Skip to main content
SearchLoginLogin or Signup

Gender: Transboundary Partnerships in Civil Society's Peacebuilding Efforts

This blog entry is part of the series "Gendered Aspects of Peace and War in Turkey".

Published onSep 12, 2022
Gender: Transboundary Partnerships in Civil Society's Peacebuilding Efforts

Gender: Transboundary Partnerships in Civil Society's Peacebuilding Efforts


Translated by: Meral Camcı

I don't believe women are inherently or essentially more peaceful than men. But I do believe that in today's world, women experience power differently. Having had to navigate being in the less powerful position in multiple aspects of their lives, women are often more adept at how to surreptitiously pressure for change against large, powerful actors. The term "manipulative," often charged against women in a derogatory way, reflects a reality in which women have often had to find ways other than direct confrontation to achieve their goals. And finding alternatives to direct confrontation is at the core of nonviolent resistance.

The words above belong to Brazilian documentary filmmaker J. Bacha. In a TED talk on the resistance of Palestinian peasant women[1], she states that structural conditions increase women's capacity and skill in the struggle for peace. This analysis by Bacha is actually valid for all the weak parties in social relations. These unequal relations, described as “structural violence” by J. Galtung[2], who is prominent in peace studies, teach the weak side to avoid direct conflict. Because in case of direct conflict, unequal power relations often lead the weak side to failure. In this sense, structural violence provides the weaker sides of social conflicts with new skills such as finding sideways, creating alternatives, and using multiple tools and methods.

Nonviolent social mobilization mainly refers to civil society actors in peacebuilding work. As Bacha reminds us, civil society activities focused on women and gender have undeniable potential in peacebuilding. This article explores the transboundary potential of gender in the peacebuilding endeavors of civil society actors in Turkey. 

Scope of Peacebuilding

In order to evaluate this potential, it is useful to first touch on the scope of peacebuilding. Considering the limitations of the article, let's include only two names that have an important place in peace studies. J. P. Lederach, in his book Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies[3], argues that social peace efforts cannot yield results without an inclusive process. The conflicts that emerged in the post-Cold War world are mostly based on intra-state identity. Mostly located at the peripheries of the global system in terms of socio-economic and socio-political; Such conflicts that take place in countries struggling with problems such as poverty, inequality, and underdevelopment create deep divisions in society on both vertical and horizontal planes[4]. Resolution of such conflicts requires building an infrastructure for reconciliation with a long-term perspective. These infrastructure works, which should include different social layers, should, on the one hand, strengthen the sources of consensus within the society, on the other hand, maximize external contributions. In this sense, the “building of the house of peace”, according to Lederach, requires a multi-actor and multi-action structure that aims to achieve and maintain reconciliation. [5]

Like Lederach, J. Galtung suggests that we consider peace as a multi-actor, multidimensional, and inclusive social transformation with the concepts he developed. Galtung builds his approach, which he calls “transformation through conflict”, on six elements: (1) culture of peace, (2) peace structure, (3) mediation, (4) peacebuilding, (5) non-violence, and (6) recovery[6].  If these elements come true, the six core tasks of peace work can be accomplished. Three of these refer to “negative peace”: (1) the absence of direct violence by the military or any other actor; (2) the absence of structural violence from economic, political, or cultural structures that affect large populations; and (3) finally, the absence of cultural violence that justifies both forms of violence. The remaining three mandates express “positive peace” beyond nonviolence: direct, structural, and cultural peace. Direct peace means the exchange of mutual good and services rather than violence. Structural peace requires the building of sustainable structures under an equitable economy and an equitable political regime based on reciprocity, equal rights, benefits, and dignity. Finally, cultural peace refers to the affirmation and dissemination of direct and structural peace as norms and values in social life. [7]

In summary, conflict resolution and peacebuilding cannot be reduced to stopping or ending armed conflicts, contrary to popular belief. There is no short-term and easy solution to the social problem in question, it is necessary to target and plan a long-term and highly complex social transformation. Conflict transformation and peace-building cannot be reduced directly to the actions of the conflicting parties, nor can it be achieved by the actions of political actors alone. It is possible through a multi-faceted, multi-layered, and multi-actor social mobilization, both from the bottom up and from the top down. In these multiple mobilizations, civil society actors can play a vital role in conflict resolution and social transformation.

