Will boys be boys? : an analysis of the impact of gender mainstreaming policies on the military culture and identity of Dutch peacekeepers and their behaviour during MINUSMA

Will Boys Be Boys?

An analysis of the impact of gender mainstreaming policies on the

military culture and identity of Dutch peacekeepers and their behaviour

during MINUSMA

A thesis submitted by Carla Hagemann

in candidacy for the degree of Master of Science Graduate School of Social Sciences

International Relations UN Peacebuilding Supervisor: Dr. Jana Krause Second reader: Dr. Conny Roggeband

Word count: 24,161 June 2019

Abstract

Soldier’s hegemonic identities and hypermasculine military cultures have threatened the legitimacy and effectiveness of previous and ongoing UN peacekeeping missions. This thesis argues that the behaviour of peacekeepers, particularly their engagement of local populations, could be positively impacted by transforming military culture through an increased focus on gender training. Employing a qualitative research design, including interviews with Dutch soldiers and military advisors, this study reveals the progress the Dutch armed forces have made in their efforts to implement gender mainstreaming policies. Past and current shortcomings will be identified, as well as future opportunities for the Dutch. The potential of female and male soldiers to adopt a new military identity and the ongoing transformation of the Dutch military culture become apparent. To extend the impact of gender mainstreaming policies and increase operational effectiveness, this thesis finds that an increased cooperation between troop contributing countries is necessary.

Table of Content

2.3 Essentialist and Constructivist perspectives on female peacekeepers ... 12

2.3.1 Women as “saviours”? ... 13

2.3.2 Contradictions ... 14

2.3.3 Limitations ... 15

2.3.4. Gaps and Questions ... 17

2.4 Critical theory ... 17

2.5 Concluding Arguments ... 19

3. Theoretical Framework and Concepts ... 21

3.1 Hegemonic Masculinity / The Military as a Gendered Organization ... 21

3.2 Potential change of the military masculinity ... 23

3.3 Change through military transformation ... 25

3.3.1 The need for gender training ... 27

3.3.2 Expected empirical observations ... 27

4. Methodology ... 28 4.1 General Approach ... 28 4.2 Interviews ... 29 4.3 Case Selection ... 32 4.4 Limitations ... 33 5. Analysis ... 35

5.1 The transformation of the military ... 36

5.2 Views on women (in the military) ... 42

5.3 Hegemonic relations in the military ... 46

5.4 Change general culture ... 50

5.5 MINUSMA experience ... 53

5.6 Smile and Wave: The Dutch Approach ... 56

6. General obstacles ... 59

6.2 Cooperation with other TCCs ... 61

7. Conclusion ... 64

8. Bibliography ... 67

Abbreviations

CIMIC = Civil-Military Cooperation

DAP = Defence Action Plan

DPKO = Department of Peacekeeping Operations

GENAD = Gender advisor

NAP = National Action Plan

SEA = Sexual exploitation and abuse

UN = United Nations

UNSCR = United Nations Security Council Resolution

TCCs = Troop contributing countries

WPS = Women, Peace and Security

1. Introduction

The second secretary-general of the United Nations (UN), Dag Hammarskjöld, once said that “peacekeeping is too important to be undertaken by soldiers [but] soldiers are the only ones who can do it” (Hammarskjöld cited in De Groot 2001:33).

According to many military scholars (De Groot 2001, Whitworth 2004, Enloe 2000), few conventionally trained soldiers are equipped to become effective peacekeepers, lacking empathy, impartiality and social-oriented qualities, such as intercultural communication skills. On the contrary, by focusing on combat activities, such as “aggression, instrumentality and goal-oriented ‘brutality’ ”, ‘soft skills’ are being discouraged by traditional military training (Higate and Henry 2004:52). These skills, however, are essential to contemporary UN missions with mandates that focus explicitly on the protection of civilians and the promotion of human rights, such as the UN mission in Mali (MINUSMA). 95% of all peacekeepers currently deployed serve in missions under such mandates (Hultman 2017). Peacekeeping personnel, particularly since the first UN Resolution (UNSCR) 1325 on Women, Peace and Security (WPS) from 2000, are expected to comprehensively engage local civil society, develop the sensibility to detect gender issues and address the roots and impact of gendered dynamics in conflicts (UN Peacekeeping 2019a, Valenius 2007).

More alarming still are the recurrent and lasting allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) of local civilians in need of protection, directed at UN peacekeepers (Higate and Henry 2004, Whitworth 2004, Beber et al. 2017). In 2003, the UN adopted a zero-tolerance-policy on sexual assault (ZTP). Nevertheless, abusive incidents are still reported. Scholars point out that SEA allegations do not only harm local women, men and children while simultaneously representing a failure to the mission’s core task, (the protection of civilians), but also undermine the overall reputation of the mission, its credibility, and its effectiveness (Jennings 2019, Burke 2014, Nordas and Rustad 2013). Duncanson (2009:63) argues those problems “(…) stem from a particular form of military masculinity, hegemonic within western1 militaries, associated with practices of strength, toughness and aggressive

1

Throughout this thesis, the term “western“ is used to encompass armed forces and societies of European countries, Australasia and the United States and Canada.

heterosexuality”. The UN claims that an increased deployment of female peacekeepers could lead to a better implementation of UNSCRs on WPS and render peacekeeping operations generally more effective (UN Peacekeeping 2019a). However, troop-contributing countries seem to be reluctant or unable to increase the number of women in their national armies (Carreiras 2010). Furthermore, it has been argued that a better balance of female and male peacekeepers is not enough to address the roots of the problem (Karim and Beardsley 2013, 2016).

Following the 2000 Brahimi report, the 2005 Zeid report (detailing a comprehensive strategy for the elimination of SEA) lists alternative recommendations, including an urgent call for extensive, rigorous training of peacekeepers (Zeid 2005). Training should encompass gender awareness, HIV/AIDS-awareness and the standards of conduct and prohibitions, prior to, and during deployment, to effectively prevent sexual assault (Zeid 2005, Holland et al. 2014, Patel and Tripodi 2007). National action plans (NAPs), according to UNSCR 1325, and sundry international initiatives on the implementation of gender awareness and adequate peacekeeper training have since been brought into being, such as the UN-launched Elsie initiative (Ghittoni et al. 2018). However, Jennings (2019) warns that when it is not properly applied, awareness training can often be part of the problem: there have been reports of troops spreading stigmatizing stories about locals. Thus, scholars additionally recommend more targeted recruitment strategies of soldiers in troop-contributing countries (TCCs), involving evaluations of gender equality values (Karim and Beardsley 2016). This stems from the argument that while the years of training in the military constitute an exceptional socialisation and learning process, young recruits have already been socialized in civil society, before joining the armed forces (Moelker and Bosch 2008).

Implementation of such recommendations could arguably lead to a change of the prevalent military culture, which is held to share traitsamong armed forces across the world (Autessere 2014, Soeters and Tresch 2010, Jennings 2019). This culture is exemplified by a hypermasculine image and hegemonic gender relations (Carreiras 2010). Following the academic consensus, it is precisely this culture that produces an environment, which structurally excludes female soldiers, where SEA of civilians becomes more likely, and where a transparent feedback or complaint structure is being discouraged or even prevented. The extensive consequences of this last point in particular are exemplified in a recent case involving a highly ranked US Navy Seal,

who randomly killed Iraqi civilians and nearly got away with his crimes because of informal cover-up policies in the US military (Spiegel Online 2019).

Nevertheless, as will be worked out in the discussion of academic literature relating to this topic, the potential of changing male peacekeepers’ mentalities and transforming the aggressive military masculinity is not sufficiently investigated. Furthermore, the research on the impact of UNSCR 1325-prescribed gender mainstreaming policies turns out to be limited (Olsson and Gizelis 2015). This thesis sets out to fill out this knowledge gap, by studying the culture of masculinity and the effects of gender mainstreaming policies within the Dutch armed forces. Specifically,

I research whether such policies, including adapted recruitment strategies, gender awareness training, higher numbers of deployed women and efforts to strengthen their role within the Dutch armed forces, have had an impact on the military culture and identity of Dutch soldiers. This thesis argues that change in the

military identity and culture of peacekeepers could also affect their behaviour in UN missions, particularly with regard to contact with local populations and the sexual abuse of civilian women. A better understanding of the military culture and identities of peacekeepers will help to effectively adapt training and recruitment strategies, enhance policies, and ultimately lead to more effective operations and improved civilian protection (Sion 2006, Ruffa 2017, Higate and Henry 2004).

Subsequently, in light of such concepts as hegemonic masculinity (Connell 1995), the military as a gendered, highly masculine organization (Carreiras 2010), and Duncanson’s (2009) theory of military masculinity’s potential to change, I test my research question through semi-structured interviews with a sample of 11 male and female soldiers of the Dutch military with peacekeeping experience in Mali. The interviews, primary literature on gender training in the Dutch Army (DCAF 2019), studies on gender advisors (GENADs) within the Dutch armed forces (Kesteloo 2015) and NATO GENADs (Bastick and Duncanson 2019), and three interviews with gender and/or CIMIC trainers involved with Dutch peacekeeper’s training in preparation for Mali, indicate whether or not the adaptation of gender mainstreaming policies within the Dutch army has effected changes to military masculinity. The interviews with peacekeepers will partly be compared to interviews of Dutch peacekeepers, deployed to Kosovo and Bosnia in 1999 (Sion 2006-2009), to indicate

changes and overlaps of the past 20 years in the Dutch armed forces. Furthermore, literature and publications on gender training in peacekeeping contexts, the Dutch military and its transformation in general, and on women in the Netherlands armed forces in particular, will be used for background information.

This thesis contributes to the discussion of a possible change of mentality in (Western) armies and describes the slow development and modernization of peacekeeping training and recruitment strategies of the Dutch armed forces, while indicating shortcomings and enhancement possibilities.

The results of this study are ambivalent. Gender awareness training in the Dutch military is either not at all or insufficiently provided; the number of women in military service is still remarkably low and the culture of peacekeepers is still distinctly masculine and at times misogynist. Fragments of change may however still be observed. Traditional positive characteristics of military identities, such as camaraderie and loyalty seem to overshadow negative or stereotypical perceptions of women and thereby facilitate their inclusion. These attributes have been widely neglected by scholars in their often one-dimensional representation of military masculinities and should be used and extended in future gender trainings. Furthermore, a distinct finding of this study is that soldiers appear to have become more critical of their duties within the military as well as of the military as a whole, and more self-reflecting regarding their role and the environment they work in. This thesis therefore concludes that a change in mental attitudes of militaries is evidently possible and slowly proceeding, as is the transformation of the military. However, much more must be done at a faster pace, to ensure the inclusion of female soldiers, the involvement of gender mainstreaming in all peacekeeping related activities and the creation of a gender sensitive military culture.

2. Literature Review

The number of academic studies focussing on the alleged impact of female peacekeepers on UN missions and gender relations within the military has risen sharply since UNSCR 1325 on Women, Peace and Security (2000) and the UN’s call for more women as peacekeepers. In the following section, I structure and untangle

different theoretical approaches that are relevant to the discussion of the role of gender and women in military. Essentialised notions of female characteristics have been used to justify the positive impact of female peacekeepers in UN missions. At the same time they are still effective as a mechanism to exclude women within the military. The paradox of essentialism in the military context will be demonstrated and rejected through constructivist arguments. After discussing theories of essentialism and constructivism, these concepts will be applied and critically reviewed in light of the debate on the effectiveness of female peacekeepers in UN missions. Pending questions and gaps in the literature will be revealed, before invoking arguments of critical theory. My own position in this debate will be further explained in the theoretical framework, which is based on constructivist notions and concerns of critical theory.

2.1 Essentialism

According to research in the field of gender identity, the UN’s call to recruit more female peacekeepers is built on essentialist conceptions of women as being inherently peaceful (Valenius 2007, Carreiras 2010). Indeed, not only policy makers, but military scholars too claim that female peacekeepers have pacifying effects on their male comrades because of their peaceful, caring character (De Groot 2001). This approach is based on the assumption that women have an impact on peacekeeping missions through skills and characteristics that are traditionally linked to women and are perceived as allegedly “feminine” (communication skills, placidity, altruism, charity, gentle nature, ability to control aggression etc.) (De Groot 2001, Bridges and Horsfall 2009).

Speaking generally, essentialism is rooted on observed behavioural differences between men and women and describes the belief that both genders inhere specific, fixed sets of attributes, qualities or abilities, consistent across time and space and which are fundamentally different from each other (Hepburn 2003, Narayan 1998, Heyman and Giles 2006, England 2010). Positive characteristics, such as the above-mentioned, are described as being fundamental to womanhood (Gilligan 1982). This theory limits the possibilities of change and disregards human potential or individuality (Grosz 1995, Heyman and Giles 2006, Gjerde 2004). According to Bem (1993), biological essentialists in particular have used this theory to legitimize male

superiority and dominance and gender discrimination by blaming differences on the biological natures of men and women. On the other hand, academics have found that essentialist notions have helped to construct identities and that women and men often still act according to those allegedly intrinsic attributes and “follow gender-typical paths” (England 2010:149). Similarly, men and women seem to perceive and accord abilities and qualities according to other people’s gender. According to Lawless’ (2004) study, for example, interviewees did not believe women were equally suited to deal with military crises. In a study of Boldry et al. (2001), men and women in the process of training to become soldiers evaluated their own and fellow students’ performances according to gender stereotypes. Consequently, male cadets evaluated their female comrades negatively, even if their actual performance was successful.

