World's Best

A New Era of UN Peacekeeping? The Women, Peace and Security Agenda in Africa

Where are the Women? Seeming simple at the first glance, this question from the 1980s, posed by Ann Tickner, a feminist theorist, is an essential component of the feminist movement and can be asked for many parts of women’s lives. Going beyond the solely physical and local meaning, the question becomes about women’s position in society and their role in politics. Throughout the 20th century, there was little involvement of women in the international political realm. Commissioned reports by the UN on peacekeeping operations (PKOs), traditionally considered hard politics and linked to militarism and masculinity, showed a general lack of female participation and recognition of gender, which highlighted the importance of rethinking women’s role in international peace and security (Simić 2010: 189). After a century of feminist movements, long-time lobbying of the civil society, and several UN conferences on women, the UN Security Council finally adopted Resolution 1325 on “Women, Peace and Security” in 2000, which was celebrated as a landmark in international feminist efforts (Willett 2010: 142). Having learnt from the devasting wars of the 1990s, Resolution 1325 addresses for the first time the diverse needs and experiences, the disproportionate impact of violent conflicts on women, and the necessity of their involvement in the processes of conflict prevention and peacekeeping for sustainable conflict resolution (Klein 2012: 283; Pratt and Richter-Devroe 2011: 491; Tickner 2019: 17). Subsequent resolutions in the last two decades have been built on Resolution 1325 and its four pillars: participation, prevention, protection, and relief and recovery, and have further shaped the “Women, Peace and Security” (WPS) Agenda for the 21st Century.

Having experienced new developments to greater complexity and number, and a shifting focus on post-conflict societies and state-building since the end of the Cold War, UN-mandated PKOs have not only gained importance in conflict resolution through their worldwide application, but also been subject to the obligations under Resolution 1325 (Puechguirbal 2010: 161). Thus, this research paper asks the question: How has the Women, Peace and Security Agenda impacted mandates of current multidimensional peace-keeping operations in Africa? Differing from other research, which often aims at analysing the impact of the WPS agenda on the implementation of PKOs on the ground and thereby revealing implementation gaps, this research follows Kreft’s work (2017) and rather considers the mandates of a particular set of six multidimensional PKOs. Taking into account that mandates are the direct outcome of discussions at the highest international political level, the thesis is a relevant qualitative contribution to the policy literature on the UN Security Council (Kreft 2017: 133). However, this paper goes even further by adding to and combining literature on the WPS agenda, feminist theory and PKOs. Thus, the thesis will first review literature on the WPS agenda and peacekeeping with a focus on the development during the 20th century, the adoption of the landmark Resolution 1325, and current debates and state of research. Then, the theoretical background on feminist security theory with reference to core assumptions and basic strands, the three-legged gender stool, a framework that builds upon the three prevailing concepts in gender mainstreaming: gender-as-equality, gender-as-difference, gender-as-diversity, and the hypotheses will be introduced. These parts will be followed by a presentation of the methodology and case selection of the paper. The main part will consist of the analysis of the impact of the WPS agenda on six current multidimensional PKOs, separated into three parts. The analysis shall be seen as a first overview on the impact and preparatory work for following analyses.

Women in International Peacekeeping

The following chapter will introduce the state of research on the WPS agenda and peacekeeping by outlining the development from feminist movements in the early 20th century in the Western hemisphere to the adoption and implementation of Resolution 1325 until today. 

International Efforts during the 20th Century

Although the first women’s movements for equal treatment date back to the late 1800s and early 1900s, the origins of the involvement of women in international politics and especially international security issues reach back to the International Congress of Women, held in the Hague in 1915. At the time the Women’s Peace Party, merging into the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom in 1919, assembled up to 1500 women from all over the world to work on recommendations for ending the First World War and laying with the principles of positive peace the ground for women in international peace and security (Armstrong 1914; Otto 2006: 119f.; Tickner and True 2018: 222f.; Willett 2010: 148). Three years later, in 1948, the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom gained consultative status at the United Nations, which paved the road for a more formal mobilisation of global women’s movements through several UN World Conferences on Women, declarations and conventions (Binder et al. 2008: 24; Kirby and Shepherd 2016: 250). The Report of the Commission on the Status of Women from 1969 and the “Declaration on the Protection of Women and Children in Emergency and Armed Conflict” from 1974 laid the foundation for the conferences in Mexico City in 1975 and in Copenhagen in 1980, focussed on women’s participation in struggles against racism, colonialism and apartheid regimes (Binder et al. 2008: 23). During the “UN Decade for Women: Equality, Development and Peace” from 1975 to 1985, which aimed to increase the visibility of UN women activities, the UN General Assembly adopted the “Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women” in 1981 and the “Declaration on the Participation of Women in Promoting International Peace and Cooperation” in 1982 (Binder et al. 2008: 24; Harrington 2011: 563; Otto 2006: 133). 

Despite the 1985 conference in Nairobi aiming at stronger economic and social empowerment of women and condemning violence in any form against women, only at the UN World Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995 did the ignorance of women’s experiences in wars or the lack of their participation in peacekeeping efforts (only 2% women) raise any serious concerns (El-Bushra 2007: 132; Klein 2012: 28; Miller et al. 2014: 6-9). Traditionally, the mandates of UN PKOs of the 20th century did not issue specific requests for women, but the 189 signatories of the “Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action” vowed to change this (Hebert 2011: 123; Simić 2010: 188). In June 2000, the “Beijing Plus Five” conference, built on the Brahimi Report, the Windhoek Declaration and the Namibia Plan of Action, drew attention to the devasting wars of the 1990s and their impact (Pratt and Richter-Devroe 2011: 491; Tickner 2019: 17;  Willett 2010: 149). The shifting security environment after the Cold War and the efforts of the “NGO Working Group on Women, Peace and Security” finally made the UN Security Council aware of the importance of considering the situation of women in conflict and their involvement in peacekeeping (Goulding 1993: 456; Harrington 2011: 559; Puechguirbal 2010: 161 Shepherd 2008: 384 Väyrynen 2004: 125, 129, 136). As such, Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security was born.

Adoption of UN Security Resolution 1325

Echoing the 1915 principles, resolution 1325 is both, traditional as it is built upon the works of earlier movements and adventurous as it goes for a more encompassing approach (Bell and O’Rourke 2010: 941; Harrington 2011: 568; Tickner and True 2018: 221, 227 ; Tryggestad 2018: 245). Unanimously adopted on 31 October 2000, 1325 is the product of the first entire UN SC session devoted to women’s experiences in (post-)conflict situations and links gender equality, peace and security (Cohn et al. 2004: 130; Dharmapuri 2011: 56f.; Willett 2010: 142). Aiming to end the stigmatisation of women as solely victims in armed conflicts, the resolution portrays the image of women as agents of and for change in post-conflicts (Pratt 2013: 772f.; Willett 2010: 148). Nevertheless, it also points out the different experiences in conflict and post-conflict settings of women and the disproportionate impact of wars on women – not only in a physical sense, but visible in all aspects of life (Dorning and Goede 2010: 2; El-Bushra 2007: 132, 145; Gumru and Fritz 2009: 210; Otto 2006: 128; Shepherd 2011: 511; Willett 2010: 148). After ten preambular paragraphs, that refer to broad normative standards embraced by the international community and previous UN resolutions, 18 operational paragraphs cover the four pillars, reflecting both equality and difference perspectives and promoting a gender-perspective (Gibbings 2011: 528; Pratt andRichter-Devroe 2011: 490-492; UN SC 2000). The resolution recognizes women’s contribution to peacekeeping and calls for participation of all women at all levels of decision-making in mechanisms for the prevention, management and resolution of conflicts, in peace negotiations and peacekeeping (Dunn 2016: 39). With the aim of increasing the number of women in a variety of roles such as Special Representatives, the participation pillar is built on the idea of equality between women and men (Dunn 2016: 95; Kirby and Shepherd 2016: 249; Miller et al. 2014: 2; Pfaffenholz 2018: 176-180). 

