 Thank you, Andrea. Good afternoon. It's an honor and a privilege to once again serve as a moderator for a panel. I think you'll find this a fascinating discussion. The simple theme that you will see wheezed through these papers is reform. I'm going to shorten the biointroductions in the interest of time, but I commend you to read the entire bios in the handout because these are extraordinary. On my right is Dr. Elizabeth Blake, who is a deputy for individual training and learning at the Joint Staff J7 in Suffolk, Virginia. Next is Patrice Bernay, which I'm a major. Patrice Bernay-Masife, at the Bloody of Seville, who is currently serving in the General Middle Academy of Spain, known as the General. Next is Laura Huber, a Ph.D. student, a local science at Henry University. Her paper, I think, will be very eye-opening as it runs in some ways counter and in some ways compare with some of the things you've heard so far. And then Sarah Schroeder, contractor for the Navy in Washington, D.C., with an extensive background in the private sector of government operations. And she's going to talk about reforms to the U.N., so there's some really interesting detail in her last presentation. I'll take any more time. Dr. Lake, the podium is yours. Good morning. It's great to stand in front of a group of friends and for this great symposium once again. Thank you, Mary, for bringing us all together. I have a lot to talk about today. I only have 15 minutes, as we've already heard. We're on a time crunch. So if there's things that I bring up and only touch upon, please feel free to talk to me during one of the breaks or later on. So through some of the work that I have been working on through PME in the past, professional military education, I had heard about this mandate of women peace and security. And each of those reporting resolutions after that called out training as a requirement within the resolution. The U.N.'s Action Plan developed in 2005 specifically calls out training in several different areas in regards to the topic and say that each of the member states needs to develop a national action plan and that plan must include and require training for their personnel. My current position as an education specialist on the joint staff at the J7 is we deal with policy, but also how to implement that policy. So when it came time for me to do some research for my dissertation, I had a number of different topics I was considering and my dissertation chair actually said, we need to do some work on this women peace and security. Sounds great. Why don't you do a comparative study on how the U.S. is doing in regards to implementing a training program compared to what NATO and Partnership for Peace Countries are doing. And so that's what I'm going to talk to you today about is my research results and what I found which maybe is a little bit of surprise. So I started with a purpose statement and I'll read it right here. It is to provide a means of determining if U.S. military units are behind your head of North Atlantic Tree Organization or NATO and Partnership for Peace Countries in regards to gender awareness training and support of UNSCR Resolution 1325. It will provide a cross-country examination of how militaries in specific countries are institutionalizing gender as a planning factor that will assist in operational effectiveness in any of cultural considerations. The resulting information will assist in determining if there are areas in the U.S. implementation of the national action plan that could be improved upon based upon the work conducted by other countries. So my research questions were rather basic, but it was, are U.S. military units behind your head of the NATO countries? And what are they doing, the U.S. military units are doing in regards to implementation and what are the NATO Partnership for Peace Countries doing? So those are the basic two general ones. And then what are the factors that might have contributed to the outcomes of these questions? Things such as are there cultural barriers or other factors that might affect the support of the training? Have the countries developed a particular position on their staff that is specifically in place to advise on gender? And have professional military education institutions or the respective countries inculcated gender awareness training as a standard in their curriculum? So for my research, my subject matters, my members, consisted of one each from Canada, Norway, France, Germany, Bosnia Herzegovina, the Netherlands, and a partner country of Sweden. There were five members I interviewed that came from the U.S. So total of the 12 members from eight countries included three men and nine women. These people were either ones that I worked with previously in past conferences and sessions and knew about or ones that I heard about that would be a good person to talk to. There are mostly people in their 40s and 50s and these interviews were conducted either in person or on the phone or via Skype. So the research was done through an iterative framework. I reviewed each of the national action plans from those countries that I just mentioned. And I could go into that in great detail that I'm not going to due to time, but I was looking at and comparing all of their different national action plans in the different sections of them. But then also asking them and doing a series of interview questions about 45 minutes with each of them. So through that I looked at the themes that came out of those interviews, bucketed the themes to come up with my findings. So what are the findings? That's the main thing we're trying to find here and talk about today. So are the U.S. military units ahead or behind the other NATO partner countries? Well, yeah. The U.S. does like behind most of the other countries that we interviewed. However, we really are not doing too bad and we're really not alone. There are factors that contributed to how robust the training was in some of the other countries. So it ended up being not such a comparison of the good versus the bad, but kind of almost the bad versus the worse because there's a lot of struggles that everybody is having. And we think we're behind, but there's a lot of other factors that are preventing us from going forward just like there's a lot of other factors out there that the other countries are struggling with also. The U.S. is making inroads in professional military education. Most of the geographic combat commands have at least a little time in the commander's orientation program to explain what WPS is. Training programs within the other countries are more robust. Of course, Sweden, we've already heard about their North Center for Gender Military Operations, but there are other countries such as Australia, Canada, Great Britain, they're starting to think about other programs also. But it all comes down to leadership. The support of leadership really is key. So all the countries did have some kind of a sexual harassment type training, which should be no surprise, but we also are concerned about sexual exploitation and abuse training. That is something that most everybody is lacking in their training programs, just what that is and how to prevent it. And I'm sure Rachel will agree with me on that one also. The factors that contributed to the non-supportive gender awareness training by any country included cultural aspects that mainly the age of leadership, realizing that this is now part of what the military is doing, fighting in an urban environment, remembering the rear area, not just the steel on target in the front, and basically having an understanding of what it is that's being discussed. Having a gender advisor on a staff certainly helps. It's a good indicator of support if the commander is willing to have that position, because most everybody says, I don't have the resources for this position. Where am I going to take that position out of it? In regards to the inclusion of gender and PME curriculums, the U.S. is