutions Addressing Civil Wars’, information available at www.ipinst.org/programs/coping-with-crisis/details/11/28.html.
5 Paras 9, 10, 11 and 12, SC Res 1325.
6 Paras 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 13, SC Res 1325.
7 Resolution 1325 is a ‘thematic’ resolution best understood as a Chapter VI UN Charter (non-binding) resolution. Its legal authority has been accentuated by the fact that it was passed unanimously, and that the resolution uses the language of obligation. On the status and nature of Resolution 1325, see S Anderlini, Women Building Peace: What they do, Why it Matters (Lynne Reinner, Boulder, Colorado, London, 2004) 196–199; Otto, D, ‘A Sign of “Weakness”? Disrupting Gender Certainties in the Implementation of Security Council Resolution 1325’ (2006) 13 Michigan Journal of Gender and Law 113 ; Tryggestad, TL, ‘The UN and Implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security’ (2009) 15 Global Governance 539. On the background of Resolution 1325 see generally Peace Women website <peacewomen.org/themes_theme.php?id=15&subtheme=true>and UNIFEM Women War and Peace Portal at <womenwarpeace.org/1325_toolbox>.
8 Para 17, SC Res 1325. For reports see tracking at <www.womenwarpeace.org/1325_toolbox#tracking>.
9 See references above (n 7).
10 Para 12 urges ‘the Secretary-General and his Special Envoys to invite women to participate in discussions pertinent to the prevention and resolution of conflict, the maintenance of peace and security, and post-conflict peacebuilding, and encourages all parties to such talks to facilitate the equal and full participation of women at decision-making levels’.
11 Para 17 urges that ‘the issues of sexual violence be included in all United Nations-sponsored peace negotiation agendas’, and also that ‘the inclusion of sexual violence issues from the outset of peace processes in such situations, in particular in the areas of pre-ceasefires, humanitarian access and human rights agreements, ceasefires and ceasefire monitoring, DDR [demobilization, demilitarization and reintegration] and SSR [security sector reform] arrangements, vetting of armed security forces, justice, reparations, and recovery/development.’
12 SC Res 1889 recognizes in its preamble the underrepresentation of women ‘at all stages of peace processes’, and in particular at the level of mediators. The preamble also notes the particular exclusion from peace processes of refugees and internally displaced persons, both being groups where women tend to be over-represented. Para 1 calls on Member States, international and regional organizations to improve the participation of women in peace processes, and para 4 calls on the Secretary-General to develop a strategy to increase the number of UN mediators who are women.
13 See United Nations Secretary-General, Women, Peace and Security, UN Doc. S/2004/814 (2004); United Nations Secretary-General, Women, Peace and Security, UN Doc. S/2008/622 (2008).
14 See, for example, Gender Action for Peace and Security, Global Monitoring Checklist on Women, Peace and Security (Gender Action for Peace and Security, London 2009); see further United Nations Secretary-General, Women, Peace and Security, UN Doc/ S/2010/173 (2010).
15 See, for example, Charlesworth, H and Woods, M, ‘“Mainstreaming Gender” in International Peace and Security: The Case of East Timor’ (2001) 26 Yale Journal of International Law 313 ; L Olsson and J Tejpar (eds), Operational Effectiveness and UN Resolution 1325—Practices and Lessons from Afghanistan (Stockholm, FOI, Swedish Defence Research Agency, 2009). More work is in train. In 2007, International Alert launched a three year project entitled Supporting women's peacebuilding priorities: Implementing UN SCR 1325, the research component of which will be case studies, see <www.international-alert.org/gender/index.php?t=2>.
16 See in particular, Otto (n 7); Otto, D, ‘The Exile of Inclusion: Reflections on Gender Issues in International Law Over the Last Decade’ (2009) 10 Melbourne Journal of International Law 11 ; Scully, P, ‘Vulnerable Women: A Critical Reflection on Human Rights Discourse and Sexual Violence’ (2009) 23 Emory International Law Review 113 ; Cohn, C et al. , ‘Women, Peace and Security: Resolution 1325’ (2004) 6 International Feminist Journal of Politics 130. cf the nuanced defence of Resolution 1325 in Tryggestad (n 7).
17 For reasons for the post Cold War rise in peace agreements, see Bell (n 1) ch 2.
18 See figures in text at III.A. below (there are peace agreements in 97 jurisdictions or interstate disputes, with the current number of states standing at around 192 (the number of UN members), depending on how states are classified).
19 Bell (n 1) 55–56 (for classification of peace agreements in these terms).
20 J Arnault, ‘Good Agreement? Bad Agreement? An Implementation Perspective’, Princeton, Center of International Studies, Princeton University, no date, www.stanford.edu/class/psych165/Arnault.doc [accessed 20 September 2010].
