By: Khushbu Ahlawat, Consulting Editor, GSDN
Introduction
The twenty-first century has witnessed an intensification of global conflicts, humanitarian crises, and socio-economic inequalities that disproportionately affect women. While global governance frameworks increasingly emphasize gender equality, the realities experienced by women—particularly in conflict-affected and fragile states—continue to reveal structural vulnerabilities. The observance of International Women’s Day each year underscores the persistent gap between commitments to gender justice and the lived experiences of women across the globe.
In recent years, scholars and policymakers have begun to highlight the gendered dimensions of insecurity. Women are not only victims of conflict but also key agents in peacebuilding and post-conflict reconstruction. However, their contributions often remain underrecognized within formal political processes. The normative framework of United Nations initiatives—particularly the adoption of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security—was intended to address this imbalance by promoting women’s participation in peace negotiations and ensuring their protection during armed conflicts.
Despite these institutional commitments, gender-based violence, limited political representation, and systemic health disparities remain widespread. The persistence of these issues reveals the need for a broader analytical framework that integrates security studies with gender perspectives. This article argues that contemporary global conflicts must be examined through a gender-sensitive lens that accounts for the intersections between security, governance, and health. By analyzing recent conflicts, policy responses, and scholarly debates, the study seeks to demonstrate how the Women, Peace and Security agenda can be strengthened to address emerging challenges in global politics.
Conceptualizing Gendered Security in Global Politics
Traditional security studies have historically prioritized state sovereignty, territorial integrity, and military capabilities as the core elements of national security. However, feminist scholars have long critiqued this state-centric approach for overlooking how security is experienced differently by individuals, particularly women. Scholars such as Cynthia Enloe argue that international politics cannot be fully understood without examining how gendered power relations shape institutions, militaries, and policy-making structures. Similarly, J. Ann Tickner highlights that mainstream international relations theories often neglect the everyday insecurities faced by women, including economic marginalization, domestic violence, and restricted access to healthcare and education. Recent global conflicts provide powerful evidence of these gendered security dynamics. For instance, during the Russia-Ukraine War, millions of Ukrainian women and children were displaced across Europe, exposing them to heightened risks of human trafficking, exploitation, and economic precarity. Humanitarian reports indicated that displacement not only disrupted livelihoods but also placed women in informal labor markets where legal protections were limited. Similarly, in the ongoing Israel–Hamas War (2023–present), women in Gaza have faced compounded insecurities ranging from restricted access to reproductive healthcare to the burden of caring for displaced families in overcrowded shelters. These examples reveal that armed conflict generates multidimensional insecurities that extend beyond the battlefield, affecting social structures, health systems, and community resilience. Feminist scholars therefore emphasize that understanding security through the lived experiences of women provides a more comprehensive perspective on the real human costs of conflict.
The emergence of the human security paradigm in the 1990s marked a significant shift in the study of global security by prioritizing the protection and dignity of individuals rather than focusing exclusively on the state. This framework recognizes that threats to security may arise from economic instability, environmental degradation, food shortages, and health crises, all of which disproportionately affect women due to existing social inequalities. Within this paradigm, gender becomes a crucial analytical category because socio-cultural norms, legal discrimination, and unequal access to resources often shape how women experience insecurity. The resurgence of authoritarian governance in contexts such as the Afghanistan Taliban takeover (2021) illustrates how political instability can rapidly reverse women’s rights and security gains. Following the Taliban’s return to power, restrictions on women’s education, employment, and public participation dramatically increased, effectively excluding women from political and economic life. Scholars such as Valerie Hudson have argued that the status of women within societies is closely linked to broader patterns of national stability and conflict, suggesting that systemic gender inequality can serve as an early indicator of political instability. Militarization further reinforces patriarchal power structures by concentrating authority within male-dominated institutions such as the military and security services. Consequently, women remain underrepresented in peace negotiations and strategic decision-making processes despite evidence that their participation contributes to more sustainable peace outcomes. Integrating gender perspectives into security policies—through inclusive governance, gender-sensitive humanitarian programs, and stronger implementation of international frameworks such as the Women, Peace and Security agenda—therefore becomes essential for building durable peace and addressing the multidimensional nature of contemporary global conflicts.