Civil Society and Peacebuilding

There are several studies on the concrete roles that Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) can play in peacebuilding[8]. However, we can include two approaches here, one from field experience and the other from theory. Between 1990 and 2007, 73 of the 102 conflict cases took place in different countries on different continents such as Afghanistan, Angola, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bangladesh, Cambodia, East Timor, El Salvador, Georgia, Indonesia, Iraq, Israel-Palestine, Kosovo, Nepal emerged as a result of negotiations. There are 441 legal documents issued throughout these negotiations. Examining these documents within the framework of peace agreements, civil society, and participatory democracy, C. Bell and C. O'Rourke state that four functions of civil society come to the fore in these texts: (1) humanitarian aid, (2) agreement monitoring, (3) legitimization, support, dissemination, and (4) transition governance and institutional development (See: Figure 1).[9]

For example, in cases such as Sierra Leone, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Guatemala, Angola, El Salvador, and the Philippines, non-governmental organizations were called upon to deliver humanitarian aid to people who were damaged and displaced during the conflict. Various roles have been given to civil society actors in monitoring and detecting human rights violations in Croatia, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Philippines, Sri Lanka, and South Africa, monitoring the implementation of peace agreements. In some cases, as seen in Colombia and Somalia cases, civil society played a role in legitimizing the peace process and providing social support. In cases such as Indonesia, Burundi, Sudan, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, and Kosovo, conflict resolution and peacebuilding included democratization and the transformation of administrative structures. In these cases, civil society actors took part in the preparation of the new constitution and the realization of institutional transformations in areas such as freedom of expression and association.[10]  

Figure 1: Roles of Civil Society in Peace Processes (1990-2007)

Reference: Bell, Christine & O’Rourke, Catherine, “The People’s Peace? Peace Agreements, Civil Society, and Participatory Democracy,” International Political Science Review, 28:3 (2007), pp. 293-324.

Figure 2: A Theoretical Framework on the Roles of Civil Society in Peacebuilding

Reference: Paffenholz, Thania (Ed.) Civil Society and Peacebuilding: A Critical Assessment, Boulder, Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2010.

Secondly, we can talk about a prominent theoretical framework regarding the functions of civil society in conflict resolution and social peacebuilding. Led by T. Paffenholz and C. Spurk, the study[11], which lasted three years and included 11 countries, highlights seven functions of civil society based on debates on democracy, development, and peacebuilding. These functions are (1) protection (of citizens), (2) monitoring, (3) advocacy and public communication, (4) in-group socialization, (5) social cohesion, (6) facilitation, and (7) service delivery (See: Figure 2).[12] According to the results of the research, the functions of civil society may differ depending on the context, that is, time, place, and actors. In this sense, contextual analysis is important; All peacebuilding civil society actors should be supported and the effectiveness of peacebuilding functions should be systematically improved.[13]

Gender and Peacebuilding

Conflict resolution experiences in different times and places demonstrate the importance of gender-based mobilizations in civil society in peacebuilding.[14] For example, civil society made a significant contribution to the 2010-2018 peace process that ended more than 50 years of conflict in Colombia.[15] Women's organizations have ensured that the gender issue is one of the main agenda items of the peace process and a gender-sensitive peace agreement is formed. There were no women at the first negotiating table. However, an important transformation was achieved with the efforts of women's organizations. The number of women increased over time, both within the government and the delegation of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia - People's Army (FARC-EP), and a gender subcommittee was established as part of the negotiations. It was ensured that 122 measures including a gender perspective were included in the six main reform headings of the peace agreement. In addition, women's organizations ensured that some arrangements for confronting the past and building justice within the scope of the peace agreement were expanded to include acts of sexual violence.[16]

Again, the social mobilization of women made an important contribution to the Northern Ireland peace process, which is relatively well known to critical civil society actors in Turkey. Women's mobilization in the civil sphere has increased women's political participation. Both the participation and representation of women in political parties increased and women established their own parties. Women's civil initiatives to end peace and violence have turned into a women's party, the Women's Coalition. The Women's Coalition was mainly mobilized around the function of “conflict-sensitive social cohesion/intergroup social cohesion”,[17] as conceptualized by Paffenholz and Spurk. The Women's Coalition, which was established with the partnership of the members of the conflicting sides of the divided society, made small “p” politics over daily problems such as poverty, health, child and elderly care, instead of big “P” politics. Bringing the women and children of the divided society together and enabling them to work on common platforms; It has pioneered many civil initiatives such as providing health and shelter support to women who are victims of conflict, humanizing the conflict by increasing the visibility of the victims with such services, preventing violence directly, and recording violence.

