peace

Read On! Environmental Peacebuilding

/ Cecilia Marcela Bailliet / Leave a comment

On International Women’s Day I recommend seeking inspiration from the latest book edited by Daniëlla Dam-de Jong, Professor of International Sustainable Development Law, Grotius Centre for International Legal Studies, Leiden University, the Netherlands and Britta Sjöstedt, Senior Lecturer in Environmental Law, Lund University, Sweden- The Research Handbook on International Law and Environmental Peacebuilding, available via Open Access!

At a time in which the UN Secretary-General has criticized the international community for its lack of cooperation to address climate change or safeguard peace, this book shines a path towards potential progress in 18 highly inspiring, innovative chapters that open a window of visionary ideas in pursuit of a genuine sustainable peace. The authors underscore the need to address the global challenge of resolving armed conflicts that are connected to environmental threats, including resource scarcity and environmental degradation. The authors are: Virginie Barral, Carl Bruch, Daniëlla Dam-de Jong, Onita Das, Sondra Faccio, Ole Kristian Fauchald, Karen Hulme, Jens Iverson, Marie Jacobsson, David Jensen, Tadesse Kebebew, Merryl Lawry-White, Albert Martinez, Sequero Sarah Mead, Elisa Morgera, Isabelle Morley, Marco Pertile, Giulia Pinzauti, Naomi Roht-Arriaza, Bas Rombouts, Britta Sjöstedt, and Mara Tignino.
It is perhaps the willingness of the authors to explain how different fields of law and non-legal regimes converge to provide protection opportunities for inter alia, the environment, indigenous people, rural women, and future generations that provokes our imagination to consider creative approaches. The chapters are well-written, thoroughly researched, and highly readable!

In Honor of Johan Galtung- A Call for Recognition of the Universality of Positive Peace and International Solidarity to Counter World Disorder

/ Cecilia Marcela Bailliet / Leave a comment

The passing of Johan Galtung, the peace scholar who articulated the concept of “positive peace” as incorporating equality, non-discrimination, and termination of structural violence marks the urgency of the international community to repair what Agnes Callamard described as an international system “rooted more in systemic inequality and discrimination than in universality.”[1] Citing the many examples of atrocity crimes in the twentieth century, culminating in Israel and Gaza at present, she called for accountability to counter the rampant impunity by state and non-state actors. However, a more pressing challenge is whether it is possible to complement accountability measures with strategies to pursue positive peace and solidarity. It is notable that the UN Declaration on the Right to Peace Art. 2 sets forth the responsibility of states to guarantee equality and non-discrimination as a means to build peace within and between societies[2]. The former High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet invoked the role of civil society espousing solidarity as a means for attaining equality: “Equality is about empathy and solidarity and about understanding that, as a common humanity, our only way forward is to work together for the common good.”[3] 

The staggering levels of inequality around the world are fomenting violence and instability, in direct contradiction of the UN Charter’s affirmation of the aim of “the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small.”[4] Human Rights has suffered from a myopic era in which there was neglect and underfinancing programs focused on securing equality for all and the corollary of the need to recognize and implement collective rights and duties. Creative new approaches that aim to correct the imbalance in policy and practice should be based on human rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 1 (2) articulates a duty of care as an element of being human: “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.” One may reflect that the lack of dissemination of a universal duty of care correlates with the resounding failure of modern governments and societies to end practices that marginalize and exclude others from the enjoyment of human rights.

It may be suggested that the first step to countering the trend towards world disorder would require a collective pivot towards recognition of common obligations of care towards all others within a nation and externally through programs promoting positive peace and international solidarity.  All governments and civil society actors should galvanize support for bringing to an end all forms of apartheid and systemic exclusionary structures to enable the fair participation of all people (irrespective of sex, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, language economic class, age, etc.) in education, work, and civic life. The Revised Draft Declaration on Human Rights and International Solidarity Article 9 (c ) calls for States to act in solidarity with civil society by “Building the full, equal and meaningful political participation of all people in national, regional and global decision-making positions”.[5]  We may envision the international community embarking upon a type of global social contract based on allegiance to the universality of the principles of positive peace and international solidarity, reversing the trend of inequality, polarization, fragmentation, and violence that has enveloped our world.

