Translating the Women, Peace and Security Agenda into EU Common Security and Defence Policy: Reflections from EU Peacebuilding

Abstract

Existing studies of European Union Common Security and Defence Policy (EU CSDP) 1 missions often rely on a conceptualisation of Women, Peace and Security (WPS) implementation as a technical, linear and deterministic process. While this scholarship is part of a concerted effort to develop an accountability mechanism and push for organizational change, this paper contends that we also need a more grounded and contextual approach to capture the complex, ambivalent and often tortuous translation of WPS into CSDP relatively new security practices. This suggests that a deeper interrogation of what meaning(s) mainstreaming gender assumes in the context of EU CSDP missions and how this conceptualisation informs the practice of peacekeeping is required. Drawing on interviews with EU peacekeeping personnel we outline an ambivalent account of how different CSDP actors interpret WPS and gender mainstreaming and compose it in use, with different effects.

Imagining the European Union: Gender and Digital Diplomacy in European External Relations

“…One key site where the EU has engaged with gender in the external sphere is through the global Women, Peace and Security agenda encapsulated in UN Security Council Resolution 1325 and the eight follow-up resolutions (Ansorg and Haastrup, 2018; Davis, 2018; Deiana and McDonagh, 2017, 2018; Guerrina et al, 2018a; Guerrina and Wright, 2016; Muehlenhoff, 2017). If the Women, Peace and Security agenda calls for better representation of women in peace and security, then this should be integrated into digital diplomacy strategies deployed by the EEAS to mark EU60 and International Women’s Day.…”

Prevention From Afar: Gendering Resilience and Sustaining Hope in Post-UNMIL Liberia

“…There has been extensive literature on the implementation of gender equality and gender mainstreaming policies inside the EU (Cavaghan, 2017;Guerrina, 2005;Hoskyns, 1996;Lombardo and Meier, 2006;Verloo, 2007). Research has also investigated the gendered impacts of EU policies and external gender equality promotion in security and in development policies (David and Guerrina, 2013;Debusscher, 2011;Deiana and Mcdonagh, 2018;Guerrina et al, 2018;Guerrina and Wright, 2016). The scholarship that analyses gender mainstreaming in Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) uniformly claims that although the EU has been clear in its commitment to gender mainstreaming, little has been materialised in practice.…”

“…Some reckon that this is due to lack of strategic planning and robust institutional support (Olsson and Gizelis, 2015), while others note that it is the absence of feminist actors and feminist networks in the European External Action Service (EEAS) and in CSDP that has limited the implementation of gender policies (Guerrina et al, 2018;Guerrina and Wright, 2016). A third group of scholars suggest that there is resistance to acknowledge the essential linkages between gender, peace and security in peacekeeping and post-conflict transition and that the implementation of the Women, Peace and Security agenda in CSDP and in EU missions is considered as just an addendum and not as essential for the achievement of the EU objectives (Deiana and Mcdonagh, 2018). The literature on gender equality and gender mainstreaming in EU development policy also reaches similar conclusions: while there have been some progress on systematic technical assistance and capacity building to developing countries, results are still far from having the transformative potential sought and fall short of EU normative predisposition to guarantee gender equality (Allwood, 2013;Debusscher, 2011;Debusscher and van Der Vleuten, 2012).…”

“…Although these are 'both relevant policy frameworks for eliminating all forms of discrimination and violence that women and girls suffer from' (Council of the European Union, 2018), it is not a coincidence that the Spotlight Initiative is born not as part of the Comprehensive approach or the New Strategy on Women, Peace and Security, but as the tool through which to implement the first thematic objective of the GAP II -ensuring girls' and women's physical and psychological integrity -and situated in the European Commission Directorate General for Development Cooperation. The Women, Peace and Security agenda is perceived as an instrument directed at incorporating gender in peacekeeping and immediate postconflict transition, and therefore as a tool to be mobilised in very specific and time-bound contexts which enable quick emergency action (Deiana and Mcdonagh, 2018). By contrast, the Gender Action Plan II presents a new transformative approach that clearly resonates with resilience.…”

“…The literature examining gender equality and gender mainstreaming policies have noted a growing commitment to include gender analysis and sensibilities in underdeveloped and postconflict spaces intervened upon, albeit have been critical of the instruments and policies being implemented (Deiana and Mcdonagh 2018;Guerrina, Chappell, and Wright 2018;Guerrina and Wright 2016). For example, some studies show how formal institutions in societies intervened upon have remained controlled and dominated by men from elite groups, while disregarded women and feminist organisations and networks (Pratt and Richter-Devroe 2011;Ryan and Basini 2017).…”