European Peace Institute / News

The historic decision on loss and damage (L&D) at the 2022 UN Climate Change Conference (COP27) calls for a new fund and funding arrangements focused on addressing L&D. It also tasks a Transitional Committee to prepare recommendations on the new fund and funding arrangements for adoption at the 2023 UN Climate Change Conference (COP28) in Dubai. This decision reflects a recognition that existing funding arrangements are grossly inadequate to address the escalating scale of L&D. Addressing L&D will require both enhancing these existing arrangements and creating a new fund and funding arrangements, forming a mosaic of solutions across countries, institutions, and markets.

This paper aims to aid the Transitional Committee and other stakeholders by providing an initial sketch of that mosaic. First, it examines existing arrangements, modalities, and sources of funding for addressing L&D from UN humanitarian agencies, multilateral development banks and international financial institutions, and insurance and bond markets. Second, it proposes reforms to existing arrangements that would address key finance gaps and bottlenecks. Third, it identifies elements of a new L&D fund that would complement existing arrangements and make use of innovative finance (including levies and bond issuances) to operate at scale.

With roughly six months left until COP28, the Transitional Committee will need to work efficiently to achieve its mandate, which includes determining the fund’s institutional arrangements, modalities, structure, governance, sources of funding, and coordination and complementarity with existing funding arrangements. To this end, the paper recommends that it should:

• Begin securing financing before COP28, particularly innovative financing, which takes longer to secure than traditional donor contributions;
• Consult with the private sector to determine its role, including in the use of insurance mechanisms and risk pools, frontloading, and connections between L&D and jobs;
• Determine the form and role of triggers, including for slow-onset events;
• Consider how to address noneconomic losses, including displacement and forced migration; and
• Identify the actions, mechanisms, and institutions required to operationalize the fund, including an internal or external coordination mechanism.

Download

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-xrclzk").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-xrclzk").fadeIn(300);});});

For more than three decades, radio stations have been an integral part of several UN peace operations, with UN radio stations currently active in the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mali, and South Sudan. These radio stations enable the UN to share reliable information with people in contexts where trustworthy information is often in short supply. Together with Fondation Hirondelle and UNESCO, IPI cohosted a policy forum on May 4th to discuss the role of UN radio and other media platforms in fostering a healthy information environment and supporting a robust local media landscape.

As information spreads faster than ever through digital channels, radio stations are being forced to evolve into multimedia platforms. “Radio is not typically the first platform that comes to mind when thinking about the ways we access information today, but in many countries, it remains a powerful tool” asserted IPI’s Editor and Research Fellow Albert Trithart.

UN radio stations have and continue to face an array of challenges. They need to strike a delicate balance between their role in serving the UN mission as a source of public information and strategic communications, on the one hand, and in serving the public as a source of impartial news, on the other. They also need to balance their role as a major media outlet with their responsibility to foster a broader network of independent local journalists that will outlast the presence of the UN mission. On top of this, UN radio stations face broader political challenges, including some missions’ deteriorating relationships with host states, shrinking civic space, threats to journalists, and disinformation campaigns.

The framework of the UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity aims to create free and safe environments for journalists and media workers worldwide. Within this framework, local and community radio stations often play a critical role in ensuring access to conflict-sensitive humanitarian and other public interest content. Andrea Cairola of UNESCO’s Freedom of Expression and Safety of Journalists Section provided insight on how geopolitical and technological changes have impacted UN Peacekeeping radio over the past three decades, specifically in relation to radio equipment and media liberalization since the late 1990s.

Chief of Communications and Public Information for UNMISS Ben Dotsei Malor raised the following critical question: “What do we do when missions leave?”

When the United Nations Operation in Cote d’Ivoire (ONUCI) closed, Radio de la Paix, formerly ONUCI FM, was born out of a memorandum of understanding between the national government and the Félix Houphouët-Boigny Foundation for Peace. Building an audience and gaining the trust of the population takes time. If a media landscape is left abruptly, people are deprived of a basic human right, the right to information, which is accompanied by many consequences. Transition strategies need to be built from day one insisted Caroline Vuillemin, Executive Director of Fondation Hirondelle.

This side event took place one day after World Press Freedom Day on May 3rd and comes as the UN assesses its approach to strategic communications in peacekeeping missions. The 2023 World Press Freedom Day marked the thirtieth anniversary of the proclamation of an international day to advocate for press freedom and took place under the theme “Shaping a Future of Rights: Freedom of Expression as a Driver for All Other Human Rights.” IPI’s event served as an occasion to reflect on the critical role that access to information, including through UN radio, plays in ensuring the enjoyment of all other human rights.

Speakers:
Caroline Vuillemin, Executive Director, Fondation Hirondelle
Ben Dotsei Malor, Director, Strategic Communications and Public Information, UN Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS)
Abdoulaye Sangaré, Director and Manager, Radio de la paix (Côte d’Ivoire)
Andrea Cairola, Senior Program Specialist, Freedom of Expression and Safety of Journalists Section, UNESCO

Moderator:
Albert Trithart, Editor and Research Fellow, International Peace Institute

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-cxslul").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-cxslul").fadeIn(300);});}); Download the Report

Forced marriage is a distinct form of conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) used strategically by armed groups. Although recent rulings at the International Criminal Court (ICC), such as the case of The Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen, have built precedent for charging and convicting non-state armed groups with forced marriage as a distinct form of crime against humanity, policymakers and practitioners have more work to do to prevent and address the long-term impacts of forced marriage. Forced marriage not only directly affects forced wives (and their children) but also harms entire communities. Forced marriage can lead to cycles of violence and have negative repercussions on human security, including livelihoods, education, and health in communities.

IPI and UN Women cohosted a policy forum on April 19th to discuss the forms and impacts of forced marriage and provide key recommendations for policymakers and practitioners to address gaps, broaden perceptions, and disrupt binaries. This event launched a novel dataset documenting the use of forced marriage by non-state armed groups by IPI’s Head of Women, Peace and Security Program Phoebe Donnelly and PhD Candidate in Political Science at Duke University Emily Myers.

Pauline Brosch of UN Women provided a policy perspective and touched on strategies that the international community can take to better address forced marriage and other forms of conflict-related sexual violence. Teddy Atim of the Feinstein International Center, a practitioner and researcher of humanitarian emergencies and post-conflict settings, drew on examples of recovery from forced marriage in Northern Uganda to highlight multiplier effects, such as the likelihood of conflict-related sexual violence survivors experiencing ongoing violations in return communities.

