There’s a scene from a documentary—grainy footage, early 2000s—where a woman in Congo stares directly into the camera. Her village had been destroyed. Her body had been violated. Her voice, though, was steady as she said, “This is not collateral damage. This is the war.”
That sentence stuck with me. Because for a long time, the brutalization of women during conflict wasn’t just overlooked—it was normalized. It took decades of advocacy, survivor testimonies, and a whole lot of uncomfortable global reckoning to start shifting the tide. And while we’re still miles from perfect, international law is—slowly but surely—beginning to show up for women caught in the middle of war.
Let’s break down where we are, how we got here, and what’s actually changing on the ground.
The Old Rules Weren’t Made for Women
Let’s be blunt: International humanitarian law (IHL)—think Geneva Conventions and related treaties—was built during a time when warfare looked very different. Trench battles. Uniformed armies. Men on front lines, women “protected” at home.
So when modern conflict zones blurred those lines—with sexual violence, displacement, and targeted attacks on women becoming common tactics—the old legal playbook was hopelessly outdated. Women weren’t just civilians; they were targets. And for the most part, no one was held accountable.
Here’s a simple breakdown of where the laws used to fall short:
| Issue | How It Was Handled (or Ignored) |
|---|---|
| Sexual violence in war | Often dismissed as “spoils of war” |
| Gender-based persecution | Not recognized as a distinct crime |
| Forced marriage or pregnancy | Not explicitly criminalized |
| Women’s role in post-war justice | Largely absent or sidelined |
The Breakthrough: From Rwanda to The Hague
If you want a turning point, rewind to 1994. The Rwandan genocide left nearly a million people dead, and an estimated 250,000–500,000 women were raped—many publicly, many repeatedly. The horror was unimaginable, but it triggered something global. For the first time, international courts started recognizing rape as a weapon of war.
In 1998, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) convicted Jean-Paul Akayesu of genocide and crimes against humanity—including rape. That verdict was historic. It basically told the world: “Sexual violence during war isn’t just unfortunate. It’s criminal.”
Fast forward to the International Criminal Court (ICC), and things got even more explicit. Under the Rome Statute (2002), sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, and gender-based persecution are now war crimes and crimes against humanity.
What’s New (And What Still Sucks)
Here’s where the rubber meets the road. International law on paper is slowly catching up. But enforcement? Patchy at best.
Let’s start with the wins:
- UN Security Council Resolution 1325 (2000): This was the first time the UN formally recognized the impact of war on women—and the importance of involving women in peace processes.
- Yazidi genocide case (2021): A German court convicted an ISIS fighter of genocide and crimes against Yazidi women. Huge precedent.
- Gender Advisors in UN Missions: There’s a growing push to embed gender-focused officers in peacekeeping and humanitarian missions.
But here’s the catch: Just because something’s illegal doesn’t mean it stops happening. There’s still a massive gap between legal recognition and actual protection.
For instance, in conflicts from Syria to Sudan to Ukraine, reports of sexual violence pour in. Investigations are slow. Survivors often fear coming forward. And perpetrators—especially high-ranking ones—rarely see a courtroom.
Justice Isn’t Just a Courtroom Thing
One of the biggest shifts in international law isn’t just about punishment—it’s about prevention and inclusion.
There’s a growing focus on women in peacebuilding. Because when women are at the negotiation table, peace agreements tend to last longer. (Seriously—UN studies back this up.) There’s also more attention on rebuilding infrastructure that addresses women’s needs post-conflict—like reproductive healthcare, mental health support, and legal aid.
Plus, grassroots justice is becoming part of the picture. Think community tribunals, survivor-led truth commissions, and reparation schemes shaped by those who actually lived through the violence.
So, What Needs to Happen Next?
Three things, plain and simple:
- Enforcement must improve. Having laws without action is like locking the door but leaving the window wide open.
- Survivors need real support—not just token “awareness campaigns,” but trauma-informed, culturally sensitive care that helps them rebuild.
- Women must lead. Not just in NGOs or peacekeeping roles, but in parliaments, courts, and high-stakes negotiations.
And maybe the most radical shift? Stop framing women as victims only. They’re leaders, fighters, healers, and decision-makers. International law needs to reflect that complexity—not just protect them, but empower them.
FAQs
What is the Rome Statute, and why does it matter?
It’s the treaty that created the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 2002. It defines war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide—including those based on sexual or gender violence.
Are there any countries that haven’t signed the Rome Statute?
Yep. Big ones, too—like the U.S., China, and Russia. That means the ICC’s reach is limited.
Why is sexual violence used as a weapon of war?
It’s not random. It’s strategic—used to terrorize communities, break up families, and assert dominance. That’s why prosecuting it matters so much.
Are there women leading in international courts now?
Yes, more than ever before. From ICC judges to UN special rapporteurs, women are taking key roles—but they’re still underrepresented.
