Author: Paroma Mehta

Ba and Bhopal claim that there is a significant need for improved care for survivors and highlight their trepidations about the long-term impact of wartime sexual violence on survivors, and their families[1]. Through analyzing data from 3075 different research papers in the field and almost 400 reference lists and personal communications by use of Microsoft Excel and MetaXL, Ba and Bhopal conducted the “systematic review” of data from 20 different case studies from 6 different countries. They also used mixed-method appraisal tools to ascertain the health results of wartime sexual assault on civilians since 1981. The paper predominantly draws on quantitative data, along with analysis of existing mixed method studies.

Similarly, Woldetsadik claims that Ugandan women suffer from “untreated trauma, lack access to mental health care, and face economic hardships.[2]” She utilises a “trauma processing” model by Remer and Ferguson to explore long-term impacts, in addition to semi-structured interviews with Ugandan women and Ugandan government surveys. Additionally, Woldetsadik makes use of a dataset known as GEO-SVAC, which provides an event-based geographic dataset of conflict events and presents a mix of qualitative and quantitative data to review the variety of different sources she makes use of.

Both of the research papers are arguably neo-positivist in the approach to their methodology, by relying heavily on case studies and statistical analysis. Despite their differences in focus and overall methods, they come to relatively similar conclusions about the topic they are discussing – stating the importance of improving care for survivors of sexual assault in conflict.

These papers relate to my research because they represent the angle and the kind of approach that I want to utilise in my own research paper. I believe that these two works provide a very clear nod to the existing conversation in the field and provide me with an introduction to the kind of data and methods that are currently pertinent to research in this area. In addition to this, it presents an insight into what kind of research is lacking in the field, which I believe is discourse on the post-trauma care framework.

[1]Ba and R. S. Bhopal, “Physical, Mental and Social Consequences in Civilians Who Have Experienced War-Related Sexual Violence: A Systematic Review (1981-2014),” Public Health 142 (2017): 121–135.

[2]Mahlet Woldetsadik, Long-Term Effects of Wartime Sexual Violence on Women and Families: The Case of Northern Uganda (RAND Corporation, 2018), accessed September 20, 2019, https://www.rand.org/pubs/rgs_dissertations/RGSD417.html.

In high school, I studied the theory of knowledge. The main point of this class was to answer the question – “how do we know what we know?” Throughout, we learned that the ways of knowing can be divided into two main categories. One is ontological, like sense perception, emotion, faith and intuition. Ontology determines how researchers look at and perceive the world – a framework for how researchers ascertain the events and the patterns that they are researching. As Andrew Abbott posits, “social science aims to explain social life.[1]” Researchers can use ontological frames to analyse the things they perceive to be true and to make sense of the things they believe to be fact. This relates directly to the sine qua nonof interpretive research Schwartz-Shea and Yanow present in their work: “(interpretive research) seeks knowledge about how human beings, scholars included, make individual and collective sense of their particular worlds.[2]” Another category is methodological ways, like reason, memory and language. Methodology determines how researchers can carry out their research, mainly the methods they can use to conduct data collection. It allows researchers to make more systematised conclusions about the world around them through means like surveys or structured interviews.

Since there are so many ways of knowing, it is not difficult to conduct research and to make knowledge claims about the same. However, this brings us to a new question – what really can be stratifiedas knowledge? There is no real obvious answer about what knowledge is. It can be argued that we know these things through the observation of people, things and events happening in our environment, but it can also be argued that the knowledge we have is a product of the programming and opinions passed down intergenerationally. I am of the view that the knowledge we hold is the product of a combination of factors. It is undoubtedly the ideas and things we can see materially but also the beliefs, opinions and feelings we can experience in a more abstract way. There is no all-encompassing definition of knowledge because it is itself an extremely broad concept and is heavily subjective, depending on a person’s interpretation of the world around them.