actually doing better than all the other countries at this point. Trying to include it as a topic is tough and has had its struggles, but it's at least being talked about. With Mary here at Naval War College, with Nayla at National Defense University, with Lauren at Marine Corps, with Christine at the Army War College, you guys are doing great in trying to clue within the curriculum. I did mention the Air Force, we're still trying to figure that one out, so we're trying to crack that nut. But within the PME institutions, that is something actually the other countries have not had the chance to really kind of talk about as much as they've had in the training programs. So you guys are doing great in that regard. There's still room, though we can move forward. We've already talked about that, but that yesterday will hopefully help with that. So what are the recommendations? Well, key leadership engagement certainly is something, as I mentioned, that is important and critical for this agenda to go forward. And that's not a surprise to anybody here. We've already talked about that. The Nordic Center does do a key leader symposium. We did have one last September over in the United States at the NATO headquarters. There were two people from the United States in attendance. The other 42 military officers, key leaders of the general rank. The other 40 attendees were from NATO countries. So we agree that is something that we want to do more here in the United States. We have great plans to do that. We just need to get some stabilization within some of the positions within DOD before we can go forward and make that happen. Change the professional military education policy. We've tried to include this topic as a special area of emphasis. We were able to do that one year. The next two years it was voted on negatively to not be included. This year we didn't even try. Because I think there's another avenue that we need to try to take that approach. They're going to change the policy on the officer's professional military education policy. There's one sentence in there I'd like to read. Comprehend the roles that factors such as geopolitics, culture, region, and religion play in shaping, planning, and execution of joint force operations. It could be easiest to include more gender in that sentence. There's also other, and you guys have already done a great job under the table making sure this works. But maybe we can bring it forward in other ways. And that's something I think we can look forward to. Support the position of a gender advisor. We've had gender advisors in wartime. The current Resolute Support Gender Advisor is a U.S. Lieutenant Colonel, Air Force. We've had them in the past. But they haven't gone over as trained gender advisors so. So we have that position within our commands such as AFRICOM has one. PACOM has one that's double-headed. And Southcom has a gender advisor. One of the first we heard about Admiral Tidd, he said he wants a gender advisor. He has an E-9 as a gender advisor. And first core is Sergeant Lowry as a gender advisor. We just need to have that awareness of what this position is and how that can help the commander when they are doing the operations. The inclusion of gender in more exercises. I could talk about Talisman Saver for a long time. Just spent three weeks with a couple of people in the audience doing that exercise. That was an objective of the exercise. It had its struggles, but at least it's an objective of the exercise. We need to include it in more of the exercises that the U.S. is doing. Sweden has been doing some of their Viking exercises. They have one coming up at 18. That's already a big part of this Viking 18 exercise. And some other countries have included also. We just need to have the exercise designers and planners understand what this topic is and be able to include it in the exercise. Recruitment of women. The U.S. is doing very well. We're at the top of three countries that have the greatest number of women within the military forces. Now, we've talked about integration of women and how that helps move this agenda forward. Sweden only has 7%. So yeah, they're doing great in the gender mainstream. They just need to get more women into their forces. And they readily admit that. They'll say they're not doing well in that regard. Other countries have included women in their combat arms a lot earlier than we have, but they still haven't had the women representation in that area either. So there's some work that can be done, but having more women into the field like we're doing will certainly move the agenda along further. And the draft, and this again is what I mentioned from my dissertation defense back in November. Drafted in size and best practices paper, some kind of a guiding document or a handbook that could be in addition to the implementation plan. Now, Christine, in her work at PQSY, is doing great in developing some kind of a handbook that can be a single guide at the desk side reference for those people who don't understand what we're talking about and say, look, here's what it is and here's how we can implement it. Just me and make sure it's on their desk and not on the bookshelf working together dust. So the way ahead. Well, we've all heard about the WPS Act. We all thought it was dead in May. Got a little bit more traction. We'll see if it makes any more traction. But there is one statement in there. Under this bill, DOD would be required to train personnel prior to deploying to certain regions on the importance of involving women in the following areas. Conflict prevention, mitigation and resolution, protecting civilians from violence and combating human trafficking. So if that bill does go farther, we're going to be busy and we're going to make sure this training does happen. We do need included more exercises. Like I mentioned, Talisman Saber did include a little bit of it. I had a promising call by a Marine or Lieutenant Colonel from the Pentagon who said, I just finished a planning conference for an interagency tabletop exercise and I heard that you're doing some work in this area. We need included in the next exercises of work doing up in the Pentagon. Now, they're doing a series of globally integrated exercises between combat commands and also getting the joint staff and DOD to actually play in exercises. And if anybody's been in the exercise world, you normally have role players for those positions. Well, these are going to be people actually doing that job in an exercise. So to have this top being included in a tabletop interagency exercise will be a great, great thing for you to make it happen. Now, we heard about, Amanda Common talked about her work as far as unconscious bias. I had a person approach me two weeks ago. He's a brand new observer trainer where I work. He's a Lieutenant Colonel in the Air Force, a fighter pilot. And he did his paper, a more winning paper at the Air War College on having a female voice and getting more female radiators into the Air Force and what an importance that is. And he has two young girls and he says, I want to make this world a better place for my girls. And he talked to the CFPA, the Chick Fighter Pilots Association. Chick Fighter Pilots. That's what they call themselves. And he interviewed them for his paper and it was just amazing some of the things that they talked about. And so it's great to have this younger generation, the colonels below, they're finally getting it and finally understanding how having a voice of the other 50% of the population can help move this forward. So I do teach at the Swedish Nordic Center for Gender Military Operations for the Gender Vice Course. Fortunately, they've been, or unfortunately, they've invited me back every time. I helped develop the course and then have been teaching at the sections of the last three. We have another one coming up in October. So Rachel, I'll take on that mantra of getting more UN stuff into the course as we have our instructor prep time in