Banning sex: who pays the price? The effects of zero-tolerance policies on female peacekeepers

ABSTRACTThe contested zero-tolerance policy of the United Nations (UN) regulates sexual relations between peacekeepers and civilians while on mission. Though the policy is intended to protect civilians from sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA), many have argued, conversely, that it exacerbates their precarity and undermines female sexual agency. This study pushes these debates further by examining how sexual regulatory frameworks endorsed by the UN directly and indirectly impact female peacekeepers. Drawing on interviews conducted with police officers, soldiers, and gendarmes, as well as elite decision makers across four countries (Ghana, Zambia, Uruguay, and Senegal), we argue that strict regulation of sexual behaviors can limit women’s ability to meaningfully participate in peacekeeping operations in two ways. First, it incentivizes and legitimizes domestic security institutions’ decisions to extend “protectionist” zero-tolerance policies to female peacekeepers. When taken to the extreme, these policies can be enforced through gender segregation models that marginalize women in the workplace. Second, banning sex with civilians can inversely channel sexual demands toward female peacekeepers. This can contribute to a hypersexualized work environment in which SEA and harassment is rife. These findings reinforce the need to reconsider policy frameworks governing sexual relations and raise urgent questions regarding the sexual agency of female peacekeepers.KEYWORDS: United Nationszero-tolerance policiesfemale peacekeeperssexual exploitation and abuse (SEA)regulating sex Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.Notes1 Between 2007 and 2023, there were 1,309 allegations of SEA and harassment reported against UN peacekeepers (UN Missions Citationn.d.).2 According to the UN, “sexual exploitation” is defined as “any actual or attempted abuse of a position of vulnerability, differential power, or trust, for sexual purposes, including, but not limited to, profiting monetarily, socially, or politically from the sexual exploitation of another.” “Sexual abuse” is defined as “actual or threatened physical intrusion of a sexual nature, whether by force or under unequal or coercive conditions” (UNHCR Citation2023).3 While this study refers to “men” and “women” in binary terms to remain consistent with UN and institutional policy discourses, it is important to recognize that gender binaries are a social and cultural construct that many may not recognize or support. Additionally, while sex, such as male and female, refers to an individual’s biological characteristics, gender is the socially constructed roles, behaviors, and attributes considered appropriate for women and men (Butler Citation2006). Our discussion primarily focuses on the experiences of female peacekeepers, as the UN’s policy and rhetoric often focus on the presence of female bodies. We use “female” and “woman” largely interchangeably in this analysis.4 There are many debates among local and international policy actors concerning the distinction between “sex trafficking” and “smuggling.” The distinction depends largely on whether those who deploy these terms support sex work or are against it. One can identify two camps within the international community concerning this issue. The first are those who promote the protection of the rights of adult sex workers and deem consent a crucial aspect of distinguishing victims of sex trafficking from voluntary sex workers who choose to migrate. The second are those who consider all forms of prostitution a form of violence against women and champion its gradual abolition. They argue that acknowledging the possibility of consent in this context entails making a distinction between more and less undeserving victims. It also provides a “way out” for the trafficker, who can claim that consent was given for the work (see Meshkovska et al. Citation2015).5 The policy was adopted in 2003 in response to reports that refugees in West Africa, particularly children, were being abused by UN personnel (Simm Citation2013).6 These countries were the pilot countries for DCAF and the Gender and Security Sector Lab at Cornell University for the Measuring Opportunities for Women in Peace Operations (MOWIP) methodology. The authors helped to implement the methodology in these countries and the data obtained is used in this article to illustrate the variation in the implementation of policies regulating sex. For more information about the methodology, see DCAF (Citation2020).7 The detailed results are available in Karim and Huber (Citation2020, Citation2021, Citation2022) and Karim (Citation2022).8 This is based on data collected by the authors in 2019.9 Only two women interviewed noted harassment as a challenge that they encounter, and it was not clear whether the nature of that harassment is sexual. However, it is possible that SEA is prevalent but unreported.10 This is based on data of personnel in the police forces of Zambia and Senegal collected by the authors in 2019 as a complement to the interview process. For more information about the source of this information, see the full results (Karim Citation2022; Karim and Huber Citation2022).Additional informationFundingThis work is supported by DCAF and the Geneva Centre for Security Sector Governance under the grant name ELSIE INITIATIVE FOR WOMEN IN PEACE OPERATIONS.Notes on contributorsRadwa SaadRadwa Saad is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Africana Studies at Cornell University, USA. Her current work explores how archetypes of citizenry are contested, appropriated, or expanded through military conscription practices in post-colonial states. More broadly, her work examines the role of militaries in state-building processes, security sector reforms, and issues of peace and security in Africa. She holds an MSc in Security Studies from King’s College London, UK, and is an alumnus of the African Leadership Centre’s Peace, Security, and Development Program for upcoming African scholars.Laura HuberLaura Huber is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Mississippi, USA. Her research interests include security sector reform, conflict, gender, peacekeeping, and political violence. Her work primarily examines how gender norms influence political violence, the impact of conflict and international interventions on women’s rights, female peacekeepers, and gender reform in the security sector. In particular, her research explores how women’s integration into, and gender norms within, security institutions are connected with effectiveness, community relations, abuse of power, and sexual violence and exploitation. She received her PhD in Political Science from Emory University, USA, in August 2019. Her work has been published or is forthcoming in International Studies Quarterly, the Journal of Conflict Resolution, Political Research Quarterly, Conflict Management and Peace Science, Perspectives on Politics, and International Peacekeeping.Sabrina KarimSabrina Karim is the Hardis Family Assistant Professor of Government at Cornell University, USA. She is the co-author of the books Equal Opportunity Peacekeeping (Oxford University Press, 2017) and Positioning Women in Conflict Studies (Oxford University Press, 2024). Her research focuses on conflict and peace processes, particularly state building in the aftermath of civil war. Specifically, she studies international involvement in security assistance to post-conflict states, gender reforms in peacekeeping and domestic security sectors, and the relationship between gender and violence. She also directs the Gender and Security Sector Lab and is Principal Investigator of the NSF CAREER award for “The Domestic and International Politics of Global Police.”