21 As Chinkin writes, ‘The legitimacy of the implementing action derives from the peace agreement, which tends to acquire a weight and authority of its own. If a particular policy is not within the mandate specified by the agreement it may be hard to convince those implementing the agreement to address the issue.’ C Chinkin ‘Peace Agreements as a Means for Promoting Gender Equality and Ensuring the Participation of Women’ United Nations Division for the Advancement of Women, EGM/PEACE/2003/BP.1, 31 October 2003 at 12. For recommendations regarding gender and peace agreements see further United Nations Division for the Advancement of Women, ‘Peace Agreements as means for Promoting Gender Equality and Ensuring Participation of Women–A Framework of Model Provisions’ Report of the Expert Group Meeting Ottawa, Canada 10–13 November 2003, 10 December 2003, New York, United Nations. UN Doc EGM/PEACE/2003/Report.
22 See further, Bell, C, ‘Peace Agreements: Their Nature and Legal Status’ 100 American Journal of international Law 391–394.
23 See M Loughlin, Sword and Scales (Hart Publishing, Oxford, 1999).
24 A Dobrowolsky, ‘Shifting States: Women's Constitutional Organizing Across Time and Space’ in LA Banaszak, K Beckwith, and D Rucht (eds), Women's Movements Facing the Reconfigured State (CUP, New York, 2005) 114–140. See also A Dobrowolsky and V Hart, Women Making Constitutions: New Politics and Comparative Perspectives (Palgrave McMillan, Houndsmill, Basingstoke & NY, 2003).
25 Dobrowolsky ibid, 114 (referring to constitutions).
26 See H Martin, Kings of Peace, Pawns of War: the Untold Story of Peace-making (Continuum, London and New York, 2006), xi, noting that 99 per cent of those who negotiate in peace processes are male; A Potter ‘We the Women: Why Conflict Mediation is Not Just A Job for Men’ (Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, Geneva, 2005); see also, UNIFEM Briefing Note, ‘Women's Participation in Peace Negotiations: Connections between Presence and Influence’ (April 2009) noting that out of 21 major peace processes since 1992, only 2.4 per cent of signatories were women, no women had been appointed Chief or Lead peace mediators in UN-Sponsored peace talks, and that women's participation in negotiating delegations averaged 5.9 per cent of the 10 cases for which such information was available, <www.realizingrights.org/pdf/UNIFEM_handout_Women_in_peace_processes_Brief_April_20_2009.pdf>.
27 For the pilot of the database see <www.peaceagreements.ulster.ac.uk/>. The dataset on peace agreement references on women and the UN is held in full at www.transitionaljustice.ulster.ac.uk/tji_database.html.
28 See Bell, C and O'Rourke, , ‘The People's Peace? Peace Agreements, Civil Society, and Participatory Democracy’ (2007) 28 International Political Science Review 293 (reviewing peace agreement references to civil society).
29 The two main websites are the UN Peacemaker website, which defines a peace agreement as ‘Peace agreements are contracts intended to end or significantly transform a violent conflict so that it may be addressed more constructively’ <peacemaker.unlb.org/index1.php>; and the USIP peace agreement digital library which defines a peace agreement as ‘the full text of agreements signed by the major contending parties ending inter- and intra-state conflicts worldwide since 1989’, <www.usip.org/resources-tools/digital-collections>. A third definition is found in the Uppsala conflict database which states that ‘A peace agreement should address the problem of the incompatibility, either by settling all or part of it, or by clearly outlining a process for how the warring parties plan to regulate the incompatibility’, <www.pcr.uu.se/research/UCDP/data_and_publications/definitions_all.htm#dyad>.
30 The definition of battle-related deaths used is taken from the Uppsala Conflict Data Program as: conflict behaviour between warring parties in the conflict dyad, which is directly related to the incompatibility, ie carried out with the purpose of realizing the goal of the incompatibility and result in deaths, see <www.pcr.uu.se/research/UCDP/data_and_publications/definitions_all.htm>.
31 For an overview of civil war datasets and their categorization of ‘civil war’ see K Eck, ‘A Beginner's Guide to Conflict Data: Finding and Using the Right Dataset’ Uppsala Conflict Data Program Paper #1 <www.pcr.uu.se/publications/UCDP_pub/UCDP_paper1.pdf>.
32 See eg, Harbom, L, Hogbladh, S and Wallensteen, P, ‘Armed Conflict and Peace Agreements’ (2006) 43 Journal of Peace Research 617.
34 We counted processes rather than conflict dyads because processes often address more than one conflict dyad simultaneously (see eg Agreements in Burundi); counting by ‘dyads’ would therefore have led to double-counting of these processes. The Uppsala Conflict Data Program defines a dyad as ‘two conflict units that are parties to a conflict. One of these units has to be an armed challenger while the other unit has to be the challenged one, for example; government vs opposition group or two alliances fighting each other (the alliance is connected by its position in the incompatibility)’, <pcr.uu.se/research/UCDP/data_and_publications/definitions_all.htm#dyad>.
35 This last element of the coding is, we note, controversial as sexual violence should not be assumed to be directed against women only. However, many of the processes in which sexual violence is mentioned are ones where violence against women was an acknowledged feature of the conflict and where failure to code as a mention of women would be to fail to recognize that violence against women was the primary motivating factor for the provision.
36 See Cohn et al. (n 16) 138, quoting demands of women's organizations in the Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Boungainville and Fiji: ‘Whatever the code words let us in! Peace-builder, decision-maker, whatever argument works, let us in! Let us in so we can wrestle with the discussion at least, contest the parameters, and react, in real time and not after the fact.’
