‘Endless nightmare’ of death and destruction in Gaza, UN officials tell Security Council. July 2024. Credit: UNRWA
GENEVA, Nov 4 2024 (IPS) – While the expansion of democracy is a key condition for peace, the Achilles’ heel of democracies is that their leaders are constrained by electoral calendars, forcing them to push for peace or delay, whereas autocracies can afford to play the long game to achieve the favorable outcomes they desire.
Take, for example, the current wars in Ukraine and the Middle East: U.S. leadership may be influenced by the approaching November elections, skewing policy decisions, while autocratic leaders of rival powers can be confident in their long-term tenure.
To be clear, this does not suggest that we should abolish democracy. Quite the opposite—more democracy and more bottom-up scrutiny of leaders are needed, as outlined below.
Short-termism lies at the heart of several misconceptions within Western democracies that complicate peacebuilding efforts. One such misconception is the “better the devil you know” mentality, which has long been used to justify support for brutal regimes in exchange for short-term gains.
From the Cold War to the present, global powers have backed dictators and militias, prioritizing strategic influence over human rights. For instance, Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi, once an international outcast, was quickly embraced by Western leaders after making some concessions.
However, such cynical realpolitik is not only morally wrong but counterproductive. Supporting autocrats for short-term diplomatic or economic gains only fuels anti-Western sentiment. Recent research shows that U.S. military aid to dubious regimes has often backfired, leading to more, not fewer, terrorist attacks from those nations. Instead of supporting despots, Western nations should focus on promoting long-term peace through jobs, representation, and security.
These are the true foundations of stability, and investing in them is far more effective than cutting deals with dictators. In the end, helping to build peaceful societies is a far better investment than propping up corrupt regimes.
Short-termism has also frequently prompted leaders to prioritize quick cash transfers—often subject to embezzlement—over policies that enhance long-term economic productivity and resilience in fragile countries. The belief that financial aid can “buy” peace is a common misconception.
Peace cannot simply be bought; it must be “invested in” through the development of human capital and productive capacities. Large sums of money, like oil revenues, often fuel corruption and conflict in unstable states. Countries such as Venezuela, Sudan and Nigeria have suffered from the “resource curse,” where abundant resources become a source of instability rather than prosperity.
Similarly, foreign aid, when poorly managed, can have unintended negative consequences. Studies indicate that U.S. food aid can sometimes exacerbate conflict in recipient regions, as armed groups divert resources for their own benefit. This is not to say that Western democracies should abandon aid. Instead, they should focus on smarter investments in education and healthcare, which reduce incentives for violence.
Human capital cannot be stolen, and improvements in education and health increase employment opportunities, diminishing the motivation for conflict. Investing in people is the best path to sustainable peace.
A third common misconception in conflict resolution is that winning over “hearts and minds” should come first, with security following later. This is again driven by short-termism, as providing services may be quicker than establishing security. The theory is that by providing amenities and increasing local support, tensions will ease. However, this approach rarely works in practice.
When people’s basic safety is at risk, they prioritize security over services or political ideals. Research in places like Iraq shows that security and basic infrastructure must be established first—without them, no other policy can succeed. For instance, the Dayton Agreement in Bosnia successfully ended a brutal war and prevented its resurgence, largely thanks to international peacekeepers.
Offering security guarantees to all parties is essential for bringing armed factions to the negotiating table and laying the groundwork for lasting peace. Without security, efforts to win hearts and minds are doomed to fail.
After examining these misconceptions that jeopardize peace efforts, my new book, The Peace Formula: Voice, Work, and Warranties, Not Violence, outlines the solid fundamentals for achieving sustainable peace in the long term, based on hundreds of empirical studies.
First, there is a growing body of evidence that a democratic voice makes a crucial difference. When citizens have political rights, civil liberties, and their preferences are considered, their incentives for violent attacks on the state diminish.
Every regime in history has eventually felt the need to extend political rights or collapsed. Even autocratic Rome was forced to extend citizenship beyond Italy to survive for a few more centuries. Long-term stability and peace are impossible when citizens are treated as slaves.
Similarly, a strong and productive economy is another prerequisite for lasting peace. Having a fulfilling, well-paid job makes it much less tempting to join a warlord or enlist as a volunteer in a brutal war. These higher opportunity costs of abandoning work for warfare form the second pillar of sustainable peace and stability.
Finally, security guarantees are crucial. When the state lacks a monopoly on legitimate violence over its territory, power vacuums typically give rise to warlords, organized crime, and insurgents that challenge state authority. Consider the rise of the mafia in historical Sicily or the situation in Somalia today. Security is one of humanity’s basic needs, and if a state is too weak to provide it, UN peacekeeping troops must be ready to step in when invited.
If the academic literature increasingly provides clear answers on what needs to be done, why then are the components of a peace formula not consistently implemented? While we can point to successful examples of post-conflict reconstruction, such as Germany and Japan after World War II, the list of failed states and aborted democratization efforts is equally long.
The problem can be reduced to the concept of “smart idealism.” It isn’t rocket science. The issue with “smart idealism” is twofold. First, the “smart” aspect is relatively new. Many of the scientific insights underpinning the above arguments—such as the failure of supporting bad regimes and the importance of human capital—are based on cutting-edge research. Only recently has empirical evidence shown that cash handouts can backfire and that “winning hearts and minds” is futile without basic security.
Second, the “idealism” aspect is a tough sell. Peacebuilding is a long-term commitment that requires significant investments. After World War II, the Allies transformed Germany, Japan, and Italy into functioning democracies, but it came at a steep financial cost. The fear of another world war motivated these efforts.
Today, however, few political leaders are willing to commit such resources to nations like Somalia, where the political payoff is uncertain, and re-election prospects at home may be harmed. Additionally, most politicians operate within short-term electoral cycles, bringing us back to the issue of “short-termism.”
Their incentives favor projects with immediate returns, not long-term peace investments that would benefit their successors. In the short term, shady deals with despots may seem politically advantageous, even if they prove disastrous later.
Are these roadblocks insurmountable, or can we do something about them? Yes, we can! Rather than relying solely on elected officials to make the right choices, civil society must apply pressure, advocating for democracy globally. Ordinary citizens have historically driven positive change—think of the movements that dismantled South African apartheid.
Despite global setbacks in democracy over the past decade, fighting for sound, evidence-based policies remain essential. Democracies may falter, but they have an extraordinary capacity to recover, drawing on the remnants of past democratic capital, as Argentina’s history demonstrates. As Abraham Lincoln famously noted, “Those who shall have tasted actual freedom I believe can never be slaves, or quasi slaves again.”
Dominic Rohner is a globally recognized authority on armed conflict and peacebuilding. He serves as Professor of Economics at the Geneva Graduate Institute, where he holds the prestigious André Hoffmann Chair in Political Economics and Governance, and is also a Professor at the University of Lausanne. He holds a PhD in Economics from the University of Cambridge, and his pioneering work has earned multiple international awards and accolades.
With opinion polls showing almost dead heat for the two candidates in key swing states, moments, before United States elects its first female president, it is once again at a very nervy electioneering.
Since the ratification of the 19th Amendment to the American constitution, on August 18, 1920, which granted women the right to vote in US elections, a contest with a leading female candidate has never been this close before, and pundits and campaign officials will likely have a long wait on election night for a result.
The woman who paved the way in the 1872 presidential election, for today’s possibility, was Victoria Woodhull, as presidential candidate for the Equal Rights Party, a publisher and women’s rights champion, though she faced violence and threats, and was not legally able to vote for herself, with Frederick Douglas she received 26 votes.
While recent memory is placed on the 2016 election where Hillary Clinton got the votes, but fell short in the Electoral College system, before her time, following on Woodhull’s breaking the seal, there have been some 29 female candidates who sought the presidency of the US government, through the ballots.
NOTABLE NAMES
Notable names are Belva Ann Lockwood, who ran in 1884 and 1888 under the banner of the Equal Rights Party. Margaret Chase Smith, in the 1964 election, was the first woman to be nominated for a major party, in the Republican primary votes in New Hampshire, Illinois, Massachusetts, Texas, and Oregon, and a few other states.
In 1972, Shirley Anita Chisholm was the first African American woman to seek nomination for president, representing the Democratic Party. He name was on the ballot in 12 primaries, and, at the end, she received 151.95 votes at the Democratic National Convention.
Patsy Takemoto Mink, the first woman of colour to enter the US Congress, in 1972, embarked upon an anti-war campaign, during the Democratic presidential primary, winning two per cent of the votes. She also served as assistant secretary of state for oceans and international environmental and scientific affairs, and as president of Americans for Democratic Action.
In 1976 and 1980, Ellen McCormack entered 20 state primaries for the Democratic presidential nomination. In 1976 she became an anti-abortion candidate, winning 22 convention votes. She became the first woman to qualify for federal campaign matching funds and qualified for Secret Service protection. In 1980, she ran for president again as the candidate of the Right to Life Party, winning more than 30,000 votes from three states.
Sonia Johnson ran in 1984, on the ticket of the Citizens Party, receiving federal matching funds and winning more than 70,000 votes. Patricia S. Schroeder ran on the ticket of the Citizens Party, receiving federal matching funds and winning more than 70,000 votes.
