Understanding how gender narratives are exploited by far-right violent extremists is a pressing multilateral policy issue.
Analysis
-
-
In the world of global climate negotiations, a critical one took place this past Friday, October 20th. As the fourth session of the Loss and Damage Transitional Committee was coming to an end with barely any time for negotiators to read a last-minute text, a decision was made to add a fifth session around the […]
-
Last month during the general debate of the United Nations (UN) General Assembly, India’s Minister S Jaishankar made a remark about how Western states invoke respect for the UN Charter and advocacy for a rules-based order. “For all the talk, it is still a few nations who shape the agenda and seek to define the […]
-
Without accountability and the meaningful participation of local actors, the transformative potential of Mexico’s FFP remains limited.
-
The UN’s multidimensional approach to peace support cannot simply be replaced by putting more non-UN boots on the ground.
-
The New Agenda for Peace serves as a stark warning that the damage being done now will have significant implications for humanity’s future wellbeing, safety, and stability.
-
The New Agenda for Peace provides an opening for continental actors to advance priorities at the global level. However, this requires the AU to deliver on revamping its own multilateral system as a springboard to reforming global multilateralism.
-
Bold language on transforming patriarchy is not matched with concrete proposals to advance the WPS agenda and gender equality more broadly.
-
There seems to be a disconnect between the overall diagnosis of the New Agenda for Peace and its prescriptions for peace operations.
-
The New Agenda for Peace sets a clear vision for reforms, but does not go into the details on how to achieve them. This cautious approach is a reflection of the secretary-general’s belief that it is the role of the UN to support—not make—the decisions of member states.