Sexual violence during armed conflict

It is quite difficult to draw a clear line between sexual and other violence against a person, especially in situations of armed conflict, occupation and imprisonment. The laws of different countries may define differently the concepts of rape and other violent acts of a sexual nature. The terms rape , sexual assault, and sexual violence are often used interchangeably ^[6] . There is no universally accepted definition of "military rape" ( eng. War rape ). The Elements of Crimes, adopted in 2002 in addition to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court , defines in article 7 (1) (g) -1 “the crime against humanity of rape” as follows ^[7] :

The perpetrator encroached ^[a] on the face of the person, committing an act which resulted in the penetration, even the smallest, into any part of the body of the victim or performer, by the penis or any object or any part of the body into the victim's anal or genital opening.

The assault was committed with the use of force or threat of force against a given person or another person, either through coercion caused, for example, by fear of violence, gross coercion, detention, psychological pressure or abuse of power, or by using an environment characterized by coercion, or the assault was committed against a person incapable of giving consent expressing his true will ^[b] .

“Assault on the body" here is understood in a rather broad and gender-neutral sense; the perpetrator of the crime and the victim may be of any gender and any sexual orientation. Coercion is considered not only direct physical violence, but also any kind of threat, as well as the use of such a state of the victim in which he is unable to give a truly voluntary and informed consent ^[8] .

In times of war or civil armed conflict, lawlessness and impunity often reign, especially in relation to an unarmed population. There are times when their commanders are explicitly allowed to loot and rob the civilians in the occupied territory to soldiers or militants; these trophies are perceived as compensation for low incomes and the great risk of combatants. The possibility of unpunished rape can also be considered as payment, compensation or reward to the winners ^{[6] [9]} .

According to UNICEF , “systematic rape is often used as a weapon of war for ethnic cleansing, ”and in the 20th century alone, they were used in several armed conflicts in different regions of the world, including in Bosnia , Cambodia , Uganda, and Vietnam ^[10] . In 2008, the UN Security Council stated that “ especially women and girls become targets of sexual violence, including those used as military tactics with the aim of humiliating, dominating, intimidating, dispersing and / or forcibly displacing civilians belonging to one ethnic group or another community ” ^[11] .

Amnesty International also announces the deliberate use of rape in modern conflicts to achieve military goals: expelling former residents from controlled territory, gradually exterminating the remaining residents by breaking their family ties, spreading AIDS, destroying cultural and religious traditions ^{[8] [12]} . Gayatri Chakravorti Spivak characterizes " gang rape by the conquerors "as" a metonymic celebration of territorial acquisition ” ^[13] .

Dara Kay Cohen claims that in some armed groups gang rape is deliberately designed to increase the cohesion of members of the armed group, especially those forcibly involved in this group ^[14] . Some armed groups that use minors in hostilities deliberately rape as a "maturity ritual" and to tame novice fighters to violence; this is especially true in patriarchal societies, where maturity and masculinity are associated with violence and dominance. Some refugees and internally displaced persons in conflict areas, with a ruined economy and an inoperative public safety system, were victims of kidnapping and trafficking for the purpose of sexual or labor exploitation ^[15] . In some conflicts, rape was used as torture - with the aim of forcing girls and women to reveal secret locations or other secret information. Discussing gang rape as a practice of uniting soldiers, Cohen spoke of the “socialization of combatants,” in which members of armed groups:

1. begin to experience feelings of superiority and achievement;
2. acquire aggressive status and reputation;
3. consider themselves particularly courageous;
4. demonstrate loyalty to the group and risk appetite.

Thus, organized gang rape, not even used as a weapon of war, can be a means of rallying an armed group ^[16] .

Rafael Grugman , in the book Woman and War. From love to violence, he noted three characteristic signs of military rape:

The first is publicity. They are performed openly, in full confidence in permissiveness. There is no fear of punishment, the rapist in military uniform does not consider his actions criminal.

The second is gang rape. It, according to the rapists, “rallies the collective” (as well as the joint drinking of alcohol). “Heroes”, not fearing sexually transmitted diseases, proudly call themselves “milk brothers”.

