Securitization and practices of human security in the north

Transcription

1 Securitization and practices of human security in the north Draft for National conference in political science, Trondheim 3-5. January Kirsti Stuvøy, PhD-candidate, Department of political science, University of Tromsø.

2 1. Introduction This paper takes as its starting point the juxtaposition of the comprehensions of security in context of formal political processes in the securitization approach and the humanization of security (Chun, 2003) introduced in the 1994 UNDP report New Dimensions in Human Security (UNDP, 1994). It is argued that the latter directs attention specifically to local positions and experiences of security. This introduces human security as a category that opens up for engagement with local positions of security. Questions then arise concerning the methods available for studying security within such a human security framework. During the last year I have collected empirical material by means of qualitative interviews with representatives of non-governmental crisis centers for women in Russia. In this paper I use this material to suggest an analytical framework that takes seriously how both subjective and objective aspects affect the comprehension of security. The securitization approach introduces criteria on the basis of which security is linked to the political process of gaining legitimacy for the adoption of emergency measures against an existential threat. Such processes are observed by focusing analytically on the speech acts performed as means to gaining such a level of legitimacy. The argument is that the securitization approach suggest an analytical parameter on the basis of which the objectification of certain issues as security is observed. In the 1994 UNDP report on human security, the need to be attentive to local experiences of security and the realization of security in people s immediate social context was emphasized. This concern with subjectivity in the human security concept introduced an alternative approach to the comprehension of security. I argue that both objectivist and subjectivist aspects are crucial elements in the process of studying and comprehending security. I use human security as the entrance point for engaging subjects view of a specific security issue, the issue of violence against women. I then propose an analytical framework that is attentive to both the subjectivist and objectivist aspects of the comprehension of security. It is argued that this is a useful step for gaining insight on the processes of power and politics that determine the comprehension of security. However, this final step is not pursued here. The purpose of the paper is to suggest an analytical framework that disentangles subjectivist and 2

3 objectivist aspects on the basis of the analysis of the qualitative interviews, and to get the usefulness of such an approach discussed. The thesis is that in an analysis of the issue of violence against women and the security-practices of non-governmental crisis centers for women, the human security viewpoint gives a representation of security that is attentive to the dynamics of subjective experiences and objective identification of security. I begin with a short discussion of the securitization approach and the human security perspective, before introducing the case, violence against women. Violence against women is not just a problem that women around the world become victims of. It is also an international field in terms of UN documents on the issue and in terms of the people working to combat this issue worldwide, who constitute an activist network or even an epistemic community. Therefore, before studying the practices of security in a a specific local context, I introduce the issue in terms of international documents and criticism thereof. This also serves to underline the importance of engaging local perspectives, as they introduce viewpoints differing from the monolithic language in international documents. In section four, I provide some examples of how the focus on subjectivist and objectivist moments functions as analytical variables for the systematic comprehension of the empirical data. Section four is also the final section of the paper, and I conclude by suggesting that while the securitization approach envisages security in an exclusively objectivist perspective, the human security approach allows an incorporation of both subjectivist and objectivist aspects. 2. Securitization and human security Security understood as a result of processes of constructing discourse through speech acts is the proposition of the Copenhagen school. 1 Speech acts performed through language comprise the analytical focus on the basis of which acts of expressing security concerns are studied. The sheer uttering of security by a state-representative, e.g. the description of a certain development as a matter of security, implies the claim of a special right to use whatever means are necessary to block it [i.e. the specific development (KS)]. (Wæver, 1 Main representatives of the Copenhagen school are Ole Wæver and Barry Buzan, and their earliest significant titles are People, states and fear (Buzan, 1983) and Security: A New Framework for Analysis (Buzan; Wæver, and Wilde, 1998). 3