37 The agreements are in Bougainville / Papua New Guinea and are referenced and discussed further below (n 82). In fact, research on the Bougainville process indicates a substantive ‘women's process’ although this often took place with little connection to the formal track one negotiations and peace agreements: see Chinkin (n 21) 4.
38 See P Hayner, Negotiating Peace in Sierra Leone: Confronting the Justice Challenge (Geneva, Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, International Centre for Transitional Justice, 2007) 17–18 (documenting the influence of human rights guidelines circulated by the UN Secretary General on the Sierra Leone Lomé Accord, 1999. These guidelines were only circulated to UN SG representatives in mid 1999, and were perhaps only drawn to the attention of his representative in Sierra Leone two days before the Lomé Accord was signed). See further below (n 90).
39 The list of agreements draws on and incorporates but goes beyond other comprehensive collections. By way of comparison, at the time of writing the UN peacemaker collection had 376 peace agreements in 91 jurisdictions, while USIP has 129 agreements in 42 jurisdictions. However, our own records indicate that even our own collection is incomplete, for we have references for up to 60 additional agreements which we do not hold, but believe from authoritative sources (including references from within other peace agreements) to exist, but which are not publicly available. For the most part these include rather obscure ‘repeat’ agreements, and a large number of agreements in Chad/Libya.
40 These peace agreements were signed between 1 January 1990 and 1 May 2010. The figures relating to processes after 1325 include 24 processes which started before that date and continued after. In order to provide for the most accurate accounting of references to women these processes are included in both the before and the after tallies. Of post Resolution 1325 processes, only 20 were processes starting after that date.
41 The percentages relate to the percentage of agreements and processes in the relevant time period. As with table 1, the processes that were both pre- and post- Resolution 1325 are included in both before and after figures to provide for the most accurate reflection of changes.
42 The percentages relate to the total number of agreements in the relevant time period.
43 A logistic model was estimated with the dependent variable taking the value 1 if the agreement contained a reference to women, the value 0 if it did not and with the explanatory variable taking the value 1 if there was UN involvement in drafting the agreement, 0 if there was not. Estimating this model separately for pre- and post- Resolution 1325 agreements indicated that, for post-1325 agreements UN involvement had a significant positive influence on the likelihood of agreements making reference to women; for pre-1325 agreements, however, the likelihood of agreements making reference to women was not significantly affected by UN involvement. The statistical analysis demonstrated that the effectiveness of UN involvement, in terms of references to gender/women in agreements, could not be considered independently of whether or not Resolution 1325 was operating.
44 See Jarstad, A and Nilsson, D, ‘From Words to Deeds: The Implementation of Power-Sharing Pacts in Peace Accords’ (2008) 25 Conflict Management and Peace Science 206.
45 ibid. 215.
46 Bangladesh/Chittagong Hill Tract (B) 4 (a) and (C) 3–4, Agreement between the National Committee on Chittagong Hill Tracts Constituted by the Government and the Parbattya Chattagram Janasanghati Samity, 2 December 1997; Burundi art 8, Accord de Partage de Pouvoir au Burundi (French) 6 August 2004; India/Bodoland Para 4.2 Memorandum of Settlement on Bodoland Territorial Council, 10 February 2003; Nepal art 9, Decisions of the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) Maoist Summit Meeting, 8 November 2006; PNG/Bougainville art 11.1 of Constitution, art 33 of Transitional Provisions, Draft Basic Agreement Concerning the Bougainville Reconciliation Government, 24 December 1998; Philippines/Mindanao art 25, Peace Agreement with the Moro National Liberation Front, 2 September 1996 (provision for 15 per cent sectoral representatives including from ‘women’); Somalia: art IV, Addis Ababa Agreement conclude at the first Session of the Conference on National Reconciliation in Somalia, 27 March 1993; art 29, The Transitional Federal Charter of the Somali Republic, 29 January 2004; art 5, Decision on the High Level Committee Djibouti Agreement, November 25, 2008.
47 Somalia (2004) ibid.
48 Nakaya, S, ‘Women and Gender Equality in Peace Processes: from Women at the Negotiating Table to Postwar Structural Reforms in Guatemala and Somalia’ (2003) 9 Global Governance 459 , 468.
