Kathleen Kuehnast on Developing a Culture of Peace

Kathleen Kuehnast is the director of the United States Institute of Peace’s (USIP) Center for Gender and Peacebuilding, where she focuses on gendered experiences in conflict and post-conflict transitions. On September 9, 2014, Dr. Kuehnast and four other experts participated in a panel discussion on “The Role and Contributions of Women and Youth to the Culture of Peace” during a UN High Level Forum on the Culture of Peace.

Dr. Kuehnast’s remarks reflect her own views and not necessarily those of USIP. Her address to the panel was as follows:

The first American president, George Washington, stated that he did not want an Office of War without an Office of Peace. Two hundred years later in 1984, the U.S. Congress created the U.S. Institute of Peace with a mandate to prevent, mitigate and resolve violent conflicts around the world, and to focus on peacebuilding.

It took two centuries to enact Washington’s desire for an “office” of peace, and perhaps there are lessons learned [that] we might reflect upon this afternoon as we discuss the culture of peace today. I would like to make three points related to gender and the culture of peace.

First, a culture of peace needs dynamic and creative leadership to organize for peace. Second, a culture of peace must have an inclusive approach that does not “instrumentalize” women or children. Finally, a culture of peace requires a well-funded effort.


Nearly five decades ago, Martin Luther King Jr. stated:  “Those who love peace must learn to organize as effectively as those who love war.” King also recognized that leadership is a key starting point in any critical change process, especially as he emphasized that a genuine leader is not a searcher for consensus but a molder of consensus.

In that vein, we need leadership that shapes new and innovative ideas, including how to ensure more women are in leadership positions to assist in building lasting peace.

My second point is the need for an inclusive process. As a socio-cultural anthropologist, I have studied for the last 25 years societies in transition, whether it is from war to peace, from communism to democracy, or from disaster to recovery. I have seen how transition impacts societal gender roles.

I lived in Central Asia while the Soviet Union collapsed. Societal transition deeply affects how society organizes gender roles, and in places like Central Asia, which had among the highest literacy rates for women in the Muslim world, I witnessed the day-to-day collapse of gender equality norms and beliefs.


One of the issues among policy shapers and policy makers is that we use the term “gender” as another name for “women.”  However, men too are gendered beings, and they too must deal with magnified notions of hyper-masculinity that meld power and status in societies with violence.

When we are not gender-inclusive, this leaves us with half of a solution to many of the problems that plague women and girls in conflict and fragile settings. Therefore, a culture of peace must not create new silos or reinforce old silos. We must make sure that we engage men as partners for positive change.

Malala … and her father

In a two-year study that the Institute of Peace conducted on lessons learned on women’s programming in Iraq and Afghanistan, one of the most consistent recommendations for ensuring sustainable programs for women is to consider men and the many roles they play in society as husbands, brothers, sons or fathers. Men need to be a part of the change and not kept apart.

Men often play a role as societal gatekeepers, and they [can offer opportunities]  for the girls and women who are a part of their lives. We know that education for girls is strengthened when fathers advocate for their daughters. We know the remarkable courage of Malala Yousafzai. But we often do not tell the story of her father’s persistence and courage to defy social norms in Pakistan.

We have to solve the problems of inequality and [of the] lack of women and girls arm-in-arm with male champions on this urgent issue. I want to suggest that the next creative path begins with breaking down silos. To stop the cycle of violence, we recognize that boys and men who are victims of violence have a greater chance to end up being perpetrators of violence.

What we need is the creation of a culture of peace that is inclusive of women but allows the complexity of human relationships its full right, and engages men and the greater understanding of gender identity.

A ‘Silicon Valley’ for Non-Violence

Finally, effectively organizing for peace requires resources.  It requires commitment by the international community, governments and local civil society. Commitment and funding go hand-in-hand. [While] Dr. King said that we need to learn to organize as effectively as those who organize for war, we also need to invest and bring resources to bear upon the global problem of violence.

We need to incentivize peacebuilding. We need to think about a culture of peace as a “start-up” operation. What we need is a Silicon Valley for non-violent approaches to global problem-solving. We need the same kind of creative force that lies behind the creative technologies and how these could be applied to the culture of peace. We need to organize so that our best minds, our most innovative ideas, are being applied to building peace.

There is no need to remind this audience that our world is a complex place with too much violence – a world in which short-term thinking and violence seem to be the default setting toward solving problems. What we need is long-term thinking, where our default setting is non-violent problem solving, and applying innovative technology toward a culture of peace.

Kathleen Kuehnast holds a doctorate in socio-cultural anthropology from the University of Minnesota, and has a particular focus on Central Asia and the impact of the post-Soviet transition on Muslim women. In addition to directing the Center for Gender and Peacebuilding, she is currently a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Before coming to the U.S. Institute of Peace, Dr. Kuehnast worked 15 years in the field of international development research community driven development in post-conflict reconstruction along with the impacts of migration and poverty on gender roles. Kathleen is also a valued member of WIIS


*Photo Credit: UN Photo/Devra Berkowitz

In honor of International Women’s Day, we have asked some members of the Women In International Security Advisory Board to share their thoughts on this year’s theme: Equality for women is progress for all. After reading their posts, feel free to leave a comment sharing your view on International Women’s Day 2014!


