The United Nations
Fourth World Conference on Women

Beijing, China - September 1995
Action for Equality, Development and Peace

I.  INTRODUCTION

The United Nations recently held one of the largest conferences in its history, the Fourth World Conference on Women ("Beijing Conference") which convened in Beijing, China, from 4 through 15 September 1995.[1] During the plenary sessions, conference delegates heard governments from around the world announce their commitments to women's rights.[2] During the working sessions, the delegates translated those commitments into two major documents appended to the conference report, the Beijing Declaration and the Platform for Action.[3]

The U.N. Commission on the Status of Women (CSW),[4] overseen by the U.N. Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC),[5] served as the preparatory committee for the Beijing Conference.[6] The CSW undertook extensive measures to negotiate and develop a detailed draft Platform for Action.[7] These preparations were critical, given the limited time, financial constraints, and overwhelming task that the delegates faced in Beijing.

After working diligently for ten days through daytime, evening, and weekend sessions, the delegates produced a thirty-eight paragraph Declaration and 345 paragraph Platform for Action.[8] Although several dozen countries entered reservations, every nation attending agreed "to adopt and implement most, if not all, of the [Platform], which calls for global action to achieve equality, development and peace."[9]

The Platform is divided into six chapters: the Mission Statement; the Global Framework; Critical Areas of Concern; Strategic Objectives and Actions; Institutional Arrangements; and Financial Arrangements.[10] In developing the Platform, conference attendees focused on twelve critical areas of concern that relate to women: poverty; education and training; health care and related services; violence against women; the effects of armed or other kinds of conflict on women; economic structures and policies; power and decision-making; mechanisms to promote the advancement of women; human rights; media stereotyping; environment and natural resource safeguarding; and the rights of the girl child.[11]

Those who attended the Beijing Conference agreed that it represented a great accomplishment and hope for the advancement of women on the international scale.[12] Nevertheless, we should examine the results of the Beijing Conference critically. As one non-governmental organization (NGO) participant commented, "the real work is bringing Beijing home."[13] Thus it is necessary to review other significant predecessor events in the development of women's rights under international (U.N. treaty-based) law before we analyze where the Beijing Conference and its Platform for Action can lead women in the future.

This Comment examines the potential for changing the international status of women that the Beijing Conference and Platform might have. Part II addresses the historical development of international women's rights. Part III discusses the challenges present in international human rights development, focusing on those peculiar to women's human rights. Part IV analyzes how the Beijing Conference addresses those problems and examines the Beijing Platform's potential. Finally, part V proposes developments and mechanisms necessary to maximize the Beijing Conference's impact and effectiveness.

II.  THE DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNATIONAL WOMEN'S RIGHTS

A.  Background to the Beijing Declaration and Platform

The international commitment to women's rights dates to the inception of the United Nations. In the U.N. Charter, all member states proclaim their determination

[t]o achieve international cooperation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion.[14]

The Beijing Declaration draws member states' attention to their obligations undertaken in the U.N. Charter,[15] as well as those responsibilities created in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,[16] the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women,[17] the Convention on the Rights of the Child,[18] the Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women,[19] and the Declaration on the Right to Development.[20] The Beijing Declaration goes further to cite the consensus and progress made at the following U.N. conferences and summits

on women in Nairobi in 1985, on children in New York in 1990, on environment and development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, on human rights in Vienna in 1993, on population and development in Cairo in 1994, and on social development in Copenhagen in 1995.[21]

Reference to such varied topics illustrates one of the central themes at the Beijing Conference: women have distinctive needs in nearly all aspects of life. Therefore, states must recognize and take into account women's perspectives when implementing all social and economic programs.

Although the United Nations celebrated its fiftieth anniversary in October 1995, it is clear that the admirable standards established in the U.N. Charter and at numerous international conferences remain largely unmet. This Comment discusses the progress achieved at the Beijing Conference and its predecessors, as well as the continued efforts needed to realize the goal of equality.

B. The Decade for Women: 1976-1985

The U.N. General Assembly proclaimed 1975 to be the International Women's Year.[22] That title was significant because it formally placed women's issues on the agenda. The International Women's Year was then followed by the United Nations Decade for Women from 1976 to 1985.[23] This period of increased attention to women's rights produced the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women[24] ("Women's Convention").

1.  The Women's Convention

The U.N. General Assembly unanimously adopted the Women's Convention in 1979, and on September 3, 1981, following ratification by twenty states, it entered into force as a binding treaty.[25] This two year period between adoption and ratification made it the fastest human rights convention to come into force.[26] The Women's Convention has been ratified by 139 states to date.[27] It has been described as "the definitive international legal instrument requiring respect for and observance of the human rights of women; it is universal in reach, comprehensive in scope and legally binding in character."[28]

The breadth of the Women's Convention is indicated by the definition of discrimination against women as

any distinction, exclusion or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital status, on a basis of equality of men and women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field.[29]

Article 2 illustrates the scope of the Women's Convention in powerful and broad language: "States Parties condemn discrimination against women in all its forms, [and] agree to pursue by all appropriate means and without delay a policy of eliminating discrimination against women . . . ."[30] This section requires states parties to establish and enforce legal rights and protections through their organs of government.[31] Moreover, Article 2 clearly imposes state responsibility in the public and private spheres for both de jure and de facto discrimination.[32]

The Women's Convention explicitly excepts affirmative action legislation from its definition of discrimination. However, it provides that such reformative measures must terminate upon the achievement of equality of opportunity and treatment.[33] In addition, the Women's Convention covers a wide spectrum of equal rights issues, including participation in political and public life (including the rights to vote, to hold office, to participate in all non-governmental organizations and associations, and to represent states at the international level); acquisition, change, or retention of one's nationality; equal rights with respect to the nationality of children; educational and vocational opportunities (including the elimination of stereotyping roles along the lines of gender); employment opportunities (including the right to equal remuneration for work of equal value and rights to maternity leave); particular problems faced by rural women; and marriage and the guardianship and adoption of children.[34]

Finally, Article 17 of the Women's Convention establishes the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW).[35] Its purpose is to evaluate the implementation of the Women's Convention and to make recommendations to improve the implementation process.[36]