A stronger focus on the prevention of violence through the promotion of women’s rights, including prosecution of atrocity crimes, respect for civilian nature of refugee camps, exclusion of sexual violence from amnesty agreements, strengthening women’s rights under national law, and support for local peace initiatives forms the second pillar of the resolution, also based on the equality idea (Dunn 2016: 40, 95-98). 1325 further demands protection of women from sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) in emergency situations and recognizes gendered aspects of conflict and differences between men and women in terms of vulnerability (Dunn 2016: 40, 98-100; Gumru and Fritz 2009: 213; Harrington 2011: 557; Tryggestad 2018: 240). Working through and in line with these three pillars, the fourth pillar Relief and Recovery focuses on women’s and girls’ different priorities in disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR), security sector reform, transitional justice, and governance reform (Dunn 2016: 101). Passed under Chapter VI instead of VII, 1325 cannot be enforced by the UN Security Council, but members states diffuse and implement it through national actions plans (Gibbings 2011: 522; Kirby and Shepherd 2016: 250; Miller et al. 2014: 10; Shepherd 2008: 383; True 2016: 310f.; Willett 2010: 142f.). Concerning the implementation of 1325 in PKOs, peacekeeping has experienced an increase in number, size and budget of the missions and a growth in scope and complexity of the mandates including a civilian component and a wide range of activities from restoring basic public services to facilitating fair elections (Bellamy and Williams 2013: 4; Daniel 2013: 39; Goulding 1993: 452; Puechguirbal 2010: 161).

Implementation of the WPS Agenda in the 21st Century 

Since 2020, the WPS framework is based on 10 resolutions and 84 countries and several international and regional organisations have adopted national action plans (Adjei 2019; Peace Women 2020b, 2020c). Subsequent resolutions of 1325 have further expanded the WPS agenda in the last two decades and have amongst other issues focussed on the growing awareness of SGBV in PKOs (Dharmapuri 2012: 270; Heathcote 2014: 53; Hudson 2012: 443; Shepherd 2011: 505; True 2016: 30). 1820 (2008) introduces the zero-tolerance policy for sexual abuses in PKOs, and 1888 (2009) creates the office of a Special Representative of the Secretary General on Conflict-Related Sexual Violence (CRSV) (Binder et al. 2008: 27; Miller et al. 2014: 3; Kirby and Shepherd 2016: 251). Further resolutions have focussed on monitoring the implementation of CSRV mechanisms (1889 (2009), 1960 (2010), 2106 (2013), 2122 (2013)) and a gender-perspective in UN Security Council working areas (2242 (2015), 2467 (2019), 2493 (2019)) (Shepherd 2011: 507; Kirby and Shepherd 2016: 251; True 2016: 308; UN SC 2019a, 2019b). Despite the original idea of 1325 to end the stigmatisation of women as victims, even subsequent resolutions still include and legitimize their actions through underlying essentialist assumptions on women’s inherent peacefulness due to their role as mothers and construction of women as fragile, passive, subordinate and in need of protection like children (Aroussi 2010: 2, 6; Heathcote 2014: 50; Puechguirbal 2010: 181; Puechguirbal 2012: 4, 9; Shepherd 2011: 506). Besides these feminist critiques on the WPS agenda, other recent research has focussed on its implementation in peacemaking processes (Shepherd 2015: 64). Thereby, various empirical analyses, such as the Global Study on the Implementation of Resolution 1325 signal a positive trend concerning women’s participation and recognition, especially in police and civilian personnel, but simultaneously reveal still existing implementation gaps (Adjei 2019: 133f.; Bell and O’Rourke 2010: 956; Coomaraswamy 2015: 40, 141, 175; Hendricks 2015: 365; Olsson et al. 2015: 42; Pfaffenholz 2018: 169; Shepherd 2015: 56f.; Stone 2014: 27; Willett 2010: 152). 

Concerning this paper’s research question, it is, however, more relevant to review literature on the impact of the WPS agenda on mandates of PKOs. Although this literature is rather scarce, Kreft’s work is groundbreaking (Kreft 2017: 134). In her qualitative document analysis, she finds out that while there is a clear trend towards greater gender-sensitivity in UN PKO mandates, not all UN PKOs reflect the spirit of 1325 to the same degree (Kreft 2017: 136). Positively correlated with greater gender-sensitivity in mandates is the presence of sexually violent conflicts, also supported by Krause’s research (Krause 2015: 106; Kreft 2017: 148). Congruent with these findings, St. Pierre’s work (2010) considers the impact of the WPS agenda on PKO mandates and the development of several UN agencies and policy directives, such as “Gender Equality in Peacekeeping Operations” (2006) or “Integrating a Gender Perspective into the work of the United Military in PKOs” (2010) (St. Pierre 2010: 5). Puzzled by the different degrees of WPS agenda implementation and countries’ troop contributions, Karim and Beardsley (2015) analyse the deployment of female peacekeepers with the help of the protection norm (Karim and Beardsley 2015: 64).

Feminist Perspectives on the Women, Peace and Security Agenda

The following chapter briefly presents the theoretical background of feminist security studies by outlining feminist perspectives on the WPS agenda, the theoretical framework of the three-legged gender stool, developed by Booth and Bennett in 2002, and the three main hypotheses of this paper.

Feminist Security Studies

Research during the Cold War was dominated by a realist perspective, that was preoccupied with balance-of power dynamics, wars and national security, but ignorant of women and the concept of gender in security (Blanchard 2003: 1291; Sjoberg 2009: 184; Tickner 1992: 12, 14; Tickner 2019: 17; Willett 2010: 144). Traditional security studies were characterized by a dichotomous understanding of binary differences between masculinity (war) and femininity (peace) (Aroussi 2009: 10). Women were associated with weakness, motherhood, subordination, and irrelevance in politics, and it was seen as typical male domain to provide for their being and national security (Puechguirbal 2012: 8; Sjoberg 2009: 196; Tickner 1992: 3f., 9, 89; Väyrynen 2004: 137). 

Since the 1980s and 1990s feminist researchers, such as Anne Tickner (1992), Cynthia Enloe (1989) or Rebecca Grant (1991), have entered the international scene and criticised that realism renders women invisible from international relations, excludes them from foreign policy decisions, lacks a gender-awareness, but promotes essentialist assumptions about the natural roles of the sexes (Blanchard 2003: 1292; Dorning and Goede 2010: 6; Jansson and Eduards 2016: 59;Sjoberg 2009: 205f.; True 2015: 420; Willett 2010: 145). Demanding critical security studies with a gender lens, feminist research challenged traditional security studies and developed gender-sensitive security concepts (Higate and Henry 2004: 482). By asking “Whose security is emphasized and how?” feminists drew attention to the prioritisation of men’s security and the necessity of a new security concept, based on individual needs and freed of militarism (Blanchard 2003: 1289; Hendricks 2015: 366; McKay 2004: 155; Puechguirbal 2012: 11). Instead of referring to the male adult body as referent object for security, the new definition of security was broad, multidimensional, and sensitive to gender and existing gender hierarchies (Blanchard 2003: 1298; Jansson and Eduards 2016: 594; Sjoberg 2009: 198-201). Definitions now involved more than physical security, but also economic inequalities and structural violence, influenced by the Copenhagen School or feminist human security frameworks (McKay 2004: 169; Sjoberg 2009: 207; Tickner 2019: 18; Willett 2010: 144). Common feminist IR scholarship uses such a gender lens and agrees that true security cannot be achieved until unequal power structures of gender, race and class are eliminated (Tickner 2019:16). The concept of gender thereby refers to the process and assessment of implications for both men and women, and is defined as a social category or a system of symbolic meaning, creating social hierarchies based on perceived associations with masculine and feminine characteristics (Dharmapuri 2011: 58; Otto 2006: 121; Sjoberg 2009: 187, 191). However, the first wave of feminism, referring to the women of the Hague Congress for Peace in 1915, was not so clear about a gender-perspective. Back then, a maternal and pacifistic rhetoric was used and the stereotypes of male bellicosity and pacifistic female nature were accepted (Hendricks 2015: 370). Only after the Second World War and especially since the 1960s, two distinct camps emerged, one in the tradition of women’s inherent peacefulness, emphasizing differences between men and women, and one in the tradition of equal rights movements, following an equal treatment perspective (Aroussi 2009: 3f.;Blanchard 2003: 1299). The 1990s were shaped by a recognition of diverse needs and a shift to a gender perspective, distinctively valuing equality, differences and diversity (Booth and Bennett 2002: 433f.; Hudson 2005: 169.). 