Alchin (2015) claims the exclusion of women from certain military roles is often based on the argument that women are not as physically capable as men. He states that both female and male soldiers tend to believe that women cannot keep up with men, even though studies have shown that women can match the strength of men (Davis and McKee 2004). Interestingly, most cadets do not even consider strength as a vital quality to peacekeeping missions (Alchin 2015). Indeed, ongoing technologizing of warfare led to different fighting methods and strategies, and the majority of soldiers in contemporary armies are not combatants anymore (Carreiras 2010). Ironically, the promotion of deployment and value of female peacekeepers in official UN documents and even gender mainstreaming documents seem to rely on stereotypical, essentialised conceptions of gender. New opportunities for women in the military are legitimized by a discourse on the difference of female qualities (Valenius 2007, Carreiras 2010, De Groot 2001). The same reasons for which women are excluded from military roles serve as an incentive to promote their inclusion in other parts of military activities today (De Groot 2001, Dittmer and Apelt 2008). This leads scholars to argue that men are made for war and women for peace, which may make women the better, more effective peacekeepers (De Groot 2001, Salla 2001, Reardon 1993).

2.2 Constructivism

Many scholars criticise precisely this approach and challenge the idea of a masculinity or femininity being essential or inherent to people (Connell 1995,

Petersen 2003, Higate and Henry 2004). They argue identities around gender are constructed by society, according to stereotypes and essentialized notions, ignoring differences and variations between the same gender and other influences on experiences or abilities, such as race, ethnicity or age (Valenius 2007, Carreiras 2010). According to Valenius (2007:513), essentialist approaches totalize gender experiences, “(…) as if biological womanhood were enough to bring out women’s experiences”. A construction of identities and behaviour used to be necessary to “inculcate values of selfless sacrifice for the group” (Shields et al. 2017:215, Skjelsbaek and Tryggestad 2009). Goldstein (2001), for instance, analyses how society constructs concepts of masculinity and contrasting femininity that motivate men to fight and overcome fear and trauma by living up to the cultural norm of ‘manhood’. He argues that unequal constructed gender identities lie at the heart of the war system. However, today’s conflicts are not as divided anymore, as Goldstein (2001) describes it. Soldiers can no longer compartmentalize their life, their belief systems and identities as ‘easily’ into “feminized peace” and “masculinized combat”. The operational requirements have changed. Today’s peacekeeping missions, which compose the biggest or even only part of military activities of contemporary Western armed forces, no longer take place on battlefields. Instead, civilians, women and children become part of it. Softer, more “feminine” qualities are in demand and peacekeeping missions have turned into large, complex operations with multifunctional mandates and requirements (Skjelsbaek and Tryggestad 2009).

Furthermore, it is highly controversial to base (UN-) initiatives mobilizing women to join the armed forces in troop-contributing countries on constructed identities. Through qualitative interviews with female peacekeepers, scholars such as Valenius (2007), Sion (2009 etc.) and Skjelsbaek and Tryggestad (2009) found that women are not inherently more peaceful, controverting the claim of women as a pacifying and civilizing factor among male peacekeepers. Bjarnegard and Melander (2017) thus argue that variations among men (and women) and difference between societies need to be studied. However, the consensus with IR and gender scholars implies that contrasting hegemonic gender relations still form the heart of our societies and become manifest in a great measure in the context of national military forces (Connell 1995, Duncanson 2015). The construction of identities, especially military masculinities and the understanding of gender relations, according to many,

can impact the security of civilians, particularly women and girls (Higate and Henry 2004, Shields et al. 2017). Additionally, it can also impact the mental health and suicide rate of veterans (Shields et al. 2017, Braswell and Kushner 2010). For the purpose of the protection and wellbeing of civilians, but also male and female peacekeepers, it is thus crucial to research the culture of hegemonic masculinity within armed forces and its potential for change.

2.3 Essentialist and Constructivist perspectives on female peacekeepers

The role of women in the army and the effectiveness of female peacekeepers have been widely discussed for the past 20 years and the topic is still highly controversial. Some of the core arguments, which I will only invoke briefly, are quite practical, such as the argument of women’s rights, gender equality and equal treatment and opportunities. According to Skjelsbaek and Tryggestad (2009), for instance, the inclusion of women’s rights in institutions or areas of male dominance - which the military is a prime example of – depicts a measure to ensure the same rights and opportunities for women and men. In other words, women should be encouraged to take the chance and implement their equal rights in joining the military. Others argue that the involvement of women in the military and peacekeeping operations broadens the pool of skills and experiences, leading to more diversity, and contribute to institutional changes, all of which can improve the operational effectiveness (UN Peacekeeping 2019a, Moelker and Bosch 2008, Karim 2017, Bove 2015, Enloe 2002, Olsson and Tryggestad 2001). Women are needed for body searches on local women, especially in countries where men are not allowed to touch or speak to women (Hendricks and Hutton 2008, Carreiras and Kümmel 2008, Richardson and Bosch 1999). Moreover, since many armies have abandoned compulsory military service, they struggle with enlistment regressions and depend increasingly on qualified female personnel (Skjelsbaek and Tryggestad 2009, Moelker and Bosch 2008). However, putting these undeniable arguments aside, scholars also point to the unique and direct role women might play in conflict settings. Allegedly, they contribute to UN missions by playing an inspirational or educational role to local women, being better respondents to victims of sexual violence, having a pacifying, calming and balancing effect on their male comrades (which can decrease SEA allegations involving

peacekeepers) and interacting better with locals (UN Peacekeeping 2019a, Alchin 2015, Valenius 2007).

2.3.1 Women as “saviours”?

Peacekeepers have to gain the local’s trust in order to obtain information about social networks, ongoing violence and local political actors, to better protect the communities (Gordon and Young 2017). The UN and several academics believe that women are more likely or more capable of interacting with local populations, either because women are thought to be more caring, peaceful and conciliatory than men (De Groot 2001) or at least because they are being perceived this way by local populations and seem less threatening (Karamé 2001, Karim 2017). These qualities are thus not justifiable with the allegedly essential characteristics of women, but with assumptions of local people or of the socialisation processes of women within society and within the military. Since women are believed to be more approachable they often receive tasks within the military aligned with the engagement of the local population (Advisor B). Women supposedly gain trust of civilians (especially women and children) more easily, “understanding and detecting their unique protection needs and tailoring the responses of peace operations” (UN 2015:67, Karim 2017, Hendricks and Hutton 2008). Especially female victims of (sexual) violence are more likely to talk to another woman (Mackey 2001). During research on Norwegian peacekeepers, Karamé (2001) also found that female soldiers were better at fostering good relations with local people and understanding their needs, as they were predominantly female. This led to an increased access to local information, data for decision-making and eventually to the better protection of civilians (Karamé 2001, Hendricks and Hutton 2008). Karim’s (2017) findings suggest that female peacekeepers believe likewise that they bring this asset to missions. This self-efficacy could even alleviate rape and promote gender equality in the host country (Karim 2017).

