Weaponizing Gender: Militarized Masculinity and Sexual Violence in Russia’s War on Ukraine

Image Generated by AI

Introduction

Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022, the global community has been confronted with overwhelming evidence of systematic atrocities committed against Ukrainian civilians. Among these atrocities, sexual violence stands out as a key method through which Russian forces perpetrate terror and subjugation. Conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) is not a new phenomenon in warfare; however, its apparent scale and orchestration in Ukraine call for urgent scrutiny and an expanded theoretical lens.

This article undertakes a multifaceted analysis of gender-based sexual violence (GBSV) in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. It situates ongoing abuses within core concepts of international criminal law, namely war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Furthermore, it brings feminist international relations (IR) and sociological theories—particularly ideas surrounding militarized masculinity  and sexual objectification — to bear on the discussion. In doing so, the article explores how deeply ingrained gender hierarchies and violence-oriented military cultures contribute to widespread sexual violence. Ultimately, it contends that the perpetration of these acts by Russian forces might meet the legal thresholds for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and potentially genocide, especially when combined with explicit rhetoric aimed at the eradication of Ukrainian identity.

Defining Gender-Based Sexual Violence

Gender-based sexual violence (GBSV) involves sexual acts carried out without voluntary consent, predominantly targeting women and girls because of their gender identity. If the violence arises from motives other than gender, it would not be classified as GBSV. Feminist theorists like Liz Kelly (1988) advance the “continuum of sexual violence,” scholars recognize that everyday inequalities—including harassment and intimidation—can escalate into severe violations during conflict. War amplifies patriarchal norms by legitimizing male dominance and reinforcing the notion that women’s bodies are territory to be conquered. These deeply ingrained biases intensify the scope and cruelty of violence, rendering GBSV a strategic tool in undermining and terrorizing targeted populations. International criminal law provides three principal legal frameworks for categorizing wartime sexual violence:

1. War Crimes (Rome Statute Article 8): Rape and other sexual offenses are prosecutable as war crimes when linked to international or non-international armed conflict.

2. Crimes Against Humanity (Article 7): Sexual violence constitutes a crime against humanity if committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack on a civilian population.

3. Genocide (Article 6): Requires the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group; sexual violence can further these aims by inflicting serious bodily or mental harm or preventing births within the group .

These legal categories often overlap, and conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) can simultaneously qualify as war crimes and crimes against humanity. It may also constitute genocide if there is clear intent to partially or wholly annihilate a targeted group. To meet this threshold, prosecutors must establish both the widespread scale of sexual violence and that it was driven by explicit animus—such as ethnically or nationally motivated hatred—rather than solely as a means of domination or tactical control. This distinction is critical, as genocide requires proving that the violence was not just systematic but deliberately aimed at group eradication.

Historically, international law classified rape as a “crime against honor,” framing it as a violation of morality rather than recognizing its profound physical and psychological harm. This definition minimized the agency of survivors and failed to address sexual violence as a deliberate weapon of war. The landmark rulings of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) in 1998 marked a turning point. These decisions redefined sexual violence as a prosecutable war crime and crime against humanity. Additionally, they established that, when committed with intent to destroy a group, it constitutes genocide.

Gender Disparities and Socio-Cultural Ramifications

Although men can be victims of sexual violence, data consistently indicates that women disproportionately suffer its consequences in armed conflict. Patriarchal norms consider women the symbolic and biological bearers of community, exploiting the stereotypes of “dominant” men and “vulnerable” women to instil terror and break community cohesion. Feminist scholars argue that militarized masculinity encourages viewing women as objects or “conquerable territory,” crystallizing and justifying environments in which crimes like rape become an extension of battlefield tactics. Militarized masculinity, a concept elaborated by Political theorists such as Cynthia Enloe, underscores how military structures reinforce hegemonic masculine values—aggression, dominance, and control — thereby facilitating sexual atrocities as a tool for subjugation and humiliation.

Women face distinct repercussions. Forced pregnancy, for instance, can stigmatize survivors within patriarchal societies. In some communities, sexual violence survivors’ risk ostracization, further diminishing the group’s capacity to rebuild. This dynamic amplifies the destructive potential of rape, transforming it into a weapon that not only harms individual survivors but also threatens the social and demographic fabric of an entire community.

