15. July 2025
2025 marks 25 years since the adoption of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security (WPS). A milestone in recognizing that gender matters for achieving sustainable peace, the resolution became one of the most visible frameworks for promoting gender equality in global peace and security institutions. The WPS Agenda focuses on the 3Ps – prevention, protection, and participation of women – and integrates aspects of post-conflict reconstruction, humanitarian aid, and transitional justice. This new blog series looks at what it means to celebrate and critically reflect on 25 years of Women, Peace and Security in 2025.
The UN Security Council’s recognition of the gendered impacts of armed conflicts was a landmark moment that has since developed into a growing policy architecture. UNSCR 1325 was followed by over ten UNSCR resolutions, more than 100 national action plans (NAPs) guiding states’ implementation, and widespread uptake by regional organizations such as the EU, NATO, and the African Union. Some additional issues have been added, such as the multi-faceted problems of conflict-related sexual violence, the protection of civil society and human rights defenders in particular, and the greater accountability of national action plans.
Crucially, the WPS Agenda is not a top-down framework designed by politics. It emerged from decades of feminist advocacy by women’s rights activists and global peace movements and the engagement of political actors within the UN system. As scholars and activists have long emphasized, UNSCR 1325 was not gifted from above, it was won through sustained pressure and negotiations demanding that peace and security frameworks reflect the lived realities and knowledge of those affected. Milestones such as the 1995 Beijing Platform for Action, along with the mobilization of women’s peace networks in the Balkans, Liberia, and elsewhere, laid crucial groundwork. However, the WPS Agenda remains a deeply contested space. Many of the transformative feminist demands that led to the emergence of the WPS Agenda have been diluted in political practice. While institutional recognition was a vital step, implementation often reflects compromises, selective interpretations and a persistent gap between feminist visions and political realities.
Feminist Perspectives on the Current State of the WPS Agenda
Feminists themselves have voiced their critique related to the WPS Agenda. They argue that the implementation of the WPS Agenda is dominated by Western liberal feminist ideals. These are often imposed on the majority world –an alternative to derogatory like ‘developing’ or ‘third world’ – without adequate local engagement or respect for indigenous knowledge and practice. Such efforts frequently sideline and silence contributions from the majority world. Many implementation efforts focus only on the participation of women, neglecting the other WPS pillars and issues. Additionally, women are often included in peace processes only in symbolic, tokenistic roles without real decision-making power. Inclusion is sometimes limited to NGO elites, sidelining grassroot women’s organizations or marginalized groups.
While many countries have adopted one or more NAPs on WPS, they often lack funding, clear accountability, or any enforcement mechanisms. Governments and international bodies frequently express rhetorical support but fail to make structural changes or prioritize women’s meaningful participation. They also reproduce neocolonial structures. In general, the WPS Agenda remains weak in referring to structural causes of armed conflicts such as poverty, unemployment, or capitalist exploitation of rare commodities.
Another key criticism of the WPS agenda—and its implementation—is that it often treats “women” as a homogeneous group, overlooking the diverse and intersecting identities that shape experiences of conflict and peace. This includes insufficient attention to how gender intersects with race, class, disability, ethnicity, sexuality, and the rights and roles of LGBTIQ*people. As a result, many WPS policies risk reinforcing exclusionary practices rather than addressing the full spectrum of gendered experiences in conflict and post-conflict settings.
Last, but not least, the WPS Agenda has to cope with global shifts in world order which result in an increasing number of authoritarian states and an increased worldwide militarization. Shrinking civic spaces affects women’s and feminist organizations and human rights defenders, leading not only to stigmatization and hate speech in social media but to physical attacks and killings.
Despite such limitations, the WPS Agenda remains a relevant policy instrument and serves as a fallback option after the ending of feminist foreign policies, for example in Sweden and more recently in Germany. Gender backlash – or the pushback of gender equality norms – does not only appear in authoritarian states such as in Russia, but also in so-called liberal democracies such as the United States of America. It also affects realities and negotiations at the United Nations, as indicated by the failure to achieve consensus at CSW69 (United Nations’ Commission on the Status of Women). The growing politicization of gender issues and backlash against women’s rights and LGBTIQ+ inclusion contribute to a fragmented international landscape. Against this backdrop, expectations for meaningful outcomes at the 25th anniversary of the WPS agenda in October remain modest.
Five Themes to Reflect on and Reimagine the WPS Agenda
The WPS agenda remains both a hard-won framework and a contested space – both in theory and practice. So, over the course of this year in a blog series, we ask: what does it mean to celebrate and critically reflect on 25 years of Women, Peace and Security in 2025? This blog series marks the 25th anniversary not just with celebration, but with reflection and reimagination. To do so, we focus on five interconnected themes that were discussed during a roundtable discussion at PRIF on “Women, Peace and Security: What’s Next in a Time of Changing World Order?” and shape the future of the WPS Agenda:
Feminist Knowledge and Lived Experience
The Women, Peace and Security (WPS) Agenda is more than a policy framework, it is a feminist knowledge system that grew over time. It challenges our understanding of who gets to produce knowledge on peace and security issues, whose experiences count, and how institutions listen (or don’t). How has local feminist knowledge and community practice (re)shaped the WPS Agenda? Or transnational feminist activism? What lessons emerge when we center our inquiries on lived experiences?
Postcolonial Critique & Power
The WPS Agenda emerged within UN structures dominated by the so-called Global North. Critics have pointed out how this legacy has shaped peacebuilding interventions and sidelined knowledge from the majority world. How do histories of colonization and intervention still shape peacebuilding, and what might a locally rooted, decolonial WPS Agenda look like?
Beyond ‘Adding Women and Stir’: Inclusivity, Masculinities and Queer Perspectives
Although the agenda is titled “Women, Peace and Security”, it must move beyond essentialist understandings of ‘women’ and binary gender roles. The involvement of all genders is crucial for achieving sustainable and positive peace. How can WPS frameworks become more inclusive – addressing masculinities, queer and non-binary identities? How do intersectional realities affect people’s experiences across regions?
Global Resistance and Backlash
From funding cuts of WPS related program in US institution to anti-gender campaigns across continents, the WPS Agenda and feminist principle are under attack. This backlash is not accidental – it is organized and political. It also appears in peacebuilding contexts. How do we understand and resist the growing backlash against gender justice – from global conservative movement to state-level rollbacks of rights?
Reimagining the future of the WPS Agenda
The WPS Agenda is not a finished project – but a constantly evolving and changing framework and knowledge system. Upholding feminist principles requires not only defending past gains but also reimagining what peace, security, and justice can mean in a rapidly changing world.