Alchin (2015), however, claims the opposite: women are “oblivious to the impact they have on the local population” (Alchin 2015:90). In any case, local women seem to react more positively to female peacekeepers and feel that their own security improves when female soldiers are present (Karim 2017). Thereby women could improve the general reputation of peacekeeping missions in local communities and normalize their presence (Bridges and Horsfall 2009). The UN is further convinced

that female peacekeepers can serve as role models and inspire local women to consider joining the security sector and thus empowering them (UN Peacekeeping 2019a). Female peacekeepers can also help with challenging rigid patriarchal gender roles and stereotypes in local communities and “shedding symbols of status and power” (Pillay 2006:6).

Pruitt (2016), Karim (2017) and Karim and Beardsley (2016) researched how an increased number of women and of peacekeeping personnel from countries with higher records of gender equality can reduce the number of SEA allegations involving peacekeepers. Scholars even argue more female peacekeepers could reduce rates of transactional sex among male peacekeepers and local women, and sexual misconduct of UN personnel (Beber et al. 2017, Bridges and Horsfall 2009). Prince Zeid Al-Hussein (2005) attributes women to create or “promote an environment that discourages sexual exploitation and abuse, particularly of the local population”. However, according to Valenius, this is an allegation, not supported by studies (Valenius 2007:519). Moelker and Bosch (2008) agree and criticize that studies have been misinterpreted, for example by De Groot (2001), who is using stereotypes of femininity to claim, “a larger percentage of women prevents the blurring of moral standards” (Moelker and Bosch 2008:40). Pillay (2006) points out that even if women did not have this pacifying effect on their male comrades, at least there is no known SEA incidents or undisciplined behaviour in UN missions involving female peacekeepers (Pillay 2006).

2.3.2 Contradictions

The essentialist theory that women are inherently peaceful, more empathetic, open towards locals and have a pacifying impact on their male comrades has been severely critiqued from multiple angles. Constructivist scholars, such as Valenius (2007) and Carreiras (2010) argue that this perspective reinforces traditional gender roles and that variations in masculinities and femininities are ignored. Moelker and Bosch (2008) point to the incidents around the Abu Ghraib prison and Lynndie England as a counterexample. Sion (2008) and Kember (2010) observed that female peacekeepers did not show more empathy or curiosity and were not interested in establishing dialogues with the local population. Further, they tend to restrict their

“femininity” and refuse to take over “feminine” roles in order to become part of the masculinized group and be accepted by male peacekeepers, thus accepting and reinforcing the established hegemonic masculinity (Sion 2008).

The argument that women can report on their male comrades and play the role of “moralizers” does not only fall short in addressing the root of the problem, but is rather naïve and transfers an unreasonable task and responsibility towards a minority group who is probably not interested in undertaking the burden and pressure of solving this problem (Karim and Beardsley 2016, Valenius 2007). It is doubtful that women would be able to observe SEA offenses, and even if, that they would take the risk to weaken their already difficult position in the army, by restricting their loyalty and report on their comrades (Karim and Beardsley 2016, Moelker and Bosch 2008). Valenius (2007) observed that female peacekeepers in different UN missions avoided male comrades in their free time, because they did not want to know, whether they got involved with prostitutes or offended the UN code of conduct in a different manner. One could also question, if women would be able to “counteract patriarchy and militarized masculinity, if the institutional structures are responsible for bolstering militarized masculinities” (Karim and Beardsley 2016:113). Furthermore, through this approach, responsibility of action and behaviour and thus liability and culpability are taken away from the perpetrators, namely the men.

2.3.3 Limitations

Multiple academics have also noted that women are limited and sometimes even prevented from contributing effectively and according to their anticipated function in UN missions (Sion 2008, Karim 2017, Moelker and Bosch 2008, Karamé 2001, Alchin 2015, Carreiras 2006/2010, Higate and Henry 2004). Sion (2008), for instance, describes a systematic functional, sexual and physical exclusion of female peacekeepers in Bosnia and Kosovo, substantiated from the most inherent differences between men and women, limiting them in their ability to constructively perform in UN missions. Through qualitative interviews with peacekeepers and locals in Liberia (UNMIL), Karim (2017) found that female peacekeepers are prevented from contributing actively to missions and thus reaching their full potential and bringing added benefits due to “access gaps” and barriers. Many argue these barriers are created through the hypermasculine environment and culture of armies, leading to

gender dichotomies and seeming resistant to change (Karim 2017, Moelker and Bosch 2008). Evidence shows that women are often not allowed to leave the base and are required to only travel with men at all time because commanders view the mission as too dangerous for them (Sion 2008/2009, Karim 2017, Karamé 2001, Moelker and Bosch 2008, Alchin 2015). Furthermore, most peacekeeping missions take place in societies in which men and women are not equal and female peacekeepers often face open rejection from mostly male locals, due to religious or patriarchal belief systems, especially in Muslim communities (Sion 2008, Moelker and Bosch 2008). Sion (2008) witnessed in Bosnia that local men did not tolerate the presence of female peacekeepers and did not let them talk to their wives.

Likewise, women are allegedly being excluded by male soldiers, as they view them as emasculating and endangering the mission’s prestige and effectiveness, pointing out their inferiority when it comes to certain tasks (Sion 2008, Alchin 2015, Boldry et al. 2001). “If “even a woman can do it,” the value of the mission for proving masculinity is thrown into question.” (Sion 2008:562). Furthermore, men feel that they destroy the unit’s cohesion (Boldry et al. 2001, Sion 2008). Similarly, scholars (Carreiras 2006/2010, Boldry et al. 2001) give evidence for a gendered division of labour in security institutions, which leads to women being particularly excluded from combat-related areas and their social integration and representation in higher hierarchical positions remaining limited. This division causes female peacekeepers’ inability to perform most tasks, especially those that involve interacting with locals in the field - tasks the UN and scholars anticipated them to perform. Furthermore, Karim and Beardsley (2013) found that troop-contributing countries tend to deploy their female personnel to areas that are least risky –often countries with high rates of sexual violence and gender insecurity. Most women are thus not deployed to countries, where they are most needed and could potentially have the greatest impact (DeJonge-Oudraat 2013). MINUSMA, which is the deadliest and most dangerous mission of the UN at the moment, has in proportion to the strength of the troops, compared to all other current UN missions, the lowest percentage of deployed women, namely 3.1% as of March 2019 (UN Peacekeeping 2019c).

2.3.4. Gaps and Questions

Most scholars blame the exclusion of women and the ineffectiveness of peacekeeping missions, especially the dialogue with local populations, on the hypermasculine culture of the army. As the literature review shows, scholars mostly agree that the mere adding of women to a hypermasculine environment does not make peacekeeping missions more effective. “‘Adding and stirring’ does not (…) attend to the gendered power structures to which women are added” (Valenius 2007:513). The desired effect of more women as peacekeepers has mostly failed to appear, with few exceptions, such as the all-female police unit in Liberia (Cordell 2010, UN Secretary General 2016). (UN) policymakers and scholars should therefore not only focus on women’s participation but also on the quality of their participation (Karim 2017) and on alternatives to make future peacekeeping missions more effective.

