Foreign Relations of the United States, 1977–1980, Volume II, Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs

336. Telegram From the Department of State to All Diplomatic and Consular Posts¹

Washington, April 1, 1980, 1821Z

85747. Inform Consuls, for Ambassadors and heads of U.S. programs. Subject: Worldwide Status and Rights of Women. Message From Secretary Vance. I deeply appreciate the response of posts to joint cirtel State/AID/ICA/Peace Corps 138588² on ways to advance the status of women as an integral element of US foreign policy. Nearly 90 percent of posts responded with thoughtful and valuable proposals which we have summarized below.

Posts submitted some 150 examples of ways they have already found to encourage host countries to recognize the rights and advance the status of women. These examples are particularly useful and timely in view of the Second World Conference of the UN Decade for Women, scheduled for July 1980 in Copenhagen,³ to which each UN member nation will send a delegation to present its own national agenda. The preparations for this conference now underway in each country offer us an opportunity to raise the question of the local status of women.

I recognize that what we do in the United States is crucial to what we can do or advocate abroad. I also recognize that the status of women is a highly sensitive issue in many countries. Furthermore, there may arise or now exist extraordinary circumstances, such as marked political instability or anti-US sentiment, when an active pursuit of enhanced women’s rights by the Country Team is not appropriate.

Recognizing these limits, there is still a wide range of opportunities for discussion, action and Country Team planning. I look to you to assure personally that your staff and relevant members of your mission consider these proposals in Embassy activities and in preparing country programs.

A. Summary of general conclusions of post responses

1. In most countries there has been at least modest and, for some, considerable progress over the last decade in advancing the rights and status of women. These rights are now widely recognized under law and by internationally approved instruments. More women are being educated and are coming to occupy more positions of influence, especially in the professions and government. New government (or private) machinery has been established in many countries to address women’s interests and responsibilities.

2. However, the implementation and enforcement of laws extending human rights to women are generally lax. In many countries, the laws themselves fail to provide women with equal civil, political and economic rights, such as those involving property, divorce, and inheritance. Inequitable rates of pay for the same work are universal, even in highly developed countries. Women everywhere predominate in menial or lower status jobs. Women are generally under-represented in such powerful bodies as labor organizations as well as cabinets, parliaments, national councils, the higher courts and large business. Even in highly modernized Western countries, traditions of male dominance persist. Rural conservatism and even conservatism of the women themselves in many countries perpetuate unjust conditions and make progress painfully slow. These attitudes are not easily eradicated, yet forces for change are reported at work almost everywhere.

3. The process of modernization, however, often affects women in adverse ways. In many LDCs women—particularly the low-income and rural women—are the primary victims of pervasive unemployment, urban migration, rapidly advancing technology, overpopulation, and the widening gap between the educated and the illiterate poor. As Embassy Ankara writes, “pressures associated with the rapid shift to an urban society have been especially acute for rural women . . . while the rise of urban middle and upper-class women have masked their problems.” The consensus is that it will take the constant, informed attention and support of host governments and citizens, of international and private organizations, to insure that women share equally in the benefits and not just the burdens of development and modernization.

4. A significant number of US missions have made sustained efforts to advance women’s status. Our joint cirtel has strengthened their position; and has sparked, renewed interest in, and generally advanced the concept of equality for women. As presented here, the number and quality of examples of success from posts and post proposals for US action should reinforce work underway and stimulate new efforts. We expect and hope that many of these initiatives will become standard practice and a foundation for policy in missions generally.

5. The following proposals and examples for Embassy action can be applied, without additional funding, by most posts, wherever located (section B). Additional proposals for developing countries are detailed separately (section C).

B. Embassy examples/proposals for diplomatic ways to encourage host countries to advance the status of women:

1. Put “our own house in order”, specifically, put more women officers in visible, responsible positions at US Embassies. As Embassy Abidjan notes: “We must first demonstrate that we have confidence in our own women officers. When host countries see a higher percentage of women in decision-making positions in our Embassies abroad, not only are they likely to imitate us, but we ourselves will stand on stronger ground in our advocacy of women’s rights.” Posts widely acknowledge the positive effect of US women in senior positions. As a Near Eastern Embassy reports, “We are a public demonstration of the equality of women, having for years past had women as diplomatic officers on our staff in a part of the world where women are unthinkable as diplomats.”

2. Show the US commitment to human rights and equality of opportunity by increasing the number and responsibility of women nationals hired locally. According to Embassy Abu Dhabi: “Assignment of women officers, as well as secretaries, and employment of Arab and non-Arab third-country women nationals in the Embassy are more obvious examples of US use of women power.”

3. Assure that the Embassy is at all times in contact with the host country’s (A) women leaders; (B) government-established bureaus/directorates of women’s affairs; (C) appropriate women’s organizations. A significant number of Embassies report designation of a special “women’s affairs officer”. From Bonn, the Ambassador writes, “I have specifically asked a member of my professional staff to follow and report on issues of importance to women as they develop here . . . and instructed my staff to express strong US support for the significant steps taken by the German Government in recent years to improve the status of women.”

4. Reassess Embassy’s own attitudes toward women nationals (A) by reviewing Embassy’s contact lists carefully “to make sure our own unconscious biases or an assumption of local biases hasn’t led us to leave out possible useful contacts because they are women” (Embassy Santiago); (B) by substituting “working dinners and luncheons for men and women” to replace “stag” functions where these are still practiced (Embassy Pretoria); and (C) inviting local women leaders to Embassy functions “for serious discussions”, not merely for social occasions (Embassy Brussels).