49 Afghanistan Chapter VI, Agreement on Provisional Arrangements in Afghanistan Pending the Reestablishment of Permanent Government Institutions (Bonn Agreement), 5 December 2001; Burundi art 15(16), Protocol 4, Chapter 3, art 13(d), Arusha Peace and Reconciliation Agreement for Burundi, 28 August 2000; DRC: Chapter III (1), Global and Inclusive Agreement on Transition in the Democratic Republic of Congo (The Pretoria Agreement), 16 December 2002; art 3b (iv), Inter-Congolese Negotiations: The Final Act (The Sun City Agreement), 2 April 2003; Great Lakes: art 1(11) and 3(33), Dar-el Salaam Declaration on Peace, Security Democracy and Development in the Great Lakes Regions, 20 November 2004; Preamble, Protocol of Non-Aggression and Mutual Defence in the Great Lakes Region, November 30, 2006; Guatemala: Preamble, Agreement on a Firm and Lasting Peace, 29 December 1996; art 178, Agreement on the Implementation, Compliance and Verification Timetable for the Peace Agreements, 29 December 1996; Liberia: art XXVII, Comprehensive Peace Agreement Between the Government of Liberia and the Liberians United for Reconciliation and Democracy (LURD) and the Movement for Democracy in Liberia (MODEL) and Political Parties, 18 August 2003; Mexico/Chiapas: Paragraph 5e, and III.5, Joint Proposals that the Federal Government and the EZLN agree to remit to the National Debating and Decision-Making Bodies in accordance with paragraph 1.4 of the Rules of Procedure, 16 February 1996; PNG/Bougainville: art B.4.28, Bougainville Peace Agreement, 30 August 2001; Sudan: art 1(15), Darfur Peace Agreement, 5 May 2006; arts 1(2) and 7(19), Chapter One, Eastern Sudan Peace Agreement, 14 October 2006; Uganda: arts 2.1(b) and 2.1(f), Agreement on Comprehensive Solutions between the Government of Uganda and the Lord's Resistance Army/Movement, Juba, Sudan, 2 May 2007; Zimbabwe: art 20, Agreement between the Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) and the Two Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) Formations, on Resolving the Challenges Facing Zimbabwe, September 15, 2008.
50 Sudan (2006) Darfur ibid.
51 Sudan: Protocol between the Government of the Sudan and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM) on Power Sharing, May 26, 2004.
52 Bangladesh/Chittagong Hills Tract (1997) (n 46).
53 See Rooney, E, ‘Engendering Transitional Justice: Questions of Absence and Silence’ (2007) 3 International Journal of Law and Context 93.
54 cf Nakaya's discussion of Somalia (n 48) 469–470 finding that breakthrough quotas for women failed at the level of implementation because ‘the real decision making authority continues to rest within clans.’
55 Bangladesh/Chittagong Hills Tract (1997) (n 46); India/Bodoland (2003) (n 46); Guatemala: Agreement on the Identity and Rights of Indigenous Peoples, 31 March 1995; Mexico/Chiapas: Protocole sur les principes de négociation en vue d'un accord de paix conclu par le Gouvernement et l'EZLN (Ejército zapatisa de liberación nacional), 11 September 1995; Actions and Measures for Chiapas Joint Commitments and Proposals from the State and Federal Governments, and the EZLN, 17 January 1996; Agreement on the Documents, 16 February 1996; Commitments for Chiapas by the State and Federal Governments and the EZLN under Paragraph 1.3 of the Rules of Procedure, 16 February 1996; Joint Declaration that the General Government and the EZLN shall submit to national debating and decision-making bodies, 16 February 1996; Philippines/Mindanao Memorandum of Agreement on the Ancestral Domain Aspect of the GRP-MILF Tripoli Agreement on Peace of 2001, 5 August 2008.
56 Great Lakes (2004) (n 49), para 35; see also, Bosnia and Herzegovina: Annex 4, The General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina (The Dayton Agreement), 21 November 1995; Burundi (2000) (n 49), Protocol I, art 5; Cambodia: Annex 5, art 2, Agreement for a Comprehensive Political Settlement of the Cambodia Conflict, 23 October 1991; Colombia arts 13 and 43, Political Constitution 1991; Eritrea: Preamble, art 5, Constitutional Commission of Eritrea Draft Constitution, July 1996; Fiji: art 5(k), Constitution (Amendment) Act of 1997 of the Republic of the Fiji Islands, 25 July 1997; Great Lakes: (2004) (n 49), Preamble, Paragraph 11, art 35; (2006) (n 49), art 2; Iraq: art 20, Constitution of Iraq, 2005; Liberia (2003) (n 49), art XXXI(3); Mexico/Chiapas: Actions and Measures (2006) (n 55), ‘Guarantees of Access to Justice’; Commitments for Chiapas (1996) (n 55), Commitment 1; art 5(e), Joint Proposals that the Federal Government and the EZLN agree to remit to the National Debating and Decision-making Bodies in Accordance with paragraph 1.4 of the Rules of Procedure, 16 February 1996; Nepal: Preamble and art 3.5, Comprehensive Agreement concluded between the Government of Nepal and the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), 21 November 2006; Preamble, 12-point Understanding between Parties and Maoists, 22 November 2005; (2006) (n 46) Preamble; Philippines/NDF Part III, art 23, Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the National Democratic Front of the Philippines, 16 March 1998; Somalia (2004) (n 46), art 26(i); South Africa: Preamble a, Declaration of Intent, 21 December 1991; Sudan: Principles on Preamble, art 1.6, Machakos Protocol, 20 July 2002; arts 2 and 3, Declaration of Principles for the Resolution of the Sudanese Conflict in Darfur, 5 July 2005; (2004) (n 51), art 188.8.131.52; Uganda: (2007) (n 49), arts 2(1)(b), and (f), and 5; art 5, Agreement on Implementation and Monitoring Mechanisms, February 29, 2008; UK/NI Rights, Safeguards and Equality of Opportunity, Part 1, The Agreement Reached in Multi-Part Negotiations, 10 April 1998; Zimbabwe (n 49) art 6.