2.  The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women

The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women is comprised of twenty-three "experts of high moral standing and competence in the field covered by the Convention."[37] States parties elect the members by secret ballot.[38] Under the Women's Convention, each state party can nominate one person from among its nationals.[39] During the selection process, states must consider equitable geographical distribution and representation of different cultures and legal systems.[40] CEDAW members serve in their personal capacity[41] and receive emoluments from U.N. resources as decided by the General Assembly.[42] The U.N. Secretary-General provides the staff and facilities that CEDAW requires to function.[43]

States parties must periodically report legislative, judicial, administrative, or other measures taken towards implementing the Women's Convention.[44] A state party must submit its first report within one year after the Women's Convention enters into force for that state, and must submit subsequent reports at four-year intervals.[45] In accordance with Article 20 of the Women's Convention, CEDAW meets annually for not more than two weeks. During this period the Committee reviews the reports prepared and submitted by states parties.[46] CEDAW then makes suggestions and general recommendations to the General Assembly through ECOSOC,[47] which also transmits the reports to the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW).[48]

3.  Weaknesses of the Women's Convention

The most widely acknowledged weakness of the Women's Convention is the difficulty in its implementation caused by the extensive number and substance of reservations made to it by states parties.[49] As of January 18, 1995, forty-two states parties had made, and not subsequently withdrawn, reservations to the Women's Convention,[50] making it "among the most heavily reserved of international human rights conventions."[51]

A reservation is "a unilateral statement, however phrased or named, made by a State, when signing, ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to a treaty, whereby it purports to exclude or to modify the legal effect of certain provisions of the treaty in their application to that State."[52] Reservations are permissible unless generally or specifically prohibited by a treaty,[53] or when "the reservation is incompatible with the object and purpose of the treaty."[54] Other states parties are considered to have accepted a reservation unless they object to it either within twelve months of notification or "by the date on which [they express their] consent to be bound by the treaty."[55]

The effect of a reservation varies depending on the type of treaty. Human rights treaties differ from other international treaties that create mutual privileges and obligations, which are normally concluded on the basis of reciprocity.[56] Under the principle of reciprocity, reservations made with regard to another party are interpreted to modify the obligations of both the reserving state and the other party.[57] In contrast, human rights treaties create obligations erga omnes with respect to other states parties.[58] The Vienna Convention itself recognizes that the normal rules of treaty termination or suspension "do not apply to provisions relating to the protection of the human person contained in treaties of a humanitarian character, in particular to provisions prohibiting any form of reprisals against persons protected by such treaties."[59] Thus, as the Women's Convention is a humanitarian treaty, any reservation made to it does not affect the obligations of any state other than the one making the reservation.

Some of the Women's Convention reservations relate to issues that are not fundamental to the object and purpose of the treaty. For example, some reservations relating to the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) are essentially procedural.[60] However, a significant (and to some, troubling) number of the reservations relate to Article 2, which sets out the general goals and obligations asserted by the Women's Convention.[61] These reservations thus go to the heart of the treaty's object and purpose. While permitting reservations encourages more states to ratify the Women's Convention,

[t]he Women's Convention may face the paradox of maximizing its universal application at the cost of compromising its integrity. Indeed, the legal issue of the propriety of reservations to this Convention goes to the heart of both values of universality and integrity.[62]

Furthermore, it may not be possible to prevent such troubling reservations. Article 29 of the Women's Convention grants the ICJ the power to resolve disputes between two or more states parties concerning the treaty's interpretation or application.[63] There is no other process within the Women's Convention to reject reservations that are incompatible with its object and purpose. However, the Convention specifically permits a state party to declare its intent not to be bound by Article 29.[64] This is of critical importance, because "compatibility of reservations is ultimately a legal question and can only be resolved by a judicial body."[65]

In contrast, the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination,[66] which "is considered by many to be the most effective international human rights instrument in existence today,"[67] contains specific measures for rejecting reservations. Article 20(2) of the Racial Convention states that

[a] reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of this Convention shall not be permitted, nor shall a reservation the effect of which would inhibit the operation of any of the bodies established by this Convention be allowed. A reservation shall be considered incompatible or inhibitive if at least two-thirds of the States Parties to this Convention object to it.[68]

This provision has proven to be an effective means of regulating and minimizing reservations.[69] The Racial Convention has 128 states parties and only four reservations that are purported modifications or exclusions of the obligations assumed under the treaty.[70] Approximately three percent of the states parties have entered substantive reservations to the Racial Convention while the figure is twenty-two percent for states parties to the Women's Convention.[71]

In addition to the problems presented by the extensive reservations, CEDAW has limited powers with which to implement the provisions of the Women's Convention. For example, while CEDAW has the power to declare a state party in violation of the Women's Convention, it "has no quasi-judicial powers enabling it to order an appropriate remedy."[72] CEDAW's most effective means of exerting pressure on states parties is its public review of the individual state reports.[73] In other words, the Women's Convention must rely on a sense of public embarrassment accompanying a negative review by CEDAW. In addition to this obvious weakness, closer scrutiny of the Convention reveals further inadequacies.

First, the Women's Convention does not simply codify customary international law. Instead, the primary purpose of the Women's Convention and other international women's rights mechanisms is to establish rights and obligations that currently do not exist. Thus, the extent to which a state is embarrassed by CEDAW's criticisms is likely to be tempered by the inadequate priority that all states currently assign to women's issues. A state is not likely to be embarrassed if shown to be violating provisions of the Women's Convention that its peer states also violate.

Second, the reports submitted to CEDAW are created by the states themselves. This approach is meant to direct the attention of states parties to women's rights on a regular, if not continuous, basis, and encourage states uniformly to consider the impact on women of a policy or program prior to its adoption. However, under the current system the objectivity of these reports is questionable, since states may be expected to frame their efforts in the best light. Moreover, because states may be expected to emphasize their positive achievements, discriminatory practices may tend to be overlooked.