5. Arrange more exchanges between US and host country women individually and in groups, emphasizing the selection (A) of more women IVs (international visitors); (B) of more “top” US women as “American participants” to come to speak on US political, social and cultural issues to mixed, repeat, mixed audiences at universities, unions and at Embassy luncheons/dinners.

6. Encourage greater exchange of information on women and on women’s issues in all posts by: (A) having standard Embassy reporting include data on the local situation of women and their material contribution to host countries’ basic needs and GNP; (B) having the Ambassador take the lead in using interviews, speeches and articles to discuss US women’s status; (C) disseminating information on US women through more USICA exhibits, seminars and enlarged library collections on women, including material on women’s civil/political/economic rights, population control, child care, legal reforms, etc., and (D) stimulating cross-cultural support by putting host country women’s organizations in touch with US organizations, public and private institutions, and individuals concerned with the advancement of women.

C. Specific Embassy recommendations for developing countries.

1. Encourage host countries to arrange more training for women. Use all possible means—AID, USICA, Peace Corps, local or foreign PVOs, UN or third country agencies, private foundations. Lack of training continues as the predominant factor in women’s continued low status. Specifically, (A) expand training programs to non-traditional areas, including administration, law, labor, cooperative management; (B) make a major effort to see that women farm workers are included in all training in agricultural extension and in new farm technologies and processes; (C) to offset the frequent practice of training already advantaged women, encourage more non-formal training of low-income rural and urban women in income-producing skills.

2. Support/encourage local governments’ collection of statistical data on women—income, migration, employment/unemployment, family patterns—for use in planning development projects and in Embassy economic reports. Many LDC posts advise that lacking such data, country and US planners can make serious mistakes in program design and allocation of priorities.

3. Support/encourage surveys of women’s contribution to national food production (Embassy Bamako). Estimates indicate that from 70 percent to over 90 percent of rural women in most Third World countries engage in agriculture. However, few objective factual assessments exist of women’s material contribution to the host country’s total food supplies and GNP. Sharper studies would “raise the level of general awareness that many projects and techniques designed to increase agriculture production are based on the false premise that men do most of the agricultural work, and encourage rural development innovations designed to be implemented by women”. (Embassy Brazzaville).

4. In planning development projects, identify felt needs especially of rural women—a “rule too often neglected” (Embassy Djakarta). Embassy Bamako reports that perhaps the greatest needs include better access to wells, pumps, potable water, carts to carry water. Hauling water, often exclusively “woman’s work”, may alone take two to four hours per day. Embassy Accra concurs: “The most important single (US) step could be providing piped water or wells for each community.”

5. Encourage and where feasible plan for arranging women’s access to credit through cooperatives or otherwise, especially women farm workers, market women and artisans in handcrafts.

6. Use more effectively—and expand—Ambassadors’ self-help funds. These discretionary funds, now available to Ambassadors posted in developing countries, have “exceptional potential”, involve “minimal paper work, and (produce) speedy action” of self-help projects. Embassy Dakar urges that these funds be “constructively expanded and supplemented with additional funding especially earmarked for small projects of immediate impact on enhancing the status of women.”

7. Encourage funding of more self-help or projects by local and foreign PVOs, private foundations, UN agencies, especially where host country may be sensitive to US funding. Teaching income-earning skills is repeatedly stressed as a priority for self-help projects for both urban and rural low-income women.

8. Encourage involvement of more Peace Corps volunteers in design of development projects.

9. Use all available assistance programs of US Government. Examples: Use PL 480 funds for self-help projects; channel more Food for Peace to maternity/child care centers.

10. Help call attention to possible negative aspects of some “modernization” development programs, e.g., Embassy Banjul is attempting to help its own and host country officials “understand the social consequences” of a new river development project which will soon open vast, new areas to rice cultivation, which is traditionally women’s work. The Embassy asks: “Will men assist women in the larger rice fields, or will already overburdened women cultivators simply face a much heavier burden?” “What will be the effects on social, family structure?”

These thoughtful proposals show that many Embassies have developed a variety of diplomatic and practical strategies for encouraging the advancement of women. Although the major responsibility for carrying out some of the proposals rests ultimately in Washington, where coordination with USICA, Peace Corps and AID is already underway, Embassies and other posts clearly have a role to play. The issue of women’s rights and status is an integral part of the human rights equation. As such, it is integral to US foreign policy. The Copenhagen Conference lends new urgency and relevance to the US role.

Vance

1. Source: National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, D800165–0604. Unclassified. Drafted by Joyce, Good, and Baer; cleared by Maynes, Bleakley, Schwebel, Cheshes, Overly, Fleisher, Rizik, Seitz, Phyllis Oakley, Wales, Goott, Benedick, Barbara Thompson, Lollis, Hanley, Arvonne Fraser, Becker, Reinhardt, Jennone Walker, and Celeste; approved by Vance. The Department reprinted the telegram in an April 16 Department Notice for State, AID, USICA, and ACDA employees. (Department of State, Bureau of Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs, 1980 Subject Files, Lot 82D180, SHUM Women 1980)
2. See Document 327.
3. See Document 342.