Reimagining Women, Peace and Security for Today’s Geopolitics

Twenty-five years after the launch of the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda, it is evident that progress has been made, but remains uneven and increasingly challenged by the persistent and brutal nature of contemporary conflicts. The adoption of UNSCR 1325 marked a pivotal moment, recognising the unique impact of armed conflict on women and girls. This resolution acknowledged women’s essential roles as active contributors to peace and security, urging increased participation in peace processes.

Women are now more widely acknowledged as agents of peace, moving beyond the limited view of them solely as beneficiaries of aid. While it helped foreground gender issues and established a global framework adaptable across contexts, its impact has not always extended to tangible action on the ground. Entrenched patriarchal norms and sociopolitical barriers continue to marginalise and under-represent women. In recent years, the world has witnessed the intensification of conflicts and increased human rights violations, with women and children disproportionately bearing the greatest harm. These challenges highlight the need for continued commitment and effective implementation of the WPS framework to ensure meaningful progress toward gender equality and sustainable peace.

Gaza: A Critical Test of WPS Implementation

In the last two years, the world has witnessed harrowing images of the genocide in Gaza, revealing profound shortcomings in WPS implementation. It has exposed the double standards of international norms, exposing systemic gaps in protection, accountability, and relief. According to UN Women, in 2024, seven in ten women killed in conflict globally were in Gaza, making it as one of the most dangerous places for women and children. Life expectancy has plummeted by 30 years. According to the UN Population Fund, an estimated 55,000 pregnant and breastfeeding women in Gaza are expected to be at severe risk of death from malnutrition by mid-2026. With alarming rates of physical and psychological harm, Gaza has become a graveyard for women and children. Entire multigenerational families have been obliterated, where women face alarming rates of arbitrary detention, gender-based violence and forced displacement, all within a climate of insecurity, fear, and death.

Gaza serves as litmus test for how WPS commitments are being upheld in practice, especially in regions of the Global South. We must ask ourselves: which women’s rights are deemed sacred? What kind of feminism are we advocating; one that truly addresses the root causes of oppression, or one that merely offers superficial solutions? Is it a feminism with a neocolonial agenda at its heart, carrying implicit biases about what liberation and freedom mean, or is it a cross-border movement that unequivocally addresses human rights violations, breaking free from imperialist agendas?

To support women and girls effectively, it is essential to address root issues such as occupation, systemic violence, and systemic inequality. Protection alone is insufficient without accountability. The shortcomings of the WPS agenda not only undermine efforts to promote peace but also complicates the work of practitioners striving to create meaningful change. UNSCR 1325 underscores the need to enforce international humanitarian law to protect women and girls during and after conflict.

Eight Main Takeaways:

In the implementation of WPS, it is essential to consider areas for improvement and insights gained from experiences in other settings. I would like to present eight key observations derived from my work across diverse conflict environments:

First, women’s inclusion in peace processes heavily limits women’s participation to the ‘women’s rights’ and ‘women’s issues,’ domain. Although women represent half of the population, their voices are frequently confined to committees or working groups that address gender-specific concerns, while core issues such as food security, education, economic development, political legitimacy, and peacekeeping governance remain at the periphery. Negotiating rooms and Track One processes are often male dominated. This marginalises women’s broad expertise and lived experience and reinforces implicit biases in policymaking. Women’s participation should not be merely symbolic but meaningful in all stages of the peace process. Women’s voices and perspectives are critical to local dialogues, better policies and more equitable peace agreements. International organisations should model inclusive leadership within their own delegations to normalise women in positions of leadership.

Second, the absence of robust accountability and enforcement mechanisms often results in tokenisation of women, used to satisfy donor expectations rather than to harness them as genuine partners and active contributors to peacebuilding. This undermines women’s realisation of their full potential as agents of peace. Meaningful women’s participation in peace processes must be non-negotiable and embedded within governance structures. Strong accountability and effective enforcement are essential. In addition, it is essential to internally role model Feminist Foreign Policy approaches to ensure authenticity and policy coherence between domestic and foreign policy. This alignment will reinforce legitimacy, trust, and sustained impact across both arenas.

Third, the advancement of women’s rights can be undermined when women’s rights are instrumentalised and co-opted to serve domestic and foreign policy agendas. These harmful foreign policy agendas risk further alienating women, making it extremely difficult for women to advocate for their rights and dignity internally. This has created a division and mistrust inside the community between different women’s movements who each carry their own biases of the other. Women should be recognised as strategic partners and active agents of peace.