A Democrat, she made headlines when she took preliminary steps toward making a serious run for the presidency, but dropped out before the primaries because she could not raise the necessary funds, Lenora Fulani, representing the New Alliance Party, sought to become president in 1988 and 1992, and qualified for federal matching funds.
Only candidates seeking nomination by a political party to the office of president are eligible to receive primary matching funds. A presidential candidate must establish eligibility by showing broad-based public support. He or she must raise more than $5,000 in each of at least 20 states (that is, over $100,000).
FIRST WOMAN
To date, Kamala Harris, is the first woman (black and Indian), to hold the office of vice president of the US. Prior to Harris, whose father is a Jamaican, other women have sought to become vice president. Sarah Palin, in 2008, for the Republican Party; Geraldine Ferraro, for the Democrats in 1984; Frances ‘Sissy’ Farenthold had her name put into nomination for vice president at the Democratic National Convention in 1972.
Toni Nathan, in 1972, as the Libertarian candidate for vice president, became the first woman to win an electoral vote, when one Republican voted for her instead of for his party’s candidate. It is worth noting that other women throughout history have had their names placed into nomination and/or earned electoral votes for vice president, but they did not receive wide support.
Harris was selected as President Joe Biden’s running mate, after contesting for president in the 2020 Democratic primary, she left the race before the first primary contest. She was district attorney of San Francisco from 2004 to 2011, also, California’s attorney general from 2011 to 2017, serving as the first black woman to be elected statewide in California. In 2016, Harris became the first woman of colour to be elected to the Senate from California, as well as the first south Asian woman, and only the second black woman in the US Senate.
If she is successful in this year’s presidential contest, it will put the US on par with countries, such as Sri Lanka, India, Israel, Argentina, Central African Republic, Portugal, United Kingdom, Dominica, Iceland, Norway, Malta, Philippines, Pakistan, Ireland, Lithuania, Nicaragua, Bangladesh, Poland, Burundi, Canada, Rwanda, Turkey, Haiti, Guyana, New Zealand, and Jamaica, that have elected and selected women to be head of state.
Other countries whose governments have been headed by women include Latvia, Panama, Switzerland, Finland, Indonesia, Senegal, Sao Tome and Principe, Peru, Macedonia, Mozambique, Germany, Ukraine, Chile, Liberia, South Korea, Moldova, Australia, Costa Rica, Kyrgyzstan, Slovakia, Trinidad and Tobago, Denmark, Kosovo, Mali, Thailand, Malawi, Slovenia, Brazil, Mauritius, Namibia, Barbados, and Mexico.
There are 25 female members in the US Senate, 151 in the Congress, and a recent poll indicate that 53 per cent of Americans say more women are needed in political office, in their country. The Biden Cabinet has four female members, including the first female treasury secretary, Janet Yellen. In the very crucial office, secretary of state, three women have served in that capacity: Madeleine Albright, Condoleezza Rice, and Hillary Clinton.
In 2007, Nancy Pelosi became the first, and only woman to be elected as speaker of the US House of Representatives. The US Supreme Court has four female members, and 27 per cent of the Federal judges, are women.
A recent survey conducted by the Pew Research Center says 39 per cent of respondents say a woman president would be better at working out compromises, with 37 per cent saying a woman would be better at maintaining a respectful tone in politics, and a third say a woman president would be better than a man at being honest, and ethical, with 34 per cent say she would stand up for what she believes in, despite pressure.
In September, the Pew Center reported that 81 per cent, say the economy will be very important to their vote in the presidential election, while 45 per cent express more confidence in Vice President Harris to make wise decisions about immigration policy.
Improvement of the status for women in the US is a major concern for rights group, and gender specialist, as their standing has consistently lags behind men’s, despite notable advancements over recent decades. Women earn less than men, experience higher poverty rates than their male counterparts, face specific adverse health conditions, and remain under-represented in political office across the various spectrums.
Wind turbines overlooking Vyas Chhatri, traditional architecture of Jasalmer district in Rajasthan. Credit: Athar Parvaiz/IPS
NEW DELHI, Nov 4 2024 (IPS) – While India continues to rely heavily on coal, the south Asian economic giant is also aggressively pushing renewable energy production, especially after the costs of renewable energy production have fallen drastically in recent years around the world.
But experts say that India—the world’s third largest emitter of greenhouse gases (GHGs)—has to face many headwinds for achieving its net zero target by 2070 and before that, reaching the target of a 45 percent reduction in GHG emission intensity by 2030 from 2005 levels.
According to the experts, addressing the gaps in policies and strategies are some of the main measures India needs to take for a rapid transition to renewable energy sources. But most of them believe phasing out fossil fuels such as coal appears to be a daunting task for India given its huge reliance on them. India ratified the Paris Agreement on Climate Change in 2016, committing to limit the global average temperature rise to below 2°C by the end of the century.
As part of its first Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), India had pledged to reduce the greenhouse gas (GHG) emission intensity of its economy by 33–35 percent by 2030 from 2005 levels. In August 2022, the Indian government revised its NDCs, raising its ambition to a 45% reduction in GHG emission intensity by 2030 from 2005 levels.
The south Asian country has also pledged to become carbon-neutral or achieve net zero carbon emissions by 2070, an announcement made by the Indian government in 2021 during CoP 26 in UK. According to the UN Climate Change Executive Secretary, Simon Stiell, Decarbonisation is the biggest transformation of the global economy of this century.
Coal to Stay ‘For India’s Development’
Presently, the contribution of coal for India’s energy generation is 72 percent and accounts for 65 percent of its fossil fuel CO2 emissions. The contribution of coal for energy generation in India, say the experts, is not going to change anytime soon.
“Coal cannot be removed from India’s energy mix in the next 20 years. We require coal because we need a development-led transition, not a transition-led development,” said Amit Garg, a professor at Indian Institute of Management (IIM), Ahmedabad-Gujarat. “We can adopt new technologies and try new ways, but we in India cannot eradicate coal just yet.”
Anjan Kumar Sinha, an energy expert who is the technical director of Intertek, told IPS that energy security in India is currently dependent on coal and would take time for its phasing out given how the country is yet to be ready for a rapid phase-out of coal, which is currently extremely important for India’s energy security.
“In phasing it out, we have to improve flexible operations of coal-based plants for electricity dispatch, especially with increasing levels of renewable energy,” he said.
According to Sinha, coal being an important energy resource which India has, “we need to wash its sins” with a continuous increase in production of renewables. India, Sinha said, “has to save itself… it can’t leave it to the rest of the world.”
India has been hailed for the progress the country has achieved in its clean energy transition in recent years. The Indian government aims to increase non-fossil fuel capacity to 500 GW and source 50 percent of its energy from renewables by 2030.
“[This] progress seems encouraging on several fronts. Today, India stands fourth globally in total renewable capacity, demonstrating a 400 percent growth over the last decade,” notes an article published by researchers of the Bharti Institute of Public Policy at the Indian School of Business.
But, despite this progress, the authors say that India faces a lot of challenges as it still remains heavily reliant on fossil fuels.
India’s Growth and Green Journey
With India’s economy expected to expand rapidly in the coming years, there will be an increase in demand for resources, and the environmental footprints will also increase. According to the latest World Energy Outlook report of the International Energy Agency (IEA), India’s energy consumption will increase by 30 percent by 2030 and 90 percent by 2050, with carbon emissions from energy use rising by 32 percent and 72 percent in the same period.
If successful in meeting its climate commitments over the next seven years, India could offer a developmental model wherein a country continues to grow and prosper without significantly increasing its energy or carbon footprint. But the path ahead for India’s energy transition is full of significant challenges.
“This is one of the most challenging times for India. We have the challenge of growth, jobs and energy consumption, which we have to balance with environmental considerations,” B V R Subrahmanyam, the CEO of NITI Ayog, India’s top official think tank, was quoted as saying by India’s national daily, The Times of India, on September 11, 2024.
But he has emphasized that fossil fuels will continue to drive the country’s growth. “It is no longer about growth or sustainability, but growth and sustainability,” he was quoted as saying.
Experts also believe that there are hurdles along the road as the country seeks to phase out polluting energy sources.
According to this article published in Outlook magazine on October 30, uncertainties such as low renewable energy (RE) investments in recent years, land availability, high intermittency of renewables, higher costs of panels due to import duties and distribution companies that are tied up in long-term power purchase agreement (PPA) not buying new RE power are some of the major concerns.
“While there has been progress on deployment of electric vehicles in the country, upfront costs and a lack of reliable charging infrastructure pose challenges in scaling up the initiatives… for the industrial sector, fossilized manufacturing capacities will create decarbonisation challenges,” the article says.
Raghav Pachouri, associate director, Low Carbon Pathways and Modelling, Vasudha Foundation, highlighted how storage can play an important role in making energy transition successful.
“The success of the energy transition to renewable energy lies with the integration of storage. Current capacities are limited, and the quantum of requirements is huge.”
Moreover, Pachouri says, infrastructure for electric vehicles remains inadequate, with fewer than 2,000 public charging stations as of 2023.