4 1995:55) In order to comprehend security, security analysts should therefore focus on the processes that underlie the recognition of such claims, and how such claims gain resonance and contribute to legitimizing measures that do not necessarily adhere to traditional rules and procedures (Buzan; Wæver, and Wilde, 1998:23ff.). 2 A primary advantage of this approach is its focus on how security is constructed by means of a dynamic process on the basis of which a specific issue gains increasing attention, to the extent that it qualifies for the adoption of emergency policies. Security is synonymous with exceptional political acts that are legitimate because they address existential threats. As Lene Hansen has noted, according to this perspective the actual definition of security [is] dependent on its successful construction in discourse. (Hansen, 2000:288) To study security therefore demands a focus on the arguments employed in the process of securitization and how they receive effects. The securitization approach thus provides a basis for researchers ex ante analytical engagement with whether or not an act of securitization has taken place. By studying speech acts, the analysis reveals the step-bystep process that led to the recognition of a specific issue as a security issue, the dynamic process by which an issue becomes securitized. Security is thus an identifying tag to be placed on issues that come to be accepted as valid for the adoption of emergency measures (legitimization). This approach effectively creates a threshold for the understanding of security, and thus, functions as means to distinguishing political from security issues. After all, not everything is security. The threshold is however not substantially defined, as certain issues are not a priori excluded from being understood as security issues. The threshold is defined in analytical terms, according to which the recognition of security issues depends on the acceptance of the adoption of special measures that challenge the procedures and rules 2 A successful securitization is not assessed on the basis of empirical observation of the adoption of emergency measures. The analytical focus is on the process of gaining legitimacy for the pursuit of special measures that would not have been conceivable if the issues had not been framed as an existential threat (Buzan; Wæver, and Wilde, 1998:25). From this emerges the distinction between a securitizing move and securitization, the former being associated with a speech act that does not gain resonance in terms of the acceptance of adoption of emergency measures, while the latter does. Wæver notes (Wæver 1995:55, footnote 24) that a securitizing move is risky, because a lack of recognition of a claim of an emergency threat involves potential loss of prestige, a characterization that leads to the comparison of a securitizing move with a bet. It is odd that the impact of a unsuccessful securitization on the specific issue or on the people affected by the issues, is not addressed. The focus is solely on actors of prestige. 4

5 otherwise valid in the political domain. 3 Thus, security issues are defined on the basis of their achievement of recognition within formal political processes. The task of the analyst is to neutrally observe these processes of responses and exchanges between various securitization actors, including both politicians, bureaucrats, governments, lobbyists or pressure groups, and how they come to define a referent object of security in terms of how its represents an existential threat (Buzan; Wæver, and Wilde, 1998:35ff.). Such an analytically defined threshold excludes any concern with locally experienced insecurities that do not reach the level of formal politics. Although it is recognized that such a viewpoint is complementary to the Copenhagen perspective (Buzan; Wæver, and Wilde, 1998:35), it is noted that security is not a good to be spread to ever more sectors (ibid.). Hence, security is not only a limited but also a negative concept. In contrast to the securitization perspective, the notion of human security provides a category for taking account of local experiences and points of view, and studying them in a security perspective. In its signature 1994 report on human security, the UNDP underlined that human security is people-centered and addresses people s life situation in the seven domains of economy, food, environment, health, community, the personal and the political (UNDP, 1994:24). The focus on humans underlines that security is a global matter. This encapsulates a normative concern with improvements of life situations around the world. It is pointed out that this universal value can only be realized locally. This view is the basis for a focus on people s activism of creating security: Universalism implies empowerment of people. (UNDP, 1994:13) Individual effort is not sufficient, but must be complemented by judicious public policy and with participatory community organizations. (UNDP 1994:20). It is recognized that the multidimensionality of human security demands policy responses both on the local, state and international level. Beyond this decompartmentalization of responsibility, in its 1994 report the UNDP directed attention to conditions within states, and thereby made clear that it is not sufficient for states to focus on the survival of the sovereign state itself. Although the task of effectuating human security is distributed to multiple entities, the UNDP in 1994 took upon itself the task of advocating a human security idea, and stood 3 A crucial question in a securitization analysis is therefore: When does an argument with this particular rhetorical and semiotic structure achieve sufficient effect to make an audience tolerate violations of rules that would otherwise have to be obeyed? (Buzan; Wæver, and Wilde, 1998:25) 5

6 thereby for an ideological change from security in terms of the state and territory to community and people (cf. Karamé, 2005:56). The 1994 UNDP document is thus a primary example of how the sovereign state is challenged in its practices of formal government by international initiatives to institutionalize and apply certain norms and standards. Non-state actors can contest established norms and become involved in defining new practices of rule and order. This process is described as a discernible shift in the allocation of authority for determining norms of governance. (Johnston; Shearing, 2003:22) In order to observe this process, the suggestion is that analytical focus should be directed at forms of micro-governance in order to establish how particular institutions promote governance within a specific field (cf. Burris 2004:337). In regard to security, the assumption is that the multidimensionality of threats to security demand an engagement with multiple agents involved in establishing security. These new agents are non-state entities, e.g. nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), as well as supra-national organizations such as the United Nations, the European Union, the World Trade Organization, etc. The securitization approach can recognize the speech acts of such actors to the extent that they speak to and gain leverage within the formal political sphere. The securitization approach is thus not excluding voices, but the success of a speech act of security is dependent upon it being heard and acted upon by putting aside established rules of action within the formal political sphere. Theoretically, no actors are prohibited from striving for such a position. For example, the human security perspective as outlined by UNDP in 1994 directs attention to human insecurities experienced by individuals in their specific social environment. Such experiences remain irrelevant to the securitization approach as long as they do not achieve attention and are responded to by means of legitimizing the adoption of emergency measures within the formal political process. Alternatively, human security points to the empowerment of individuals and groups in defining what security constitutes for them, and also to their capabilities of establishing security in local contexts. In the 1994 UNDP report the primary responsibility of states to provide security for their citizens is recognized, but at the same time the role of empowerment, by means of which local communities themselves should take on the task of alleviating local security issues, was underlined. Human security is 6

