"They wanted more than protection. They wanted a say in the decisions through which their security and their country’s future would be determined," recalled the Afghan policewomen the author met at the Kabul City Police Centre in 2013.
Kabul City Police Centre, 2013: Experience over symbolism
In 2013, while serving as NATO’s gender adviser in Afghanistan, the author spent time with Afghan policewomen at the Kabul City Police Centre. Many travelled to work in civilian clothes because, as the author records, "wearing a police uniform made them targets for harassment, intimidation and violence." Several had been widowed by conflict and were supporting families while serving in hazardous conditions. Their priority was not merely personal safety or token presence in security institutions; it was influence — the ability to shape decisions that affect their security and communities.
UN Security Council Resolution 1325 and the visible spread of WPS
The UN Security Council Resolution 1325 — which the source says "created the WPS agenda" — will mark its 26th anniversary on 31 October. Over the years, the United Nations and NATO have adopted extensive WPS policies: military gender advisers are embedded across headquarters and operations, training is routine, and references to local women’s participation and gender perspectives have become commonplace in security and protection policies. By many measures, the source notes, WPS has been a success in producing visible commitments and procedural activity.
Audit-ready is a season. It shouldn't be.
Evidence in spreadsheets, controls drifting between audits, frameworks multiplying on flat headcount. Nubivance runs continuous compliance on Rapid7 Cyber GRC - SOC 2, HIPAA, ISO 27001, PCI, CMMC.
End the scrambleInclusion without influence: what the author's research found
Research conducted by the author comparing the UN’s protection framework and NATO’s human security agenda concluded that, in most cases, visible gender commitments have not changed who sets priorities or who controls resources. Gender advisers and participation mechanisms are often present but disconnected from the loci of authority where planning assumptions, resource allocation and operational priorities are established.
Participation is frequently treated as consultation rather than authority. The source describes gender advisers operating inside internal advisory or external engagement functions rather than decision-making structures. Cultural friction exacerbates this gap: gender is often treated as a "women’s issue" rather than an operational lens that explains unequal risks and outcomes. In some military settings, recognising gendered differences in security experiences is viewed as political or discriminatory rather than as a practical way to understand unequal risks and outcomes.
Timing, sequencing and accountability: why participation fails to shape strategy
The author’s interviews repeatedly emphasise problems of timing and sequencing. Gender expertise and participatory processes are commonly introduced after key planning assumptions are set: advisers are brought in late, consultations occur after priorities have been determined, and gender-focused guidelines are added once main planning is complete. Under those conditions, the source argues, gender considerations may shape implementation but rarely influence strategy.
Accountability systems compound the problem. Organisations are "relatively good at counting activity" — consultations held, personnel trained, or policy checklists completed — but far less able to evaluate whether participation changed decisions, altered planning assumptions, or influenced resource allocation. The author labels this dynamic "institutional containment": WPS commitments become visible in procedure and personnel while remaining weakly connected to the centres of authority and power.
What this means for commanders, gender advisers, and local women
- Commanders and senior leaders: Responsibility for implementation must extend beyond specialist advisers. The source asserts that transformational change requires commanders to incorporate gender expertise early enough to shape planning.
- Gender advisers: To be effective, advisers must be connected to decision-making structures rather than confined to advisory or engagement roles; they must be brought into planning before priorities are set so their expertise can influence strategy.
- Local women and civil society: Local women often hold knowledge about community security concerns and conflict dynamics that external actors lack. When participation is reduced to a box-ticking exercise, institutions risk missing information critical to mission success and deny those women authority to shape outcomes.
The central lesson offered by the author is clear and specific: increasing representation, consultation or the number of women in a room does not automatically redistribute power. Meaningful change, the source argues, occurs only when expertise, participation, influence and decision-making power become connected. For defence organisations facing complex security environments, that practical coordination between inclusion and authority may be the WPS agenda’s most important test — and its most urgent task.
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/women-peace-and-security-has-an-influence-problem/