A serious global public health concern, violence against women affects not only the health of the victims but also that of their families and society as a whole. Physical violence is defined as using force against another person by shoving, biting, slapping, stabbing, shooting, or pinching. Verbal abuse is the use of words to cause harm to the person being addressed. Although brutal, it is still the least acknowledged violation of fundamental human rights.1 Any behavior that threatens, intimidates, or diminishes the victim’s sense of self-worth or self-esteem is considered emotional, intimate partner violence (also known as psychological or mental abuse).2,3 Sexual violence occurs when a wife is physically coerced into having sex against her will, coerced into having sex out of fear, or coerced into doing something sexual that she finds demeaning or humiliating.2,4 Economic abuse happens when an intimate partner has control over the victim’s finances.2,5
According to estimates, 35% of women worldwide have experienced intimate partner violence (IPV) at some point in their lives.2 Nevertheless, because abuse against women is frequently unreported, this figure is probably underestimated. Thirty percent of women report experiencing physical or sexual abuse at the hands of their relationships. A WHO poll conducted in ten countries revealed that between 15% (Japan City) and 71% (Ethiopia Province) of women who had ever been in a relationship reported having suffered physical or sexual abuse (or both) at some point in their lives from an intimate partner.6 It is alarming to learn that men, usually men in their close social circles, are responsible for almost 4 out of 10 (38%) female homicides.
The field of IPV research is lacking in the Middle East.7 A systematic review of IPV prevalence in Arab countries found that the reported prevalence (ever) ranged from 6% to more than half (59%) for physical abuse, from 3 to 40% for sexual abuse, and from 5 to 91% for emotional/ psychological abuse.8 A study on women accessing medical facilities in Alexandria, Egypt in 2012 found that 77% of the women had experienced domestic abuse.9 A previous study found that the lifetime prevalence rates of emotional, physical, and sexual abuse were 39%, 30%, and 6% respectively.10
The lifetime prevalence rate of intimate partner violence (IPV) varies from 35% to 45% in different parts of the Kingdom.11–16 According to earlier research, between 20% and 30.3% of female patients in primary care clinics in Riyadh,17 central Saudi Arabia, and Al-Jawf province, northern Saudi Arabia,18 had experienced IPV in the previous year. According to previous surveys, 39.3% of married women in Al Ahsa,11 the eastern province of Saudi Arabia, and 34% of married women in Jeddah,12 western Saudi Arabia,12 reported having experienced violence at some point in their lives. The disparity most likely results from differences in each local sub-community’s sociodemographic makeup.
Women’s acceptance of their beliefs about domestic abuse reveals their status in a particular social and cultural context and provides insights into the social, cultural, and behavioral transformation stage of the countries’ evolution towards a gender-democratic society.19–24 Women’s perceptions of men’s power over women’s behavior and the cultural acceptance of that power are the best indicators of domestic violence, according to studies.21 A systematic evaluation of 15 Ethiopian studies25 found that over 50% of women support domestic abuse. These perceptions have a negative impact on women’s lives in several ways, including re-victimization, seeking help when needed, and the effectiveness of government and non-governmental organizations’ efforts to reduce domestic abuse.19,26,27 Reasons for using violence included burning food, fighting with the spouse, leaving the house without telling anybody, neglecting the child, refusing sex, being unfaithful, defying, and having suspicions of adultery. Sayem et al28 found that approximately 49.5% of Bangladeshi women who experienced physical violence believed that a man should be able to beat his wife. The proportion of women who think their husbands should be allowed to beat their wives was higher among rural women.29
When discussing varying levels of women’s independence, “autonomy” and “women’s empowerment” are frequently used interchangeably. Most studies focus on women’s decision-making and physical autonomy (movement freedom).11 Numerous studies have examined other facets of autonomy, including speaking one’s mind, keeping one’s health, and participating in the labor force.30
Social conventions in Saudi society restrict the choices available to women, even with education.11 However, this empowerment may not protect them from domestic abuse. A recent evidence assessment evaluating preventative interventions for violence against women and girls concluded that there was “insufficient evidence to recommend social empowerment interventions”.31 A study of 744 married Indian women living in urban areas found that career training and social clubs—participatory treatments meant to enhance women’s social empowerment—increased the risk of domestic violence.32 Due to the dearth of data and the adverse health effects Saudi Arabian research has shown, a current study that links the prevalence rate to protective and risk factors is necessary. A prior study conducted in Bangladesh found that longer-married, more powerful women were less likely to experience physical abuse. This might be the case because, in Bangladeshi society, a stronger woman obtains some protection against physical abuse during a longer marriage. This is expected since women are shielded by having more children as their marriages last longer. The discovery that more powerful women who had only sons were less likely to experience physical abuse lends credence to this.33
Studies contend that women’s empowerment can give women the autonomy and power to mitigate IPV through education, enabling them to know their place in society.34 Empowerment is associated with lower levels of intimate partner violence (IPV) revictimization, though the direction of this association is still unknown. This claim, though, appears pointless because some strong-willed women nonetheless encounter IPV.35,36 Empowerment was linked to better outcomes for six months among women who experienced IPV in a prospective national study of women veterans from all eras of military service living in US households.37 The study’s conclusion suggested that empowerment may play a significant role in protecting IPV victims from unfavorable outcomes in the future. These findings support the idea that empowerment plays a crucial role in helping victims of violence recover.38,39 An investigation into whether women’s empowerment guarantees a decrease in intimate partner violence (IPV) in Bangladesh found that older cohorts of more empowered women were more vulnerable to physical violence than younger, less empowered women.33 Less empowered women who were childless had a higher chance of experiencing physical violence than more empowered women who had only male children. Compared to more empowered, primary-educated women, women with less education and power were more likely to be victims of physical abuse. Compared to more powerful women who had been married for over 19 years, less powerful women who had been married for less time were more likely to experience physical abuse.
The most important challenges in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are closing the gender gap and empowering women. Women who are empowered will have greater freedom of movement, financial and social independence, and family decision-making authority. In addition, this would eventually lead to the adoption of contemporary contraception, prenatal care, institutional delivery, trained birth attendance, and—above all—a superior standard of health for children. Further comprehensive research is necessary to ascertain the impact of women’s empowerment on intimate partner violence (IPV).40,41 The Saudi Arabian government implemented the Law for Protection against Abuse in September 2013, which aims to protect against all forms of abuse and to provide social, psychological, and medical treatment. According to the Saudi Vision 2030, women would have more freedom to travel, new career options, and more autonomy and decision-making authority (a driver’s license was first provided in 2016). The recent spike in women’s empowerment in the workforce and society will influence future research conducted in Saudi Arabia on the prevalence of intimate partner violence.
In our previous study, we asked 400 married women attending the Ministry of National Guard-Health Affairs primary healthcare centers in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, to rate the prevalence of various forms of domestic abuse and the factors that contribute to it.42 We found a 44.8% lifetime overall prevalence of IPV. The present study used the same data to investigate three main areas: (1) the level of views Saudi women have towards IPV, (2) their relationship to IPV prevalence, and (3) the relationship between women’s empowerment and IPV prevalence in Saudi Arabia. This study was conceived based on the growing concern about violence against women, particularly by intimate partners, but also the lack of knowledge regarding the underlying risk factors that are related explicitly to husbands and women’s empowerment traits. In Saudi Arabia, no prior research has looked into the potential connection between IPV and women’s empowerment. This could serve as a springboard for future nationwide studies.
Materials and Methods
Study Area/Setting
Saudi citizens, National Guard members, and their relatives can receive state-of-the-art medical care from National Guard Health Affairs, a sizable healthcare institution. Four of Riyadh’s top main and secondary care facilities serve the population that visits National Guard Health Services. The following primary healthcare facilities’ out-patient clinics were used to recruit participants: 1) King Abdulaziz Iskan City Clinic (which serves 60,000 people); 2) Khashm Al-Aan Clinic (which serves 150000 people); 3) Umm Al-Hammam Clinic (which serves 90,000 people); and 4) Dirab clinic (which serves 10,000 people).
Study Subjects
Married women between the ages of 15 and 65 who participated in outpatient clinics at Ministry of National Guards-Health Affairs (MNG-HA) primary care centers in Riyadh during the survey were included in our study. Women who came with their spouses were not allowed.
Study Design
This study is an analytical cross-sectional research.
Sampling Method and Sample Size
An estimated 350 women were needed, based on a 25% global lifetime prevalence rate of women impacted by IPV2 (the degree of precision is considered to be 0.05 and 95% CI). To compensate for the incompleteness of the data collection, 400 married women were sampled.
The target population for the study consisted of all married female patients between the ages of 15 and 65 who were willing to participate in the outpatient clinics at the primary healthcare centers (PHCCs) of the NGHA in Riyadh. With the premise that the distribution of females matches the precise distribution of the catchment area of the four PHC centers, a straightforward random selection procedure was used to choose samples proportionate to the size of the entire catchment area of each center (as previously noted). As a result, 190 individuals from Khashm Al Aan, 115 from Umm Al Hamam, and 15 from Dirab PHCCs were selected as participants for Iskan.
Data Collection
Attitude toward IPV:
The WHO multi-country (WHOMC) VAW instrument, validated in Arabic, was used in this study.6,43 The questionnaire contained a part on attitudes towards women’s roles in society and when a husband has the right to abuse his wife. Based on this section, 10 items regarding attitudes towards IPV were answered on a 3-point Likert scale: agree (0 points), disapprove (2 points), and not sure (1 point). The total and percent mean scores (PMS) were calculated for each woman. Each woman’s attitude was divided into three categories: “positive” (>80%), “neutral” (60–80%), and “negative” (<60%).