7 thus a concept that directs attention to multiple forms of security governance that are necessary to address current and future security problems. From this perspective, analytical attention can be directed at non-state providers of security (cf. Shearing, 2006:26). 4 Non-governmental crisis centers for women represent such an agent of security. They provide security for victims of domestic violence. By looking into how crisis centers, through various services, aim at securing women in a local context, I examine the activities of security actors that are seldom paid attention to in other attempts to mirror the reality of security. The activities of such local crisis centers are attached to a number of international documents that constitute a normative base for the comprehension of the issue of violence against women. I begin with looking into these documents, and argue that the representation of the issue of violence against women as objectively identifiable in these documents can insightfully be contrasted with examination of views expressed by local agents of security, i.e. the crisis centers, that deal with this issue (in practice). 3. Violence against women and human security The work to prevent violence against women on a global scale has led to the adoption of a number of UN documents on the basis of which international reporting structures are established as means of implementation. When the UN General Assembly in 1979 adopted The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), women s human rights were addressed in context of the recognition of existing inequalities and the discrimination of women on many fronts in contemporary society. It is recognized in the Convention that discrimination against women violates the principles of equality of rights and respect for human dignity (CEDAW 1979, preamble) and the message is that the Parties condemn discrimination against women in all its forms, agree to pursue by all appropriate means and without delay a policy of eliminating discrimination against women (CEDAW 1979, Art. 2). The Convention was 4 To recognize the diversity in the governance of security does not imply an exclusion of the state. The role of the state in the governance of security is recognized while at the same time looking at the role of non-state providers of security. The role of the state is thus not a priori defined, but it is an empirical question to clarify the role of the state in relation to other governance entities (Wood; Benoît 2006:3). 7

8 ratified in 1981, and in November 2006, 185 counties have signed the Convention. 5 The parties to the Convention are obliged to report to the UN Secretary-General every four years on the legislative, judicial, administrative or other measures which they have adopted to give effect to the provisions of the present Convention and on the progress made in this respect (Art. 18). A Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, established in Art. 17 of the CEDAW Convention, is tasked with overseeing and managing the reporting procedures. In this reporting system the state is responsible for collecting information and preparing a report that is submitted to the international committee for examination in a CEDAW session (two annually), and these elaborations result in a statement by the CEDAW Committee on the report, including also the pinpointing of needs of improvements of state measures. A further international reporting system regarding the status of women exists within the framework of The United Nations High Commission on Human Rights. With its headquarter in Geneva, this UN entity examines, monitors and reports on the human rights situation in specific territories, as well as on major phenomena of human rights violations world wide. Violence against women was in 1994 recognized as such an international human rights phenomenon when a Special Rapporteur was appointed to report on and examine the causes and consequences of violence against women. 6 The establishment of the Rapporteur in 1994 recurred upon Resolution 48/104, adopted by the UN General Assembly in December 1993, Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against women (UN Document A/RES/48/104) (DEVAW). This resolution emphasized violence against women specifically and aimed to strengthen and complement the CEDAW Convention. It is recognized in the resolution that violence against women is an obstacle to the achievement of equality, development and peace, and that women s opportunities are limited by continuing and endemic violence. Therefore, domestic legislation must be developed so that it addresses these sufferings of women. Furthermore, national plans, prevention strategies, training of law enforcement officers and adjustments in the educational system are envisaged as are also new data collection 5 Information from CEDAW website: (Nov 15, 2006) 6 This appointment took place in 1994 in the 56 th meeting of the Commission on Human Rights, see resolution 1994/ states are members of the Commission which meets annually in regular sessions in March/April. The mandate was extended in 2003, in resolution 2003/45 adopted in the 59th session of the Commission. 8