It is therefore surprising that academics have broadly failed in addressing the possibility of a cultural change within the military (through gender mainstreaming policies) and the potential of male peacekeepers. Seemingly, the acceptance of “boys will be boys” is even rooted in feminist research. Most academics base their focus on the positive impact of women in peacekeeping missions without considering the possibility of men becoming “better” peacekeepers. This is especially relevant as the prospect of the UN raising the deployment of women in the near future significantly enough to be able to change the current environment of peacekeeping missions seems unlikely (Beber et al. 2017). This is first and foremost due to the fact that TCCs have failed so far to increase the number of female soldiers in their national forces. Moreover, women tend to find the military unattractive as career path (Skjelsbaek and Tryggestad 2009). To this day more than 95% of UN peacekeepers are men (UN Peacekeeping 2019a). This thesis thus closes a gap in the literature by focusing on gender mainstreaming policies and modern-day peacekeeping training with male and female peacekeepers, constituted to promote gender equality for inclusive security (DCAF 2019), and the policies’ impact on the military identity and culture of peacekeepers and their behavior in MINUSMA.

2.4 Critical theory

Some academics argue that soldiers, socialized in the highly masculine environment of the army, will never be able to function as effective peacekeepers and

thus question the appropriateness of using soldiers to create peace (Duncanson 2009, Enloe 1989, Nordas et al. 2013). Whitworth (2004), Higate and Henry (2004) for instance, point to the contradiction that traditional military activities and soldier training are based on the promotion of violence, assault and militarized masculinity, while peacekeeping is dependent on altruistic, peaceful behaviour, impartiality and more social/humanitarian skills – qualities, discouraged by conventional military training. “A peacekeeper must combine qualities of a soldier and a social worker” (De Groot 2001:33). Tension develops, when soldiers are expected to perform in both environments (Whitworth 2004, Betts-Fetherton 1998). As the previous paragraphs show, tension and severe problems have risen indeed. Sion (2008:561) concludes: “Although peacekeeping is a new military model, it reproduces the same traditional combat-oriented mind-set of gender roles”. Sion (2008) conducted anthropological fieldwork on Dutch male and female peacekeepers in Bosnia and Kosovo, and argued the Dutch army still uses a traditional rhetoric of violence and war making. According to her, the Dutch armed forces contain a masculine image and a culture of violence, with female peacekeepers being suppressed and discriminated by their male comrades. Albeit, her research was only conducted on two units within one mission and peacekeepers in 2008, which consisted of a generation, that was trained before the focus on gender became mainstream in western militaries (through UNSCR 1325 etc.).

Furthermore, peacekeepers seem to feel that they are immune to prosecution of their crimes and in fact, prosecution of peacekeepers proved to be unlikely (Patel and Tripodi 2007, Allred 2006, Alchin 2015). For a long time, the de-facto immunity of peacekeepers has been criticised, and calls for stricter policies with clear rules of punishment for raping and human trafficking, for all soldiers serving, have been released (Amnesty International 2014). However, the disciplinary authority over peacekeepers still lies with the TCCs and the responsibility to address severe human rights violations, such as SEA allegations, were passed “from desk to desk, inbox to inbox, across multiple UN offices” (Deschamps et al. 2015:2).

Others report that peacekeepers learn to construct locals in a patronizing and derogatory manner, having misogynist views and devaluating local women by depicting them as “easy” sex objects, predatory, opportunistic and untrustworthy (Jennings 2019, Higate and Henry 2004, Higate 2004). This deconstruction could lead to peacekeepers getting sexually involved with local women, without having in mind

the circumstances that force women to sell their body for money or food. These deconstruction mechanisms and the highly and maybe even fundamentally militarized environment of armies (Enloe 1989, 1993) lead scholars to believe, that the deeply rooted and misogynist culture prevents peacekeepers from doing their job effectively (Jennings 2019). Furthermore, this culture cannot be changed, as the majority, namely male soldiers benefit from it (Woodward 2000, Ford 1997). Correspondingly, Wood and Toppelberg (2017) write about the persistence of sexual assault within the US military, due to the hypermasculine socialization processes of soldiers, particularly officers, despite gender training and recent reforms. They also point to the aggressive retaliation against soldiers that report violence, and the seemingly toleration of sexual assault by hierarchically high ranked officers.

However, they also raise the fact that the assault of female soldiers is comparable in numbers to that of civilian women by civilian men, which leads scholars to argue the military masculinity of the US army is an unsurprising extension of broader US values and culture (Belkin 2012, Kuersten 2014, Vanden Brook and Zoroya 2013). This stands in line with the conclusion of Whitworth (2004), that peacekeeping masculinities are shaped and influenced by national ideologies. Furthermore, Holland et al. (2014) criticize that the newly established sexual assault training in the US Army has not undergone any evaluation by outsiders. According to his findings, the assertion of a US military report, that most active duty members have received such training, is highly doubtful.

As I will show in the following analysis, the Dutch armed forces have a different recruitment strategy, than the US military, and since 2019 have opened all positions and departments to women, opposed to the US, where women are still banned from direct participation in combat arms, enabling men dominating positions over women (Hinojosa 2010). A comparison between US and Dutch national values shows that their cultures are fundamentally different. While the USA have a highly competitive, masculine culture, the Netherlands can be described as a rather feminine country with high values for equality and solidarity (Hofstede 2019).

2.5 Concluding Arguments

The argument, socialization processes are essentially the reason for sexual assault and harassment in the (US) military (Wood and Toppelberg 2017), shows that only a

change of these processes and a change of the toxic, hypermasculine environment can stop further violence. Hinojosa (2010) agrees, by arguing that gender training and sexual assault training could be essentially effective, if done right. Policymakers and academics seem to be convinced alike that gender training improves the output of peacekeeping troops and influences the effectiveness of operations, including the safety of civil population and peacekeeping troops (Puechguirbal 2003, The Netherlands’ NAP on UNSCR 1325 2016-2019, Allred 2006). Soldiers that learn to apply a gender perspective could support societies to achieve gender equality. Overall, a long lasting, positive peace is directly correlated with gender equal societies (Alchin 2015, Caprioli 2005). Schoemann (2010) observed, that a lack of gender training and awareness prior to deployment, led to senior male soldiers discouraging women from joining peacekeeping missions voluntarily.

As quoted in the beginning of this thesis, despite constant criticism, UN officials and policy makers still believe soldiers are the right people to be deployed to UN missions (together with civilians and humanitarian workers). Especially in Mali, where conflict is still ongoing, the operational environment is dangerous and deadly (Karlsrud and Smith 2015, Cold et al. 2017). MINUSMA has been named the world’s deadliest missions and the Netherlands has recorded the most fatalities among European troop-contributing countries (Cold et al. 2017, UN Peacekeeping 2019b). The worst-case scenario in peacekeeping missions, namely violent attacks on peacekeepers, local civilians or civilian/humanitarian workers, cannot be discounted. Therefore, defence strategies, warfighting preparation and capacity and traditional military training are necessary and have to be maintained (Dandeker and Gow 1999, Egnell 2008). After all, soldiers seem in fact to be the only people “who can do it” (Hammarskjöld in De Groot 2001:33). In a relatively peaceful time, especially Western national governments have increasing difficulties to justify growing military budgets to their people. The call for an independent peacekeeping corps of all-round human security workers, highly trained in humanitarian aid, military and police skills and understanding of development concepts such as gender awareness and participation (Glasius 2008) thus seems unlikely to be followed, even, if it would make sense from a strategic and military angle (Dandeker and Gow 1999).