The Women's Coalition, which was designed to work in a divided society and led by two women, one Protestant and the other Catholic, made the most important contribution to the Northern Ireland peace process to bring the voices of women and women to the peace table. While only one woman participated in the negotiation processes until the 1990s and women's problems and voices were not heard, the Women's Coalition built a kind of “common political space” with the participation of women from different social groups, with the capacity to speak to everyone, and participated directly in the negotiation processes with two representatives. With all these efforts, they provided the opening of discussion areas for women's problems, the empowerment of women, and their participation in peace negotiations. In addition to women's issues, the Women's Coalition made it possible to address the issue of equality in a broader framework beyond religious distinctions. For example, they made sure that the issues of “unified education” where Catholic and Protestant children could study together, and “mixed housing” were included in the Good Friday Agreement.[18]

Finally, women played a crucial role in the Philippines/Bangsamoro experience, which can be seen as one creative and innovative peace process.[19] T. Q. Deles, a civil society activist who later served as the minister overseeing the peace process on behalf of the Philippines government, underlines the five main dynamics that ended the 40-year conflict in the Philippines, where the peace agreement granting extensive autonomy to the Bangsamoro region was adopted in the January 2019 referendum: “( 1) the presence of third parties, (2) the involvement of many people, (3) an increased negotiation design, (4) the participation of civil society and the public, and (5) the participation and leadership of women.”[20]

Civil Society in Turkey

It can be said that there is a “strong state, weak civil society” structure in Turkey. As a reflection of this structure, the number of non-governmental organizations working in the fields of rights, law, democracy, and human rights is very limited, aside from dire issues such as the Kurdish conflict.

As can be seen in Figure 3, the majority of the associations (68.73%) that form the backbone of civil society actors are institutions operating in the fields of professional solidarity, sports, and religious services. Out of a total of 121,305 associations, the number of associations working and advocating for rights is only 1,528 (1.26%).

Figure 3: Number of Associations by Field of Activity, 2022

Reference: Derneklerin Faaliyet Alanlarına Göre Dağılımı (, (Distribution of Associations by Field of Activity), accessed: 22.06.2022. (Translator’s Note: Vertically to the left, from top to bottom, the associations' fields of activity: Professional and Solidarity; Sports; Performing Religious Services; Education and research; Culture, Art and Tourism; Humanitarian aid; Keeping Social Values Alive; Health; Environment, Natural Life, Animal Protection; Individual and social development; Zoning, urbanism and development; Rights and advocacy; Associations for the Disabled; Thought-based; Support to public institutions and personnel; Food, Agriculture, Livestock; Solidarity with the Turks abroad; Cooperation with international communities; Relatives of martyrs and veterans; For the elderly and children; Children; Unknown)

A similar distribution table applies to foundations. When we look at the sectoral distribution of the activities of nearly 6,000 foundations in Turkey in 2020, only 1,312 (3.93%) of the 33,390 activities in total were related to the field of “law, human rights, democracy”.

Figure 4: Distribution of Foundation Activities on a Sectoral Basis, 2020

Reference: Yeni Vakıflar - T.C. Vakıflar Genel Müdürlüğü (, (New Foundations - T.R. General Directorate of Foundations), accessed: 22.06.2022. (Translator’s Note: Vertically to the left, from top to bottom, Agriculture, Livestock; Sport; Socio-cultural, History; Social Support; Social Service; Arts; Health; Assistance to Staff; Vocational Education; Development; Law, Human rights, Democracy; Education; Other; Environment; Science, Technology)

In addition to this general weakness, when we look at the position of civil society actors on the Kurdish issue, it is seen that the majority of these actors generally have positions focused on the state and power. In the report titled Non-Governmental Organizations in the 2013-2015 Resolution Process, which was prepared based on interviews with 48 NGO representatives and 3 experts operating in the cities of Ankara, Istanbul, Diyarbakir and Van, a representative from an NGO which stands out with conservative and Islamic values summarizes this situation in the following words:

“When we come here to the West … Their view of the Southeast issue has always been state-oriented. That is, it has become state-centred. The West looks at the state first; what does the state say, what is the state's position here, it positions itself accordingly. […] NGOs are always subject to inspection, NGOs in Turkey are subject to control. It’s OK. They are very well controlled financially. But non-governmental organizations are also politically controlled. […] (Civil) formation is always indexed to something, to power and the state in political matters. But it is a full non-governmental organization on social and cultural issues..”[21]   

While NGOs working in areas such as rights, law, democracy, and human rights have a very limited place in civil society studies in Turkey, there is a strong ghettoization tendency among these actors. There are three types of ghettoisation, geographical, political and sectoral, among rights-based NGOs that have a significant potential in peacebuilding in Turkey. On the one hand, as a reflection of the social division around the Kurdish issue, there are walls that are not easy to overcome between the Kurdish geography and the NGOs operating in the rest of the country. On the other hand, due to political polarization, each political neighborhood has its own civic space, and the partnerships between these areas are negligible. Worse still, civil society actors are in the shadow of the political establishment, and in this sense, their potential to transform politics is quite low. Finally, civil society actors living in geographical and political ghettos are also in a sectoral ghettoization in their own neighborhoods. Institutions that carry out specific activities in key areas such as women, gender, children, poverty and development have a low capacity to establish multidimensional and inclusive collaborations and partnerships among themselves.[22]

Women's Quest for Peace

Rights-based civil society efforts for the resolution of the Kurdish conflict started mainly in the 1990s. In order to heal the wounds of conflicts, civil society initiatives based on the solidarity of victims and around rights violations in areas such as human rights, migration, disappearances, detainees and convicts, freedom of expression have diversified and strengthened after the 2000s. Although there are many reasons for the revival after the 2000s, especially the start of the European Union (EU) membership process and the increasing search for peace after 1999 were effective. 

In the 1990s, these efforts included recording the consequences of violence and providing support to victims of conflict (legal, medical, psychological, material, etc.). In addition, as seen in the example of the Saturday Mothers, a collective memory of the different faces of the Kurdish issue was built. In the 2000s, these efforts diversified to include areas such as gender, poverty alleviation and development, culture and art, media and communication, production; and functions such as mediation and facilitation, public communication and advocacy, disseminating a culture of peace, and social cohesion. 

Gender-oriented mobilizations for peacebuilding mainly started with the associations between the Kurdish Women's Movement (KWM) and different women's/feminist movements. The first contacts between the KWM and different women's/feminist movements began in the 1990s, albeit limited and conflictual. And especially with the 2000s, relations that broke the political and geographical ghettos and provided mutual transformation developed.[23] Both the historical legacy of this “conflict-solidarity relationship”[24] and the unique characteristics of the civil society movement in this field made gender-focused civil society mobilization one of the most crucial areas -besides the human rights movement- which has the potential to cross borders/ghettos in peace-oriented efforts in Turkey. [25]

The campaign “Against War, Nationalism, Racism: Don't Touch My Friend”[26] launched in 1994, mostly by women from the socialist tradition; The Saturday Mothers, who came together for the first time on Saturday, May 27, 1995 in Galatasaray Square in Istanbul for their relatives who were lost in custody and who fell victim to unsolved political murders, and continue their struggle with various interruptions, are among the first activities that form the basis of these cross-border partnerships.[27] Although Saturday Mothers were not a gender-focused meeting, they were able to convey the demand for peace to the society through Mothers, and received the support of non-Kurdish women, especially from the left/socialist community. The Women's Permanent Platform for Peace, established in the early 2000s; Amargi magazine, which was published between 2006-2016 and brought Kurdish and non-Kurdish feminist women together; KAMER[28], who has been working mainly in the Kurdish geography since 1996, has also established a lively cooperation with the feminists in the west side of Turkey; Ankara Women's Platform, founded in 2006 with the leadership of women from the Feminist Movement of Turkey (FMofT), and Women's Initiative for Peace (WıfP)[29], founded in 2009; The Socialist Feminist Collective which was active in 2008-2015 and the LGBTI Peace Initiative[30] established in 2015 should be particularly noted. In this period, political parties as well as civil society areas such as associations, initiatives, collectives, campaigns and platforms became the main places of engagement of gender-oriented civil society actors. 