9 and statistics on domestic violence, and research on the causes, nature, seriousness, and consequences of violence against women. The adoption and implementation of such measures are henceforth included as an item on the CEDAW reporting. 7 The General Assembly condemns violence against women both within a public and private domain: Article 1 For the purposes of this Declaration, the term "violence against women" means any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life. Violence against women thus encompasses physical, sexual and psychological violence, and the occurrence of these forms of violence in the family, within the general community and perpetrated by the state, are all incorporated into the resolution (Article 2). A similar definition is the basis for the work of the Special Rapporteur: [The Commission on Human Rights] 4. Affirms that the term "violence against women" means any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life, and including domestic violence, crimes committed in the name of honour, crimes committed in the name of passion, trafficking in women and girls, traditional practices harmful to women, including female genital mutilation, early and forced marriages, female infanticide, dowry-related violence and deaths, acid attacks and violence related to commercial sexual exploitation as well as economic exploitation; 8 In addition to the general reference to physical, sexual and psychological violence both in domestic and public spheres, this definition is more specifically citing forms of violence that in light of the contemporary discussion have generated attention, such as honour killings and trafficking. In both definitions there is a concern with threats of use and use of violence against women. Living in constant anxiety of becoming a victim of genderbased violence is thus recognized as a serious limitation of women s life situations. 7 The CEDAW Convention does in fact not entail any references to violence against women. Shepherd notes that that at no point does DEVAW refer to gendered violence as perpetrated by men, as one would expect if the documents were based solely on the conceptualization of violence as violence against women. (Shepherd, 2005:388). 8 Commission on Human Rights, resolution 2003/45. 9

10 The adoption of these documents was thus the basis for establishing international monitoring structures on the matter of violence against women. The CEDAW reporting system is founded on the willingness of the states to contribute by means of reporting on their efforts to eliminate violence against women. This also reinforces the responsibility of states to ensure protection of women. In accordance with its mandate of examining human rights situations around the world, the Special Rapporteur on violence against women travels to specific regions and reports on the developments there. The establishment of these reporting systems on violence against women gives the impression of being a rather stringent institutionalization of international efforts to take action on the issue of violence against women worldwide. 9 The reporting systems contribute on the one hand with information but also create expectations on behalf of multiple actors in terms of the observations of developments in specific regions. Overall, this institutionalization of efforts to eliminate violence against women on a global scale over the last two decades has directed attention to practices within states, and speaks to the recognition by the international community of the problem of violence against women. This development is seen in close connection with the activism of the international women s movement who has successfully framed this issue and set it on the agenda (cf. Joachim, 2003). The loud voices (Shepherd, 2005:381) of women activists were heard. This achievement of a level of legitimacy of the issue of violence against women that justified institutionalized international response suggests, when reflecting upon the Copenhagen school, that a successful speech act was conducted. Today, attempts at domesticating violence against women, according to which it is a private problem, are challenged by a web of international treaties and conventions that recognize violence against women not only as a public but also as an international concern. The mandate of the CEDAW committee was in 2000 broadened to include also a complaint structure. Individuals and groups can according to The Optional Protocol to the CEDAW convention, which entered into force in December 2000, submit complaints of violations of the convention. The requirement is that the state has ratified the Optional 9 This stringency must be seen in relation to the myriad of UN Committees that address women issues, as this implies that the efforts of the international community to eliminate violence against women are scattered. This is not necessarily negative, but can also be understood as a reflection of the nature of the problem, as violence against women occurs both at the work place, in the home and in other spaces. 10

11 Protocol, and that the violation took place after ratification. The Optional Protocol from 2000 also opened up for the possibility that the Committee itself may launch investigations into grave violations of the Convention in a specific state. 10 The security concerns of women were taken to the highest level of international cooperation in 2000, when the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1325 on women, peace and security. This extensive resolution addresses the specific vulnerability of women to violence, and launches a gender-mainstreaming approach according to which gender concerns shall be taken into account on all levels of UN peace operations. Gender based violence is thereby exerted on to the agenda of all UN activity in armed conflicts. Gender mainstreaming aims at implementation of gender concerns on the micro-level, among peacekeepers and in local communities (see Withworth, 2004). The 1993 resolution of the General Assembly on violence against women fully acknowledges the necessity of achieving changes in the legal, political, administrative and cultural fields on the national level. The role of non-governmental organizations is particularly alluded to in the resolution from The work of NGOs contributes to increasing awareness of the problem world wide, and the General Assembly aims to facilitate and enhance the work of the women s movement and non-governmental organizations and cooperate with them at local, national and regional levels (Res 48/104). The international commitment to eliminate violence against women thus incorporates a comprehension of the need to complement international conventions and reporting systems with action on the national, regional and local level. One way in which the international system has established a basis for exchange among multiple actors engaged in activities to eliminate violence against women world wide, is through a conference-diplomacy. The first UN conference on women issues convened in Mexico 1975, as delegations from 133 states gathered to discuss gender equality. In the Women s Year 1976, the International Tribunal on Crimes Against Women gathered nongovernmental representatives in Brussels. The UN conference diplomacy mobilized both state representatives and non-governmental activists, and this helped women activists lobbying inside the UN win institutional allies. (Joachim, 2003:256) Deliberations 10 The Committee has so far considered a handful of complaints. A main concern was in these processes the admissibility of the complaint, as the domestic legal system must have been fully exhausted for the complaint structure of the CEDAW to take on the case. CEDAW website. 11