the first part of October. But there is an online courses out there on Gender Awareness Training that we developed four years ago with NATO that was more NATO focused, but we just recently revised it for Talisman Safer and we did include more UN in there. And much of the chagrin of the NATO gender advisor, but we said, look, we've got to include more across the board. And so we did have that in there. And so that is an easy thing that I'm leaving for you all to use within your organizations. As on joint knowledge online, you could easily, anybody can get an account there if you are not associated with the military, whether it's another country or U.S., but you're a civilian, you can use me as a sponsor. I'll be glad to be your sponsor and just sign up and just Google in the search field Gender Awareness, that course will come up. And then that will be a good way to get out to your, the people within your institution. So, I conclude by saying that, yes, we may seem at times we're behind some of the other countries in some areas that we are, but we really are doing some great things. And with this group here that keeps growing every year, I think we have a good momentum to move ahead and move that snowball over the big hill. So, thank you very much. Thank you very much. Good morning. I am Mayor Beatriz de la Matipe. First, I want to thank very much Mary for this opportunity of being here with all of us. I belong to a police military corps, which's name is Guadalajara, and I currently assigned to the Humanist Military Department at the General Military Academy from Spain, working as a teacher. Today, I am going to give a lecture entitled Is New Horizon in the Training of Spanish Officers According to Gender Perspective. For beginning, I'd like to begin to show a data chart of December of 2016. We can see that the 8% of women are officers in Spain. The 4.6% of women are not commissioned officers. And the 16.4% of women are intruders and sailors. I am going to divide this talk into five parts. Introduction, Gender Perspective in Spain, the Academy of General Military, historical background and our cadets, Gender Perspective, formation of the Academy of General Military, syllabus and additional measures, future vision and conclusions. Let's look now at Gender Perspective in Spain. With respect to military observatory for the equality of women, have several functions among other. It analyses the dates and makes proposals about the impact among men and women in terms of recruitment, military teaching, military career and the conciliation between prevail, family and working life. It follows and studies the suggestion of the Gender Perspective Committee and the action over women is unsecurity, especially in the UN and NATO scope. It ensures the implementation of gender criteria in a statistical sources from the Ministry of Defense in which the data where military personnel are gathered and processes of correcting both genders. Organ law 3, 2007, intends both to fight against all kinds of demonstration which still exists in terms of discrimination, direct or anti-direct on the ground of sex and promote the real equality among men and women getting rid of obstacles and social stereotypes which prevent from getting it. The plan of action of government of Spain for the implementation of 1,325 or solution constitute the decisive political framework to incorporate the gender perspective in deprivation, management and solution of air combats. Finally, the protocol of action against sexual harassment and by reason of sex this protocol tries to keep on promoting the culture of fear tolerance in the air forces by the implementation of preventing measures and evicting protection. The third one, allow through information, formation and amendments to establish a good working atmosphere in the units so as to prevent and avoid a situation of sexual harassment. Whereas the second one, apart from establishing the non-seal mechanism investments, investigation and punishment of sex behaviors and the internal protection of the victim by ensuring the right defense and avoiding, avoiding, sorry, harmful consequences. Now we move on to historical background of the academy. The General Military Academy was created in 1882 located in Eastford, Epoch in the town of Toledo. Since then, the General Military Academy has lead three epochs. First epoch in the town of Toledo from 1992 to 1893, during this period the so-called Spirit of the General was born, which implies the cohesive feeling of currency and unity of origin. Second epoch in the town of Zaragoza from 1927 to 1930, the decalogue set of values of fundamental virtues that cadets have to seek and they are still residing nowadays in different events and paradigms, represent a brilliant example of educative coherence. In this photo, you can read the first article of the decalogue to have great love for the mother country and profess loyalty to the king, openly portrayed in all the events of the life. Third epoch in the town of Zaragoza from 1940 until now, the curricular revolution has adapted scientific and technological studies to the factors that have emerged from the conflicts, completing them with a necessary preparation in humanities and values. In the follow-up on three slides, we are talking about our cadets. Cadets of different corp and branches are trained at the Academy. General corp of the army, they are integrated into different branches in fine tree, cavalry, artillery, engineers and signals. Quartermaster corp and polytechnic engineer corp, dentist common corp, judicial corp, controller, medics at the unit of music and finally, civil guard, police military corp. The officer cadets of the army remain four of the five-year formation at the General Military Academy. The accent mode is with high school grade together with the map got into the university intersection. Moreover, they have to pass a second language test, English test, a physical test and a medical checkup. The percentage of women in 2016 was 10.4%. The presence level set up in 2010 consists of 353 European credits and 52 military training work weeks. Cadets are both commissioned as president and graduated into the university degree of management engineering. Therefore, this is an all-round education, scientific, technological, humanistic, job training and essentially a formation of values. The Defense University Center is an organization under the Ministry of Defense currently attached to the University of Zaragoza and located inside the academy. The next issue I would like to focus on silos in the field gender perspective in the academy. Analysis of the International National aesthetic regulation of the armed forces. Spanish constitution, universal right of equality of all people before the law. Armed forces royal regulations in which commanders are ordered to ensure the implementation of the criteria and regulation related to the effective equality of men and women and the prevention of gender violence. Organic law, 9, 2011 on rights and duties of the Spanish Armed Forces, there is no discrimination on the basis of gender or sex. And finally, Organic law, 8, 2014 of the Spanish Armed Forces disciplinary regime. The expression of content on grounds of gender are sanctions. We have a close curricular way through the study of principle of equality, principle of no discrimination due to sex, treatment of women in air conflicts, practices and activities in relation to gender roles. Now we move on to additional measures about gender perspective. The instructor or professor gave both lectures to the new community students based on gender violence card and talks about information security, 16. All students and teachers attend lectures about the protocol of sexual harassment in the Spain Armed Forces and the prevention of gender violence in which the different ways of behaving are outlined in detail whether victim or witnesses. Commander or insurer of carry out relevant proceeding to serve for sanctioned