Because CEDAW is its only compliance review mechanism, except for the optional and highly reserved Article 29, the Women's Convention, in effect, does not allow for inter-state complaints. In contrast, the Racial Convention establishes the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD), which is authorized to hear inter-party complaints alleging treaty violations.[74] Because much of the force behind international law rests upon public opinion, inter-party complaints are an important mechanism for drawing attention to human rights violations. Furthermore, contract law principles, the backbone of treaty law, support permitting inter-party complaints. After all, the act of ratifying a treaty is not merely one of solidarity; conflicts may forseeably arise. When states ratify treaties, they are creating laws with consequential obligations and duties. Therefore, breaches of treaty provisions require an avenue for resolving inter-party complaints.

In addition, unlike the Racial Convention, the Women's Convention does not provide for an individual petition process.[75] CERD is authorized to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals claiming to be victims of Racial Convention violations.[76] The Women's Convention, however, creates a paradox: while it is aimed at promoting and protecting individuals' rights, it provides no mechanism by which individuals can seek redress or force compliance with the terms of the convention.

Moreover, the CEDAW reporting system is troubled because many parties to the Women's Convention are delinquent in their reporting obligations. States agree to submit an initial report within one year of entering into the treaty and additional reports every four years thereafter.[77] As of March 1, 1995, forty-four initial reports and eighty-eight subsequent reports were overdue.[78] Because report review is the only compliance-checking mechanism created by the Women's Convention, this presents a critical problem.[79]

Even without the workload represented by the overdue reports, CEDAW is so over-burdened and under-resourced that a newly submitted report will not be reviewed for at least three years.[80] The Women's Convention limits CEDAW's meeting time[81] to "a period of not more than two weeks annually,"[82] a restriction that does not affect other major human rights treaty bodies.[83] In its June 1995 Report on the Progress Achieved in the Implementation of the Women's Convention, CEDAW emphasized that it is unable to function effectively and implement the Women's Convention without proper resources.[84] As discussed above, CEDAW's power is severely limited when functioning under the best of circumstances. As a practical matter, this delay in review allows objectionable policies to continue for years without being addressed. More importantly, CEDAW's deficient resource allocation sends the message that the United Nations and the international community do not consider women's rights to be a priority, so that states need not take seriously the law of the Women's Convention.

Until recently, implementing the Women's Convention was impeded further by the geographic separation between CEDAW's Vienna-based Secretariat, the Commission on the Status of Women,[85] and all of the other human rights treaty bodies at the Geneva-based Centre for Human Rights. In 1993 CEDAW changed its meeting location to U.N. Headquarters in New York City. The relocation remedied the problem because the Centre for Human Rights also has an office in New York.[86] In a practical sense, for more than a decade CEDAW's physical separation made it difficult to promote and integrate women's rights as human rights.

Finally, the Women's Convention and CEDAW remain relatively unknown on both the international and domestic levels.[87] Because the Women's Convention is aimed at promoting the rights of individuals, it is imperative that those individuals become aware of their states' commitments and obligations regarding those rights. It is difficult to promote change on a national basis if individuals are not aware of their rights. In particular, NGOs are adept at educating individuals about their rights and their state's legal obligations.

Although NGOs are widespread and very active, the Women's Convention provides no formal procedure to involve them in the reporting process.[88] While CEDAW has received informal submissions from NGOs on an ad hoc and individual basis,[89] these organizations remain underutilized. They are an invaluable source of information[90] and their reports are more likely to be objective and substantive than those submitted by the states parties. Furthermore, NGOs are in contact with the populations that the Women's Convention was designed to reach. Unlike governments, it is the exclusive purpose of the NGOs to collect data and promote education and reform in specific areas. Therefore, a formal mechanism to involve NGOs in reporting would greatly increase the value of CEDAW's work. NGO involvement in the reporting procedure would provide much needed improvement in data collection as well as education. While it would not affect CEDAW's formal power, NGO involvement would probably make the Women's Convention and CEDAW's existence better known. Since women are more likely to advocate change actively if they are aware of their state's legal obligations, increased NGO involvement could serve to empower the Women's Convention and CEDAW.[91]

4.  The Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action - 1993

The United Nations World Conference on Human Rights (WCHR), held in Vienna during June 14-25, 1993, culminated in the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action.[92] There, the women's lobby made its mission well known, creating an "almost dominant presence."[93] The parallel WCHR-NGO Forum included ten to fifteen institutions whose names reflected their primary concern with women's rights.[94] A specific working group considered the status of women's rights.[95] In addition, the women's lobby infiltrated all other working groups, thereby ensuring that women's interests were considered throughout the agenda.[96]

Ultimately, the WCHR recognized women's rights as human rights for the first time,[97] noting that the human rights of women should "form an integral part of the United Nations human rights activites, including the promotion of all human rights instruments relating to women."[98] The Vienna Declaration cited the harmful effects of traditional customary practices, cultural prejudices, and religious extremes as factors contributing to gender-based discrimination and systematic injustices.[99]

While the WCHR encouraged the universal ratification of the Women's Convention,[100] it simultaneously acknowledged a number of the convention's weaknesses.[101] For example, the WCHR urged CEDAW to continue its review of Women's Convention reservations.[102] It encouraged states parties to withdraw[103] "reservations that are contrary to the object and purpose of the [Women's] Convention or which are otherwise incompatible with international treaty law."[104] The WCHR encouraged both education about the existence of implementation procedures and adoption of new, stronger implementation mechanisms regarding women's equality and human rights.[105] Finally, the WCHR suggested that both the CSW and CEDAW review and consider "the possibility of introducing the right of petition through the preparation of an optional protocol to the [Women's Convention]."[106]

Also for the first time, the WCHR "recognized gender-based violence as a human rights concern."[107] Because such violence can be perpetrated only against individuals, this action emphasizes that individuals are proper subjects of international law. Furthermore, it emphasizes that the focus has shifted from scrutiny only of state action to include private action.[108]

The strong feminist presence in Vienna indicated the realization that the Women's Convention, though strong in language, is extremely weak in effect. The Women's Convention lacked the necessary maturation period. The best intentions could not substitute for education, debate, persuasion, and norm-creating, all of which legitimize and strengthen international human rights treaties. Swept away by the momentum of the Decade for Women, the Women's Convention was conceived prematurely, and what was born is a convention without any muscle.[109]

The WCHR was not capable of resolving the human rights violations that plague women throughout the world.[110] "Vienna's success remains limited"[111] because the WCHR narrowly focused on violence against women to the exclusion of other significant women's rights issues.[112] Many delegates felt isolated, frustrated, and even disempowered as a result.[113] Nonetheless, it "set the stage" for Beijing and its results provide "fertile ground for expanding the women's human rights dialogue within the international framework."[114]

III.  CHALLENGES IN INTERNATIONAL WOMEN'S RIGHTS

International human rights law is a difficult area in which to achieve progress. Traditionally, states and international organizations have been considered the primary subjects of international law.[115] Human rights law, however, is different in that it focuses on the rights of individuals rather than those of states or international organizations. Because of this focus on individuals, human rights law necessarily must peer into the domestic laws of nations and into the private spheres of life. This level of scrutiny creates special problems in the development of human rights law, because throughout history states have been fiercely protective of their sovereignty and have resisted external forces which attempt to dictate how they should construe their municipal laws.

