In a previous article, I addressed how the death of a 22-year-old Iranian woman named Mahsa Amini sparked one of the biggest women’s rights protests the Islamic Republic of Iran had ever encountered. Her death highlighted the continuous oppression of women in the Islamic State, and the Honourable Melaine Joy imposed sanctions and stated,
“These sanctions are in response to gross human rights violations that have been committed in Iran, including its systematic persecution of women and in particular, the egregious actions committed by Iran’s so-called ‘Morality Police,’ which led to the death of Mahsa Amini while under their custody.”
Following her statement, numerous Canadians took to the streets to solidify her Canadian perspective, as they refuted the atrocities taking place in Iran. A report from Canadian International Council, proclaimed, “[u]nder the government of Justin Trudeau, Canada has embraced a feminist foreign policy—gradually at first, and with fervor over the past year.” In history Canada has shown its commitment to achieving a feminist approach in foreign policy, however, it wasn’t until 2017 that it would put itself forward as the role model for other countries. In 2017 the Trudeau government introduced The Feminist International Assistance Policy (FIAP), a policy approach that would seek to combat gender inequities globally and further support women’s empowerment. Furthermore; Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, showed he was not afraid to address the topic of women’s rights to his peers internationally as he created the Gender Equality Advisory Council of the G7 to “call on the leaders of the G7 and other countries to commit themselves, through the ‘Biarritz Partnership’, to adopt and implement progressive legislative frameworks for gender equality”. However six years down the line, these initiatives have done very little to create a dent in the global landscape on women’s rights, asserting the claims that Canada’s stance on feminism was potentially performative. Canada stood in line with its agenda as outlined in the FIAP, however many draw the question as to how the government has enabled the state of women’s rights in Iran to reach this climax despite the FIAP. This is as result of the underachieving policy goals of FIAP. This policy proposal will seek to rectify the flaws of a sincere, yet underwhelming legislation.
Opportunities to Strengthen Current FIAP
- Take aim at the language of FIAP. Demonstrates poor generalisation of key terms such as women empowerment and gender equality, and offers an ambiguous perspective on feminism
When analysing FIAP there is strong presence of an oversimplified execution of a complex situation in women empowerment and gender equality. FIAP asserts its presence in helping overcome gender equality and support the empowerment of women. In efforts to do so, it outlines how it will achieve this, as it states,
Canada will… address the unacceptably high rates of sexual and gender-based violence experienced by women and girls… provide better support for local women’s organizations and movements that advance women’s rights… help governments in developing countries address the differential needs of women and men through policies and services… step up its commitment to evidence-based decision making
Issues raised by FIAP, while of significant importance, all generalise the reality of women empowerment and gender equality; two very separate causes within many developing countries. British economist Naila Kabeer best addresses this in her publication, Resources, Agency, Achievements: Reflections on the Measurement of Women’s Empowerment. Kabeer states, “women’s empowerment is about the process by which those who have been denied the ability to make strategic life choices acquire such an ability.” The focus for Kabeer when conceptualizing the empowerment of women is the development of self-agency. Kabeer believes aspects most pertinent to the empowerment of women are resources and achievements—the only factors in which women can achieve agency in every context. Canada’s FIAP is aware of this distinction as stated in their executive summary: “increase their participation in equal decision making. This will help women and girls achieve more equitable access to and control over the resources they need to secure ongoing economic and social equality.” The relevance in decision-making is not unrecognised, however, there is a broad outlook of this term. Canada’s FIAP places great importance on women having agency by being involved in the decision-making at a macro level as opposed to a micro level. FIAP insists on involving women in the economic decision-making that relates to the progression of society. While this remains essential in furthering the empowerment of women, it must be realised many women do not reach these levels of power. Through promoting agency by these means, FIAP creates a dynamic in which many envision women as decision-makers only at the highest of levels. Referring back to Kabeer now, women may claim agency and be decision makers in many different ways: “bargaining and negotiation, deception and manipulation, subversion and resistance as well as more intangible, cognitive processes of reflection and analysis.”In asserting the empowerment of women, Canada must seek to do this at every level. FIAP does not do this in an adequate manner, rather, it oversimplifies the topic thus creating a generic response, that does not address the intricacies of the matter.