past events. Fifth year students and teachers attend some talks about gender perspective in order to correctly conclude the process of sterilizing the gender perspective. This is a key aspect to carry out the common action in the present society. Participation and attendance of teachers and students to conference, congresses and seminars. Turning to future vision during this course the academy has created a working group of gender perspective which is analyzing the current situation at the academy and is searching for formative improvements in this area. In the short term some initiatives have already been developed such as the inclusion of a conference related to this topic at Cervantes Chair or the proposal of doing some of the end of degree projects based on the topic of women peace and security in the following academic years. In the medium term to extract the teaching impacted to analyze the presence of women in the front line and theater of operation to train teachers to make an international comparison with other armies and police military corps. And finally in the long term this is essential to lead research projects so as to contribute to make an even better environment. To conclude there is a great concern of the academy and the Spanish Enforces in women peace and security fields. The gender perspective must be present alone must be present alone on the cadets training period. The present syllabus is implemented in a specific and cross curricular way. Talk is related to gender perspective improving such a training with complementary actions. A working group has just been created with the aim of detecting formative deficiencies and needs in this field. And finally the gender perspective must occupy an understanding place in the educational integral system with basic pillar is the format is the formation in values. I would like to mention the teacher Decalogue and his article 5 says teacher will devote all the effort to the integral formation of the cadets conscious that ethical principles such as maturity and professional capacity constitute a role in their development as a person. Finally I have said Prussian philosopher Kan Manuel education is the development of all perfection that the human being nature is capable of. Thank you very much for your attention. We will echo all of the previous presenters Thank you to Mary and to the Naval War College for inviting me to come speak here today as well as boosting all of us in this conference. And so the paper that I'm going to be presenting today asks a question that I think a lot of us have touched upon explicitly or implicitly in our presentations and that's the basic question of why do we see such a large degree of variation among countries in compliance with UNSCR 1325. And I think that as as you mentioned my paper is a little different in the way that I'm going to be approaching that question as well as how I integrate into the theme of our conference today and that's because I actually in order to understand how we can amplify the WPS agenda in the future first take a look back into how we have developed over the past 30 years to look at how various security sectors specifically military and police forces have adopted gender reforms and what has motivated them to adopt these policies. So specifically this paper asks two main questions. First it asks which countries are adopting security sector gender reforms and then the second question is why are they adopting these policies. And as I'll discuss more in a moment this paper argues that while conflict and particularly civil war can be especially damaging to gender equality it can also provide an opportunity for gender reform in the security sector and that this process of conflict does provide an opportunity for gender reform has changed and been amplified after the adoption of 1325. But first I just kind of want to set the stage of it for what I mean when I say variation in the adoption of gender reform within the security sector. As I'm sure many of us know only about 66 sorry 66 states have adopted national action plans for the implementation of 1325 as well as the women's representation within the military's ranges are in military and police forces ranges between 0.5% to 56%. So we see why ranges in women's participation in these forces even though the UN through UNSCR 1325 has specifically called on all countries to increase women's participation within the security sector and yet of 150 countries that I have surveyed only 54 currently had publicly stated gender targets or quotas for increased recruitment of women into their military and police forces. So we see this variation in which on one hand some countries already seem to have implemented gender reform and have higher participation rates of women within their military's whereas other countries are starting to take are taking steps to attempt to improve gender representation within their military's and other countries are doing little to no attempt to reform their security institutions and so this paper is really attempting to understand why we see such variation in these actions of countries. But just to kind of define the terms that I'm using before I go forward and explain my theory when I talk about gender reform in the military sector I'm particularly referring to two types of reforms. The first are female ratio balancing reforms which I'm just going to refer to as gender balancing reforms for the rest of the presentation. And these reforms are those that seek to increase the number of women related to men within a security institution. And so for the purposes of my paper I define this as five different types of policies it includes the lifting of bans of women from certain types of positions for female combat men as well as things like recruitment campaigns targeted at recruiting women or the creation of an all-female unit or gender specific unit as well as the adoption of a national action plan for the implementation of UNFCR 1325 and how many was that? That was four. The fifth one is escaping me but it is in the paper that you all will receive a copy of later. So that's the first gender balancing and that's what we've been talking about a lot and talk about countries attempting to increase the physical representation of women within their security institution. The second type is a broader category which are gender mainstream reforms. And these I define in my paper very broadly as any type of reform which seeks to change the gender culture of a security institution in order to promote gender equality. So I just mentioned as well as various other types of reforms such as gender training as we have been talking about, the adoption of sexual harassment policies or the creation of specialized equipment or facilities along with various other types of policies. And then secondly for the purposes of this paper my gender reforms that I'm going to talk to you and show you some results for are limited primarily to the police and military forces. So when I look at why certain states are adopting these policies compared to others there are of course a number of different reasons that may motivate a country to adopt gender reform in the security sector. But in this paper I look at how the experience of civil war both while civil war is actively occurring and after civil war had occurred can alter a states level of political will and its ability to adopt gender security sector reform. And particularly there are five different ways which conflicts can help motivate gender security sector reform. The first is perhaps the most pragmatic and that is that during conflict the security sector increases as well as there is a greater need for more mobilization into the security sector. And therefore governments as the demand increases and as it may outstir the supply of available men they may turn to women in order to fill the swelling ranks of the security sector and therefore you are likely to see a greater balance of reforms to