For example, though a state might ratify a treaty governing its activity within the international community, it may be less inclined to do so when the international agreement will govern how it regulates and treats its own nationals. Human rights conventions address the rights of individuals; a state ratifying a human rights convention, therefore, agrees to external (international) obligations regarding its recognition of the convention and its protection of individual's rights thereby recognized. Because states resist relinquishing their sovereign powers to the international community, human rights conventions must overcome this major obstacle to acceptance if they are to be implemented effectively.

As a subcategory of human rights, women's rights conventions also focus on the individual and face opposition from states because of sovereignty concerns.[116] States will often justify discrimination and noncompliance with human rights conventions on the basis of custom or cultural practices.[117] This obstacle is particularly difficult to overcome when the customs are founded on religion. Most states are inclined to protect their major religions' practices as sacred aspects of their culture.[118] States may also tolerate subjects who continue to adhere to religious practices in spite of contrary legal constraints.[119] Furthermore, gender-based stereotypes often exist within cultures.[120] Since people have been indoctrinated to accept these roles as the "natural" order of things, many states resist or reject classifying these practices as discriminatory or biased.[121] This protective attitude toward sovereignty and territorial integrity is responsible for much of the contractual nature of international law, which grows out of mutual agreements among states. The threat to state sovereignty and lack of commercial advantage posed by human rights treaties explains why states hesitate to enter into them.[122] Rebecca J. Cook notes several reasons why "[m]ost states are apprehensive about the possible consequences of accepting a human rights treaty."[123] First, the interpretation and scope of human rights treaties are far less certain than those of commercial treaties.[124] Second, states realize that they may be unable to withdraw from a treaty, and its breach could be harmful or humiliating.[125] Furthermore, as with the obligations created under the Women's Convention and the Beijing Platform, de facto as well as de jure practices may be reviewed for possible violations.[126] Therefore, while a state's laws may facially conform to the standards established under the Women's Convention, the state may nevertheless be wary of ratifying the treaty for fear that in practice the actual impact of its laws, or private practices that simply are not addressed by its laws, will be deemed a treaty violation.[127] Consequently, many states refuse to ratify human rights treaties out of fear that they may be leaving themselves too vulnerable to attack from beyond their borders.[128]

However, if the principles embodied in a convention are recognized as part of customary international law, a state may be bound by those principles even if it refuses to submit voluntarily to the convention. A principle may be legally binding if it is both widely acknowledged and respected out of a sense of legal obligation.[129] In the area of international women's rights, however, binding customary laws are lacking. No state currently abides by the standards established in the international conferences addressing women's rights. Therefore the principles underlying those conferences fail to meet the standard that permits their recognition as part of customary international law. As a result, international conferences on women's rights face a substantial task. To create binding non-customary international law, the conventions adopted at such conferences must develop from a process of education, research, and debate, and must reach some level of agreeement among the participants as to both the current and the optimum status of the principles involved.

The failure to develop from such a process has led to one of the most serious criticisms of the Women's Convention: that it was prematurely conceived.[130] While proponents of the Women's Convention argue that it was an important milestone because it put women's issues on the international agenda,[131] other human rights proponents argue that the period between the Declaration and the Convention was too brief.[132] Such a short discussion period did not allow for the standard maturing process that conventions require to gain recognition and legitimacy.[133] The result has been that, although the Women's Convention supposedly exists as binding international law, it is virtually ineffective. Even so, many international figures believe that, given the existence of a Women's Convention, continued lobbying efforts by women are inappropriate.[134] Thus, in some aspects, the existence of a largely compromised Women's Convention hinders further progress.

Diversity among women in their ideals and goals further hinders progress toward equality. Although women share in common their unequal status when compared to that of men, women from nation to nation, community to community, and even from household to household have diverse ideals and values. Because women are dispersed throughout every religion, race, culture, society, and economic class, there exists a correspondingly broad range of ideas and goals among individual women. Many jurisprudential scholars acknowledge that this "diversity of voices is not only valuable, but essential, and that the search for, or belief in, one view, one voice is unlikely to capture the reality of women's experience or gender inequality."[135] For example, in the United States a white woman may perceive that the law treats her as a second-class citizen, while an African-American woman may perceive that the law treats her as a third- or fourth-class citizen.

Thus, while women can generate support for and empowerment from each other, they are not always successful in doing so. First, women may oppose each other when their views clash, as when they maintain that particular religious beliefs or practices are fundamental and take precedent over conflicting feminist[136] ideals.[137] Second, women may not support each other when their views, although not contradictory, vary widely based on differing priorities.[138] For example, women from more socially oppressed and economically depressed nations might believe that the right to equal remuneration for equal work is a lofty and justly principled goal, but they might have more immediate and basic needs. Consequently, they would be likely to put the force of their political weight behind more basic, life-dependent issues. Therefore, women are faced with a potentially troublesome dichotomy. On the one hand, women are diverse individuals with a multitude of legitimate, and sometimes conflicting, aspirations. To demand compromise or subordination of some views to others for the sake of unanimity seems contrary to the common themes and principles of women's struggle for equality. On the other hand, women need to support each other as much as possible, because comprising half of the world's population is likely the greatest source of power that women possess.