Discussing the relationship between different women's movements/feminist movements in Turkey for the period 2002-2018, and focusing on the concepts of “solidarity” emphasizing partnerships between women and “alliance” emphasizing differences, İ. A. Küçükkırca[31] states that despite the splits and contradictions/tensions in the east/west axis, a contact and dialogue has been established between the KWM and the other five main women's movements/feminist movements. Based on interviews with 37 activists from Diyarbakir, Ankara, Istanbul and Izmir, the research concluded that “feminists have become a bridge between women's groups in Turkey and Kurdish women”.[32] Compared to other groups, KWM developed a relationship of alliance with FMofT on the differences of the Kurdish region, as well as a relationship of solidarity with other women, and provided meetings at different venues and platforms. However, they only developed an alliance with the Socialist Women (SW) and, to a lesser extent, the LGBTIQ+ movement. On the other hand, they had limited contact and dialogue with Religious Women/Conservative Feminist Women (RW/CFW) on the basis of alliance. The encounters between the KWM and the highly representative Republican Feminist Women (RFW) were limited to indirect meetings only in petitions involving solidarity around the common problems of women and on large platforms. These relations, which could not turn into a mass movement[33] and socialize the peace efforts in this sense, as Küçükkırca underlined, while they sprout in times of peace, they faded during periods of conflict.[34]

Table 1: The Relations of the Kurdish Women's Movement with the Women's/Feminist Movements in Turkey






Contact Places





Platforms, Campaigns, Associations, Initiatives, Collectives, Parties





Parties, Platforms, Campaigns, Associations, Initiatives, Collectives

LGBTİQ+ Movement




Platforms, Campaigns, Associations, Initiatives, Collectives





Platforms, Campaigns, Associations, Initiatives, Collectives





Campaigns, Associations, Platforms

Reference: Küçükkırca, İclal Ayşe, İttifak, Dayanışma ve Çelişki Kavramları Işığında Türkiye Kadın/Feminist Hareketler (Women/Feminist Movements in Turkey in the Light of the Concepts of Alliance, Solidarity and Contradiction), Diyarbakır: DİSA Publications, 2018, p. 46.

The “alliances” established between the KWM and different women's/feminist movements, which express the relationship between women based on their differences rather than commongrounds, can be considered as peace initiatives aimed at solving the Kurdish issue. In this sense, the relations established today, although limited to groups other than the RFW, which are largely represented within the Republican People's Party (CHP), and even though they sprout mostly in the solution processes, show that civil initiatives in the field of women and gender have a crucial potential for peacebuilding. However, as noted by Paffenholz, who conducted 11 case studies, civil society can play a supportive, rather than a decisive role in peace processes.[35] Relationships and bridges that are revived in dialogue and negotiation processes are often destroyed in times of conflict. The table in Turkey also confirms this situation. The cooperation and partnership ground created by gender-focused civil society efforts during periods of relative non-conflict in Turkey in the 2000s has largely disintegrated with the end of the Resolution Process and the State of Emergency administration, especially after 2015-2016.[36] In the words of H. Çağlayan, “the roads opened by digging wells with a needle remained under ditches, blockades and demolition.”[37]

The partial positive differentiation in the field of gender in the establishment of cross-border partnerships in the field of civil society can be attributed to three main dynamics. The first of these is the critical role played by the KWM in carrying the gender equality struggle across Turkey into the political and social arena. KWM, which emerged from the mainstream Kurdish politics in the 1990s and transcended the Kurdish issue in the 2000s, made Kurdish women's voices heard strongly in the Kurdish and Turkish society and transformed them into a collective political subject.[38] In addition, it turned into a mass movement and had an impact on Turkey. Besides mass mobilization, with innovations such as women's participation in politics on a local and central scale, female leaders, quota and co-chairmanship, the KWM has become the most powerful face of mainstream Kurdish politics that can speak beyond its borders to the whole of Turkey. The weakness of the feminist movement in Turkey in the early periods and its inability to become a mass movement, however, as a women's movement with a high representative power in the 2000s, the KWM brought the demand for gender equality to the field of political and social struggle, in addition to the Kurdish issue, with an effective and mass mobilization, It strengthened the feminist movement and created a platform for partnership in the field of gender that transcends political and geographical ghettos.[39] Especially after the forced migration, the increasing mass power and political mobilization of the KWM in metropolises, especially in Istanbul, made a great contribution to the visibility of the women and gender-oriented struggle beyond the Kurdish issue.[40] It should be noted that the relationship it established with different women's movements and feminist movements in Turkey on independent platforms was influential in the transformation of the KWM into an autonomous and founding component in mainstream Kurdish politics.[41]

Secondly, gender-focused civil society mobilization is an area where the state's direction and influence is more limited and critical approaches to the state are stronger compared to other civil society studies. This distance from the state facilitated cross-border partnerships and paved the way for some – albeit limited – initiatives for peacebuilding.

