Testing the Hillary Doctrine

Published date01 June 2017
DOI10.1177/1065912917698046
Date01 June 2017
Subject MatterArticles
/tmp/tmp-18qY4IvvVJPnxB/input 698046PRQXXX10.1177/1065912917698046Political Research QuarterlySaiya et al.
research-article2017
Article
Political Research Quarterly
2017, Vol. 70(2) 421 –432
Testing the Hillary Doctrine: Women’s
© 2017 University of Utah
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Rights and Anti-American Terrorism
https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912917698046
DOI: 10.1177/1065912917698046
journals.sagepub.com/home/prq
Nilay Saiya1, Tasneem Zaihra1, and Joshua Fidler1
Abstract
In her various roles as First Lady, Senator, Secretary of State, and Democratic presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton
has long maintained that the subjugation of women poses a national security threat to the United States. Clinton’s
proposition has come to be termed the “Hillary Doctrine.” Yet does this principle receive support from the empirical
record? In this paper, we offer a test of the Hillary Doctrine by analyzing if more anti-American terrorism emanates
from countries that restrict women’s rights than from countries that are not gender restrictive. Using a time series,
cross-national analysis of 156 countries from the period 1981 to 2005, our negative binomial models offer strong
support for the Hillary Doctrine and suggest that the promotion of women’s rights may well enhance the national
security of the United States with respect to terrorism. These results are robust to a wide range of changes to the
empirical research design.
Keywords
Hillary Clinton, Hillary Doctrine, terrorism, anti-Americanism, women’s rights, national security
Introduction
Give women equal rights, and entire nations are more stable
and secure. Deny women equal rights, and the instability of
The subjugation of women is a direct threat to the security of
nations is almost certain. The subjugation of women is,
the United States.
therefore, a threat to the common security of our world and
—Hillary Clinton1
to the national security of our country,
Hillary Clinton has long been a champion of international
she declared (Clinton 2010). In the final chapter of her
women’s rights, believing that the “rights of women and
memoir reflecting on her experience as Secretary of State,
girls is the unfinished business of the 21st century”
Clinton (2014, 562) wrote,
(Fuller 2014). In 1995, First Lady Clinton delivered a
landmark speech at the United Nations Fourth World
It was no coincidence that the places where women’s lives
Conference on Women in Beijing, China, in which she
were most undervalued largely lined up with the parts of the
asserted that “human rights are women’s rights and wom-
world most plagued by instability, conflict, extremism, and
en’s rights are human rights once and for all” (Clinton
poverty. This was a point lost on many of the men working
1995). She made the status of women a central concern of
across Washington’s foreign policy establishment, but over
her tenure as Secretary of State, articulating at her Senate
the years I came to view it as one of the most compelling
confirmation hearings her belief that women’s rights
arguments for why standing up for women and girls was not
should be “central to our foreign policy, not as adjunct or
just the right thing to do but also smart and strategic . . . this
was a cause that cut to the heart of our national security.
auxiliary or in any way lesser than all of the other issues
that we have to confront” (Clinton 2009). She made simi-
The idea that women’s rights and American national
lar statements in her campaign to become America’s
interests might be connected made its way into official
forty-fifth president.
policy documents during Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of
Recently, Clinton has taken the issue of women’s
State, including the inaugural Quadrennial Diplomacy
rights further, considering it an issue of national security
rather than just a normative concern. At the 2010
TEDWomen Conference in Washington, D.C., she 1State University of New York, NY, USA
unequivocally stated that the empowerment of women
and girls was not just a humanitarian and moral issue but
Corresponding Author:
Nilay Saiya, The College at Brockport, State University of New York,
a security issue as well—one with direct implications for
Brockport, 209A Hartwell Hall, Brockport, NY 14420, USA.
