Home

Women, Peace, and Security in the Cultural Sphere

5 October 2005

Entering this conversation as a documentary filmmaker and an academic in the areas
of international politics, gender studies, and cultural studies, I spend
a lot of time thinking about how gendered and sexualized people outside of the
mainstream (usually women and queers) challenge mainstream understandings of
peace and security through their everyday actions.  In particular, I'm interested
in how films, filmmaking, and web interventions break past conventional understandings
of where politics occurs, beyond states and formal international organizations. This kind
of thinking compliments the work of the many activist women blogging on this site,
who strive to ensure that women are more equitably represented at all governmental
decision-making levels and in extra-governmental mechanisms for the prevention,
management, and resolution of conflict.

In considering 'women making a difference', I'm interested in how women use
film and the web in efforts to promote peace and security.  But I'm also interested
in how these interventions by women are so often taken over by others to serve their
own purposes.  As a US citizen living and working in the UK, I pay a lot of
attention to how mainstream discourses of peace and security coming from the
Bush and the Blair adminstrations overwrite or obscure what these women are doing.

Let me give you an example.  Did any of you see the film Kandahar?  If you did, you
probably remember this film as a devastating critique of all recent interventions
into Afghanistan.  These include critiques of the ideological struggle between the US
and the USSR during the Cold War that played itself out in Afghanistan in the late 1970s
as well as critiques of the subsequent implimentation of a fundamentalist interpretation
of Islam imposed by the Taliban regime.  This critical message about war as a way
of imposing enlightenment was vividly portrayed in the film and explicitly stated in
countless interviews with the film's director Mohsen Makhmalbaf and the film's star
Nelofer Pazira.  Yet in spite of all this, the Bush administration used Kandahar as part
of its justification of its war in Afghanistan.  Implying that the film made the case for
the urgent rescue of Afghan women by US and UK military forces, the Bush administration
encouraged US citizens to view the film as a testimony to the hardships these women faced
while imagining themselves supporting the military rescue of these women. In the struggle
for the hearts and minds of US and UK citizens over how to think about the plight of
Afghan women, the Bush and Blair administrations paraded first wives Laura Bush and
Cheri Blair before the public to emphasize this official line. As women speaking
on behalf of the human rights of Afghan women, Laura Bush and Cheri Blair added
legitimacy to the official foreign policies of the US and UK governments.  In so doing,
they participated in the occlusion of the message the film's star, collaborator, and
conceiver of the story, Nelofer Pazira, hoped would reach the wider world --
military intervention is not the answer in Afghanistan. 

Examples like this one demonstrate how the so-called cultural sphere is very much
part and parcel of the so-called political sphere.  But it also demonstrates the
power of institutionalized voices like Presidents, Prime Ministers, and their wives
to short-circuit powerful political interventions for their own purposes -- in this
case, in support of military intervention rather than against it.  In so doing, it
supports the idea that women make a difference in politics, but it complicates what
this difference might be and might do.  Is it enough to increase women's participation
as key decision-makers in or allied with instititionalized political organizations? 
Or is it necessary to think about what these women stand for?  For, as this example
demonstrations, the category of 'women' as stereotypically standing for those opposed
to conflict and supporting peace almost immediately breaks down when we consider
a real-world example involving real women.

 

Can there be a green populist project on the Left?

Many on the Left want to return to a politics based on class, not populism. They point to Left populist parties not reaching their goals. But Chantal Mouffe argues that as the COVID-19 pandemic has put the need for protection from harm at the top of the agenda, a Left populist strategy is now more relevant than ever.

Is this an opportunity for a realignment around a green democratic transformation?

Join us for a free live discussion on Thursday 22 October, 5pm UK time/12pm EDT.

Hear from:

Paolo Gerbaudo Sociologist and political theorist, director of the Centre for Digital Culture at King’s College London and author of ‘The Mask and the Flag: Populism and Global Protest’ and ‘The Digital Party: Political Organisation and Online Democracy’, and of the forthcoming ‘The Great Recoil: Politics After Populism and Pandemic’.

Chantal Mouffe Emeritus Professor of Political Theory at the University of Westminster in London. Her most recent books are ‘Agonistics. Thinking the World Politically’, ‘Podemos. In the Name of the People’ and ‘For a Left Populism’.

Spyros A. Sofos Researcher and research coordinator at the Center for Middle Eastern Studies, Lund University and author of ‘Nation and Identity in Contemporary Europe’, ‘Tormented by History’ and ‘Islam in Europe: Public Spaces and Civic Networks'.

Chair: Walid el Houri Researcher, journalist and filmmaker based between Berlin and Beirut. He is partnerships editor at openDemocracy and lead editor of its North Africa, West Asia project.

Had enough of ‘alternative facts’? openDemocracy is different Join the conversation: get our weekly email

Comments

We encourage anyone to comment, please consult the oD commenting guidelines if you have any questions.
Audio available Bookmark Check Language Close Comments Download Facebook Link Email Newsletter Newsletter Play Print Share Twitter Youtube Search Instagram WhatsApp yourData