B. Assessment of women’s empowerment:
Based on data from the 2000 National Health Survey of Oman, Al Riyami and Afifi30 developed a questionnaire for this assessment. The women’s empowerment module includes two indices measuring women’s participation in decision-making and freedom of mobility.
The decision-making process: We asked married women, “Who gets the last word on”. The eight things that involve making decisions are cooking, family planning, spending money on the house, buying clothes for the kids, medicine, health care, problem-solving, and seeing family. A woman is empowered for everything when she accepts responsibility for her choice. The decision-making index had eight points; a woman with an index value of zero is considered least empowered, and a woman with an index of eight is considered most empowered. The reliability of the decision-making index was evaluated using the Cronbach-alpha coefficient, which had a value of 0.56.30 The continuous variable was then converted to a bivariate by applying a cut to the score higher than the 25th percentile.
Freedom of movement. Married women were asked, ”Does your husband allow you to go alone? For six locations: shopping, visiting a hospital or health facility, dropping by a child’s school, seeing friends and family, and going for a walk. In such field, a woman is considered powerful if she can go alone the majority of the time, if not always. The index’s point value ranges from 0 to 6. Regarding freedom of movement, women who score zero are the least empowered, while those who score six are the most empowered. This index’s Cronbach-α coefficient is 0.82.30 A cut score greater than the upper 25th percentile was then utilized to turn the continuous variable into a bivariate. Women in the other group were perceived as having great authority, whereas those who scored between 0 and 5 had little freedom of movement.
C. IPV screening as an outcome measure:
This study used the WHO multi-country (WHOMC) VAW instrument, which has been validated in Arabic.6,43 The questionnaire consists of 12 components. The questionnaire included sections on demographics, IPV, and injuries to the respondent and her partner that were deemed culturally appropriate to enquire; other sections on general health were left out. The four forms of IPV that are covered by the modified questionnaire are (1) physical violence, (2) emotional abuse, (3) sexual abuse, and (4) economic abuse.
Data on the following was gathered for every form of IPV:
The degree and frequency of violent experiences in the past and present, whether they were frequent, infrequent, rare, or never. When a person answered “always” to any of the IPV items, violence was taken into consideration, and the prevalence of various forms of violence was calculated in accordance. Based on the woman’s reporting of one or more forms of violence, the overall prevalence of IPV was assessed.
Reasons for IPV: The Family Violence Prevention Fund’s suggested screening questions were used to determine these causes.43
The history of child abuse and maltreatment by the woman and her husband, including beatings, sexual harassment, witnessing the father hit the mother, etc.
Demographic information about the lady and her spouse, such as age, education, occupation, and income, as well as their relationship, such as consanguinity, length of marriage, subsequent marriages, cohabitation in the same home, and additional children from previous marriages. A thorough explanation of the questionnaire’s components was provided in our earlier study.42
The National Family Safety Program (NFSP) data collectors at MNG-HA in Riyadh were invited. The NFSP is a unique national program in Saudi Arabia that combats IPV by raising public awareness, creating preventative efforts, and providing support to victims of abuse. The staff members of this program are specialized social workers and researchers who have conducted research, dealt with women on delicate matters, addressed confidentiality issues, and provided participants with safety strategies in case they report IPV. We made sure that none of these staff members worked in primary health care (PHC) clinics to reduce any potential adverse effect on recruitment should it turn out that any of them knew the ladies or had previously visited them. They approached the woman about participating in the study while waiting to see the doctor. They were trained in data collection techniques, privacy assurance, and effective communication strategies. The best ways to approach participants were as follows: (1) establish trust; (2) comprehend the dynamics of intimate partner violence; (3) comprehend the safety and autonomy of abused women; (4) learn how to ask questions about abuse; and (5) be straightforward and nonjudgmental.44 Women were informed they could withdraw from the study or not participate.
A pilot study was carried out to determine if the study would be feasible in terms of participant willingness, the number of women recruited in each clinic, the most efficient way to approach participants, the time needed to complete the questionnaire, and possible dropout reasons. It also helped us decide if the validity and reliability of the tool were adequate. Twenty pilot study participants were selected, randomly evaluated, and subsequently excluded from the main trial. The results of the pilot research were taken into consideration while making any necessary modifications.
Data Management
Data input and statistical analysis were performed using IBM Corporation’s SPSS® version 20.0 (Armonk, NY, USA). Descriptive statistics, such as percentages, frequencies, means, and standard deviations, were used to measure the attitude statement responses and demographic characteristics. Before determining which statistical test to employ, the Shapiro–Wilk test was used to examine the data for normality of the following variables: women’s empowerment score, women’s attitude score, and women’s age. The association between women’s views (positive, neutral, and negative) and degrees of empowerment (empowered and non-empowered) with all forms of IPV and total violence was investigated using analytical statistics. These included the Mn-Whitney test, the Person Chi-square test, and the Chi-square test for linear trend. The following independent variables were used in the logistic regression analysis to see if women’s empowerment could independently predict IPV: woman’s age (in years), women’s attitude (score), husband’s and wife’s experience of child abuse (yes versus no), women’s empowerment (score), and polygamy (yes versus no). A p-value of 0.05 was used in all analyses to indicate statistical significance.
Results
The Demographic Traits of Wives and Their Spouses
The demographic characteristics of women and their spouses are shown in Table 1. About 96% of women lived with their spouses, and for 97% of women, this was their first marriage. According to 14.8% of women, their husbands were living with other spouses, and 29.4% of those husbands were married to other individuals. Of the women surveyed, 64.1% said they were married to a relative (44.4% to 19.7%, respectively). According to Table 1, 59% of husbands and 40.5% of women said they had experienced abuse as children.
Table 1 Sociodemographic Characteristics of the Study Sample
Women’s Beliefs and Attitudes on the Abuse of Women
Among the overall number of women, 54.9% held a positive opinion on women being assaulted, 15.5% had a negative attitude, and 29.6% held a neutral attitude. While 29.7% of all women believed that a wife should sleep with her husband regardless of her desires, around one-third (34.8%) felt that a woman should obey her husband regardless of her opinions. Table 2 shows that women thought that a husband should be allowed to beat his wife if she is suspected of treason (27.8%), leaves the house without informing him (21.4%), or neglects to raise the children (18.4%).
Table 2 Women’s Response to Beliefs and Attitude Statements to Women’s Violence
Empowerment of Women
Over two-thirds of women (67%) and one-third (33%) were classified as less empowered based on the decision-making measure (Table 3). Table 4 shows that 40% of women were classified as less empowered and 60% as highly empowered based on the Freedom to Move index.
Table 3 Response of Women to Decision-Making Process Index
Table 4 Response of Women to Freedom to Move Index
Association Between Attitude and the Occurrence of IPV
Between women who reported a positive attitude towards IPV (ie, being against abuse) and those who reported neutral or negative attitudes (ie, agreeing to be abused by husbands), the prevalence of IPV increased significantly (χ2LT=4.35, p=0.037) to 45% and 56.8%, respectively. A strong correlation was found between the attitude level and the overall prevalence of IPV. (Table 5 and Figure 1)
Table 5 Prevalence of IPV according to Women Empowerment and Women’s Attitude to Violence
Figure 1 Association of women’s empowerment and women’s attitude to IPV with IPV prevalence.
Association Between Empowerment and IPV Prevalence
There was a significant correlation (p<0.001) between the women empowerment decision-making process index and all forms of domestic abuse. Empowered women reported a significantly lower prevalence of total IPV (30.1% versus 77%, χ2=74.91, p<0.001) than non-empowered women. Only physical types of IPV showed a significant correlation with the measure of women’s empowerment known as freedom of movement. The rate of domestic violence reports by empowered women was significantly lower (16.2% versus 27.7%, χ2=5.77, p=0.016). (Table 5 and Figure 1).
Figure 2 shows the correlation between the mean score of women’s empowerment and the reporting of violence against intimate partners. A significant relationship was observed between the reporting of abuse and lower mean perceptions of women’s empowerment in all types of abuse.
Figure 2 Association between women empowerment (mean score) and reporting of intimate partner violence.
In the logistic regression study of IPV, women’s empowerment was included as an independent variable after controlling for the age of the wife, women’s attitudes towards IPV, the wife and husband’s experiences with child abuse, and polygamy. Women’s empowerment was a protective factor (OR=0.734, 95% CI: 0.63–0.85) against IPV, whereas the wife’s history of child abuse was a risk factor (OR=3.98, 95% CI: 1.88–8.42). (Table 6).
Table 6 Predictors of Intimate Partner Violence Among Women
Discussion
Forty-five percent of the 400 Saudi women surveyed said they have been victims of IPV. Compared to non-empowered women, empowered women had a significantly reduced prevalence of IPV when it comes to decision-making and mobility. When possible confounders were considered, women’s empowerment was a significant IPV protective. There was some, but not much, correlation between a favorable attitude towards IPV and a lower risk of domestic abuse.
