Examine the feminist perspective of state and state security

Examine the feminist perspective of state and state security

The core of the feminism as an ideology lies at the generations old discrimination that the woman has faced just because of her gender. So, obviously the feminist mind has thought about state and the security of the state as a subject where those decimations can be nullified by providing enhanced explanations and revolutionary views.

Existence of a ‘structured’ system of promoting discrimination’ is the belief of feministic mind. Feminists look at the state as the expansion of that patriarchal society as such. Institutionalisation of patriarchy, patriarchal society and systems based on gender is perhaps more dangerous than anything else for a woman to be saved from the attacks of patriarchy proponents. That is what more or less state is all about. The state, because it is a reflection of people’s society more or less a patriarchal society attempts vehemently to control woman’s role. Reproduction – which is woman’s only domain, inheritance – which is actually to be considered as righteous right of a born and sexuality are governed and regulated by the state. The mental stigma that ‘woman’ is to be ‘protected’ by the man actually leads woman giving up her autonomy. The systematic deconstruct of the concept of state by Sylvia Walby quite clearly points out to woman’s labour and reproduction as objects of control by the state. It is evident that the perspective of feminists of the state is perhaps rightly influenced by the discrimination emanates out of patriarchy.

Over the period of time with the advent of feministic movements allied with other social movements, the state is compelled to change with time progressively. High emphasis and respect for democratisation served well to woman good. The woman’s reservation in parliaments, assemblies and institutions of self-government are at the centre stage of national debate in many countries. Electoral pressures and intellectualism have pushed many nation-states to sign conventions like Convention on Eliminating Discrimination Against Woman (CEDAW). Multi-national and international organisations have upped their mark to push change in pre-meditated conceptualisation of state by asking elimination of men’s only views regime is a right approach. From employment to violence, the patriarchal proponents and the philosophy as such have been challenged quite firmly because of positive effects of this new feministic conceptualisation of the state.

Well, it is quite obvious that in every sphere of state affairs the feminists look at the roles affecting woman that is quite different than the conventional. State security too is thought a bit different way. Men are those who fought and fight wars. It is man’s domain. There are the conventional thoughts. The feminists are critical of these views. They find state security affairs help patriarchal enthusiast to propend. Woman has historically been the victim of inhuman wartime crimes like mass rape etc. Feminism argues to broaden the very concept of security. It supports a theory where security related conflicts are not merely managed with the help of security personnel only but there is a need to have a sea change in understanding the idea of security of the state. This idea and perspective to security affairs should be understood and expound to keep peace with democratisation processes. Empowering the affected is one of the core way-outs accepted in this concept. The feministic perspective to state security somehow indicates to adopt peaceful measures as the violent conflicts management has historically dramatically cost more on women who are usually outside the state priority.

The feminist urges for peaceful approaches while dealing with the state security. This perspective is quite remarkable as it propends gender equality in a structured institutionalised system called the state.

Changing dimensions of security in post-cold war period

Changing dimensions of security in post-cold war period

An impactful outcome of the end of cold war on global security affairs is the world where military interventions were became the only threats to the security. There came the era where security affairs have to be thought in relation to environment, economy, culture and perhaps least in relation to military interventions. Changing dimensions of security in post-cold war period cab be discussed efficiently under the following broad topic heads:

®Rise in conflicts related to separatism and ethnic nationalism.

®International terrorism threating global peace.

®Change in approaches to interstate competition since economic worries get the centre stage.

®Rise in threats to environment.

The post-cold war era can be predominantly termed as modern era of civil wars. The established peaceful lines separating a state from the other were and are being challenged. Apart from more conflicts are of intra state nature than interstate. In the middle east, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria,  Jordan, Israel, Palestine, Yemen, Pakistan etc. , in the Africa, Somalia, Sudan, Egypt, Libya, Algeria, Mali, Niger, Congo etc. are few of the states badly affected by advent of civil wars. In civil wars, there nothing ‘civil’ in that. Few of the deadliest weapons of modern era are being used against so called enemy mainly ending us hurting innocent citizens. The highest lose is of innocent civilians and their property. It seems the paradigm of security is now changed to human centric than state centric especially after cold war. Human security is prime is issue now.

Experiences of religious and radical intolerance have been gradually developed as form of terrorism. Radicalisation of religious beliefs is one of the gravest worries especially after the end of cold war. Amalgamation  of drug and trafficking mafia grouping with radical religious fronts with the blessings of selfish political outfits have created cross border networks of important supplies threatening the security of  the state. The havoc and charged atmosphere created after every successful terror attacks do weaken the state’s credulity and subsequently authority. This sort of atmosphere fuels the civil wars.

The most threatening establishment that has got its profound presence is international terrorist organisation. Majority of 35 odd terrorist organizations designated by the United Nations have come into existence after the end of cold war. The signature event showing the malicious and dangerous idea of these organizations was 9/11 in the US. It showed how the mightiest military power in the world could be shaken and faith of millions of peaceful people can be trembled. It is considered as a turning point in global security regime. The London bombings, attacks on embassy, Indian and Afghan parliaments and strong emergence of radical terrorist organization Al Qaeda under the leadership of Osama Bin Laden were few of the grave happenings that have defined the new state security realities in early 2000s. Recent advent of emergence of the Islamic State of Iraq and Levan (ISIL) is considered dangerous threat than the earlier to world peace.

Non-military threats to security are important aspects arose mainly after end of the cold war. There are two main subjects of a state with which threats to state security are being thought: 1. Matters related to economic stability and growth and 2. Matters concerning environmental degradation. Financial stability of a country, foreign flows, energy supplies are few of the most important sectors of economy that are now target in new world order. Economic insecurities are pushing for radical change in political regime as for example the Suhurto regime. It has ignited revolutions too many a times.  States like Nauru, Fiji, Kiribati, Borabora and entire Caribbean are under existential threats due to global environment degradation. The United Nations has recognised this fact for small developing islands. These nations are at the blink of submergence.

The post-cold war era has seen qualitative change and shift in the perception about threats to security. Non-military dimensions occupy considerable space in the imagination of security policy makers. That is a sea change and significant too along with worries for speedily rising civil wars and international terrorism.