When Sweden launched the world's first Feminist Foreign Policy in 2014, it was often portrayed as a novel experiment in diplomacy. More than a decade later, I would argue that its greatest contribution was not the label itself, but the challenge it posed to some of the most enduring assumptions about power, security and international leadership.
For centuries, diplomacy has largely been designed by men, for systems dominated by men. This is not merely a question of representation. It has shaped what governments define as security threats, whose voices are considered legitimate in peace negotiations, and which experiences are regarded as politically relevant. The absence of women from decision-making has never been neutral; it has influenced the substance of international politics itself.
The central insight behind feminist foreign policy was therefore simple: a world in which half of humanity is systematically excluded from power cannot produce either sustainable peace or effective international cooperation.
This proposition was supported not only by normative arguments but increasingly by evidence. Research consistently demonstrated that peace agreements are more durable when women participate in negotiations. Countries with higher levels of gender equality tend to be more stable, more prosperous and less prone to violent conflict. Women's political participation contributes to broader social trust and stronger democratic institutions. Gender equality is not a peripheral social issue; it is closely connected to the resilience of states and societies.
From this perspective, feminist foreign policy was never intended to be a separate policy area. It was an analytical framework for understanding international relations more accurately.
This became particularly important as global politics entered a period of growing instability. The return of great-power competition, the rise of authoritarianism, climate change, technological disruption and widening economic inequalities have transformed the international landscape. Traditional concepts of security remain essential, but they are increasingly insufficient on their own.
The COVID-19 pandemic illustrated this clearly. Around the world, violence against women increased dramatically during lockdowns. Women's labour-force participation declined. Girls' education suffered setbacks in many countries. Yet these developments were not merely social consequences of the crisis; they affected economic recovery, political stability and societal resilience. A narrow understanding of security would have overlooked these dynamics. A broader perspective made them impossible to ignore.
The same lesson applies to conflict prevention and peacebuilding. During my years as Sweden's Minister for Foreign Affairs and as Chairperson-in-Office of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), I saw repeatedly how women were often among the first to identify emerging tensions within communities and among the most active actors in local peace initiatives. Yet they remained significantly underrepresented in formal negotiation processes.
This paradox persists globally. Women frequently sustain societies during conflict, but are excluded when decisions about peace are made. As a result, peace processes often fail to reflect the realities of the populations they are intended to serve.
The challenge today is therefore larger than increasing the number of women in leadership positions, important as that remains. The deeper question concerns the nature of leadership itself.
International politics is often described through the language of competition, dominance and power projection. These dimensions will remain part of global affairs. However, many of the defining challenges of the twenty-first century—from climate change to pandemics, migration, cyber threats and economic interdependence—cannot be managed through coercion alone. They require cooperation, coalition-building and long-term thinking across borders and sectors.
Women leaders do not possess these qualities by virtue of gender. Essentialist assumptions should be avoided. But opening leadership structures to greater diversity tends to broaden perspectives, challenge established habits and improve decision-making. The objective is not to replace one model of leadership with another, but to expand our understanding of what effective leadership looks like.
This discussion has become even more urgent at a time when women's rights are facing renewed challenges in many parts of the world. Gains that once appeared irreversible can no longer be taken for granted. In some countries, political leaders openly question gender equality, reproductive rights and the legitimacy of feminist perspectives in public policy. Simultaneously, democratic backsliding and attacks on civil society have reduced the space available for women activists, journalists and human-rights defenders.
These developments should concern all defenders of democracy, not only advocates of gender equality. Historically, restrictions on women's rights have often accompanied broader attacks on democratic institutions and fundamental freedoms. The struggle for gender equality is therefore inseparable from the struggle for democracy itself.
Looking ahead, the future of diplomacy will depend on our ability to rethink power in a rapidly changing world. The most successful international leaders will not simply be those who command the greatest resources or military capabilities. They will be those capable of building legitimacy, fostering inclusion and creating coalitions across political, cultural and geographic divides.
The enduring significance of feminist foreign policy lies in its recognition that who participates in decision-making shapes the decisions that are made. More inclusive leadership does not guarantee better outcomes. But exclusion almost certainly guarantees poorer ones.
In an era defined by complexity and uncertainty, the international community can no longer afford to leave half of humanity on the margins of diplomacy, peacebuilding and global governance. Inclusion is not only a matter of justice. It is a prerequisite for effective leadership in the twenty-first century.
References:
By Ann Linde, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Sweden 2019-22 for Berlin Global