12 continued in Copenhagen in 1980, and in Nairobi in 1985, the Nairobi Forward Looking Strategies to the Year 2000 were adopted. Here, governments identified violence against women as an obstacle in the realization of equality, development, and peace. (Joachim, 2003:256) A gathering of experts in Vienna in 1986, contributed to the diagnostification and suggestion of a problem-solving approach (Joachim, 2003: ) 11 : The fact that violence against women takes place within the sacred entity of the family, implies that it is difficult to disrupt and take action against it. The slogan Make the private public rested upon the recognition that the family as an institution does often not provide security. The action suggested was to criminalize violence against women, thereby mobilizing the significant symbolic role of the legal system. This underlines also the importance of action on the domestic level, and this implied emphasis on the role of local activists in striving for national strategies and implementation. Almost a decade later, in 1995 at the Beijing conference, The Beijing Declaration and Platform of Action introduced gender as a basic concept with which to re-evaluate societal structures. These developments of practical solutions and analytical frameworks to understand violence against women underline that [n]ot only feminist activism but also decades of feminist theorizing have enabled the consideration of gendered violence as a social and political issue. (Shepherd, 2005:380) This acknowledgement of violence against women and the erection of institutionalized practices to address the issue also contributes to the construction of the problem and its representation: The conceptualization of violence against women, while it attempts to raise the profile of such violence, also functions to construct violence against women. (Shepherd, 2005:394) It is noted that women in these documents are constructed as a homogenous group, vulnerable, exploited and subject to male violence (ibid.), and they must be protected, always and in any spheres: In DEVAW, women exist, and so must be secured against the many and various acts of violence that they may encounter at any moment, in any sphere of their lives. (Shepherd, 2005:384) 12 The 11 The expert meeting gathered social scientists, including sociologists, lawyers, and criminologists. The organisers were the UN Branches for the Advancement of Women and for Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice. Joachim 2003: Shepherd notes that thinking about violence against women as a research approach is congruent with accepting existing gender narratives in which men are those who are empowered. Controlling and active, as well as aggressive., p

13 framing of the issue that has taken place through the international activism and the adoption of international documents has created a particular world of meaning and being (Nayak; Suchland, 2006:470) While recognizing a form of insecurity that disproportionally targets women, Nayak and Suchland (2006) note that there are two immediate consequences of the particular politicization of violence: First, focusing on violence against women, as opposed to gendered violence, implies that violence against men and against groups in ways that are gendered, raced and internationalized (Nayak; Suchland, 2006:472) are ignored. Second, in response to gender violence, racism, imperialism and Orientialism have been approved, as visible in the explanation of Islamism as the explanation par excellence for gender troubles around the world. (Nayak; Suchland, 2006:472) 13 Overall, these analyses of the international documents that target gender discrimination, including violence against women, challenge the foundational assumption that gender violence is perpetrated by men against women. It is indeed argued that violence against women is not the effect of a male hegemony, but constitutes in itself a hegemonic project that succeeds in furthering a specific representation of practice (Nayak; Suchland, 2006). The human security perspective has been associated with the establishment of international responses and the definition of standards and rights in international documents. In addition, however, human security includes a local dimension. Human security is realized in people s lifeworld. From this perspective of human security, the focus is on security as multi-dimensional, and attention is directed at the different viewpoints of security. The concern is thus with positional experiences of security. The analyses of the international documents on violence against women show that these documents fix a particular meaning, and thereby implicitly suggest that violence against women is objectively identifiable. From a human security viewpoint, the local experiences of violence must be attended to, and juxtaposed to such normative frames expressed in international conventions and resolutions. Drawing upon Bourdieu, it is suggested that while the international documents represent a definition of how to see the issue, by engaging the 13 Self-reflectively, the authors note that [i]ronically, it may be such limited understandings of gender violence that unintentionally keep the topic of gender on the sidelines of political science. (Nayak; Suchland, 2006:472) 13

