Retrieved 5: Gender & Peace-Building

[Music] So when it comes to peace-making and peace-building, typically what happens is those who were the leaders of the conflict are the ones who assemble around the table and make the terms of peace. And because the women haven't been out on the streets, they're not at the peace table. This garden of international development agencies, civil society organizations, government officials and traditional rulers are here to take another look at the role of women in conflict this time as agents of peace and security. There are plenty of studies that show that when women are included in peace-building processes, peace is bound to last longer. And yet between 1992 and 2018, women were only 13% of negotiations in major peace processes. So what can we do to change that? And more importantly, what can a feminist foreign policy bring to peace-building efforts? I'm Christina. And I'm George. I'm a journalist and producers at the Greek podcast project. And this is retrieved. The podcast that shines a light on the new chapter of foreign policy, taking it out of its dusty past and into a fair future. George, who are we speaking with today? Today we're speaking with Maria Haji Babelal, associate professor at the department of social and political sciences in the University of Cyprus. For 40 years she's been doing really, really important work in Cyprus leading peace-building efforts. She's involved with a number of NGOs, one of which she's the founding member and president of. The Cyprus Peace Center. And she's also the founding member and president of the first independent Cypriot women's NGO hands across the divide. She's advised governments, she's done plenty, plenty of research and activism. She's really on the ground and still doing incredible work. So I can't wait for this one for our final episode. A great George, I'm very excited to speak with her. [Music] Hi Maria, welcome to the show. Hi Kristina, thank you very much for this opportunity. How are you doing today Maria? Oh, very well, except the heat here in Cyprus. We're from in Cyprus, are you tuning in? I'm tuning in from Nikosia. Exciting, well I think we can get right into the interview and hear more about Cyprus, your work there and your background. Yeah. So you wear many hats? Yeah. Yes. You are a scholar, you're an advocate, you are a peace builder, and you've done a lot of impactful work in Cyprus. How did you get started on this track? Well, it's a long story Kristina, but I just put it in three sentences. One is when I started my PhD in the United States at Boston University and at Harvard. I was really looking for a theory, for a framework to understand deeper conflict and more specifically the Cyprus conflict. What were the conditions that led us to this division and also the impact this conflict has on ordinary people in their everyday lives. So one day passing outside Levant Library at Harvard, I saw a poster announcing a meeting between a Palestinian-Pnested members and PLO. And I thought my goodness, and it was in the 80s when PLO was a terrorist organization. And I acquired and I introduced myself if I could attend that. So what I saw happening in that room really immediately, as we say, that was my defining moment. And I said to myself, this is what I really want to do in Cyprus. Dialogue, contact amongst people, and also bringing in the more unofficial understanding of people's experiences in the forefront. And how policies should also be taking into consideration this aspect, which later became what we call in my jargon and conflict resolution, unofficial diplomacy, citizens diplomacy, etc. So the last 40 years I've been trying to do this in Cyprus. The early steps were not easy at all especially after I wrote my thesis and the first papers I published on analyzing the Cyprus conflict from a conflict resolution lens. So we just want to jump into feminist peace building if you can give us a definition of what that is and what it looks like and what the role of intersectionality plays in that. Okay. In conflict resolution we speak about three levels. The one is Pisa Kiwi, which is the cessation of postilities and so on. And then peace may key, which is the more official diplomatic agreements and so on. And the third level is peace building. And peace building really refers to building as the name suggests new structures for peace, new structures where people who were enemies before can start cooperating, can start also rebuilding a new company. And new culture away from the male dominated and militaristic approach into one of resolution. Also one of challenging the power dynamics and this is where I think the feminist approach has a lot to tell us with regard to this aspect of power hierarchies, power dynamics. Both before the conflict during and after so peace building cannot be completed without gender equality approaches. Also feminist approach makes us revisit the norms and the values that sustained those structures, those military is thick and those patriarchy structures that fed the conflict culture. So we need to deconstruct a lot. And of course we also understand through feminism that women are not homogeneous social groups, men are not either. So this is where we unpack the differences and where intersectionality comes in. And we talk about the experiences of women in the rural areas of working women of women in the front line during these military strife. But the most important I think is that intersectionality invites us to put new theoretical questions. Can you give us some examples of the new theoretical questions you're referring to? Yes, for instance, one theoretical question has to do about looking at the root causes of sexual violence of rape during and even after the cessation of hostilities. For instance, we ask why men are really treated, even the wounded men as heroes, as the ones who really protected the state, the nation and not also have the same priority of looking at raped women. Why women raped are ashamed, are silenced, are inside through so many other countries, you know, they are marginalized, they are put on the site. Why is that? So these are the questions that we pose in new literature, a new knowledge and understanding comes up, which of course does not stay there, but, you know, these new understandings help us build new policies. And then women are not just simply victims, you know, they're agents as well. And they've been also contributing a lot in the process of peace making and negotiations and so on. Could you give us some more practical examples of peace building processes that take gender into account, what have been their outcomes and what can