In the past two decades, international organizations (IOs) and nongovernmental organizations (NIOs) have begun to respond to wartime sexual violence. Unfortunately, wartime sexual violence has been happening for years, and no one has responded in a legal and meaningful way. Wartime sexual violence has begun to be viewed as a weapon of war. Sexual violence has begun to be viewed not as a women’s issue or an inevitable product of armed conflict, but an unambiguous peace and security issue that many organizations must have an obligation to prevent. On the other hand, the political silence regarding sexual violence as a weapon of war has gone on since war has existed and through the centuries organizations have stepped forward to take action in the protection of anyone who has or will be sexually violated during war. I will be discussing WWII which will cover the Hague, the Geneva Convention, and the Tokyo Tribunals. Secondly, I will be discussing the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). Third, this paper will cover the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). What the courts have done for international law, will also be discussed in this paper. Prior to the mid 1990’s, sexual violence which occurred during wartime failed to get the attention it deserved, even though it was common knowledge that the atrocities were being committed, many believed that sexual violence that occurred during war was understood to be an unfortunate consequence of war. A gender perspective on wartime sexual violence in practice usually means focusing on the incidence, causes, and consequences of sexual violence against women and girls.1 When the 20th century came around, advocacy and human rights began to stand up for women who had been a victim of sexual violence, and who will be a victim of sexual violence. Particularly, with the horrific atrocities that were committed in the former Yugoslavia and in Rwanda, this led to the increased awareness of sexual violence, and that the world needed to intervene, and hold the perpetrators responsible for their actions. Why after centuries of sexual violence occurring or being tolerated, were IOs, leaders and countries driven to respond to cries of help? Some believe that countries were being persuaded, compelled and/or ashamed into responding to the sexual violence being committed. Wartime sexual violence has been framed as a women’s rights issue, a human rights violation, and as a weapon of war or genocide, each with varying degrees of success.2 The weapon of war term is the most important factor in determining the response from the international communities actions towards this weapon. Although rape and other forms of sexual violence has been historically present during wartime, it has become a strategic weapon of war. The use of rape as a weapon in war has occurred for centuries in war, it was only in the later part of the 20th century has it been explicitly punishable under international law. I. WWII and Sexual Violence Historical records are largely silent about the occurrences of sexual violence during WWII. This is not because sexual violence did not occur, but because of many other reasons. Part of the problem was that sexual violence was being committed by all sides of the conflict. During WWII sexual violence had been accepted as an inevitable , unfortunate reality of armed conflict. Mostly because during the 1940’s sexual matters were not being discussed openly. Plus there was no movement to help women who were being sexual assaulted. It has only been in the more recent years has the issue been discussed. At the forefront of this matter, was the crimes that had been committed against the Chinese women during WWII. In 1937 in the city of Nanjing located in China which was the capital of the country, over a six week period, Japanese Army forces brutally murdered hundreds of thousands of people in the city. Not only were people being murdered, 20,000-80,000 women and children were raped and tortured during the war in China. Not only rapes were being committed but monks, men and boys were being forced to commit acts of sexual violence against women they knew or were related too. The Tokyo Tribunal addressed the sexual violence committed in Nanjing as excessive military aggression but ignored the sprawling system of forced prostitution known as the Comfort Women System.3 These women were forced into brothels and forced to be prostitutes. The Tokyo Tribunals was the first court to discuss wartime sexual atrocities. After WWII, advocates pushed very hard for the prosecution of wartime sexual violence, but it was very hard because many women were not very vocal about their experiences after it happened. During the Nuremburg trials and the Tokyo Tribunal Court sexual violence was not prosecuted, except for the atrocities committed at Nanjing. In the post-WWII era, nongovernmental organizations had consultative status and worked on ma