Generalising terms extends beyond women’s empowerment; the term ‘gender equality’ is also subject to broad interpretation, as exemplified by FIAP. One can understand gender equality as, “The concept that women and men, girls and boys have equal conditions, treatment and opportunities for realizing their full potential, human rights and dignity, and for contributing to (and benefitting from) economic, social, cultural and political development.” FIAP justly recognises the need for gender equality and does map out the means to achieving it, but there is far greater complexity to the issue of gender equality. FIAP fixates its wording and literation on women and girls when referring to gender equality. While this is key in creating a balance, as previously raised, gender equality also requires the facilitation of men and boys. Through its terminology, FIAP has inadvertently perpetuated the assumption and essentialization of gender to mean women. With too great a focus on women, it further imbalances and essentialises women as being vulnerable. In her analysis of the United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1325 on women, peace, and security, Nadine Puechguirbal offers an insight into the essentialization of women. Through the policy’s language, it breaks women into three categories as defined by Puechguirbal:
This gender essentialism defines women in three conflating categories – women as vulnerable, women as mothers and women as civilians. This essentialism lends itself to the maintenance of a powerful assumption: ‘If women can be assumed to be civilians, and are innocent and vulnerable, it is they in particular (along with children, the elderly and the disabled) who must be protected
FIAP does not do a much better job of not essentialising women. This policy spotlights women and girls and further contributes to the inconsistent power dynamics in developing countries. Within both of these pieces of legislation it contributes to the view of women being vulnerable, and does not do an adequate job in countering gender inequality, let alone address the rise in gender identities and finding solutions for those marginalised groups in developing countries. A generalised understanding of gender equality poses further risks as it marginalises more women.
A commonality within these two different approaches that generate ‘Women Empowerment’ and ‘Gender Equality’ within FIAP is the ambiguity of a feminist approach. There is a generalised conception of what feminism is, but, to devote a policy agenda solely to one concept, one would envision a clear and precise idea of the term. However, Canada fails to achieve this in FIAP. Jennifer Thomson of the University of Bath explains why Global Affairs Canada may have embraced this approach, as she states “the adoption of the term feminist to describe their foreign policy allows for a great deal of flexibility in terms of how these states understand the word, and what they choose to emphasise by using it.”Nevertheless, by taking this policy approach, there comes a loss. The intentions of FIAP, prove to be nothing short of sincere, yet a poor execution of its premise results in an ambiguous search for an unidentified goal. Through a predefined goal of this policy approach, it refutes the confusion between key terms such as gender equality and women empowerment. By creating a benchmark definition for a feminist approach, this solution creates a clear guideline for obtaining whatever goal it sets out to achieve.
Remedy
A proposal that does not provide a precise definition of its goal is not an adequate piece of legislation. One may argue that a reason for a lack of application in this policy is rooted in the uncertainty of its premise. I would advise revamping Canada’s FIAP through providing a clearer pathway on its purpose: How does Canada define feminism? How does Canada distinguish women’s empowerment from gender equality? And how does Canada view the role of women within developing countries? These are questions that require immediate answers in efforts to ensure the FIAP can be executed justly. Of course with this outlook, it may require an almost complete upheaval of the current policy plan, one that took a great deal of time to actualize. Through doing this, it may help Canada reach its goal earlier than planned.
2. Address conflicting interests between supporting arms trade with Saudi Arabia and mitigating the abuses women face as a result of displacement from Saudi Arabia / Yemen War.
As previously addressed, many have called on FIAP for being merely a performative act of the Canadian government to score points with the public, and this is heavily attributed to our going arms trade with Saudi Arabia. Oftentimes, the idea of Canada’s neutrality faces heavy critique as it consistently contradicts its stance on different international events. In 2014, Canada joined 113 other states in ratifying the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). The treaty was designed to ensure “The responsibility of all States, in accordance with their respective international obligations, to effectively regulate the international trade in conventional arms.” In signing this treaty, Canada was demonstrating its stance against growing conflicts in developing countries and displaying how they would combat the use of foreign arms. In 2021, Global Affairs Canada reported Saudi Arabia to be Canada’s top export destination for arms just behind the United States. Despite a fractured relationship following former minister for Global Affairs Chrystia Freeland’s tweets regarding Saudi Arabia’s human rights practices, Canada still remains as an almost a proprietary partner in dealing arms with Saudi Arabia.