Women’s acceptance of their views regarding domestic abuse reveals a lot about their status in a given social and cultural context and provides insights into the social, cultural, and behavioral transformation stage of the countries’ evolution towards a gender-democratic society.19,26,27 A systematic review of fifteen studies found that more than 50% of women support domestic abuse. Among the reasons given were food burning,19,27,45 arguments with the spouse,19,26,27,44,45 leaving the house without telling the husband,19,26,27,43,45 child neglect,19,26,27,45 refusing sex,19,25–27,43,45–48 being unfaithful,19,25,43,46,47 disobeying her husband,19,25,48 and suspicion of infidelity.19,25,47,48 In our study,15.5% of the women said they had a negative attitude, which meant they put up with their husbands’ mistreatment. A third of the ladies agreed that a wife should obey her husband’s orders even if she is not convinced to do so and should sleep with him even if it makes her uncomfortable About 25% of women agreed that a husband had the right to beat his wife if she was accused of betraying him, leaving the house without warning him, or not giving the kids enough attention. These findings were consistent with a prior study that examined the extent and correlates of conditional acceptance of wife-beating among men and women in Benin, Ethiopia, Malawi, Mali, Rwanda, Uganda, and Zimbabwe using data from the demographic and health surveys (DHS).49 The study demonstrated that wife-beating was widely accepted by both men and women in all the countries examined under specific conditions. It was nearly universally accepted in Uganda, Mali, and Ethiopia. A prior survey indicated that some women consider beating to be a regular and loving behavior.50
Rules or standards of behaviour in society that people choose to follow even when they break them are known as cultural and social norms that encourage violence.22–24,51 The Saudi Law for Protection against Abuse52 addresses behavior in society that is considered unpleasant and may foster an environment that is favorable to abuse. Additionally, it broadens the public’s comprehension of what constitutes abuse and its repercussions while creating valuable and scientific instruments to combat it. It also provides legal processes for the prosecution and holding perpetrators accountable It was discovered that there was a substantial correlation between the attitude and the overall prevalence of IPV. In particular, the prevalence of IPV was much lower among women who expressed positive views regarding IPV—that is, those who do not accept being mistreated by their husbands—than among those who reported neutral or negative attitudes. However, after controlling for confounding variables, women’s attitudes toward IPV were not a significant predictor of IPV prevalence. To put it another way, attitude might not be sufficient to end IPV.
There may be differences in the pattern of IPV in less industrialized environments compared to more industrialized ones.53 The context influences the intensity of the violence; traditional rural settings typically have higher rates of violence than urban settings.6 Women who lack social and economic authority are more vulnerable to domestic abuse.54,55 In our research, women who felt empowered reported significantly lower rates of domestic abuse. Even after taking into consideration the wife’s age, women’s views towards IPV, and the wife and husband’s histories of child abuse and polygamy, women’s empowerment remained a protective factor. As a result of women’s empowerment, the prevalence of IPV may decrease by more than thirty percent. All forms of IPV were found to have a strong correlation with the women empowerment decision-making process index in our research. The results of our investigation corroborated those of a prior study,41 which discovered that women with more remarkable decision-making ability had a much lower incidence of IPV. Although not significantly, women who scored higher on autonomy were less likely to be victims of intimate partner violence. Previous research has also reported this correlation.33,56,57 It is possible that this association stems from the fact that higher decision-making facilitates open communication, compromise, and problem-solving, lowering the risk of disagreements turning violent in intimate partner relationships. Another possibility is that women who actively participate in decision-making subvert stereotypes and conventional gender norms, which uphold unequal power dynamics.58 This subverts the underlying beliefs that may encourage abusive behavior.
In India, it was discovered that women’s economic independence was a risk factor for intimate partner violence (IPV).59 Women’s empowerment, in conjunction with gender equity, can lower the incidence of violence against women. This might result from their increased family participation and the ensuing disagreement over decisions about how to spend their money and what to do about their kids’ medical needs. When paired with gender parity, women’s empowerment can lower the rate of violence against women. The women empowerment decision-making process index showed a strong correlation with all forms of IPV, including economic violence. Empowered women reported a significantly lower occurrence of both financial and general violence than did non-empowered women.
Previous research has linked child abuse to victimization later on.60–65 The adverse effects of maltreatment or neglect in childhood, as well as the development of insufficient coping mechanisms, may shed light on the relationship between IPV victimization and childhood maltreatment.66 In our study, the wife’s history of maltreatment of children was found to be a significant predictor of IPV. Women who experienced maltreatment as children were four times more likely to experience intimate partner violence (IPV) in the future than non-victimized women. These findings suggest that when it comes to IPV (victimization and perpetration), individuals with past histories of child abuse or neglect ought to be given more consideration. Polygamy and an increased risk of intimate partner violence (IPV) have been linked by numerous studies, including ones carried out in Saudi Arabia.6,16 Alquaiz et al16 discovered in their Riyadh study that polygamy, perceived poor self-health, lack of family support, and women’s young age were risk factors for IPV in Saudi women. However, this study did not find that polygamy or the age of the women were independent predictors of IPV.
Limitations
This research is subject to many limitations. Since our study is cross-sectional, conclusions on causality cannot be made. To assess IPV more correctly, longitudinal cohort studies should be carried out to ascertain baseline IPV exposure from the previous year and receipt of IPV-relevant prophylactic interventions. An interview questionnaire served as the basis for this investigation. Because of this, there may be remembrance bias and cultural prejudice in the disclosure of some issues. Due to social conventions, feelings of shame or embarrassment, and the stigma associated with talking about marital issues—particularly sex—the majority of women tend to underreport concerns linked to empowerment and violence.67 We did not include wives and spouses in our study. If this exclusion reflects a secure marriage where the husband is more supportive of his wife, then it may have increased the occurrence of IPV. Moreover, employing a convenient sample resulted in practical difficulties in addressing women formally and methodically, which might have led to selection bias. In addition, the study’s recruitment included women who went to PHCCs for minor ailments. As a result, it’s possible that this group does not fairly reflect all women in the intended audience. Furthermore, it is challenging to quantify research on gender-based violence due to the long history of highly subjective meanings of terms like abuse and violence, which differ among cultures. Strict interviewer training, painstaking questionnaire pre-testing, and standardized instruments comprised the study’s methodology. We think that these actions contributed to a decrease in bias.
Conclusion
Over the past 20 years, Saudi Arabia has made enormous progress in preventing domestic abuse and empowering women. The National Family Safety Program was started by a royal decree in 2005, and it is now required to protect family members from abuse and violence. The first national law to protect women from domestic abuse and violence was the “Protection from Abuse Law”, which was passed shortly after in 2013. Despite these significant advancements in human rights, women’s empowerment was not officially on the governmental agenda until the 2016 publication of Saudi Vision 2030. Saudi Vision 2030 includes a dedicated national initiative on women’s empowerment. It targets women’s rights in all circumstances, including decision-making and movement, and collaborates with all governmental and non-governmental organizations. This national initiative, coupled with strict legislative measures against domestic abuse, would not only protect women after the fact but also prevent violence against them. Consequently, over time, the prevalence of IPV will progressively decline.
According to our research, women’s empowerment is a strong predictor of IPV in women. Women’s empowerment could serve as a deterrent to violence against intimate partners. Women’s attitudes towards violence were not a good approach to measure it. The support of women who lack social and economic power should be the aim of government action. Social standards in Saudi Arabia restrict the choices available to women, even with an education. This could change our perspective and allow for developing a brand-new metric for women’s empowerment.
Using focused empowerment techniques to address IPV is crucial to creating a culture in which women can prosper without facing violence or oppression. Future studies should keep looking for creative ways to combine comprehensive violence prevention programs with empowerment initiatives so that all women have access to the tools and assistance they need to live safe lives. It is advised to implement advocacy programs and economic livelihood empowerment projects to change women’s perspectives on domestic abuse and to increase their ability for social independence, autonomy, and decision-making. The main goals of these interventions ought to be to alter public perceptions of violence and provide women the authority to engage in decision-making.
Abbreviations
IPV, Intimate partner violence; VAW, Violence Against Women; PMS, percentage mean score; NFSP, National Family Safety Program; PHC, primary health care; IRB, Institutional Review Board; MNG-HA, Ministry of National Guard-Health Affairs; KAIMRC, King Abdullah International Medical Research Center.
Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate
Approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at NGHA was obtained [Ref.# RC14/059 R]. Selected women were given a cover letter that describes the study objectives, their right to refuse participation or answer any question, the participants’ anonymity (absence of personal identities), and confidentiality of their responses (availability of data to the research team only). Then, verbal consent was obtained from all participants, and the IRB approved this verbal consent. The voluntary nature of participating in the survey was made explicit and unambiguous in the cover letter. Interviews occurred privately; no spouses, relatives, or friends were present. This study was conducted following the Declaration of Helsinki.
Data Sharing Statement
Most of the data supporting our findings is contained within the manuscript, and all others, excluding identifying/confidential patient data, will be shared upon request by contacting the corresponding author [Mostafa Abolfotouh [email protected]].
Acknowledgments
The King Abdullah International Medical Research Center (KAIMRC) initiated and funded this study. The research coordinators from the Population Health Research Section at KAIMRC—Ms. Oraynab Abou Abbas, Ms. Shahla Al Dhukair, Ms. Donna Elsayed, and Dr. Maliha Nasim—would like to express their gratitude for their efforts in searching and reviewing the literature. Special thanks go to Ms. Sereen Al-Madani, the research coordinator from the National Safety Program at King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, for her continuous supervision and monitoring of the clinic data collectors. All individuals included in this section have consented to the acknowledgment.
