Efforts to develop more inclusive peace processes are making progress. Yet, 20 years after the passage of U.N. Security Resolution 1325 on women, peace, and security, very few women are currently part of formal peace processes. This gap is exemplified by the recent struggles of Afghan women to be included in peace talks and U.N. reports that showed between 1990 and 2017, women constituted only 2 percent of mediators, 8 percent of negotiators, and 5 percent of witnesses and signatories in major peace processes. A new initiative from Our Secure Future, “Mobilizing Men as Partners for Women, Peace and Security,” seeks to remedy this by calling on men in gatekeeping positions throughout the defense, diplomacy, development, civil society, faith-based, and business sectors to commit to ensuring women are an equal part of peace processes and decision making. 

The U.S. Institute of Peace hosted an event exploring how men in leadership positions are organizing as partners to identify, encourage, and mobilize collective voices in the support of women’s engagement in the pursuit of peace. By bringing global citizens more fully into this campaign, these stakeholders can step away from the sidelines of the women, peace, and security movement and more fully stand alongside—and empower—the women leading the effort. Take part in the conversation on Twitter with #MobilizingMen4WPS.

Speakers

Sanam Naraghi-Anderlini
Founder and Executive Director, ICAN 

Honorable Ed Royce
Former U.S. Representative from California

Ambassador Donald Steinberg 
Fellow, Our Secure Future

Ambassador Steven McGann
Founder, The Stevenson Group

Ambassador Melanne Verveer
Executive Director, Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security

Ambassador Rick Barton
Co-director, Scholars in the Nation's Service Initiative, Princeton University

Rosarie Tucci, moderator
Director, Inclusive Peace Processes, U.S. Institute of Peace

Sahana Dharmapuri
Director, Our Secure Future

Dean Peacock
Senior Advisor for Global Policy, Promundo

Related Publications

How to Revive an Afghan Peace Process

How to Revive an Afghan Peace Process

Wednesday, September 18, 2019

By: USIP Staff

The halt to U.S. peace talks with the Taliban, announced September 7 by President Trump, should be used as a starting point for new negotiations, according to U.S. and Afghan specialists. The United States and Afghans have a chance to shape a new phase of talks to maximize the possibilities for a peace accord that Afghans can accept, the experts said at USIP. Some urged resuming talks as quickly as possible. Others argued for focusing first on unifying non-Taliban Afghans following the planned September 28 elections, and on exploiting war fatigue among the Taliban.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Peace Processes

What are the Prospects for Power-Sharing in the Afghan Peace Process?

What are the Prospects for Power-Sharing in the Afghan Peace Process?

Monday, September 16, 2019

By: Alex Thier

While the negotiations between the U.S. and the Taliban were recently thrown-off course, a peace agreement among Afghans remains an urgent priority. The U.S.-led negotiations over a phased drawdown of U.S. troops in exchange for a Taliban commitment to eschew terrorism and engage in intra-Afghan negotiations took nearly a year. Yet these talks excluded the Afghan government and other political elites and didn’t address the fundamental question of what it will take for Afghans to put a sustainable end to four decades of war: how will power be shared?

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Peace Processes

Negotiations, Continued: Ensuring the Positive Performance of Power-Sharing Arrangements

Negotiations, Continued: Ensuring the Positive Performance of Power-Sharing Arrangements

Thursday, September 12, 2019

By: David Lanz; Laurie Nathan; Alexandre Raffoul

Most negotiated peace settlements since the 1990s have featured some aspect of power sharing, including those in Northern Ireland, Burundi, Bosnia, and Nepal. However, by freezing a sometimes unstable status quo, power sharing can create challenges to maintaining peace over the longer term as issues arise that rekindle enmity or create new suspicions among the parties. This report argues that power-sharing arrangements can be made more durable by providing robust forums, either permanent or ad hoc, that allow parties to resolve differences as they arise and to reaffirm their commitment to peace.

Type: Special Report

Democracy & Governance; Peace Processes

Afghan peace talks are damaged, but not yet broken.

Afghan peace talks are damaged, but not yet broken.

Tuesday, September 10, 2019

By: USIP Staff; Andrew Wilder

President Trump’s weekend announcement of a halt to U.S. peace talks with Afghanistan’s Taliban—including a previously unannounced U.S. plan for a Camp David meeting to conclude that process—leaves the future of the Afghanistan peace process unclear. USIP’s Andrew Wilder, a longtime Afghanistan analyst, argues that, rather than declaring an end to the peace process, U.S. negotiators could use the setback as a moment to clarify the strategy, and then urgently get the peace process back on track before too much momentum is lost.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Peace Processes

View All Publications