Framework of the Three-Legged Gender Stool 

The framework of the three-legged gender stool is ontologically and epistemologically based on the three camps of logic: gender-as-equality, gender-as-difference, and gender-as-diversity (Dunn 2016: 23). Simultaneously, it also relates to different theoretical perspectives, categorizations and traditions of feminist theory and was strongly influenced by feminist discourses, the equality-difference debate and the idea of intersectionality. The idea of the gender stool, developed by Booth and Bennet, is that a successful mainstreaming perspective and gender-sensitive policy-making depend on all three “legs” interacting simultaneously (Booth and Bennett 2002: 435; Dunn 2016: 23). The gender-as-equality perspective is based on an equal treatment, that prescribes actions that guarantee women to have the same rights and opportunities as men in public spheres through legislation and allows for addressing gender discrimination starting from the individual (Booth and Bennett 2002: 434f.; Squires 2005: 368). It reflects feminist liberalism as well as socialist theory, both defining success as women and men being treated as equals (Dunn 2016: 48, 74). While feminist liberal theory is about increasing women’s representation, socialist feminist theory, closely related to Marxist feminism, accounts structures of production in the economy and reproduction in the household to determine women’s position (Hudson 2005: 158; Pratt 2013: 774; Tickner 1992). Analogous, in Squires’ framework this perspective is called inclusion and seeks gender neutrality (Crenshaw 1989: 368). The second stool leg, the gender-as-difference perspective or women’s perspective, inspires initiatives that recognize women as disadvantaged group in society, who deserve particular treatment due to differences (Booth/ Bennett 2002: 435). It corresponds to what Squires calls reversal or difference politics and was influenced by feminist radical and cultural theory. 

According to Hudson and Pratt, radical feminism is essentialist and focusses on the differences between men and women, violence against women, and women’s contributions. To make their voices louder and to fight the institutionalised patriarchy, affirmative action is necessary (Dunn 2016: 49; Hudson 2005: 158; Pratt 2013: 774; Squires 2005: 368). In Hansen’s categorization, this is called standpoint feminism, which has a critical understanding of the state as a set of patriarchal practices that support and silence structural disadvantages of women (Hansen 2010: 21). Cultural feminist theory, a category also told apart by Pratt, is about women’s role in opposing war and building peace (Pratt 2013: 774). Finally, the gender-as-diversity, gender perspective or diversity politics, aims to transform the organisation of society to a fairer distribution of human responsibilities and the recognition of a plurality of intersecting identities. Gender-as-diversity or the strategy of displacement argue for a widening focus from gender inequality to recognition of the diverse and intersecting inequalities and thus embrace Hook’s and Crenshaw’s idea of intersection as well as postcolonial feminist theory (Booth and Bennett 2002: 434f.; Crenshaw 1989: 166, 368, 370; Dunn 2016: 50, 74). Postcolonial feminism criticizes the underlying racial assumptions of the narratives, such as brown men as sexual harassers, white men as the protectors (despite the problem of SGV by peacekeepers) and the exclusion of women from feminist and antiracist discourse (Crenshaw 1989: 140, 144; Pratt 2013: 777). By focussing on black women, who often were excluded from protection from rape and feminist movements and had to decide between race or sex discrimination, postcolonial feminism attempts to combine gender and race through the concept of intersectionality (Crenshaw 1989: 139, 149, 156; Hooks 2015: 216, 223). 

Hypotheses 

Deduced from the three-legged gender stool framework, three main hypotheses will help to answer the research question: How has the WPS Agenda impacted mandates of current multidimensional PKOs in Africa? Thereby, each hypothesis corresponds to one leg of the gender stool as previous research has shown that all perspectives are reflected in the WPS agenda, albeit to varying degrees. Based on the gender-as-equality perspective and liberal feminist theory, current PKOs are expected to strongly focus on amplifying women’s voices in all political activities to promote equal treatment and establish equal opportunities (Dunn 2010: 27). Hypotheses H1 reads: The mandates of current PKOs in Africa reflect the spirit of 1325, especially in regard to improving participation of local women and strengthening prevention against women rights’ violationsIn line with the gender-as-difference perspective and radical and cultural feminist theory, the WPS agenda also takes women’s different experiences in wars and the disproportionate impact of wars into account. Based on previous research, it is expected that the protection and relief and recovery pillar of 1325 refer to these differences between men and women, include the special needs of women, and reflect this gender-as-difference perspective. However, due to the criticism on the essentialist argumentation on women’s and men’s differences and the fact that only later phases of conflict mandates of PKOs must focus on reconstruction, the difference-perspective is less considered. The second hypothesis reads: Fewer mandates of the PKOs, and if, only later ones, focus on the protection of women and their special needs in relief and recovery. Differing from the other two traditionally established perspectives of the 1960s, gender-as-diversity draws from non-Western postcolonial and black feminism of the 1990s. Due to the rather conservative context of the UN Security Council, Western feminist movements’ dominance, and thus lesser focus on diversity in 1325, it is expected that mandates of current PKOs also have not embraced an intersectional perspective of gender as they have the other two gender perspectives. The third hypothesis reads: Current multidimensional PKOs do not fully exhaust the potential of 1325 as they lack the diversity perspective.

Methodology and Case Selection

In order to answer the research question, how the WPS agenda has impacted the mandates of current multidimensional PKOs, three hypotheses, deduced from the theoretical framework of the three-legged gender stool, will guide through the analysis. Based on qualitative-analytical analysis of the mandates of the PKOs, each hypothesis will be responded to in one part of the following chapter. Due to the scope of the paper, the analysis will be applied to a particular set of current UN-missions. The case selection for this paper took the starting date, the location, the number of personnel, and the scope of the mandate into account. The PKOs were supposed to have started after the adoption of Resolution 1325 and to be deployed on the African continent. The selected PKOs have more than 1000 troops and are based on encompassing, multidimensional mandates, which leads to a case selection of the six UN-mandated peace support missions: MINUSCA, MINUSMA, MONUSCO, UNMISS, UNISFA, and UNAMID.

Using qualitative content analysis (QCA) according to Mayring and Schreier, the analysis is applied to a total of 226 resolutions, split up into 19 on MINUSMA, 25 on MINUSCA, 29 on MONUSCO, 43 on UNISFA, 51 on UNMISS and 59 on UNAMID. As preliminary work for the QCA, the analysis starts with a search for the words “women” and “gender”. More in-depth examinations on the context of the words follow on 186 selected resolutions mentioning women and 170 selected resolutions mentioning gender. Aiming at a systemic description and of specific aspects of these resolutions the first and latest resolution of each PKO, selected due to the fact that they can show a development, are analysed detailly on the grounds of a coding frame (Schreier 2012: 1, 4). The main categories refer to three logics behind the hypotheses: equality, difference and diversity and the subcategories are inspired by the four pillars and criteria stated in the Report of the UN Secretary General S/2010/498 on the implementation of the WPS agenda (Peace Women 2020a; Schreier 2012: 59-67; UN SC 2010: 9ff). The first hypothesis, pertaining to the equality-perspective, examines references to the first two pillars of 1325. Concerning the participation pillar, references to participation, representation and involvement of women in UN troops as well as local women in peace processes will account for references to participation. For the second pillar, prevention, the promotion of women’s rights is of interest. Thus, references to support for local peace initiatives, measures for strengthening national laws, and a focus on refugee camps will be looked at and seen as consideration of the prevention pillar. The second hypothesis, considering the difference-perspective, analyses the two other pillars. The protection pillar will be examined in terms of references to mechanisms that ensure the protection of women from SGBV in conflict situations and by peacekeepers, and reporting obligations to the UN Security Council. The fourth pillar, relief and recovery, will be measured in references to the inclusion of women in security sector reforms and women’s needs in DRR programmes. The third hypothesis will be answered with a word count analysis of “gender” and an in-depth analysis of the word’s context for each PKO’s first and latest resolution. Aiming to meet the quality criteria of qualitative research objectivity, reliability and validity, it is important to keep in mind that this application of QCA is context-specific, interpretative and reflexive (Schreier 2012: 29-35). The creation of the coding frame as well as the interpretation of the resolutions is based on subjective experiences and will most likely differ from other researchers’ understandings. Thus, the processes and interpretations will be explained in a precise and transparent manner in the following analysis to meet standards of quality research and consider self-reflection throughout the paper.

