Impact of U.S. Militarism-Centered Foreign Policy on Women Living with the Threat of Potential Armed Conflict
Impact of U.S. Militarism-Centered Foreign Policy on Women Living with the Threat of Potential Armed Conflict
Introduction
As illustrated by past conflicts, the recent escalation of militarism in the forms of wars – including in Ukraine, Gaza, and Syria – has not made the world a safer place. Countless people have lost their lives in the conflict zones, with the survivors still under various risks of losing their own lives or those of loved ones. With a series of U.S. budgets approved to support its allies engaged in wars on the ground, the U.S. government is actively involved in armed conflict that has an irrevocable impact on the innocent civilians exposed to indiscriminate bombings, even at schools and hospitals. Militarism is often portrayed as an inevitable national defense system against “enemy” nations. However, U.S. militarism, the most powerful in the world, has multiple overarching drivers that include serving the interests of the political agenda, propping up the defense industry, and nationalism, which together shape its foreign policy. Today, U.S. foreign policy centered on militarism has enabled more than 170 U.S. military installations overseas supposedly to deter and prevent war. The top three countries with the largest U.S. military installations are Germany, Japan, and South Korea, in terms of size. In Asia, along with these installations, the U.S. conducts regular military exercises in preparation for potential war engagement with countries such as China and North Korea. Contrary to its pronounced goal, the effect of the military exercises led by the U.S. in the Pacific Rim under the nose of North Korea is questionable, as the situation has drifted further from peace. The Korean War has not ended, as its 71-year-old armistice agreement has never been changed to a peace agreement, and the tension on the peninsula has sharply risen as the scale of military exercises has become larger and even nuclear-capacity weapons are tested on land and waters. Following the first nuclear exercise conducted in Pyeongtaek, South Korea, from July 30–Aug. 1, 2024, the U.S. and South Korea conducted a joint special forces exercise called the Ulchi Freedom Shield from Aug. 24–29 at a specialized center located 32 kilometers from Seoul; a U.S.-supplied nuclear-capable weapons system was involved.
The effectiveness of these joint military exercises to maintain security and stability on the Korean peninsula and across Northeast Asia and the Indo-Pacific is also questionable, as elevating joint combat readiness can threaten security and stability in the regions and among the people. Increased U.S. militarism has violated the security and human rights of people, especially women in the host countries around U.S. military bases. Following a brief review of the stance of the UN and civil society regarding women and armed conflict, this summary examines the impacts of U.S. military installations on women and girls in potential armed conflict through the case in South Korea and recommends a feminist foreign policy as an alternate foreign policy that must be adopted for its citizens and people overseas.
The UN and Civil Society Against Armed Conflict
A direct correlation between militarism and gender violence has been recorded and witnessed across history globally. In 1995, at the Fourth World Conference on Women, the last one of its kind, held in Beijing, Women and Armed Conflict was recognized as one of the 12 critical areas of concern in what is known as the Beijing Platform for Action (BPfA). The Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, adopted unanimously by 189 countries, is the key global policy document on gender equality and women’s empowerment laid out in 12 critical areas of concern. The Beijing Conference was followed by a series of five-year reviews at the UN Commission on the Status of Women. Hence, CSW69/Beijing+30 will be held in 2025.
Five years after the Beijing Conference, recognizing the grave and unique impact armed conflict has on women, in 2000, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1325 on women, peace, and security (WPS). Eight years later, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1820 on WPS and identified the use of sexual violence as a tactic of war. It states that “rape and other forms of sexual violence can constitute war crimes, crimes against humanity or a constitutive act with respect to genocide.” In 2010, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) adopted a general recommendation on women in conflict prevention, conflict, and post conflict situations.[1]
In 2015, the UN established 17 Sustainable Development Goals and specified goal 16 to "promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels.”
Despite decades of work from civil society and the UN, wars continue and women and girls around the globe suffer sexual violence in armed conflict. In order to effectively reduce or eliminate sexual violence in armed conflict, ending current wars and preventing future ones are in order. One effective way to reach that goal is to have more countries adopt a foreign policy promoting peace and security of women instead of building military powers, namely feminist foreign policy. The U.S. has yet to adopt a feminist foreign policy.