The event aimed to help member states and UN officials align policies related to conflict-related sexual violence, like forced marriage, with the data and realities on the ground. Survivors must always have a seat at the table: “We can only address the root cause of forced marriage and other forms of conflict-related sexual violence if we involve survivors,” emphasized Victoria Nyanjura founder of Women in Action for Women and survivor of forced marriage.

In light of the discussions at the event, it is clear that there is a need for increased capacity and accountability. Forced marriage is a chronic feature of the political economy of war and takes place in contexts where rule of law has collapsed due to protracted conflict and instability, affirmed Alejandro Sánchez of the Office of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict.

The launch event took place a day before the conference entitled “Catalyzing Change: Ongwen, Sexual and Gender-Based Crimes, and Intersectional Feminist Practice in International Criminal Justice.” This conference, hosted by the Cardozo Law Institute in Holocaust and Human Rights, in partnership with UN Women and others, analyzed the impact of the ICC case The Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen on the treatment of forced marriage (and other sexual and gender-based crimes) in international law. Panelists at this conference included civil society and legal experts from Uganda, who were able to connect with key stakeholders in the UN community at IPI’s event.

Opening Remarks:
Jenna Russo, Director of Research and Head of the Center for Peace Operations, International Peace Institute

Speakers:
Phoebe Donnelly, Senior Fellow and Head of Women, Peace, and Security Program, International Peace Institute
Emily Myers, PhD Candidate in Political Science at Duke University and National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellow (virtual)
Teddy Atim, Visiting Fellow at the Feinstein International Center, Tufts University
Pauline Brosch, Policy Analyst, Peace and Security, UN Women
Victoria Nyanjura, Founder, Women in Action for Women (WAW)
Alejandro Sánchez, Deputy Team Leader, Programmes and Communications, Office of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict

Moderator:
Jenna Russo, Director of Research and Head of the Center for Peace Operations, International Peace Institute

Many non-state armed groups use forced marriage during armed conflict. This practice has been documented across all geographic regions, in every decade since the 1940s, and across armed groups with many different ideologies. Yet while policymakers, scholars, and practitioners recognize forced marriage as an important form of conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV), there are no frameworks for conceptualizing the frequency and range of forms of forced marriage that occur in conflict.

To fill that gap, this paper introduces an original dataset tracking forced marriage in armed conflict and uses the data and illustrative examples to divide forced marriage in armed conflict into three types: member–member forced marriage, member–civilian forced marriage, and civilian–civilian forced marriage. This dataset can be a tool for policymakers and practitioners to understand the impacts of forced marriage in armed conflict and better design prevention strategies and survivor-centered responses.

The report concludes with an overview of existing policy, legal, and programmatic responses to forced marriage in conflict settings, including by non-state armed groups, and provides recommendations for how these responses can better address this complex phenomenon:

• Data collection: Disaggregate data on CRSV by the form of violence (when possible), avoid linking sexual slavery and forced marriage, and gather more data on the unique needs of survivors of forced marriage.
• Criminal accountability: Continue prosecuting forced marriage as a distinct crime against humanity and promote the inclusion of forced marriage as a distinct crime against humanity during negotiations on the treaty on crimes against humanity.
• Sanctions: Continue to include information on CRSV in the reports of sanctions monitoring committees, ensure that sanctions listing criteria are applied against perpetrators of forced marriage, and ensure that every panel of experts includes at least one member with expertise on gender issues or CRSV.
• Reintegration: Factor the different types of forced marriage into the design of reintegration programs and provide support that considers the unique needs of individuals exiting forced marriage.

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-wdxkhs").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-wdxkhs").fadeIn(300);});});

The recent Climate Change Conference (COP27) in Sharm el-Sheikh made progress in some areas, but not nearly enough to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. The world is still off-track to avert the most dangerous consequences of global warming. The latest study of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the “Climate Change 2023 Report,” brings into sharp focus the losses and damages being experienced now and expected to continue into the future, which are hitting the most vulnerable people and ecosystems especially hard. As the UN Secretary-General has stated, climate action is needed on all fronts.

The current way of life based on carbon is unsustainable and needs to change, affirmed IPI President Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein during the policy forum on “Legal Avenues to Fight Climate Change,” cohosted by IPI and the Permanent Mission of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the UN on March 30th.

To accelerate climate action, there is growing momentum to explore legal avenues to address the climate emergency. Climate litigation is on the rise at the international, regional, and national levels, and several clear legal pathways are being pursued.

A request for an advisory opinion on climate change from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) was adopted by the UN General Assembly by consensus on March 29th. Ambassador of Vanuatu Odo Tevi outlined the lengthy but rewarding process it took to pass the resolution, spearheaded by Vanuatu which is among the Pacific Island countries facing the brunt of the climate crisis.

Climate change imposes an enormity of challenges on small island states. Payam Akhavan, Counsel to the Commission of Small Island States on Climate Change and International Law discussed the December 12th request for an advisory opinion on the impact of climate change on oceans from the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS). Akhavan provided a brief overview of the ITLOS proceedings, noting the prospect of a hearing in September 2023 which would unfold in parallel with the ICJ process. The ITLOS is anticipated to have an advisory opinion before the ICJ holds its first hearing, which could shape jurisprudence and raises questions surrounding harmonization between international judicial bodies.

Proposals to make ecocide—the destruction of the environment—a crime under international law are currently being considered. Kate Mackintosh, Executive Director of the Promise Institute for Human Rights highlighted Ukraine’s use of ecocide in its criminal code since the late 1990s and noted the study of the effects of sea-level rise on the law of the sea, statehood, and protection of affected persons already underway.

Global solidarity is key to preventing vulnerable countries from choosing between responding to climate change and their own development, affirmed Romanian Foreign Minister Aurescu.

This event is a continuation of a conversation on the topic of legal avenues to fight climate change which commenced in December 2021.  

