Power and Authority in the Production of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325

Abstract

United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1325 was adopted in 2000 with the aim of ensuring all efforts toward peacebuilding and post‐conflict reconstruction, as well as the conduct of armed conflict itself, would entail sensitivity toward gendered violence and gendered inequalities. In this article, I contrast two accounts of the writing of UNSCR 1325 that issue from the two institutions that claim authority over the document: the United Nations Security Council and the NGO Working Group on Women, Peace and Security. I make a broader theoretical argument about the importance of paying analytical attention to the discursive terrain of international institutions when analyzing the formulation and implementation of security policy, concluding that contemporary theorizing of international institutions is product/productive of a particular configuration of political authority and legitimacy that can, and should, be challenged.

Security Sector Reform and the Paradoxical Tension between Local Ownership and Gender Equality

“…As a Security Council Resolution adopted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, UNSCR 1325 and the following six resolutions are legally binding upon all of the UN's 193 member states (Shepherd 2008).…”

'You will go far but no further': Applying a gendered lens to the women peace and security agenda in post-conflict Liberia

“…Post-colonial/black 22 feminist theory embraces an intersectional perspective of gender (gender-as-diversity), where gender is just one of a diverse range of intersecting identities (hooks 1981;Crenshaw 1989). Shepherd's (2008a) analysis of the language of the WPS policy supports this critique that the WPS policy contains different perspectives of gender informed by opposing feminist theories.…”

“…Some scholars acknowledge the limitations of WPS policy language around gender, while others identify that the WPS policy contains different feminist perspectives of gender based on different strands of feminist thinking (Pratt 2013;Pratt and Richter-Devroe 2013;Shepherd 2008a). For example, Pratt (2013) identifies that while the WPS policy contains liberal, cultural and radical feminist constructs of gender it lacks a focus on a post-colonial/black feminist construct.…”

“…Some debates point to the absence of strong political will, defined accountability measures and effective monitoring and evaluation frameworks (Westendorf 2010: 22;Barnes 2006: 2;Coomaraswarmy et al 2015;Otto 2010: 113;UN Women 2012a;EPLO 2013;Anderlini and Tirman 2010) as indicators for the slower than hoped for implementation. Other debates focus on the scope of the WPS policy, tools of implementation and the WPS policy language as hampering the implementation progress (Shepherd 2008a;McLeod 2011;Pratt 2013). I also recognise the implementation site as a potential barrier.…”

Girls with guns : the disarmament and demobilization of female ex-combatants in Africa.

“…However, since the passing of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1325 in October 2000, the international community is now stressing the importance of incorporating women into peace and security frameworks by codifying these processes into international law (Cohn et al 2004;DeLargy 2013;Popovic et al 2010;Tryggestad 2009). Eager to mainstream a gendered perspective into peacekeeping operations, Resolution 1325 concentrates on four thematic areas: gender-based violence, access to decision-making, peacekeeping operations, and DDR processes (deAlwis et al 2013;Shepherd 2008;Willet 2010). Rather than merely considering the differing needs of females, Resolution 1325 calls for the inclusion of active female participants into peacekeeping and peacebuilding operations.…”