Funding
There is no funding to report.
Disclosure
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
References
1. Heise L, Ellsberg M, Gottmoeller M. A global overview of gender-based violence. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2002;78(1):S5–S14. doi:10.1016/S0020-7292(02)00038-3
2. World Health Organization. Global and Regional Estimates of Violence Against Women: Prevalence and Health Effects of Intimate Partner Violence and Non-Partner Sexual Violence. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2013.
3. Nojomi M, Agaee S, Eslami S. Domestic violence against women attending gynecologic outpatient clinic. Arch Iran Med. 2007;10(3):309–315.
4. Jahanfar S, Malekzadegan Z. The prevalence of domestic violence among pregnant women who were attended in Iran university of medical science hospitals. J Fam Violence. 2007;22(643):8. doi:10.1007/s10896-007-9084-0
5. Chimah CU, Adogu PO, Odeyemi K, Ilika AL. Comparative analysis of prevalence of intimate partner violence against women in military and civilian communities in Abuja, Nigeria. Int J Women’s Health. 2015;7:287–295.
6. Garcia-Moreno C, Jansen HA, Ellsberg M, Heise L, Watts CH. Prevalence of intimate partner violence: findings from the WHO multi-country study on women’s health and domestic violence. Lancet. 2006;368(9543):1260–1269. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69523-8
7. Boy A, Kulczycki A. What we know about intimate partner violence in the Middle East and North Africa. Violence Against Women. 2008;14(1):53–70. doi:10.1177/1077801207311860
8. Elghossain T, Bott S, Akik C, Obermeyer CM. Prevalence of intimate partner violence against women in the Arab world: a systematic review. BMC Int Health Hum Rights. 2019;19(1):29. doi:10.1186/s12914-019-0215-5 PMID: 31640716; PMCID: PMC6805386.
9. Mamdouh HM, Ismail HM, Kharboush IF, et al. Prevalence and risk factors for spousal violence among women attending health care centers in Alexandria. Egypt EMHJ. 2012;18(11):1118–1126.
10. Haddad L, Shortar A, Younger J, et al. Screening for domestic violence in Jordan: validation of an Arabic version of a domestic violence against women questionnaire. Int J Women’s Health. 2011;3:79–86. doi:10.2147/IJWH.S17135
11. Afifi EM, Al-Muhaideb NS, Hadish NF, Ismail FI, Al-Qeamy FM. Domestic violence and its impact on married women’s health in Eastern Saudi Arabia. Saudi medi j. 2011;32(6):612–620.
12. Fageeh WM. Factors associated with domestic violence: a cross-sectional survey among women in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. BMJ open. 2014;4(2):e004242. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004242
13. Rachana C, Suraiya K, Hisham AS, Abdulaziz AM, Hai A. Prevalence and complications of physical violence during pregnancy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2002;103:26–29. doi:10.1016/S0301-2115(02)00022-2
14. Tashkandi AA, Rasheed P. Wife abuse: a hidden problem. A study among Saudi women attending PHC centers. East Mediterr Health J. 2009;15(5):1242–1253.
15. Al-Faris H, Al-Faris E, Naghma N, et al. A history of childhood maltreatment among spouses predicts violence against women. Ann Saudi Med. 2013;33(6):595–600. doi:10.5144/0256-4947.2013.595
16. Alquaiz AM, Almuneef M, Kazi A, Almeneessier A. Social determinants of domestic violence among Saudi married women in Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. J Interpers Violence. 2017;1:886260517746128. doi:10.1177/0886260517746128
17. Barnawi FH. Prevalence and risk factors of domestic violence against women attending a primary care center in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. J Interpersonal Violence. 2017;32:1171–1186. doi:10.1177/0886260515587669
18. Abdel-Salam DM, ALruwaili B, Osman DM, et al. Prevalence and correlates of intimate partner violence among women attending different primary health centers in Aljouf Region, Saudi Arabia. Int J Environ Res Public Health.;19(1):598. PMID: 35010864; PMCID: PMC8744963. doi:10.3390/ijerph19010598
19. García-Moreno C, Jansen HA, Ellsberg M, Heise L, Watts C. WHO Multi-Country Study on Women’s Health and Domestic Violence Against Women. World Health Organization; 2005.
20. Yount KM, Halim N, Hynes M, Hillman ER. Response effects to attitudinal questions about domestic violence against women: a comparative perspective. Social Science Research. 2011;40:873–884. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2010.12.009.
21. Heise LL. Determinants of partner violence in low and middle-income countries: exploring variation in individual and population-level risk [Doctoral dissertation]. London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine; 2012.
22. Tsai AC, Kakuhikire B, Perkins JM, et al. Measuring personal beliefs and perceived norms about intimate partner violence: population-based survey experiment in rural Uganda. PLoS Med. 2017;14(5):e1002303. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1002303
23. Tillman S, Bryant-Davis T, Smith K, Marks A. Shattering silence: exploring barriers to disclosure for African American sexual assault survivors. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2010;11(2):59–70. doi:10.1177/1524838010363717
24. Tran TD, Nguyen H, Fisher J. Attitudes towards intimate partner violence against women among women and men in 39 low-and middle-income countries. PLoS One. 2016;11(11):e0167438. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167438
25. Guracho YD, Bifftu BB. Women’s attitude and reasons toward justifying domestic violence in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Afr Health Sci. 2018;18(4):1255–1266. doi:10.4314/ahs.v18i4.47
26. Ethiopia CS; ICF International USA. Ethiopia: demographic and health survey; 2011.
27. Macro OJ. Central Statistical Agency: Ethiopia Demographic and Health Survey 2005. Vol. 3. Calverton, Maryland, USA: ORC Macro; 2006:6–59.
28. Sayem AM, Begum HA, Moneesha SS. Attitudes towards justifying intimate partner violence among married women in Bangladesh. J Biosoc Sci. 2012;44(6):641–660. doi:10.1017/S0021932012000223
29. Semahegn A, Mengistie B. Domestic violence against women and associated factors in Ethiopia; a systematic review. Reprod Health. 2015;12:78. doi:10.1186/s12978-015-0072-1
30. Al-Riyami AA, Afifi M. Determinants of women’s fertility in Oman. Saudi Med J. 2003;24(7):748–753.
31. Fulu E, Kerr-Wilson A, Lang J, Gibbs A, Jacobson J, Jewkes R. What works to prevent violence against women and girls. evidence review of interventions to prevent violence against women and girls Pretoria. Med Res Counc. 2014;2014:1580–1589.
32. Rocca CH, Rathod S, Falle T, Pande RP, Krishnan S. Challenging assumptions about women’s empowerment: social and economic resources and domestic violence among young married women in urban South India. Int J Epidemiol. 2009;38(2):577–585. doi:10.1093/ije/dyn226
33. Sanawar SB, Islam MA, Majumder S, Misu F. Women’s empowerment and intimate partner violence in Bangladesh: investigating the complex relationship. J Biosoc Sci. 2019;51(2):188–202. doi:10.1017/S0021932018000068
34. Johnson DM, Johnson NL, Perez SK, Palmieri PA, Zlotnick C. Comparison of adding treatment of PTSD during and after shelter stay to standard care in residents of battered women’s shelters: results of a randomized clinical trial. J Trauma Stress. 2016;29:365–367. doi:10.1002/jts.22117
35. Angelucci M, Heath R Women empowerment programs and intimate partner violence. In: AEA Papers and Proceedings. vol. 110. Nashville: American Economic Association; 2020. pp. 610–61411.
36. Karakurt G, Cumbie T. The relationship between egalitarianism, dominance, and violence in intimate relationships. J Fam Violence. 2012;27:115–122. doi:10.1007/s10896-011-9408-y
37. Dardis CM, Dichter ME, Empowerment IKM. PTSD and revictimization among women who have experienced intimate partner violence. Psychiatry Res. 2018;266:103–110. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2018.05.034
38. Dutton MA. Empowering and Healing the Battered Woman: A Model for Assessment and Intervention. New York: Springer; 1992.
39. Johnson DM, Worell J, Chandler RK. Assessing psychological health and empowerment in women: the personal progress scale revised. Women Health. 2005;41(1):109–129. doi:10.1300/J013v41n01_07
40. Ewerling F, Lynch J, Victora C, van Eerdewijk A, Tyszler M, Barros A. The SWPER index for women’s empowerment in Africa: development and validation of an index based on survey data. Lancet Glob Health. 2017;5(9):e916–23. doi:10.1016/S2214-109X(17)30292-9
41. Donkoh IE, Aboagye RG, Okyere J, Seidu -A-A, Ahinkorah BO, Yaya S. Association between the survey-based women’s empowerment index (SWPER) and intimate partner violence in sub-Saharan Africa. Reprod health. 2024;21(1):63. doi:10.1186/s12978-024-01755-8
42. Abolfotouh MA, Almuneef M. Prevalence, pattern and factors of intimate partner violence against Saudi women. J Public Health. 2020;42(3):e206–e214. doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdz092 PMID: 31504716.
43. Family Prevention Fund. Facts on health care and domestic violence. In: Ammar N (ed). Beyond the shadows: domestic spousal violence in a “Democratizing Egypt”. Trauma Violence and Abuse, 2006;7(4):244–259. doi: 10.1177/1524838006292520.