occur. Second during and after conflict we often see that traditional gender stereotypes and gender goals may be challenged. This is obviously most explicitly related to the security sector when women participate and a conflict has combatants. As this can demonstrate women's agency as security officers as well as it can help decrease any stereotypes that women are not suitable for the security sector and the ideas that they are weak or nonviolent or innocent. However even short of direct participation in the conflict as combatants women can also find other ways during conflict that may enable them to challenge traditional stereotypes that exclude them from participating within the security sector. For example during conflict women often gain increased roles within the economic sector then they become the breadwinners for their families in the absence and additionally they may gain greater roles within the community such as the leaders of their families they may mobilize peace movements and then they may also become politicians and then they may use kind of the momentum that they gather during the war taking over these roles of perhaps the missing men who are off fighting or have been killed in order to leverage their increased leadership after the war to bring greater access to the security sector. Third kind of in contrast to that past the previous mechanism during conflict women often face great levels of insecurity and they may be greater levels especially to their physical security than they experienced during peacetime and therefore as a result the government may feel responsible and may feel that it can undertake gender reform as an attempt to specifically address women's gender conflict and similarly during conflict the legitimacy of the security sector is often damaged and this is especially true during civil war in which the security sector has potentially participated in violence against its own civilians and therefore the government may hope to leverage stereotypes that women are more peaceful or less corrupt and more trustworthy than men in order to regain some of their legitimacy in the eyes of the public and then finally what international actors often gain unprecedented access to policymaking within the state as we know during conflict policymaking abilities of by the government may falter due to infrastructure destruction or due to political discord and this may make it difficult for the country to pass policies however the international community who then attempts to intervene in the conflict or after the conflict to promote peace then gains an opportunity to influence policymaking within the state and as we know the international community favors the WPS agenda and therefore is likely to promote the adoption of gender reform within the security sector and the post-conflict state therefore in this paper I hypothesize that states are either actively experiencing a civil war or have experienced a civil war within the past 10 years are going to be more likely to adopt both gender balancing and gender mainstream reforms within the security sector than non-conflict states however we might expect that the character of this gender reform within the security sector looks different within these conflict-affected countries and in particular while you will expect that active conflict countries are going to be more concerned with their personnel and therefore they're going to be more concerned with gender balancing reforms in order as I said to follow through in contrast post-conflict states are likely to be more concerned about their ideas of legitimacy and reputation and therefore they're going to be more concerned about gender mainstream reforms so therefore the second set of hypotheses is that while both conflict and post-conflict states are more likely to adopt these policies than non-conflict states active conflict states should be especially more likely to adopt gender balancing reforms whereas post-conflict states and then finally kind of bringing in 1325 if 1325 has been effective in changing the kind of normative structure of how we view the role of women within the security sector we should expect that given its emphasis on conflict that conflict and post-conflict states should be especially more likely to adopt these reforms after the passing of UNSCR 1325 okay so in order to attest these hypotheses I collected data of 150 states between 1988 and 2016 and I recorded their history of gender reform policies during that time and it's important to note that I was only collecting data on the adoption of policies not whether the policies were implemented over time using this data I created two and sorry for any of you who hate statistics but I ran statistical models I'm going to have to talk little statistics quickly I created two main variables these are the outcomes that I'm looking to test the first was whether a gender balancing reform was adopted within the state year and the second was whether a gender mainstream reform was passed or sorry adopted within the state year I then tested whether there was a correlation between a state's conflict status and the adoption of these reforms I had two different kind of indicators of a state's conflict status the first is basically whether the state is either actively experiencing a civil war with 25 battle deaths or more or has experienced a civil war within the past 10 years so I included those within the same category and then the second set of independent variables I used step rated that conflict status out into active conflict and those and for anyone who is interested and I can explain more for the modeling if anybody is interested in a state's progress with state standard errors and a number of controls to help for other things that might be affecting whether or not the state adopts these gender security sector reforms so overall the results do show that conflict status is correlated with the adoption of these gendered security sector reform policies and in particular about 8% more likely to adopt gender both gender balancing and gender mainstream reforms than non-conflict states when we separated out the results are generally consistent however we do see that post-conflict states are not more likely to adopt gender balancing reforms than non-conflict states that is unique to active conflict states which again if we consider that gender balancing may be driven primarily by the swelling of the security sector after conflict we may expect that as the security sector shrinks we will no longer meet that gender balancing reform but we do see that again both post-conflict and active conflict states are more likely to adopt gender mainstream reforms than non-conflict states and then finally how am I doing that okay and then finally I ran a number of models in which I looked at whether this same conflict status and the adoption of these reforms changed when we considered whether or not we were looking at before 1325 was adopted or after 1325 and there are a number of interesting results some of which were not really what I was expecting first we see that non-conflict states were the most receptive to 1325 we saw that it was non-conflict states that changed their behavior most significantly before 1325 to suddenly beginning to adopt both gender balancing and gender mainstream reforms after 1325 so that may imply that 1325 did successfully change the behavior the ideas and the normative values of non-conflict states what kind of the surprising is some of the results of the conflict affected states and once again it's with gender balancing and in it we see that again post-conflict states are not more likely to adopt gender balancing reforms after the adoption of 1325 so it doesn't seem that post-conflict states saw from 1325 that they needed to they needed to take these steps to increase women's representation within the security sector that's something a result that surprised me quite a bit from some of my other work however it may again indicate