A Feminist Reading of Security in Africa - a Response

Virginia Gamba
Programme Director, Institute for Security Studies

Published in Monograph No 20, 'Caring Security in Africa, February 1998

Heidi Hudson has produced a remarkable contribution to the understanding of security through the lens of gender. Her scholarly work serves many purposes: to explore the changing nature - and the defects - of contemporary security concepts; to understand the feminist conceptualisation of security; and to provide a more gender-based definition of security in Africa. In writing about these topics, Hudson both educates and guides the reader into the discourse of feminist security concerns, concepts, and implications for overall human development. Her arguments are logical and powerfully justified. This is, as Hudson points out, the right moment to broaden our existing security assumptions by incorporating feminist epistemology. But the article's value, as will be pointed out below, should not be determined by the quality of its discourse on security, but must rather be judged on the way in which the author strives to present the evolution of feminist thought and all its variants to make it applicable to the realities of modern politics, with particular relevance to Africa. It is in this discourse that the article stands its own ground and makes a compelling case for revision.

Hudson exhaustively explores a variety of feminist approaches and their differences in terms of "gender inequality, difference, and scholarship." She then undertakes a feminist critique of the mono-gendered state and peace studies, and proposes a feminist conceptualisation of society, including political, socio-economic, military, and ecological security patterns. In the last two sections of her work, Hudson evaluates the feminist contribution to the security debate under four headings: as a critique of world policies; as a definition of comprehensive all-inclusive security; as a link between the individual and international levels of security; and in terms of its practical applicability. She then exemplifies all of these by writing about the security of women in Africa and its implications for the achievement of continental peace. Here, Hudson's text is synthesised to reflect the state of women's rights in Africa, the needs for sustainable development, and the roles of African women in combat and ecology. Finally, she proposes a collective security instrument that might take these feminist concerns into account and might be institutionalised through the Southern African Development Community (SADC).

Because this work is really about the position, problems and views of women in Africa, it appears that the shorter sections, that serve as introduction to the latter, have been written with the view of creating a favourable climate for the latter discussion. Because of this, the sections on contemporary strategic and security concerns and on a revision of feminist thought are not conclusive.

Firstly, by acknowledging that the contemporary security agenda needs to be broadened both "vertically and horizontally", leading scholars have opened the way for incorporating non-traditional objects of security: to upgrade non-military threats to the level of security concerns and to strive to find a people-centred approach in defining the objects of security policy. These new considerations are far removed from the more technical and impersonal approaches followed during the Cold War era, with its emphases on the underpinning mentality of nuclear deterrence and the necessity to identify potential enemies at all costs. The timing for the inclusion of a feminist view of security in the determinations of priorities, security concerns and viable alternatives, is therefore ripe.

But Hudson's article, although it describes change and an ongoing revision of security trends, does not recognise that feminist theory has already made an impact in this field. This is rather surprising as many of the scholars and decision-makers, who have pushed for the broadening of the security agenda for the last fifteen years, are women. Their views and contributions to the new security agenda have been firmly recognised, as for example, in the case of the so-called Brundtland Report.1 Nevertheless, instead of looking at the direct and indirect contribution that women politicians, scientists and scholars have made to the new security agenda, Hudson concentrates on explaining feminist thought as if it existed in isolation from the mainstream of security thinking. And yet, just like women have made a fundamental impact on the changing character of security concerns world-wide, they have also been instrumental in developing what Klein calls the existing "quality of strategic discourse", much as they have assisted in the perpetuation of a specific security paradigm and have supported "the patriarchal basis of the modern state." On the issue of security, therefore, it is important to acknowledge that, regardless of their wisdom, security paradigms have been a product of both male and female thinkers in the past.

A second problem in this article arises from the general feminist studies section, where the discourse related to theories on gender difference, inequality and oppression curiously omits any mention of religion or culture in reference to the basic structures of male supremacy in almost all societies. The role of patriarchy and of basic male supremacy is afterwards used extensively in the main body of the paper but, by not making adequate reference to the influence of male-centric religions (except for a fleeting reference to Islam later in the text), a very important problem arises which poses difficulties in accepting the proposals for change put forward by the author. The "patriarchal basis of the modern state" is not only based on a "premeditated" power relationship between men and women as inferred by the author. The patriarchal basis of society could easily be justified in terms of the literature mentioned by Hudson, but the reality, like that of the security paradigms which she explores earlier, is that there is no `us' versus `them' rivalry between men and women: it is both men and women who have devised, accepted and supported a patriarchal system, as well as the predominance of male-centric religions. Women have perpetuated the state of their subsidiary and supportive role, rife with oppression and abuse. Women are the educators and perpetuators of tradition and custom. As long as women perpetuate a role for themselves that is inferior to men's, society in general will not change. Painful, as it is, this must be said, particularly as the author dedicates the main body of her text to the creation of an environment conducive to protect women's security in Africa, a region where women play an important role in the perpetuation of the systems that cast them into submission.

Regardless of the items that could have been reinforced in this text, it is important to note that the areas where Hudson sees the need to bring women perspectives to bear in the African security debate are crucial: women's rights as human rights; securing development by meeting basic needs; undermining a culture of militarism by creating an awareness of personal security; and finding the link between the "inattention to environmental problems and the silence about women's rights." Sustainable and equitable development, conducted in peace and guaranteeing personal security is, without a doubt, the road which Africa should strive to follow, but putting this basic and fundamental need in terms of gender differences is to simplify the problem and confuse its solution.

There is much more that needs to be done to secure Africa and its peoples: democratisation, professionalisation, constructing a law-abiding society by the provision of effective judicial and criminal systems, the eradication of corruption, the resolution of ethnic conflict, and resorting to solidarity and co-operation in solving common problems are all important issues in Africa, which should be placed on a par with the need to secure women's rights. Hudson acknowledges this when she reviews the options open to African women: to rely on the African state's capacity to provide security; to work through grassroots organisations; and to establish a mechanism for regional security. Of all three, the latter is the one that Hudson favours. She concentrates on one regional mechanism above others - the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and explores the flaws in its construct. As she points out: "The flaws in SADC indicate that national interest is still the main driving force behind regional co-operation. A sectoral approach to security is adopted which makes the organisation more of a security regime than a security community." And yet, this is the mechanism that the author believes might assist in developing an agenda that looked at African security concerns in a broad light, taking into consideration feminist thinking and women's security concerns. The one thing that Hudson does not comprehend, is that SADC is deficient, not because of its national interest construct, but because it is not operative. Thus, in as much as SADC might be turned into an organisation that can adequately consider women's views and needs, it first needs to work in an efficient manner.

The feminist view of security, advanced as it is, can only be implemented in the way that other views grew to dominate society in the past: by consensus. There will never be a consensus regarding the status and role of women in different societies if this is not approached as part and parcel of the evolution of civilisations. Women perpetuate the image we have of women: for women to break this mould, particularly in rural societies, education and self-discovery are needed. For the latter to occur, society must function first. Men and women must work with their inherent nature to create an environment where these and other ideas might prosper to the advantage of all. To disregard this, is to continue with the tradition of a past that requires contradiction and strife to be able to move forward.