Remembering Peace in a Time of War: Why International Law Matters More Than Ever | Building Peace
What Role for International Law in Ensuring Women’s Participation in Peace Processes and Beyond?
by Julia Vassileva
This piece, guided by the question “What role does international law play in ensuring participation of women in peace processes?”, examines the significant barriers women face in peace processes and peace negotiations, and the role of international law in aiming to overcome them. The research positions itself as a contribution to the broader discourse on international law and peace settlements, durable peace (see here and here), feminist approaches to international law, and implementing/‘promoting human rights through international law.’ Broadly, international law can promote women’s leadership in peace processes by building on human rights principles, UN Security Council Resolution 1325, and conventions such as CEDAW, all of which underpin women’s participation and protection in conflict resolution. By integrating women’s quotas in peace negotiations and ensuring that peace agreements uphold human rights standards, international law can hold states accountable for excluding women from leadership roles. Additionally, enforcing these obligations through international monitoring mechanisms further strengthens women’s positions. Regional legal instruments can further support women’s inclusion, ensuring legal reforms that protect women’s rights and promote their participation in peacebuilding.
Diverse literature exists on the various benefits of women’s participation in peace processes more generally, such as increased legitimacy and effectiveness, improved substance and national ownership, and broader stability. However, research has demonstrated that rhetorical commitments, such as normative language in policy documents and strong political statements, do not necessarily lead to concrete actions or tangible outcomes in practice. This frequent lack of women’s participation has prompted scholars of international law (see for example here, here, here, and here) to ask whether there might be a legal basis for the participation of women. There are several notable examples where women’s involvement in peace-making has had a positive influence. For instance, in Northern Ireland, the Northern Ireland Women’s Coalition played a crucial role in the Good Friday Agreement negotiations, advocating for inclusive language and approach to peace. Similarly, in the Colombian Peace Process, women’s organisations actively contributed to the Havana peace talks, successfully advocating for a sub-commission that ensured women’s rights and perspectives were incorporated into the final agreement. These cases demonstrate that when women are meaningfully involved, peace agreements tend to be more comprehensive and durable.
Thus far, it has been argued that there is a lack of rules in this area; however, while no specific actions are prescribed, there might be ‘a normative framework to guide and evaluate the conduct of relevant actors in terms of applicable international standards.’ Different analyses have explored human rights considerations—the right to equality, political participation, self-determination—as well as some mention of conventions such as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW).
“Women’s participation” is increasingly emphasised in policy documents from the UN and regional organisations such as the European Union (EU), North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), and the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). At the UN level, key frameworks include the 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly Goal 16, as well as initiatives on sustaining peace and conflict prevention. Additionally, UNSC Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security (WPS) highlights the importance of women’s participation. The relevance of the WPS agenda, based on Resolution 1325 and the subsequently developed National Action Plans (NAPs) in various countries has been explored in the literature and in practice. In line with them, various international organisations, including the EU, NATO, and the OSCE, have adopted related policies.
A comprehensive approach would not only analyze the legal principles that establish women’s right to participate in peace processes but also explore how these rights are implemented (or circumvented) in practice. This includes examining power structures within negotiation settings, the informal and cultural obstacles to women’s participation, and the role of international and domestic actors in enforcing commitments.
In recent research, I conducted an analysis of legal and policy documents on peace processes and women’s participation in negotiations, collaborating with scholars from Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Moldova, and Ukraine (see here, here, here, and forthcoming work). The case studies explored the role of women in peace negotiations, the barriers that they face, and how international law could support greater participation. For instance, women in the region have been active on civil society and grassroot levels of the peace process, working with internally displaced persons and refugees and dialogues with the conflict regions; while still a minority, they have also occasionally engaged as key negotiators. In these contexts, civil society activists can use international law and policy to promote inclusive practices, demonstrating the potential of international legal norms to strengthen the role and protection of women in conflict and post-conflict settings globally.
This work found that one of the key reasons for low numbers of women in peace processes is the structure and setup of peace negotiations often dominated by political elites—thus, the link between women’s participation and process design (see here and here). From the perspective of international law, this would mean that when peace processes are designed, it should be taken into account that a certain structure of the peace negotiations might lead to a de facto exclusion of women’s voices. It could be considered to include provisions (even in the form of gentlemen’s agreements) on the need to involve female voices in track 1 negotiations. While this would require political will from the outset, it could ultimately benefit all parties involved, as research has shown that women’s participation contributes positively to the sustainability and effectiveness of peace processes. Embedding such commitments early in negotiations would help create a more inclusive framework, reinforcing international legal principles on equal rights for women and strengthening the legitimacy of peace agreements.
In this regard, international law can set guidelines and standards for inclusion (‘source of a potential legal obligation (or justification) for inclusion’). For example, CEDAW obligates states to take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women in political and public life, which can be interpreted to include participation in peace processes. Similarly, UN Security Council Resolution 1325 and its follow-up resolutions, while not binding in the same way as treaties, establish a normative framework that has been incorporated into many national legal systems through National Action Plans. These instruments create expectations and reporting obligations, and they can be invoked by civil society and international actors to pressure governments into compliance. Moreover, legal arguments based on the right to equal participation, can be used to justify the inclusion of women in official peace negotiations. While enforcement mechanisms remain weak, this body of law offers both a justificatory basis for inclusion and a toolkit for advocacy and accountability.
However, a key obstacle to women’s participation is that legal and policy commitments exist ‘on paper’ but are there is no accountability mechanism or enforcement. This serves as a reminder that international actors remain important agents in ensuring women’s participation; international pressure and continuous emphasis on the topic is often key. Thus, while international law provides important normative foundations for women’s participation in peace processes, it often facilitates this objective only in principle, while inhibiting it in practice due to weak enforcement mechanisms and structural limitations. The absence of binding provisions specifically mandating women’s inclusion in peace negotiations allows elite-driven processes to persist without accountability for exclusion (see here and here). To strengthen international law’s role, future developments could include the codification of explicit legal obligations to include women in peace processes, stronger accountability mechanisms (such as linking participation benchmarks to aid or sanctions), and the inclusion of standardised gender provisions in peace agreement templates (see here and here). Expanding the legal standing of civil society actors to invoke international norms in peacebuilding contexts would further enhance the implementation of these commitments, helping to translate them into meaningful participation on the ground.
In sum, international law and policies can ensure more meaningful participation of women in peace processes and peace negotiations. Understanding the specific challenges that women face in such settings can give practical insights for legal considerations: this involves discussing the structure of peace processes as often elite-dominated hard power negotiation formats, the non-implementation of legal and policy commitments to include women, as well as other practical barriers that hinder women’s meaningful participation. Making these connections between law and practice can provide a basis for rethinking how peace processes are structured, with the ultimate goal of fostering more equitable and effective outcomes.
Dr. Julia Vassileva is a Visiting Researcher at CIL and a Postdoctoral Research Fellow in the International Security Program at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University, Kennedy School.