Finally, it can be said that in gender-focused civil society studies, political engagements are limited and there is a stronger critical mind compared to other fields. The multiple forms of violence that women from different political neighborhoods are exposed to in Turkey and their commonality, the power of male-dominance within each political movement, and the existence of intra-organizational gender equality efforts have accumulated a potential to overcome the political and geographical ghettos in the area in question.


[1] Bacha, Julia, “How women wage conflict without violence,” TED: Ideas Worth Spreading, August 2016,, accessed: 09.06.2022.

[2] Galtung, Johan, Peace by Peaceful Means: Peace and Conflict, Development and Civilization, London, SAGE Publication, 1996, pp. 198-210.

[3] Lederach, John Paul, Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies, Washington, D.C., United States Institute of Peace Press, 1999, p. 39.

[4] Lederach, Ibid., pp. 11-14.

[5] Lederach, Ibid., p. xvi.

[6] Galtung, Johan, Çatışmaları Aşarak Dönüştürmek: Çatışma Çözümüne Giriş, (Transcend and Transform: An Introduction to Conflict Work), Ankara, International Strategic Research Organization (USAK) Publications 2012.

[7] Galtung, 1996, pp. 2, 32, 198-210; Galtung, Johan, “Introduction: peace by peaceful conflict transformation – the TRANSCEND approach,”, in, Charles Webel & Johan Galtung (Eds.), Handbook of Peace and Conflict Studies, London: Routledge, 2007, pp. 14-32.

[8] Spurk, Christoph, “Understanding Civil Society,” in, Thania Paffenholz (ed.) Civil Society and Peacebuilding: A Critical Assessment, Boulder, Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2010, 03-27; Edward, Michael, Civil Society, Cambridge, UK: Polity, 2004, pp. 3-71; Barnes, Catherine, “Civil Society and Peacebuilding: Mapping Functions in Working for Peace,” The International Spectator: Italian Journal of International Affairs, 44:1 (2009), 131-147; Barnes, Catherine, Agents for Change: Civil Society Roles in Preventing War & Building Peace, Amsterdam: European Centre for Conflict Prevention, 2006; Quaker Council for European Affairs (QCEA), Building Peace Together: a practical resource, Brussels: QCEA, 2018; Democratic Progress Institute (DPI), “Çatışma Çözümünde Sivil Toplumun Rolü” (“The Role of Civil Society in Conflict Resolution”), Democratic Progress Institute, Roundtable Meeting Report, London, 01 March 2014; Kilmurray, Avila, A Pot Pourri of Civil Society Action for Conflict Transformation and Peacebuilding, London: Democratic Progress Institute (DPI), 2013; Democratic Progress Institute, Roundtable Meeting: Çatışma Çözümünde Uluslararası Deneyimlerden Çıkarılan Dersler (Lessons from International Experience in Conflict Resolution), Democratic Progress Institute (DPI), Ankara, 28-30 September 2018; Democratic Progress Institute (DPI), Çatışma Çözümünde Filipinler Deneyimi Konulu Karşılaştırmalı Çalışma Ziyareti Raporu (Comparative Study Visit Report on Philippines Experience in Conflict Resolution), London: Democratic Progress Institute, 2016.

[9] Bell, Christine & O’Rourke, Catherine, “The People’s Peace? Peace Agreements, Civil Society, and Participatory Democracy,” International Political Science Review, 28:3 (2007), pp. 293-324.

[10] Bell & O’Rourke, Ibid. 

[11] Paffenholz, Thania (Ed.) Civil Society and Peacebuilding: A Critical Assessment, Boulder, Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2010.

[12] Paffenholz, Thania & Spurk, Christoph, “A Comphrehensive Analytical Framwork,” in, Paffenholz, Thania (Ed.) Civil Society and Peacebuilding: A Critical Assessment, Boulder, Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2010, pp. 65-76.

[13] Paffenholz, Thania, “Conclusion,” in, Paffenholz, Thania (Ed.) Civil Society and Peacebuilding: A Critical Assessment, Boulder, Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2010, pp. 425-430.  