Therefore, a change of the military culture is an inevitable solution to end the sexual assault of local women, to meet the needs of effective and legitimate peacekeeping missions and ensure the best possible protection of civilians in

peacekeeping missions (Ruffa 2017). This prompts the key question: Is it possible to adjust the military culture and identity of soldiers to meet the needs of peacekeeping missions? Building on theoretical arguments of Duncanson (2009/2013/2015), Carreiras (2010/2014) and other constructivist scholars, and conceptions of constructivism and critical theory, this question will be substantiated and then tested through the analysis.

3. Theoretical Framework and Concepts

Derived from the relevant literature I developed the theoretical argument that the hegemonic masculinity and hypermasculine culture within the military can be changed through gender mainstreaming policies. I argue that this change can impact their behaviour in UN missions, particularly regarding the contact to local populations and the sexual abuse of civilian women. In the following paragraphs, I introduce the concepts of this thesis, namely hegemonic masculinity and hegemonic relations in the military, as a prime example for gendered, hypermasculine organizations. By probing Duncanson’s constructivist and critical theory that a change of the hypermasculine military culture is possible and that the potential of male soldiers to adopt gender perspectives has been underestimated, this thesis analyses if and how gender mainstreaming policies within the Dutch armed forces impact its culture. As I will elaborate further in the following paragraphs, Duncanson’s (2009/2015) constructivist approach implies that the identities of individuals, and thus cultures of entities, can be changed, since these identities are constructed in the first place. This change can be induced through the transformation of the military, as will be described through Carreiras’ (2010/2014) theoretical approach. Thereafter, I conclude, what I draw from these theoretical arguments and spell out my hypothesis on what I expect to find through my analysis according to the theoretical approach.

3.1 Hegemonic Masculinity / The Military as a Gendered Organization

The concept of ‘hegemonic masculinity’ explores "[...] the cultural dynamic by which a group claims and sustains a leading position in social life" (Connell 1995:77). Masculinity can be described as a concept in complex gender relations and practices, which positions women and men in relation to each other, and ultimately, as the impact of these practices on culture, personality, and physical experiences (Connell 1995). The term ‘hegemonic masculinity’ is defined by Connell as a norm of (or the

truth about) masculinity, as a configuration of gender-based practices that guarantees the dominant social position of men and the subordinate position of non-men (Connell 1995). The hegemonic ideal of masculinity is a man in contemporary Western culture that is independent, aggressive, heterosexual, rational, and risk-taking (Connell 1995). Different, constructed masculinities occur in different areas of society and institutions (Acker 1992).

The military can be considered as an extreme case for hegemonic gendered organizations and the socialization of soldiers, as a preeminent process of masculinization (Carreiras 2006/2010, Enloe 2000, Alchin 2015, Lopes 2011, Higate and Henry 2004, Skjelsbaek 2007, Skjelsbaek and Tryggestad 2009). Accordingly, the constructed military masculinity of soldiers demands an ‘anti-femininity’, physical strength, aggressiveness, obedience, team loyalty and "(...) the endurance of hardships (...), a rugged heterosexuality, unemotional logic, and a refusal to complain" (Barrett 1996:132, Enloe 2000, Goldstein 2001, Higate 2007, Alchin 2015). This masculinity serves as an ideal for soldiers, and qualities associated with it turn into collectively shared and glorified values (Carreiras 2010, Alchin 2015). Pressure is exerted on soldiers to adapt to this extreme form of masculinity and its hegemonic features cause the exclusion or inclusion of groups or individuals (Moelker and Bosch 2008). Soldiers embodying this constructed optimal image of masculinity become "symbols that have authority despite the fact that most men [...] do not live up to them" (Connell and Messerschmidt 2005:846). But even if most men find it hard or impossible to achieve ideal military masculinity, they still benefit from the predominance of this masculinity and the overall inferior status of women (Connell 1995, Duncanson 2009, Alchin 2015). Men that do not fit this ideal, but do not challenge its dominance, become “complicit”, according to Carrigan et al. (1985). Thereby, the military has not only amplified the dominance of a hypermasculine culture, but also participated actively in its reproduction (Higate and Henry 2004).

Supportive and complementary views on women, as passive victims or supportive, emphatic wives and mothers, must be built in order to construct masculinity (Duncanson 2009, Higate 2007, Sion 2008). Especially in the highly masculine environment of the military, femininity is the dichotomy to masculinity and misogynist beliefs occur distinctively (Wood and Toppelberg 2017, Higate 2007, Enloe 2000). Any ability, skill or trait, traditionally attributed to women, such as care, peacefulness, willingness to communicate, strong social behaviour, but also weakness

and vulnerability, are avoided by male soldiers to appear masculine (Carreiras 2010). Indeed, these non-combat skills grow more important with the increased employment of soldiers to peacekeeping missions (Duncanson 2009, Higate 2007). The protection of civilians in UN missions, contact to and support of the local population and the fight against sexual exploitation and abuse, are key tasks of contemporary Western armies. The masculine environment and culture of armies seem to be the strongest and most persistent barriers female soldiers are facing (Moelker and Bosch 2008). According to Bosch (2003), gender sensitivity and mainstreaming is essential to lift cultural barriers, leading to the better integration of women.

3.2 Potential change of the military masculinity

According to Duncanson (2009), however, a variety and multiplicity of masculinities in different organizational environments, and depending on intersectionality (age, gender, ethnicity etc.), is evident. Drawing on research within the British army, Duncanson (2009, 2015) claims that the potential of social change and possible construction of an alternative military or peacekeeping masculinity have been widely unheeded in IR-research or considered as an adaption and extension of hegemonic masculinity, necessary for the retention of power, creating new hierarchies (Niva 1997, Hooper 2001). Duncanson (2009:77) argues progressive change and a shift towards a new or hybrid peacekeeping masculinity, combining traditional (positive) military characteristics such as bravery, ambition and steadfastness, and feminized qualities of more women as peacekeepers, is possible and “could provide a model of soldier identity ideally suited to conflict resolution”. In line with Connell’s (1995) and Butlers (2004) poststructuralist understanding of identities being dependent on and constructed in relation to the contexts in which people are situated, making identities not unitary, fixed, stable or pre-given. Thus, actively constructed masculinities can vary, they are complex, diverse and even contradictory and hegemonic relations between women and men can be dismantled (Connell 1995, Duncanson 2013/2015). “Soldiers are not born, they are Made” (Whitworth 2004:3). They are constructed through a hypermasculine environment and through everyday practices, in which the expression of and acting upon homophobia, racism or sexism and promotion of violence is being tolerated or even encouraged (Whitworth 2004, Duncanson 2013). Their identity and culture is never complete and should rather be

understood as fluid and a process (Butler 1990, Higate and Henry 2004, Vuga and Jelušič 2015).

