Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Introduction resit - Coggle Diagram

- - - - • Contradictory trends: While pro-gender norms have advanced in some international fora, there is simultaneous backlash and resistance in global politics (Mouffe, 2005).
        
        "which vociferously contests and resists the diffusion of pro- gender norms."
      - • Re-masculinisation of foreign policy: A return to prioritising traditional, militarised security concerns (e.g., war on terror) over long-term peace and gender-sensitive approaches (Jeffords, 1989).
      - :red_cross:• Policy example of backlash: The U.S. reinstated and expanded the Mexico City Policy (“global gag rule”) in 2017, cutting funding to organisations that discuss or provide abortion services (Tanyag, 2017).
      - :check:• Rise of illiberalism and populism: Increasing support for right-wing populist movements, especially among men seeking to "reclaim" entitlements (Inglehart & Norris, 2003).
      - • Gap in research: There is still limited scholarly work on gender in foreign policy, beyond Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) (Aggestam & Bergman-Rosamond, 2016).
  - - - p. 3
      - [There are concerns regarding the future of gender equality ODA and funding for women’s rights organizations.] Many DAC members, including current FFP countries, have announced major ODA cuts. For example, France may reduce overall development assistance by forty percent and Germany cut ODA by €1 billion in 2024 and has announced an additional €2 billion in cuts for 2025.
      - … several philanthropic funders are also withdrawing from the sector. They estimate that with the Netherlands, Wellspring Philanthropic Fund and Sigrid Rausing Trust/USA ending initiatives that invested directly in women’s rights organizations and feminist movements, $2.83 billion per year will be lost.
  - - - Papworth, p. 7
        
        Russia’s 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine exposed some of these disagreements over FFPs and military spending among both member states and civil society actors. Several countries with FFPs, including Germany, Canada, and Sweden, have been supplying high levels of financial and military aid to Ukraine. Some have argued that this counteracts feminist principles of anti-militarism. To them, a response based on the principles of FFP should prioritize humanitarian rather than military assistance, as well as the representation of women in the negotiation process, the upholding of inter- 34 national treaties on women and children, and the humane treat- ment of refugees. Others, however, have justified military support to Ukraine under FFPs, arguing that self-defense is a feminist act. These competing perspectives underscore that there is no “right” way to implement an FFP.