Frontline Voices: final report

A quarter of a century after the adoption of UN Security Council Resolution 1325, the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda stands at a defining moment. What began as a vision to place women at the heart of peace and security is now under growing strain. Once a transformative promise, it has been weakened by backlash, underfunding and selective implementation. The question is no longer whether WPS is needed; that is beyond doubt. The challenge is how to prevent it from being diluted, co-opted or quietly abandoned.

This report is the outcome of Frontline Voices: Women Shaping Peace and Security, a project by Friends of Europe created to confront this challenge directly. It brought together women peacebuilders, policymakers, civil society leaders and defence experts to examine what went wrong, what still works, and what needs to change to restore the agenda’s credibility and purpose.

The project combined a set of expert working groups with a collection of articles and podcasts that amplified their insights. Participants from conflict-affected regions and international institutions explored how to make women’s participation in peace and security meaningful and lasting.

The WPS Agenda under strain  

The agenda is under pressure on multiple fronts. Politically, it faces a legitimacy crisis: opponents frame gender equality as ideological or divisive, while institutions co-opt WPS into narrow technical fixes that leave underlying power structures untouched. Implementation has lagged despite the adoption of over 100 national action plans. Too many lack funding, accountability or evaluation, creating a culture of symbolic commitments without delivery.

Structural barriers remain entrenched. Women are too often confined to marginal roles, excluded from decision-making and facing backlash when attempting to challenge the status quo. Funding flows reinforce these inequalities: grassroots women’s organisations, central to sustaining peace, face shrinking budgets and bureaucratic hurdles while militarised spending surges.

Deepening the challenges to WPS credibility is the inconsistency with which it is applied. The same governments that champion gender equality in some forums remain silent in others, especially when strategic alliances or economic interests are at stake. The result is a fragmented and politically vulnerable agenda.

A path to restoring legitimacy  

The way forward is not retreat but transformation. Participants identified practical and ambitious recommendations across six areas:

1. Institutional Transformation – WPS cannot rely on individual champions or symbolic reforms. It requires systemic change: gender-responsive budgeting, political quotas, stronger UN mandates and independent accountability mechanisms. Participation must be institutionalised so it endures beyond individual careers, with new evaluation metrics capturing the often-invisible work of women peacebuilders.
2. Funding Reform – Long-term, predictable investment is needed for women-led organisations, local networks and community peacebuilders. Redirecting even a small fraction of military budgets would have outsized impact. Transparent monitoring and gender-responsive budgeting at all levels is necessary to ensure gender equality is not just a stated priority, but also matched by dedicated resources built into financial planning.
3. Meaningful Participation – Representation alone is not power. Women must have genuine influence across parliaments, ministries, peace negotiations and recovery processes. This means transparent selection, early involvement and protection against threats. Military recruitment shortages and shifting security challenges are opening space for change and enhanced gender equality.
4. Localisation and Contextualisation – Peace strategies must be rooted in the lived realities of affected communities. Local dialogue, cultural fluency and civil society participation are essential. Intersectionality must be taken seriously, ensuring the inclusion of women with disabilities, LGBTQI+ voices, indigenous leaders and other marginalised groups.
5. Redefining Security – In the WPS context, the concept of security must move beyond a focus on hard military strength towards prevention, resilience and dignity. Peace is not just the absence of violence but the presence of trust, access and stability. WPS risks being narrowed to token representation within military structures unless it challenges the root causes of insecurity.
6. Political Dialogue Transformation – WPS is not just a gender project but a political agenda for more inclusive peace. It requires spaces for dialogue that privilege listening over confrontation, recognition of backlash as a political barrier, and support systems to ensure women’s visibility is not traded for vulnerability. Women negotiators must be empowered to shape the full spectrum of security, governance and economic issues.

Conclusion: sustaining momentum through transformation 

The WPS agenda is being squeezed by militarised security responses, shrinking resources and political backlash. Yet, the objective of Resolution 1325, to reimagine institutions and embed participation, justice and accountability into peace and security, is as relevant today as it was 25 years ago. Revisiting WPS now could allow governments and institutions to correct course, reinforce commitments and move closer to what the agenda was meant to deliver.