that gender balancing is mostly affected by this pragmatic need for personnel and not so much by the normative changes of 1325 however we do see that 1325 did change in a statistically significant way the behavior of post-conflict states and that we see that after 1325 post-conflict states are much more likely to adopt gender mainstream reforms than post-conflict states were before 1325 where they were about 33% likely to adopt a gender mainstream reform before 1325 afterwards they're about 50% likely to adopt women's reforms so just to kind of conclude in general these kind of results I think really speak to two things first I think they have a relatively hopeful indication or implication for the effect of 1325 and that they do indicate that 1325 did appear to change the behavior of non-conflict states and post-conflict states however it does appear that the effectiveness perhaps more than normative effectiveness of 1325 is limited when it comes to active conflict states but this is in line with some of the work that we've already referenced in which during conflicts states often become more militarized and they're more mass humanized which goes against the gender reform kind of values but so that may indicate that as we move forward we should really be focusing on how we can sell the idea of WPS2 states that are actively experiencing conflict and then finally kind of moving forward since the study has shown that country context does play a role in affecting who adopts these reforms I hope to in the future look at how it benefits whether or not the reforms are successfully implemented particularly looking at whether or not I think the reform was adopted due to the internal external pressure how that affects whether or not it is unsuccessfully implemented and that is all for me alright, thank you thank you gravity or ban will be shared, sure that's going to be hard to follow I'd like to echo everyone else and say thank you for the opportunity the Naval War College has allowed me to or afforded me to speak about my thesis Millennium Challenge Corporation, MCC as a model for UN resolution enforcement to promote economic reform of marginalized populations please note that women are a huge subset of the classification marginalized population by MCC I too do not wish to offend anybody mine will be a shock to your system so I apologize in advance I'd like to ask the audience a question please raise your hand if you think the UN resolutions are purposeful resolutions have a duty but they lack enforceability I am going to list some facts to set the tone as stated in the UN General Assembly the effective rate of resolutions for 2017 is only expected to be about 55% for some of the top monetary contributors collectively for peacekeeping operations the UN published that all members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out a security council while other organs of the United Nations make recommendations to member states only the security council has the power to make decisions that member states are then obligated to implement under the charter I am obligated to pay taxes that the government expects in exchange for my right as a US citizen but I can ignore such a demand by not paying taxes until they catch me that's essentially what the member states are doing under into resolutions found by the obligation 25 of the charter but knowingly and willfully ignoring them the UN is recycling and redressing resolutions without actually addressing the problem of enforcement a great example is the UN security council's response to Syrian crisis in total 23 resolutions have been implemented since 2012 if the same resolutions are working why would we need to keep coming up with new ones to address the same issue earlier this week the UN press reports that Carla del Ponte a former war crimes prosecutor who said Sunday she is resigning from the UN's independent commission of inquiry on Syria because of the security council's inaction on holding criminals accountable in the war battered country she told Swiss magazine Blake we have had absolutely no success for five years we've been running up against walls to get a better budget and more than 28 percent of the peacekeeping budget this is $10 billion every year with no return on investment Millennium Challenge Corporation has spent $10 billion overall since it's inception 13 years ago with a return on investment using their model for policy reform building infrastructure preventing the marginalized at this time there is no singular or joint entity, either domestically or foreign, that will pick up the tab if the US pulls out. Of these countries, my thesis looks at Afghanistan, Burundi, Sri Lanka, Sudan, and Syria, and what resolution enforcement would look like. To review the economic landscape of each country, I used reputable tools such as the Heritage Foundation Index of Economic Freedom, the World Economic Forum's Global Competitive Index, and the Hofsted model. The fact remains that only three out of five of these countries have a baseline by Hofsted or by left. The country ratings were repressed, mostly on free or not graded. Only one of these has a compact started with MCC, and that's as of December 2016. What's worse is that all five of these countries are members of the UN with resolutions attached to address the current situation. Is it because these countries are not relevant and or too dangerous to compile information on? Think about the countries in Africa. If we were to assist in creating a stable landscape for the marginalized populations, we would not only benefit from the economic standpoint, but from capitalizing on untapped resources like rare earth materials that we require from a national security perspective where China may be the sole provider. No one has offered a solution to the problem, but yet the problem keeps getting discussed over and over. The UN is an outdated system that no longer serves the same purpose it once was established for. We must do something to help the marginalized populations from being tortured, isolated and poverty, held back from financial independence, and free from fear of starvation and death on a regular basis. How do you propose we do this? My thesis proposes that the UN adopt the Millennium Challenge Corporation business model framework and use the UN integrated sustainable development goals, SDGs, to enable a third party UN enforcement arm, aka a corp, that will ensure resolution compliance and promote economic security through infrastructure development and policy reform so the marginalized populations of the world are able to rise simultaneously as the elite. My theory is not an attempt to recreate the wheel, it's taking a fresh approach to generating the synergy among a group of resources not fully aligned before and leveraging the financial punch already thrown by the U.S. but in a different manner. The U.S. needs to paint the picture of what it would look like if they walked away with 22% of the budget. We have already threatened to reduce funding from certain areas, but instead, use the financial cloud to leverage what the catastrophic outlook would be if we pulled out permanently, then perhaps threat to do so and be prepared to walk away as we are dumping $10 billion down the drain every year. This will force other countries to step up to the plate both monetarily as well as adhering to the resolutions. In addition, countries would have no other option than to comply with the new set of rules late before them. If not, they will be ejected from the U.N. arena. Globally, no one has time to deal with defiance in the realm of security for the marginalized populations and stunting global economic growth. The states would be in reaction mode attempting to find out how they will function when 22% of the U.N. budget leaves the table. The answer is it won't. In January, UNGA raised the budget for 2017 to $5.6 billion. The way I see it, the member states have only one choice. This on the assumption