Sexual Violence During Conflicts

Sexual Violence During Conflicts

Words Unspoken:

Sexual Violence during Conflicts

11th of February 2011

Annefleur Klaus

3279006

Centre for Conflict Studies

(Georg Frerks)

INDEX

Introductionp. 2

An empirical and juridical overviewp. 2-4

A weapon of warp. 4-7

Wartime rape: culturally bounded?p. 7-11

The hidden secret of menp. 11-13

Conclusionp. 13-15

Literaturep. 16-17

Introduction

In this paper, I will discuss sexual violence during conflicts, since this topic still seems underreported, while it has been highly acknowledged that rape occurs widespread during conflicts. More importantly, some crucial elements are still being excluded from the topic of sexual violence during wars, and these thus need to be stressed. This study is solely based on research of literature. In order to come to a clear understanding of the high rates of sexual violence during conflicts, I first discuss how rape is used as a weapon of war and how different scholars are looking at this phenomenon. Secondly, I look more deeply at the war of Former Yugoslavia in the 1990s and the five year conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo in the 90s, since in these two areas sexual violence has been widespread, and is even still continuing in the DRC as it is called the ‘center of rape’ in today’s world. By comparing these two different conflicts and the occurrence of sexual violence, we can conclude whether rape as a weapon is used in the same manner or can differ per country, area or culture. Last but not least, I discuss the victimization of women and the neglect of attention and aid towards men and boys who are targeted by sexual violence as well during war. I do want to make clear that women are clearly the majority who suffer from this horrible weapon of war, but I am questioning whether positioning women overwhelmingly as the ‘victim’ and men as the ‘perpetrator’ is accurate. By doing this, women who have experienced sexual violence feel stigmatized and weakened, and it excludes men from being ‘victims’ as well. The topic of this paper is extremely sensitive and needs to be discussed with care. As Bastick puts it clearly: ‘certain media outlets were treating the issue in an over sensational manner, thus undermining rather than reinforcing the victims’ right to dignity and privacy’ (Bastick 2007: 125).

An empirical and juridical overview

In recent years, especially since the trial at the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia where three men guilty of rape and sexual torture during the war in Bosnia were tried, sexual violence during conflicts is a high concern. This concern is not underestimated, as rape seems to be highly present during conflicts and continues to be in post-war settings. As many scholars indicate, rape has accompanied many wars and conflicts. Bastick (2007) conducted extensive research in fifty different countries, across all continents, which experienced a high rate of sexual violence during conflicts. Also De Brouwer et al (2009) illustrate the magnitude of sexual violence in conflict situations, beginning in the First World War, where Belgian and French women were raped and forced into prostitution, largely by the German Army. And further discussing many more haunting periods in different countries, ending most recently in Kenya, which experienced a 7,5 per cent increase in the incidence of sexual violence after the election crisis at the end of 2007. Susan Brownmiller (1975) was one of the first to mention rape in war in her well known feminist classic, Against Our Will, in which she shows the naturally form of rape during war how it is viewed by men and its attitude towards it. ‘Unquestionably there shall be some raping’ (Brownmiller 1975: 31). According to Brownmiller the history of rape goes much further back. She claims that rape was socially acceptable behavior within the rules of warfare already in ancient Greece. This was a shameless act for warriors who saw the women they conquered as legitimate spoils of war and exploited them for slave labor, viewed them as battle-camp trophies, and used them as practical wives and concubines. Also during the march of Constantinople in the First Crusade, many knights and pilgrims took their time off for sexual assaults. Moreover, in the 20th century, rape during war was highly common. In World War I rape was a weapon of terror, Brownmiller says, and during the Second World War a weapon of revenge. ‘Rape flourishes in warfare irrespective of nationality or geographic location’ (1975: 32).

There has not been an exact moment in history where rape became a war crime. Although attention towards this indisputable ‘side effect’ of war were far away and undermined, in the 19th century rape has been reported as a crime punishable by the death penalty. As Mark Ellis (2007) notes, the article on ‘crimes against humanity’ after the Nuremberg Charter did not include rape by name as a crime against humanity. In the Control Council Law No. 10 of 1945 (in December), rape was for the first time mentioned as a crime against humanity and the first institutional program for the protection against rape for women was founded in the 1949 Geneva Convention (Ellis 2007: 228,229). According to Ellis, though, both the ICTY and the ICTR have had the most important impact on breaking the silence of rape, since it became prosecuted as genocide[1], a war crime[2] and a crime against humanity[3]. The two Tribunals have thus brought the crime of rape to a higher level by including rape as a genocide. Also the first to be executed for sexual assaults happened in these courts, so indeed the ICTY and the ICTR have made some important steps toward the recognition of rape as an extensive crime during warfare.

