The Feminist Institutional Dimensions of Power-Sharing and Political Settlements

Abstract

This article applies key insights from feminist institutionalist analysis to power-sharing and political settlement in postconflict societies. Drawing on the concept of “gender orders,” allied with considerations of the informal and highly masculine rituals and rules that pervade institutional political life, the article demonstrates how apparent gendered gains in power-sharing are limited in their transformative effect. Despite a greater emphasis on female inclusion, as mandated by United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325, women's capacity to shape postconflict politics in power-sharing is limited. These limitations are shaped not only by the complexity of postconflict political landscapes but by women's restricted access to closed informal spaces pivotal to the masculine functioning of power-sharing. The tendency to view women's contributions in highly essentialized and feminized ways undercuts and devalorizes women's political work in power-sharing institutions. Urging greater attention to the informal life of political institutions, the article exposes the multiple layers of exclusion for women in postconflict political engagement.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Thanks to Ashlynn Kendzior for research assistance to enable the completion of this article.

FUNDING

This research and the fieldwork underpinning it was supported by the Political Settlements Research Programme, funded by UK Aid from the UK Department for International Development (DFID) for the benefit of developing countries.

Notes

1. See, generally, Fiona Mackay, “Nested Newness, Institutional Innovation, and the Gendered Limits of Change,” Politics and Gender 10, no. 4 (2014): 549–71; Paul Chaney, Fiona Mackay, and Laura McAlister, Women, Politics and Constitutional Change: The First Years of the Assembly for Wales (University of Wales Press, 2007).

2. Cynthia Enloe, Bananas, Beaches and Bases: Making Feminist Sense of International Politics (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2014), 241.

3. Hans-Joachim Lauth, “Informal Institutions and Democracy,” Democratization 7, no. 4 (2000): 24; Vivien Lowndes, “Something Old, Something New, Something Borrowed… How Institutions Change (and Stay the Same) in Local Governance,” Policy Studies 26, no. 3 (2005): 292.

4. Gretchen Helmke and Steven Levitsky, “Informal Institutions and Comparative Politics: A Research Agenda,” Perspectives on Politics 2, no. 4 (2004): 727.

5. Louise Chappell and Georgina Waylen, “Gender and the Hidden Life of Institutions,” Public Administration 91, no. 3 (2013): 604.

6. Helmke and Levitsky, “Informal Institutions and Comparative Politics,” 727.

7. Louise Chappell, “‘New,’ ‘Old,’ and ‘Nested’ Institutions and Gender Justice Outcomes: A View from the International Criminal Court,” Politics & Gender 10, no. 4 (2014): 576.

8. Donald L. Horowitz, Ethnic Groups in Conflict (University of California Press, 1985); Timothy D. Sisk, Power Sharing and International Mediation in Ethnic Conflicts (Washington, D.C.: United States Institute of Peace Press, 1996).

9. This definition draws on the work of Siobhan Byrne and Allison McCulloch, “Gendering Power-Sharing” in Power-Sharing: Empirical and Normative Challenges, edited by Allison McCulloch and John McGarry (London: Routledge, 2017) 251.

10. Some preliminary work in this regard has already been undertaken. See Georgina Waylen, Engendering Transitions–Women's Mobilization, Institutions and Gender Outcomes (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007); Anna Grzymla-Basse, “The Best Laid Plans: The Impact of Informal Rules on Formal Institutions in Transitional Regimes,” Studies in Comparative and International Development 45, no. 3 (2010): 311–33.

11. Edwards Laws, Political Settlements, Elite Pacts, and Governments of National Unity: A Conceptual Study (Development Leadership Program Background Paper, 2012),http://publications.dlprog.org/Political%20Settlements,%20Elite%20Pacts,%20and%20Governments%20of%20National%20Unity.pdf (accessed October 18, 2017).

12. United Nations Security Council, Resolution 1325, “Women, Peace and Security,” 31 October 2000, http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/1325 (accessed October 18, 2017).