The psychological toll of CRSV is immense, often manifesting as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, dissociation, or suicidal ideation. When rapes occur in public or involve family members as forced witnesses, the communal trauma multiplies, eroding trust and stability. This fracturing of social bonds aligns with militarized masculinity’s strategic goals: to annihilate collective resilience and pave the way for more effective occupation or control.

Such deliberate terror extends beyond immediate physical damage, eroding cultural and familial structures over time. Because many affected communities also maintain patriarchal norms, victims may confront double stigmatization: beyond the trauma of assault, they endure ostracism, shame, or blame tied to entrenched beliefs about “purity” and “honor.” This intersection of external aggression and internal patriarchal pressures can persist for generations, fuelling ongoing marginalization and communal fractures. Ultimately, conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) not only serves as a short-term tactic of domination but also cements oppressive hierarchies in post-conflict scenarios, undermining collective recovery and reinforcing ingrained power imbalances.

Difficulties Towards Accountability and Redress

Ukraine, alongside international partners, is actively working to ensure justice for survivors of conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV). Government bodies, including the Ukrainian Prosecutor General’s Office and organizations like La Strada Ukraine, collect survivor testimonies, while the International Criminal Court (ICC) investigates potential war crimes and crimes against humanity. A significant domestic step is Ukraine’s draft law No. 10132, introduced in October 2023, which aims to formalize survivors’ legal status, provide reparations, and offer psychosocial and legal support. Additionally, a May 2024 pilot project provides emergency financial aid and counselling services.  However, In Trump’s America, shifting geopolitical dynamics and the administration’s inconsistent approach to international justice may undermine global efforts to prosecute Russian war crimes. The U.S.'s historical leadership in international criminal accountability could weaken if domestic policies prioritize realpolitik over human rights enforcement. Russia's geopolitical leverage, particularly its veto power at the UN Security Council, further obstructs legal action, enabling impunity for conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) and other atrocities. Strategic alliances, economic interests, and political calculations may deter robust responses, allowing perpetrators to evade prosecution. Without coordinated global pressure, efforts to hold Russia accountable risk stagnation, reinforcing a cycle of impunity.

Policy Recommendations for Addressing GBSV in Ukraine

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has demonstrated how militarized masculinity and patriarchal norms fuel conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) as a weapon of war. However, shifting U.S. policies—particularly under Trump—have weakened international accountability mechanisms, complicating Ukraine’s legal efforts. To counter these challenges, the following measures might be prioritized:

1.     Strengthening Legal Accountability: Ukraine must work with the ICC and EU-backed tribunals to prosecute war crimes. The U.S. should fully reinstate cooperation with the ICC and push for a special tribunal for Russian war crimes.

2.     Victim Support Services: Ukraine should formalize draft law No. 10132, securing long-term international fundingfor psychosocial care, legal aid, and forensic investigations. Mobile justice teams should ensure evidence collection in conflict zones.

3.     Expanding Sanctions and Legal Measures: The U.S. should reintroduce Global Magnitsky Act sanctions against Russian officials responsible for CRSV. Perpetrators should face extradition, asset freezes, and international travel bans.

 

Ukraine must meticulously document all CRSV crimes, ensuring a comprehensive legal record for future prosecutions. Political shifts are inevitable—if Russian leadership changes, accountability opportunities may arise. A thoroughly archived dossier of evidence will allow Ukraine to pursue justice once Putin and his regime fall. Meanwhile, Ukraine should strengthen diplomatic efforts with Global South allies, particularly with India, China, and Indonesia framing CRSV justice as a universal human rights issue beyond Western influence. By securing broad international backing, Ukraine can reinforce long-term accountability mechanisms, ensuring war criminals face justice regardless of changing political landscapes. Justice delayed must not be justice denied.

By Dr. Vishal Singh Bhadauriya, a Post-Doctoral Fellow in the Indian council of Historical Research at New Delhi, India is currently exploring the dynamics of Chinese expansionism in the evolving multipolar landscape of Asia under Xi Jinping’s leadership.

*** The views expressed herein belong solely to the author and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the Journal of Maritime and Territorial Studies or Yonsei Institute for North Korean Studies. ***