In addition to the diversity of their views and priorities, lack of political and economic power in women's hands is another challenge to the progress of women's rights. Women's rights lobbyists currently rely upon the ideology of "fairness in equality" to garner support.[139] A number of factors make it clear that this appeal to justice is not enough to bring about real change for women. First, if there were such consensus on the issue of gender equality, then women would already receive better, if not equal, treatment. Second, because states undertake international obligations voluntarily, lobbying groups need bargaining power and cognizable, tangible incentives to gain support for their cause.

States enter into international agreements when it is in their national interest to do so. Given that women comprise roughly one-half of the world's population, one might be tempted to believe that they would be able to marshal the requisite power to effectuate change. However, because societies have incorporated gender-based discrimination into their cultures, women bear a great burden in overcoming stereotypes and gaining power.[140] In short, "money talks," and women do not control most of the world's money.[141]

Even in the United States, where equality of opportunity is arguably closer at hand than in most parts of the world, it is difficult for women to enter the business world.[142] Even if women are successful in breaking into the more powerful industries, it is difficult for them to advance as quickly and to as high a level as their male colleagues.[143] Furthermore, women are often paid less than men for the same work.[144] For example, law is among the easiest of the typically male-dominated professions for women to enter in the United States.[145] Women currently comprise nearly half of the student population of U.S. law schools.[146] Nevertheless, women have a more difficult time obtaining employment with the highest paying law firms.[147] Those who succeed in getting those associate positions face a vastly more difficult time than men in being promoted to a partnership position. "In recent years . . . women have actually become less successful at making partner [in New York City's largest and most prestigious firms]."[148] In New York City, seventeen percent of the male associates hired after 1981 made partner compared to a mere five percent of the females.[149] This is only one of several daunting statistics that help explain why ninety-four percent of all women who started working at New York City's top-grossing law firms in 1987 have since left their jobs.[150]

Lastly, most women are expected to maintain their workload within the home in addition to their jobs in the community.[151] Such expectations derive from the still pervasive belief that most domestic work is "women's work."[152] Because such tasks are usually performed by women and do not produce any income, "women's work" such as housework and child-rearing often go unrecognized as work.[153]

IV.  HOW DID THE BEIJING CONFERENCE ADDRESS THESE PROBLEMS?

The Beijing Platform for Action[154] is strikingly comprehensive. While the Women's Convention defined women's rights in broad, vague language, the Platform is very specific and defines problems, objectives, and actions to be taken in great detail. One needs merely to glance at the Platform to understand why CSW needed to make such extensive preparations for the conference. Absent significant preliminary drafting and negotiations, a ten-day world conference could not possibly culminate in such a substantive document.

Chapter I, entitled "Mission Statement," immediately sets the sunstantive tone of the document. It begins:

The Platform for Action is an agenda for women's empowerment. It aims . . . at removing all the obstacles to women's active participation in all spheres of public and private life through a full and equal share in economic, social, cultural and political decision-making.[155]

After listing the Platform's goals in general terms, the Mission Statement then challenges governments, international organizations and institutions to commit themselves to achieving the objectives set forth in Chapter IV.[156]

In Chapter II, "Global Framework," the Platform acknowledges the work and progress achieved to date in international women's rights.[157] It reminds states of their existing obligations under the U.N. Charter and previous international conventions.[158] It then lists a number of factors that contribute to the ever-changing global environment, including the end of the Cold War, excessive military expenditures, increased democratization, widespread poverty, economic recession, and environmental degradation.[159]

The Platform's third chapter, "Critical Areas of Concern," is only four paragraphs long.[160] It simply lists the issues that the delegates addressed in Beijing. Citing concerns that range from the effects of armed conflict on women to stereotyping in the media, the list illustrates the Platform's tremendous scope.[161]

Chapter IV, "Strategic Objectives and Actions," identifies objectives to be achieved in each of the areas of critical concern listed in Chapter III, and describes actions to be taken to achieve those objectives.[162] Having reminded states of their outstanding obligations in Chapter II, the Platform in Chapter IV implicitly demands their continued or renewed commitment by listing concrete actions which states parties should take.

First, the chapter recognizes that "women face barriers to full equality and advancement because of such factors as their race, age, language, ethnicity, culture, religion or disability, because they are indigenous women or because of other status."[163] With these considerations in mind, the chapter then addresses six general areas of concern and lays down specific objectives as well as actions designed to achieve the objectives. These areas, discussed in detail below, are women and poverty, education and training of women, women and health, violence against women, women and armed conflict, and women and the economy.[164]

Throughout Chapter IV, the Platform consistently calls for greater fact-finding and information gathering.[165] Statistics are generally compiled in such a way that they ignore the different impact policies have upon women and men.[166] Sex- and gender-specific data are needed, however, because "[o]ne of the most important, indeed crucial, advocacy functions—and indispensable to the promotion and protection of human rights—is the investigation, documentation, exposure, and denouncing of violations of human rights and the violators themselves."[167]

A.  Women and Poverty

Poverty manifests itself in many different ways. It exists in all nations, whether in epidemic proportions in developing countries or in smaller pockets in developed countries.[168] Poverty's impact is wide-ranging. Not only does it encompass obvious manifestations, such as lack of income and resources with which to sustain a livelihood, but it extends further to include hunger and malnutrition, illness, higher death rates, limited or lack of access to educational opportunity, inadequate housing, homelessness, and unsafe environments.[169] The Platform notes that "[poverty] is also characterized by lack of participation in decision-making and in civil, social and cultural life."[170]

Today, there are more than one billion people living in unacceptable conditions of poverty,[171] most of whom are women.[172] Furthermore, in the past decade this gender-based disparity in the distribution of life-sustaining means has increased disproportionately.[173] While the causes of poverty are multidimensional, problems are most pronounced in developing countries as they struggle to participate and gain a foothold in the international economy.[174]

The Platform recognizes that "[w]omen contribute to the economy and to combatting poverty through both remunerated and unremunerated work at home, in the community and in the workplace."[175] Furthermore, the Platform draws attention to the fact that in addition to their work outside the home, women often bear a disproportionate share of the household labor burden because of gender-based division of labor.[176]

In addition to this inequitable workload distribution, women face further economic challenges, including the absence of economic and educational opportunities, a lack of access to economic resources, and a lack of participatory decision-making opportunites.[177] Furthermore, poverty can make women more "vulnerable to sexual exploitation."[178] Such exploitation takes on a variety of forms,[179] including prostitution for young girls and women,[180] wife inheritance,[181] and the highly lucrative pornography industry.[182]