13. Ibid.

14. UN News Centre, “Women Must Have Their ‘Rightful Place’ at the Heart of Peace and Security – UN chief,” http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=55392#.Wd_VtRNSydJ (accessed October 18, 2017).

15. See, Carol Cohn, “Mainstreaming Gender in UN Security Policy: A Path to Political Transformation?” in Global Governance: Feminist Perspectives, edited by Shirin M. Rai and Georgina Waylen (New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2008), 185–206.

16. Jennie E. Burnet, “Gender Balance and the Meanings of Women in Governance in Post-Genocide Rwanda,” African Affairs 107 (2008): 361–86.

17. Rwanda is often viewed as the preeminent example of this practice. Claire Devlin and Robert Elgie, “The Effect of Increased Women's Representation in Parliament: The Case of Rwanda,” Parliamentary Affairs 61, no. 2 (2008): 237–54.

19. According to a 2012s study by UN Women, in “31 major peace processes between 1992 and 2011, [women made up just] 4 per cent of signatories, 2.4 per cent of chief mediators, 3.7 per cent of witnesses and 9 per cent of negotiators.” See Christine Bell, “Text and Context: Evaluating Peace Agreements for Their ‘Gender Perspective,’” http://wps.unwomen.org/pdf/research/Bell_EN.pdf (accessed October 18, 2017); UN Women, “Women's Participation in Peace Negotiations: Connections between Presence and Influence,” http://www.unwomen.org/∼/media/headquarters/attachments/sections/library/publications/2012/10/wpssourcebook-03a-womenpeacenegotiations-en.pdf (accessed October 18, 2017). In the context of the mediation in the Great Lakes area, the appointment of President Mary Robinson (Ireland) as Special Envoy of the Secretary General marked the first time a woman had been designated as Chief Mediator for a UN-led conflict mediation. See “Women in Conflict Mediation: Why It Matters” (New York: International Peace Institute, 2013).

18. Catherine Moore and Tarsila Talarico, “Inclusion to Exclusion: Women in Syria,” Emory International Law Review 30, no. 2 (2015): 213–56.

20. Louise Chappell, “Comparative Gender and Institutions: Directions for Research,” Perspectives on Politics 8, no. 1 (2010): 183–89.

21. See Chappell, “Comparative Gender and Institutions.”

22. Francesca Gains and Vivien Lowndes, “How is Gender Implicated in Institutional Design and Change? The Role of Informal Institutions: A Case Study of Police and Crime Commissioners in England and Wales” (Working Paper in Gender and Institutional Change, No. 6, European Research Council, 2016). http://hummedia.manchester.ac.uk/schools/soss/politics/research/uic/WorkingPaper6-GainsLowndes.pdf (accessed October 18, 2017).

23. See the comments by U.S. Vice President Pence that he would not have dinner with a woman who was not his wife. Olga Khazan, “How Pence's Dudely Dinners Hurt Women,” https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/03/pences-gender-segregated-dinners/521286/ (accessed October 18, 2017).

24. Chappell and Waylen, “Gender and the Hidden Life of Institutions.” 599.

25. An ongoing study on political settlement in Somaliland from a gender perspective aims at bridging this formal/informal gap. Michael Walls, Marie-Luise Schueller, and Amina-Bahja Ekman, “Political Settlement in Somaliland: A Gendered Perspective,” http://www.progressio.org.uk/sites/progressio.org.uk/files/gender_in_somaliland_single_page_2017_03_22_final.pdf (accessed October 18, 2017).

26. Fiona Mackay, “Nested Newness, Institutional Innovation, and the Gendered Limits of Change.” See also Shirin Rai's work on informality, performance and political institutions: Shirin Rai, “Gendered Ceremony and Ritual in Parliament,” http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/pais/research/researchcentres/cpd/gcrp (accessed October 16, 2017).

27. Rebekka Clara Freidman, “Remnants of a Checkered Past: Female Combatants and the Renegotiation of Agency in Post-War Sri Lanka,” International Studies Quarterly (forthcoming).