The third sign is the killing of a woman after sexual abuse. If the first two signs are provoked by a violation of demographic imbalance, the need for sexual release and a temporary clouding of the mind - the driving force is alcohol and an excess of male sex hormones - then killing a raped woman is a crime that cannot be justified. ^[17]

Susan Brownmiller was the first historian to attempt a survey of rape in war, using both historical documents and theory. She concluded that

The war creates an excellent psychological environment for the manifestation of contempt for men to women. The masculinity of the armed forces - the ruthless power of weapons that are only in their hands, the special spiritual connection between comrades in arms, the courageous discipline of orders issued and executed, the simple logic of hierarchical command - gives men the long-awaited confirmation of the correctness of their ideas about the secondary role of women in the world.

Original text

War provides men with the perfect psychological backdrop to give vent to their contempt for women. The maleness of the military — the brute power of weaponry exclusive to their hands, the spiritual bonding of men at arms, the manly discipline of orders given and orders obeyed, the simple logic of the hierarchical command — confirms for men what they long suspect— that women are peripheral to the world that counts.

and that " rapists are the most ordinary men who have become extraordinary by joining the most exclusive men's club in the world ” ^[18] .

Kelly Dawn Askin ( Kelly Dawn Askin ) notes that the victims of wars more and more often become civilians . In World War II, they killed at least forty-five million. According to many studies, men and women were equally tortured , but women were most often the victims of rape (although there were also cases of rape of men and boys) ^{[19] [20]} . But the topic of sexual violence against men during military conflicts remains largely unresolved, since men who suffer from such violence report it and testify less often than women victims, and also because of the tendency of some non-governmental organizations involved in this topic to disproportionately great attention to violence against women ^[21] . But women do not report all cases of rape, so it is very difficult to obtain reliable data on the real extent of this phenomenon ^[22] . Victims of sexual violence during armed conflicts can be not only women and children from among the enemy combatants and non-combatants, but also allies, civilians of their country and even other military personnel of their army ^[19] ; but most of the victims are civilians. ^[23] Despite many documented cases of rape of women during various armed conflicts, the laws of many countries on the protection of civilians during armed conflict do not pay much attention to sexual crimes against women. And even where wartime laws were in place that explicitly prohibit sexual violence, the few perpetrators were held accountable. According to KD Eskin, the laws of war often regard sex crimes against women as insignificant and not worthy of serious prosecution ^[24] . Therefore, until recently, rape remained a hidden, unstudied element of war. According to Human Rights Watch , this is due to the significant gender specifics of the war, in which mostly men are extremely cruel, including in the form of violence against women " ^[20] .

For many centuries, the right of winners to take any trophies, including women, has been explicitly or implicitly recognized ^[25] . Moreover, rape during the war was underestimated and considered as sad, but inevitable side effects of sending men to the front ^[20] , as well as legal material rewards to warring soldiers (often irregularly received salaries), and as confirmation of the courage and success of these soldiers ^{[26 ]} . Considering the wars of antiquity, Harold Washington argues that the war itself was presented as a kind of rape of the vanquished, and the captured cities as its victims. He claims that military rape takes place in the context of stereotypes about men and women, in particular, that violent force belongs to men, and women can only be the objects of its action ^[27] .

Violence against men

Contrary to these beliefs, during armed conflicts is also quite common. A study conducted in 2009 by Lara Stemple ^[28] revealed many cases of sexual abuse of men during armed conflicts and places of detention in various regions of the world. So, in the 1980s, in El Salvador, 76% of male political prisoners were sexually abused; Among prisoners in concentration camps in Sarajevo, about 80% were victims of rape or sexual abuse. Stemple concludes that this topic has not been sufficiently studied and it is difficult to judge the real extent of this phenomenon, as men who suffer from violent acts of a sexual nature attract less attention from researchers than women who suffer from the same actions ^{[21] [29]} . Mervyn Christian of Johns Hopkins School of Nursing also believes that many cases of sexual abuse of men have not been reported, and they remain outside the study ^[30] .