Evaluating Feminist Foreign Policy Models
Introduction
Last November, the newly elected Swedish Foreign Minister, Tobias Billstrom, declared that while gender equality remains “a core value for Sweden and its government”, the country will no longer pursue a feminist foreign policy.1 Although Sweden was a forerunner of the feminist foreign policy model in 2014, which espoused an innovative approach that aimed to address and integrate female perspectives into foreign policy decisions, the country is now actively veering away from its former stance on this issue. This shift represents a departure from earlier advances and could have noteworthy implications for Sweden’s global reputation in the sphere of women’s empowerment. This change in position might also influence other nation-states that have announced their support of adopting a feminist foreign policy, including France and Mexico.2
Several feminist policy initiatives have faced numerous hurdles in being realized on a global scale. So far, existing models have attracted considerable interest as substantial frameworks for promoting gender equality and the empowerment of women, as evidenced by their adoption in several Western nations and in significant international organizations. By questioning the status quo of the male-dominated field of international diplomacy, in both bilateral and multilateral settings, feminist approaches to foreign policy have resulted in the advancement of new opportunities for women across various sectors, including social, economic, and political development. However, given the novelty and subtlety of existing feminist approaches to the field, it is critical to dissect the extent of their adoption and implementation across different regions, particularly in non-Western contexts. How has the feminist foreign policy agenda developed, and how can governments and multilateral organizations use it as a better tool for women’s empowerment across geographies and settings?
Background
While efforts to include the empowerment of women as a key pillar in foreign policy have been used by a number of states, it was first labeled and presented as a “feminist foreign policy” by Margot Wallstrom, the former Swedish foreign minister in 2014.3 The model that she proposed called for countries to advance gender equality through diplomatic relations.4 It aimed to represent a global movement, which addressed the following three core areas: rights, which include combating all forms of discrimination that restrict the freedom of women, representation, through promoting participation and effective influence in decision-making, and resources, which provide equal opportunities for all.5
The origins of carving a wider role for women in foreign policy, however, were developed simultaneously with several milestones in modern international law, beginning with the United Nations General Assembly’s Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), which was adopted in 1979.6 The concept was further reinforced in the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action in 1995, as well as the UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace, and Security in 2000.7 Although there is no universal agreement on what constitutes a “feminist foreign policy” in that exact wording, it is widely recognized as one of the most crucial attempts in highlighting the significance of collective power, rather than the unequal power distribution between men and women, across political and diplomatic spheres of practice.8 Sweden seemingly started a movement that inspired a number of countries to formally adopt a variety of feminist foreign policy strategies, some of which are more expansive and ambitious than others, but deserve further study nonetheless.
For instance, Canada followed Sweden’s lead and adopted a women’s rights approach to its international decision-making,9 further committing itself to a Feminist International Assistance Policy in 2017, which advocated for changing social norms and power structures as an essential element for empowering women and girls.10 Some other objectives include human dignity, environmental and climate action, inclusive governance, and peace and security.11 Canada also centered the implementation of its commitments towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Paris Agreement in this policy, given the integral role of women in both spheres.12 This positioned the country as an international donor that is committed to advancing women’s empowerment by allocating 15% of all its bilateral investments to overseas gender development projects.13
Following this, in 2019, France pledged to support global initiatives that focus on the advancement of women globally, and created a thorough accountability structure for its policies by setting clear timelines, indicators, and assigned stakeholders.14 The country also announced its International Strategy on Gender Equality, which unveiled the primary goal of allocating 75% of France’s Official Development Assistance (ODA) to gender-related projects by 2025.15 Aligned with these efforts, France’s Ministry of Europe and Foreign Affairs also advocates for equal opportunities in employment, training, mobility, and career advancement for both men and women, alongside the pursuit of equal pay.16