14 positional experiences complementary views of the issue are expelled (cf. Bourdieu, 1999:618). By engaging the views of representatives of non-governmental crisis centers, I analyze such processes of representation. Suggesting that human security cannot be interpreted such that a state enterprise must create and sustain (all) processes of security, the underlying assumption is that local groups, such as women groups, have the capacity to create positive environments of security (cf. Hoogensen, 2005a:125). When looking into local practices on the issue of violence against women, the question is what representation of security is created. In the following, I provide some examples of how the analysis of the interviews provides insight on the divergence between subjectivist views and objectivist recognition of the issue. 4. Practices of security in the north In 1993 Marina Pisklakova started to operate the first phone line for victims of domestic violence in the Russian Federation. The hot-line was located in the premises of the Institute of socio-economic problems of the people at the Academy of the Sciences in Moscow, which made a room and a phone available. A Swedish volunteer trained Pisklakova, whose engagement was motivated by her attentiveness to the stories of abuse and violence that she had heard from colleagues and acquaintances as well as her participation in feminist seminars during perestroika. Today, Pisklakova is the director of the national umbrella organization National centre for the prevention of violence - ANNA (Азоциация нет насилию). A number of non-governmental crisis centers emerged throughout the 1990s, in part instigated by the inflow of money from foreign grant-givers, and in part by the feminist activism connected to the preparations for the UN Women s Conference in Beijing in In the Russian northwest, where I in my empirical research have focus on the regions Murmansk oblast, Archangelsk oblast, and the Republic of Karelia, the first crisis center was established in Murmansk in 1997, with support from the Norwegian Council for Equality (Likestillingsrådet) and the Barentssecretariat. It is during the last decade therefore that institutional responses to the issue of violence against women have been established in Russia. One of the most recently established crisis center in northwestern region, the Severodvinsk city societal organization for women; cabinet of 14

15 psychological help for women in crisis situations (Cabinet), speaks to the recent recognition of this issue: When we [in 2001] began to work on this program [on the improvement of women s situation], we were the first in the city to address the problem of violence against women. Because, in principle, earlier no one ever talked about it. (Informant 12) Therefore, although the Soviet Union declared the Women Question solved in the 1931 Constitution and ratified the CEDAW convention in 1981, the issue of violence against women has only during the last decade been an object of public debate and activism in Russia. When studying this issue in a context of transformation, as in Russia today, the many tensions and conflicting comprehensions of this issue affect the representation of the problem, and this makes a useful case for studying the tensions between subjectivist and objectivist aspects related to the comprehension of such a human security problem. I have interviewed representatives of seven non-governmental crisis centers in five cities in the northwest of Russia and three national umbrella organizations in Moscow. 14 In addition, I have visited and interviewed three Norwegian entities that have taken part in the Network of Crisis Centers in the Barents Region (NCBR), a network of crisis centers in the north of Russia, Norway, Sweden and Finland, established in 1999 and headed by the Finnish activist and academic Aino Saarinen. I use these interviews as means to studying the field of violence against women in Russia. That implies that I recognize the multiple actors engaged in the field through the interviews with this specific actor group, non-governmental crisis centers for women. I focus on how the local crisis centers establish security for the victims, and how they assess the process of producing this security. By engaging the local dynamics of this process, I gain insight on representations of the issue of violence on a local level. While the CEDAW convention addresses discrimination against women generally and the 1993 GA Resolution addresses specifically violence, the local non-governmental crisis centers help specific women. The crisis centers are agents of empowerment. For example, the crisis centers work with the victims of violence, and invite alternative ways of living, while at the same time being sensitive to the importance of actively making a choice to get out of a violent relationship: 14 A list of all informants is included at the end of the paper. 15