we learn from them? I think we have many examples of this and I think they're. One that I learned from a lot was the Irish women's, I mean Northern Ireland's case with women's coalition. And this was before 1325 in Ireland. That's why we learned a lot from that kind of strategy that was used by them, women in Northern Ireland, which started from the grassroots, you know, with women in the different communities of different ideological and sectarian and differences. But they were able to formulate a shared understanding of the conflict, but at the same time, they built together shared goals that women's presence, experiences and participation cannot be ignored, but need to be included. So it starts from the grassroots and it builds up to the middle level and then to the macro level to trap one, as we say, to the decision making level. Can you take us a little bit to the micro level, maybe speak more about the case of Ireland or Cyprus and show us what that grassroots work looks like in practice? Yes, I mean from what I also saw, because I've worked with women in Northern Ireland, this was done at the very community level. You go to the women's neighborhoods, you go to their community centers, you go to their schools, to their areas where they gather and so on. And one of the techniques we use is to create safe spaces for these women to really be able to articulate the experience of conflict in their everyday life and starting from the domestic to the communal. And recently we used it as in Cyprus in a very three year program that I coordinated and I initiated and we addressed exactly this aspect that I'm talking about creating spaces for dialogue and these spaces have to do with safety. Women feel very vulnerable and especially in conflict culture, you know, there is not much trust or even of your neighbor. So we use a lot the conflict resolution mechanism of trans building before we engage with women's stories and very intimate experiences. Let's speak about inclusivity because I feel like that's a very important aspect of the feminist foreign policy that can be very impactful in peace lasting longer. So an international peace institute study that analyzed I think 182 signed peace agreements between 1989 and 2011 found that when women are included in peace processes, there is a 35% increase in the probability that a peace agreement is going to last 15 years or more, which is quite significant. Why does peace last longer when peace processes are gender inclusive? Yeah, there's been a lot of research also on this as you mentioned. Yes, and when women sit at the negotiating table, absolutely. They are much more the whole package of agreement, peace agreement is much more representative and much more democratic and much more participatory. So what difference would it make apart from the more sustainability of the agreements? I think at the table women bring very complimentary new understandings of how gender equality is interlinked with peace and peace building. And also how women's participation during the peace process and in the implementation phase is extremely important. One reason is because women are much more knowledgeable of the grassroots and communal levels. So the agents of bringing this agreement that was decided with their participation, therefore there is a much more ownership of the agreement, not only at the elite level, but also the civil society level. And the other aspect I think is that women bring at the table issues that men might not think of bringing. For instance, the issue of security, which is a very big issue in all peace processes. And usually the male understanding of security is from the defense level, armies and weapons and agreements of the military and institutions and so on. So women would say, hold it, you know, this is not security in its holistic aspect, which has to do with everyday life. So they bring in human security. Let's move on to talk about the 30-25 resolution. It's a very significant resolution. And you could argue that the link between gender peace and security has officially been recognised, whether or not that is effective is obviously for debate. But are you able to just go over the resolution, talk a little bit about its history, the main kind of pillars and what it's really recommending or attempting to do? Okay, I mean, as you know, 30-25 of 2000 did not come about just because security council, which as we all know, is the most patriarchal mechanism of the UN. And at the same time, the five permanent members are the ones who are producing countries. So they have all this industry of war, right? So in order to reach that stage, that unanimous slit, 13-25 was adopted in 2000, a lot of background work went into it. So who were involved? Again, they worked academics, academics sent studies and books to all these different departments of the security council and men to inform them about the impact of war on women and men that it's different. There are also experiences, there needs, there are understandings and so on. So they started with the information campaign. Then the NGOs of different countries that are stationed at the UN headquarters started lobbying, you know, the different members and then sending information and so on. Or back to their NGOs in their national governments. So this chance of communication helped a lot to mobilize locally their own governments. There is a lot of background work that took place before this resolution and there were different drafts by women from Africa, from Latin America, from Asia, from Europe. And so until the final text was adopted. Could you elaborate a little more on the mechanisms aspect because we've spoken a lot about security on this show, but I'm more so interested in understanding what mechanisms have been created and are available for countries to put the resolution into practice? I think with regard to, as George mentioned before, the 1325 is a tool in all that panacea, you know, and there's been a lot of criticism of it as well. That doesn't stress enough that you know patriarchy and also the role of men in the creative wars. For instance, even in democratic societies in Europe. I mean, just to take the issue of participation, the European Institute of Gender Equality last year in its report said that democratic, that EU countries will take them 60 years to reach gender equality. And the UN Secretary General Guderis told us in March, 8th of March, that it will take 400 years for gender equality globally. So what does this tell us? So just to look at one of the pillars and unpack it in our national and international governments and representations, we see that we still have a lot to