In a notable development, Germany announced its Feminist Foreign Policy guidelines earlier this year, which included a groundbreaking position for an “ambassador for feminist foreign policy.”17 This newly created role aims to drive global attention towards women’s issues, including the enhanced representation of women and the allocation of improved development funding towards initiatives that combat gender inequality.18 The launch of the guidelines led to political pushback in the country, especially from conservative political actors who argue that the feminist label can symbolize a form of radicalism, and can be a seemingly naive but divisive concept. German politician Markus Soder, the regional premier of Bavaria, and the head of the state’s Christian Social Union, called the new feminist foreign policy approach “incomprehensible,” highlighting that “traveling the world and telling everyone else what they should and should not do is doomed to failure.”19
These examples showcase a Western feminist perspective that tends to mainly focus on extending aid and support to non-Western populations with claims of advancing gender equality. Nevertheless, countries like Mexico have challenged the notion that such policies were exclusive to Western nations, and the country claimed to be the first in Latin America to officially incorporate a feminist framework into its international policy decisions.20 Mexico’s primary goals of adopting this position included the desire to foster substantive equality, advance individual liberty, eradicate structural disparities, and abolish all forms of discrimination against women.21 The country also aims to ensure that questions of equality and the inclusion of women are reflected in its existing institutional structures, especially among government staff.22
Further to this, Chile’s former Foreign Minister, Antonia Urrejola, advocated for the development of a comprehensive feminist approach to guide the nation’s diplomatic relations last year. Her call highlighted the need to integrate feminist principles across all aspects of her country’s global engagements.23 She mentioned that the key to this transformation will be to include women in decision-making processes at all political levels, increase visibility and comprehensibility in favor of gender equality, and introduce rigid and normative changes to modify the working language in Chile’s foreign ministry to one that is non-discriminatory.24 The final guidelines of Chile’s version of feminist foreign policy will be presented later this year as part of the new government’s objectives on this file.25
Other countries in non-Western regions have also expressed interest in including a feminist lens in their diplomatic relations. Libya made headlines when its first female Foreign Minister Najla Elmangoush announced her intention to pursue a feminist foreign policy at the Generation Equality Forum in 2021.26 India is another example, and with the upcoming G20 Leaders’ Summit set to take place in New Delhi in September 2023, the country is showing an increased interest in the greater engagement of women in decision-making, both locally and internationally.27 These developments illustrate the global recognition of the transformative potential of feminist foreign policy in its diverse formats.
Discussion
While mainstream analysis of feminist foreign policy frameworks focuses on what countries declare their objectives to be, little attention has been placed on what women at the receiving end of these initiatives think. A significant emphasis of Western models revolves around the pursuit of stability and peace where governments have strategic interests, particularly in the cases of previously colonized nations. A key example is France, which increased its bilateral development aid on projects targeting gender equality to 37% in 2021, compared to just 26% in 2019, making it the seventh largest provider of gender-focused funding.28 However, sometimes initiatives like this can risk negatively affecting the receiving community due to a complete disregard from donor countries to traditional norms, historical nuances, and cultural customs of groups they seek to ‘empower’. Post-colonial perspectives have critically examined these concepts, raising questions about the strategic narratives and the underlying motivations driving the utilization of feminist foreign policy as a way to boost a country’s status within global hierarchies.29 These perspectives challenge the potential understanding of feminist ideals, highlighting the need for a nuanced understanding of power dynamics when it comes to colonial legacies.30 As such, international policymakers need to be more aware of how their initiatives can be perceived as a form of imposing Western values, which at times fail to do justice to the acknowledgment of diverse cultures and societies around the world. Hence, suggesting that Western states need to ‘save’ women can be looked at as feminist ‘domination’ and a form of reinforcing colonial savior narratives.
Critics also point out that the increased integration of women in foreign policy has been accompanied by limited research within both academia and policymaking.31 Not enough funding is being allocated to research related to women in diplomacy, as despite significant representational milestones, there are still pertinent questions about the actual impact and influence women have in governance processes across the field. While women have become more visible and present in some defense and diplomacy positions in the past two decades, men continue to hold the vast majority of decision-making positions, especially at the highest levels.32 By examining such gendered dynamics in foreign policy, more research emphasis should be placed on notions of power, privilege, and representation that have historically shaped and limited the scope of women in policymaking. These angles offer a critical framework to challenge established narratives and foster more equitable foreign policy practices.