On that note, as a researcher, I do not believe that anyone can ever truly be an objective observer of the world they live in. Even the most rational of people are often affected by their biases or preconceived notions. Therefore, while we can try as much as possible to be aware of these prejudices, it is also important to note that we can never truly suspend them. Due to this, I believe that we are always contributing to the world of knowledge that we prescribe to. We tend to create work that is similar to that of people who share our worldview. This does often lead to the creation of biased work, but this is not necessarily a negative thing – it aids in providing more holistic views of the things we study and research, which deepens our understanding of the same.

[1] Abbott, Andrew Delano. Methods of Discovery: Heuristics For The Social Sciences. New York: W.W. Norton, 2004.

[2] Schwartz-Shea, Peregrine, and Dvora Yanow. Interpretive Research Design: Concepts And Processes. New York, N.Y.: Routledge, 2012.

“Systematic sexual abuse and other forms of gender-based violence are often deployed as weapons in war.”^[1]

Almost a month ago, Kashmir lost its special status as a state. For the weeks that have followed, there have been countless articles about the instability in Kashmir, with a significant increase in discourse around sexual violence in conflict zones like the valley.

Even outside the context of Kashmir, more and more researchers are looking into wartime sexual assault and the literature on the subject continues to grow tenfold every day. For my Olson Scholar’s research topic, I am interested in investigating the topic through my own perspective. However, the biggest problem that I perceive I will face is truly narrowing down my topic due to the fact that there is no dearth of different dimensions on this issue.

The two most commonly discussed are perhaps the idea of rape as a weapon of war and the ethicality of wartime crimes of sexual violence. However, something that I have particularly noticed as a personal point of curiosity is the public health impact of wartime sexual assault on populations.

The underlying reason under perceiving wartime sexual assault as a public health issue is that violence, in and of itself, is a public health issue. In their 2016 research^[2]paper, Leana S Wen and Kathleen Goodwin posit that violence is an epidemiological problem for two main reasons: firstly, it “directly impacts the well-being of communities everywhere,” and secondly, the effect of violence on a community could mean increased “toll of the trauma of living in high-crime areas” on vulnerable populations. Since wartime sexual assault arguably falls under these two categories, it is important to discuss the nature and the implications of sexual violence on a population both during and following periods of conflict, especially when taking into considerations effects like increases in STIs and unwanted pregnancies. The public health implications of this go beyond the physical – the impact on mental health is significant and can be extremely damaging to vulnerable citizenries.

However, as aforementioned, narrowing down on a specific area of investigation will undoubtedly pose a problem. As a student of the social sciences, I am filled with questions about the different nuances of the topic. For example, despite the efforts of the international organisations to mitigate the issue of wartime through statements and conventions like the International Committee of the Red Cross’ 1992 aide-mémoire to the Geneva Convention^[3], why has there often been little to no impact on the numbers of sexual assault in times of war? What role do local and regional governments play in both instigating use of sexual violence but also in the pacification of the same? Additionally, does political insecurity inherently lead to power complexes and grandiose behaviour in its military factions?

There are many questions to be asked and answered in the context of this issue, which makes the research of the same both stimulating and Sisyphean. However, in the same vein, I look forward to researching the topic and establishing a better understanding of the same.

Notes:

^[1]“‘Kashmir Women Are The Biggest Victims Of This Inhumane Siege'”. Al Jazeera, Last modified 2019. https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/women-biggest-victims-inhumane-siege-190820122327902.html.

^[2]Wen, Leana S., and Kathleen E. Goodwin. “Violence Is A Public Health Issue”. Journal Of Public Health Management And Practice22, no. 6 (2016): 503-505. doi:10.1097/phh.0000000000000501.

^[3]Sellers, Patricia V. “The Prosecution Of Sexual Violence In Conflict: The Importance Of Human Rights As Means Of Interpretation.”, 2007. https://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/women/docs/Paper_Prosecution_of_Sexual_Violence.pdf.