Beyond the Battlefield: Why the Global Quest for Peace Rests on the Shoulders of Women
Around the world, the cries for “ceasefire,” “end the war,” and “stop the brutality” form a deafening chorus, yet the voices behind these pleas—those of women and girls—are too often muffled at the very tables where the future of nations is decided. This disconnect between those who endure the most horrific consequences of conflict and those who negotiate its end remains one of the most significant barriers to global stability. As the international community reflects on a quarter-century of the Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) agenda, the evidence is clearer than ever: when women are at the heart of peace processes, the resulting agreements are not only more inclusive but significantly more durable. Yet, despite twenty-five years of rhetoric and legal frameworks, the global commitment to women’s leadership in peacebuilding is faltering under the weight of chronic underfunding and political apathy.
The formal journey toward recognizing women as essential architects of peace began on October 31, 2000, when the United Nations Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1325. It was a watershed moment, born from years of tireless advocacy by civil society groups who demanded that the world stop viewing conflict solely through the lens of male combatants and traditional powerbrokers. Resolution 1325 shifted the paradigm, enshrining the right of women to participate equally in peace negotiations and acknowledging that war affects genders differently. Today, that original resolution is supported by nine subsequent mandates, forming a binding legal framework for all UN member states. However, the gap between these legal obligations and the lived reality of women in conflict zones is widening.
To understand the scope of the WPS agenda, one must look at its four foundational pillars: Participation, Prevention, Protection, and Relief and Recovery. These are not merely administrative categories; they are the lifelines of modern diplomacy. Participation demands that women hold seats at every level of decision-making, from local mediation to international treaty signing. Prevention focuses on stopping the outbreak of conflict by addressing the root causes of violence, including gender inequality itself. Protection ensures that women and girls are shielded from sexual and gender-based violence during and after hostilities. Finally, Relief and Recovery mandate that humanitarian aid and post-war reconstruction are designed with the specific needs of women in mind, ensuring they are not left behind in the wake of destruction.
The impact of this agenda is best seen through the eyes of those leading the charge on the ground. In Palestine, Randa Siniora has spent over three decades as a lawyer and human rights defender, fighting for justice under military occupation. As the Director of the Women’s Centre for Legal Aid and Counselling, she has become a symbol of resilience, refusing to let Palestinian women be characterized merely as victims. In 2018, she made history as the first Palestinian woman to brief the UN Security Council, emphasizing that women are initiators of change who demand meaningful political participation rather than just humanitarian sympathy. Her work highlights a core tenet of the WPS agenda: peace is impossible without the pursuit of legal protection and gender equality.
Similarly, in the volatile landscape of South Sudan, Police Commissioner Christine Fossen demonstrates that leadership in peacebuilding often comes in uniform. Leading the UN Police component of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS), Fossen uses her thirty years of experience in the Norwegian police force to mentor a network of uniformed women peacekeepers. For Fossen, leadership is not defined by rank but by the daily act of setting an example and using one’s voice to protect the vulnerable. Her presence in South Sudan is a testament to the fact that when women serve in peacekeeping roles, they build greater trust within communities and provide a different perspective on security that often de-escalates tension.
Despite these individual successes, the 2025 report from the United Nations Secretary-General presents a sobering reality. The world is currently witnessing a “grim picture” of implementation. As man-made conflicts proliferate from Eastern Europe to the Middle East and Sub-Saharan Africa, women are being actively shut out of the rooms where peace is discussed. Alarmingly, one in four countries now reports a significant backlash against women’s rights, with hard-won progress being rolled back by extremist ideologies and authoritarian regimes. This regression is compounded by a catastrophic lack of investment. While global military spending continues to reach record highs, funding for conflict prevention and grassroots peacebuilding is being slashed.
These funding cuts have direct, deadly consequences. In many regions, the departure of UN peacekeeping missions and the scaling back of frontline organizations leave women and girls without a critical layer of protection. When budgets are trimmed, the first things to go are often the programs that monitor war crimes, support survivors of sexual violence, and provide legal aid. This is not just a financial issue; it is a data issue. There is a profound lack of gender-disaggregated data in conflict zones, which makes the specific suffering of women invisible. Without accurate statistics on sexual violence or targeted attacks on female activists, it is nearly impossible to secure prosecutions or allocate resources effectively.
The violence of conflict is not always as loud as a bomb blast; it is often insidious and long-lasting. Women in fragile or conflict-affected environments are nearly eight times more likely to live in extreme poverty compared to those in stable regions. The collapse of healthcare systems in war zones also takes a disproportionate toll on mothers. In 2023, six out of every ten maternal deaths globally occurred in countries facing humanitarian crises, often from entirely preventable causes. This is the “quiet” violence of war—the deprivation of basic rights and the destruction of the social fabric that sustains life.
In Sudan, leaders like Mona Mohamed Omaer Hamad are working to mend this fabric. As part of the Sorkenat Organization, Hamad raises awareness about the role of women in democratic change. Her vision is one where women are present in state institutions not as tokens, but as leaders capable of high-level decision-making. She argues that women must resolve conflicts side-by-side with men to ensure that the peace achieved is one that serves the entire population. This sentiment is echoed in Haiti by Pédrica Saint-Jean, the Minister for Women and Women’s Rights. A survivor of multiple armed attacks herself, Saint-Jean advocates for a stronger response to gender-based violence and pushes for Haitian women to take the lead in governance. For her, the fulfillment of women’s fundamental rights is not a luxury to be addressed after a war—it is a prerequisite for ending the war.
As we look toward the 30th anniversary of the Beijing Declaration, the global blueprint for gender equality, the urgency of the WPS agenda has never been greater. Currently, 115 countries have developed National Action Plans to meet the goals of Resolution 1325, but a plan without a budget is merely a promise broken. The “Beijing+30” agenda calls for the full financing of these plans and the direct support of women’s frontline organizations. True progress will be measured by more than just signatures on a page; it will be seen when more women are voting in post-conflict elections, when fewer girls are forced into child marriage as a survival strategy, and when female peacebuilders are no longer targets of digital and physical abuse.
The message from the frontlines is clear: when women lead, peace follows. The historical evidence suggests that peace agreements influenced by women are 35 percent more likely to last at least fifteen years. This is because women tend to prioritize social reintegration, education, and healthcare—the very things that prevent a society from sliding back into violence. The question that remains is not whether women are capable of leading the world toward peace, but whether world leaders are finally willing to listen. The Women, Peace, and Security agenda is not just a policy for women; it is a roadmap for a more stable and just world for everyone. After twenty-five years, the time for “explaining” the importance of gender equality in peace is over. Now is the time for the investment and political courage required to make it a reality.