Chapter IV addresses inadequate social welfare systems, noting that they often fail to take account of the specific conditions of women living in poverty.[183] Ultimately, women face a greater risk than men of falling into poverty.[184] This is particularly true for older women

where social security systems are based on the principle of continuous remunerated employment. In some cases, women do not fulfil this requirement because of interruptions in their work, due to the unbalanced distribution of remunerated and unremunerated work. Moreover, older women also face greater obstacles to labour-market re-entry.[185]

Acknowledging that our increasingly interdependent and globalized world economy has resulted in an uncertain economic climate with an "unmanageable" amount of external debt, the Platform calls upon states to reevaluate macroeconomic policies and to implement them through full and equal democratic participation by men and women.[186] The Platform asks governments to incorporate a gender perspective into their macroeconomic programs and policies.[187] Specifically, it emphasizes the need to enable the poor, particularly women, to conserve and use environmental resources responsibly, so as to build a foundation for sustainable development.[188]

The Platform reminds states of their responsibilities by delineating their obligations.[189] Among other things, it instructs states to allocate public expenditures to promote women's economic opportunities and equal access to resources;[190] to create social security systems that place women and men in equal positions at all stages of life;[191] and to develop policies and programs to ensure women's access to food, housing, education, training, and legal services.[192]

Moreover, the Platform demands action from all levels of government.[193] It directs governments to "ensure free access to or low-cost legal services to women living in poverty";[194] to "[u]ndertake legislative and administrative reforms to give women full and equal access to economic resources";[195] to consider ratifying Convention No. 169 of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) to protect the right of indigenous peoples;[196] and to encourage links between women and formal savings and credit institutions.[197]

The Platform speaks to multilateral financial and development institutions, such as the World Bank, and even commercial banks.[198] This is particularly interesting because, as discussed above, international law historically has had difficulty in reaching individuals and private actors.[199] Nevertheless, the Platform calls on these private actors and financial institutions who had no input into the Platform's development, to lobby for and develop programs that will improve women's economic status. As difficult as it might be for governments to take action in their private domestic realms, they are, nevetheless, privy to the Beijing Conference debates and have the option of ratifying the Platform. In contrast, private actors and financial institutions cannot ratify or, for that matter, refuse to ratify international conventions. Nevertheless, the Platform urges them to participate in the reform, perhaps relying on the premise that by improving women's situation, they necessarily improve the global situation and thereby indirectly improve their own.[200]

B.  Education and Training of Women

The Platform defines education both as a human right and an essential tool for achieving equality, development, and peace.[201] Furthermore, it describes education as "one of the best means of achieving sustainable development and economic growth that is both sustained and sustainable."[202] Regardless of one's socio-economic level, education is the single most valuable resource one can exploit to improve one's standard of living. Literacy alone can improve health, nutrition, and education in the family; it can also empower women.[203]

While acknowledging a recent improvement in female access to education, the Platform also notes that today, more than five years after adopting the World Declaration on Education for All and the Framework for Action to Meet Basic Learning Needs, approximately 100 million children, including at least sixty million girls, are without access to primary schooling."[204] Furthermore, more than two-thirds of the world's 960 million illiterate adults are women.[205]

The Platform attributes this disparity, in part, to discrimination in girls' access to education.[206] This, in turn, results from "customary attitudes, early marriages and pregnancies, inadequate and gender-biased teaching and educational materials, sexual harassment, and lack of adequate and physically and otherwise accessible schooling facilities."[207] Furthermore, girls routinely are expected to undertake domestic work at a very young age in addition to their schoolwork.[208] The results are often poor scholastic performance and withdrawal from school.[209] Despite the fact that educating mothers results in definite improvements in nutrition, health, infant mortality, and fertility, long-term beneficial effects of education are lost because girls are the first to drop out of, or be withdrawn from, school.[210]

Gender-biased curricula and teaching materials also contribute to the inadequate education of women.[211] The biased curricula reinforce traditional gender-based roles that deny women an opportunity to secure full and equal partnership in society.[212] The Platform cites science curricula as being particularly gender-biased on two grounds: science courses are often denied to girls, and women scientists and their accomplishments are rarely recognized.[213] Ramifications of this bias are unfortunate; because education in the areas of mathematics, science and technical training has direct benefits in daily life,[214] its absence in girls' curricula imposes equally direct detriments. Accordingly, to prevent the concentration of girls in limited fields of study,[215] the Platform directs governments to "develop curricula, textbooks and teaching aids free of gender-based stereotypes,"[216] as well as to heighten the awareness of educators as to the "status, role and contribution of women and men" in the family and society.[217]

In addition to suffering the unacceptable and disproportionate illiteracy rate,[218] women are frequently the head of the household. According to Marilyn Waring, a 1984 ILO study reported as a conservative estimate that three in ten households in developing countries were headed by women.[219] This "ILO report described patriarchal social structures and bias and access to education, training, credit, technologies, and productive resources as being responsible for the fact that, wherever they are found, most female-headed households fall, by all standards, below the poverty line."[220]

Acknowledging the influence that mass media wield,[221] the Platform notes that television has the ability to "shape values, attitudes and perceptions of women and girls in both positive and negative ways."[222] The British Columbia Court of Appeal held that exploiting women and children in publications and films can lead to "abject and servile victimization."[223] Moreover, research indicates that pornography "is harmful to equality and bodily security rights."[224] Therefore, to teach children to challenge negative media roles as wrong as well as to respect women, the Platform urges educators to teach critical judgment and analytical skills.[225]

To remedy gender-bias in the education and training of women, the Platform establishes goals which governments should pursue: universal access to basic education and completion of primary education by at least eighty percent of primary school-age children by the year 2000;[226] a closed gender gap in secondary education by the year 2005;[227] and full universal primary education in all countries by the year 2015.[228] Furthermore, states are obligated to remove gender barriers to scholarship, fellowship, and career development at the tertiary level.[229] However, to ensure equal access to upper-level education, the Platform also encourages government affirmative action programs when appropriate, although such programs are necessarily not gender-neutral.[230]