28. Anne Marie Goetz, “Gender Justice, Citizenship and Entitlements: Core Concepts, Central Debates, and New Directions for Research,” in Gender Justice, Citizenship and Development, edited by Maitrayee Mukhopadhyay and Naysharan Singh (New Delhi: Zubaan, 2007), 16.

29. See generally Laura Sjoberg, Women as Wartime Rapists (New York University Press, 2016).

30. Laura Sjoberg and Caron E. Gentry, Mothers, Monsters, Whores: Women's Violence in Global Politics (Zed Books, 2007), 197.

31. Kate Fearon, Women's Work: The Story of the Northern Ireland Women's Coalition (Belfast: Blackstaff Press Limited, 1999), 144.

32. See Kamala Harris when questioning AG Sessions in the Senate. Katie Rogers, “Kamala Harris Is (Again) Interrupted While Pressing a Senate Witness,” https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/13/us/politics/kamala-harris-interrupted-jeff-sessions.html (accessed October 17, 2017).

33. See Elizabeth Warren being censured for reading a letter from the wife of slain civil rights leader Martin Luther King in the Senate (“nevertheless she persisted”) while male colleagues who undertook the same action were not. Paul Kane and Ed O'Keefe, “Republicans Vote to Rebuke Elizabeth Warren, Saying She Impugned Sessions's Character,” https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/02/07/republicans-vote-to-rebuke-elizabeth-warren-for-impugning-sessionss-character/?utm_term=.9d28931e7fc1 (accessed October 17, 2017).

34. Shirin Rai, “Gendered Ceremony and Ritual in Parliament.”

35. An illustrative example of this phenomena: “When Kosovo politician Jakup Krasniqi publically expressed his dissatisfaction with a Pristina-Belgrade normalization dialogue meeting in April 2016, he did so by blaming the result on the ‘weakness’ of Kosovo's female delegation, against the Serbian side's ‘toughness.’ He further claimed he wasn't just referring to the gender of delegates, but that a conciliatory approach to negotiations was in itself a ‘female’ characteristic, and needed to be challenged so as to ‘defend the interest of the country and the nation.’” Laura Wise, “Dangerous Women at the Peace Table,” http://dangerouswomenproject.org/2016/11/04/plays-well-others/ (accessed October 17, 2017).

36. Laura Wise, “Would You Trust This Woman with Your Country?” http://www.politicalsettlements.org/2016/06/09/would-you-trust-this-woman-with-your-country/ (accessed October 17, 2017).

37. Anne Sisson Runyan and V. Spike Peterson, Global Gender Issues in the New Millennium (Boulder: Westview Press, 2014) 63, 258–59.

38. Fionnuala Ní Aoláin and Naomi Cahn, “Hirsch Lecture: Gender, Masculinities, and Transition in Conflicted Societies,” New England Law Review 44, no. 1 (2010): 101–23.

39. Fionnuala Ni Aoláin, Dina Hayes, and Naomi Cahn, On the Frontlines: Women, War and the Post-Conflict Process (Oxford University Press, 2011).

40. Sjoberg, Women as Wartime Rapists, 36; Runyan and Peterson, “Global Gender Issues in the New Millennium.”

41. R. Charli Carpenter, “Innocent Women and Children”: Gender, Norms and the Protection of Civilians (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2006).

42. Sandesh Sivakimaran, “Sexual Violence Against Men in Armed Conflict,” European Journal of International Law 18, no. 2 (2007): 253–76.

43. V. Spike Peterson, “Gender Identities, Ideologies, and Practices in the Context of War and Militarism,” in Gender War and Militarism: Feminist Perspectives, edited by Laura Sjoberg and Sandra Via (Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, LLC, 2010), 19.

44. Elshtain examines the myth of men as the “just warrior” in conflict and women as “beautiful souls” and how these myths serve to recreate and secure women's position as noncombatants and men's identity as warriors. Jean Bethke Elshtain, Women and War (New York: Basic Books, 1987).