Impacts of U.S. Militarism on Women and Girls in Armed Conflict and South Korea
A majority of the U.S. population may think the U.S. is unrelated to the issue of women in armed conflict, as there has not been a war on U.S. soil in more than 150 years. However, U.S. military involvement overseas triggers and aggravates the violence women and girls face in armed conflict, both actual and potential.
Since WWII, under the claimed goal of “maintaining security,” the U.S. has created more than 170 U.S. military foreign installations. In host countries, the U.S. has shown a strong tendency to prioritizing militarism and political interests over human rights, especially those of women and girls. Sexual assault and harassment within the U.S. military remains a persistent problem. This problem is compounded when considering foreign installations, where extraterritoriality jurisdiction applies under Status of Forces Agreements, or SOFAs. These agreements often allow the U.S. to retain exclusive jurisdiction over its service members in many countries, including the ROK and Japan. U.S. military personnel overseas face lighter or sometime no punishment for an array of human rights violations, including sexual violence committed in host countries.
In South Korea, where the third biggest U.S. military bases are installed overseas and which hosts the U.S. military’s largest overseas installation at Camp Humphreys, sexual exploitation at so-called “camptowns” or Gijichon (기지촌) is wide spread and ongoing.[2] Official documents indicate that during and after the Korean War, the U.S. government requested Korean “comfort women” who could provide “sexual services” to U.S. military personnel stationed in South Korea. The U.S. government referred to these women as “comfort women.” The term “comfort women” is a euphemism for women and girls who were forced into Japan’s wartime military sexual slavery system from the 1930s until the end of WWII. Since the outbreak of the Korean War, during the initial years of the South Korean international adoption program, a large percentage of children adopted from South Korea were of mixed race because of the coordinated military sex trade in the Gijichon that developed around U.S. military bases. U.S. military presence in South Korea, designed to keep the “peace and security” of the host country, has ironically threatened the peace and security of women and children, especially those who live near military installations. Examples include 13-year-old students Hyo-Sun and Mi-Seon,[3] as well as a 26-year-old waitress at an army base in Dongducheon city, Yun Geum-I — just three of the many victims affected by U.S. militarism overseas and unjustly handled cases of U.S. military sexual violence in South Korea. Some victims cannot be identified. In Sangpaedong, Dongducheon, near another U.S. military base, Camp Casey, there is a big graveyard with numerous unidentified victims’ graves, including newborns. It’s said that sometimes two or three people were buried together.[4] Near the Sangpaedong cemetery, the last STD medical treatment facility built to lock up Gijichon women thought to be ill still stands. Along with the cemetery, the last STD medical treatment facility is at risk of removal due to a “city revitalization project.”[5]
Conclusion
U.S. foreign policy based on militarism has caused various forms of violence, human rights violations, and conflict extension overseas, disproportionately impacting women and children. Resolving the problems and issues associated with women in armed conflict can also help resolve gender violence at home. To do so, it is critical that the U.S. adopt a feminist foreign policy. The U.S., the leading country in the world, can interrupt the current suppressive trends and provide an accountable societal structure for women and girls to live in peace and security. Along with the U.S. government’s adoption of a feminist foreign policy, the government’s collaboration with civil society, women’s active participation in decision-making for a peaceful society, and peace education for children must happen simultaneously to establish sustainable change. People, especially women and children, deserve no less than the end of a repeated pattern of decades with more promises than progress in peace-making and genuine security.
Click the button below to learn more about Japanese wartime military sex slaves referred to as “comfort women,” the unpunished murder of Hyo-Sun and Mi-Seon, the unpunished murder of Yun Geum-I, or the significance of the U.S. adopting a feminist foreign policy.
Submitted by Sung Sohn
[1] CEDAW/C/GC/30
[2] “[Interview] Fighting for Reparations for Korea’s Camptown Women Before It’s Too Late,” Hankyoreh, June 26, 2022.
[3]최예지, 안치용, and 신다임, “대한민국을 촛불로 물들인 14세 소녀들의 죽음,” March 16, 2021, Le Monde Diplomatique, https://www.ilemonde.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=14266
[4] 임성용, “2~3명세워 같이 묻은 무덤…잊지말아야할 이유,” May 18, 2024, Oh My News, https://www.ohmynews.com/NWS_Web/View/at_pg.aspx?CNTN_CD=A0003030198&CMPT_CD=P0010&utm_source=naver&utm_medium=newsearch&utm_campaign=naver_news.
[5] Ibid.