In light of the universal need for education, the Platform also directs states to provide educational settings that support and encourage the schooling of pregnant adolescents and young mothers.[231] Also, governments should encourage ratification of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,[232] if they have not already done so.[233]

Additionally, the Platform asks governments to work in conjunction with NGOs, employers, workers, trade unions, and educational institutions to develop and implement policies to train and educate women and provide them with skills necessary to meet the needs of a changing socio-economic environment.[234] It seeks to ensure access for adult women with little or no education to quality education and training.[235]

The Platform calls for the removal of legal, regulatory, and social barriers to sexual and reproductive health education, and for formal education on women's health issues.[236] It also encourages development of education and services to promote self-esteem and prevent unwanted pregnancies as well as the spread of sexually transmitted diseases—in particular HIV/AIDS.[237] Recognizing that today's children are tomorrow's leaders, the Platform emphasizes the need for training in peaceful conflict resolution.[238] In addition, leadership qualities need to be instilled in the young in order to create leaders for future generations.[239]

The Platform calls upon governments to provide the necessary monetary resources to the educational sector,[240] and to establish monitoring mechanisms to evaluate the implementation of educational reforms.[241] Furthermore, it encourages governments to fund programs to ensure equal educational opportunities for girls, women, boys, and men,[242] and to fund special programs in mathematics, science, and computer technology to advance opportunities for all girls and women.[243]

To better educational opportunities for women, the Platform also asks the World Bank and other multilateral development institutions to increase funding for development of education and economic recovery plans.[244] Furthermore, it asks international organizations such as UNESCO to contribute to and encourage awareness and improvement of educational systems by evaluating them and making appropriate recommendations to governments.[245]

C.  Women and Health

The Platform defines "health" as a "state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity."[246] While proclaiming that all women have the right to the highest attainable standard of health, the Platform recognizes that this right remains largely illusory for the majority of women[247] and cites as causes both the inequality between men and women and the inequality among women from different regions, classes, and ethnic groups.[248]

The Platform asserts that women's lack of power over their sexual and reproductive lives and lack of decision-making power are "social realities which have an adverse impact on their health."[249] The Platform declares that "[r]eproductive health . . . implies that people are able to have a satisfying and safe sex life,"[250] and that there is a basic right of all couples and individuals to decide freely and responsibly the number, spacing and timing of their children.[251] Harmful practices, such as female genital mutilation and early marriage, pregnancy, and child-bearing are described as discriminatory practices that pose grave health risks.[252] Young girls are at risk of being victims of sexual abuse, violence, prostitution, infection from HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases, and unsafe abortions.[253]

Furthermore, young men are inadequately educated concerning not only the respect they owe to women but also their responsibilities arising out of sexual activity and reproduction.[254] The Platform notes that women consequently suffer from widespread domestic physical and mental abuse in addition to unwanted pregnancies and sexually related diseases.[255]

While the Platform encourages better access to health care and specifically to safe abortion practices,[256] the Platform compromises its position regarding the legalization of abortion by rejecting abortion as a method of family planning.[257] Furthermore, it states that the legality of abortion can be determined only at the national or local level.[258] This position clearly represents a political compromise at the Beijing Conference, as the Platform goes on to stipulate that where legal, abortions should be safe, and states should "consider" reviewing laws that punish women who have had illegal abortions.[259]

This attempt at neutrality is particularly striking for two reasons. First, the rest of the document consists of rather forceful demands for state action in areas where status is undecided or is decidedly contrary to the status proposed in the Platform. Second, if ratified and adopted, international legal principles dictate that the Platform would supersede any national or local laws. This section of the Platform, therefore, clearly represents an attempt to achieve broad acceptance by compromising its goals.

D.  Violence Against Women

The Platform defines "violence against women" as "any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or private life."[260] This language is significant because it delves into the private sphere, a barrier that international law crosses reluctantly, and it implies that women have status as individual subjects of international law.

The Platform declares that violence against women is a violation of their human rights and fundamental freedoms as well as an obstacle to the objectives of equality, development, and peace.[261] It also notes that, while women's low social and economic status can be both a cause and consequence of violence against them, violence is a phenomenon that cuts across all cultural, class, and economic lines.[262]

The Platform lists numerous examples of violence directed against women by their families, their communities, their governments, armed conflict, and population control efforts. These include domestic violence, domestic sexual child abuse, marital rape, female genital mutilation;[263] rape within the general community, sexual harassment and intimidation within the community and within the workplace, trafficking in women and forced prostitution;[264] physical, sexual, and psychological violence perpetrated or condoned by states;[265] murder, systemic rape, sexual slavery, and forced pregnancy during armed conflict situations;[266] and forced sterilization, prenatal sex selection, and female infanticide.[267] Violence is cited as "one of the crucial social mechanisms by which women are forced into a subordinate position compared with men."[268] It exists as the result of historically unequal power relations between men and women and cultural patterns of race, sex, language, or religiously linked practices.[269] Media-promoted stereotypes and lack of education also contribute to continuation of these practices.[270]

For example, in India, the deliberate abortion of female fetuses is widespread.[271] This lucrative practice uses a medical procedure called amniocentesis to determine the sex of the fetus; if the fetus is female, she is aborted.[272] An estimated 78,000 female fetuses were destroyed in this way between 1978 and 1980 in India.[273] Female infanticide is another widespread practice. Particularly in China, where the one-child family policy exists, parents of newborn girls kill the infants because they want their one child to be a boy.[274] Compounding the tragedy, mothers who have given birth to girls are often abused.[275]

The Platform suggests a holistic and multidisciplinary approach to education aimed at ending violence and promoting self- and mutual respect.[276] While seeking to improve acceptance of women's perspectives on policy, this section also notes the importance of training public officials, such as police officers, so they are better able to gain women's trust.[277]

E.  Women and Armed Conflict

The Platform declares peace to be inextricably related to equality for women.[278] Although avoiding war through peaceful conflict resolution is in everyone's interest, war has specific, unique effects on women. The Platform cites "[m]assive violations of human rights, especially in the form of genocide, `ethnic cleansing' as a strategy of war and its consequences, [and] rape" as abhorrent practices that must be stopped.[279]