Fourth, achieving gender equality and protecting women’s rights requires adopting an intersectional approach that recognises the multilayered forms of oppression, local conflict dynamics, as well as a keen awareness of how power dynamics are reinforced by global structures. Often, imperialist forms of care translate as paternalistic top-down approaches that fail to understand and respond to the actual needs of women.

There has been a systematic exclusion of women from rural, conservative, and marginalised communities. The women who tend to get a seat at the table generally come from elite or liberal backgrounds. These exclusionary norms have rendered some categories of women invisible. Inclusion of women from various backgrounds is critical.

A more comprehensive concept of security means ending all forms of violence. Feminist approaches to foreign policy, when applied superficially, fail to acknowledge the intersecting forms of discrimination and oppression. Genuine progress demands a grounded understanding of how intersectionality and root causes of violence manifest in both local and global context, as well as addressing differential vulnerabilities and unequal power relations. Women’s rights must be seen within the broader framework of democratisation and human rights protection, promoting meaningful inclusion and equality for all.

Fifth, religious and local customs play a significant role in shaping gender identities, roles, and expectations. They should not be disregarded. When conceptions of equality and empowerment are indigenous to the community, they have a higher chance of being sustainable. WPS interventions should be grounded in local capacities, resources, knowledge, and lived realities. There is often a missed opportunity to integrate indigenous peacebuilding principles that are deeply rooted in justice, community, and equality. Conversations about controversial subjects may be most productive when they are locally embedded. For instance, in conservative communities, highlighting the religious foundations for the renegotiation of gender norms could be a good way to produce constructive pathways for positive reinterpretations and to get community buy in. Focusing solely on secular perspectives may miss valuable sources of religious legitimacy that support women’s rights and the re-negotiation of harmful gender norms.

Sixth, understanding and addressing the role of men and boys in the implementation of WPS is critical to sustainable and inclusive peace. Interventions should be whole society focused and collaborative rather than competitive in nature between men and women. In parallel, they must be implemented with the full intention of doing no harm and empowering women and girls, while drawing in men and boys in transformative ways. To achieve sustainable change, men and boys must be partners and active agents of peace. A whole society approach will enable different entry points where gender equality is not perceived as a zero-sum game.

Seventh, language matters and it can evoke visceral emotions. Language can either be used to protect women’s freedoms or to discriminate against them. As such, it becomes critical to define the terms and concepts to close the gap of ambiguity and build sufficient consensus. The use of appropriate vocabulary is essential to build sufficient consensus and promote discussion between groups across ideological and political divides.

Eighth, constitutional development should be understood as an iterative process, not a one-off moment. Constitutions are living instruments whose meaning evolves through review, amendment, and reinterpretation considering changing social realities. This iterative understanding must be grounded in on-the-ground realities and ongoing political negotiations, ensuring that constitutional design remains relevant to the lived experiences of those most affected. Moreover, a credible peace process must foreground human rights guarantees and practical implementation measures from the outset, ensuring accountability mechanisms are embedded rather than retrofitted.

In conclusion, we need to critically examine the political nature of knowledge production and how certain tropes can either invite or restrict questions that challenge existing political, social, and cultural norms. It is also crucial to consider the emotional investments that shape power and knowledge, as these directly influence what we observe, disregard, and accept as fact. This involves reevaluating our partnerships with the Global South and establish resilient, rights-based systems that can withstand political shifts. Ultimately, the core question we face is not just about including women at the peace table, but about how we can cultivate a decolonised, rights-based feminist community founded on justice and equality.

Dr Houda Abadi is Founder and Director of Transformative Peace. Dr Abadi has more than 18 years of experience designing and implementing peacebuilding programs in the US, Europe and the MENA region. Dr Abadi works with a wide range of stakeholders to facilitate dialogue and promote peacebuilding in sensitive conflict zones such as Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Palestine, Syria, and Sudan. She develops programs to foster women’s inclusion in peacebuilding processes; provides expertise in designing community based and gender sensitive PVE programs that are locally owned and led; facilitates collaboration between policymakers and grassroots leaders across political and religious divides; conducts evidence based research to help shape policy decisions at the national and international levels, and lastly empowers community leaders to be positive agents of change.