Impact of the WPS Agenda on Mandates of Current UN PKOs in Africa

Celebrated as a “milestone in the struggle for greater gender equality at all levels of peacekeeping, peacemaking, peacebuilding and post-conflict reconstruction”, 1325 introduced a new era for international conflict resolution with stronger focus on women (Aroussi 2009: 6). Several works have analysed the implementation of the WPS agenda and women’s roles in peace support missions and especially in PKOs on the ground, however this paper turns to the specific mandates of the six PKOs; each hypothesis will be focused on in one respective chapter (Adjei 2019: 137, 141; Hebert 2011: 121; Kreft 2017: 133; Miller et al. 2014: 2). 

Mandates for Equality

The following chapter responds to the first hypothesis, reading: The mandates of current PKOs in Africa reflect the spirit of 1325, especially in regard to improving participation of local women and strengthening prevention against women rights’ violations. This hypothesis will not only present the general findings of the qualitative document analysis, including a search for the word “women”, but also delve deeply into the participation and prevention pillars on the grounds of references to the above-mentioned criteria. General findings indicate that 186 resolutions out of 226 refer to women, which correspond to a percentage of 82.3 percent, and thereby each mission has certain mandates that refer to women. The highest share of 93 percent of mandates referring to women has MONUSCO, which is the UN mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). This mission began on 1 July 2010 and is mandated until 20 December 2020. This corresponds to 27 out of 29 resolutions referring to women with only seven reaffirming resolution 1325, and 17 setting out obligations for implementing 1325. The 27 resolutions referring to women name the word “women” an average of seven times with an overall maximum of 17 times in resolution 2109 (2013). In addition, despite being slightly lesser, but still considering at least in terms of counting the word “women”, the UN mandated a mission in Mali, which started on 25 April 2013 and was recently prolonged until 30 June 2021, called MINUSMA. For this mission, 89.5 percent or 17 out of 19 resolutions refer to women and 15 out of the 17 even set out operational clauses on the specific implementation of 1325 obligations. While the average of 17 resolutions is eight references to women, the latest resolution 2531 (2020) even mentions the word “women” 21 times. Beginning on 8 July 2011, one of the longest missions, that has experienced several shifts in its resolutions and which is still mandated today and even prolonged until 15 March 2021 is UNMISS in South Sudan. Of its 51 resolutions, 44 mention women; in 13 of those mentions they only reaffirm the WPS agenda and in 29 they refer to actual implementation obligations. In the resolutions referring to women, women are on average referred to 9 times and 25 times to as the most. 

Starting on 31 July 2007, UNAMID, the mission in Sudan, which was just recently extended for another two months until 31 December 2020, has the highest number of resolutions. Of its 59 resolutions, 48 resolutions mention the word women, with an average of six times and a maximum of 17 times. In half of the 48 cases, women are only referred to in a context of affirmation of Resolution 1325, and in the other half in a context of real implementation on-the-ground. Located directly in Abyei, beginning on 27 June 2011 and mandated through 15 November 2020, the other UN mission in Sudan refers to women in 76.7 percent, corresponding to 33 out of 43 resolutions. Resolutions of UNISFA hint at the real implementation in 19 cases and reaffirm the WPS agenda in 13 cases. On average the word “women” is mentioned eight times and 17 times at the top. The least focus on women shows MINUSCA, the mission in the Central African Republic since 10 April 2014, lately extended until 31 July 2021. Only 68 percent of 25 resolutions on MINUSCA refer to women; twelve focus on the implementation and five reaffirm the agenda. Overall, one can see that references to women are made in the majority of the resolutions, however differences exist in the quantity and intensity (implementation of affirmation of agenda) between the missions. 

By investigating the equality movements and the strive for equal recognition and involvement of women, the following section will analyse the consideration of the participation and prevention pillar in the resolutions of the missions. In total 131 of the 186 resolutions that referred to women, corresponding to 70.4 percent, referred to participation, in most times by explicitly stating the word “participation”.  Thereby, UNISFA’s resolutions refer in comparison to other PKOs with 78.8 percent the most to participation and UNAMID with only 62.5 percent the least. Of the resolutions that actually refer to women, MINUSMA and MINUSCA both refer in 76.5 percent to the participation and involvement of women. UNMISS, with 70.5 percent of the cases, and MONUSCO, with 66.7 percent, mention participation slightly less. The more detailly qualitative document analysis of the respective first and latest resolution on the PKOs supports the finding that the participation pillar is well reflected in the mandates of the PKOs. For instance, in MINUSCA’s first resolution 2149 (2014) it reads “full and effective participation, involvement and representation of women in all spheres and at all levels” (S/RES/2149, para. 35). In MONUSCO’s latest resolution the involvement of women is emphasized in regard to local elections, by declaring the need “ensure the full, effective and meaningful participation of women at all stages” (S/RES/2502, para. 2). While slightly differing in the exact wording, the resolutions resemble each other in that they both recognize the importance of not only participation, but full, effective and meaningful participation (e.g. S/RES/253, para. 3). 

Concerning obligations on equal and effective participation, some PKOs’ mandates and resolutions go even further. An example of this can be found in UNMISS’ first resolution from 2011, which aims at “promoting women’s leadership” and recognizes the need to “broaden and deepen the pool of available civilian experts, especially women” (S/RES/1996, preamble, para. 12). Both UNMISS and UNISFA include distinct quota on the participation and representation of women. The latest resolution of UNMISS demands a 35 percent minimum for women’s representation in the Revitalised Agreement, which was the outcomes of the peace negotiations, and women’s involvement in all spheres of political leadership (S/RES/2514, para. 9). UNISFA’s latest resolution calls for increased participation in public life and decision-making processes, as well as a 40 percent quota for women in the Transitional Legislative Council (S/RES/2524, preamble). UNAMID, however, aims to increase the share of women in PKOs (S/RES/2525, para. 9). Still, the share of women in uniformed personnel is 7 percent, which is inarguably quite low. Other shares of women in uniformed personnel in the selected PKOs range between 5 to 10 percent. Only the female shares of civilian personnel, which are between 19 to 28 percent, are higher, and are still far behind the equality goals. 

The second pillar, based on the idea of equality between men and women, is prevention and will be analysed in the following. 114 out of the 168 resolutions, corresponding to 61 percent, link women to issues concerning prevention of violence. At the top ranking is MINUSCA with 88.2 percent of its resolutions with reference to women that acknowledge the importance of prevention. MINUSCA expects all conflict parties to give clear orders against sexual exploitation and abuses (SEA) and calls upon the Transitional Authorities to implement measures for timely investigations against abuses (S/RES/2149, para. 15). It especially supports the “Mixed Unit for Rapid Intervention and Suppression of Sexual Violence against Women and Children” (S/RES/2499, para. 25). MINUSMA mentions in 70.6 percent of its resolutions that refer to women, women in the context of prevention. As the second pillar is often referred to as prevention against (sexual) violence, MINUSMA “urges all parties to prevent and eliminate sexual violence in conflict and post-conflict situation” and addresses “the stigma of sexual and gender-based violence” (S/RES/2531, para. 8, 56). Resolutions of the UNISFA and UNMISS missions, however, have drastically less obligations on prevention measures. 