[14] Daşlı, Güneş, Alıcı, Nisan ve Flader, Ulrike, Kadınların Barış Mücadelesinde Dünya Deneyimleri: Sırbistan, Kosova, Sri Lanka ve Suriye (World Experiences of Women in Struggle for Peace: Serbia, Kosovo, Sri Lanka and Syria) , Ankara: Demokrasi Barış ve Alternatif Politikalar (DEMOS) Araştırma Merkezi (Democracy, Peace and Alternative Policies (DEMOS) Research Center), 2017.

[15] Caicedo, Luz Piedad, “Juan Manuel Santos Hükümeti ile Kolombiya Devrimci Silahlı Güçleri – Halk Ordusu (Farc – Ep) Arasındaki Barış Sürecine Sivil Toplumdan Kadınların Katılımı” ( “The Participation of Women from Civil Society in the Peace Process Between the Government of Juan Manuel Santos and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia – People's Army (Farc – Ep)”), Çatışma Çözümünde Uluslararası STK Deneyimleri Çalıştayı (International NGO Experiences Workshop in Conflict Resolution), Barış Vakfı (Peace Foundation), İstanbul, 03.11.2018.

[16] For an in-depth study of the Colombian peace process from a gender perspective, see.: Daşlı, Güneş, Alıcı, Nisan & Figueras Julia Poch, Barış ve Toplumsal Cinsiyet: Kolombiya Barış Süreci (Peace and Gender: The Colombian Peace Process), Ankara: Demokrasi Barış ve Alternatif Politikalar (DEMOS) Araştırma Merkezi (Democracy, Peace and Alternative Policies (DEMOS) Research Center), 2018.

[17] Paffenholz & Spurk, Ibid.

[18] Kadın Koasliyonu’nun Kuzey İrlanda barış sürecine katkısına dair birinci ağızdan daha detaylı bilgiler içn bkz.: Democratic Progress Institute, Barış Süreçlerinde ve Çatışma Çözümünde Kadınların Rolü: Kuzey İrlanda Karşılaştırmalı İnceleme Çalışması Yuvarlak Masa Toplantı Raporu, Democratic Progress Institute (DPI), Ankara, 29 temmuz 2017.

[19] Hafıza Merkezi, “Söyleşi: Filipinler’den barış inşasında yenilikçi bir örnek,” Hakikat Adalet Hafıza Merkezi, 28/06/2018,, erişim tarihi: 15.02.2019. (Memory Center, “Interview: An innovative peacebuilding example from the Philippines,” Truth Justice Memory Center, 28/06/2018,, accessed : 15.02.2019.)

[20] Democratic Progress Institute, Yuvarlak Masa Toplantısı: Çatışma Çözümünde Uluslararası Deneyimlerden Çıkarılan Dersler (Roundtable: Lessons from International Experience in Conflict Resolution), Democratic Progress Institute (DPI), Ankara, 28-30 September 2018, p. 151.

[21] Çiçek, Cuma, 2013-2015 Çözüm Süreci’nde Sivil Toplum Kuruluşları (Non-Governmental Organizations in the 2013-2015 Resolution Process ), İstanbul: Barış Vakfı (Peace Foundation), 2017, pp. 26-27.

[22] Çiçek, Ibid., pp. 27-32. 

[23] For a critical analysis of these boundaries, see: Işık, Ruken, “Türkiye Kürt Kadın Hareketi Tarihi ve Feminist Hareketle İlişkiler: Dekolonyal Bir Feminizme Doğru”, (“The History of the Kurdish Women's Movement in Turkey and Relations with the Feminist Movement: Towards a Decolonial Feminism”) in, Feryal Saygılıgil and Nacide Berber (Ed.), Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi Düşünce –  Feminizm (Political Thought in Modern Turkey – Feminism), İstanbul: İletişim, 2020, pp. 273-292; Gölsel, Nisa, “Feminizm, Sosyal Bilimler ve Mitoloji Tartışmaları Ekseninde Jineoloji” (“Jineology Axis of Feminism, Social Sciences and Mythology Debates”), in, Feryal Saygılıgil andNacide Berber (Ed.), Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi Düşünce –  Feminizm (Political Thought in Modern Turkey – Feminism), İstanbul: İletişim, 2020, pp. 293-301.

[24] Gölsel, Ibid.