[1] Agnes Callamard, Gaza and the End of the Rules Based Order: What the Israel-Hamas War means for Human Rights and International Law, Foreign Affairs (February 15, 2024).

[2] Declaration on the Right to Peace, adopted by the UN General Assembly A/RES/71/189 (2 February 2017),

[3] Equality is at the heart of human rights | OHCHR

[4] Inequality Inc. | Oxfam (oxfamamerica.org)

[5] reviseddraftdeclarationrightInternationalsolidarity.pdf (ohchr.org)

International Solidarity for Children

/ Cecilia Marcela Bailliet / Leave a comment

One of the markers of the deep polarization between people interviewed in the media addressing the impact of both the hostage taking and the killing of children in Israel and Gaza is the repeated implied reference to the principle of Tu Quoque– that breaches of international humanitarian law, being committed by the enemy, justify similar breaches by a belligerent. This is principle is considered to be universally rejected in international humanitarian law, given that its obligations are considered to be unconditional and not based on reciprocity. It is imperative that the concept of international solidarity replace the narrative of revenge and division that is manifested in cycles of violence that is devasting children in Israel and Palestine.  

International solidarity is an expression of unity by which peoples and individuals enjoy the benefits of a peaceful, just and equitable international order, secure their human rights and ensure sustainable development.[1] It supports recognition of overlapping cross-border local to global solidarity network initiatives demonstrating a common empathy and shared aim between different peoples. This in contrast to unitary solidarity which is exclusionary as it centers on a common nativist, national segregated community orientation.  International Solidarity is intended to promote respect for, protection, and fulfilment of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all individuals, without distinction as to race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth, disability or other status. All individuals, including children, have the right to participate meaningfully in, contribute to and enjoy a social and international order in which all human rights and fundamental freedoms can be realized. The aim is to promote solidarity between Israeli and Palestinian children and to encourage their right to engage in solidarity initiatives to build peace and enjoy human rights.

States, International Organizations, and Non-State Actors have a duty to respect the right of international solidarity and not breach obligations under international law. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 38 (4) sets forth the obligation to take precaution in relation to children in conflict: “In accordance with their obligations under international humanitarian law to protect the civilian population in armed conflicts, States Parties shall take all feasible measures to ensure protection and care of children who are affected by an armed conflict.” State and Non-state actors, including Hamas, are obligated to respect human rights and humanitarian law. This includes ensuring that children are not subject to attack (or taken hostage), that they are not forcibly displaced or separated from their parents, that they be given humanitarian assistance (including food, water, and medicine), that they are not subjected to arbitrary house raids or arrest and detention, that they not be used as human shields, and that they enjoy a clean and healthy environment. The current conflict has not only resulted in the severe psychological trauma and anxiety, but also deaths and injuries of children in Gaza and Israel.[2]

The urgency of pursuing full negotiations to secure the release of the hostages, with special priority for the children, women, elderly, and disabled persons is underscored.

Martin Luther King observed “The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it. Through violence you may murder the liar, but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth. Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate. In fact, violence merely increases hate. Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.”[3]

Moreover, the spread of anti-Semitic and Islamophobic hate speech has incited violence in other countries, including the murder of a Palestinian 6 year old child and a Jewish woman in the United States.[4] As the Spokesperson for the OHCHR Ravina Shamdasani stated[5]:

“We call on political and other leaders to speak out, unequivocally, against such speech, and to take clear measures to stem any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence. This is a time for the international community to come together in solidarity, advocating for the protection of all civilians, no matter where, no matter what.”

 King Abdullah suggested a vision of international solidarity that would be child centered at the Cairo Summit for Peace: “Our collective and unified message to the Israeli people should be: We want a future of peace and security for you and for the Palestinians, where your children and Palestinian children should no longer live in fear. .  .The only path to a safe and secure future for the people of the Middle East and the entire world—for the Jewish people, for Christians, for Muslims alike—starts with the belief that every human life is of equal value . . .”[6]

It is important that international and national actors within governments, international and regional organizations, civil society, and faith-based groups cooperate to pursue a cease- fire to be followed up by a peace and solidarity transitional justice mechanism that would be inclusive of participation by children. Positive News provides an overview of ten civil society groups that work for Israeli-Palestinian peace.[7] A future peace and solidarity mechanism should collect and share children’s stories of common losses as well as interdependent future aspirations to establish mutual recognition, empathy, and trust among the children of Israel and Palestine.  It should deconstruct the polarizing narratives in order to create a common commitment to promote a culture of sustainable peace and international solidarity.  This may help to promote support for expansion of peace and solidarity educational programs for Israeli and Palestinian children in the future.

[1] The revised Draft Declaration on Human Rights and International Solidarity, available at: G2306905.pdf (un.org)

[2] Children in Gaza ‘developing severe trauma’ after 16 days of bombing | Israel-Hamas war | The Guardian

[3] Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community?. p. 67

[4] 6-Year-Old Boy Dead in Anti-Muslim Attack Near Chicago, Police Say – The New York Times (nytimes.com) 

US synagogue head killed as police warn against speculation over motive | Crime News | Al Jazeera

[5] Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories | OHCHR

[6] Remarks by His Majesty King Abdullah II at the Cairo Summit for Peace At the Cairo Summit for Peace | King Abdullah II Official Website

[7] Bridging the divide: 12 groups working for Israel-Palestine peace – Positive News – Positive News

Nobel Peace Prize for 2023- Press Release

/ Cecilia Marcela Bailliet / Leave a comment

The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize for 2023 to Narges Mohammadi for her fight against the oppression of women in Iran and her fight to promote human rights and freedom for all.

“Zan – Zendegi – Azadi”
“Woman – Life – Freedom”

The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize for 2023 to Narges Mohammadi for her fight against the oppression of women in Iran and her fight to promote human rights and freedom for all. Her brave struggle has come with tremendous personal costs. Altogether, the regime has arrested her 13 times, convicted her five times, and sentenced her to a total of 31 years in prison and 154 lashes. Ms Mohammadi is still in prison as I speak.

In September 2022 a young Kurdish woman, Mahsa Jina Amini, was killed while in the custody of the Iranian morality police. Her killing triggered the largest political demonstrations against Iran’s theocratic regime since it came to power in 1979. Under the slogan “Woman – Life – Freedom”, hundreds of thousands of Iranians took part in peaceful protests against the authorities’ brutality and oppression of women. The regime cracked down hard on the protests: more than 500 demonstrators were killed. Thousands were injured, including many who were blinded by rubber bullets fired by the police. At least 20 000 people were arrested and held in regime custody.
The motto adopted by the demonstrators – “Woman – Life – Freedom” – suitably expresses the dedication and work of Narges Mohammadi. 

Woman. She fights for women against systematic discrimination and oppression.

Life. She supports women’s struggle for the right to live full and dignified lives. This struggle across Iran has been met with persecution, imprisonment, torture and even death.

Freedom. She fights for freedom of expression and the right of independence, and against rules requiring women to remain out of sight and to cover their bodies. The freedom demands expressed by demonstrators apply not only to women, but to the entire population.

In the 1990s, as a young physics student, Narges Mohammadi was already distinguishing herself as an advocate for equality and women’s rights. After concluding her studies, she worked as an engineer as well as a columnist in 
various reform-minded newspapers. In 2003 she became involved with the Defenders of Human Rights Center in Tehran, an organisation founded by Nobel Peace Prize laureate Shirin Ebadi. In 2011 Ms Mohammadi was arrested for the first time and sentenced to many years of imprisonment for her efforts to assist incarcerated activists and their families.

Two years later, after her release on bail, Ms Mohammadi immersed herself in a campaign against use of the death penalty. Iran has long been among the countries that execute the highest proportion of their inhabitants annually. Just since January 2022, more than 860 prisoners have been punished by death in Iran.

Her activism against the death penalty led to the re-arrest of Ms Mohammadi in 2015, and to a sentence of additional years behind walls. Upon her return to prison, she began opposing the regime’s systematic use of torture and sexualised violence against political prisoners, especially women, that is practised in Iranian prisons.

Last year’s wave of protests became known to the political prisoners held inside the notorious Evin prison in Tehran. Once again, Ms Mohammadi assumed leadership. From prison she expressed support for the demonstrators and organised solidarity actions among her fellow inmates. The prison authorities responded by imposing even stricter conditions. Ms Mohammadi was prohibited from receiving calls and visitors. She nevertheless managed to smuggle out an article which the New York Times published on the one-year anniversary of Mahsa Jina Amini’s killing. The message was: “The more of us they lock up, the stronger we become.” From captivity, Ms Mohammadi has helped to ensure that the protests have not ebbed out.

Narges Mohammadi is a woman, a human rights advocate, and a freedom fighter. In awarding her this year’s Nobel Peace Prize, the Norwegian Nobel Committee wishes to honour her courageous fight for human rights, freedom, and democracy in Iran. This year’s Peace Prize also recognises the hundreds of thousands of people who, in the preceding year, have demonstrated against the theocratic regime’s policies of discrimination and oppression targeting women. Only by embracing equal rights for all can the world achieve the fraternity between nations that Alfred Nobel sought to promote. The award to Narges Mohammadi follows a long tradition in which the Norwegian Nobel Committee has awarded the Peace Prize to those working to advance social justice, human rights, and democracy. These are important preconditions for lasting peace.    

Oslo, 6 October 2023
 

Peace and Solidarity: Dilemmas of the Evolution of International Law in An Age of Decoupling

/ Cecilia Marcela Bailliet / Leave a comment

I presented my research to the North South Webinar Series, based on my previous Research Handbook on International Law and Peace (Edward Elgar 2019) and my forthcoming Research Handbook on International Law and Solidarity (Edward Elgar 2023). I will discuss the normative evolution of these third generation rights, the link to the UN Report Our Common Agenda, solidarity paradoxes in an age of decoupling and recoupling, as well as securitized peace and solidarity. There is a role for peace and solidarity in the context of transitional justice, and hence relevant to intractable conflicts like Palestine in which peace and solidarity civic society spaces are under threat. I argue for a pro homine peace and solidarity that is gendered, intergenerational, and inclusive. Peace and Solidarity are both means and ends as they call for pacific settlement of disputes, recognition of the right to freedom of expression (including digital access) and equitable participation and benefit in the common heritage of mankind. The lecture is available here

Solidarity for Peace: Approaches within International Law Seminar Live Stream 14 March 10 am Oslo Time

/ Cecilia Marcela Bailliet / Leave a comment

Following the invasion of Ukraine, the international community has expressed solidarity in pursuit of a peaceful resolution. Within International Law, which legal solidarity approaches can be taken by states?

Can we pursue “peace and solidarity through law”? Can we replace “lawfare” and “security through power”? Is it possible to dismantle the structures of violence, oppression maintained by states and non-state actors and change the context of a fragmented international order? Solidarity is the value that all individuals and peoples have the right to benefit from peaceful and equitable international order.

The live stream is available here

UN General Assembly Emergency Session on the Ukraine

/ Cecilia Marcela Bailliet / Leave a comment

Pursuant to the Uniting for Peace Resolution A/RES/377 (V) 3 November 1950, the General Assembly will hold an Emergency Session on the Ukraine at 10 a.m. New York Time, you may watch on UN WebTV

The letter submitted by the Ukraine is available here

It should be noted that although the primary formal mechanisms of accountability may be limited, there remain alternative forums, such as fact finding mechanisms, reports by UN human rights treaty and charter bodies as well as European institutions, as well as peoples tribunals.

Ingrid Weurth in the LawFare blog correctly critiques the misuse of humanitarian arguments to justify territorial intervention:

“I have been arguing for years that expanding international law to focus on human rights and humanitarian objectives at the expense of territorial integrity has created credibility and other problems that weaken the international legal system as a whole.

Today, the international community should reinvest in norms of territorial integrity and sovereignty through international law, even at the occasional expense of humanitarian objectives (which should be pursued vigorously through other avenues). The work of the United Nations should focus on interstate peace and territorial integrity.”

I would argue that the UN work on peace cannot be divorced from human rights as it is defined as a purpose within the preamble of the UN Charter, as well as Article 55, while Article 56 places an obligation on Member States to cooperate to achieve respect for human rights. The orientation of the international order is the pursuit of a pro homine peace, as discussed in The Research Handbook on International Law and Peace.

Jane Addams and Belva Ann Lockwood, et al., the newest members of ASIL

/ Diane Marie Amann / Leave a comment

A warm welcoming of new members highlighted the recent annual meeting of the American Society of International Law.

