Feminist foreign policy as ethical foreign policy? A care ethics perspective

Abstract

This article argues that a liberal cosmopolitan approach to feminist foreign policy reproduces existing relations of power, including gender power relations and Western liberal modes of domination. I suggest that a critical feminist ethic of care offers a potentially radical and transformative account of ethics as a basis for a transnational feminism – one that reveals and troubles the binary gender norms that constitute the international and which exposes the ways in which patriarchal orders uphold political hierarchies that obstruct the building of empathy and repairing of relationship. To illustrate this argument, I address the recent diplomatic crises faced by Sweden and Canada in their relationships with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Policymakers and diplomats must aim to build understanding by recognizing the material and discursive factors that have constructed, over time, the relationships between Saudi Arabia and Sweden/Canada, as well as the ways in which patriarchal structures – across the globe and at multiple scales – hinder the possibility of attentive listening and connection across borders. It is only through the prism of this relationship – where difference takes on meaning – that the more complex role of Western states in the contemporary system of transnational militarism is revealed.

Spreading a norm-based policy? Sweden’s Feminist Foreign Policy in international media

“…Certain academic works were front-runners in initiating an early debate about a feminist foreign policy, whether in general (Alwan & Weldon, 2017) or by focusing on Sweden (Aggestam & Bergman-Rosamond, 2016) and Canada (Vucetic, 2017) in particular. The number of publications on feminist foreign policy have then surged (Ridge et al, 2019;Robinson, 2019;Rosén Sundström & Elgström, 2019;, creating a lively discussion on the nature, promises and problems of a feminist foreign policy.…”

“…Most publications on feminist foreign policy try to define this phenomenon and some discuss the challenges it faces due to its norm-based and radical nature. Three key challenges emerge from a perusal of relevant literature: an absence of a universal definition of feminist foreign policy (Ridge et al, 2019;, a clash between ideals of the policy with realities on the ground (Robinson, 2019;Vucetic, 2017), and sharply conflicting attitudes towards the concept of feminism itself (Baxter, 2018;Lind & Salo, 2002). We elaborate on each of these challenges below.…”

Incredibly loud and extremely silent: Feminist foreign policy on Twitter

“…Existing contributions suggest that the FFP should be seen as an example of an ethical orientation in foreign policy and various analytical frameworks are suggested as useful for future studies of the Swedish FFP as well as other gender-sensitive and ethically driven foreign policies (e.g., Aggestam and True, 2020;Aggestam et al, 2019;Robinson, 2019). An interesting debate has arisen about the theoretical underpinnings of the FFP, situating it either within 'gender cosmopolitanism' (Aggestam and Bergman Rosamond, 2016;Bergman Rosamond, 2020) or feminist ethics of care (Aggestam et al, 2019;Robinson, 2019). While these are valuable contributions driving the study of the FFP forward, to date there have been fewer attempts at analyzing the implementation of the FFP.…”

Política exterior feminista: el próximo emprendimiento normativo de América Latina

“…Mucho de lo que consideramos como una "correcta" o "ejemplar" política exterior feminista proviene de las agendas y experiencias que se promueven en el Norte global, con sus presupuestos, con sus medios, y con la tradición histórica de dicho Norte global. En este contexto, cuando el Norte global aplica su política exterior en el Sur global (política de mitigación y asistencia) lo hace con el propósito de "dar voz" a quienes no la tienen, como parte de una acción ético-moral de reparación (Robinson, 2019). Esta noción, junto con ser tremendamente conflictiva y paternalista, sigue agudizando las brechas entre el Norte y el Sur global, entre el civilizador y el domesticado, entre el protector y el protegido, entre el interventor y el intervenido.…”