44. Ellsberg M, Heise L; World Health Organization. Researching Violence Against Women: a Practical Guide for Researchers and Activists. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2005:257.
45. Semahegn A, Belachew T, Abdulahi M. Domestic violence and its predictors among married women in reproductive age in Fagitalekoma Woreda, Awi zone, Amhara regional state, North Western Ethiopia. Reprod health. 2013;10(1):1–9. doi:10.1186/1742-4755-10-63
46. Gebrezgi BH, Badi MB, Cherkose EA, Weldehaweria NB. Factors associated with intimate partner physical violence among women attending antenatal care in Shire Endaselassie town, Tigray, northern Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study, July 2015. Reprod health. 2017;14:1. doi:10.1186/s12978-017-0337-y
47. Tsegahun T. The status of gender based violence and related services in four Woredas (Woredas surrounding Bahir Dar town, Burayu woreda, Bako woreda and Gulele Sub-city of Addis Ababa). CARE Ethiopia. 2008;2008:1.
48. Gossaye Y, Deyessa N, Berhane Y, et al. Ulf Hogberg. Butajira rural health program: women’s health and life events study in rural Ethiopia. Ethiop J Health Dev. 2004;17(5):1–52. doi:10.4314/ejhd.v17i5.9856
49. Rani M, Bonu S, Diop-Sidibé N. An empirical investigation of attitudes towards wife-beating among men and women in seven Sub-Saharan African countries. Afr J Reproduct Health. 2004;8(3):116–136. doi:10.2307/3583398
50. Tilahun T. Correlates of domestic violence against women in Bahr Dar, Amhara region, Ethiopia. Ethiopian J Dev Res. 2006;28(2):31–61.
51. Edwards KM. Intimate partner violence and the rural-urban-suburban divide: myth or reality? A critical review of the literature. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2015;16(3):359–373. doi:10.1177/1524838014557289 Epub 2014 Dec 4. PMID: 25477015.
52. AlJuhani S, AlAteeq M. Intimate partner violence in Saudi Arabia: a topic of growing interest. J Fam Med Prim Care. 2020;9(2):481–484. doi:10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1139_19
53. Archer J. Cross-cultural diff erences in physical aggression between partners: a social-role analysis. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2006;10:133–156. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1002_3
54. Lamichhane P, Puri M, Tamang J, Dulal B. Women’s status and violence against young married women in rural Nepal. BMC Women’s Health. 2011;11(1):1–9. doi:10.1186/1472-6874-11-19
55. Sabarwal S, Santhya KG, Jejeebhoy SJ. Women’s autonomy and experience of physical violence within marriage in rural India: evidence from a prospective study. J Interpersonal Violence. 2014;29(2):332–347. doi:10.1177/0886260513505144
56. Bengesai AV, Khan HT. Female autonomy and intimate partner violence: findings from the Zimbabwe demographic and health survey, 2015. Cult Health Sex. 2021;23(7):927–4434. doi:10.1080/13691058.2020.1743880
57. Kebede SA, Weldesenbet AB, Tusa BS. Magnitude and determinants of intimate partner violence against women in East Africa: multilevel analysis of recent demographic and health survey. BMC Women’s Health. 2022;22(1):74. doi:10.1186/s12905-022-01656-7
58. Amel Barez M, Mirzaii najmabadi K, Latifnejad Roudsari R, Mousavi Bazaz M, Babazadeh R. ‘It is a hard decision’: a qualitative study of perinatal intimate partner violence disclosure. Reprod Health. 2022;19(1):1. doi:10.1186/s12978-022-01514-7
59. Dalal K, Yasmin M, Dahlqvist H, Klein GO. Do electronic and economic empowerment protect women from intimate partner violence (IPV) in India? BMC Women’s Health. 2022;22(1):510. doi:10.1186/s12905-022-02110-4
60. Feerick MM, Haugaard JJ, Hien DA. Hien DA Child maltreatment and adulthood violence: the contribution of attachment and drug abuse. Child Maltreat. 2002;7(3):226–240. doi:10.1177/1077559502007003005
61. McKinney CM, Caetano R, Ramisetty-Mikler S. Nelson S Ann Childhood family violence and perpetration and victimization of intimate partner violence: findings from a national population-based study of couples. Epidemiol. 2009;19(1):25–32.
62. Murphy LM. Childhood and adolescent violent victimization and the risk of young adult intimate partner violence victimization. Violence Vict. 2011;26(5):593–607. doi:10.1891/0886-6708.26.5.593
63. Renner LM, Whitney SD. Risk factors for unidirectional and bidirectional intimate partner violence among young adults. Child Abuse Negl. 2012;36(1):40–52. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2011.07.007
64. Seedat S, Stein MB, Forde DR. Association between physical partner violence, posttraumatic stress, childhood trauma, and suicide attempts in a community sample of women. Violence Vict. 2005;20(1):87–98. doi:10.1891/vivi.2005.20.1.87
65. Spatz Widom C, Czaja S, Ann Dutton M. Child abuse and neglect and intimate partner violence victimization and perpetration: a prospective investigation. Child Abuse Negl. 2014;38(4):650–663. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.11.004
66. Krause ED, Kaltman S, Goodman L, Dutton MA. Role of distinct PTSD symptoms in intimate partner reabuse: a prospective study. J Trauma Stress. 2006;19(4):507–516. doi:10.1002/jts.20136
67. Oyediran KA, Feyisetan B. Prevalence and contextual determinants of intimate partner violence in Nigeria. Afr Popul Stud. 2017;31:1003.
The UN, which was established to foster global peace and stability, has now become a paralyzed institution that inadvertently contributes to raging conflicts because it is constrained by an archaic structure that no longer meets the dramatically changed world order.
NEW YORK, Nov 1 2024 (IPS) – The United Nations, established in 1945 at the end of World War II, has sadly virtually outlived its usefulness as it commemorated its 79th anniversary due to its failure to reform itself and adjust to the new world order following the collapse of the Soviet Union, which is significantly different from when the UN was established.
The UN’s mission, which is to promote peace and stability, has failed time and again, as many of the current violent conflicts, especially the Ukraine War and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, glaringly demonstrate.
As Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy aptly put it when he asked during his address to the Security Council in 2022: “Where is the security that the Security Council needs to guarantee? … Where is the peace?”
Over the years, scholars and think tanks have offered reformist ideas to make the UN more adaptable and responsive to the changing world order. They have failed primarily because of how the UN was structured and the opposition of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) – the US, Russia, China, Britain, and France – to any significant reforms that could diminish their power.
Offering any comprehensive reforms to the UN is certainly beyond the scope of this column. However, there are some limited reforms that the UNSC can take, without a fundamental change in its structure, to enhance its effectiveness in maintaining global peace.
Before that, it is essential to point out some of the UN’s shortcomings to put into context the limited reforms that can be taken.
The UN Security Council’s structure The UN Security Council’s structure, particularly the veto power held by its five permanent members, often leads to inaction. This power allows any one of these countries to block resolutions, even if there is broad international support. This has resulted in deadlocks on critical issues such as the Syrian Civil War, the Ukraine War, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The killings of civilians and the destruction of cities and towns, particularly by Israel and Russia, are devastating and continue unabated even through the UN and its humanitarian agencies. The International Criminal Court and UN human rights experts have repeatedly called on the Security Council to act. In these cases, the US and Russia’s adversarial relations prevented them from reaching solutions to mitigate these conflicts.
The composition of the Security Council does not reflect current global dynamics, leading to questions about its legitimacy and effectiveness. Calls for reform have been persistent but largely unaddressed due to the reluctance of current permanent members to alter a system that benefits them.
Only one-quarter of the global population is represented by the Security Council. Blocks of countries, including Muslim states, African nations, South American countries, and India, with over 1.3 billion people, are not represented in the SC.
Peacekeeping Constraints The UN peacekeeping missions are often criticized for their limited mandates and resources. Peacekeepers are usually deployed in areas where there is no peace to keep, like Cyprus, Kosovo, and Western Sahara. They are generally not adequately equipped or have the authority to engage in violent operations.
This limitation is starkly evident in regions plagued by terrorism and violent extremism, including the Sahel region in Africa, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and the Central African Republic, where peacekeepers struggle to stabilize situations without adequate support from powerful nations. In addition, there is often a disconnect between UN mandates and local realities, which complicates peacekeeping efforts.
Peacekeepers may not be adequately trained or prepared to handle complex regional dynamics, leading to ineffective interventions.
Lack of Enforcement Mechanisms The UN often lacks effective enforcement mechanisms for its resolutions. While the Security Council can theoretically impose sanctions or authorize military action, veto power and political considerations frequently prevent decisive actions. This allows countries that are committing crimes against humanity or engaged in war crimes to escape any punitive measures with impunity, even when imposed by the UNSC.
National Interests Over Global Peace The interests of powerful member states often precede collective global security objectives. The major arms-exporting nations are also permanent members of the Security Council, creating conflicts of interest that undermine efforts to resolve disputes where these nations have strategic interests.
This is highly evident in the Israel-Hamas war and Russia-Ukraine wars, where the US, in particular, is providing massive military support. In this context, geopolitical rivalries among major powers hinder consensus on critical issues. For example, China and Russia often align against Western countries on various international matters, leading to a stalemate in effectively addressing conflicts.