Duncanson (2013) criticizes that many feminists point to the differences and complexity of gender identities when it comes to the identities of women, but tend to forget about the same varieties within masculine identities, and thus, do not apply to them in empirical analyses. When Karim and Beardsley (2016) argue patriarchal belief are changeable, they rise the comparison that SEA offenses and misogynistic beliefs are learned behaviour and not essential. And any learned behaviour can be unlearned as well and be replaced through gender-equality values (Karim and Beardsley 2016:113). Scholars support this theory by delineating that the degree and specific embodiment of masculinity differ among soldiers, according to their rank (Enloe 1993, Cohn 1993, Carreiras 2010, Sion 2008). For instance, soldiers show a different attitude towards women conforming to their unit, field of duties and rank.

Furthermore, several scholars point out that the potential of positive attributes and qualities in military identities, such as the idea of loyalty to the group and mission, teamwork and leadership, are often disregarded when it comes to the analysis of military culture (Duncanson 2009, Dandeker and Gow 1999). The positive impact of male peacekeepers and the fact that a majority of peacekeepers does not misbehave during missions or contribute to women’s insecurity and exploitation is mostly left aside (Higate and Henry 2004). Higate (2007) notes that some male soldiers might find constructed hierarchies and hegemonic gender relations inappropriate and resist them. Again, differences in gender identities are being ignored and in line with Connell (2002), the above described hypermasculine military identity, is unlikely to be the only form present in armed forces.

It is important to find out, if these alternative masculinities challenge the dominant culture of gender dichotomies (Duncanson 2009, Higate 2007). Higate and Henry (2004) emphasize the influence of authorities within the military and codes of conduct on peacekeepers’ actions. In their study, they observed soldier’s keen attitudes on obeying the rules and trying to improve the bad reputation of peacekeepers. The stricter and longer in time UN rules and prohibitions are applied, the more they should be implemented. Military culture cannot be framed pursuant to Vuga and Jelušič (2015) and is not resistant to internal or external changes. Indeed,

many academics have claimed that the socialization process of soldiers is not only dependent on the environment and culture of their army, but is affected by several different factors, such as national ideologies and the changing gender norms in civilian society, especially the role and behavior of women in society (Segal 1995, Enloe 2000, Skjelsbaek and Tryggestad 2009, Higate and Henry 2004, Whitworth 2004).

Accordingly, the socialization process of soldiers starts prior to their enlistment, implying that recruits have constructed a certain form of cultural identity before joining the armed forces (Elron et al. 1999, Higate 2004). It is debatable, that a specific type of people are more prone to joining the military, hoping to live up to this certain hypermasculinity; and the military is willing to draw on these kind of expectations and attractions (Hinojosa 2010, Patel and Tripodi 2007, Skjelsbaek and Tryggestad 2009, Moelker and Bosch 2008). Thus, a different, more stringent recruitment strategy, for instance by evaluating recruits on their values for gender equality, could lead to a different socialization process in the army (Karim and Beardsley 2016, Hedlund and Soeters 2010).

3.3 Change through military transformation

Higate and Henry (2004) and Carreiras (2010) point out that variations of socialization processes and the resulting military culture can vary in time and space due to the transformation and modernization of the military. Only since very recently in the Netherlands, for instance, women can access all kind of positions, units and departments of the armed forces (submarine department since 2019). Carreiras (2010, 2014) describes that all Western armies went through modernization processes; most ended conscription and increased their participation in peacekeeping missions, which changed the requirements, priorities goals and values of armed forces. Carreiras (2010:474) concludes that societal and cultural conceptions of masculinity and femininity have changed and a sensibility towards gender awareness is slowly growing in political mainstream, media and Western societies, leading to a “significant historical shift inside the military”.

The transformation of military characteristics becomes especially visible, when it comes to the new focus on peace-oriented missions (Vuga and Jelušič 2015). Military organizations can be “degendered” by incorporating the humanitarian dimension of peacekeeping missions and “changing the cultural patterns and values upon which

shared meanings are built” (Carreiras 2010:482). Duncanson (2009) argues that soldiers in peacekeeping missions struggle between wanting to apply what they have learned during peacekeeper training and the desire or demand to be masculine. Especially soldiers, that are being recruited and trained for peacekeeping missions, depict a great potential of a change of military culture, as international peace support missions already blurry the lines between war/peace, military/civilian. Peace missions represent a new reality to soldiers with the minimal use of force and the requirement of non-traditional security tasks (Duncanson 2009, Cornish 2015, Sion 2008, Carreiras 2010).

Soldiers that join European armed forces today know that they will most likely be deployed to peacekeeping missions, rather than missions of territorial defence (Carreiras 2014, Moelker and Bosch 2008). If they know from the beginning onwards that an additional humanitarian dimension in peacekeeping missions is required from them, the blurred lines of peacekeeping, the inclusion of women and stricter UN codes of conduct, will become a matter of course. Indeed, Hedlund and Soeters (2010) found that modern-day Swedish soldiers construct their identity around the image of the peacekeeping role, with higher ethical and moral standards, rather than the war fighting role. A change of military culture and identity thus seems possible. And the reason for this change is traceable to the rigorous training and gender mainstreaming approaches in the progressive armies of Sweden and Norway (Kronsell, 2012).

Duncanson (2015) argues that such a change should be induced by a shift from the construction of identities through radical ‘Othering’, towards identity construction through relations and recognition of similarity, equality, respect, interdependence and empathy. The more militaries focus on training for peacebuilding missions, comprising newest resolutions on gender and cultural awareness and responses to sexual violence, the more such a change becomes possible. Apart from adapting recruitment strategies, focusing on the UN code of conduct and increasing the number of women among male soldiers, it can be argued that through an enhancement of peacekeeper training, including a focus on gender awareness along the lines of UNSCR 1325, it should be possible to redefine identities of both female and male soldiers within the military context.

The need for gender training

According to many scholars, implementing a gender perspective in the training of peacekeepers can lead to more successful peacekeeping operations, such as the engagement of local population (Hinojosa 2010, Puechgirbal 2003, Allred 2006) and allegedly to a change of the military culture. The culture, beliefs and values of militaries seem to be resistant to change, but mostly because military institutions are slow in updating and reforming their organization or approaches (Groves 2003, Moelker and Bosch 2008). Despite the UN’s ZTP of sexual assault, only few armies have implemented programs or trainings against misbehaviour of their soldiers, and NAPs amount on a voluntary basis. In fact, 16 years after UNSCR 1325 only 77 of 193 member states have NAPs on WPS and solely 18 of them have implemented an allocated budget (UN Security Council 2018). The necessity of a transformation of the culture in the armed forces was already pointed out some 25 years ago, but the military only focused (and failed) on raising the numbers of women in the army, assuming the culture and the related problems would change automatically (Moelker and Bosch 2008).

