The echoes of conflict are often defined by the roar of heavy machinery and the strategic maneuvers of generals, but the most enduring calls for an end to the bloodshed come from the quietest corners of the world’s most fractured societies. “Ceasefire.” “End the war.” “Stop the brutality.” These are not merely slogans; they are the urgent, unmistakable demands of women and girls who bear the disproportionate weight of modern warfare. As the international community reflects on a quarter-century of the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda, the message from UN Women is clear: peace is not a product of backroom deals between armed factions, but a collaborative achievement that remains fragile as long as half the population is excluded from the conversation.
Twenty-five years ago, the global landscape of diplomacy shifted. On October 31, 2000, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) took a historic step by unanimously adopting Resolution 1325. This was not just another bureaucratic milestone; it was the birth of the WPS agenda, a framework born from years of tireless advocacy by civil society and feminist leaders. It signaled a fundamental change in how the world defines security. For the first time, global leaders officially acknowledged that conflict and peace must be viewed through a gendered lens, moving beyond the traditional powerbrokers—historically and currently dominated by men—to include the insights and rights of women.
The logic behind the WPS agenda is as practical as it is moral. Evidence consistently shows that when women are present at the negotiating table, peace agreements are more inclusive, address a broader range of societal needs, and are significantly more likely to last. True peace is more than the absence of gunfire; it is the presence of justice, equity, and the fulfillment of human rights. Without accounting for the needs of women and girls, any cessation of hostilities is merely a temporary pause in a cycle of instability. Today, the WPS agenda is bolstered by ten binding UNSC resolutions, yet the gap between policy and practice remains a chasm that threatens to swallow the progress made since the turn of the millennium.
The WPS framework is built upon four essential pillars: Participation, Protection, Prevention, and Relief and Recovery. These pillars are designed to align gender equality with global security as a shared responsibility. Participation demands that women have an equal seat in all levels of decision-making, from local community mediation to international peace treaties. Protection focuses on the safety of women and girls, particularly against the scourge of conflict-related sexual violence. Prevention aims to stop the outbreak of conflict by addressing its root causes, including gender inequality and the proliferation of arms. Finally, Relief and Recovery ensure that humanitarian aid and post-conflict reconstruction are designed to meet the specific needs of women, who often lead the rebuilding of their communities long after the soldiers have left.
The impact of this agenda is best seen through the lives of those on the front lines. In Palestine, Randa Siniora, a lawyer and human rights defender, has spent over three decades fighting for justice under military occupation. As the Director of the Women’s Centre for Legal Aid and Counselling, Siniora has been a vocal advocate for moving beyond the narrative of women as mere victims. In 2018, she became the first Palestinian woman to brief the Security Council, emphasizing that women are initiators of change who demand meaningful political participation and legal protections. Her work highlights a core truth of the WPS agenda: women do not want to be protected in a vacuum; they want the power to protect themselves and their societies.
Similarly, in the world of international peacekeeping, leaders like Police Commissioner Christine Fossen are redefining what security looks like. Leading the UN Police component in South Sudan, Fossen brings thirty years of experience from the Norwegian police force to one of the world’s most complex humanitarian environments. By mentoring the Network for Uniformed Women Peacekeepers, she is ensuring that leadership is not defined by rank alone, but by the ability to set an example and protect the vulnerable. Her presence in South Sudan is a testament to the fact that a gender-diverse security force is more effective at building trust within local populations.
Despite these individual triumphs, the broader picture painted by the United Nations Secretary-General’s 2025 report is deeply concerning. We are currently witnessing a period of chronic under-investment and a weakening of the very implementation mechanisms that were designed to uphold Resolution 1325. As man-made conflicts proliferate across the globe, rates of sexual violence and targeted attacks against female activists are on the rise. Perhaps most alarming is the reported backlash against women’s rights in one out of every four countries, a trend that threatens to undo decades of hard-won progress.
The funding crisis is perhaps the most tangible obstacle to the WPS agenda. While global military spending continues to reach record highs, donors are increasingly turning away from conflict prevention and peacebuilding. Drastic cuts to humanitarian budgets are forcing frontline organizations to halt their operations, reducing the ability of the UN to monitor crimes, establish justice systems, and support grassroots peacebuilders. When UN peacekeeping missions depart due to lack of funding, they leave behind a vacuum that often results in the immediate erosion of safety for women and girls.
This lack of investment is compounded by a persistent gap in gender data. When women and girls are not counted, they are effectively invisible in the eyes of policymakers. The absence of comprehensive statistics on sexual violence leads to fewer prosecutions and a lack of resources for survivors. Without data, it is impossible to track women’s representation in peace processes or to hold governments accountable for their promises. Budget cuts have undermined the very efforts meant to train communities on how to collect and utilize this vital information, creating a cycle of ignorance that fuels further marginalization.
The human cost of this failure is staggering. In fragile and conflict-affected environments, women are nearly eight times more likely to live in extreme poverty than those in stable regions. The violence of conflict is not always as loud as an explosion; it is often the insidious deprivation of healthcare and safety. In 2023, six out of ten maternal deaths globally occurred in countries in crisis, often from preventable causes that could have been mitigated with gender-sensitive humanitarian response plans. Furthermore, the rise of digital abuse, trolling, and stalking against female officials and activists has created a new frontier of conflict, designed to silence women before they can even reach the negotiating table.
In Sudan, leaders like Mona Mohamed Omaer Hamad are working through the Sorkenat Organization to ensure that women are not silenced. Hamad advocates for women’s roles in democratic change, insisting that they must be present in state institutions as leaders capable of high-level decision-making. In Haiti, Pédrica Saint-Jean, the Minister for Women and Women’s Rights and a survivor of armed attacks, continues to push for a stronger response to gender-based violence. These women represent the “Relief and Recovery” pillar in action, demonstrating that the reconstruction of a nation is impossible without the leadership of those who understand the specific traumas of its population.
As we look toward the future, the path is already mapped out, though the will to walk it remains inconsistent. Today, 115 countries have developed National Action Plans to meet the WPS agenda, but only a fraction of these plans are fully funded. The upcoming 30th anniversary of the Beijing Declaration offers a critical opportunity for the international community to recommit to these goals. The Beijing+30 agenda calls for the full financing of national plans and the support of women’s frontline organizations, recognizing that gender equality is not a luxury to be addressed after peace is achieved—it is the prerequisite for peace itself.
The evolution of the Women, Peace and Security agenda from a policy document to a global social movement is the only way forward. We will know we are succeeding when we see more women participating in peace processes, more girls in school in conflict zones, and fewer mothers dying in childbirth in refugee camps. We will know we are succeeding when the international community treats the safety and participation of women not as an afterthought, but as the cornerstone of global stability. When women lead, peace follows. The only question that remains is whether the world’s leaders are finally ready to listen.