Only in two-thirds of UNISFA’s resolutions referring to women make reference to the prevention of violations of women’s rights. UNISFA’s current mandate, however, is quite concrete on how to prevent those violations. It supports further steps to promote women’s rights and the development of a National Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security (S/RES/2524, preamble, para. 2ic, 2iiid). UNISFA’s mandate strengthens Sudan’s national law that criminalizes female genital mutilation and acknowledges the work of local women’s protection networks (S/RES/2524, preamble, para. 2iiic). UNMISS resolutions, which refer in 65.1 percent to prevention and women, support the implementation of key international human rights treaties and conventions, call on all conflict parties to stop any form of SGBV and support local women’s peace organisations (S/RES/1996, para. 12; S/RES/2514, para. 28). Both the first and the latest UNMISS mandates aim to strengthen SGBV prevention through early warning systems, gender expertise and training, gender advisors and gender focal points in all mission components (S/RES/1996, para. 24; S/RES/2513, para. 18). The latest resolution also mandates an intensified and extended presence and active patrolling in areas of high risk of SGBV and stronger involvement of all in gender-sensitive community violence reduction programs (S/RES/2514, para. 8avi, 19). MONUSCO’s resolutions with reference to women take prevention into account only in 59.3 percent. While the first resolution on the MONUSCO mandate only refers to the WPS agenda in its preamble, the latest resolution strongly reaffirms and operationalises the “important role of women and youth in the prevention and resolution of conflicts” and condemns sexual violence (S/RES/2502, preamble, para. 6). In order to protect women’s rights, 2502 identifies threats of SGBV and strengthens the DRC’s “Action Plan Against Sexual Violence in Conflict”. This includes the Government’s zero-tolerance policy on SGBV, other preventive measures, judicial procedures, and a special focus on the needs of internally displaced persons and survivors of sexual violence (S/RES/2502, para. 9, 29, 50c). UNAMID, the longest PKO that is currently still deployed, only refers to prevention in 43.8 percent of its resolutions mentioning women. In its first mandate it emphasises the importance of bringing justice to those responsible for ongoing SEA against civilian population and in its latest resolution it mandates an “increase in humanitarian and protection needs, including related to sexual and gender-based violence” (S/RES/1769, preamble; S/RES/2148, preamble). Comparing the six PKOs, one can note that the focus on prevention is very different. While in contrast to MINUSCA where almost 90 percent of the resolutions refer to prevention as an important pillar for the implementation of 1325, UNAMID lags behind with less than 45 percent.

These first findings show that mandates of current PKOs, although they are deployed on the same continent during the same time frame, have similar troop sizes, and are based on multidimensional mandates reflect to different degrees the obligations under 1325. In general, 186 out of 226 mention the word “women” at least once, which can of course not be seen as the only or best way to measure reference to the WPS agenda, but in the limited scope of this paper gives first hindsight. While references to participation range between 66.7 to 78.8 percent, references to prevention range between 43.8 to 88.2 percent, with UNAMID as an outlier measuring less than 45 percent. MINUSMA, MINUSCA and UNISFA stand out due to their overall high reflection of an equality perspective, both in regard to participation and prevention. The first hypothesis, reading: The mandates of current PKOs in Africa reflect the spirit of 1325, especially in regard to improving participation of local women and strengthening prevention against women rights’ violations, can be partially verified. Based on the findings, it can be concluded that all missions are based on respective resolutions which include obligations for the implementation of 1325 and the WPS agenda. While a focus on improving participation can also be proved for a wide range of woman, including not only local women but also female peacekeepers, consideration of the prevention pillar is still at medium levels in some resolutions, such as ones of the UNAMID mission. This leads to the conclusion that only some mandates fully reflect the equality spirit of 1325 and some still have room for stronger consideration for the prevention of crimes. In conclusion, the hypothesis can only be accepted to a limited degree.

Considering Differences

In the following chapter, the second hypothesis, reading Fewer mandates of the PKOs, and if, only later ones, focus on the protection of women and their special needs in relief and recovery, will be examined on the grounds of an analysis of the last two pillars of 1325. General findings on the protection of women from violence show that 118 of the 186 that refer to women refer to women in context of protection, which corresponds to 63.4 percent. A comparison of the selected PKOs shows that the percentage of referring to protection ranges between 54.2 percent in UNAMID and 70.6 in MINUSCA. UNAMID, whose mandates were already rather lacking the prevention pillar, only account in half of the cases to protection and otherwise just refer to and reaffirm the resolution 1325 in general. Upon closer examination, it is the first resolution of UNAMID which focusses on the protection of women and requests the UN Secretary-General to implement the zero-tolerance policy against sexual violence by peacekeepers in the UNAMID mission (S/RES/1769, preamble, para. 16). In comparison, MINUSCA refers in 12 out of 17 resolutions to the protection of women. Thereby, the first mandate shows what the protection of women includes. On the one hand it includes mechanisms that ensure the protection from SGBV by peacekeepers by implementing a zero-tolerance policy of the UN, and on the other hand it involves mechanisms that ensure the protection from SGBV in general conflict, for instance through Women Protection Advisors (S/RES/2149, para. 30, 32, 38; S/RES/2499, para. 41). 

The topic of SEA by peacekeepers is of continuing importance in current PKOs. While peacekeepers construct themselves in one of the three ways, either “natural” men who were involved with local women, victims of the predatory advances of local women, or disciplined men who were attempting to avoid sexualized temptations, the UN tries to uphold its reputation (Higate and Henry 2004: 489). MINUSCA mandates also include the obligation to monitor, investigate and report on violations and abuses against women and to follow a gender- and survivor-centred approach (S/RES/ 2149, para. 31, S/RES/2499, para. 32). UNISFA and UNMISS are two other PKOs that have mandates with higher consideration of protection needs of women. UNISFA mentions in 69.7 percent of its resolution referring to women the importance of strengthening the protection of women from SGBV (S/RES/2524, para. 2iiid). UNMISS does so in 67.4 percent of these resolutions. The measures that promote the protection of women from violence resemble the obligations of MINUSCA’s mandates. It explicitly states the importance of the “necessary means to ensure full compliance by UNMISS with the United Nations zero tolerance policy on sexual exploitation and abuse” and keeping the Security Council as well as human rights bodies through reports, investigations and monitoring in a transparent manner informed (S/RES/1996, para. 23; S/RES/2514, preamble, para. 8dii, 22). MINUSMA and MONUSCO, acknowledging the importance of protection of women from SGBV in 64.7 percent and 63 percent of the cases, also resemble the obligations of 1325. In addition to the known mechanisms of zero-tolerance policy and the deployment of Women Protection Advisors in MINUSMA’s case, the mandate calls for support for member states and regular reports on SGBV abuses (S/RES/2100, para. 16, 23, 30; S/RES/2531, preamble, para. 28). MONUSCO mandates also include similar mechanisms, but especially stress the important role of UN Women Protection Advisors, the documentation of violations and support for DRC’s efforts in ensuring the protection of women and girls (S/RES/1926, para. 12, 15; S/RES/2502, para. 8, 33). All in all, one can note with the exception of UNAMID, the protection pillar is implemented in between 63 and 70 percent of the resolutions referring to women. The different missions’ mandates include almost the same mechanisms and measures. Moreover, even at this point it cannot be argued that the protection pillar was significantly considered less than the pillars based on equality. 

