|
This article discusses to what extent, of at all, the concerns embodied in the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) Agenda take priority over respect for patriachal local customs and institutions when undertaking Post-Conflict Peace Building (PCPB) missions in fragile states. It argues that the concerns embodied in WPS agenda should take priority over respect for patriachal local customs and institutions to the extent that it addresses three challenges: (1) interntional interventions; (2) the separation of dimension in "silos"; and (3) the women oriented bias. This article looks at three perspectives to answer the challenges. The first is the Feminist Hybridity Perspevtives's arguments that emphasize the collaboration of international capacities and local knowledge in prioritizing the international intervention. The second is the Feminist Political Economy Perspective's arguments that suggest an integrated approach between political security dimension and socio-economic dimension to tackle the challenge of incomprehensive approach due to separation between the two during the PCPB missions. The third is the gender as national interest perspective that provides a basis for the continuation of the discourse on the WPS Agenda by nation-states in order to answer the challenge of the women-orianted bias. |