The role of GENADs has only been implemented in 30, mostly European countries and thus the research on their work and their effectiveness is nominal (Bastick and Duncanson 2019). According to those GENADs and trainers, however, they can successfully change mindsets of individual soldiers, in regard to women and the relevance of gender, and the change of working practices within the military (Bastick and Duncanson 2019). This has been done through the initiation of conversations about discrimination and equality, the challenging of comrade’s attitudes and the introduction of innovative processes and practices, directing attention to the specific needs of women, girls and boys in conflict (Bastick and Duncanson 2019). Those individual soldiers can then in turn influence the attitudes and behaviour of their colleagues (Bastick and Duncanson 2019). And even if their achievements might be modest so far, “this is how change happens in large institutions: incrementally.” (Bastick and Duncanson 2019:573).

Expected empirical observations

This thesis is testing the constructivist approaches of scholars including Duncanson (2009/2013/2015) and Carreiras (2010/2014). My hypothesis is that a

change of military culture and the identity of individual soldiers is possible and can be induced through a transformation of the military and gender initiatives. Theoretically, the efforts of the Dutch army to implement a gender perspective and its slow transformation, should lead to a changed military culture and different mindsets of individual Dutch soldiers are assumable (compared to previous studies, in which the hegemonic, hypermasculine culture of Dutch peacekeepers seemed prevalent, Sion 2006/2007/2008/).

In my theoretically informed analysis, I thus expect to find soldiers that are more sensitized towards gender-related issues, hold an understanding of the importance of gender in peacekeeping, are more aware of their responsibilities, the environment in which they work in and the consequences of their actions. Following my theoretical argument that a changed military culture can impact soldier’s behaviour and attitudes in peace missions, I also expect to find enhanced skills in the engagement of the local population, an understanding of the benefits of an increased number of female peacekeepers and the equal views on and treatment of male and female soldiers and male and female locals. Reviewing the relations between female and male soldiers, I expect to find anti-hegemonic, equated relations.

4. Methodology

Based on the theoretical framework and the analyses of relevant documents, I conducted and interpreted semi-structured interviews with a sample of 8 male and 3 female soldiers of the Dutch military with peacekeeping experience in Mali. The results were compared to previous studies on peacekeepers (Sion 2006/2007/2008/2009, Carreiras 2010, Jennings 2019), in which scholars found a deeply rooted masculine culture, in order to find out, if the military culture is similar today. The data and perceptions of interviews with gender or CIMIC advisors, working with Dutch MINUSMA-peacekeepers, were compared and supported by studies on NATO GENADs of Kesteloo (2015) and Bastick and Duncanson (2019). Through a document analysis of literature on gender training in peacekeeping studies and published documents on the implementation of gender training in the Netherlands, the framing of gender training in the Dutch military was carved out and collated to the results of the interviews. Thereby I could find out, if constructive

recommendations on gender training of UN reports and scholars, such as Puechguirbal (2003), have been successfully implemented.

4.2 Interviews

To detect, if a change of military culture and identity of soldiers has been initiated through gender mainstreaming policies, quantitative analysis is not suitable, as identity, mentality and culture are research fields of high subjectivity, sensitivity and nuances, which are not measurable through quantitative data. Qualitative interviews are necessary to understand the values and perceptions of peacekeepers that form their military identity and the culture within the army, that underlie and influence the behaviour of peacekeepers during a mission (Jennings 2019). Ruffa (2014) advocates an increased dialogue between security studies and military sociology, to understand margins of manoeuvre of soldiers in missions, through studying the role of culture. The influence of gender training can best be studied through the observation of the recipients of the training and the actors in the field – Dutch peacekeepers. The interviews comprise female and male peacekeepers, as they may have different forms of perception and experience.

Firstly, the interviews aimed to explore the relation between male and female peacekeepers and perceptions on the opposing gender. Since masculinity is constructed in relation to femininity, “consideration of attitudes towards women, and the various interactions and relationships with different women on peacekeeping operations, are essential, when exploring constructions of masculinity” (Enloe 1993: 19f). Further, I wanted to find out more about the inclusion of female peacekeepers in the military and if male peacekeepers still develop their identity, by constructing an opposing idea of femininity.

Secondly, the interviews were developed to scrutinize the main focus and priorities of peacekeepers within the military and peacekeeping missions, their perceptions of core tasks of UN troops and their perceptions of their own abilities to engage with the local population. Through these questions I wanted to test if characteristics associated with femininity or masculinity still “have a significant degree of explanatory power in terms of the production and allocation of material and symbolic resources (…)“ (Carreiras 2007:472). Moreover, their motivation for joining the military (and the reason to stay or leave), their perceptions of acceptance within

the military and what makes a good peacekeeper, their experience in peacekeeping training and what they drew from it, provide information about the current environment of the military and the influence of gender training. To test, if a change of military masculinity impacts the performances of peacekeepers, the interviews also focused on their experience in Mali, their perception of performance, core tasks, successes and problems during the mission.

Following advice of Helfferich (2014), the guideline of the problem-centered interviews was constructed as open as possible and as structured as necessary, to enable the interviewees to speak openly about their experience and perceptions. It also allowed for the respondents to raise issues they find relevant, within the framework of the relevant topic, and give them the opportunity to contradict my assumptions (Fujii 2018). In gathering and analysing the empirical data, "Analysis of Guideline Interviews" (Schmidt in Flick 2005:447-456) “Interviewing in Social Science Research: A Relational Approach“ (Fujii 2018) and "Guidance and Expert Interviews" (Helfferich 2014) provided orientation. The interviews were semi-structured, but a questionary was prepared, in case some interviewees were less communicative or open (see appendix).

Before beginning the interviews, I introduced myself as a researcher from the University of Amsterdam and read the clause of informed consent, including the assurance of their anonymity and privacy in the final research paper, in order to minimize harm of the participants (Fujii 2012:718). All interviewees confirmed their voluntary participation and that he or she understands all the dimension of the research study (Fujii 2012:718). The oral interviews were recorded with the consent of the interviewees and transcribed; transcripts will only be submitted without any indication of the participant’s identity (except for their gender). Three soldiers did not agree to a recording, but written notes of their interviews can be found in the appendix. The quotations used in the final paper are allocable through alphabetical numbering of the interviews (Soldier A - Soldier K; Advisor A – Advisor C). All biographical details are obscured, to protect the privacy and confidentiality of the interviewees (Fujii 2012: 721). Only the gender of the soldiers is indicated (Soldiers A-H: male; Soldiers I-K: female).

The meetings were mostly held in familiar surroundings of the interviewees, to make them feel secure and comfortable. One interview was conducted via skype;