57 Bosnia and Herzegovina: Annex, Washington Agreement, 1 March (1994); (1995) (n 56) Annex 4; DRC (2003) (n 49), Resolution No DIC/CPR/02 (cites Sudanese incorporation of CEDAW); Great Lakes (2006) (n 49), art 35; Guatemala: (1995) (n 55), B.1.(c); 1.B.13(h), Agreement on the Social and Economic Aspects and Agrarian Situation, 6 May 1996; Mexico/Chiapas (1996) Actions and Measures (n 55), ‘Situation, Rights and Culture of Indigenous Women’.
58 Afghanistan Preamble, The Tashkent Declaration on Fundamental Principles for a Peaceful Settlement of the Conflict in Afghanistan, 19 July 1999; Burundi (2000) (n 49), art 6; DRC: art III, Act d'Engagement, Nord Kivu, 23 January 2008; art III, Act d'Engagement, Sud Kivu, 23 January 2008; Eritrea (1996), (n 56), art 7.2; Great Lakes: (2004) (n 49), Preamble; (2006) (n 49), art 3; Preamble and art 8, Pact on Security, Stability and Development in the Great Lakes Region, 15 December 2006; Guatemala: art 1.B, Agreement on the Social and Economic Aspects and Agrarian Situation, 6 May 1996; Iraq: Preamble, UNSC 1546, 8 June 2004; Iraq: Preamble, art 30, Constitution of Iraq, 15 October 2005; Mexico/Chiapas: (1995) (n 55), art 1(1)(b); (1996) (n 56), ‘Situation on Rights and Cultures of Indigenous Women’; Nepal (2006) (n 56), art 7.6; Sudan (2005) (n 56), Preamble; UK/NI (1998) (n 56), ‘Rights, Safeguards, and Equality of Opportunity’.
59 Sudan (2004) (n 51).
60 Bosnia and Herzegovina: art 14, Framework Agreement on Police Restructuring, Reform and Democratization in Republika Srpska, 9 December 1998; El Salvador: art 7, D.(b), Peace Agreement (Chapultepec Agreement), 16 January 1992; Rwanda: art 84(6), Protocol of Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Rwanda and the Rwandese Patriotic Front on the Integration of the Armed Forces of the Two Parties, 3 August 1993; Sudan (2006), Darfur (n 49), art 25 (379); UK/NI: art 21, Joint Declaration by the British and Irish Governments, 1 May 2003.
61 Burundi (2000) (n 49), art 7(18b); Fiji (1997) (n 56), art 134; Liberia (2003) (n 49), art XXVII; Uganda: art 25, Annexure to the Agreement on Accountability and Reconciliation, February 19, 2008 (not specifically judiciary, but calls for accountability mechanisms to have representation of women in ‘all institutions’).
64 Burundi (2000) (n 49), Protocol IV, Chapter 3 art 16(i); DRC: (2003) (n 49), Resolution NO: DIC/CHSC/01 Relating to the Emergency Programme in Different Social Sectors; Paragraph 12.7, Accord de Paix Entre le Gouvernement et le Congrès National Pour la Defénse du Peuple (CNDP), Goma, 23 March 2009; Great Lakes (2004) (n 49), arts 27 and 67; Iraq (2005) (n 56), art 30(1st); Kenya: art 2, Public Statement—Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation 4 February 2008; Liberia (2003) (n 49), art XXXI(3); Nicaragua: Preamble, The Toncontin Agreement, 23 March 1990; art 1, The Managua Protocol on Disarmament, 30 May 1990; Sierra Leone art XXVII, Peace Agreement between the Republic of Sierra Leone and the Revolutionary United Front of Sierra Leone (RUF/SL) (Lomé Agreement), 7 July 1999; Sudan Chapter VI, Peace Agreement between the Government of Sudan and the South Sudan United Democratic Salvation Front, 21 April 1997; Uganda: (2007) (n 49), art 2.1(f); arts 2.2 and 2.8, Agreement on Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration, February 29, 2008.
65 Kenya ibid, para 1 (c).
66 Liberia (2003) (n 49), art XXXI(3).
67 Guatemala: art III.8, Agreement on Resettlement of the Population Groups uprooted by the Armed Conflict, 17 June 1994. See also, Burundi (2000) (n 49), Protocol IV Chapter 3 art 16(i); Guatemala (1996) (n 58), art 1.B; Iraq (n 56), art 30(1st).