Ethnic cleansing in the former Yugoslavia has recently captured the world's attention. However, the practice is not confined to the Serbo-Croatian conflict. Not long ago in Algeria, fifteen- and sixteen-year-old sisters were brutally murdered by the "Signatories of Blood"[280] for attending school against the orders of this Islamic fundamentalist group. When their mother tried to stop the killings, she too was killed.[281] These murderers "told witnesses that violent death was inevitable for any women who defied their orders."[282] Furthermore, fifteen-year-old girls are reportedly gang-raped and killed in public "as a `warning' to their friends and families."[283]

These practices are more than just abhorrent; they illustrate the belief that women are property. These rapes and murders are committed to destroy the enemy's chattel.[284] By victimizing and dehumanizing girls and women, the perpetrators destroy their enemy's property in the same way that they destroy real property with bombs. Such horrific acts not only undermine the physical and mental state of the individual victim, but also indicate an underlying perception of women as merely a means to gain strategic advantage over an enemy.

The Platform entreats governments to involve women and integrate their gender perspective in the conflict resolution decision-making processes.[285] Clearly, the issues that women face during armed conflict are unique and need to be addressed. However, what is not clear is whether the Platform is the proper vehicle to address war. To some extent, the abhorrent war-related practices listed above can be addressed as violations of international law. Furthermore, including peace as a goal of the Platform risks diverting attention from problems which are fundamentally women's issues, but which are not already addressed by international law.

F.  Women and the Economy

The Platform draws attention to women's lack of power, which it equates with access to economic opportunities and participation in economic decision-making.[286] It is difficult for women to effectuate change when they lack the power to wield influence within both the community and the home.

Discrimination in education, training, hiring, promotion, and remuneration hinder women's advancement in the public sphere.[287] Economic power is perhaps the most influential political bargaining tool, and men control most of it. Because discrimination causes women to earn less money, it therefore weakens their influence on their governments' policies. On the individual level, it is also difficult for women to improve their socio-economic status because of the effects of discrimination.

The Platform also emphasizes women's contributions to the economy through unremunerated work.[288] The United Nations System of National Accounts (UNSNA) is "the internationally recognized system for measuring and recording the values that economic theorists have observed."[289] This system assigns value to "work" performed in each country. These measurements are used in calculating a nation's Gross National Product and Gross Domestic Product figures.[290] UNSNA was developed to create a common language in which economists can conduct dialogues regarding different nations' productivity.

Both the inception of the system and the choices as to what would be counted were politically motivated.[291] The men who created the system did not account for the work that women typically perform because this work did not involve the exchange of money.[292] Thus, child-care, subsistence farming, and housework for example, are not recognized by UNSNA as productive activity, or work. The process of assigning value to unpaid work is called "imputation".[293] Currently, some nations impute a value for a "hidden economy" category when calculating their national accounts.[294] For instance, Italy imputes a minimal value for illegal activity, such as drug dealing, when they formulate their national account.[295]

The Platform encourages states to impute women's unremunerated work when calculating their national accounts.[296] It does not suggest that women should be paid for their domestic labor, but rather that the work performed by women should be quantified and factored into the calculation of national accounts. Their work would then yield some power to women, as it would affect the value of states' national accounts.[297] Furthermore, the assignment of monetary value to "women's work" is an acknowledgment that women are productive contributors to the economy. In a practical sense, it should not be more difficult to arrive at a value for domestic work than for any other.

The work that women do is necessary and it would be extremely difficult to institute changes requiring men to relinquish their compensated positions to undertake unremunerated work in the home. Imputation, therefore, is a very attractive—as well as fair—alternative. It forces states to recognize the value of women's contributions, yet it does not take cash out of anyone's pocket (directly). Because national accounts would then reflect women's work as economic productivity, women would gain bargaining power in their struggle for political equality and other rights, since imputation would enable women to cite dollar figures representing their economic value. Therefore, women would no longer be limited to reliance on abstract notions of fairness in their quest for recognition of their human rights.

V.  HOW CAN THE PLATFORM BE MOST EFFECTIVELY IMPLEMENTED?

The Beijing Conference and the Platform it produced certainly highlighted and drew international attention to women's issues. The Conference also provided women from around the world with the opportunity to exchange views and educate each other about their distinctive needs and concerns. Furthermore, it attracted a considerable amount of media attention, which is a valuable means of publicizing women's needs to the global community. However, it remains to be seen whether states will ratify the Platform and give it legally binding effect.

Regardless of the Platform's legal future, it is important to continue to analyze the Beijing Conference and its Platform. The Conference's work is not complete. Women must persist with their efforts to ensure that the work which went into the Beijing Conference and Platform are converted into results. We must continue to work, so that the cumulative effect of the achievements to date in the realm of international women's rights delivers the strongest impact possible. This is especially true because many of the weaknesses that plague the Women's Convention, such as inadequate CEDAW resources and its weak implementation provisions, continue to impair women's standing and ability to pursue legal recourse when their rights are violated.

Women must persist in efforts to empower themselves and each other. Women's greatest potential source of power lies in the fact that they constitute half of the world's population. To mobilize this massive group, NGOs can and should be better utilized to promote women's education and lobbying efforts. It is imperative that those women who occupy stronger positions work to effectuate change on behalf of their less powerful sisters. Collectively, working for the improvement of women's circumstances in some parts of the world serves the aim of improving the lot of all women.

Politically, women must show that it makes economic sense to account for and impute women's unremunerated work when calculating national accounts. Strategically, imputation has the benefit of appealing to governments and of endowing women with economic bargaining power. Women must also work to improve the status of the Women's Convention. If that work can convince governments to ratify the Women's Convention where they have not, and where they have ratified, to retract incompatible reservations that have restricted its effect, the Convention can become a stronger, more effective tool. Women's greater voice in U.N. activity could also yield more influence for CSW and CEDAW.

Education is the most promising investment that can be made in women's economic and political future. Women need to educate each other as well as men, boys, and girls, to overcome discriminatory stereotypes and empower women to improve their collective and individual situations. Most importantly, women must realize that the struggle is far from over, and that the Beijing Conference and its Platform for Action can best serve as groundwork for future efforts.

ELIZABETH L. LARSON