Opening Remarks:
H.E. Christian Wenaweser, Permanent Representative of Liechtenstein to the UN

Speakers:
H.E. Bogdan Aurescu, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Romania; Member, UN International Law Commission; Professor of International Law, University of Bucharest (pre-recorded message)
H.E. Odo Tevi, Permanent Representative of Vanuatu to the UN
Kate Mackintosh, Executive Director, Promise Institute for Human Rights
Payam Akhavan, Professor of International Law, Massey College, University of Toronto; Member of the Permanent Court of Arbitration; Counsel to the Commission of Small Island States on Climate Change and International Law

Moderator:
Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, President and Chief Executive Officer, International Peace Institute

Many peacekeepers are deployed in areas where ongoing armed conflicts or other situations of violence, including attacks against peacekeepers, have constrained their capacity to implement their mandate and protect themselves. This has led some troop-contributing countries (TCCs) to raise concerns about the high-risk environments to which their troops are deployed. One of the most critical issues when deploying troops to nonpermissive environments is ensuring they have the right capabilities and mindset.

This paper interrogates TCCs’ perspectives on capabilities and mindsets and explores their implications for peacekeeping policy and practice. The goal is not only to deepen understanding of the UN’s progress on implementing the A4P+ priorities but, more importantly, to assess the state of play of peacekeeping in nonpermissive environments, drawing on the diverse perspectives of TCCs.

The paper concludes by considering how capabilities and mindsets relate to accounta­bility for and accountability of peacekeepers. Failure to properly train, equip, and support troops being deployed to nonpermissive environments raises questions about whether the UN and TCCs are accountable to peacekeepers. Likewise, it is unclear to what extent peacekeepers should be held accountable for their performance when they have not been provided the proper equipment, training, and mindset.

Download

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-xlkhqw").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-xlkhqw").fadeIn(300);});}); Download the Report

At a policy forum cohosted by IPI and the Permanent Mission of the Netherlands to the UN on March 28th, IPI Head of the Brian Urquhart Center for Peace Operations Jenna Russo announced the recent publication and first independent report on the topic of accountability for crimes against peacekeepers, written by IPI Senior Policy Analyst Agathe Sarfati. The report highlights striking contrasts between the number of fatalities and the number of prosecutions: Since 2013, over 250 peacekeepers have been killed in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mali, and the Central African Republic, but only eight trials were conducted in relation to these crimes.

The UN Secretariat has focused on increasing accountability to peacekeepers, including fighting impunity for crimes against peacekeepers as part of the Action for Peacekeeping Plus priorities (A4P+). Stéphane Jean, DPO and OROLSI’s focal point on the topic, emphasized the dual objective of holding perpetrators of crimes against peacekeepers accountable: “Those who maim and kill UN Personnel are often the same who victimize and target civil society. Political, financial, and technical support from member states is critical.”

As the UN aims to advance both accountability of and accountability to peacekeepers, this policy forum examined the progress and remaining challenges linked to fighting impunity for crimes against peacekeepers.

Representatives from MINUSMA and MINUSCA noted the challenges to support investigations and prosecutions while affirming that convictions are not the end-all be-all.

Mona Ali Khalil of the Harvard Law School Program on International Law and Armed Conflict emphasized that if we ask for accountability for peacekeepers, we also need to ask for accountability of peacekeepers.

Colonel Ashish Bhalla of India noted increased violence and risks in security environments of contemporary peace operations. India, the largest troop-contributing country (TCC) to UN missions championed Resolution 2589 and played a key role in the creation of the Group of Friends to promote accountability for crimes against peacekeepers. Unfortunately, promoting accountability is not a simple task and is often difficult to put into practice.

Both the event and publication are part of IPI’s broader workstream on A4P+, funded by the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

Opening Remarks:
Jenna Russo, Director of Research and Head of the Brian Urquhart Center for Peace Operations, International Peace Institute
Djeyhoun Ostowar, Deputy Head of Political Affairs Section, Permanent Mission of the Kingdom of the Netherlands to the UN

Speakers:
Stéphane Jean, UN Office of Rule of Law and Security Institutions (OROLSI), Department of Peace Operations (DPO)
Colonel Ashish Bhalla, Military Adviser, Permanent Mission of India to the UN
Rafik Maamar, Head of Criminal Investigations, UNPOL, MINUSCA (Via Zoom)
Ahmed Ghanem-Ali, Chief, Justice and Corrections Section, MINUSMA (Via Zoom)
Mona Ali Khalil, Affiliate, Harvard Law School Program on International Law and Armed Conflict; Former UN Senior Legal Officer (Via Zoom)

Moderator:
Agathe Sarfati, Senior Policy Analyst, International Peace Institute

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-bdvqis").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-bdvqis").fadeIn(300);});});

IPI together with the Permanent Mission of the Republic of Botswana to the UN cohosted a ministerial-level policy forum on March 27th entitled “The Kimberley Process to Eradicate Conflict Diamonds: Twenty Years of Challenges and Achievements.”

UN General Assembly Resolution 55/56 addressed the role that diamonds can play in fueling armed conflict by creating the Kimberly Process (KP), an international certification scheme to limit the illicit trade in rough diamonds. This process has not only significantly reduced the number of conflict diamonds on the open market but also helped economies thrive based on the trade of this mineral. Current Kimberley Process chair Winston Chitando expressed his perspective that the KP mechanisms “have been largely successful,” while recognizing a Review Committee would be valuable to confront the challenges ahead.

Some countries still heavily rely on the diamond trade: in Botswana, for instance, it generates more than half of government revenue and accounts for more than one in twenty jobs. The Kimberley Process has faced criticism, however. Some argue that it does not take into account environmental impacts, labor rights, and human rights concerns in mining communities. Drawing on the example of energy for comparison, Cristina Duarte stressed the need to change the business model of natural resource management in Africa to increase domestic value creation.

On the week of the UN General Assembly resolution calling for reforms to enhance the effectiveness of the Kimberley Process, the question remains: Is the Kimberley Process still relevant after more than 20 years of existence? The KP is an institution which must be used as a vehicle for peace and sustainable development; review and reform will lead to a more relevant and effective process, emphasized Dr. Kwape.

Participants in this ministerial-level policy forum discussed how the Kimberley Process has helped weaken the link between conflict and diamonds and transformed local economies. They also discussed how issues such as environmental protection and human rights can become part of the certification scheme. IPI Vice President Adam Lupel noted that a critical issue for KP reform will be the debates around expanding the definition of “conflict diamond” beyond the funding of “rebel groups.” Ensuring the ethical and sustainable sourcing of diamonds is also a matter of improving state practices, listening to affected communities, protecting human rights, and safeguarding the environment.