For the final pillar, one can note that measures on relief and recovery were considered less. In total, only 105 out of 186 resolutions refer to women’s role in relief and recovery, corresponding to a percentage of 56.5. Again, falling behind in explicit references are UNAMID mandates due to the fact that half of its resolutions refer only broadly to the whole WPS agenda. Out of 48 resolutions that mention women, 20 resolutions refer to women in relief and recovery. Out of the 27 MONUSCO resolutions mentioning women, 13 focus on the role of women in relief and recovery. The latest MONUSCO resolution states the “important role of women and youth in the prevention and resolution of conflicts” and demands “to support the psychological and medical support of survivors of sexual violence in conflict to facilitate their reintegration” (S/RES/2502, preamble, para. 9). The missions UNISFA, UNMISS and MINUSMA yield approximately the same levels ranging between 63 and 65 percent. UNISFA’s latest mandate thereby explicitly recognizes the importance of women in peaceful political transition in the Sudan (S/RES/ 2425, preamble). Both the first and latest mandate of the UNMISS mission stress the development of a DDR strategy with particular attention to the special needs of women and call on the “meaningful participation of women in the peace process” (S/RES/1996, para. 3cii; S/RES/2514 preamble). MINUSMA also calls for the participation of women at an early stage of the stabilization phase and in security sector reform to take their special needs into account (S/RES/2100, para. 25; S/RES/1531, para. 28). Similar to MINUSMA’s mandates’ wording, MINUSCA’s mandates call for women’s involvement in stabilisation activities, security sector reform and DDR processes (S/RES/2149, para. 35). The latest resolution also calls for elections after peace processes with the involvement of women (S/RES/2499, preamble). MINUSCA mandates stand out as 70.6 percent of the relevant resolutions refer to women in relief and recovery processes. In conclusion, one can state that the fourth pillar of resolution 1325 has also found application in the PKO mandates, albeit to different degrees. MINUSCA with 70.6 percent and UNAMID with 41.7 percent differ quite extensively.

As for the hypothesis, reading Fewer resolutions of the PKOs, and if, only later ones, focus on the protection of women and their special needs on relief and recovery, one must note that the findings show a different trend. While it is true that the relief and recovery pillar is only referred to in 105 out of 186 cases, based on the data, the protection pillar has found slightly more recognition than the prevention pillar, which contradicts the hypothesis. It cannot clearly be stated whether the equality perspective is reflected more than the difference perspective. Additionally, there is not a clear trend that more recent resolutions show higher acknowledgements of protection or relief and recovery, meaning that the mentioning of women in relief and recovery does not depend on the phase of the transformation to peace. After considering the information gleaning from this analysis, the second hypothesis must be rejected and cannot be verified.

Lacking Diversity

Several resolutions of the examined PKOs are tasked “to take fully into account gender considerations as a cross-cutting issue throughout [their] mandate[s]” (S/RES/2531, preamble). But what does this really involve? While some resolutions explicitly call for the deployment of Gender Advisors who provide gender training and expertise, others only reaffirm the importance of such gender considerations while leaving further measures untouched. In the following scenario, the 226 resolutions will be searched for the word “gender” and the first and latest resolutions of each PKO will be analysed more detailly on the context of the word to examine the third hypothesis, reading: Current multidimensional PKOs do not fully exhaust the potential of 1325 as they lack the diversity perspective. 

General findings of the word-count-analysis show that out of the 226 resolutions, 170 of them mention the word “gender”. This corresponds to 75.2 percent, which is less than the share of women’s references of 82.3 percent in the resolutions. It should also be noted that while resolutions mentioning the word “women” do not mention the word “gender” in 53 cases, resolutions which mention the word “gender” do not mention the word “women” only in 3 cases (one UNISFA and two UNAMID resolutions). This leads to the assumption that the WPS agenda has first of all impacted PKO mandates in terms of consideration of women, but not of gender. Combining this empirical finding with the historical development of feminist theory, which lacked a gender-as-diversity perspective for a long time and was rather focussed on the equality-difference-debate, it suggests that PKOs really lack a strong diversity perspective. The following comparison of the selected PKOs will show whether certain differences in the reference to gender between the PKOs can be distinguished. MONUSCO is the PKO which has the most resolutions that mention the word “gender”. Out of its 29 resolutions, 26 mention the word “gender”, which corresponds to 89.7 percent. On average these 26 resolutions name the word five times and the latest mandate, resolution 2502, even 13 times. Almost as often as they refer to the PKOs, MINUSMA and UNMISS refer approximately 84 percent to gender. Both mention the word an average of five times, while MINUSMA’s resolution 2223 (2016) states it 11, which is the highest number of all MINUSMA resolutions, UNMISS’ resolution 2514 (2020) brings it to 23 times. The PKO in the Sudan, UNAMID, refers to gender in 42 out of its 59 resolutions, which corresponds to a share of 71.2 percent. The average resolution thereby only refers three times to gender, but the resolution 2429 (2018) brings it to 19 times. UNISFA, also deployed in the Sudan, has the same average and maximum, but only 29 out of 43 resolutions (67.4 percent) mention gender. The mission with the least emphasis on gender with only a reference in 56 percent of its resolutions is MINUSCA. At the same time, it mentions the word seven times on average in these resolutions, which is the highest average compared to the other PKOs. It is highly noticeable and puzzling that while MINUSCA reached the highest levels of references to women in the context of prevention, protection, relief and recovery and almost in participation, it shows the least references to gender. 

But in what context do all these resolutions mention and use the word “gender”? Although all PKOs’ mandates mention that gender considerations are a “cross-cutting issue”, the resolutions also use gender in much more diverse contexts. Due to the limited scope of the paper, the first and latest resolution of each PKO are analysed on the context of the word, which leads to a little data set of 48 references to gender. Most of them (13 references) are used in a context of protection from SGBV, for instance “supporting protection for women and children from all forms of sexual and gender-based violence” through the “deployment of gender and women protection advisors” (S/RES/2524, para. 2iiid, 8). Other times, gender is used in the context of analysis, training and monitoring (9 references) or in the context of judicial processes and holding violators accountable for their actions (6 references) (“support to accountability and transitional justice, including for acts of sexual and gender-based violence” (S/RES/2524, para. 2iib)). In addition, the resolutions also call for stopping SGBV (5 references), condemning SGBV (2 references) or improving gender awareness and implementation (4 references). One can note that gender is mostly used in the phrasing “sexual and gender-based violence” and all actions around it, such as protection from and judicial processes for it. In terms of the hypothesis on hand, reading: Current multidimensional PKOs do not fully exhaust the potential of 1325 as they lack the diversity perspective, it is necessary to have a short look at the context in which the word “gender” is used in 1325. In 1325, gender is mentioned 11 times: three times in the preamble and affirmative context of previous resolutions and commitments, four times in the expression of incorporating gender mainstreaming in PKOs (para. 5, 15, 17), two times in the call for gender considerations in peace agreements (para. 8, 16), once in the context of protection from SGBV (para. 10), and once in the call for gender-sensitive training (para. 7) (S/RES/1325). Based on the findings of the 48 references to gender in the first and latest resolutions of the selected PKOs, one can see that the mandates of current multidimensional PKOs refer to these gender contexts except for the explicit gender considerations in peace agreements. All in all, this brief analysis illuminates the fact that gender perspective is reflected in the mandates of current PKOs. The mandates miss certain aspects and are less focussed on gender than on women, but the hypothesis that a diversity perspective is lacking, does not prove correct. 1325 as the starting point for the WPS agenda shows with 33 references to women and only 11 references to gender already a stronger focus on women than on gender in general, which leads to the assumption that the mandates of the PKOs almost fully reflect 1325, but that 1325 misses a stronger diversity perspective and focus on gender. At this point, the third hypothesis must be rejected and the necessity arises to transfer this analysis to subsequent resolutions of 1325 and see how they incorporate the diversity perspective and whether then mandates of current PKOs fully reflect this perspective.

Conclusion

Where are the Women? Picking up on Anne Tickner’s question from the 1980s and the following feminist movements towards greater involvement of women in the international political security realm, the landmark adoption of resolution 1325 by the UN Security Council has laid the foundation for the further evolving Women, Peace and Security agenda of the 21st century. 1325 with its four pillars, participation, prevention, protection and relief and recovery, and subsequent resolutions have thereby impacted peacekeeping in terms of references to women significantly. Following up on the puzzle how in particular the WPS has had an impact, this paper asked the question: How has the WPS agenda impacted mandates of current multidimensional PKOs in Africa?