Bureaucratic Inefficiencies Slow bureaucratic processes and mismanagement frequently hamper the UN’s operations. These inefficiencies can delay critical humanitarian aid and other interventions necessary for maintaining peace. Addressing these issues would require substantial reforms, particularly within the Security Council, alongside a commitment from member states to prioritize global peace over national interests.
Reforms that Can Enhance Effectiveness of UN Operations Given, however, the insurmountable difficulties in undertaking comprehensive reforms of the UN, it is still possible to reform the UNSC to enhance its effectiveness in maintaining global peace, which involves addressing several key issues. Here are several doable reforms that could rectify some of the problems.
Reform proposals include limiting the use of vetoes, particularly in cases involving mass atrocities or violations of international law. This could include requiring a supermajority for vetoes to be effective or mandating discussions in the General Assembly following a veto.
Regional Representation Ensuring geographic balance and representation of diverse cultures and civilizations is crucial. This could involve creating regional seats that rotate among countries within a region, thereby enhancing representation without significantly increasing the number of permanent seats.
Strengthening the Role of the General Assembly Enhancing the General Assembly’s role in peace and security matters could counterbalance Security Council paralysis. Initiatives like the “Uniting for Peace” resolution allow the General Assembly to act when the Security Council is deadlocked. Given the differing national interests and geopolitical considerations, consensus-building can still be achieved without necessarily compromising national interests.
Non-amendment Reforms Reinterpreting existing UN Charter provisions may allow for more flexible responses to global crises without formal amendments. Such reforms could empower other UN bodies to act when the Security Council cannot.
Balancing Power Dynamics Expanding membership while managing veto power requires careful negotiation to ensure new members do not exacerbate gridlock. There is also concern about maintaining the council’s effectiveness with an increased number of members.
Expansion of Membership Increasing permanent and non-permanent members is a widely discussed reform. This expansion could include adding new permanent members without veto power, such as countries from underrepresented regions like Africa, Latin America, and Asia. The G4 nations (Brazil, Germany, India, and Japan) and African countries have been prominent candidates for permanent seats.
Although there is broad agreement on the need to reform the UNSC, achieving that involves piloting multifaceted geopolitical landscapes and balancing various national interests. That said, incremental changes, especially those not requiring formal amendments to the UN charter, may offer a feasible path forward.
If the UNSC does not adopt some of these reforms, the UN will virtually outlive its usefulness, especially in the area of conflict resolution, where the daily horrific death and destruction around the world attests to its dismal failures.
Dr. Alon Ben-Meir is a retired professor of international relations, most recently at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University (NYU). He taught courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies.
UNITED NATIONS, Nov 1 2024 (IPS) – The United Nations continues to be virtually paralyzed – and remains politically impotent amidst two raging conflicts—as Russia and Israel keep defying the world body.
The killings of civilians and the destruction of cities, particularly by Israel, are devastating and continue despite repeated warnings from the UN, its humanitarian agencies, the International Criminal Court (ICC), UN human right experts and the Security Council.
Which prompts the question: has the UN outlived its usefulness –even as it commemorated its 79th anniversary on the annual UN Day on October 24?
The United Nations, which has failed to help resolve some of the world’s ongoing and longstanding civil wars and military conflicts—including Palestine, Afghanistan, Yemen, Western Sahara, Myanmar, Syria, and most recently, Ukraine—was challenged by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during his address to the Security Council last April.
And he rightly asked: “Where is the peace that the United Nations was created to guarantee? And where is the security that the Security Council was supposed to guarantee?
The repeated US calls for a ceasefire by Israel have fallen on deaf ears—even as violations of the UN Charter continue with accusations of war crimes and genocide in Gaza since October 7 last year.
Speaking on condition of anonymity, an Asian diplomat, was right on target, when he told IPS the countries that violate the UN charter and commit war crimes are “rogue nations” and should be driven out of the world body.
But that will never happen with a Security Council empowered with vetoes.
Sarah Leah Whitson, Executive Director, Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN) told IPS the UN Security Council has served as the principal obstacle to global peace and security, hindering rather than helping efforts to end conflicts around the world.
Both the United States and Russia have used their veto power to ensure the wars they support, whether Russia’s conflicts in Ukraine and Syria, or the US supported wars in Gaza, Lebanon and Yemen, continue.
Without ending the veto power of these two global powers that are fomenting the worst conflicts in the world, the UN will continue to be a toothless and discredited institution, Whitson declared.
Dr Ramzy Baroud, a journalist and Editor of The Palestine Chronicle, told IPS the question of whether the United Nations has outlived its usefulness or not, depends on how we choose to comprehend the initial formation and the original purpose of the organization.
“If we believe, and many rightly do, that the UN was formed to protect the interests of those who emerged victorious following the devastation of WWII, then, largely it has succeeded in its mission.”
Indeed, the UN, especially its executive branch, the Security Council, has mainly reflected the balances of global power, which, until recently, was mostly titled in favor of the US and its western allies, he said.
Though this is somewhat changing, he pointed out, the US continues to prove that it is still capable of being a major obstacle before allowing the institution to serve even a nominal role in imposing international and humanitarian laws on guilty parties, the likes of Israel.
“However, if we subscribe to the misconception that the UN existed as a global guarantor of peace through the generation and implementation of international laws, then there is no question it has miserably failed”, he declared.
Responding to a question at a press briefing early October, UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric said: “Well, when people talk about the failures of the UN, my question back to you is, which UN are you speaking about?”
“Are you speaking about the inability of the Security Council to come together on critical issues? Are you speaking about Member States not respecting and not implementing resolutions? Are you speaking about Member States not upholding the rulings of the International Court of Justice, which every Member State has signed up to?”
And are you speaking about the Secretary-General feeling that you think he’s not doing enough or his humanitarians are not doing enough? So, I think those types of questions are extremely valid, but I think one has to examine which part of the organization you’re speaking about,” said Dujarric.
On the margins of the BRICS Summit in Kazan on October 24, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres met with Vladimir Putin, President of the Russian Federation and reiterated his position that the Russian invasion of Ukraine was “in violation of the United Nations Charter and international law.”
But Russia’s response went unannounced—even as violations continue.
Responding to a question at a press conference in Colombia on October 29, Guterres said: “We need peace among ourselves. That is the reason I’ve been asking, in line with the Charter, in line with international law, and in line with the General Assembly resolutions.”
“That is why we have been asking for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, releasing all hostages and massive humanitarian aid to Gaza. That is why we have been asking for peace in Lebanon and peace that respects Lebanese sovereignty and Lebanese territorial integrity and paves the way for a political solution”.
“That is why we have been asking for peace in Sudan, where an enormous tragedy exists,” Guterres said.
Perhaps these are appeals that will continue to remain unanswered.
Elaborating further, Dr Baroud told IPS what is particularly exasperating is that despite its obvious failures, the UN continues to carry on as if it served any other purpose aside from mirroring the existing imbalances of power around the world, and as a publicity platform for the US, Israel and others, who violate international law with complete impunity.
The UN was formed following the atrocities of WWII. Now, it stands completely useless in its inability to stop similar atrocities in Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon. There is no moral, let alone rational justification of why the UN in its current form should continue to exist, he argued.
Now that the Global South is finally rising with its own political, economic and legal initiatives, it is time for these new bodies to either offer a complete alternative to the UN or push for serious and irreversible reforms at the currently ineffectual organization, said Dr. Baroud, a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA). www.ramzybaroud.net
In an oped piece for IPS Dr. Alon Ben-Meir, a retired professor of international relations, most recently at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University (NYU), pointed out that the UN Security Council’s structure, particularly the veto power held by its five permanent members, often leads to inaction.
This power allows any one of these countries to block resolutions, even if there is broad international support. This has resulted in deadlocks on critical issues such as the Syrian Civil War, the Ukraine War, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, he said.
“The killings of civilians and the destruction of cities and towns, particularly by Israel and Russia, are devastating and continue unabated even through the UN and its humanitarian agencies.”
The International Criminal Court and UN human rights experts have repeatedly called on the Security Council to act. In these cases, the US and Russia’s adversarial relations prevented them from reaching solutions to mitigate these conflicts, he pointed out.
Although there is broad agreement on the need to reform the UNSC, achieving that involves piloting multifaceted geopolitical landscapes and balancing various national interests.
That said, incremental changes, especially those not requiring formal amendments to the UN charter, may offer a feasible path forward, said Dr Ben-Meir, who has taught courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies.
“If the UNSC does not adopt some of these reforms, the UN will virtually outlive its usefulness, especially in the area of conflict resolution, where the daily horrific death and destruction around the world attests to its dismal failures,” he declared.
Meanwhile, the UN’s declining role in geo-politics, however, has been compensated for, by its increasingly robust performance as a massive humanitarian relief organization.
These efforts are led by multiple UN agencies such as the World Food Program (WFP), the World Health Organization (WHO), the UN children’s fund UNICEF, the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) , the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), among others.
These agencies, which have saved millions of lives, continue to provide food, medical care and shelter, to those trapped in war-ravaged countries, mostly in Asia, Africa and the Middle East, while following closely in the footsteps of international relief organizations, including Doctors Without Borders, Save the Children, international Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), CARE International, Action Against Hunger, World Vision and Relief Without Borders, among others.