Speakers:
H.E. Lemogang Kwape, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Republic of Botswana
H.E. Winston Chitando, Minister of Mines and Mining Development, Zimbabwe
H.E. Cristina Duarte, UN Under-Secretary-General and Special Adviser on Africa

Moderator:
Adam Lupel, Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, International Peace Institute

Since 1948, more than 1,000 UN personnel have been killed in malicious acts while serving in UN peacekeeping operations. Since 2013, the vast majority of fatalities have taken place in the Central African Republic (CAR), Mali, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). To address this trend, the UN Secretariat and member states have increasingly focused on strengthening the policy framework on accountability to peacekeepers. They have also increasingly focused specifically on how to pursue justice for peacekeepers who have been victims of attacks.

This paper focuses on advancing justice for crimes against peacekeepers as one aspect of the overall effort to enhance accountability to peacekeepers. It provides an overview of the role of UN peacekeeping operations in investigating and prosecuting crimes against peacekeepers and the UN’s growing focus on advancing and prioritizing accountability for these crimes. It then examines case studies of criminal cases supported by the UN missions in CAR (MINUSCA), Mali (MINUSMA), and the DRC (MONUSCO) in their respective host states and provides an overview of cross-cutting challenges they have faced.

The paper concludes with recommendations to help the UN Secretariat, peacekeeping operations, the Security Council, and other member states accelerate the investigation and prosecution of crimes against peacekeepers in a consistent and balanced manner:

• The UN Secretariat should maintain a comprehensive approach to accountability, develop a common definition of crimes against peacekeepers, ensure that host states adhere to human rights standards when engaging with those accused of crimes against peacekeepers, and improve internal and external coordination in this area.
• UN missions should pursue a comprehensive approach to accountability, continue to support host-state investigations and prosecutions of those accused of crimes against peacekeepers, advocate for host-state authorities to pursue accountability, and ensure sustained documentation of and follow-up on cases.
• The Security Council should reinforce peacekeeping mandates to build the host state’s capacity to pursue accountability and encourage legal clarity on the nature of crimes against peacekeepers.
• UN member states should use the group of friends to offer new ideas on ways to promote accountability and use the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations to discuss ways to improve coordination in this area.

Download

Diplomatic corps, private sector, medical representatives and key players called on local, regional and global communities to bridge divides between the medical, private and humanitarian sectors in order to build resilient societies that can sustainably address the challenges of the twenty-first century.

IPI MENA hosted its first Global Humanitarian Leaders Series on March 21 under the theme “Pioneering Humanitarian Medical Assistance” which featured key-speaker Dr. Sanduk Ruit, Ophthalmologist from Nepal and Recipient of the 5th Edition of the Isa Award for Service to Humanity, for his ground-breaking research on cataracts and humanitarian contributions in saving the sight of 120,000 low-income people free of charge.

Opening the conference, IPI MENA Senior Director Nejib Friji pointed to IPI’s milestone ICM report, specifically the section focusing on the health sector, pandemics and public health. “Among various recommendations, one stands out to me during this webinar,” he noted. “Partnerships with the private sector should be strengthened – there is great potential for public-private partnerships in health, and these could include partnerships in research and development.”

He called on ophthalmologists and private sector leaders who have rich experience in conducting humanitarian medical work in remote areas, in Tunisia, North Africa and beyond in Africa, to assist people in need and preserve sight. “I hope they join the efforts with Dr. Ruit to further expand their noble initiatives in Africa and other continents,” he stated, while thanking the Kingdom of Bahrain for granting the Isa Award to highlight Dr. Ruit’s humanitarian work.

Underscoring the importance of focusing on eyesight as an area for humanitarian work, Dr. Ruit noted the socio-economic burdens of blindness in that it shortens life expectancy, income, and employment, all of which are critical in low-income developing countries.

“About 36 million people are blind, and if you add the number of operable cataract cases it is about 100 million people. Unfortunately, close to 90% of those cases live in low- and middle-income countries,” he stressed.

He underlined that cataracts are still the most common cause of blindness, and while 100 million patients require cataract surgery, only 30 million surgeries are done per year. This deficit of 70 million patients who need cataract surgery live in low-income areas.

“To provide modern cataract surgery at the community level it is really important that our work be sustainable,” he stated, and stressed the need for powerful research and innovation in this field. This enables them to tap into new technology at reduced costs, and as a result allows them to reach poorer communities to perform the surgeries.

He shared a case study of a low-income woman who suffered from blindness due to cataracts and as a result was abandoned by her husband despite having a nine-month-old baby. The child was malnourished as the woman couldn’t properly look after him due to her medical situation. Dr. Ruit noted that her case could represent any woman from a low-income area in Asia, the Pacific, Africa, or even South America. Six years after performing surgery on her for free, Dr. Ruit found that she was running the household and farm of her family, her son was going to school, and she was able to negotiate some of the most difficult terrains in Nepal to provide for her family.

“You can see why good vision is very central for this part of the world,” Dr. Ruit stressed. “She is back into the affairs that are related to society, she is now an economically viable family member.”

He emphasized the importance of sharing the knowledge and know-how to the medical and health sectors globally to sustainably help and improve local low-income communities. “We are training close to 800 eye doctors now from almost 40 countries around the world and the technique specifically addresses the local socio-economic conditions,” he stated, while noting the critical importance of the medical and private sector linking up with local partners in each respective country and gaining the support from the local health ministries.

During the open-floor debate session, Bangladesh Ambassador to Bahrain Dr. Nazrul Islam underscored Bangladesh’s willingness to collaborate and cooperate with Dr. Ruit to ensure his humanitarian work can access Bangladesh’s health sector, to which Dr. Ruit noted the request he received for a partnership with the Bangladesh Ophthalmological Society, as well as the work they do with local doctors.

Professor Khalil Rayes, Secretary General of the Tunisian Ophthalmological Society, invited Dr. Ruit to an upcoming annual congress session on blindness in Tunisia and responded to Dr. Ruit’s call for collaboration with a suggestion for cooperation in this field. He noted the various campaigns on the prevention of cataracts in Tunisia and sub-Saharan countries as well as the importance of engaging with governmental and NGO associations. He also underscored the need for research and innovative thinking in developing surgical techniques that are not expensive to meet the needs of the people.