Integrating feminist ideals into foreign policy lacks a clear roadmap for empirical implementation, primarily due to differing opinions on definitions, and the persistence of traditional gender roles that individuals, in some places, still assume within society. For example, in times of conflict, a striking gender disparity emerges, with men primarily assuming direct combat roles, resulting in a higher frequency of battle-related fatalities. Conversely, women, constituting a substantial portion of displaced populations and refugees, endure indirect health ramifications, such as heightened vulnerability during childbirth and inadequate access to essential medical services. More focus on these important distinctions needs to be considered by feminist foreign policy models. These approaches also have the potential to provide a unifying political framework for the varied aspects of women-related strategies that are implemented by governments across different continents. They can improve coordination, effectiveness, and inclusivity at the highest levels of diplomatic leadership. However, for these models to be productive and results-focused, they should aspire to transform the practice of foreign policy across different political and diplomatic levels, and take into consideration how differently they are perceived across regions.
Recommendations
The prospect of countries and multilateral organizations adopting new models that will enable the wider inclusion of women in diplomacy outweighs its challenges and implementation difficulties. However, to embrace effective feminist foreign policy strategies that uphold comprehensive objectives, a number of recommendations should be considered:
1. Reevaluating strictly Western definitions of feminist foreign policy
To better shape the scope of feminist foreign policy and extend its meaning beyond a narrow focus, it should cover the more general objective of attaining gender equality across different geographies. Constructing such definitions requires the engagement and thorough consultation of advocates, academics, civil society groups, and policymakers that are relevant to local contexts. By incorporating a wide range of perspectives, the international community can create inclusive and nuanced definitions that consider varying normative systems. Each region has its own historical and normative experiences which should not be dismissed, in addition to the different institutional processes that determine how each country introduces changes to its foreign policy initiatives.
2. Considering context-driven impact measures and indicators of success
Given the sensitivity of imposed change in foreign policy, particularly when the desire for social and cultural reforms is prescribed by a donor country, proposed policies may harm women and girls, especially in more conservative contexts. For this reason, the implementation of initiatives should carefully consider long-term impact measures and indicators of success that are unique to specific countries of focus. This could be done on two levels. First, internal and external evaluation should be conducted by high-level steering committees that include experts from local and regional backgrounds. As non-Western countries are now showing interest in officially adopting feminist initiatives as well, such as Libya and India, understandings of feminist foreign policy must consider different regional features. As a result, all tools and actions should aim to create better participation, ownership, and responsibilities for women. Second, the empowerment of women and girls should be complemented with a focus on strengthening the participation of men as well. This requires strong attention to awareness-raising, capacity-building, and education, especially on peace, justice, and power-sharing.
3. Prioritizing shifting power imbalances in the field
Governments around the world can also set an example by pursuing gender parity in hiring for leadership roles and by enhancing internal personnel procedures. Promoting leadership inclusivity for women can demonstrate that improving gender equality is a shared goal of government employees at all levels. This could be done through government-funded training in foreign ministries so that all employees can possess the technical know-how required to carry out gender equality initiatives and implement them effectively.
Conclusion
Feminist foreign policy, if approached correctly, could be a groundbreaking tool to enable gender equality in diplomatic and political spheres around the world. Ultimately, the focus should be placed on implementing forward-looking policies that accommodate entire populations, and maximize every person’s potential while leaving no one behind. For more countries to integrate a feminist approach to their political frameworks and policies, it is crucial to account for the norms and cultures in different contexts to make it applicable and beneficial to all.
Although the gap between rhetorical policy commitments and meaningful implementation has been a recurring point of critique, several countries are now integrating and centralizing women’s empowerment in their international engagements. The strength of feminist foreign policy should not lie only in its ability to address gender imbalances, but also in accounting for cohesiveness, adaptability, and applicability in different settings, specifically across non-Western regions.
To access the works cited & endnotes, download the full report.
The statements made and views expressed are solely the responsibility of the author, and do not represent Fiker Institute.