16 Crisis centers always work on the basis of the needs of the victims. We can never take action against her choice. We always follow up on her choice. We help her throughout this process. We do not have the right to intervene against her will. (Informant 19) However, although individuals receive assistance in finding their options and become educated in how to make choices on behalf of themselves and their life, this emphasis on individual choice is contrasted with reflection on the structural constraints that define the space of maneuvering for the subjects. In addition to the importance of understanding the personal responsibility for changing their own life situation, the subjective experiences of violence are also reflected in the threshold that must be overcome by the individual when contacting a crisis centre: Women come here [to the crisis center (KS)] and it is very hard for them to begin to talk. They are used to taking care of their problems on their own. But then such an emergency took place, so she can t take it anymore. She is already at the edge. (Informant 2) There is also a regional factor entailed in this, when considering the practice of crisis centers in small communities: Many are silent, they don t talk. Because the smaller the city, the more difficult it is for such a small service to work. Because it is more difficult to make such a service anonymous. (Informant 15) The fear of the consequences, for example in regard to societal status, is one intimidating factor: For a woman to come to a crisis center is very difficult. If she is the wife of a director, if this women is afraid of losing her status, afraid of losing her children it is very difficult. (Informant 15) The concern with the choice of the individual directs responsibility to the subject that has become a victim of violence. The role of the subjects willingness to take action is attached to multiple layers of fear and insecurity: Notably, when a woman s patience is overflowing, that is, the woman lives in such a situation of violence, that when she calls and comes [to the crisis center (KS)], she is already prepared to talk about her situation. She is prepared to talk, that is one thing, but is she ready to move [make changes]? Sometimes the woman is psychologically prepared to talk, to talk for a very long time about her problems, but she is not always also ready to take this further and defend her rights, for that she is not always ready. Then, we may ask for her decision, what is she prepared to do in order to put an end to the violent situation, but that is her freedom of choice. (Informant 11) In contrast to the concern with individual responsibility, the focus on the stigma connected to the individual s choice of seeking help and advice direct attention to societal norms and the hegemonic culture that can affect individual s practices. 16

17 From a human security viewpoint, security must be understood both in terms of people s experiences of security and in terms of public responses, e.g. structure of assistance, that help remedy the security problems. In regard to the problem of violence against women this implies that the subjective viewpoints and experiences must be connected to the experiences with the objective structures that circumscribe societal responses to the issue of violence against women. In Russia, for example, the possibility for a women to choose to leave her husband is constrained by in particular two structural factors: the housing problem and economic dependence. The housing problem is related to the fact that a women has nowhere to go if she decides to leave her husband in a case of violence, because there are very shelters available at crisis centers for women. In the northwest region, in Murmansk oblast, Arkhangelsk oblast and in the Republic of Karelia there is one shelter in Murmansk and one in Sortevala. 15 In Moscow, with approximately million inhabitants, there is not yet any shelters for women, but one is in the planning to be erected 2007 (Informant 19). Further problems with the housing market are availability as well as price. Both make it practically impossible for either the woman or the man to find alternative housing. Therefore, in Russia many divorced couples continue to share a two-bedroom apartment. While it might be conceivable that a women who has become a victim of violence, moves to live with relatives and friends for a while, this is problematic not only because of the lack of space, but also in regard to the special experiences that this women is recovering from. This is fully recognized in a Norwegian crisis center context, in which the focus is on the fact that the stress experienced by a women who has to leave her home, should not be further worsened by an intimidating housing alternative. In response to the housing alternatives that Russian crisis centers offer victims of violence, the differences are vast between the opportunities in Norway and Russia, as a Norwegian NCBR participant noted: People should not be installed in bad houses, old houses that smell mould. Because then they move back to the perpetrator of violence, because there they at least had maybe a nice home. We are very concerned about this The second [crisis center] I visited in Archangelsk 15 The shelter in Murmansk was financed by the Barentssecretary, and implied that the women activists in Murmansk were given money to buy an apartment that houses the crisis center, the phone line and consultancy facilities, and also represents an opportunity for housing women in very needy cases - at in total three rooms. In Sortevala, the Finnish Solidarity Foundation in 2003 financed the establishment of a shelter in cooperation with the local women s council Nadeschda, which was later transferred to the municipalities that took over the running of the crisis center. 17

18 I wouldn t even take my horse in there. I was totally shocked, I cried when I got out of there. (Informant 18) The economic dependence is a consequence of unemployment. Since the late 1990s, the Russian Federation has experienced strong and persistent economic growth. As a result, in 2006 the Russian Federation paid off its last debt to the Paris Club and announced that they will begin external lending. 16 The increase in oil revenues led to the establishment of a stabilization fund in 2003, which on December 1, 2006 totaled USD 83,21 billion. 17 These overall measures of economic growth and welfare improvement do however not reflect regional discrepancies, and although the Russian economy is growing and jobs are in plenty, the payment is meager compared to the cost of living (sources to be added). 18 In regard to violence against women, the economic dependence of the woman on her husband implies that her structural position from which to take the right choices for her own future is impeded. However, this economic dependence is not one-directional, as under certain circumstances, the man is economically dependent on the woman. These economic relations are assessed in terms of power relations that define the dynamics of couples and often also explain the use of violence, as well as the direction of violence: At the beginning she explains that, yes, my husband is beating me. In my family there is domestic violence. We [the consultants (KS)] talk to her for a couple of hours, and learn that earlier, she beat him. When she earned more, when he was unemployed ( ) [V]iolence from the side of men in relation to women, when she is absolutely without blame, that I have experienced very seldom. (Informant 2) This serves to underline the role of economic security not only in terms violence against women, but in regard to violence overall and the need to comprehend all forms of violence in terms of social relations. In addition to economic dependence and the knowledge of non-existent state assistance in such matters, there are also other aspects, such as in particular the parental rights, that imply that the situation of violence demands very difficult choices for a women if she considers taking actively charge of the situation and change her life, as the crisis centers consult her to do. Overall, absolutely all the representatives of the crisis 16 Radio Free Europe, August 2006 ( 8FC7-620B070A0FD1.html) and Johnson s Russia List, JRL #6 (February). 17 RIA Novosti, : In comparison, the Norwegian pension fund totalled NOK billion (ca. USD 260 billion) on September 30, 2006 ( 18 The average monthly income in Russia, as of November 2006, is USD