Introduction
As illustrated by past conflicts, the recent escalation of militarism in the forms of wars – including in Ukraine, Gaza, and Syria – has not made the world a safer place. Countless people have lost their lives in the conflict zones, with the survivors still under various risks of losing their own lives or those of loved ones. With a series of U.S. budgets approved to support its allies engaged in wars on the ground, the U.S. government is actively involved in armed conflict that has an irrevocable impact on the innocent civilians exposed to indiscriminate bombings, even at schools and hospitals. Militarism is often portrayed as an inevitable national defense system against “enemy” nations. However, U.S. militarism, the most powerful in the world, has multiple overarching drivers that include serving the interests of the political agenda, propping up the defense industry, and nationalism, which together shape its foreign policy. Today, U.S. foreign policy centered on militarism has enabled more than 170 U.S. military installations overseas supposedly to deter and prevent war. The top three countries with the largest U.S. military installations are Germany, Japan, and South Korea, in terms of size. In Asia, along with these installations, the U.S. conducts regular military exercises in preparation for potential war engagement with countries such as China and North Korea. Contrary to its pronounced goal, the effect of the military exercises led by the U.S. in the Pacific Rim under the nose of North Korea is questionable, as the situation has drifted further from peace. The Korean War has not ended, as its 71-year-old armistice agreement has never been changed to a peace agreement, and the tension on the peninsula has sharply risen as the scale of military exercises has become larger and even nuclear-capacity weapons are tested on land and waters. Following the first nuclear exercise conducted in Pyeongtaek, South Korea, from July 30–Aug. 1, 2024, the U.S. and South Korea conducted a joint special forces exercise called the Ulchi Freedom Shield from Aug. 24–29 at a specialized center located 32 kilometers from Seoul; a U.S.-supplied nuclear-capable weapons system was involved.
The effectiveness of these joint military exercises to maintain security and stability on the Korean peninsula and across Northeast Asia and the Indo-Pacific is also questionable, as elevating joint combat readiness can threaten security and stability in the regions and among the people. Increased U.S. militarism has violated the security and human rights of people, especially women in the host countries around U.S. military bases. Following a brief review of the stance of the UN and civil society regarding women and armed conflict, this summary examines the impacts of U.S. military installations on women and girls in potential armed conflict through the case in South Korea and recommends a feminist foreign policy as an alternate foreign policy that must be adopted for its citizens and people overseas.
The UN and Civil Society Against Armed Conflict
A direct correlation between militarism and gender violence has been recorded and witnessed across history globally. In 1995, at the Fourth World Conference on Women, the last one of its kind, held in Beijing, Women and Armed Conflict was recognized as one of the 12 critical areas of concern in what is known as the Beijing Platform for Action (BPfA). The Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, adopted unanimously by 189 countries, is the key global policy document on gender equality and women’s empowerment laid out in 12 critical areas of concern. The Beijing Conference was followed by a series of five-year reviews at the UN Commission on the Status of Women. Hence, CSW69/Beijing+30 will be held in 2025.
Five years after the Beijing Conference, recognizing the grave and unique impact armed conflict has on women, in 2000, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1325 on women, peace, and security (WPS). Eight years later, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1820 on WPS and identified the use of sexual violence as a tactic of war. It states that “rape and other forms of sexual violence can constitute war crimes, crimes against humanity or a constitutive act with respect to genocide.” In 2010, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) adopted a general recommendation on women in conflict prevention, conflict, and post conflict situations.[1]
In 2015, the UN established 17 Sustainable Development Goals and specified goal 16 to "promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels.”
Despite decades of work from civil society and the UN, wars continue and women and girls around the globe suffer sexual violence in armed conflict. In order to effectively reduce or eliminate sexual violence in armed conflict, ending current wars and preventing future ones are in order. One effective way to reach that goal is to have more countries adopt a foreign policy promoting peace and security of women instead of building military powers, namely feminist foreign policy. The U.S. has yet to adopt a feminist foreign policy.
Impacts of U.S. Militarism on Women and Girls in Armed Conflict and South Korea
A majority of the U.S. population may think the U.S. is unrelated to the issue of women in armed conflict, as there has not been a war on U.S. soil in more than 150 years. However, U.S. military involvement overseas triggers and aggravates the violence women and girls face in armed conflict, both actual and potential.