the U.S. keeps my advice. The states must comply with resolutions that are monitored and enforced through a third party and increase individual contributions or be forced out of the interpay-to-place circle that has the economic, financial, as well as military cloud to ice-blade a similar country in the non-existence. The U.N. needs to adopt MCC's approach to treating it as a business. Countries go directly to MCC, requesting monetary assistance for infrastructure and security in varying forms with the intent to adhere to the policy reform and MCC mandates as conditions to receive inside assistance. Think of the U.N. as MCC and the countries that are part of the U.N. asking for assistance in the form of resolutions are like the countries coming to MCC for help. The countries in the U.N. must adhere to the resolutions that are adopted or face consequences by the proposed court above, including being expelled from the lead circle of 193 member states. MCC is already entrenched in the U.N. as the U.N. Sustainable Development Goals, SDGs, slated to transform the world by 2030, which were based off of the MCC Millennium Development Goals and DGs. Every member state was tasked with a segment to meet said goals. In turn, the U.N. already sees MCC as a catalyst and policy developer for change through partnership and enforcement. Knowing that the MDGs morphed into the SDGs highlights the underlying synergy between MCC and the U.N. The foundation has already been laid and put in an MCC-style judgeship in charge of ruling, monitoring, as well as affirming a member state's reaction to resolutions is the correct way to proceed forward as the current U.N. SC does not own enforcement due to political entanglements and policy-bound directives. The U.N. is trying to be everything to everybody, which becomes too generalized and results in forwarding power over a single lane of authority to its six different groups slash organs like the U.N. SC. As clearly stated thus far, the bottom line is that the U.N. faces internal issues that cannot be fixed with that independent, non-biased oversight committee that will treat each violation accordingly as directed by a specified set of rulings. It will be absolved and shielded from political rhetoric as the role of each judge would be quite simple. One, the Judiciary Council would be an extension of the already established U.N. International Court of Justice, C.I.J. or I.C.J., which is the principle judicial organ of the U.N. We shall not be the seventh organ and call it the U.N. Resolution Court, U.N. RC. The U.N. C.I.J. would remain an entity, but now roll up to the U.N. RC. The U.N. RC would handle U.N. Resolution Violations with the responsibility of enforcement. This organ will have a larger overreach as the resolutions are voted on by all members and the members are obligated under Article 25 of the Charter to comply. It will no longer be an obligation, but rather complying will be a requirement to maintain the right to be a member state of the U.N. The reason that C.I.J. will not absorb the right and remain separate is that it is the only concern with legal disputes submitted that are between two states as well as giving advice on legal questions when there is still any board and as not all disputes involve ever a member state. Two, the committee would go through nominations and elections for each position of the court and endure a voting by member state peers. It will begin by each nation going through a process to draw up candidates to be the elected judge for the member state. Then the member states would hold primary elections to identify who will be the individual in the general election going against other member state primary election winners. Member states already vote on resolutions as a democracy, so this would not be a new concept to them. We three, we will keep the widely popular number of 15, the U.N.S.C. and U.N. C.I.J. being favorable. However, the 15 judges will be subject to elections and all will be active participants with the 15th judge breaking a tie code on any given judgment regarding a resolution violation. There will no longer be five permanent members with veto power plus 10 non-permanent members representing 193 member states. It will be 15 elected judges with three year terms as enough happens in three years to be seasoned and to react to the violations by member states in a timely manner. In turn, 15 countries will be elected by their peers to maintain citizenship every three years and as in any election, any country who is a primary candidate entered into the general election. We will be applicable as they say or maybe it's just me, permanent positions with veto power or so last year. This has been a long time coming due to the political entrenchment that the U.N. has allowed to happen. If the U.N. wants to talk in circles due to more emphasis on political figures than this by their high life, the elephant in the room or forced countries to get the right individuals into the right positions by forcing diplomatic and transparent communications between states. Seeing as how we need change yesterday, my suggestion would be to implement the new structure of my thesis proposals beginning in 2018 and line it up with the next adjustments to its scale of assessments by the UNGA. This means start now, line up the project milestones for reform, place them into an agenda for completion and pass out rules to monitor progress and ensure completion. I would venture to say that the lack of true enforcement in the UN resolution process is the definition of insanity. We're doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results. Resolutions seem to come back to a need for politics and a want of establishing democracy. If resolutions are enforced, then democracy can be built and if democracy can be built then policy reform can occur. Policy reform will give and enforce rights of the country's citizens and stimulate the economy by reducing the number of people fleeing their country. Plain by NCC's rules will result in infrastructure development for the hard to reach areas if the country complies with policy reform regulations. Rookie Jews will return to their country if hope is given for a better life with the right to own property not be the property of another individuals be an entrepreneur and free from torture. There are three core principles to the NCC model. First, since they believe policy matters NCC funding is performance based. Second, they believe that foreign aid should be predicated on partnership and not paternalism. NCC funding requires country ownership. Third, since they are interested in outcomes NCC insists upon tangible, meaningful and sustainable results. I think this approach will work the same for resolutions and that the US is investing in the UN and each resolution should be traded like a compact or threshold project. The countries need to take ownership of implementation and put a larger portion of the budget. The UN would fall apart without US investment. To me, this means enforcement would foster empowerment for development and create opportunities for the US, its businesses as well as other countries to open up trade discussions with other countries who are relatively inaccessible or secure. NCC forms partnerships with some of the world's poorest countries but only those committed to good governance, economic freedom and investments in their citizens. I think this falls right in line with the UN resolutions as they are commitments by the member states of the UN as a group to implement the same traits in a country that NCC forms partnerships with countries for. The UN enforcement would force countries to meet conditions for investments. NCC uses an economic rate of return, ERR, to identify which projects and countries to choose for contacts and threshold programs. NCC states at its core, ERR is a comparison of the cost and benefits of a public investment. I think the US should look through the business lens and view