Foreign Policy Reorientation

Framing

The FFP Guidelines and the FDP Strategy are framed differently in the respective fore­words of the ministry heads. Unlike the AA paper, which begins with a victim / per­pe­trator narrative, the BMZ paper uses an agency narrative that emphasises the potential of people to act effectively.

The preface to the AA document begins with a scenario of violence: “As long as women are not safe, no one is safe,” reads Foreign Minister Baerbock’s first sentence. The Russian war of aggression against Ukraine and the sexualised violence “that Russians have since unleashed on Ukrainian soil”, as well as the murders and human rights violations, but also the protests in Iran, create a framing with nation-state references right from the start. A feminist foreign policy is therefore “bitterly neces­sary”.

Development Minister Schulze introduces the FDP Strategy with the question of jus­tice. Women, who make up half of the world’s population, should also have half of the power. “Women”, she says immediately afterwards, “are important actors for sus­tain­able development. They have so much strength, knowledge, special skills and inno­­vative ideas – in short, enormous potential!”

Descriptions of gender power asymmetries and other structures of discrimination are often accompanied by stereotypical characterisations of groups that are dis­criminated against or marginalised. Such discourses often degenerate into perpetrator / victim narratives. When it comes to paying special attention to the needs of dis­advantaged groups or empowering them, there is a danger of portraying them as “vic­tims”, as weak or inferior and in need of special protection. Feminist approaches counter this by recognising agency, that is, the ability of individuals to act and be effective.

Problem diagnostics

The use of key concepts to describe and evaluate problems can be an indicator of the extent to which the two ministerial documents are informed by feminist approaches and theories. Both the FFP Guidelines and the FDP Strategy are based on the principle of “justice” and the recog­nition of the benefits of inclusion. They assume “that societies are more peaceful and prosperous when all people can par­ticipate in political, social, and economic life” (AA), or that “there is less poverty, less hunger, and more stability in the world […] when women have equal rights and respon­sibilities” (BMZ). Thus, two aspects – the one intrinsic-normative and the other ex­trin­sic-utilitarian in nature – justify why equal participation should be made pos­sible for all people.

According to AA, feminist foreign policy is “an integral part of a value-based foreign policy”. It is about “naming historically grown power structures” and “overcoming them”; however, these power structures are not described as patriarchal in the FFP Guide­lines. Moreover, the concept of patri­archy or patriarchalism, which is central to feminist social critique or any of its deriva­tives, does not appear anywhere in the FFP paper. However, it is used 13 times in the FDP Strategy. The “patriarchal power sys­tem”, “patriarchal social system”, “patri­archal social order”, “patriarchal norms”, “patriarchal power relations”, “patriarchal power structures”, etc., are referred to as the cause of the problem and as a description of the status quo to be overcome. In the glossary of the BMZ paper, patriarchy is defined as “a system or social order struc­tured by the general domination of men over women and the construction of a power relationship between the sexes. In a patri­archal social order, all authoritative values, norms and patterns of behaviour are shaped by and oriented towards men.”

Similarly, the term “feminism” is used as a noun and given an explanation only in the FDP Strategy. Here, too, there is “(no) attempt at a definition”, referring to the plurality of feminist currents, movements and approaches. “Common to all feminisms is [...] their resistance to discrimination and oppression and their commitment to gender-equitable power relations.” Capitalism as a system is not questioned in any of the documents. The (unpaid or poorly paid) reproductive work inherent in the eco­nomic system – a major theme of feminist social critique – is only addressed in the BMZ paper under the term “care work”. “Data from 2020 show that, on average, about three-quarters of the world’s unpaid care work is done by women,” the paper says. The FDP strategy also raises the issue of poor working conditions (especially for women) at the beginning of supply chains, which German and European supply chain regulations are supposed to address.

Overall, the BMZ paper draws more fre­quently and explicitly upon critical ana­lytical categories of feminist approaches than the AA paper.

Target groups and diversity

Both ministerial documents can be under­stood as concepts of affirmative action or positive discrimination. These are positive measures designed to counteract social dis­crimination against certain social groups by granting them specific advantages. “Af­firma­tive” in this sense means the spe­cial affirmation and support of these groups (EIGE).

In line with this, the focus in both cases is on three groups of people, in descending order of priority: (1) women and girls, (2) mar­ginalised groups, (3) all people. The FFP Guidelines state: “A feminist foreign policy thus aims at the equality of women and girls worldwide. It addresses the par­ticular concerns of marginalised groups. It seeks to ensure that all people enjoy equal rights.” At the same time, they state: “A feminist foreign policy is not a foreign policy for women, but for all members of a society. It includes, not excludes.”

The BMZ paper also emphasises that feminist development policy is not a “policy by women for women”. However, it also makes clear that women and girls – as the largest group in the world to be discriminated against – are at the centre. Gender equality is therefore the primary goal, fol­lowed by the fight against other forms of discrimination “based on gender identity, sexual orientation, age, origin, disability, socio-economic status, ethnicity or religious affiliation or ascription”. The stated aim of the FFP Guidelines and the FDP Strategy to change the structures that underpin these multiple intersecting discriminations and to embrace diversity makes the AA and BMZ approaches transformative, inclusive and intersectional.

