The pleas are as consistent as they are urgent, echoing from the bombed-out streets of Gaza to the displacement camps of Sudan and the embattled villages of eastern Congo. “Ceasefire.” “End the war.” “Stop the brutality.” These are not merely slogans; they are the collective demands of women and girls who bear the disproportionate weight of global conflict. For UN Women, these voices form the foundation of a mandate that views peace not as the absence of war, but as the presence of justice and gender equality. Yet, as the international community approaches a quarter-century of the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda, a sobering reality has emerged: while the world acknowledges that women are essential to lasting peace, it continues to systematically exclude them from the rooms where peace is negotiated.
The cornerstone of this movement was laid on October 31, 2000, when the United Nations Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1325. This was a watershed moment in international law, marking the first time the Council recognized that war affects women differently and that women’s participation is vital for sustainable security. It was the culmination of years of tireless advocacy by civil society groups who argued that the traditional “men with guns” approach to diplomacy was failing. Resolution 1325 shifted the paradigm, committing global leaders to a framework that accounts for the needs and insights of half the population. Today, that framework has expanded into ten binding resolutions, yet the gap between policy and practice remains a chasm.
To understand the stakes, one must look at the four pillars that define the WPS agenda: Participation, Protection, Prevention, and Relief and Recovery. These are not independent silos but a linked ecosystem. Participation ensures women have a seat at the negotiating table; Protection safeguards them from gender-based violence during and after conflict; Prevention addresses the root causes of violence; and Relief and Recovery ensures that humanitarian aid and post-war reconstruction are designed with women’s specific needs in mind. When these pillars are upheld, the results are transformative. Statistical evidence consistently shows that when women are involved in peace processes, the resulting agreements are more inclusive, better implemented, and significantly more durable.
The human face of this agenda is found in leaders like Randa Siniora, a Palestinian lawyer and human rights defender who has spent over three decades navigating the complexities of justice under military occupation. As the Director of the Women’s Centre for Legal Aid and Counselling, Siniora has been a vocal advocate for the idea that women must not be viewed solely as victims. In 2018, she made history as the first Palestinian woman to brief the Security Council, telling the world that women are initiators of change who demand meaningful political participation rather than just charity. Her work highlights a core tenet of the WPS movement: that protection and participation are two sides of the same coin.
In South Sudan, the impact of female leadership is visible through the work of Police Commissioner Christine Fossen. Leading the UN Police component of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS), Fossen brings thirty years of experience from the Norwegian police force to one of the world’s most challenging peacekeeping environments. For Fossen, leadership is an everyday act of setting an example and mentoring the next generation of uniformed women. Her presence, and the presence of the women she mentors, changes the nature of peacekeeping, making the mission more approachable to local women and more effective at gathering intelligence on the ground.
Further south, in the Marrocane resettlement center in Mozambique, Quibibi Faquihe Buana serves as a district facilitator. Displaced from her home in Cabo Delgado, she has turned her own trauma into a tool for community stability. As a recognized peace champion, she uses mobile technology to report violence and trains other displaced women on how to prevent gender-based conflict. Her story illustrates the “Relief and Recovery” pillar in action, showing that even in the depths of displacement, women are the primary engines of community resilience.
However, these individual successes are being overshadowed by a global trend of regression. The United Nations Secretary-General’s 2025 report on Women, Peace and Security offers a “grim picture” of the current landscape. We are witnessing a period of chronic under-investment and a direct backlash against women’s rights. In fact, one in four countries currently reports a significant rollback in the legal and social protections afforded to women. This is happening at a time when man-made conflicts are proliferating, and with them, the use of sexual violence as a weapon of war.
One of the most significant hurdles is the catastrophic trend of funding cuts. Despite the rhetoric of world leaders, the WPS agenda remains a low priority in national budgets. As military spending reaches record highs globally, donors are simultaneously turning away from conflict prevention and peacebuilding. These “drastic cuts” are more than just numbers on a spreadsheet; they result in the closure of frontline organizations, the reduction of UN monitoring capabilities, and the withdrawal of peacekeeping missions that often serve as the only line of defense for vulnerable populations. Without reliable funding, the promises of Resolution 1325 are little more than paper-thin commitments.
Compounding this financial crisis is a pervasive lack of gender-disaggregated data. In many conflict zones, women and girls remain effectively invisible because their experiences are not being recorded. A lack of statistics on sexual violence leads directly to a lack of prosecutions, creating a culture of impunity for perpetrators. Furthermore, without accurate tracking of women’s representation in local governance or peace committees, it is impossible to hold governments accountable for their failures. The digital age has added a new layer to this invisibility, as digital abuse, trolling, and stalking are increasingly used to silence female activists and officials, yet these crimes are rarely captured in official security assessments.
The physical toll of this neglect is staggering. Women in fragile or conflict-affected environments are nearly eight times more likely to live in extreme poverty than those in stable regions. The collapse of healthcare systems in war zones has created a maternal mortality crisis; in 2023, six out of ten maternal deaths globally occurred in countries facing humanitarian crises. These are often preventable deaths, caused by a lack of basic medical care and the prioritization of military objectives over human security. In Sudan, leaders like Mona Mohamed Omaer Hamad of the Sorkenat Organization continue to fight for women’s roles in democratic change, even as their country is torn apart. Hamad’s vision is clear: women must be present in state institutions as decision-makers, resolving conflicts side-by-side with men.
In Haiti, Pédrica Saint-Jean, the Minister for Women and Women’s Rights, echoes this sentiment. A survivor of multiple armed attacks herself, Saint-Jean has transitioned from a civil society coordinator to a government leader, pushing for a robust response to gender-based violence in a country grappling with systemic instability. Her career trajectory embodies the WPS mandate: moving from the periphery of crisis management to the center of national governance. She maintains that the fulfillment of women’s fundamental rights is not a luxury to be addressed after peace is achieved, but a prerequisite for achieving that peace in the first place.
As the world looks toward the 25th anniversary of Resolution 1325 and the 30th anniversary of the Beijing Declaration, the path forward is well-mapped but poorly traveled. Currently, 115 countries have developed National Action Plans to implement the WPS agenda. While this is a record number, the vast majority of these plans are unfunded or underfunded. The “Beijing+30” agenda calls for a radical shift: the full financing of these national strategies and the direct support of grassroots women’s organizations that are doing the heavy lifting in conflict zones.
Progress in the coming decade will not be measured by the number of speeches given in New York or Geneva. It will be measured by the number of women at the negotiating table in actual peace talks, the percentage of humanitarian aid that reaches female-headed households, and the safety of female activists in both physical and digital spaces. It will be seen when a girl in a remote, conflict-affected village can go to school without fear, and when a woman who survives violence can find justice in a court of law. The message from 25 years of the WPS agenda is unmistakable: when women lead, peace follows. The only remaining question is whether the world’s leaders are finally ready to listen.