19 centers underlined that the structural impediments on women s choice are constrained by these two structural elements, the housing problem and economic dependence. As summed up, by one informant: It is essential that there is somewhere to live and off of something (Informant 20) 19 Therefore, when the message of the human security perspective concerning the need to take account of the realization of security in people s lifeworld is taken seriously, an engagement with the subjective experiences and viewpoints on the specific security issue directs attention to objective structures that impede possibilities of empowerment, which in the example of violence against women is related to the freedom of choice. In addition to the subjective viewpoints, a focus on the activist side of the nongovernmental crisis centers directs attention to how the state addresses the issue. Nongovernmental crisis centers are in addition to their work specifically with the victims of violence, engaged in advocacy. Their political work varies from center to center, but they all share a concern with the need of a multidimensional solution to the problem of violence against women: This problem [domestic violence] is not to be solved within the framework of one crisis centre. Need a broad approach. (Informant 6) This implies cooperation between non-state and state entities, including medical institutions, the police, and the legal system. Regional crisis centers are particularly concerned with establishing cooperation with local authorities as this is the only possibility for the provision of the most adequate help to victims of violence: I always said, that both non-governmental and governmental [entities], they don t need to say that they are right. There is enough work for both! They need to supplement each other. When I give talks to governmental representatives, I always say that our aims and tasks are the same. We all would like to live better tomorrow, that our children live better. ( ) So, that, which governmental entities cannot do on the basis of the instructions [that direct their work/responsibilities], non-governmental entities do. (Informant 15) The various difficulties related to the establishment of cooperation with municipal entities that regional crisis centers experience will not be explained here. Instead, I will highlight the attempts to gain leverage for a legalistic approach to the issue of violence against women in Russia. This advocacy is headed by the umbrella organizations in Moscow, in particular by the Association No to Violence (ANNA), but also by the Russian Association of Crisis Centers and the Consortium of Non-governmental 19 «Потому, что важно, чтобы была бы где жить, и на что жить. Вот два важнейших вопросах. 19

20 organizations. These national umbrella organizations have also included their regional colleagues in various calls, such as most recently in the 2003 call of the RACC Security in the family. Time to change a recommendation to legislative and executive authorities. 20 In the preparation of this recommendation, the RACC collected advice and best-practices from various regional centers, from the northwestern region in particular from Maja in Petrozavodsk and Nadeschda in Archangelsk. The lead position of the Moscow based organizations in this advocacy is complemented by the experiences of regional crisis centers with the legal system, in particular in regard to the willingness or lack of willingness within the legal system to engage the issue of violence against women before court. The status of the legislation on violence against women in the Russian Federation is judged harshly by women activists: In contemporary Russia, there exists a law on the protection of animals rights. We protect animals. I love animals very much - I m not saying that that s not necessary. But beyond that, we don t have any protection of women. (Informant 15) In Russia, violence against women is addressed in the criminal codex, and under the section Offences against life and health. Violence against women is considered a private affair. This, argues women activists, explains why violence against women is a secondary priority, as public cases are the primary focus (Matvienko, 2005:81). To address violence against women as a private prosecution case before court, demands multiple pieces of evidence, in particular a police report and a medical report that both confirm the incident of physical violence. These reports are the means by which a woman proves that she is a victim of violence. The crisis centers, that provide assistance to the women, explain that such medical reports are often denied. In addition, because of lack of trust in the police, many women do not report acts of violence, and therefore a police report that is required in order to put such a case before court, is not achievable. There are thus hindrances within the state institutional system that prevent a legal probe. Nonetheless, the legal framework does provide a basis for taking such violations before court. According to article 119 of the Criminal Codex, the procurator may initiate 20 RACC: Безопасность в семье. Время действовать. Рекомендации органам законодательной и исполнительной власти по предотвращению насилия с семе», Moscow