Women, Conflict, and Structural Vulnerabilities
Armed conflicts generate severe humanitarian crises that disproportionately affect civilian populations, with women often experiencing the most profound and multidimensional consequences. In conflict zones, the collapse of governance structures, economic systems, and law-enforcement mechanisms increases women’s exposure to displacement, poverty, and gender-based violence. Sexual violence has frequently been used as a tactic of war to terrorize communities, dismantle social cohesion, and assert political control over vulnerable populations. Contemporary conflicts vividly illustrate these gendered dynamics. For instance, the ongoing Sudan Civil War (2023–present) has produced one of the world’s largest displacement crises, with millions forced to flee their homes amid violent clashes between rival military factions. Women and girls in refugee and internally displaced persons camps face alarming levels of sexual violence, forced marriage, and trafficking, particularly in areas where humanitarian assistance is limited. Similarly, in the conflict environment in Myanmar following the Myanmar Military Coup (2021), women from ethnic minority communities have faced systematic human rights abuses, including sexual violence, forced displacement, and denial of humanitarian access. These examples demonstrate that modern conflicts extend far beyond conventional battlefields, producing complex humanitarian emergencies that disproportionately threaten women’s safety, dignity, and access to basic resources.
Another emerging illustration of gendered vulnerability in contemporary conflicts can be observed in the escalating tensions involving Iran and its regional adversaries. Recent military confrontations and airstrikes targeting Iranian infrastructure have intensified instability within the country, leading to civilian casualties and widespread disruption of daily life. Reports indicate that hundreds of people have been killed and thousands injured in recent strikes targeting military and security facilities, with civilian areas also affected. In conflict situations such as these, women frequently bear the indirect consequences of militarization, including restricted mobility, heightened surveillance, and intensified state control over social behavior. Iranian authorities have simultaneously expanded domestic repression, increasing surveillance and enforcement of mandatory dress codes through policing and digital monitoring systems.These developments illustrate how geopolitical tensions can reinforce patriarchal governance structures, limiting women’s civil liberties and participation in public life. Scholars such as Valerie Hudson argue that the status of women within societies often reflects deeper patterns of political stability and governance; states characterized by systemic gender inequality are more likely to experience internal conflict and institutional fragility. Beyond political repression, conflict environments also weaken economic structures, forcing women to assume new caregiving and livelihood responsibilities in unsafe conditions while facing limited access to employment, healthcare, and financial resources. Consequently, addressing the gendered dimensions of conflict requires not only humanitarian relief but also long-term policy interventions that integrate gender-sensitive approaches into peacebuilding, economic reconstruction, and governance reforms.
Health Inequalities and the Invisible Burden on Women
Beyond the immediate dangers of armed conflict, women experience long-term health inequalities that are deeply connected to broader questions of security and human rights. Within the framework of gendered insecurity, health should not be understood merely as a medical issue but as a critical dimension of human security. Feminist scholars argue that global health systems have historically been structured around male-centric research models, resulting in significant gaps in the diagnosis, treatment, and understanding of conditions that disproportionately affect women. As scholars such as Caroline Criado Perez highlight, the persistent “gender data gap” in scientific and medical research has led to policies and healthcare practices that inadequately reflect women’s biological and social realities. This issue becomes particularly significant in conflict and post-conflict settings where fragile healthcare systems struggle to provide adequate services. For instance, the disruption of medical infrastructure during the COVID-19 pandemic exposed structural weaknesses in global healthcare governance, disproportionately affecting women who constitute a majority of frontline healthcare workers while simultaneously bearing increased caregiving responsibilities at home. In conflict-affected regions, the destruction of hospitals, shortages of medical staff, and lack of essential medicines create severe barriers to reproductive healthcare, maternal services, and treatment for chronic diseases. These dynamics demonstrate that women’s health vulnerabilities are not isolated medical concerns but are embedded within broader structures of political instability, conflict, and gender inequality. From the perspective of the Women, Peace and Security Agenda, addressing health disparities is therefore essential for building sustainable peace and ensuring the protection of women’s rights in fragile and conflict-affected contexts.
Furthermore, the invisible burden of women’s health extends far beyond reproductive issues and encompasses a wide range of chronic and age-related conditions that remain underrepresented in global health policies. Cardiovascular disease, autoimmune disorders, osteoporosis, and menopause-related complications continue to receive limited attention in many national healthcare systems despite their significant impact on women’s long-term well-being. Scholars such as Sarah Hawkes argue that global health governance has historically framed women’s health primarily through maternal and reproductive frameworks, thereby overlooking the broader life-course health challenges faced by women. These structural biases become particularly pronounced in low-income or conflict-affected societies where healthcare infrastructure is fragile and socio-economic pressures often compel women to prioritize family care over personal health. As a result, many women delay medical consultations until conditions become severe, reinforcing cycles of vulnerability and insecurity. International institutions such as the World Health Organization have increasingly recognized the need for gender-responsive healthcare systems that incorporate a life-course approach to women’s health, emphasizing prevention, early diagnosis, and equitable access to treatment. However, implementation remains uneven due to disparities in resources, governance capacity, and political commitment. Within the broader debate on gendered insecurities in global conflict, these health inequalities illustrate how the absence of inclusive healthcare policies can undermine women’s agency, economic participation, and social resilience. Consequently, integrating comprehensive healthcare strategies into peacebuilding and security frameworks is essential for advancing the goals of the Women, Peace and Security Agenda and for ensuring that women’s rights, health, and security are treated as interconnected pillars of sustainable global stability.