do. That for me to really address in its root causes, the lack of women's participation is to look at the binary of private and public. This dichotomy, which is varying in grain in traditions, and norms has really kept the sexes separate in separate spheres of action. We read a critique from a paper by Fiona Smith that I'm paraphrasing, but she says that WPS captures the experience of women who have access to power and resources. And I know you mentioned a little earlier that sometimes women are treated as a homogenous group when it comes to peace building and there's obviously countless different experiences of women. So what's your thought on that critique that it's processes only capture the experience of women with access to power and resources? I agree with Fiona and this is where I think research and especially many African countries, but also in the Middle East and so on, we should bring this more to the public discussion that resources and the allocation of opportunities should be given to all groups of women, not just those who are either educated or have connections or have networks and so on. And the latest project we did with just finishing in Cyprus is to go to those areas in the country where women do not have access either to technology or either to knowledge or resources and give them this opportunity, voice their needs. So we went to remote villages all over Cyprus and in all the communities, Armenians, Maronites and Latin, and Turkish Cypriots and migrants and Greek Cypriots and so on. And what came out of this is the big gap that exists between the elite women, okay, who have access to resources, we have the feasibility who talk on their behalf but they are very ignorant of the real needs of these other groups of women. So resources are not allocated properly, when women tell us we don't have a bank in our village and I'm old, I need, I'm dependent on my son to come from the city to drive me 30 miles to the next bank, for instance. So these are for me issues for our feminists understanding of every dayness. So we want to jump a little deeper into your personal work in Cyprus. Can you start by telling us a little bit about why your work there is necessary and what you've achieved? You know in Cyprus we were divided, I mean the problem is so intractable, it goes back 60 years, right? If we take into account 1963, the early inter-communal strife at 67 and the first dislocation and also displacement of Turkish Cypriots living in enclaves. And then 74, we had for the first time the sharp ethnic divide and the island was divided north and south and there is a big military line along, you know, which was coined green line in 64 when the first peacekeeping forces came to the island. So this created, you know, gradually a culture of us and them and also an narrative that would not bring us together but separate us and demonize each other. So amidst this kind of environment, I was very concerned and very early on when I first came from the States to Cyprus in 89 with other Greek Cypriot colleagues, we set up the peace center. So this was the first organization that was also registered and our aim was to be advocating a peace culture and challenging the mainstream narrative from being very adversarial and exclusive into one of including the other. So after the peace center, I was involved in co-founding women's groups, Hansa Crossed the divide in 2000 and together with many of the women from Hansa Crossed the divide, especially scholars and experts on gender issues, we established the gender advisory team in 2009 and we focused exclusively on 1325 and how to integrate gender equality provisions in the negotiations. So for this, we started working at the different issues that are at the negotiating table for decades, you know, the big. So we started producing recommendations on the issue of governance, what good governance looked like from a gender perspective with the representation and participation of women in all the institutions at the federal and the constituent level. Then we started producing recommendations from a gender perspective on the issue of property. Women's rights to property, the allocation of their access to land and so on. And then we worked on the issue of citizenship, that citizenship should not be based only on the binary, Greek, Cypriot, Turkish Cypriot, but be much more fluid because today we have 25% of our communities which are mixed marriages. So where do these people go in terms of citizenship? Does that multiculturalism kind of complicate things with peace building? Multiculturalism, multiculturalism and also these different multiple identities. Where do these go? And then the fourth chapter we worked on was on the issue of economy, allocation of resources from a gender perspective. And we brought in at that time the gender budgeting principle and we presented these recommendations which we published in a brief, we had conferences and so on. But the most important thing is that we presented them to the negotiators, the pre-Cypriot, the Turkish Cypriot, the teams near the two respective leaders. And we heard comments, we heard some ideas that they provided for us, etc. However, when it came to implement what these ideas were that we were presenting to them as a negotiating table, we did not see that happening. So what does this tell us about how the gender aspect of our peace process is completely marginalized? Of course there are many women in the background who do all the work, prepare the documents and so on, but they are not visible. The contribution is not registered, it's not in the media. know these men led the process. It needs to change. Amazing, Maria. Thank you very much for your insight, Maria. This was a very interesting conversation, and I'm really glad that we got the chance to zero in on Cyprus and learn a lot more about how feminist piece building is happening there from a person that is on the field doing this important work. Thank you, Christina, and thank you, George, for this opportunity. Thank you very much, Maria. So that was the last episode of This Season of Retrieved, in which we impact what a feminist foreign policy is, where it comes from, and where it's heading. A massive thanks to the academics, policymakers, journalists, and activists that helped us look at foreign policy through the lens of feminism. We've covered everything from arms and defense to migration and piece building. We hope you enjoyed our conversations. This podcast series is produced by the Greek podcast project and supported by the Thessaloniki Office of the Heinrich Bell Foundation, distributed under Creative Commons non-commercial share-like license.