One can understand the conflict of interest in this situation. As previously stated, Canada envisions itself as being a champion of upholding human rights most especially women’s rights in developing countries, hence the development of FIAP. In 2011, President Ali Abdullah Saleh of Yemen handed over power to his deputy Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi. This was done in efforts to regain stability to Yemen, a country that was and still is suffering economically and socially. This change of power was not a welcomed change. In the first few months of his presidency, Hadi was faced with terror attacks and political instability. Houthi Shia Muslim rebels recognising the opportunity at hand due to instability in the nation, took over Northern Saada Province in 2014 and exiled President Haddi. Through this, we can gain a better understanding of Canada’s involvement as Saudi Arabia along with the other Sunni Arab States led strikes on the Houthi rebels. Through their trade partnership, Canada is inadvertently backing this Arab war that continues to displace millions of Yeminis. Within the FIAP mandate, it states, “In conflict-affected countries, protracted displacement has left millions of people with few opportunities, limited access to services and an uncertain future.” Despite being aware of the derivatives of conflict, Canada does not find it necessary to create a solution to a problem they facilitate and further perpetuates the notion that FIAP is purely performative as we do not seek to reduce conflicts women face in developing countries.
As already addressed, within FIAP the Canadian government specified efforts in supporting women displaced in the middle eastern conflict. They state, “The forced displacement of more than 4.7 million people…has been marked by serious violations of international humanitarian law, including sexual violence.” CNN sat down with multiple Iranian women and documented their harrowing experiences at the hands of Iranian law enforcement. One woman stated she both witnessed and suffered sexual violence while detained. She further stated, “There were girls who were sexually assaulted and then transferred to other cities… They are scared to talk about these things.” There is no lack of experiences relating to sexual violence for women in the Middle East and within FIAP the Canadian government outlined methods in which they could do better as they state, “With Canada’s help, 29 community centres set up in refugee camps and communities in Kurdistan and other regions are meeting the urgent needs of thousands of women and girls every year.” The Canadian government has adopted the task of rehabilitating these women who are facing a magnitude of issues from being displaced. While FIAP factors in very important responses in emergency care, such as gynaecologists, mental services, clothing and health care hygiene items. There are a multitude of factors that come from the sexual violence women face when being displaced. Studies express how “violence… has a devastating impact on women’s physical, mental, and psychological health.” The mental well-being of women who have been sexually assaulted must be better addressed. Studies conclude “Improving intervention skills and supervision services among mental health professionals to help women who face GBV is recommended.” FIAP does not address ways in which it can combat the vulnerability of women within these situations.
Many women suffer from displacement in scenarios resulting from conflicts like Yemen and Iraq, and are landed in vulnerable positions where they may be exploited. FIAP addresses how we may respond to the problems created as a result of this, yet it does not present an adequate plan on how to mitigate these problems from arising. Training law enforcement in matters pertaining to sexual assault and how to manage cases could see a reduction in women suffering from these issues. Furthermore, while FIAP has created responses, there must be greater emphasis on providing psychological support for women suffering from displacement.
