Feminist Foreign Policy - A Second Look, by Bill Wanlund
Last November we discussed in this column Feminist Foreign Policy (FFP) – an idea introduced in 2014 by Sweden’s then-Foreign Minister Margaret Wallstrom and which makes gender equity a core foreign policy goal, “based on the insight that strengthened gender equality contributes to reduced poverty and more sustainable development, security and peace.”Sweden’s FFP lasted until last year, when the incoming center-right government ditched it (though it declared that gender equity would remain a core foreign policy principle). But FFP continues to attract international attention, and we wanted to use this last “Worth Noting” of Women’s History Month to reflect on some recent developments.
In a February article for the London think tank Chatham House, Wallstrom continues her FFP advocacy, writing that the global state of women’s rights is “bleak.” For example, she says:
- laws in 104 countries forbid women from performing certain jobs
- some 40 countries have no laws protecting women from domestic violence
- 214 million women in developing countries have no access to contraceptives.
Women need to be at the negotiating table, according to Wallstrom; without that access women remain vulnerable. She sees a telling example in the 2016 peace negotiations between the Colombian government and the FARC guerillas. Women had to struggle to be included in those talks; once they were, “they introduced new perspectives into the process and put forward options to address gender inequalities in political participation and justice.”
Democratic backsliding also hurts, as authoritarian governments such as Afghanistan’s Taliban have rolled back many of the advances women had been making. However, Afghan women are starting to resist, Wallstrom notes, and she also sees a bright spot in Iran, where a women’s movement has “spread to include men as well, from all walks of life.” In Afghanistan and in Iran, “women are uniting and standing up for their rights. ‘Woman. Life. Freedom.’ has become the rallying cry around the world.”
But in Panama...
Beatriz García Nice, project lead for the Wilson Center's initiative on gender-based violence (and former consular employee at US Embassy Santiago and later an INL specialist at Embassy Quito) has found a little corner of optimism for those concerned about women in decision-making roles. In an article published March 10 – the International Day of Women Judges – she discusses the decision by Panama’s (male) president, Laurentino Cortizo, to build a majority-female supreme court.
She depicts Cortizo’s nomination of six women to the nine-member Court almost as a stealth action, calling it “a little-noticed attempt” to “quietly [revamp] the country’s judicial branch,” as well as an effort to resolve the “allegations of corruption and inefficiency” that have long plagued Panama’s judiciary.
She cautions that it’s too soon to judge whether the new Court will make a difference, but early signs are positive: Public opinion polls show a marked decline – from 56% in 2012 to 37% today -- among those who characterize the judiciary as corrupt. And, she writes, “the new chief justice, María Eugenia López Arias, plans to guarantee a merit-based system for judicial hiring…upgrade technology, and centralize judicial services…to make Panama’s courts faster.”
Unlike the lifetime tenure enjoyed by US Supreme Court justices, those in Panama serve 10-year terms. “That ticking clock,” she observes, “has given the new justices a sense of urgency, as they attempt to rebuild public confidence in the judiciary – and demonstrate the importance of elevating women to the high court.”
Read Beatriz García Nice’s article here.
Bill Wanlund is a PDCA Board Member, retired Foreign Service Officer, and freelance writer in the Washington, DC area. His column, Worth Noting, appears in the PDCA Weekly Update and addresses topics hopefully of special interest to PDCA members.