68 Burundi (2000) (n 49), Protocol II, art 3.19; Colombia (1991) (n 56) art 53; DRC (2003) (n 49), Resolution No: DIC.CHSC.01 Relating to the Emergency Programme in Different Social Sectors; Fiji (1997) (n 56), art 6(k); Great Lakes (2004) (n 49), art 33; Guatemala: (1996) ibid, art II.2, arte III.8; (1995) (n 55), F.9(g); (1996) (n 57), art 1.B; (1996) (n 49), art 88; Preamble, Agreement on a Firm and Lasting Peace, 29 December 1996; Liberia (2003) (n 49), art XXXI; Mexico/Chiapas: (1996 ‘Actions and Measures’) (n 55), ‘Situation, Rights, and Culture of Indigenous Women’; (1996 ‘Agreement Regarding the Documents’) (n 54), art 3; (1996 ‘Commitments for Chiapas’) (n 55) I, pg 2; Mexico (1996 ‘Joint Proposals’) (n 49), art III.5; Philippines /NDF (1998) (n 56), Part III, art 23; Somalia (2004) (n 46), art 26; UK/NI (1998) (n 49), ‘Rights, Safeguards and Equality of Opportunity: Economic, Social and Cultural Issues, para 1; Zimbabwe (2008) (n 49), art 5.8, 5.9, 8, 15, 16.
69 Burundi (2000) (n 49), art 8(2); Côte d'Ivoire Para 18, Security Council Resolution 1721, November 1, 2006; Guatemala: Chapter VI, 59 and 60, Agreement on the Strengthening of Civilian Power and on the Role of the Armed Forces in a Democratic Society, 19 September 1996; (1996) (n 49), art 22; Mexico/Chiapas (1996) (n 49), art 3.6; Somalia: (2004) (n 46), art 26(c)(i); (2008) (n 46), art 5; Sudan: art VIII, Chairman's Conclusions from the Arusha Consultations, August 6, 2007.
70 Côte d'Ivoire (2006) ibid, art 18; DRC (2009) (n 64), Paragraph 5.1; Great Lakes: (2004) (n 49), Chapter IV art 76 (Regional Inter Ministerial Committee implementation mechanism to be enhanced with participation of women); (2006) (n 58), art 25; Guatemala: (1996) ibid, art VI (60); (1996) (n 49), art 88; Sudan (2006) Darfur (n 49), art 29(394); (2007) ibid, art VIII; Uganda: art 11, Agreement on Accountability and Reconciliation between the Government of the Republic of Uganda and the Lord's Resistance Army/Movement, 19 June 2007; (2008) (n 64), art 3.3; art 26, Implementation Protocol to the Agreement on Comprehensive Solutions, February 22, 2008; (2008) (n 56), art 5; Zimbabwe (2008) (n 49), art 22.
71 Côte d'Ivoire (2006) ibid, art 18; Great Lakes: (2006) (n 49), Preamble; (2004) (n 49), art 27; Uganda: art 6.1(b), Agreement on a Permanent Ceasefire, Juba, Sudan, 23 February 2008; (2008) (n 64), arts 2.14 and 2.15.
72 Guatemala: (1995) (n 55), art B.1(b); (1996) (n 49), arts 29 and 85; South Africa Section 119, Interim Constitution, 6 December 1993.
73 Burundi: (2000) (n 49), art 6; art III, 1.7, Ceasefire Agreement between the Transitional Government of Burundi and the Conseil National pour la Défense de la Démocratie-Forces pour la Défense de la Démocratie, 2 December 2002; art II 1.1.5, Comprehensive Ceasefire Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Burundi and the Palipehutu-FNL (English/French), 7 September 2006; DRC: art I, 3(c), Ceasefire Agreement (The Lusaka Agreement), 10 July 1999; (2003) (n 49), Resolution No: DIC/CHSC/01 Relating to the Emergency Programme in Different Social Sectors, and Resolution No: DIC/COR/04 On the Institution of a ‘Truth and Reconciliation Commission’; art 7, Act d'Engagement Gabarone (French), 24 August 2004; Great Lakes: (2006) (n 58), art 11; (2004) (n 49), Preamble para 2, art 27, art 67; Guatemala: (1995) (n 55), B.1(a); (1996) (n 49), Section D art 177 (sexual harassment a crime); Indonesia/Aceh Preamble, art 2, Cessation of Hostilities Framework Agreement Between Government of the Republic of Indonesia and the Free Aceh Movement, 9 December 2002; Mexico/Chiapas (1996) (n 56), ‘Situation, Rights and Culture of Indigenous Women’; Nepal (2006) (n 56) art 7.6.1; Sudan art 11, 2(d) Nuba Mountains Ceasefire Agreement on Sudan, 19 January 2002; Uganda: (2007) (n 70), art 3.4 and 10; (2008) (n 71), art 5, 5.4(c); (2008) (n 61), arts 4, 13 and 24.
74 Colombia art 10, Acuerdo de la Puerto Cielo, 15 July 1998 (not deprive pregnant women of liberty); DRC: (2008 Nord Kivu) (n 58), art III (acts of violence against women); (2008 Sud Kivu) (n 58), art III; (acts of violence against women); Great Lakes (2006) (n 49), art 3 (‘renunciation of use of force, … and primary responsibility to protect the lives and human rights of women residing within their territories’); Iraq (2005) (n 56), art 29 (4), (violence and abuse in the family); Kenya (2008) (n 64), art 1; (security and protection in the camps, particularly for women and children); Nepal: art 5.1.13, Agreement on the Monitoring of Arms and Armies, 8 November 2006 (All acts and forms of gender-based violence); Philippines/NDF (1998) (n 56), Part IV, art 10 (special attention to women and children to ensure their physical and moral integrity); Sudan (2006 Darfur Peace Agreement) (n 49), art 25 (236), art 26 (278 ff), and 28 (379) (not tolerate gender based violence or abuse of women).
