|
D Suba Chandran
8 November 2025 |
On 31 October 2000, the UN Security Council adopted a landmark resolution on the role of women in conflict resolution, peacebuilding, and prevention. It called for an increased role for women in the decision-making process, both in conflict resolution and prevention, and for the protection of women and their rights during and after conflicts.
Twenty-five years after its adoption, what have been the achievements of the UNSC 1325 and the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda it spearheaded? What lessons have been learned and what can be done further?
UNSC 1325 Resolution: Background and Context
UNSC Resolution 1325 came into being amid an increased international push during the 1990s to focus on non-military security issues, with a special emphasis on women and security. Multiple conflicts in the Balkans and in Africa, including the great genocide in Rwanda during the 1990s, pushed civil society to take up the issue and build a global coalition. Also, during that decade, there was increased civil society activism at the regional and international levels, covering a wide range of issues - from nuclear disarmament to the landmine ban. Thanks to the above global push, and an unacceptable level of violence against women in the above-mentioned conflict regions, the gender agenda got a fillip.
Besides the global movement, there were also regional initiatives focusing on women's rights and demanding their participation in the decision-making processes. In some regions, for example, in South Asia, even before the 1325 resolution, there were domestic initiatives across the region, from Nepal to Sri Lanka in the 1990s, led by civil society organizations and individuals.
One of the highlights of the above global and regional initiatives was the Beijing Declaration in 1995, which called for the empowerment of women and their participation in decision-making to achieve equality, development, and peace. The 12 areas of the Plan of Action that the governments and civil society actors agreed to in Beijing subsequently became the backbone of the WPS agenda.
Shaping of the WPS Agenda
UNSC Resolution 1325, adopted in October 2000, led to a series of subsequent resolutions over the next two decades, creating a "WPS Agenda." The 1325 resolution emphasized women's representation in decision-making relating to conflict management, resolution and prevention at national, regional and international levels; subsequent resolutions expanded the agenda. The resolution also invited the Secretary-General to undertake studies on the "impact of armed conflict on women and girls, the role of women in peacebuilding and the gender dimensions of peace processes and conflict resolution," and to report to the UNSC and the UN member states. There were "open debates" to take stock of WPS performance and discuss course corrections.
A vital pivot of the 1325 resolution and the subsequent WPS agenda has been that women are not just victims but can be agents of change when engaged in decision-making processes.
The biggest achievement of UNSC Resolution 1325, as mentioned above, was the WPS agenda, which it helped shape and expand since 2000 and which also built on previous efforts, for example, the 1995 Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action.
Another significant achievement has been the National Action Plan; member countries were expected to implement the UNSC 1325 through the National Action Plans. More than 100 countries have formulated National Action Plans. Even some regional organizations have also adopted the WPS agenda.
Finally, engaging women in conflict management and resolution programmes. The UN Secretary-General, in his action taken reports, has indicated that in countries across the world and in conflicts across regions, there have been efforts to include women in negotiations.
25 years later: Limitations, Challenges and the Road Ahead for the WPS Agenda
While the 1325 kick-started a process and introduced an agenda on women, peace and security, there was a belief that it would lead to a transformation. Early October 2025, the UN Secretary General, in his remarks to the Open Debate on the WPS agenda, was candid when he admitted that "women remain absent from negotiating tables…women peacebuilders are underfunded, under threat, and under-recognized" and "sexual violence persists with impunity." Twenty-five years later, why is this the case? What have been the challenges?
First, the changing global environment on peace and security. 1325 was born at the end of the 1990s, when the Cold War had ended and civil society played a larger role in global issues. The WPS agenda expected that women would have a larger role in peacebuilding, leading to a reworking of the idea of security. Since post-9/11 up to the two wars in Ukraine and Gaza, the opposite has started happening. Instead of peace defining the security discourse, the security narrative has returned as the dominant one, thereby returning to the pre-1991 period. This return of the security and militarisation narrative has undermined the peace dividend of the 1990s.
Second, a collateral of the above – the return of the dominant security discourse – is the declining space for civil society activism at the national, regional and global levels. The rise of rightwing politics and shrinking space for democracy and civil society activities are blocking the march of the WPS agenda. Worse, there is a conservative pushback; a section is against reproductive rights and the LGBTQ debate, and is countering the WPS agenda. This could be seen in the slowdown in new resolutions to the WPS agenda and the discussions during the last six years. Of the ten big resolutions as a part of the WPS agenda, the last one was passed in 2019.
Third, the numbers. Though women's participation in conflict management and resolution processes has increased, the number remains marginal. Though numerous reports relating to conflict highlight the increasing number of women being affected, their engagement remains limited. Their participation (or the lack of it) in big-ticket items – for example, in two big conflicts of recent years – Ukraine and Gaza, should underline the real limitation. According to data, their involvement in the mediation hovers around 10 per cent or less. There is a huge gap between what the resolutions aim to achieve and what the practice is.
Fourth, the national action plans. While more than 100 countries have adopted national action plans, their implementation remains a far cry. For most developing countries, the issue is general and not specific to the WPS agenda – it is about implementing the legislation. The state institutions remain weak. While the global process – in terms of legislations and resolutions, irrespective of the recent push back - has continued, at the national level, effective implementation of the spirit of the above resolutions is yet to take place. As a result, there have been national action plans, but legislation alone cannot transform unless it is effectively implemented.
Fifth, the required gender budget at the national, regional and global levels. Multiple reports and statements, including the UN Secretary-General's latest in October, underline that the WPS agenda is underfunded. Without providing adequate funding support, but politically agreeing to the WPS agenda amounts to gender-washing.
Sixth, the social institutions. The real problem is here; unless there is a transformation in the patriarchal structure at the ground level, no national action plan can succeed. The anti-gender and the conservative pushback emanates from the age-old structures and challenges that the social institutions have posed to the gender agenda. Without societal-level changes, the global WPS agenda may remain strong in the paper in terms of legislation and resolutions, but weak in its achievements.
For the 1325 to succeed, the WPS agenda must return to what it aimed to be– transformative, not a trickle-down process. Twenty-five years later, there have been achievements, but there are also challenges and limitations. While the first two decades saw progress, the first half of this decade witnessed a slowdown, and worse, a pushback. There is a need for a course correction to get the WPS agenda back on a fast track. Otherwise, there will be a backsliding of the WPS agenda. Given the conservative pushback and the return to the security paradigm, the WPS agenda is more relevant today than ever before.
About the author
D Suba Chandran is a Professor and the Dean of the School of Conflict and Security Studies, NIAS.