Nepal Ambassador to Bahrain Mr. Tirtha Raj Wagle highlighted Nepal’s pride in Dr. Ruit’s humanitarian efforts and the strengthening of already positive relations between Nepal and Bahrain through the Isa Award, established by His Majesty King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa of Bahrain. While thanking IPI MENA for hosting Dr. Ruit, he reminded the audience of the importance of fostering South-South cooperation in vulnerable and low-income countries.

The UN secretary-general launched Action for Peacekeeping Plus (A4P+) in March 2021, three years after introducing the Action for Peacekeeping (A4P) initiative. A4P+ was conceptualized as a two-year implementation strategy for A4P that prioritizes urgent challenges facing UN peacekeeping. To monitor progress toward achieving these priorities, the UN has developed the A4P+ Plan and the A4P+ Monitoring Framework with specific results, deliverables, and indicators. To date, the UN Department of Peace Operations (DPO) has published two reports assessing the implementation of A4P+ and the impact of these efforts on UN peacekeeping operations.

This issue brief takes stock of the monitoring and implementation of A4P+ over the past two years. It begins by explaining the A4P+ priorities and tracing their emergence out of the A4P initiative and Declaration of Shared Commitments. It then discusses highlights from the A4P+ Plan and the two progress reports published as of March 2023 and examines the benefits and limitations of current approaches to monitoring and implementing A4P+.

The paper concludes that moving forward, UN officials will need to balance ambitious goals for progress with realistic expectations about what peacekeeping operations can achieve, and when. The UN will also have to decide whether to extend the current set of A4P+ priorities beyond 2023. Ultimately, while A4P+ can help grease the machinery of UN peacekeeping, its long-term impact will depend on member states delivering on their existing political, operational, and financial commitments.

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-hakufy").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-hakufy").fadeIn(300);});});

IPI together with the Gender, Justice and Security Hub cohosted a discussion on March 13th on the topic of Women’s Agency in Post-Conflict Reconciliation in  Colombia, Sri Lanka, and Uganda.

Women in Colombia, Sri Lanka, and Uganda have figured prominently among the victims of war. They also face complex challenges in overcoming the legacies of war, rebuilding their livelihoods and communities, and confronting the horrors of the past. When women feel empowered and have agency, they can  become strong advocates and facilitators of reconciliation processes, as well as peacebuilders in their communities.

This event shared research findings on women’s roles in post-conflict reconciliation in Colombia, Sri Lanka, and Uganda, as well as potential synergies between women peacebuilders in all three contexts. Despite being “disproportionately represented among the victims of armed conflict,” as highlighted by IPI Women, Peace and Security Head Phoebe Donnelly, women are still too often omitted from peace processes.  This comparison of the three cases helped identify opportunities for women to build peace in their countries and promote awareness of these specific contexts.

During the event, Policy Analyst at UN Women Pablo Castillo Díaz, evoked a discussion on the challenges of labelling. Speakers shared their insight on their respective countries:

In Uganda, co-director of the Gender, Justice and Security Hub  explained that the use of the term “post-conflict” can be problematic and/or contradictory considering the war ended 40 years ago, and that there are several ongoing conflicts. In many cases there is real conflict, and “post-war” would be more suitable.

In the case of Sri Lanka, “conflict should not be labelled as over until there is rebuilding” stated Visaka Dharmadasa,  co-director of the Gender, Justice and Security Hub. She also asserted that women must be part of the Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration process (DDR) and another R should be added for “Rebuilding” (DDRR).

In Colombia, co-director of the Gender, Justice and Security Hub   said that people are using the term “post-accord” which has to do with the fact that the country has had over 20 peace processes, including current negotiations to achieve sustainable peace.

The protection, participation and power of women peacebuilders is key for reconciliation and sustainable peace. Read more about the work of the Gender, Justice and Security Hub, and how they amplify the voices of women and marginalized groups here>>

Opening remarks:
Jenna Russo, Director of Research and Head of the Brian Urquhart Center for Peace Operations, International Peace Institute
Kirsten Ainley, Co-principal Investigator of the Gender, Justice and Security Hub and Associate Professor of International Relations, Australian National University

Panelists:
Angelika Rettberg, Co-director of the Gender, Justice and Security Hub  and Professor of Political Science at Universidad de los Andes
Visaka Dharmadasa, Founder of the Association of War Affected Women in Sri Lanka and project partner on the Gender, Justice and Security Hub
Josephine Ahikire, Co-director of the Gender, Justice and Security Hub and Associate Professor of Gender Studies at the School of Women and Gender Studies, Principal of the College of Humanities and Social Sciences at Makerere University
Pablo Castillo Díaz, Policy Specialist, UN Women

Moderator:
Phoebe Donnelly, Senior Fellow and Head of the Women, Peace, and Security Program, International Peace Institute

for social media Evyn had me remove “the contexts of,” not sure if we need/should keep it. [MZ1] [MZ1]

let’s remove [AS2] [AS2]

“can…” is included in the concept note, without it it seems like a loaded statement [MZ3] [MZ3]

or “peacebuilding and reconciliation processes”  (peace processes to avoid repetition) [MZ4] [MZ4]

Do I need to include “Associate Professor of Gender Studies at the School of Women and Gender Studies, Principal of the College of Humanities and Social Sciences at Makerere University, and Co-director of the Gender, Justice and Security Hub”? As it is quite lengthy and also right below… [MZ5] [MZ5]

Let’s just use “Co-director of Gender, Justice and Security Hub.” We do need to include an affiliation here. [AS6] [AS6]

Do I need to include “Founder of the Association of War Affected Women in Sri Lanka and project partner on the Gender, Justice and Security Hub”  ? [MZ7] [MZ7]

I added (DDRR) at the end, and all capitalized since it’s a title. [MZ8]

include “Professor of Political Science at Universidad de los Andes and Co-director of the Gender, Justice and Security Hub” ? [MZ9] [MZ9]

Again, “Co-director” only here. [AS10] [AS10]

Opening remarks:
Jenna Russo, Director of Research and Head of the Brian Urquhart Center for Peace Operations, International Peace Institute
Kirsten Ainley, Co-principal Investigator of the Gender, Justice and Security Hub and Associate Professor of International Relations, Australian National University