Since WWII, under the claimed goal of “maintaining security,” the U.S. has created more than 170 U.S. military foreign installations. In host countries, the U.S. has shown a strong tendency to prioritizing militarism and political interests over human rights, especially those of women and girls. Sexual assault and harassment within the U.S. military remains a persistent problem. This problem is compounded when considering foreign installations, where extraterritoriality jurisdiction applies under Status of Forces Agreements, or SOFAs. These agreements often allow the U.S. to retain exclusive jurisdiction over its service members in many countries, including the ROK and Japan. U.S. military personnel overseas face lighter or sometime no punishment for an array of human rights violations, including sexual violence committed in host countries.
In South Korea, where the third biggest U.S. military bases are installed overseas and which hosts the U.S. military’s largest overseas installation at Camp Humphreys, sexual exploitation at so-called “camptowns” or Gijichon (기지촌) is wide spread and ongoing.[2] Official documents indicate that during and after the Korean War, the U.S. government requested Korean “comfort women” who could provide “sexual services” to U.S. military personnel stationed in South Korea. The U.S. government referred to these women as “comfort women.” The term “comfort women” is a euphemism for women and girls who were forced into Japan’s wartime military sexual slavery system from the 1930s until the end of WWII. Since the outbreak of the Korean War, during the initial years of the South Korean international adoption program, a large percentage of children adopted from South Korea were of mixed race because of the coordinated military sex trade in the Gijichon that developed around U.S. military bases. U.S. military presence in South Korea, designed to keep the “peace and security” of the host country, has ironically threatened the peace and security of women and children, especially those who live near military installations. Examples include 13-year-old students Hyo-Sun and Mi-Seon,[3] as well as a 26-year-old waitress at an army base in Dongducheon city, Yun Geum-I — just three of the many victims affected by U.S. militarism overseas and unjustly handled cases of U.S. military sexual violence in South Korea. Some victims cannot be identified. In Sangpaedong, Dongducheon, near another U.S. military base, Camp Casey, there is a big graveyard with numerous unidentified victims’ graves, including newborns. It’s said that sometimes two or three people were buried together.[4] Near the Sangpaedong cemetery, the last STD medical treatment facility built to lock up Gijichon women thought to be ill still stands. Along with the cemetery, the last STD medical treatment facility is at risk of removal due to a “city revitalization project.”[5]
Conclusion
U.S. foreign policy based on militarism has caused various forms of violence, human rights violations, and conflict extension overseas, disproportionately impacting women and children. Resolving the problems and issues associated with women in armed conflict can also help resolve gender violence at home. To do so, it is critical that the U.S. adopt a feminist foreign policy. The U.S., the leading country in the world, can interrupt the current suppressive trends and provide an accountable societal structure for women and girls to live in peace and security. Along with the U.S. government’s adoption of a feminist foreign policy, the government’s collaboration with civil society, women’s active participation in decision-making for a peaceful society, and peace education for children must happen simultaneously to establish sustainable change. People, especially women and children, deserve no less than the end of a repeated pattern of decades with more promises than progress in peace-making and genuine security.
Click the button below to learn more about Japanese wartime military sex slaves referred to as “comfort women,” the unpunished murder of Hyo-Sun and Mi-Seon, the unpunished murder of Yun Geum-I, or the significance of the U.S. adopting a feminist foreign policy.
Submitted by Sung Sohn
[1] CEDAW/C/GC/30
[2] “[Interview] Fighting for Reparations for Korea’s Camptown Women Before It’s Too Late,” Hankyoreh, June 26, 2022.
[3]최예지, 안치용, and 신다임, “대한민국을 촛불로 물들인 14세 소녀들의 죽음,” March 16, 2021, Le Monde Diplomatique, https://www.ilemonde.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=14266
[4] 임성용, “2~3명세워 같이 묻은 무덤…잊지말아야할 이유,” May 18, 2024, Oh My News, https://www.ohmynews.com/NWS_Web/View/at_pg.aspx?CNTN_CD=A0003030198&CMPT_CD=P0010&utm_source=naver&utm_medium=newsearch&utm_campaign=naver_news.
[5] Ibid.
|
Durebang, My Sister's Place
|
Gijichon Women's Peace Museum-Seven Sisters and Sunlit Sisters' Center
|
Image credit: Sunlit Sisters' Center, Chul Kyu Chang, and ESJF