Other important programs have emerged gradually, especially regarding women’s rights. In the UN’s Millennium Declaration (September 2000), gender equality has been one of the eight main objects and was reaffirmed again in the World Summit of 2005 to achieve strong and unambiguous commitment by all governments for the Millennium Development Goals of 2015. Moreover, the commitment was made to ‘eliminate pervasive gender discrimination, such as inequalities in education and ownership of property, violence against women and girls and to end impunity for such violence’ (UN World Summit 2005). Also emphasis was put on the collective international responsibility to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity, and to be accepted by all governments. In June 2008, the Secretary to the United States, Condoleezza Rice, chaired a thematic debate of the Security Council on women, peace and security, where she noted and reaffirmed that rape could constitute genocide, a war crime and a crime against humanity. Also stating that sexual violence against women is not only affecting their health and safety, but the economic and social stability of their nations as well. This was an important mechanism to bring these atrocities to light, according to Vishnu Jayaraman (2008). Furthermore, in the UN resolution 1325 of July 2000, strengthening the institutional arrangements for support of gender equality and the empowerment of women was stressed (Resolution 1325 2010: 8).

So, gender equality worldwide has risen in importance, but in a broad manner. The crime of rape has become endemic during conflicts and still is, so explicit global rules need to be established on sexual violence. Also criticism is found on reaction of the UN on the issue of sexual violence. The Human Right Watch’ World Report 2010 reported that the Secretary of State of the United States, Hillary Clinton, and the Secretary-General Ban Kimoon of the United Nations, raised human rights concerns on sexual violence when visiting eastern Congo, but stopped short of pressuring the Congolese government or MONUC to postpone military operations until measures for civilian protection were in place (World Report 2010: 105). Besides these shortcomings of the international community, it is widely recognized that women suffer mainly from sexual violence, but it becomes clear that many men are also targeted by this terrible crime. Hence, it is important to include them as well, and to pay attention to men and boys who are raped during war, so to condemn rape as a war crime at the whole. Although rape has become a crime against humanity, it persists a common act of war.

A Weapon of War

Before discussing sexual violence as a weapon of war, it is important to illustrate what includes sexual violence, since it is not restricted to rape and gang-rape only. It includes sexual humiliation, sexual abuse, sexual harassment, sexual torture, sexual exploitation, genital mutilation, sterilization, forced pregnancy, forced abortion, sexual slavery and trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation. It is also important to stress that often objects are used in the course of sexual violence, this definitely also includes sexual violence, while the perpetrator did not use his or her body parts. The impressive, but shocking book The Men Who Killed Me by De Brouwer, Ka Hon Chu and Muscati (2009), where testimonials are told by seventeen Rwandan survivors who were raped during the conflict of Rwanda in 1994, shows the cruelty of sexual violence which the sixteen women and sole man have experienced. Many of these women were raped continuously, by the same soldier multiple times a day or by different soldiers one after another. Guns were put against their head so they did not scream or fight. Often, the family was obliged to watch, especially their husband and father. Also pregnant women and women carrying their newborns were not spared. Children who fled with their mom were often witnesses of their mother’s rape. The rapes occurred in public, so other soldiers could watch and people were frightened. Sexual humiliation was very present, they made the girls and women dance and make handstands, while they laughed at them. It seemed that there were no boundaries and the soldiers tried anything they could to humiliate the women. ‘They did to me whatever perversion came to their mind’ (De Brouwer et al 2009: 46). Sexual violence was not restricted to private parts only. ‘They tortured me in so many cruel ways, forcing me to take their penises in my mouth and shoving their penises up my nose’ (2009: 76). Many times knives, swords and sticks with nails were used. ‘These men were so sadistic that they tried to cut my vagina into two parts with a sword in order to share me’ (2009: 102). The age of the women did not matter, ranging from young girls to old women. Also the perpetrators were often very young men, and were obliged to rape by their commanders. The perpetrators knew the victims most of the time, they were their neighbors, their father’s friends or sometimes even their teachers. At times, girls and women were kept as sexual slaves and were locked up in their rapist’s houses.

After seeing these horrific testimonials, one can question: why did rape, this cruel crime especially targeting innocent women, turn into a weapon of war? As Brownmiller stated in the 70s: ‘Down through the ages, triumph over women by rape became a way to measure victory, part of a soldier’s proof of masculinity and success, a tangible reward for services rendered’ (1975: 35). She claims that it was justified by ideology or even by God and that it seemed as a heroic act by the soldier. But can we still speak of this heroic thought in the 21th century by today’s soldiers? Many scholar claim that where rape was a ‘by-product’ in former wars, in present-day wars it has clearly changed into a weapon of war. By targeting women, the whole community is reached not only at a psychological level, but also at the social and economic level. So it seems that it is not surely measured by soldiers counting how many women they conquered, rather how many people are affected and suffer from it. And how can the argument of Brownmiller explain then that more and more men are being raped as well during wars? Indeed, it seems that rape has become a weapon of war:

‘Right now the war is being fought on the bodies of women. Rape, torture, humiliation, HIV, vaginal destruction. Cheaper than AK-47s or grenades or scud missiles, rape is biological warfare. It not only wounds women in the moment it occurs, but it lodges forever in consciousness, in body, in communities, in families’ (De Brouwer et al 2009: 166).

I hereby note that some scholars are careful when indicating rape during conflicts as a weapon of war. They do so, because it is then seen as a material fact of women’s lives, but they prefer to see it as ‘a language through which gender inequality is defined’ (Buss 2009: 155). I completely understand this, but without defining rape as a weapon, rape during conflicts can also be underestimated. Hereby, I want to show the graveness of sexual violence and by naming it in this way, rape can be punished legally. Furthermore, Buss states that calling rape ‘as an instrument of the genocide’, does not reflect the full complexity of it (2009: 160). It can exclude women and limit to a type of victim. As he shows what was visible in the Rwandan conflict, where especially the Tutsi women were targeted by Hutu men, while Hutu women were also raped. So, by relating rape to the genocide, the Hutu women were excluded from help, and so were men. This is an important claim made by Buss and needs to be considered when discussing rape as a weapon of war and then especially rape as a genocide. And that this type of violence should not merely be understood as a product of war. By doing so, wartime rape is treated as apparently inevitable (2009: 161).

According to Bastick, sexual violence is an act of domination, during conflicts, ‘stranded in a complex web of cultural fixed ideas, in particular regarding genders roles’ (2007: 9). She further illustrates that it is mostly tolerated and even encouraged within armed groups. It is a crude form of humiliation, punishment and torture towards the enemy group and sometimes a strategically use to clear whole civilian populations from a certain area, as she clearly states. Thus rape can perform as a strategy to advance military objectives. Civilian people will flee as soon as stories spread of rape in their community, so it can drive away whole populations. It is also claimed that the high rate of rape during war is a result of the breakdown of law and order, there is a lack of structure and discipline and above all, impunity exists, so the perpetrators can continue their ‘work’ without punishments. Bastick, though, claims that this alone cannot explain the whole image of rape during conflicts. She claims that it is also about gaining control over the victim (2007: 14). By torturing and humiliating the enemy, they rise above them and feel like they are in control. It has an even broader impact, since it does not humiliate or punish one individual, especially by installing fear and showing their dominance. Rape can also perform as an act of genocide, to destruct an ethnic or social group. This has happened in the Former Yugoslavia, as we will see in the next section. Women were taken to ‘rape camps’ where they were raped until they were pregnant, so they could give birth to ‘Chetnick’ babies. Rape towards the enemy has also been seen as a morale booster for the armed group and even as a reward for bravery, for showing their aggression and brutality. ‘However, sexual violence is manifestly related to the perpetrators’ understanding of their own and others’ masculinity, and the masculinity or femininity of their victims’ (2007: 15). This last form of sexual violence, rape as a reward for bravery and raping because of masculinization and the feminization of the other, connects to the argument given by Brownmiller. However, in today’s conflict, this can mainly be seen as one of the reason and not as the main motivation. Rape also occurs during conflicts in specific cultural beliefs. This has been seen in the Democratic Republic of Congo, as also will be explained in the next part, where men believe that raping a virgin gives them power. By seeing the different motivations and reasons behind rape during war, we can conclude that the main line is about dominating the other group and acts as a military strategy.

Rape can be seen as a destructive cause during wars, because by targeting a women it can destruct a whole cultural group or community. ‘Women thus become the embodied boundaries of the nation-state, and as such, are targets for violence directed against a national collectivity’ (Buss 2009: 148). Women are often seen as a symbolic construction of a group or a community. When you touch a woman, you touch her husband, her father, her mother, her children, the rest of the family, her friends, and ending up touching the whole community. It is also common that men become frustrated for not being able to protect and take care of their wives and children (Bosmans 2007: 5). Thus, as discussed before, rape tends to have a greater impact of magnitude, frequency and intention. According to Hagen (2010), women who experienced sexual violence during wars suffer from multiple physical and psychological traumas. Many individuals suffer from: vaginal tearing and bleeding and extreme pains coming from their vagina; throat agitation created by the forced oral sex; bruises and broken bones; sexually transmitted infections; sexual dysfunction; problems with reproduction; sleeping disturbance; eating disorders; and pains as back pain, dizziness and headaches (Hagen 2010: 18). In many conflict or post-conflict areas medication is rare and hard to get, the unsanitary conditions make it worse, and many women refuse to get help because they are scared. In the testimonials of the Rwandan survivors it is widely visible how much the women and men still suffer. ‘My stomach, my head and my private parts ache a lot. Sometimes my private parts start bleeding without a reason’ (De Brouwer et al 2009: 56). Also, the psychological and traumatic part is apparent. ‘I started drinking, because I needed to forget about what the Interahamwe had done to me’ (2009: 62). Often the women have obtained children from the rapists and found out to be HIV positive as well. There is a great stigmatization on AIDS, and they get rejected. ‘When I told her [my daughter] that I was HIV positive, she told me to kill myself so I would not be a burden to her’ (2009: 90). It also seems difficult for the women to accept themselves again. ‘I hated my life and wanted it to end’ (2009: 97).