Both ministerial documents recognise the plurality of women and marginalised groups and describe the diversity of people (including their identities and realities) as an enrichment to be promoted. The FFP Guide­lines and the FDP Strategy address (to varying degrees) groups of people who are excluded from the full realisation of equal rights. In addition to women and girls, those affected by poverty and hunger, the politically vulnerable, indigenous peoples, people of colour, Black people and LGBTIQ* persons are mentioned.

With regard to the latter group, the BMZ paper (only) explicitly states that feminist development policy is “based on an inclu­sive, non-binary understanding of gender”. Heteronormativity, which is closely linked to the binary gender norm, is not addressed in either paper. However, if discrimination based on sexual orientation is to be tackled and same-sex relationships are to be not only “accepted” but recognised as legitimate and equal, heteronormativity must be overcome.

Past and responsibility

Unjust asymmetrical power relations also include the (post-)colonial structures that shape international relations. Whereas the FDP Strategy refers to the “Global South” several times, the FFP Guidelines do so only once. In both documents, German colonial history appears as a reference point, but with­out naming territories or using the terms “restitution” or “reparation”.

“The power imbalance between the coun­tries of the Global North and the Glob­al South has colonial origins and has grown over centuries,” the FDP Strategy states. “European colonialism” and the “colonial patterns of thought that still have an effect today”, including in development policy, are critically reflected upon. The “acknowledgement and apology for the atrocities of colonialism” would be of particular impor­tance. The claim is formulated to “pursue a post-colonial and anti-racist approach”.

According to the AA paper, feminist foreign policy is “based on critical self-reflection of one’s own history, faces up to historical responsibility, including for our colonial past, and is open to learning from others”. This is why the ministry funds “scholarships for academics from the for­mer German colonial regions to research German colonial history and its effects”.

In the context of these new concepts, which are understood as human rights-based and anti-racist and deal with the ques­tion of the past and responsibility, as well as with the critical examination of one’s own history, there is, however, one notable omission: Both the FFP Guidelines and the FDP Strategy omit any reference to the Second World War, the Holocaust or the Nazi regime.

Goals and targets

In implementing their objectives, AA and BMZ intend to follow the Swedish 3Rs model. This means that the two ministries will work to respect and promote the rights of women and girls (and marginalised groups) in all their areas of activity, to strengthen the representation of women and girls in politics and their equal participation in all areas of society, and to improve women’s access to resources (financial, human and natural). In future, therefore, there should be “gender budgeting”, that is, the allocation of financial resources to projects that contribute towards gender equality to varying degrees.

In their documents, both AA and BMZ set a target of spending 85 per cent of project funds on gender-sensitive or GG1 projects and 8 per cent on gender-transformative or GG2 projects by 2025. According to the OECD Gender Equality Policy Marker, GG1 projects focus on the technical and content-related objective, while gender aspects are considered a secondary objective. In GG2 projects, gender equality is the primary objec­tive. According to this distinction, gender sensitivity refers to the consideration of the different gender-specific needs of people. Gender transformative projects address the causes of gender inequalities in order to dismantle the power hierar­chies based on them in the long term (FDP Strategy).

On the one hand, gender sensitivity should be a matter of course; implementing organisations such as GIZ have had gender strategies in place for some time. On the other hand, the share earmarked for gender-transformative projects is conspicuously low.

Focal points and instruments

Both ministerial documents set out prior­ities. According to the FFP Guidelines, the concept of human security is to be given greater emphasis, and dialogue with civil society at home and abroad is to be inten­sified. In addition, the FFP will support the implementation of the WPS agenda and promote the fight against sexualised and gender-based violence in armed conflicts, gender-sensitive approaches to arms (ex­port) control and the protection of sexual and reproductive health and rights. Both ministries aim to counter an “anti-feminist push-back” (AA) or the “global strengthening of right-wing populist and anti-feminist tendencies” (BMZ).

No objectives or evaluation criteria are attached to this qualitative programme. Feminist foreign and development policy is understood by AA and BMZ as a “work in progress” and a process that requires the development of monitoring and evaluation tools.

The domestic dimension

The extent to which Germany can serve as a role model in the field of feminist foreign and development policy and contribute to the international norm diffusion also depends on domestic political factors. The FFP Guidelines and the FDP Strategy recog­nise that a credible feminist foreign and development policy requires the “implementation of a progressive gender equality agenda in Germany” (BMZ), which includes institutional changes within the ministry itself. Indeed, in many areas Germany does not come off particularly well in an inter­national comparison. For example, the gender pay gap is just under 18 per cent (worldwide 20 per cent, in the EU just under 13 per cent). The proportion of women in the German Bundestag was 35 per cent at the start of the new legislative period. This put the German parliament in 42nd place out of 188 parliaments. Accord­ing to the FFP Guidelines, only 27 per cent of AA rep­resentations abroad are headed by women (although women make up around 50 per cent of the workforce at AA).

AA and BMZ are committed to promoting equality, diversity and inclusion and to ensuring equal opportunities and non-discriminatory work environments. To this end, a number of institutional reforms and incentives will be introduced.

From a global perspective, Germany enjoys limited normative legitimacy on the issue of gender justice – unlike, for exam­ple, Sweden, the former pioneer of feminist foreign policy. However, the “feminist commit­ment” of AA and BMZ can help to ad­vance feminist concerns domestically.