This book conducts a gendered critique of the 'principle of distinction' in international humanitarian law (IHL), with a focus on recent conflicts in Africa. The 'principle of distinction' is core to IHL, and regulates who can and cannot be targeted in armed conflict. It states that civilians may not be targeted in attack, while combatants and those civilians directly participating in hostilities can be. The law defines what it means to be a combatant and a civilian, and sets out what behaviour constitutes direct participation. Close examination of the origins of the principle reveals that IHL was based on a gendered view of conflict, which envisages men as fighters and women as victims of war. Problematically, this view often does not accord with the reality in 'new wars' today in which women are playing increasingly active roles, often forming the backbone of fighting groups, and performing functions on which armed groups are highly reliant. Using women's participation in 'new wars' in Africa as a study, this volume critically examines the principle through a gendered lens, questioning the extent to which the principle serves to protect women in modern conflicts and how it fails them. By doing so, it questions whether the principle of distinction is suitable to effectively regulate the conduct of hostilities in new wars. This book will be of much interest to students of international law, gender studies, African politics, war and conflict studies, and international relations.

The authors focus on the multidimensionality of gender in conflict, yet they also prioritise the experience of women given both the changing nature of war and the historical de-emphasis on women's experiences.

This publication focuses on the gender dimensions of intrastate conflicts (civil wars), organised around eight key themes of gender and warfare, sexual violence, formal and informal peace processes, post-conflict legal frameworks, work issues, rehabilitation of social services and community-driven development. For each theme, the authors examine the impact on gender roles of conflict situations, the development challenges involved, and the policy options available to help build more inclusive and gender balanced post-conflict societies.

8. Challenging the state.

The book presents the international laws on the use of force whilst demonstrating the unique insight a feminist analysis offers this central area of international law. The book highlights key conceptual barriers to the enhanced application of the law of the use of force, and develops international feminist method through rigorous engagement with the key writers in the field The book looks at the key aspects of the UN Charter relevant to the use of force – Article 2(4), Article 51 and Chapter VII powers – as well as engaging with contemporary debates on the possibility of justified force to meet self-determination or humanitarian goals. The text also discusses the arguments in favour of the use of pre-emptive force and reflects on the role feminist legal theories can play in exposing the inconsistencies of contemporary arguments for justified force under the banner of the war on terror. Throughout the text state practice and institutional documentation are analysed, alongside key instances of the use of force. The book makes a genuine, urgently needed contribution to a central area of international law, demonstrating the capacity of feminist legal theories to enlarge our understanding of key international legal dilemmas.

Annotation Julie Mertus contends that attempts by humanitarian groups to provide assistance and protection for women will fall short unless they enlist the same women as major actors in such efforts. Case studies from Bosnia, Kosovo and Afghanistan describe experiences in tackling gender issues in humanitarian organizations and in situations of conflict. Mertus goes on to show how international human rights law has begun to address gender-based violence and how agencies can make use of these developments.