Differing from most research that is focussed on the implementation of the WPS in PKOs, and following Kreft’s work, this paper analysed in the form of QCA the impact of the WPS agenda on the mandates of six selected PKOs. Deduced from the framework of the three-legged gender stool, three hypotheses guided through the analysis of the impact of the WPS agenda. For the first hypothesis on the reflection of the spirit of 1325 in PKOs’ mandates, the analysis showed that out of the total 226 resolutions of the six PKOs, 82.3 percent referred to women. Furthermore, all six PKOs are based on resolutions that make references to women, but they differ in the quantity and intensity of their references. While MONUSCO resolutions refer in 93 percent of its resolutions to women, MINUSCA resolutions only in 68 percent. More in-depth analyses showed that the resolutions that refer to women refer to them in 70.4 percent a context of participation and in 61.3 percent in a context of prevention. While all PKOs thereby have mandates with similar contents, differences remain in the degree of references to the pillars. For instance, UNAMID clearly lacks a focus on prevention, which led only to a limited adoption of the first hypothesis that all PKOs fully reflect the 1325 spirit. Concerning the second hypothesis on a supposing lacking difference perspective, the findings showed that the mandates of the PKOs included considerations of both the protection and relief and recovery pillars, albeit again to different degrees. Strikingly, the PKOs MINUSCA was the top scorer in almost all four pillars and UNAMID was the least considerable mission of the pillars. Due to the fact that also no clear content-related differences could be determined, the second hypothesis proved wrong and should be focussed on in further research with different methods. The third hypothesis analysed the diversity perspective in the PKO resolutions and found that 75.2 percent of all resolutions refer to gender, which is less than the amount of references to women. Noticeable is that in 53 cases women are mentioned but not gender, but that only in three cases gender is mentioned but not women, leading to the assumption that the WPS impact is rather in the form of a focus on women than on gender. Moreover, it is striking that the top scorer in references to women, MINUSCA, makes the least references to gender with only 56 percent, and that MONUSCO makes with 89.7 percent the most references. Further examinations revealed that gender is used in diverse contexts, most often in the context of protection from SGBV, then gender analysis and training, and more abstract in gender as a cross-cutting issue across the mandate. This showed that a gender perspective is not lacking except for gender in peace agreements, but that otherwise gender obligations of 1325 are reflected in the PKOs’ mandates, which proves the hypothesis wrong and leads to the assumption that the WPS agenda should have a stronger diversity focus and the necessity to analyse further resolutions. 

Reflecting the subjectivity of the interpretation, this paper would benefit from other researchers of different backgrounds. Further research would also clearly benefit from in-depth analyses of the impact of subsequent resolutions of the WPS agenda on the PKO mandates and of the impact of 1325 on in-between resolutions of the selected PKOs. The coding frame of the QCA should thereby be supplemented by a grading of more than yes or no, such as categories of indirect or direct mentions. Furthermore, a greater selection of PKOs, which are not deployed on the African continent or started before 2000, and a mixed-methods approach would further gauge the topic. An analysis of the real implementation of the mandates on the ground would further enrich research as it would benefit from the combination of theoretical findings from the word and content analysis and then empirical findings. Future research should also ask why such differences between the PKOs exist. It is quite striking that one of the longest missions in Africa, UNAMID, shows the least consideration for the WPS agenda, but that MINUSCA reflects it significantly. Finally, the question of what to do with the results arises and should be considered in future research and in regard to policy recommendations.

References

Adjei, Maxwell. 2019. ‘Women’s Participation in Peace Processes: A Review of Literature’. Journal of Peace Education, 16 (2): 133–154.

Armstrong, Lloyd. 1914. ‘Suggestions for Peace in the Present European War’, https://digital.janeaddams.ramapo.edu/items/show/7071. Accessed 2 August 2020.

Aroussi, Sahla. 2009. ‘Women, Peace and Security: Moving Beyond Feminist Pacificism’. PSA Annual Conference, Manchester.

Bell, Christine and Catherine O’Rourke. 2010. ‘Peace Agreement or Pieces of Paper? The Impact on UNSC Resolution 1325 on Peace Processes and their Agreements’. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 59: 941–980.

Bellamy, Alex J. and Paul D. Williams. 2013. ‘The Politics and Challenges of Providing Peacekeepers’. In Providing Peacekeepers: The Politics, Challenges, and Future of United Nations, ed. Bellamy, Alex J. and Paul D. Williams. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1-23.

Binder, Christina, Karin Lukas and Romana Schweiger. 2008. ‘Empty Words or Real Achievement? The Impact of Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women in Armed Conflicts’. Radical History Review, 101: 22-41.

Blanchard, Eric M. 2003. ‘Gender, International Relations, and the Development of Feminist Security Theory’. Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28 (4): 1289–1312.

Booth, Christine and Cinnamon Bennett. 2002. ‘Gender Mainstreaming in the European Union: Towards a New Conception and Practice of Equal Opportunities?’. The European Journal of Women’s Studies, 9 (4): 430–446.

Cohn, Carol, Helen Kinsella and Sheri Gibbings. 2004. ‘Women, Peace and Security Resolution 1325’. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 6 (1): 130-140.

Coomaraswamy, Radhika. 2015, ‘Preventing Conflict, Transforming Justice, Securing the Peace: A Global Study on the Implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325’, https://wps.unwomen.org/themes/. Accessed 29 July 2020.

Crenshaw, Kimberle. 1989. ‘Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine’. Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics: 138–168.

Dharmapuri, Sahana. 2011. ‘Just Add Women and Stir?’, Parameters: 56–70.

Dorning, Swen and Nils Goede. 2010. ‘Ten Years of Women, Peace and Security: Gaps and Challenges in Implementing Resolution 1325’, INEF Policy Brief.

Dunn, Michelle Elizabeth. 2016. ‘You go far but no further’: Applying a Gendered Lens to the Women Peace and Security Agenda in Post-Conflict Liberia. Queensland.

El-Bushra, Judy. 2007. ‘Feminism, Gender, and Women’s Peace Activism’. Development and Change, 38 (1): 131-147.

Gibbings, Sheri L. 2011. ‘No Angry Women at the United Nations: Political Dreams and the Cultural Politics of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325’. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 13 (4): 522–538.

Goulding, Marrack. 1993. ‘The Evolution of United Nations Peacekeeping’. International Affairs, 69 (3): 451-464.

Gumru, F. Belgin and Jan Marie Fritz, 2009. ‘Women, Peace and Security: An Analysis of the National Action Plans Developed in Response to UN Security Council Resolution 1325’. Societies Without Borders, 4: 209-225.

Hansen, Lene. 2010. ‘Ontologies, Epistemologies, Methodologies’. In Gender Matters in Global Politics: A Feminist Introduction to International Relations, ed. Laura J. Shepherd. London/ New York: Routledge: 17–27.

Harrington, Carol. 2011. ‘Resolution 1325 and Post-Cold War Feminist Politics’. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 13 (4): 557–575.

Heathcote, Gina and Dianne Otto. 2014. Rethinking Peacekeeping, Gender Equality and Collective Security. London: Palgrave MacMillan.

Hebert, Laura. 2011. ‘Analyzing UN & NATO Responses to Sexual Misconduct in Peacekeeping Operations’. In Making Gender, ed. Annica Kronsell and Erika Svedberg. London: Routledge: 121-136.

Hendricks, Cheryl. 2015. ‘Women, Peace and Security in Africa: Conceptual and Implementation Challenges and Shifts’. African Security Review, 24 (4): 364–375.

Higate, Paul and Marsha Henry. 2004. ‘Engendering (In)security in Peace Support Operations’. Security Dialogue, 35 (4): 481–498.

Hooks, Bell. 2015. Ain’t I a Women: Black Women and Feminism. London/ New York: Routledge.

Hudson, Heidi. 2005. ‘Doing’ Security As Though Humans Matter: A Feminist Perspective on Gender and the Politics of Human Security’. Security Dialogue, 36 (2): 155–174.

Jansson, Maria and Maud Eduards. 2016. ‘The Politics of Gender in the UN Security Council Resolutions on Women, Peace and Security’. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 18 (4): 590-604.

Karim, Sabrina and Kyle Beardsley. 2015. ‘Ladies Last: Peacekeeping and Gendered Protection’. In Gender, Peace and Security: Implementing UN Security Council Resolution 1325, ned. Gizelis, Theodora-Ismene and Louise Olsson. London/ New York: Routledge, 62-95.