Panelists:
Angelika Rettberg, Professor of Political Science at Universidad de los Andes and Co-director of the Gender, Justice and Security Hub
Visaka Dharmadasa, Founder of the Association of War Affected Women in Sri Lanka and project partner on the Gender, Justice and Security Hub
Josephine Ahikire, Associate Professor of Gender Studies at the School of Women and Gender Studies, Principal of the College of Humanities and Social Sciences at Makerere University, and Co-director of the Gender, Justice and Security Hub
Pablo Castillo Díaz, Policy Specialist, UN Women

Moderator:
Phoebe Donnelly, Senior Fellow and Head of the Women, Peace, and Security Program, International Peace Institute

The UN Security Council is expected to renew the mandate of the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) in March 2023. The upcoming mandate renewal negotiations will unfold amid a worsening economic and humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan. Security Council members remain divided over what the appropriate level of political engagement between the UN and de facto authorities should be, especially after the lack of progress in getting the Taliban to change course on its policies restricting the rights of Afghan women and girls. Questions surrounding political engagement, sanctions, risk management and aid diversion, development assistance, the threat of terrorism, and ongoing human rights violations all impact the latest conversations around Afghanistan and UNAMA’s role in the country.

In this context, the International Peace Institute (IPI), the Stimson Center, and Security Council Report co-hosted a roundtable discussion on February 14, 2023. This roundtable offered a platform for member states, UN officials, civil society stakeholders, and independent experts to share their assessments of the situation in Afghanistan in a frank and collaborative manner. The discussion was intended to help the Security Council make more informed decisions with respect to the prioritization and sequencing of UNAMA’s mandate and the mission’s strategic orientation and actions on the ground.

Participants largely agreed that UNAMA’s mandated priorities are still relevant to the UN’s overall engagement in the country, even amid a deteriorating situation on the ground. They also agreed that the current mandate text includes strong substantive language on political engagement, human rights, and gender and that it also provides UNAMA with enough flexibility to prioritize its work based on evolving conditions on the ground.

The following issues are likely to shape the council’s negotiations on UNAMA’s mandate renewal:

• Balancing between supporting UNAMA’s quiet diplomacy and encouraging its public advocacy across multiple mandate areas, considering the restrictive domestic context;
• Reinforcing UNAMA’s role in coordinating and facilitating humanitarian assistance with UN and non-UN partners during a period of protracted crises;
• Supporting regional and international engagement on Afghanistan, including UNAMA’s potential role in facilitating dialogue with the de facto authorities;
• Ensuring the safety of UN personnel and their interlocutors while still implementing the mission’s mandate; and
• Sustaining the substantive progress achieved through negotiations on Resolution 2626 (2022) while considering whether there is a need to adapt the mandate to the latest developments in the country.

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-xmflui").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-xmflui").fadeIn(300);});});

Related Apps 

In cooperation with the Permanent Mission of Switzerland to the UN and the International Gender Champions Network, IPI cohosted a policy forum on March 7th on the topic of “Using Innovation and Technology to Advance Gender Equality.”

The objective of this event was to learn from examples of innovative and technological approaches to improve gender equality and to discuss how these and similar strategies can be applied more broadly to gender equality work.

Gender inequality persists around the globe. “All women and girls need access to technology, need to be represented in the digital space, and need to be safe to fully participate,” affirmed IPI President Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, in his opening remarks. The latest available data on Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 5 shows that the world is not on track to achieve gender equality by 2030. Despite progress in reforming laws, closing gaps in legal protections, and removing discriminatory laws, gender equality could take up to 286 years to achieve, based on the current rate of change.

Women’s representation in positions of power and decision-making remains below parity. Sophie Achermann, from Alliance F highlighted how “women are left out of our digital democracy,” to close the gender digital divide, everyone must be included. Gender inequality in its most extreme form is expressed through gender-based violence and violence against women, which remains high both offline and online. A study of women in 51 countries revealed that 38 percent of women surveyed had personally experienced online violence, including hate speech. Online and ICT-facilitated violence against women increased during the COVID-19 global pandemic as women spent more time online. A critical step toward achieving gender equality will be to make sure that women are able to participate safely and meaningfully in online spaces. “What works well for women will work well for the world,” asserted UN Secretary-General’s Envoy on Technology Amandeep Singh Gill.

Opening Remarks:
Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, President and Chief Executive Officer, International Peace Institute
H.E. Pascale Baeriwsyl, Permanent Representative of Switzerland to the UN

Speakers:
Amandeep Singh Gill, UN Secretary-General’s Envoy on Technology
Iris Bohnet, Harvard University
Annabella Bassler, Equal Voice, Ringier
Sophie Achermann, Stop Hate Speech, Alliance F

Moderator:
Adam Lupel, Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, International Peace Institute

The UN Security Council is expected to renew the mandate of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) in March 2023. The upcoming negotiations among council members will unfold as South Sudan enters a crucial phase of its extended political transition, which is now expected to culminate in national elections by December 2024. Hot spots of localized violence persist across the country, which could escalate should political or security conditions deteriorate. Significant humanitarian concerns, multifaceted threats to civilians, and the limited presence of state institutions to provide basic services or security amplify the magnitude of the challenges confronting South Sudan.

In this context, the International Peace Institute (IPI), Security Council Report, and the Stimson Center co-hosted a roundtable discussion on January 25, 2023. This roundtable offered a platform for member states, UN officials, civil society stakeholders, and independent experts to share their assessments of the situation in South Sudan in a frank and collaborative manner. The discussion was intended to help the Security Council make more informed decisions with respect to the prioritization and sequencing of UNMISS’s mandate and the mission’s strategic orientation and actions on the ground.