Remedy
This remedy will come as no surprise, but Canada must mitigate its conflicts of interest with the Middle East. While Canada-Saudi Arabia relations are strengthening after an awkward break in 2018, Canada must look itself in the mirror and question the morality of its arms trade with Saudi Arabia. Through the continuous partnership in the sales of arms, it further contributes to the harm of lives in the Middle East. Canada cannot continue to contradict its foreign policy, by dismantling the sales of arms to Saudi Arabia, it clears the conscious of our foreign policy and no longer holds us responsible to crimes women in the Middle East face as a result of displacement from war. Nevertheless, by adopting this approach, Canada does weaken its relationship with the powerful Arab nation of Saudi Arabia, which could prove to hamper our trade agreement pertaining to crude oil. Furthermore, The death of Mahsa Amini justifiably enraged Canadians, and many called for action in the Middle East, not just sanctions on government. Through a revamped FIAP, there is very much a possibility to mitigate scenarios like this and avoid ongoing conflict for women within the Middle East. FIAP lacked a clear plan and timeline in creating a safer environment for these women. I would heavily encourage that a new policy approach be adopted in which FIAP can outline and map out ways in which it can better educate law enforcement within these countries to do a better job in ensuring the safety of women. Much of this can be achieved through training and education. Reports state that many military and law enforcement officers do not receive sensitivity training in their onboarding process. It would be very beneficial to offer a Canadian perspective on this, which may offset the violence towards women. However, the problem lying within this approach is the view of a forced Western view on countries. Of course, this can be countered by employing native educators on this matter and having a more traditional approach to facilitate better learning.
3. Rectify previous objections or leave the policy as it is.
Canada’s FIAP is a first of its kind—a foreign policy proposal created purely to serve the betterment of women globally. At the time our government envisioned Canada to be a leader of this pertinent cause, however, their eagerness trumped their ability to fully execute a more than adequate plan, rendering its effectiveness not as purposeful as initially hoped. The pertinent objections to FIAP prove to be something, one could describe as counterintuitive. The lack of definition within the policy and only offering general concepts in the terms of women empowerment and gender equality. These generalisations oversimplify a complex issue and don’t offer attention to the diverse experiences women within these countries face. Furthermore, it is very widely accepted, that it is near impossible to achieve a goal when there is in fact no goal outlined. The goal of this policy is to achieve feminist assistance across the globe, however, we do not have an ideation of feminism.
Without sounding overly repetitive, the most glaring objection to this policy is our arms trade with Saudi Arabia. The Canadian government is directly contributing to the ongoing conflict in Yemen and further advancing the displacement of women in these regions. We are in part directly working against this policy.
The obvious remedy to these objections is to completely dismantle this policy approach and restructure it in a way that combats the issues raised. This can be done through offering a concise definition of terms such as feminism, women empowerment and gender equality. Through offering a tangible Canadian perspective on these matters, it will strengthen the policy. Furthermore, by effectively ending trade with Saudi Arabia, it will relinquish Canadas position in the Yemen war. This will enable us to stop contributing to the displacement of millions of women in these regions, something FIAP set out to achieve.
The issue in choosing these routes of remedy is simply the cost and the ignominy of admitting that the policy was formulated on a weak foundation. As previously addressed if we are to confront the issues in FIAP, it will require a complete upheaval of an already established framework. Despite the objections to FIAP, it still provides countless women in developing countries aid and support and actively seeks to better their standard of living. By changing this policy, it could cause some women to stop seeing aid in the process of rectifying the policy. In addition the resources required to revamp this policy may prove to be too costly for the Canadian government. Furthermore, by the Canadian government reconstructing FIAP, it displays that the policy was not well thought and further perpetuates the notion that the policy was potentially performative and did not seek to rectify the issues women face. To add to this, Canada could also cease trading arms to Saudi Arabia to save this policy, but this would heavily impinge the import of crude oil from this region. This would cause an increase in oil prices in Canada due to a fractured relationship with Saudi Arabia, something Canadians would show greater attention to than the arms trade. These issues can be avoided by letting this policy play out and revisiting it in a few years when it is due to be readdressed
Conclusion
Through this policy paper, we have analysed the areas in which we can see improvement and how this can be achieved. The intention of FIAP is nothing short of sincere and a genuine attempt to combat a never-ending problem, and I believe it highlighted Canada’s ability to be innovative and act independently on the world stage. Yet it also displays our lack of comprehensiveness in this field. I would suggest a revision of this policy mandate by addressing the literature used within the policy, through developing a concise understanding of the terms feminism, women empowerment and gender equality. This is the foundation of the policy mandate, yet there is no clear understanding of it. I believe through placing a greater emphasis on this, it translates to a better execution of its true goal of eradicating misogyny against women in developing countries.