Those welcomed included two luminaries – a Nobel Peace Prizewinner and a U.S. Presidential candidate – plus untold others, as reflected in this resolution, adopted by ASIL’s General Assembly:

RESOLVED,

That the American Society of International Law, wishing to provide recognition and posthumous redress to women who were excluded from membership in the Society during its early years, hereby confers membership on JANE ADDAMS, BELVA ANN LOCKWOOD, and any other women whose applications for membership were denied from 1906-1921.

FURTHER RESOLVED,

That the Society should undertake additional research to determine which members of other groups also were excluded from membership over the course of the Society’s history, and merit similar redress.

ASIL President Lucinda A. Low (left) introduced the resolutions, one of her last acts before handing the presidency to Professor Sean D. Murphy. Low, a partner at Steptoe & Johnson LLP, acted in response to a member inquiry – an inquiry prompted, as Low told ASIL members, by “International Law and the Future of Peace,” the speech I gave upon receiving the 2013 Prominent Woman in International Law award of ASIL’s Women in International Law Interest Group. As I indicated in that speech, original credit is owed to yet another ASIL President: Professor Alona Evans (below left), the 1st woman elected to lead the Society, in 1980, her tenure cut short by her death at age 63 that same year.

Six years earlier, Evans and Carol Per Lee Plumb had published “Women and the American Society of International Law” in the American Journal of International Law. They reported that ASIL, founded in 1906, had refused women’s applications for membership until 1921, the year after the U.S. Constitution was amended to give women the right to vote. Applicants before that time included:

► Lockwood (1830-1917) (top, middle), an attorney-activist who gained admittance to the District of Columbia bar in 1873 thanks to the intervention of U.S. President Ulysses Grant. Thereafter, she became the 1st woman to appear on an official ballot as a candidate for U.S. President, and also the 1st to argue a case before the U.S. Supreme Court.

► Addams (1860-1935) (top, right), the Chicago settlement house leader whose achievements including chairing the 1915 International Congress of Women at The Hague and serving and the 1st President of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom. She would earn the Peace Prize in 1931.

According to Evans’ co-authored article, when Addams sought ASIL membership, she was sent a letter in which she was “invited, instead, to subscribe to the Journal ‘for the same amount as the annual dues ….’” That letter constitutes one of the few remaining records of such applications; it is for this reason that the 2018 Resolution refers to all women, known and unknown, who were denied membership.

Similarly lacking is evidence of how members of other groups fared in ASIL. (The sole African-American person elected ASIL President, C. Clyde Ferguson Jr., served just before Evans.) The Society has further resolved to seek this information and grant redress.

As for Evans, President Low indicated that the Society is considering how best to honor her legacy. These resolutions surely constitute a superb 1st step.

(Cross-posted from Diane Marie Amann)

Recent developments in Colombian jurisprudence on conflict-related sexual violence

/ Daniela Kravetz / 3 Comments

During her first visit to Colombia last month, UN Special Representative on Sexual Violence in Conflict Zainab Bangura drew attention to the issue of sexual violence in Colombia’s five decade long conflict. She met with government officials, survivors and civil society to discuss the progress made in preventing and responding to sexual violence. The conflict, which has involved left-wing guerrillas, right-wing paramilitaries and state security forces, has taken a heavy toll on the civilian population, in particular women and children. Those who have experienced sexual violence want their crimes acknowledged. Ms Bangura’s message was clear: Colombian authorities must work to end the silence and impunity surrounding these crimes.

This is an important message. Despite their prevalence, sexual violence crimes are rarely prosecuted, and impunity levels remain high. However, several recent decisions—in which courts have stressed the need for accountability—reflect positive developments in the judiciary’s handling of these crimes.

Colombia’s Constitutional Court has played a significant role in giving sexual violence crimes visibility. In January of this year, the Constitutional Court issued Auto (Order) 009, in which it noted “with alarm” the persistence of sexual violence as a serious form of gender discrimination. It urged authorities to not only address these crimes, but to comply with their obligations to prevent and ensure their non-repetition. Importantly, it stressed that all parties to the conflict were responsible for such crimes, and referred over 400 sexual violence cases to the Attorney General’s Office for investigation and prosecution.