Participants largely agreed that the Security Council’s three-year strategic vision for UNMISS and the mission’s priority tasks remain fit for purpose and that the mandate’s broad structure is still valid in light of the current country context. The dialogue focused on identifying ways to refine the mandate and ensure that UNMISS has both the direction and the flexibility needed to support the country over the coming year. In renewing UNMISS’s mandate, the council will likely need to consider the following issues:

• Encouraging unified international support to South Sudan during this next phase of its political transition while communicating the urgency of South Sudan accomplishing critical legislative milestones before December 2024;
• Affirming the centrality of UN support to protecting civilians and encouraging UNMISS to continue prioritizing flexible and proactive approaches to the protection of civilians (POC);
• Expanding UNMISS’s support to preparations for the upcoming electoral process in ways that are consistent with the Revitalised Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan’s (R-ARCSS) provisions on free, fair, and peaceful elections;
• Continuing support to South Sudanese justice, rule of law, and security institutions, as well as considering the potential expansion of conflict-sensitive capacity-building assistance, in line with South Sudanese priorities; and
• Considering ways to integrate the emerging issues of climate change, misinformation and disinformation, and early transition planning into the mandate.

Download

The UN Security Council is expected to renew the mandate of the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO) in December 2022. The upcoming negotiations among council members will unfold against the backdrop of renewed fighting between the Armed Forces of the DRC (FARDC) and the M23 rebel group. And while several regional diplomatic initiatives are underway, the security and humanitarian conditions continue to worsen in the eastern provinces of the DRC, with persistent threats to human rights and the protection of civilians.

In this context, the International Peace Institute (IPI), Security Council Report, and the Stimson Center co-hosted a roundtable discussion on November 15, 2022. This roundtable offered a platform for member states, UN officials, civil society stakeholders, and independent experts to share their assessments of the situation in the DRC in a frank and collaborative manner. The discussion was intended to help the Security Council make more informed decisions with respect to the prioritization and sequencing of MONUSCO’s mandate and the mission’s strategic orientation and actions on the ground.

Participants agreed that MONUSCO’s strategic vision and priority tasks are still relevant to the UN’s overall engagement in the country. They also emphasized that the current mandate provides the mission with appropriate guidance to pursue the strategic direction provided by the Security Council, but some areas need to be refined for the mission to better address the ongoing crisis and new priorities. The mission will likely need to balance the following issues over the next mandate cycle:

• Strengthening MONUSCO’s capabilities to conduct proactive, robust, and mobile protection efforts in eastern DRC;
• Bridging the expectations gap on the protection of civilians by communicating what MONUSCO can achieve under its mandate as well as the limits of MONUSCO’s partnership with the FARDC;
• Establishing a constructive dialogue between MONUSCO and the East African Community’s regional force to deconflict and coordinate operations on the ground while encouraging compliance with international humanitarian law and international human rights law;
• Supporting the government’s efforts to build national capacity to implement its Demobilization, Disarmament, Community Recovery and Stabilization Program (P-DDRCS);
• Capitalizing on its good offices to coordinate and harmonize the Luanda and Nairobi processes;
• Expanding civic engagement in the formal political process and making the process more inclusive; and
• Working with regional partners to lay the groundwork for balanced bilateral agreements fostering long-term sustainable economic cooperation.

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-vkgeyl").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-vkgeyl").fadeIn(300);});}); Download the Report

While the UN Security Council and member states have elevated the protection of civilians (POC) and the primacy of politics as two central pillars of UN peacekeeping, it is not always clear how missions are expected to pursue these two sets of priorities together. To discuss the relationship between these pillars, IPI together with the Permanent Mission of the Kingdom of the Netherlands to the UN cohosted a policy forum on December 8th, entitled “The Primacy of Politics and the Protection of Civilians in UN Peacekeeping.”

Support to political processes and the protection of civilians (POC) are the two most prominent mandated tasks for multidimensional UN peacekeeping operations, emphasized in recent independent reviews and elevated by member states and the Security Council. However, despite being foundational pillars to contemporary UN peacekeeping, it is not always clear how these two sets of priorities fit together in planning and operations. Policy guidance and independent reviews stress the need to link mission political priorities and protection, yet within missions, POC is often considered parallel to the mission’s political work and is not always effectively incorporated into the political vision for the mission.

The event examined how missions’ political and POC work are understood in relation to one another and considered opportunities for strengthening both formal and informal integration. This discussion focused primarily on opportunities to strengthen integration at the mission level, for example in planning and analysis, good offices and mediation, and local-level processes. It also considered challenges, such as when the host state is among the perpetrators of violence, when high levels of violence are ongoing, or when there is a lack of a formal political process. “State actors can be so diverse, and it is important to understand the breadth of actors you have to engage with, instead of painting the government with a broad brush,” said Regina Fitzpatrick, Protection of Civilians Team Leader in the Policy, Evaluation and Training Division, UN Department of Peace Operations. Speakers also reflected on the importance of clearly defining the meaning of political primacy, and the challenges of navigating both diplomacy and accountability.

The policy forum launched the IPI policy paper on the “The Protection of Civilians and the Primacy of Politics in UN Peacekeeping” written by Jenna Russo, Director of Research and Head of the Brian Urquhart Center for Peace Operations at IPI, and Ralph Mamiya, IPI Non-Resident Adviser. This event and publication are part of IPI’s broader workstream on Action for Peacekeeping+ (A4P+), funded by the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

Opening Remarks:
Adam Lupel, Vice President and COO, International Peace Institute
H.E. Mark Zellenrath, Deputy Permanent Representative of the Kingdom of the Netherlands to the UN

Panelists:
Ralph Mamiya, Non-Resident Adviser, International Peace Institute
Kenny Gluck, Former Deputy Special Representative and Deputy Head of the UN Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA)
Wendy MacClinchy, Director of the United Nations program at Center for Civilians in Conflict
Regina Fitzpatrick, Protection of Civilians Team Leader, Policy, Evaluation and Training Division, UN Department of Peace Operations

Moderator:
Jenna Russo, Director of Research and Head of the Brian Urquhart Center for Peace Operations, International Peace Institute

Support to political processes and the protection of civilians (POC) are arguably the two most prominent mandated tasks for multidimensional UN peacekeeping operations. Policy guidance and independent reviews have made clear that politics and protection must be linked, yet within missions, POC is often considered in parallel to political work and is not always effectively incorporated into a political vision.

The purpose of this report is to examine how UN peacekeeping missions’ POC and political work are understood in relation to one another in terms of planning and operations and to consider opportunities for better integrating them, both formally and informally. The report begins by outlining the concept of political primacy and the elevation of POC within UN peacekeeping. It then provides an overview of entry points for better connecting missions’ political and POC work, including in mapping and analyses, planning and strategies, negotiated agreements, the creation of enabling environments, and local-level processes. The report then discusses various challenges and offers concluding recommendations.