45. The extension of conflict myths to post-conflict, mediation, negotiation, and governance spaces can be seen as a dimension of fast-traveling theory. Gudrun-Axeli Knapp, “Race, Class, Gender,” European Journal of Women's Studies 12, no. 3 (2005): 249–65.

46. Amy G. Mazur, Theorizing Feminist Policy (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 38.

47. See Ní Aoláin et al., On the Frontlines, 49.

48. Siobhan Byrne and Allison McCulloch, “Gendering Power-Sharing,” in Power-Sharing: Empirical and Normative Challenges, edited by Allison McCulloch and John McGarry (London: Routledge 2017), 250. Relatedly, political settlement is also presumed to be “gender blind.” See Simeen Mahmud and Sohela Nazeen, “Gendered Politics of Securing Inclusive Development,” Working Paper No. 13. Effective States and Inclusive Development Research Centre, September, (2012), 3.

49. Fidelma Ashe, “Gendering Ethno-nationalist Conflict in Northern Ireland: A Comparative Analysis of Nationalist Women's Political Protests,” Ethnic and Racial Studies 30, no. 5 (2007): 766.

50. Byrne and McCulloch, “Gendering Power Sharing.”

51. Kris Brown and Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, “Through the Looking Glass: Transitional Justice Futures through the Lens of Nationalism, Feminism, and Transformative Change,” International Journal of Transitional Justice 9, no. 1 (2015): 127–49.

52. Consider the follow passage from Sheila Meintjes, Alice Brown, and Valerie Oosterveld, “Gendering Processes of Institutional Design, Activists at the Negotiating Table,” International Feminist Journal of Politics 16, no. 2 (2014): 363: “Sheila: In the Women's National Coalition our problem was that we did not interact officially with the technical people who were in the back rooms drawing up the Constitution, for instance, and were not always sitting at the negotiation table.”

53. Catherine O'Rourke, “‘Walk[ing] the Halls of Power’? Understanding Women's Participation in International Peace and Security,” Melbourne Journal of International Law 15, no. 1 (2014): 1–23.

54. Empirical analysis of peace agreements demonstrated selective but significant advances in some contexts on gender equality and other issues coded female during peace negotiations. United Nations Peacemaker and University of Cambridge, “Language of Peace,” https://www.languageofpeace.org/#/ (accessed October 18, 2017).

55. This analysis also helps to unpack the gender impact of clientelist politics, exploring how women as political actors (as politicians, policy makers, service recipients) negotiate clientelist politics and the gender impact of these negotiations in power-sharing settings.

56. Meintjes et al., “Gendering Processes of Institutional Design,” 364.

57. Ibid. 365.

58. Barry McCaffrey, “Nelson McCausland's DSD department to be investigated by Equality Commission,” http://www.thedetail.tv/articles/nelson-mccausland-s-dsd-department-to-be-investigated-by-equality-commission (accessed October 18, 2017), describing that criteria of “areas in proximity to areas of housing need” and “areas which have seen a decline in housing need” replaced standards human rights based equality assessments on access to public housing.

59. Robert Komer, “Bureaucracy Does Its Thing: Institutional Constraints on U.S.–GVN Performance in Vietnam” (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Santa Monica, 1972), 65.

60. I note the contrary view, however, that Banazsak and Weldon (2011) suggest, namely, that it could also happen in a reversed and unexpected way in which gender norms, embedded in the institutions destabilize male privileges and advantage women. See Lee Ann Banazsak and S. Laurel Weldon, “Informal Institution, Protest and Change in Gendered Federal Systems,” Politics and Gender 7, no. 2 (2011): 262–73.

61. Chappell and Waylen, “Gender and the Hidden Life of Institutions,” 600.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Fionnuala Ní Aoláin

Fionnuala Ní Aoláin is Regents Professor and Robina Professor of Law, Public Policy and Society at the University of Minnesota and Professor of Law in the Transitional Justice Institute at Ulster University. E-mail: [email protected]