By Lotte ten Hoove, Advocacy Manager, CARE Nederland
This week marks the 15th anniversary of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on women, peace and security. In 2000, the adoption of this resolution represented a landmark victory following years of grassroots mobilisation by women across the globe. For the first time, UNSCR 1325 recognised that war impacts women differently, and that women’s participation and leadership are key to durable peace and security.
Now, 15 years and six additional resolutions later, it is broadly acknowledged that far too little has been achieved, due to a lack of political will among member states. “The greatest, most under-utilised tool for successfully building peace is the meaningful inclusion of women,” confirmed the director of UN Women, Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, during the Security Council Open Debate on 13 October, in which an unprecedented number of 112 member states assessed progress in implementation of the historic resolution. The Council, itself, adopted a new resolution, 2242, to accelerated and improve implementation of the Women, peace and security agenda.
Is 2242 yet another resolution – commitments and ideals existing just on paper? The future will tell us. But for now the adoption of this new resolution 2242 is to be applauded. It is a renewed commitment, further strengthening the normative framework of the global women, peace and security agenda, outlining some concrete actions to improve its implementation, and potentially triggering a renewed sense of urgency. Now is the time for the UN Security Council and all Member States to act on their commitments.
To improve the operations and structure of the UN system itself the new resolution outlines concrete steps, and sets ambitious targets. From now on, the Council will integrate women, peace and security concerns across all country-specific situations on its agenda. Gender targets will be added as an indicator for individual performance appraisals of senior managers at UN Headquarters and in the field. In the area of peacekeeping, the number of women in military and police contingents of UN peacekeeping operations should be doubled in five years. And very importantly, senior gender advisors and other gender officer posts are to be budgeted for and speedily recruited where appointed in special political missions and peacekeeping operations.
Perhaps the most impactful new addition to the binding framework for women, peace and security, is the establishment of an Informal Expert Group, to enable greater oversight and coordination of implementation efforts. Given that this was one of the most contentious issues during the negotiations on the draft resolution, this group is likely to carry more weight than its “informal” nature might suggest.
It is also positive that the Council further encourages the meaningful participation of civil society organisations at international and regional peace and security meetings, and that it expresses its intent to invite civil society, including women’s organisations, to brief the Council in country-specific considerations and relevant thematic areas. However, in the absence of formal mechanisms for civil society engagement, these statements remain rather non-committal.
And this holds true for other areas as well. The Council is deeply concerned that, despite recent signs of progress, women continue to be underrepresented in decision making on peace and security and calls upon donor countries to provide financial and technical assistance to women involved in peace processes. But 2242 doesn’t set any targets or timeframes on more inclusive decision making, allowing for member states to continue getting away with their slow and inconsistent implementation. Furthermore, important as high-level political participation of women is, there is very little in the new resolution on the crucial importance of participation by grassroots women and the need for National Action Plans to be connected to grassroots-level consultation on priorities and monitoring of progress. Without this, 1325 remains abstract, wishful thinking for the women most affected by conflict.
Finally, resolution 2242 breaks the “silos” between peace and security and humanitarian response by stressing the importance of protecting and promoting the rights and leadership of women in humanitarian settings (OP 16), and urging the Secretary-General to strengthen leadership and accountability to existing policies and operational frameworks. All are called upon to ensure that the women, peace and security agenda is linked to the outcomes of the World Humanitarian Summit in May 2016. And indeed, the two are inextricably linked. If the World Humanitarian Summit is serious about transformative change, then it should address the humanitarian system’s collective failure to genuinely embrace gender equality, and a strong gender pledge should feature prominently in the Summit’s outcomes.
The adoption of resolution 2242 reaffirms the consistent message of many global processes of 2015 – sustainable development goals, reviews of peace operations, peacebuilding, and women, peace and security – that more needs to be done to enable women and girls to realize their rights and be real agents of change in their societies – including in armed conflict. It sends a strong political signal to all Member States, UN system and other stakeholders, that more must be done. Now it is time to put words into actions.