The paper concludes with the following recommendations for member states, mission leadership, and other mission personnel to better integrate their POC and political work:

• Mapping and analysis: Mission leaders should ensure that mapping and analyses are conducted jointly by mission personnel working on POC and politics.
• Planning and strategies: Special representatives of the secretary-general (SRSGs) and headquarters should take ownership of, and clearly and consistently communicate to mission staff, mission concepts, mission plans, POC strategies, and political strategies. To better translate their strategic vision into actionable plans, mission leaders should also establish joint mission planning cells. Heads of POC and political components (or their equivalents) should anchor their individual strategies in the central mission concept, plan, or strategy to ensure all components are working toward a common goal.
• Negotiated agreements: During the lead-up to a formal negotiation process, SRSGs should advocate for POC. Mediators should also advocate for specific language on POC within negotiated agreements, including language on the protection of specific groups and protection from sexual and gender-based violence.
• Creating an enabling environment: Mission personnel in charge of planning and implementing POC should look for entry points to enhance the protection-participation nexus.
• Local-level processes: Senior mission leaders and member states should broaden their focus on the “political” beyond national-level formal processes to include the local level.

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-ycltkp").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-ycltkp").fadeIn(300);});}); Download Issue Brief

Over the past two decades, attacks on healthcare in situations of armed conflict have been reported at alarming levels. By collecting data on these attacks, states can better understand the scale and scope of the problem, protect health services and workers, and prevent future attacks.

On December 1st, IPI with the support of the Government of Spain, cohosted an event on “Strengthening Data to Protect Healthcare in Conflict Zones: Toward the Implementation of UN Commitments.” The policy forum provided an opportunity to discuss IPI’s new issue brief entitled “Strengthening Data to Protect Healthcare in Conflict Zones” co-authored by Susannah Sirkin and Rohini Haar, including their recommendations on ways to better use existing data-collection methods and mechanisms to prevent and protect against attacks on medical care in armed conflict.

The forum brought together representatives of UN agencies, humanitarian organizations, member states, and civil society organizations to discuss some of the policy and technical challenges related to collecting robust data on attacks against healthcare in armed conflict. It also reflected on ways to strengthen data collection and reporting with the goal of enhancing prevention and protection. “Acknowledging and reporting the violence is a first and necessary step to preventing violence,” said Susannah Sirkin, co-author of the report. Panelists also emphasized the importance of publishing data as an accountability measure. “There is no strong evidence that the publication of data detailing attacks on health care facilities results in increased security risks,” explained Leonard Rubenstein, Chair of the Safeguarding Health in Conflict Coalition.

Speakers further considered opportunities to address policy and technical challenges and examined how improved data collection may build on existing data processes, including the World Health Organization’s Surveillance System for Attacks on Healthcare and the work of the Safeguarding Health and Conflict Coalition and Insecurity Insight.

Opening remarks:
Adam Lupel, Vice-President and COO, International Peace Institute
H.E. Agustín Santos Maraver, Permanent Representative of Spain to the UN

Speakers:
Rohini Haar, Adjunct Professor, University of California, Berkeley, practicing emergency medicine physician, and co-author of the report
Susannah Sirkin, Independent Consultant and co-author of the report
Hyo Jeong Kim, Technical Officer, Attacks on Health Care initiative, World Health Organization Emergency Programme
Maciej Polkowski, Head, Health Care in Danger Initiative, International Committee of the Red Cross
Leonard Rubenstein, Chair, Safeguarding Health in Conflict Coalition
Tobijo Denis Sokiri Moses, Technical Advisor, The Rescue Initiative-South Sudan

Moderator:
Agathe Sarfati, Senior Policy Analyst, International Peace Institute

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-atjwsl").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-atjwsl").fadeIn(300);});}); Download the Report

Gendered analyses of violence often focus narrowly on women and overlook the importance of understanding masculinities. To bridge this gap in understanding, IPI in partnership with the UN Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate (CTED), the Permanent Mission of Mexico to the UN, and the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), cohosted a policy forum on “Masculinities in Peace and Security.” The November 30th event convened researchers, practitioners, and policymakers for a focused discussion on masculinity and violent extremism.

The UN Security Council held an Arria-formula meeting in July 2021, chaired by Mexico with the co-sponsorship of Estonia, Norway, the United Kingdom, and the United States, to discuss how gender stereotypes, masculinities, and structural gender inequalities influence terrorism and violent extremism. Specifically, this Arria-formula meeting explored the ways in which understanding masculinities could promote better prevention of, and response to, violent extremist and terrorist groups.

In June 2022, IPI and CTED published “Masculinities and Violent Extremism,” a joint policy report that explored how violent extremist groups across the ideological spectrum exploit masculinities in their efforts to recruit and retain members, the links between extremist violence and gender inequality within society, and how masculinities produced by state actors can feed into and mutually reinforce those produced by violent extremists.

This policy forum presented the key findings of the IPI and CTED report and provided policymakers and researchers with an opportunity to reflect on the relevance of focusing on masculinities in preventing and countering terrorism and violent extremism. “This is not a niche topic,” said David Scharia, Chief of Branch at CTED, in his opening remarks. “We must continue to strengthen our understanding of gender perspectives and gender inequalities in violent extremism.”

The discussion further emphasized the need for masculinities analysis and expansive thinking about gender. “Gender often becomes shorthand for ‘women,’” said Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms while Countering Terrorism. “However, the construction of masculinity is incredibly relevant to work on violent extremism.” The policy forum concluded by exploring areas for future growth, including further research on LGBT issues and the rights of the child.

Opening remarks:
David Scharia, Chief of Branch, UN Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate
H.E. Alicia Guadalupe Buenrostro Massieu, Deputy Permanent Representative of Mexico to the UN

Panelists:
Gretchen Baldwin, Researcher, Gender, Peace Operations and Conflict Management, Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
Aleksandra Dier, Gender Coordinator, UN Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate
Robert Nagel, Research Fellow, Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security
Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms while Countering Terrorism (virtual)
Pablo Arrocha Olabuenaga, Legal Adviser, Permanent Mission of Mexico to the UN

Moderator:
Phoebe Donnelly, Senior Fellow and Head of the Women, Peace, and Security Program, International Peace Institute