Military actors are often the most present and operationally capable elements in peace operations. Leveraging their presence, assets, and influence—through training, gender integration, and structural reforms—can significantly enhance the impact of the WPS agenda,, provided it is approached with deliberate planning and inclusive frameworks.
Africa faces peculiar challenges: an increase in asymmetrical warfare including terrorism, counter-terrorism, and insurgencies operating along traditional forms of warfare. This has necessitated highly militarised responses, at least in the short term, to create conducive conditions for political engagement. However, sustainable solutions require more than just military interventions alone, as the evolving nature of contemporary armed violence continues to shape and shift the options available for effective responses.
These shifts have implications, particularly for the funding of other equally important initiatives, such as the implementation of the women, peace and security agenda. The high costs of responding to armed violence and the near-sole focus on degrading the enemy create opportunity costs, which undoubtedly affect the effective implementation of the WPS agenda. Yet, it is in the midst of such high levels of violence and uncertainty that commitment to the gender agenda becomes even more paramount.
The effective implementation of the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda in African peace operations requires strategic pragmatism.
Tweet
Contemporary geopolitical dynamics, the retreat of multilateralism, and reprioritisation of funding to address security challenges in Europe and the Middle East have led to dwindling resources for peace operations in Africa. In an ideal world, it would almost be sacrilegious to suggest leveraging military spending for the promotion of the WPS agenda. Even under the current situation, pushback on such an idea is to be expected from several feminists. However, the world is far from what may be considered ideal and pragmatic efforts must be made to ensure the continued implementation of the WPS agenda even in the face of high-intensity operations. Leveraging military resources for the implementation of the WPS agenda may be worthwhile.
The militarisation dilemma
Despite the absence of direct causality, one of the major obstacles to the implementation of the WPS agenda in peace operations is the high and rising military expenditure. The threats to which contemporary peace operations must respond require robust, agile, and precision capabilities, which are quite expensive. While these capabilities are essential for the protection of all persons within a mission area, they also create opportunity costs, including reduced investments in non-military interventions, including for the implementation of the WPS agenda.
The militarisation of peace support operations creates a paradox: while the focus on military approaches and investment in kinetic capabilities reduces investment in non-kinetic approaches and the implementation of the WPS agenda, in peace enforcement actions or operations where the presence of civilian peacekeepers may be limited, the military will have to be responsible for the implementation of the WPS agenda.
Leveraging Military Approaches to Enhance the Implementation of the WPS Agenda in Africa
In many instances, given the degree of armed violence and the blatant disregard for the rules of armed conflict, non-uniformed personnel are unable to efficiently deliver on their mandate without the support of uniformed personnel. Military assets are strategic enablers, critical to the implementation of the WPS agenda. For instance, protection through presence and a robust posture has been instrumental in creating an enabling environment for women and girls, and in minimising gender and sexual-based violence in several theatres of operation including in Darfur under UNAMID and MINUSMA in Mali.
Although states have committed to the promotion of women’s full, equal, and meaningful participation in peace and security processes, the number of personnel dedicated to the implementation of the women, peace and security agenda remains significantly small. Comparatively, the military tends to have a higher presence and geographical reach in operational theatres. They are therefore the eyes and ears of the mission on the ground and can assist with the collection of valuable information for the effective implementation of the women, peace and security agenda; such as the collection of gender-related intelligence, which is critical to gender-sensitive conflict analysis and the identification of gender-specific threats for the co-creation of preventive and response interventions with at-risk populations.
Care must, however, be taken not to essentialise the military. Gender parity among uniformed personnel is necessary. The ability to leverage the military to effectively support the implementation of the WPS agenda depends on ensuring that the four pillars of the WPS agenda are fully integrated into military approaches. For instance, attaining gender parity in deployments is important. Gender-aware female personnel will be better able to deal with sensitive gender-specific issues of abuse and violations. But beyond numbers, there is a need for knowledge, understanding and relevant skill sets. For the military to effectively support the implementation of the WPS agenda, especially in high-intensity operations, all or at least most deployed troops must be trained to recognise that gender is a critical military capability. Women’s full, equal, and meaningful participation should be viewed not only as a matter of rights but also as a strategic asset that can be leveraged to enhance the effectiveness of peace operations and enforcement actions.
Militarised approaches can support women and the gender agenda when there is a critical mass of multi-level actors who clearly understand and value women’s full and equal participation as integral to operational effectiveness. With such understanding, it is easier to systematically integrate gender perspectives into all levels of operations, from the interpretation of the mandate through the concept of operations to field deployments. For instance, when commanders at all levels have a good understanding of gender perspectives, including gender culture and ways to mainstream gender, they are better placed to interpret the strategic intent of the mandate and design and implement a gender-responsive concept of operations at various levels.
Military gender experts can help develop gender-inclusive mission and operational strategies that include integrating gender indicators in operational planning and resource allocation, early warning data collection, and the design of responses that address identified risks. When a critical mass of deployed troops is trained and understands gender perspectives, they are able to monitor, patrol, and posture in a manner that enhances proactive rather than reactive actions, thereby improving protection for at-risk populations. Even though there are concerns over militarised approaches, particularly in relation to humanitarian actors, military assets are critical not just for non-kinetic efforts but also for providing escorts of civilian personnel in volatile and high-risk areas for civilian peacekeepers, including gender experts.
Finally, as peace support operations transition to peacekeeping missions, the deployment of gender-responsive military advisors could assist in promoting the implementation of the WPS agenda at the national level of the host country. Through gender-responsive advising, training, coaching, and mentoring, these advisors can help embed gender perspectives within national institutions, thereby strengthening inclusive and sustainable peacebuilding efforts.
As peace support operations transition to peacekeeping missions, the deployment of gender-responsive military advisors could assist in promoting the implementation of the WPS agenda at the national level of the host country.
Tweet
Linda Darkwa is a Senior Research Fellow at the Legon Centre for International Affairs and Diplomacy, University of Ghana; and the coordinator of the Secretariat of the Training for Peace Programme.