75 Philippines/NDF (1998) (n 56), art 10.
76 DRC (1999) (n 73), art 1, 3(c); cf Burundi: (2002) (n 73); (2006) (n 73); Sudan (2002) (n 73).
77 See eg art 3, Côte D'Ivoire: Annex 1, Linas-Marcoussis Agreement 24 January 2003.
78 Burundi: (2000) (n 49), arts 6 and 8(2); (2006) (n 49), art 67; DRC: (2003) (n 49), Resolution No: DIC/COR/04 on the institution of a ‘truth and reconciliation’ commission; Kenya: art 2, Kenyan National Dialogue and Reconciliation- Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission, 4 March 2008; Liberia (2003), (n 49), arts XXXI(3) (programme implementation); Sudan (2006) Darfur (n 49), arts 25 (278 ff); Uganda (2008) (n 61), arts 4 68, 13, 24 and 25.
79 Uganda (2008) (n 71), art 3(3.3); (2008) (n 63), arts 2.2, 2.9, 2.11, 2.12, 2.14, 2.15, 6.3. See also, Burundi (2006) (n 73), art II, 1.1.5; Guatemala: art 12, Agreement on the Basis for the Legal Integration of the Unidad Revolucionaria Nacional Guatemalteca, 12 December 1996; Great Lakes (2004) (n 49), Preamble para 11; Sudan: art 24.8, Agreement on a Permanent Ceasefire and Security Arrangements Implementation Modalities between the Government of Sudan and the SPLM/SPLA during the pre-interim and interim periods, 31 December 2004; (2006 Darfur) (n 49) art 26 (278 ff).
80 Colombia (1998) (n 74) 10; Israel PLO: Annex VII.2.a, Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Trip (‘Oslo II’), 28 September 1995; art 10; Sudan (2006) (n 49), art 25(275); Uganda (2008) (n 64), art 2.11 (pregnant and lactating women).
81 Nicaragua (1990) (n 64) art 10 (gender of prisoners not specified).
82 PNG/Bougainville: The Hutjena Record, 15 December 1999 and The Rotakas Record, 3 May 2001.
83 Côte d'Ivoire (2003) (n 77) Annex 1.
84 Israel-PLO: Annex VII.2.a, Protocol Concerning the Safe Passage between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, 5 October 1999.
85 UK/NI: Para 7, Agreement at Hillsborough Castle, 10 February 2010.
86 Sri Lanka: Appendix, Devolution Proposals, 3 August 1995.
87 cf Otto (n 7).
88 In their 2001 report (n 15) 314 Hilary Charlesworth and Mary Woods concluded that UNSC 1325 was ‘being implemented in a rather superficial and inadequate manner’ by the UN mission in East Timor.
89 See, for example, C Cockburn, From Where We Stand (Zed Books, London, 2007).
90 See, para 7, Seventh Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Observer Mission in Sierra Leone, UN SCOR, UN Doc. S/1999/836 (1999). For a full discussion of the relationship of UN third party to the Peace Agreement between the Republic of Sierra Leone and the Revolutionary United Front of Sierra Leone (RUF/SL) (Lomé Accord), 7 July 1999 see Hayner (n 38).
91 This distinction is of course at the heart of the Chapter VI / Chapter VII UN Charter distinction between non-binding and binding resolutions.
92 See Bedont, B and Martinez, K Hall, ‘Ending Impunity for Gender Crimes under the International Criminal Court,’ (1999) 6 Brown Journal of World Affairs 65.
93 See eg, P Collier et al, Breaking the Conflict Trap: Civil War and Development Policy, (World Bank and OUP, Washington DC, 2003); see also The White House, The National Security Strategy of the United States of America (Washington DC, The White House, 2006) 15 (dealing with ‘failed states’).
94 For an overview of some of this activity see JD Brewer, Peace Processes: A Sociological Approach (Polity, Cambridge, 2010) 68–102.
95 The Goma Declaration on Eradicating Sexual Violence and Ending Impunity in the Great Lakes Region – Goma, 18th June 2008, available at <www.womenwarpeace.org/docs/Goma-Declaration+Final+Version.pdf>.
96 See UNIFEM Briefing note (n 26).
97 The Uganda National Action Plan on UN Security Council Resolutions 1325, 1820 and the Goma Declaration, Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development, December 2008, <www.un-instraw.org/images/documents/GPS/UGANDANAP.pdf>. Resolution 1325 urges state to take action at the national level in key areas, and in Presidential Statements S/PRST/2004/40 and S/PRST/2005/52 the Security Council called on Member States to continue to implement resolution 1325, including through the development of national action plans or other strategies. So far 17 states have done so: for strategy and plans see further <www.peacewomen.org/pages/about-women-peace-and-security/national-action-plans-naps>.