international and U.S. national security:
Email: nsaiya@brockport.edu

422
Political Research Quarterly 70(2)
and Development Review of 2010 that stated, “The pro-
The quantitative literature that has arisen on women’s
tection and empowerment of women and girls is key to
rights and conflict can be grouped into three sets of stud-
the foreign policy and security of the United States” (U.S.
ies. The first deals with the effects of gender inequality on
Department of State and U.S. Agency for International
interstate conflict. These studies focus on how gender
Development 2010). The theme of women’s empower-
inequality within states creates norms of discrimination
ment and national security also appeared in the 2010
that manifest in international belligerency, leading to
National Security Strategy of the United States—a docu-
higher levels of interstate conflict (Caprioli 2000; 2003;
ment that broadly reflects the president’s approach to
Caprioli and Boyer 2001; Harders 2011; Hudson et al.
major national security concerns: “Experience shows that
2012; Melander 2005). For example, Caprioli (2000)
countries are more peaceful and prosperous when women
found that higher levels of gender equality lead to lower
are accorded full and equal rights and opportunity. When
levels of militarism in international disputes. Melander
those rights and opportunities are denied, countries often
(2005) and Harders (2011) found similar results. Caprioli
lag behind” (The White House 2010). In these policy
and Boyer (2001) showed that states with higher gender
documents, the United States officially committed itself
equality, measured by percentage of female leaders,
to promoting women’s rights in the quest to achieve inter-
experience lower levels of severity in international con-
national peace and stability.
flicts. Finally, Caprioli (2003) and Caprioli and Trumbore
These statements explicitly linking women’s rights to
(2006) found that states with higher gender equality are
national and international security have come to be known
less aggressive and less likely to use force first in interna-
as the “Hillary Doctrine.” Although a growing body of lit-
tional disputes.
erature supports a key part of the Doctrine—that countries
Not only do peaceful domestic gender relations have a
that support women’s rights tend to be more stable, secure,
beneficial impact on external state behavior, research has
and prosperous—a crucial component of Clinton’s claim
also shown that states that respect women’s rights also
remains untested—that the empowerment of women
tend to have fewer problems with respect to domestic
makes the United States more secure. In this article, we
conflict. As argued by Tickner (1992), gendered struc-
propose to test this claim by examining if countries that
tural hierarchies sustain domestic societal norms of
repress women are more likely to produce terrorists who
oppression and violence by creating a milieu that justifies
threaten American national security. We find strong sup-
the widespread use of force. Several studies have shown
port for this assertion.
that higher levels of gender inequality lead to a greater
The article proceeds in five parts. The next section dis-
likelihood of state violence and intrastate conflict.
cusses the extant literature on the relationship between
Caprioli (2005) found a strong link between gender
women’s rights and conflict, noting that no study has yet
inequality, measured by fertility rate and female repre-
tested the effect of women’s rights with respect to
sentation in the labor force, and intrastate conflict from
American national security specifically. The third section
1960 to 2001. She discovered that the likelihood of inter-
explores how three forms of gender repression—political,
nal conflict is nearly thirty times greater in states where
social, and economic—can create conditions that produce
only 10 percent of women are represented in the labor
anti-American terrorism. The fourth discusses the data
force compared with states where 40 percent of women
and methods used in the study, while the fifth presents the
enjoy the ability to work outside the home. Similarly,
results. The concluding section situates the argument and
Melander (2005) found that countries marked by gender
findings in the context of American foreign policy.
equality, measured either in terms of female representa-
tion in parliament or the ratio of female-to-male higher
Gender Inequality and Violence
education attainment, experienced lower levels of intra-
state armed conflict. Hudson et al. (2012) discovered a
After Hillary Clinton delivered her landmark speech in
statistically significant and substantively important rela-
Beijing, academics began to take the possibility that
tionship between the physical security of women and
women and their role in society might have an impact on
domestic state security. Furthermore, they found that gen-
a country’s national security more seriously, testing these
der inequality was a better indicator of state security and
claims through statistical analysis (Reiter 2015). Much of
peacefulness than measures of...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT