Konuk Yazar, 16 Agustos 2001
Margarita Papandreou, Greek Coordinator, WINPEACE
Feminism and International Relations
It seems appropriate to start this talk with a definition of feminism. I'm reminded of the first time I was asked to speak at the Women's Democratic Party Organization in Washington shortly after PASOK came into office. I had a friend in the States, a Greek-American woman, who wanted me to succeed because of the distortions being pronounced about our regime. She said, "Margarita, don't use the word 'socialism' in your talk." I was a bit taken aback, but I told her that presents me with one very difficult obstacle. The party I belong to - PASOK - is called the Panhellenic Socialist Movement. "Should I change the name of the party?" I asked.
I am simply making a point of how often a label itself creates a problem. I know the word "feminism" is often discredited. In the past it was considered by the communist world as "reformist," and not revolutionary. It was considered "western" and "white, bourgeois. " I stick stubbornly to what I like to call essential feminism because I am still committed to these values. For me it means trying to inject women's values into the public sphere, into policy making. Women's values are consistently described as those of understanding, caring, protecting - all non-violent values. They are humanist values, but with an emphasis on the marginalized persons of society, mostly women. Essential feminists are not haters of men. They dislike the system which is exploitative of women, and which has been constructed by men to fit male needs. That is very different from being a man-hater.
So, with this description of feminism, I shall proceed.
Fundamental concepts in international relations - such as sovereignty, authority, development, power and security - are endowed with different meanings depending on the gender of the interpreter. As long as the defense policy area excludes the flow of women's experiences of the world from its field of vision, it will continue with a partial and distorted version of the world. It means that while promulgating a defense policy that is aimed at achieving peace, the State disregards the specter of violence against women in all its forms; her lack of access to economic rights and to gain economic power, her lack of access to health care, to reproductive rights, and vulnerability to HIV/AIDS infection. It means a disregard of the effects of globalization - on women in particular and especially with dealing with women in the economy.
We hear frequently that there are no victors in a war. Both sides experience deep suffering. Both sides experience destruction. Both sides lose lives. Still, our countries continue to pile up weapons of war - presumably for defense, and for their SECURITY. This means that people are expecting an attack and are preparing for this potential aggressive act. In other words, at some point the defensive weapons on one side become offensive weapons and a war breaks out.
So what kind of security is that?
The alternative - our feminist alternative - is COMMON SECURITY. We can avoid a war by achieving security not against an adversary but together with him. Security must depend on a commitment to joint survival rather than a threat of mutual killing and destruction.
I am exploring these issues today as a member of a Greek-Turkish women's peace network called WINPEACE. As a network dedicated to building a culture of peace in our region, we are naturally concerned with issues of war and security. Our motivation in forming the network was, in fact, a response to a close call - a war over the sovereignty of an island in the Aegean. Looking at this incident and at history, we saw that international decision making in no way involves the affective, individual morality associated with women. The male role of "warrior" is a strong image of sovereign man and comes from his ability to legitimate violence.
If we understand how all forms of violence - to ourselves, to others, to the environment - are structured into political-economic systems and into international behavior of states, we have the conceptual basis for transforming the rules in humane ways. To mold the rules using a women's perspective could restore security at every level of human society.
Put in very simple terms, security for the male means to have the mechanisms to fight to maintain his way of life, to maintain the sovereignty of his country, to protect his property - including the "property" of wife and children, and to play a role in public life.
A woman's security is to be free of violence, to have food and home, to be able to educate her children, to protect her family's health, and to be able to explore and express her creative energies.
Therefore a very basic presupposition of all we do in the development of a feminist policy is to say that male values have shaped the way different nations and peoples deal with contact and conflict among themselves, and that this has gone on for centuries.
A women's perspective of international relations will have two key precepts as a basis for policy making:
1. A commitment to using women's values as a measure of the effectiveness of policy decisions in the international arena
2. An optimistic view of the capacities of human beings to work in cooperative ways to resolve conflict and to build a more humane, harmonious and non-violent world
Let me go through a little exercise to see how a policy issue critical to peace can be looked at through the prism of the presuppositions and precepts I mentioned above. The issue is disarmament. The presupposition is that arms and the arms race is a product of male thinking on defense. Women value a world without violence. Therefore we would develop a policy of general and complete disarmament. Our optimism on the capacities of human beings to resolve conflict causes us to believe that a strong campaign, and a powerful education program, will lay the groundwork for success in this effort. We are also practical and have a lot of common sense and recognize the difficulties and problems in seeking this goal. Thus we struggle for short term actions as part of a beginning process in this direction: to curb first, and then to reverse the arms race.
One such action for Winpeace is a bilateral agreement between our two countries - Greece and Turkey - to reduce the defense budget by 5% starting in 2002 and continuing at the same rate in the following five years, at which time there will be a review of the process.
We understand that in the case of countries that are members of NATO, that means Europe and North America, we must introduce this concept into the overall strategy of NATO.
Now, to prove that we are not just smelling incense, or singing with the birds, or gliding around like the bees and butterflies, we do recognize that governments have a vested interest in preparation for war. The military-industrial complex employs a high percentage of the work force. The manufacture and selling of arms to other countries is a financially profitable business. A strong military is a masculine pride. War itself is exciting to many males.
We see disarmament as an obvious action for prevention of war. But we also feel that there are measures in conjunction with this step that will be effective.
The few I will mention are just samples of actions consistent with our two key precepts for policy making: commitment to women's values and to human beings, and optimism about their capacities for building a better world.
a. Education is a high priority on our agenda. We want peace education at all levels of schooling and peace studies to a part of university curriculum.
b. Donor countries and international financial institutions should wipe off their books all official debts of the heavily indebted poorer countries.
c. We give support to reform of the United Nations, our one official internationally recognized body for peace. Restoration of the Charter functions to the UN.
d. Women should participate in the campaign against the space defense system under consideration by the US administration. This is a proliferation of nuclear weapons capacity.
e. Work assiduously for the empowerment of women and their involvement in mainstream political life where decisions are made on defense and foreign policy issues.
Let me conclude with this: We are concerned with affecting policy, clarifying the struggles of the region and world, understanding conflict and participating in decision-making of governments, as well as playing a role in conflict resolution and peace making. Women belong on the agenda of international relations. And feminism provides a powerful set of criteria for this field.
(KEGME CONFERENCE -" Gender Integration into Conflict Resolution and Peace Building" - February 23, 2001 - Athens, Greece)