[25] Çiçek, Ibid., p. 40.

[26] Günaysu, Ayşe, “Savaşa, Milliyetçiliğe, Irkçılığa Karşı: Arkadaşıma Dokunma!” ( “Against War, Nationalism, Racism: Don't Touch My Friend!”), Bianet, 28 December 2014,, accessed: 25.06.2022.

[27] Eralp, Feride, “Barış Talebi Feminist Bir Talep midir?: BİKG Deneyimi İçinden Yakın Tarihe Bir Bakış” (“Is the Demand for Peace a Feminist Demand?: A View to Recent History Through the Experience of WIfP)”, in, Feryal Saygılıgil and Nacide Berber (Ed.), Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi Düşünce –  Feminizm (Political Thought in Modern Turkey – Feminism), İstanbul: İletişim, 2020, pp. 302-312.

[28] Bora, Tanıl, Cereyanlar: Türkiye’de Siyasi İdeolojiler (Currents: Political Ideologies in Turkey), İstanbul: İletişim, 2017, pp. 793-800.

[29] Feride Eralp states that the Women's Initiative for Peace first gathered under the umbrella of the Human Rights Association in 1996, and then it could not turn into a long-term activity. It is stated in the Resolution Process Report prepared by the Women for Peace Initiative that it was first established in 1996. The report is open to access on the internet. See: (Microsoft Word - WEB-B\335KG report latest version) (, accessed 27.06.2022. 

[30] For a detailed analysis of the LGBTI+ Movement's peace efforts, see: Bor, Güley, Daşlı, Güneş & Alici, Nisan, Kesişen Yollardan Daralan Alanlara: Türkiye’de Kadın ve LGBTİ+ Örgütlerinin Barış Mücadelesi (From Crossing Roads to Narrowing Spaces: Women's and LGBTI+ Organizations' Struggle for Peace in Turkey), Ankara: DEMOS, 2021.

[31] For a detailed analysis of the ways in which six different women's/feminist movements in Turkey have engaged in the last two decades, see: Küçükkırca, İclal Ayşe, İttifak, Dayanışma ve Çelişki Kavramları Işığında Türkiye Kadın/Feminist Hareketler (Turkey Women/Feminist Movements in the Light of Concepts of Alliance, Solidarity and Contradiction), Diyarbakır: DİSA Publications, 2018.

[32] Küçükkırca, Ibid., p.49.

[33] The Resolution Process Report of the Women’s Initiative for Peace not only reveals the potential of gender-focused civil society work in peacebuilding, but also points to its limits in Turkey.

[34] Küçükkırca, Ibid., pp. 42-46.

[35] Paffenholz, “Conclusion,”…

[36] Bor, Güneş & Alıcı, Ibid., pp. 23-25, 40-47; Çelik, Ayşe Betül, Toplumsal Mutabakatta ve Çatışma Çözümünde Kadınların Rolü (The Role of Women in Social Consensus and Conflict Resolution), İstanbul: İstanbul Politikalar Merkezi (Istanbul Politics Center), 2018, p. 10.

[37] Çağlayan, Handan, Kürt Kadın Hareketi ve Feminist Hareketin Deneyimleri Bağlamında Barış Talebi - DEMOS Araştırma Derneği, (The Demand for Peace in the Context of the Experiences of the Kurdish Women's Movement and the Feminist Movement - DEMOS Research Association), accessed: 25.06.2022.

[38] For a detailed analysis of the emergence of the Kurdish Women's Movement in the Kurdish national liberation discourse and mobilization in the 1990s, and over time, it has transformed into a founding actor of "Kurdishness" and demanded a social transformation focused on gender equality beyond "Kurdishness", see: Çağlayan, Handan, Analar, Yoldaşlar, Tanrıçalar (MothersComrades, Goddesses), Istanbul: İletişim, 2010. For a shorter analysis on this subject, see: Işık, Ibid.

[39] Işık, Ibid.

[40] Küçükkırca, Ibid., p. 43.

[41] Küçükkırca, Ibid., p. 19.

* Sponsored by the Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung with funds of the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development of the Federal Republic of Germany. This publication or parts of it can be used by others for free as long as they provide a proper reference to the original publication. The content of the publication is the sole responsibility of Off-University. Organisation für den Frieden e.V. and does not necessarily reflect a position of RLS.

No comments here
Why not start the discussion?