Equality for women is progress for all

Carola Weil

Dean of the School of Professional and Extended Studies at American University


Women have made great strides across the globe by many measures. And yet fundamental inequalities remain. Although women make up the majority of students in higher education institutions, they remain underrepresented in high-paying and non-traditional careers, in board rooms and leadership positions. Women constitute more than 63 percent of household heads and primary breadwinners and yet continue to face persistent wage gaps, typically earning only half to three-quarters of what their male counterparts earn. More significantly though these inequalities are exasperated when we take into account intersectional identities – we are not just defined by gender but by other characteristics such as race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, and geography. Thus women of color experience higher wage gaps and fewer opportunities to advance in non-traditional careers such as in international security.

Why does this matter? Studies have shown that in a world of complex problems that exceed the capacities of any single individual or group to address, greater diversity leads to better, more sustainable problem-solving and outcomes. If we want to effectively address the conundrums of nuclear arms races, persistent ethnic and religious conflicts, or regional insecurity, we must ensure sufficient diversity among those confronting these challenges. Without women at the negotiating tables, in the ranks of decision makers or on the frontlines we are unlikely to overcome chronic insecurity at home or internationally.



Spotlight on Women in Foreign Policy Reveals Hidden Barriers

Pamela Aall

Treasurer of Women In International Security and Senior Associate, Facilitating Peace

Virginia Haufler

Director of Global Communities, Director of Graduate Placement, and Associate Professor of Government and Politics at the University of Maryland

Strong U.S. support for women’s role in peace and security policies in other countries has not been matched at home, as a forthcoming WIIS report makes clear.

The Obama administration has been vocal in calling for an inclusive political system in both Iraq and Afghanistan. It supports implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1352, which declares women’s participation as essential for sustainable peace. Both the U.S. Senate and House have, over the last decade, passed resolutions calling for Afghan women to be included in peace talks and protected under the constitution.  Hilary Clinton, as Secretary of State, put women at the center of diplomatic initiatives, and in November launched a “No Ceilings” initiative to empower women and girls, whose full participation is “critical to global progress, development and security.”

However, championship of women abroad is not reflected in what we see at home. Indeed, support for women as political leaders in the U.S. tells a different story and reflects deep ambiguity over women’s positions and expertise. According to the Rutgers Center for Women in Politics, the 2012 elections brought  a record number of women to Congress—but at only 18{5f0f57c44bc297437706deade099e6516fe1db1b31ab604b564d60e47f160dcd} of the House and 20{5f0f57c44bc297437706deade099e6516fe1db1b31ab604b564d60e47f160dcd} of the Senate, these measly levels compare extremely poorly to other countries, from Sweden (45{5f0f57c44bc297437706deade099e6516fe1db1b31ab604b564d60e47f160dcd}) to Rwanda (54{5f0f57c44bc297437706deade099e6516fe1db1b31ab604b564d60e47f160dcd}). Despite women as political leaders, secretaries of state, and increasingly viable candidates for president, the larger picture shows how tenuous women’s participation in U.S. politics still is.

The high profile of Hilary Clinton and other successful women in foreign policy positions masks the scarcity of women’s input at lower levels. A forthcoming report by Women in International Security (WIIS), Women in Peace and Security Careers: U.S. Congressional Staffs, delves into the situation of women working in congressional offices, and found a disappointing level of inequity and barriers to advancement behind the scenes of Congressional foreign policy work.

Jolynn Shoemaker and Marie-Laure Poire conducted focus groups and interviews in 2012 for this report. They note that men held the majority of positions as chief of staff for both parties in the House and the Senate. Women held only one-third of the chief of staff positions for Senate Democrats, and less than one-fifth of the positions for House and Senate Republicans. Taken as a whole, women staff members earn less than men in both chambers – as little as $1,500 less for House Democratic staff to a whopping $10,000 less for House Republican staff. The pay differential also showed up in the Senate—a  $5,000 difference for women Democratic Senatorial staff, and over $9,000 for Republicans. Women Congressional staff see men advancing more rapidly and to higher positions than women. While those interviewed recognized some degree of progress, there are still too few women on committees dealing with national security or U.S. intelligence. This creates the perception that women have less credibility as foreign policy experts, and they are invisible as a result.

The lack of women on Congressional staffs is not a trivial matter. Congressional staffs are a pipeline to higher office, both elective and in the executive branch, and excluding women from these positions becomes a barrier to their further advancement. Congressional staff are the often unseen force behind legislation, molding policy proposals and the wording of what becomes law. Women’s voices need to be heard at this stage or important considerations will be left out. For instance, they are more likely to consider violence against women as a barrier to lasting peace, as Laura Sjoberg has pointed out.

If we want to practice what we preach to countries across the globe, we need to ensure that our own political institutions are inclusive. If women are, as Time magazine declared during the government shutdown, the “only adults” left in Congress, then we need more of their voices both in the spotlight and behind the scenes.