the UN as a public investment that should have an estimated and expected return on investment. NCC is extremely transparent in how it issues foreign assistance to promote good governance practices and government decision-making. NCC's methodology for ERR analysis is thus described as micro-economic growth analysis which matters the expected increases in household incomes or the value added of individual firms. I have stated that I think the US needs to view the UN like NCC would add a country for investment. If the UN member states are not upholding the implementation of resolutions in their countries, then the UN would use the new judgeship that I suggested and as a means of action would kick out the countries that are not complying with the rules. It's that simple. No one wants to leave the UN as it doesn't provide a conduit for trade, development, and alliance building. In turn, I think countries would heed the US's warning if they threaten to pull funding unless this new structure is implemented. NCC speaks to the fact that work in one country has a likeness to spread to other countries which would imply economic stimulus is contagious and will build regional cooperation. As discussed earlier, the NCC values are already ingrained in the UN as the UN's sustainable development goals slated to transform the world by 2030 or based off of NCC's MDGs. NCC, by contract, works to eliminate obstacles and reduce risks in our partner countries to encourage business investment and accelerate economic growth and alleviate poverty. In conclusion, I'm not saying that my way is the right way, but I'm not saying that the current system is not working. We need to do more and buck status quo. It'll be a time for a fourth question. I know it's a challenge given the wide variety of the interest in the presentations, but let's start. Thank you so much. So for Laura Hover, I'm curious to know if the research went into the balance of those countries that have conscriptive service, those that have a voluntary service. At the moment, it hasn't. As I move forward with the project, I do plan that I'm going to do a closer look at how the militaries are constructed and particularly how they recruit their officers as well as their previous or, for lack of a better word, their current gender standing. So theoretically security sectors that are already relatively gender equitable don't need to adopt gender reforms, although from looking at the data, that's not what I'm seeing. I'm seeing that countries are adopting these gender reforms that are relatively equal rate across relatively more equitable countries and less equitable countries, but I have not yet looked at how the country, the military itself does their recruitment, so that is a good idea. That's something to report to the major. I'm back. My questions for Dr. Layton. So one of your recommendations was inclusion of gender and more exercises. So then you talked about the need for exercise of designers and planners to understand gender. Do you have any recommendations on how to go about getting the planners and the exercise designers more involved in this area? So I went to our observer trainers and said, okay, this is what we need to do. You need to look for these in the exercises. And they said, okay, great, I understand. Good concept. But we don't plan the exercises. So I went to the exercise planners and said, this is what you need to do to plan the exercises. I said, okay, great, but I understand it. Good thing, but we don't request it. We need to go on what the combat commander, whoever's requesting the exercise and then we'll design it included in there. So every month we have a monthly BTC that Suzanne does coordinate and we go out to the people and often I'll tell them, hey, if you want this included in your exercises, you have to go to your exercise planners and make sure this included it within the exercises. Recently one of our other exercise planners came to me and said, hey, well, the exercise designers who are our contract force need to understand what this concept is also. So they may be able to, without any overall knowledge, be able to include it just kind of surreptitiously. And so it's there without really being requested because we're having that struggle. And so we need to do a top-down and a bottom-up approach. And so that's just getting the word out for it. Thank you. Thank you, I'm Rachel. It's not really a question to Sarah, but to thank you for your very explosive, very fun take and it was a pretty accurate take over the year unfortunately. And to give you some more ammunition, I think that something that your organisation or your theory could also say is that when you're looking at each country if they meet their UN mandates on the resolutions. You could also get this court to look and hold to account for soldiers who are committing sexual exploitation and abuse because at the moment it's done internally by each nation and for me it seems to be a bit of an error because unfortunately things have been pushed under carpet. So that's just some strength and that's a segue to a question to Laura. Have you considered that countries which have a good architecture in women peace and security might have had an internal sexual exploitation and abuse problem? And I say that on thin ice, but I can see that some countries which are really good at this, that they've got their gender advisors are in some way recoiling from an internal scandal. Are you interested in any other countries doing that? I have definitely found evidence that some countries there will be some kind of scandal and then as a result they do suddenly adopt the sexual harassment policy, sexual exploitation policy to try to recruit more women and they have this reactionary push to adopt all these gender reforms. I have not yet tested, tried to find as actual statistical correlation partially because I can't find accurate data of those kinds of scandals happening within the military. I have, I am attempting to record when I find evidence sometimes you know when it makes it to the media I can find evidence of those things happening and so I have some kind of total evidence. I don't have any hard statistical evidence at the moment but I definitely do think in some countries that is the case. Good time for one more question. I have one, I thought we had one. Just one, go ahead. I have a question for Laura. Looking forward into the implementation piece you said you were going to be tracking how those gender balancing or gender mainstream reforms are implemented. Are you going to be dating into account, you talked about how the post-conflict states there are a lot of international players that can have a role and then introducing those gender reforms did any of your research track how those forms were adopted based on the role of an international player or are you going to look at that in your implementation piece as well? Yes, absolutely, absolutely. So when I was collecting the data on the adoption of the reforms I had to see evidence that it was a government driven reform so if the reform appeared to be driven almost entirely by the UN or by civil society or NGO that was not included with my data set. It gets marquee especially in post-conflict states because sometimes the UN has such a strong role or these civil society actors have such a strong role within the security center reform that they overlapped and who is actually adopting the policy but I had to see evidence that it was the government actually participating in the adoption of the reform. That being said I do think that these international actors play a big role in the implementation and moving forward I do plan to track for example what the level of the UN presence or civil society presence was within the country to see how that then affects whether it's implemented in the long term. I haven't been able to do that as yet but that is something I'm planning to do moving forward. Does that answer your question? Yeah. Thank you.