Opinion: Feminist foreign policy activism can harm African women

There has been a lot of discussion in the last few years on what a “feminist” foreign policy, or FFP, means and why it’s a good idea for countries to adopt. Sweden used to have one, while France, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, Mexico, and Chile have all signed up. There is no single definition but our understanding is that when a country adopts an FFP it prioritizes girls’ education, women’s leadership, peace and security, ending sexual violence, and boosting women’s economic freedom around the world. Some definitions also mention climate justice and ending racism. We consider that the “feminism” this approach advocates for has been very much led by white women acting as saviors perpetuating an image of “helpless African women with no agency.” It talks about anti-racism and anti-colonialism but often ends up treading similar territory. It seeks to educate us rather than listen to and meaningfully engage Africans. Powerful nations often claim that they are experts in tackling gender discrimination elsewhere while failing to address their own shortcomings or to even acknowledge the colonialism that caused gender discrimination in the first place. This can lead to them ignoring local context and the need for funding and financing to be provided to grassroots women’s groups in Africa. They may also be overlooking the need to improve gender equality at home and end up perpetuating harmful patriarchal and colonial dynamics. This typically looks like “an expert” who comes in with the solution and for the “ignorant recipient” who does nothing apart from sit and receive it. As two successful African women strategists and thought leaders, we have unique perspectives on what the conversation on FFP tends to miss in the context of our continent — and what we think needs to be changed for FFPs to reflect the aim of achieving gender equality. The work we do at our respective organizations has been central to changing the conversation about African women as drivers and active participants in our own progress as opposed to passive recipients of aid. In the United Kingdom, The Five Foundation has pushed for systemic change for years, including a significant contribution to the new international strategy on women and girls. It has regularly brought senior decision-makers together with donors, the media, and business leaders, to make the case for investment in front-line women on the African continent. This shifting of the power to the local level would be real feminist foreign policy in action and could mean the U.K. would find its place again as a partner for global peace and prosperity. Nalafem Collective works to transform the engagement between multilateral intergovernmental institutions and grassroots organizations. The Africa Young Women Beijing+25 Manifesto is a groundbreaking feminist political document that succeeded in including eight out of its 10 demands into United Nations Action Coalitions at the Generation Equality Forum, as well as the Women, Peace and Security and Humanitarian Action Compact. Nalafem has worked closely with Germany and Denmark in particular to shift power and mainstream a gender lens into their Africa strategies instead of relegating women’s rights solely to the areas of diplomacy and development cooperation. Despite the obvious and devastating scars of a colonial past, the African continent has a long tradition of being framed by countries in the global north as either a problem that needs to be solved, or as a place that should be grateful for any funding that is thrown its way, with various strings attached. We see African nations being told that they need to prioritize women and girls, yet our continent is founded and continues to thrive because of the intelligence and contribution of our women. It is not a monolith either and its unique perspectives need to be properly considered. It is true that due to colonization, we are less likely to be allowed to lead in political positions and offices, but we do continue to lead in our homes and communities. Telling us that Africans need to include women in peace building, or prioritize ending sexual violence is insensitive, inaccurate, and offensive. For example, Liberia was one of the few contexts in which women were meaningfully included in peace processes in recent history. Meanwhile, Canada has pledged to increase its military spending and Germany continues to be the fourth biggest arms exporter in the world and has allowed arms exports that violate international human rights law, without counting for the prevalence of gender-based violence committed with or facilitated by arms from these states. There has also been a lack of coherence on FFP in a broader sense, specifically with regard to the climate crisis. We see European states financing a climate framework that is capitalist, patriarchal, and detrimental to Africa. This is in spite of the fact that the African continent contributes the least to climate change and our women are the most displaced and affected by it. We have concerns too about the migration policies of many European countries that define humans in the realm of “legal” and “illegal” across colonial borders. Italy does not have an FFP itself, but the recent deal led by that country to prevent migrants from setting off to sea on the shores of Tunisia was backed by the EU. It aims to police Black bodies across the Mediterranean, many of whom are women and children currently trapped somewhere in the Libyan desert. Whether planning to have an FFP at the country level or claiming a feminist approach at the regional level, the European Commission needs to recognize migration as a feminist issue. From our perspective, for any feminist foreign policy to be meaningful, it is vital that it addresses the gap between rhetoric and practice — including an acknowledgment of colonial history. It needs to resolve any incoherence between its own aims and other policies on security and migration. The militarized conception of regional and national security should be replaced by an approach that is human-centered and clearly responds to the needs of those most affected rather than cause us any further harm. Most importantly, feminist foreign policies should deal with the root causes of conflict and inequality, and — instead of being top-down — should meaningfully include and reflect the knowledge and expertise of African people rather than telling us how to behave.