'Rape in war is deliberate military strategy'

2010-06-25 14:40:00
Last Updated: 2010-06-25 14:46:13
Washington: Since the Second World War, the use of rape as a weapon of war has assumed strategic importance and is now a deliberate military strategy, argue researchers.

A study in the Democratic Republic of the Congo found that 16,000 rapes occurred in 2008 alone and in South Kivu province, health centres estimate that 40 women were raped in the region daily.

In the UK, 50-70 percent of female asylum applicants were raped, witnessed rape, or have a credible fear of rape.

The effects of rape and sexual violence during war also extend beyond individual victims and are economically, physically, psychologically and culturally devastating for families and communities, say study authors Coleen Kivlahan, volunteer forensic physician for HealthRight International, and Nate Ewigman from the University of Florida.

For example, in recent conflicts, rape has been used as a reward for victory in battle, a boost to troop morale, as punishment and humiliation for both men and women, to incite revenge in opposing troops, to eliminate or 'cleanse' religious or political groups and to destabilise entire communities by creating terror.

Geographical, cultural, religious, political, legal, and behavioural conditions affect the likelihood of the systematic use of rape, explain the authors.

For instance, geographically remote locations allow perpetrators to rape with impunity, while the likelihood that women will be raped, shamed and isolated is increased in cultures with strong traditions regarding virginity, marital fidelity and genital cleanliness.

Religions with strong beliefs about appropriate female clothing and behaviour also increase the risk that women will be falsely accused of adultery and raped as humiliation and punishment, they add.

The international community has mounted a considerable response to the use of rape as a weapon of war, but the authors argue that rape during armed conflict is not simply about military personnel, police or terrorists, said a HealthRight International release.

For example, before 2004, rape assailants in the Democratic Republic of the Congo were primarily affiliated with the military; however, after 2004, civilian rapes increased 17-fold while rapes by armed combatants decreased by 77 percent.

'This pattern suggests a disturbing acceptance of rape among civilians,' they conclude.

'Rape is the result of the lack of dedicated societal attention to the safety, respect, and prosperity of women in peace time as well as in war.'

These findings were published in bmj.com

http://sify.com/news/rape-in-war-is-...zoEdcicib.html

Disgusting to say the least. Unfortunately it has been rampant. Japan turned it into an organized thing by forming sex slaves last century.

unfortunately this has been going for centuries...mongols under Genghis Khan gained quite a reputation(or should I say disrepute)...but then again it could be a propoganda by western intellectuals to term the eastern mongols as "savage barbarians"......but in more recent times it was widespreas during second world war....also noteworthy that up untill second world war there were actually not many prosecutions...
it is also important to note that false or exagerrated stories can me made up to justify military excesses....eg: during 1857 ( first war of independence) war rape was used as propoganda by british colonialists to justify colonialism "white man's burden"

this is from wikipedia
source
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_rape

"To the victor go the spoils" has been a war cry for centuries, and women classed as part of the spoils of war. Furthermore war rape has been downplayed as an unfortunate but inevitable side effect of sending men to war.[6] Also, war rape has in the past been regarded as tangible reward to soldiers (which were only paid irregularly) and as a soldier's proof of masculinity and success.[10] In reference to war rape in ancient times Harold Washington argues that warfare itself is imaged as rape and the cities attacked are its victims. He argues that war rape occurs in the context of stereotypes about women and men which are part of the basic belief that violent power belongs to men and women are its victims.

Since 1949 Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention explicitly prohibits wartime rape and enforced prostitution. These prohibitions were reinforced by the 1977 Additional Protocols to the 1949 Geneva Conventions.

Viewing women as a trophy and as a sex object started since humans evolved from monkeys. When rival clans(early days) fought, the winning clan would spare the young women and take them as hostages. They were then used as breeders for the clan to grow in numbers, whether a women liked it or not. A single women would go through the barbaric treatment with a number of clan members, and for a number of years until she is dead, sterile or old.

After all we are descendant of Monkeys and so we are genetically programmed to do so.

^^^^ @ ORACLE

Bro there is rape in animals, for example Chimpanzees; leave rape Chimps are Cannibals too...same cannibalism goes for Lions when encountered with their own cubs!

I agree. But in the case of animals those are animal instincts.

From my opinion, yes a soldier do require a sex in times of war as their is a huge burden of mental frustration on the soldiers during or after a war and this situation or feeling cannot be expressed through words. It can only be realized by a soldier. And during a war I dont think that a strange women will have it with her will and the soldier is bound to rape her. He cant suppress those feelings or he will go mad.
In ancient Japan, the generals gave chance to the whole army to have sex with a woman before starting to any military operation and for this women were called specially from the order of the King.
Emotions, feelings are the same only the time had change. Now no goverment will allow such acts for the army which forces the army mens to commit rapes.
(thats my opinion so reply with patience)