The Past, Present, and Future(s) of Feminist Foreign Policy

Abstract

Almost a decade after Sweden first declared that it would follow a feminist foreign policy (FFP), a further eleven countries from across Europe, North and South America, and North and West Africa have adopted, or have signaled an interest in potentially adopting, an FFP in the future. These developments have been accompanied by a growing body of feminist scholarship. Although still in its infancy, this literature can generally be divided between more normative accounts and those that are empirically focused, with particular attention paid to the FFPs of Sweden and Canada. Yet, few studies compare FFPs’ uptake across different countries and regions, examine its connections to longer histories of ideas around women and gender, or unpack the policy intersections FFP (tentatively) engages. Contributing to these different areas, Part I provides an overview of the history of FFP, interrogates FFP in the context of Foreign Policy Analysis, and explores what FFP can achieve in the current (liberal) global system. Part II turns to consider policy intersections in relation to the climate crisis, migration, militarism, and bodies. Thinking through its origins, policy intersections, and potential future(s), the contributors to this Forum explore FFP's multiple and contested future(s). Ultimately, the Forum takes stock of this feminist turn in foreign policy at a critical point in its development and considers what future possibilities it may hold.

Problematizing “Security” in Citizen Security: A feminist security studies critique of Mexico's “feminist” foreign policy and women, peace and security projects

“…It is the militarization of the WPS agenda by these states and others that accommodates and smooths over this contradiction. As Haastrup observes in a recent forum on the past, present, and future of FFP (in Achilleos-Sarll et al, 2023), even still-liberal states in the European Union that claim they have instituted FFPs or are working toward instituting them, resulting in part from civil society feminist engagement and pressure, are expanding their militarization at a fast clip, from modernizing nuclear arsenals to joining NATO, as well as providing much higher security aid prompted by their proximity to the Russian war on Ukraine. Meanwhile, former colonizing countries in the European Union, like France, continue militarized foreign interventions in Africa, where commitments to FFP on the part of the African Union are belied by its budgetary focus on military missions.…”

“…Meanwhile, former colonizing countries in the European Union, like France, continue militarized foreign interventions in Africa, where commitments to FFP on the part of the African Union are belied by its budgetary focus on military missions. Such soaring militarization unquestionably “limits the possibilities of an emancipatory FFP,” and FFPs (as well as NAPs) are, as a result, “adapted” to militarization as opposed to being a constraint on it (Achilleos‐Sarll et al, 2023, p. 20).…”

Towards a Feminist Global Health Policy: Power, intersectionality, and transformation

“…The most prominent concern is the risk of feminist approaches being co-opted by mainstream politics and neoliberal structures, leading to a dilution and depoliticisation of feminism. Critics argue that feminism is being used in a tokenistic way by policymakers to benefit their agenda and image, thereby disregarding the original intention of dismantling power structures [34,35,[68][69][70]. By integrating feminist approaches into existing structures, power imbalances are perpetuated, not challenged [35,[68][69][70][71].…”

Bilateral labor agreements as migration governance tools: An analysis from a gender lens

“…2 The chapter titled "Rethinking the Migrant Rights Agenda in Global Migration Governance: a Decolonizing Approach" by Nicola Piper and Hari KC is forthcoming in the book Handbook on Migration and Development jointly edited by Raul Delgado Wise, Ronaldo Munck, Carl-Ulrik Schierup, & Branka Likic-Brboric. origin and destination countries (Piper and KC, forthcoming), and this is more so in the case of women migrants, since such instruments remain largely gender-blind in significant ways. This paper adopts a broader intersectional feminist theoretical approach (Achilleos-Sarll, 2018;Hawkesworth, 2018) to critically examine the BLMAs as key but gendered instruments of the contemporary infrastructure of global labour migration governance. By investigating the extent to which these governing instruments connect and align with relevant international frameworks (specifically relevant ILO conventions and guidelines), we examine the extent to which BLMAs represent gains, gaps or gaffs in terms of gender equality and the human and labour rights protection of women migrants.…”