98 See, Updates to the UK National Action Plan to Implement UNSCR 1325, November 2007, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, <www.fco.gov.uk/resources/en/pdf/unscr-1325-uk-action-plan>. For the underlying UNSCR 1325—UK High Level National Action Plan, 8 March 2006, see <www.un-instraw.org/images/files/NAPper cent 20UKper cent 202006.pdf>.
99 In Uganda, for example, many of the key agreements were never signed with the LRA, the peace process collapsed, and none of the agreements could be fully implemented.
100 On the track one/two distinction and relationship of women to track one see Potter and also other references above (n 26).
101 K Fearon, Women's Work: the Story of the Northern Ireland Women's Coalition (Blackstaff, Belfast, 1999); see further Brewer (n 97).
102 In both cases the role of mediators appears to have been important to the inclusion of gender with Jean Arnault in Guatemala and Nelson Mandela in Burundi. Paradoxically, both could be described as ‘charismatic’ style leaders, often assumed to be a ‘male’ style of leadership, see (n 117).
103 See in particular Otto (n 7).
104 As a fairly crude statistical measure, to test for whether the number of agreements has fallen a Pearson's test was conducted, defined as sum of (Observed-Expected) squared/expected. Observed are 399 and 186 (pre and post) expected is 293 (equal numbers) so Pearson's is chi2(1)=77 and null hyothesis of equal outcomes is decisively rejected. In other words, there has been a significant fall off in the number of agreements being signed.
105 cf J Darby, ‘Borrowing and Lending in Peace Processes’ in J Darby & R McGinty (eds) Contemporary Peacemaking: Conflict, Violence, and Peace Processes (Houndsmill, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan, 2003) 245.
106 On new permutations of mediators see further Bell (n 1) 66–76.
107 Kennedy, D, ‘The Problem of the International Human Rights Movement: Part of the Problem?’ (2002) 15 Harvard Human Rights Journal 101 . cf Otto (n 7).
108 For theories and case studies on when and why agreements are not implemented, see SJ Stedman, D Rothchild & EM Cousens (eds) Ending Civil Wars: The Implementation of Peace Agreements (Lynne Reiner, Boulder, London, 2002).
109 See Nakaya (n 48) on Guatemala, and S Vandeginste, Law as a Source and Instrument of Transitional Justice in Burundi (Faculteit Rechten, Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, 2009) 242–298 (chronicling the long and difficult implementation process of the Arusha Accords).
110 United Nations Secretary-General Report 2004 (n 13) Section D. Peacekeeping Operations, in particular at paras 31–40.
111 See Bell (n 1) 66–76.
112 Jenkins, R and Goetz, A, ‘Addressing Sexual Violence in Internationally Mediated Peace Negotiations’ 17 International Peacekeeping 261.
113 For discussion of these assumptions in the negotiation context see DM Kolb and GG Coolidge, ‘Her Place at the Table’ in JW Breslin and JZ Rubin (eds), Negotiation Theory and Practice (The Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School, Cambridge Massachusetts, 1991) 261. However, see M Villellas Ariño, The Participation of Women in Peace Processes: The Other Table, ICIP Working Papers 2010/05, Institut Catalá per Pau, Barcelona May 2010, arguing that women are absent due to a serious lack of will.
114 A Phillips, The Politics of Presence (OUP, Oxford, 1995) 57–84.
115 Bertram, E, ‘Reinventing Governments: The Promise and Perils of United Nations Peace Building’ (1995) 39 Journal of Conflict Resolution 387.
116 Otto (n 7).
117 See Martin (n 26).
118 Aoláin, F Ní, ‘Women, Security, and the Patriarchy of Internationalized Transitional Justice’ (2009) 31 Human Rights Quarterly 1055.
119 Gardam, J and Charlesworth, H, ‘Protection of Women in Armed Conflict’ (2000) 22 Human Rights Quarterly 148.
120 Ní Aoláin (n 118).
121 A Aldehaib, Sudan's Comprehensive Peace Agreement Viewed Through the Eyes of the Women of South Sudan Fellow's Programme Occasional Paper 3/2010, Institute for Justice and Reconciliation, South Africa.
122 Mertus, J, ‘Improving the Status of Women in the Wake of War: Overcoming Structural Obstacles’ (2002–3) 41 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 541 (arguing that liberal constitutional models are too limited to accommodate the post-conflict needs of women).
123 For space ‘between’ analysis see C Cockburn, The Space Between Us: Negotiating Gender and National Identities in Conflict (Zed Books, London, 1998).
This article was produced from an ongoing peace agreement database project that was funded by the Nuffield Foundation and we would like to thank the Foundation for its support. Thanks are also due to Professor Vani Borooah, University of Ulster, for assistance with statistical analysis, and in particular work on the logistic regression analysis. We would also like to thank Dr Christopher Lamont, Professor Fionnuala Ní Aolaín, Dr Niamh Reilly, Eilish Rooney, Aisling Swaine, and Nahla Valji for advice on earlier drafts. Mistakes which remain are our own. The data underlying the article is published at www.transitionaljustice.ulster.ac.uk/tji_database.html.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.
Full text views reflects the number of PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.
* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 20th August 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.