Kirby, Paul and Laura J. Shepherd. 2016. ‘Reintroducing Women, Peace and Security’. International Affairs, 92 (2): 249–254.

Klein, Roohia S. 2012. ‘The Role of Women in Mediation and Conflict Resolution: Lessons for UN Security Council Resolution 1325’. Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice, 18 (2): 277–313.

Krause, Jana. 2015. Revisiting Protection from Conflict-Related Sexual Violence: Actors, Victims and Power. In Gender, Peace and Security: Implementing UN Security Council Resolution 1325, ed. Gizelis, Theodora-Ismene and Louise Olsson. London/ New York: Routledge, 99-113.

Kreft, Anne-Kathrin. 2017. ‘The Gender Mainstreaming Gap: Security Council Resolution 1325 and UN Peacekeeping Mandates’. International Peacekeeping, 24 (1): 132-158.

McKay, Susan. 2004. ‘Women, Human Security, and Peace-Building: A Feminist Analysis’. In Conflict and Human Security: A Search for New Approaches of Peace-Building, ed. Jeong Shinoda. London: IPSHU English Research Report Series. No. 19.

Miller, Barbara, Milad Pournik and Aisling Swaine. 2014. Women in Peace and Security through United Nations Security Resolution 1325: Literature Review, Content Analysis of National Action Plans, and Implementation. Washington D.C.

Olsson, Louise, Anita Schjölset and Frida Möller. 2015. Women’s Participation in International Operations and Missions. In Gender, Peace and Security: Implementing UN Security Council Resolution 1325, ed. Gizelis, Theodora-Ismene and Louise Olsson. London/ New York: Routledge, 37-61.

Otto, Dianne. 2006. ‘A Sign of ‘Weakness’? Disrupting Gender Certainties in the Implementation of Security Council Resolution 1325’. Michigan Journal of Gender and Law, 13 (1): 113–175.

Peace Women. 2020a, Indicators and Monitoring: Women, Peace and Security, https://www.peacewomen.org/security-council/WPS-indicators-and-monitoring. Accessed August 11, 2020.

Peace Women.  2020b, ‘Member States’, https://www.peacewomen.org/member-states. Accessed August 4, 2020.

Peace Women. 2020c, ‘Security Council’, https://www.peacewomen.org/security-council. Accessed August 4, 2018.

Pfaffenholz, Thania. 2018. ‘Women in Peace Negotiations’. In Gendering Diplomacy and International Negotiation, ed. Karin Aggestam and Ann E. Towns. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave MacMillan: 169–188.

Pratt, Nicola. 2013. ‘Reconceptualizing Gender, Reinscribing Racial–Sexual Boundaries in International Security: The Case of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on ‘‘Women, Peace and Security’’. International Studies Quarterly, 57: 772–783.

Pratt, Nicola and Sophie Richter-Devroe. 2011. ‘Critically Examining UNSCR 1325 on Women, Peace and Security’. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 13 (4): 489–503.

Puechguirbal, Nadine. 2010. ‘Peacekeeping, Peacebuilding and Post-Conflict Reconstruction’. In Gender Matters in Global Politics: A Feminist Introduction to International Relations, ed. Laura J. Shepherd. London/ New York: Routledge: 161–175.

Puechguirbal, Nadine. 2012. ‘The Cost of Ignoring Gender in Conflict and Post Conflict’. Amsterdam Law Forum, 4 (1): 4–19.

Schreier, Margrit. 2012. Qualitative Content Analysis in Practice. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Shepherd, Cassandra K. 2015. ‘The Role of Women in International Conflict Resolution’. Hamline University’s School of Law’s Journal of Public Law and Policy, 36 (2): 53–67.

Shepherd, Laura J. 2008. ‘Power and Authority in the Production of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325’. In International Studies Quarterly. 52: 383-404.

Shepherd, Laura J. 2010. Gender Matters in Global Politics: A Feminist Introduction to International Relations. London/ New York: Routledge.

Shepherd, Laura J. 2011. ‘Sex, Security and Superhero(in)es: From 1325 to 1820 and Beyond’. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 13 (4): 504-521.

Simić, Olivera. 2010. ‘Does the Presence of Women Really Matter? Towards Combating Male Sexual Violence in Peacekeeping Operations’. International Peacekeeping, 17 (2): 188–199.

Sjoberg, Laura. 2009. ‘Introduction to Security Studies: Feminist Contributions’. Security Studies, 18 (2): 183–213.

Squires, Judith. 2005. ‘Is Mainstreaming Transformative? Theorizing Mainstreaming in the Context of Diversity and Deliberation’. Oxford University Press: 366-388.

Stone, Laurel. 2014. Women Transforming Conflict: A Quantitative Analysis of Female Peacekeeping. South Orange, New Jersey: Seton Hall University.

St. Pierre, Kristine. 2011. Implementing the Women, Peace and Security Agenda in Peace Operations: Overview of Recent Efforts and Lessons Learned. Ottawa: Peacebuild

Tickner, J. Ann. 1992. Gender in International Relations: Feminist Perspectives on Achieving Global Security. New York: Colombia University Press.

Tickner, J. Ann. 2019. ‘Peace and Security from a Feminist Perspective’. In The Oxford Handbook of Women, Peace, and Security, ed. Sara E. Davies and Jacqui True. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 15–25.

Tickner, J. Ann and Jacqui True. 2018. ‘A Century of International Relations Feminism: From World War I Women’s Peace Pragmatism to the Women, Peace and Security Agenda’. International Studies Quarterly, 62: 221–233.

True, Jacqui. 2015. ‘A Tale of Two Feminisms in International Relations? Feminist Political Economy and the Women, Peace and Security Agenda’. Critical Perspectives, 11 (2): 419-424.

True, Jacqui. 2016. ‘Explaining the Global Diffusion of the Women, Peace and Security Agenda’. International Political Science Review, 37 (3): 307-323.

Tryggestad, Torunn L. 2018. ‘Negotiations at the UN: The Case of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security’. In Gendering Diplomacy and International Negotiation, ed. Karin Aggestam and Ann E. Towns. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave MacMillan: 239–258.

United Nations Security Council. 2000. Resolution 1325 (2000). S/RES/1325.

United Nations Security Council. 2007. Resolution 1769 (2007). S/RES/1769.

United Nations Security Council. 2010. Resolution 1925 (2010). S/RES/1925.

United Nations Security Council. 2011a. Resolution 1990 (2911). S/RES/1990.

United Nations Security Council. 2011b. Resolution 1996 (2011). S/RES/1996.

United Nations Security Council. 2013. Resolution 2100 (2013). S/RES/2100.

United Nations Security Council. 2014. Resolution 2149 (2014). S/RES/2149.

United Nations Security Council. 2019a. Resolution 2467 (2019). S/RES/2467.

United Nations Security Council. 2019b. Resolution 2493 (2019). S/RES/2493.

United Nations Security Council. 2020a. Resolution 2502 (2020). S/RES/2502.

United Nations Security Council. 2020b. Resolution 2524 (2020). S/RES/2524.

United Nations Security Council. 2020c. Resolution 2525 (2020). S/RES/2525.

United Nations Security Council. 2020d. Resolution 2531 (2020). S/RES/2531.

United Nations Security Council. 2020e. Resolution 2536 (2020). S/RES/2536.

United Nations Security Council. 2020f. Resolution 2541 (2020). S/RES/2541.

Väyrynen, Tarja. 2004. ‘Gender and UN Peace Operations: The Confines of Modernity’. In International Peacekeeping, 11 (1), 125-142.

Willett, Susan. 2010. ‘Introduction: Security Council Resolution 1325: Assessing the Impact on Women, Peace and Security’. International Peacekeeping, 17 (2): 142–158.

Further Reading on E-International Relations

What's your reaction?

Excited
0
Happy
0
In Love
0
Not Sure
0
Silly
0

You may also like

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More in:World's Best