The Court also highlighted two underreported issues. It noted that sexual violence against children illegally recruited by armed groups persists, in particular against indigenous children. During her visit, Ms Bangura also referred to this issue as well as to the silence that exists regarding the generations of children born out of rape. Additionally, the Court recognized that women are at times targeted for sexual violence and displaced because of their sexual orientation−an aspect of the conflict often ignored.

This ruling follows the Court’s landmark decision of 2008, Auto 092 on women and displacement, in which it acknowledged that women are among those most affected by displacement and that displaced women are particularly at risk of sexual violence. In that ruling, the Court stressed that sexual violence is “a habitual, extensive, systematic and invisible practice in the context of the Colombian armed conflict”. It called on the Attorney General’s Office to investigate 183 cases attached to the decision. Continue reading →

Beyond Sexual Violence: Gendered Political Insecurity as a Threat to Peace

/ Kristin Bergtora Sandvik / Leave a comment

Julieta Lemaitre and Kristin Bergtora Sandvik

Based on extensive field research in Colombia, our new article Beyond Sexual Violence in Transitional Justice: Political Insecurity as a Gendered Harm examines political insecurity as a specifically gendered harm that must be addressed in the ongoing Colombian transitional justice process.

In a previous blogpost we described the tragic plight of the women’s rights activist and survivor of sexual violence Angélica Bello. Bello was one of the main proponents of Law 18 June 2014, which sets out to guarantee access to justice for victims of sexual violence. The Law is part of the transitional justice process and seeks to bring Colombian law into harmony with international law regarding sexual violence in the context of the armed conflict. It defines crimes of sexual violence as war crimes and crimes against humanity, and sets out criteria for investigating sexual crimes and protecting survivors analogous to those of the ICC. As the peace negotiations in Havana between the government and the FARC guerrilla continue to make slow but steady progress, the sexual violence agenda increasingly captures the field of harms to women in war.

While recognizing the importance of this law, we nevertheless suggest that it is a problem for the ongoing transitional justice process that there are so few articulations of what other kinds of gendered harms may look like and how they should be effectively addressed. Much of the growing literature on gender in armed conflict and the debates over post-conflict reparations for women focuses on the prevalence and harms of sexual violence. This development has engendered controversial debates concerning the alleged prioritization of sexual violence at the expense of other harms to women, whether this debate sexualizes and infantilizes women, as well as with respect to forms of victimization not captured by feminist frames of reference, such as male rape (This is often framed as a debate between the Halley and MacKinnon schools of thought). In her work on reparations, Ruth Rubio-Marin takes issue with what she sees as an excessive emphasis on sexual violence in transitional justice, embodying both a suggestion that sexual harm is the worst abuse that can happen to women and the entrenchment of a patriarchal ideal of female chastity. Rubio-Marin (2012) argues that the ‘hyper-attention’ to sex now risks doing further harm to women by deviating attention from other non-sexual forms of sex-specific harms, and isolating sexual and gender based violence from broader agendas that confront the multiple gendered forms of harm and injustice.

What are these other gender specific harms? What should transitional justice focus on beyond sexual violence? How can we think of gendered harms in relation to poverty alleviation or of resource redistribution?

In our article, we argue that if civic trust is to be built among all citizens, women’s experience of exclusion from the political through force and intimidation must be included in the narratives of armed conflict, political insecurity and the aftermath of war. Importantly, political insecurity is complex and extends beyond conflict between the state and the guerrillas, and yet the guarantee of security of political activity is a central component of a transition to peace. Arguably, political insecurity will persist as long as there is no effective challenge to the subnational hold of illegal armed actors emerging in the aftermath of war. The insecurity fostered by these actors is gendered, enforcing cultural mandates to confine women to the domestic space. In a transition to the end of armed conflict guerrillas can stop being both a threat for community organizing, and a justification for state repression.

Finally, we also suggest that the complete dismantling of gendered political insecurity will remain a challenge for transitional justice. A just transition to peace for women would require first, the dismantling of the capacity of private powers (at least of organized crime and business interests) to use violence to achieve their economic goals, and it will also require a vigorous promotion of women’s political participation at the grassroots level. More scholarly attention to the gendered aspects of these problems and scenarios is needed as Colombia continues to stumble towards the end of its 5o year old civil war.