Policy Frameworks and the Women, Peace and Security Agenda
The adoption of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 in 2000 marked a transformative moment in the evolution of global security governance by formally recognizing the importance of gender perspectives in conflict prevention, peacebuilding, and post-conflict reconstruction. The resolution called for greater participation of women in peace negotiations and decision-making processes, as well as stronger mechanisms to protect women and girls from violence during armed conflicts. Over time, the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda expanded through additional international frameworks, including United Nations Security Council Resolution 1820, which explicitly recognized sexual violence as a tactic of war and emphasized the need for accountability and justice for survivors. Despite these normative advancements, the practical implementation of the WPS agenda has remained uneven across regions and institutions. Recent conflicts illustrate the persistence of this implementation gap. For example, the humanitarian crisis in Sudan following the outbreak of the Sudan Civil War (2023–present) has revealed significant challenges in protecting women from sexual violence and ensuring their participation in peace negotiations. Similarly, the internal displacement crisis triggered by the Myanmar Military Coup (2021) has exposed the limited representation of women in formal political negotiations and transitional governance mechanisms. These cases demonstrate that while the WPS agenda has successfully established international norms, translating these commitments into effective institutional practice remains a major challenge within contemporary global security governance.
Empirical research further reveals that women continue to be significantly underrepresented in formal peace processes despite evidence that their participation contributes to more durable and inclusive peace agreements. Studies conducted by international research institutions indicate that women constitute only a small proportion of negotiators, mediators, and signatories in major peace agreements worldwide. This imbalance limits the diversity of perspectives in peace negotiations and often results in agreements that fail to address critical social issues such as community reconciliation, economic recovery, and gender-based violence. Nevertheless, several cases demonstrate the transformative potential of women’s participation in peacebuilding initiatives. In Liberia, grassroots activism led by women’s movements—most notably by peace activists such as Leymah Gbowee—played a crucial role in mobilizing public pressure that ultimately contributed to the end of the civil war and the country’s democratic transition. More recently, women’s civil society organizations in Colombia have actively participated in monitoring and implementing provisions of the Colombian Peace Agreement (2016), ensuring that gender justice and victims’ rights remain central to the peace process. Scholars such as Cynthia Enloe argue that women often introduce community-centered perspectives in peace negotiations, emphasizing reconciliation, social welfare, and long-term societal stability rather than narrow power-sharing arrangements. For the Women, Peace and Security agenda to achieve its full potential, however, governments must move beyond rhetorical commitments and institutionalize gender inclusion through national action plans, gender-sensitive security sector reforms, and greater representation of women in political and diplomatic institutions. Strengthening these mechanisms is essential for transforming the WPS framework from a normative aspiration into a practical instrument for building inclusive and sustainable peace in an increasingly conflict-prone global environment.
Conclusion
The growing complexity of contemporary global conflicts has revealed that security cannot be understood solely through traditional state-centric frameworks. As this study has demonstrated, women experience conflict and insecurity through multidimensional pathways that include political exclusion, economic marginalization, health disparities, and exposure to gender-based violence. These gendered insecurities highlight the structural inequalities embedded within global governance systems and conflict environments. Feminist scholars have long emphasized that examining international politics through gendered lenses provides a more comprehensive understanding of how power operates within institutions, militaries, and societies. The experiences of women in conflict zones—from displacement and humanitarian crises to restricted access to healthcare and livelihoods—illustrate that security must be reconceptualized to prioritize human well-being alongside territorial integrity and military stability.
The Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda has emerged as a significant normative framework seeking to address these challenges by promoting women’s participation in peace processes, strengthening protections against violence, and integrating gender perspectives into security governance. However, the persistence of gender inequalities in peace negotiations, political representation, and healthcare systems demonstrates that substantial implementation gaps remain. Moving forward, strengthening the WPS agenda requires sustained political commitment, effective national action plans, and deeper integration of gender-sensitive policies within peacebuilding, development, and public health strategies. Ultimately, advancing women’s rights, health, and participation is not merely a matter of social justice but a critical prerequisite for achieving durable peace, resilient institutions, and inclusive global security in an increasingly conflict-prone world.
About the Author
Khushbu Ahlawat is a research analyst with a strong academic background in International Relations and Political Science. She has undertaken research projects at Jawaharlal Nehru University, contributing to analytical work on international and regional security issues. Alongside her research experience, she has professional exposure to Human Resources, with involvement in talent acquisition and organizational operations. She holds a Master’s degree in International Relations from Christ University, Bangalore, and a Bachelor’s degree in Political Science from the University of Delhi.
