(1) untag’s importance as a milestone for women and subsequent setbacks galvanized Seminar participants to recommend action to ensure that future mission opportunities for increasing women’s participation would no longer be squandered

In addition, the Beijing Platform for Action, in setting out required “Actions to be taken” by various stakeholders, had called on Governments and international and regional intergovernmental institutions to:

1. (a)Take action to promote equal participation of women and equal opportunities for women to participate in all forums and peace activities at all levels, particularly at the decision-making level, including in the United Nations Secretariat…;
2. (b)Integrate a gender perspective in the resolution of armed or other conflicts and foreign occupation and aim for gender balance when nominating or promoting candidates for judicial and other positions in all relevant international bodies,…as well as in other bodies related to the peaceful settlement of disputes;...¹⁷

Windhoek was a symbolically powerful and compelling venue for the Seminar for other momentous reasons, as it marked the tenth anniversary of untag and of Namibia’s independence from apartheid South Africa after a 24-year struggle. In addition, untag represented a major evolutionary step for peacekeeping as it set a notable precedent as the first deployed of the UN’s new generation of multi-component missions that further developed in the 1990s, such as the United Nations Angola Verification Mission ii (unavem ii), the United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia (untac), the United Nations Protection Force (unprofor) in the former Yugoslavia, and the United Nations Operation in Mozambique (onumoz). In contrast to previous decades of traditional peacekeeping missions staffed by mostly male military personnel to monitor ceasefires or the implementation of peace agreements, untag pioneered the transition to expanded multidimensional missions that increasingly had a range of components in addition to military contingents, such as civilian police, political affairs, civil affairs, electoral, rule of law, human rights, humanitarian relief, reconstruction and public information elements, all of which had crucial consequences for women and men of the host country.

However, after the closure of untag in March 1990, the substantial inroads that had been made for women in that Mission under the leadership of srsg Ahtisaari (who later became President of Finland and a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate) seemed to be derailing. In many of the subsequent multi-component missions established in the 1990s, the numbers of women recruited for substantive functions and at higher levels were often disappointingly low. As just one example, in the United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia (untac), one of the largest multidimensional peacekeeping operations that was established in February 1992 with seven substantive components and an authorized strength of 1227 international civilian staff, no woman was appointed at the level of Director or above despite the range of positions at those levels that existed throughout the Mission’s structure.²⁰ In addition, the 1990s had seen some major peacekeeping failures with horrific consequences, such as in Somalia, Rwanda and Bosnia, where civilian women and girls were often specifically targeted by armed elements because rape and sexual violence continued to be used as weapons of war, which generated much outrage and calls for their protection to avert further violence.

For all of these reasons, at the time that the Windhoek Seminar was convened, there was a palpable concern and resolve among the 62 participants – 51 of whom were women – to tackle the longstanding necessity to ensure that women’s needs and rights would systematically be taken into account in the planning and execution of all future UN peace support operations and that more women would be recruited, including for senior and decision-making positions, to be able to fully participate and make critical contributions in those missions. The Seminar participants, who included some who had served in untag and its UN agency partners, did not want the inroads made by women in the untag operation to be reversed, and were enthusiastically determined that the Seminar must produce practical and concrete results to try to get the momentum back on track. Simply put, participants felt that it was critical to recommend concrete measures that would make the UN and Member States accountable, in the future, for ensuring that the increased opportunities offered by the new generation of multidimensional peace support missions, where women could potentially assume so many substantive roles and provide a positive example of leadership potential to communities rebuilding their war-torn societies, would no longer be squandered.

(2) The candid and focused discussions among Seminar participants led to the adoption of a bold action-oriented approach for strengthening gender mainstreaming in multidimensional peace support missions

Over my 33-year UN career attending numerous conferences on topics relating to peacekeeping, gender equality, and the “Women, Peace and Security agenda”, I would say that the Windhoek Seminar generated frank, bold and action-oriented discussions and brainstorming among participants – both during plenary and Working Group sessions – of an intensity and level that I had never experienced before. I feel that three inter-locking elements fostered the candid and focused discourse and action-driven approach that evolved over the Seminar’s three long days (and nights) and ultimately led to such a momentous outcome, with the adoption of two ground-breaking documents at its conclusion as well as an agreed strategic approach for going forward that aimed to captivate the attention of the relevant actors at UN Headquarters and generate support and action for implementation.

As a first key element, the Seminar’s 62 participants (51 women) represented a broad range of crucial entities and partners, possessed extensive knowledge and hands-on experience in dealing with peacekeeping and gender matters (including in top leadership positions), and were from diverse geographical areas that included a number of conflict-affected countries – all of which enriched the level and nature of the plenary discussions and Working Group deliberations. It was not only beneficial but invaluable to have so many participants from various key entities who had in-depth familiarity with intersecting peacekeeping and gender issues as well as with the complex operational realities in mission settings. In addition, participants from conflict-affected countries, including some that had hosted UN peacekeeping operations, candidly shared the perspectives of national stakeholders, including of often-ignored women on the ground. The latter was very important given that the Seminar (and the broader dpko/llu Study) also sought to consider the effects and consequences of the presence of a UN peacekeeping operation on the population of the host country, particularly its women. Underscoring the Seminar’s uniquely diverse composition, the 62 participants (11 Namibians) included:

1. (a)current and former senior UN officials with substantial experience in handling peacekeeping matters at UN Headquarters and in field missions (including, e.g., four former srsgs/Force Commanders who headed missions; programme managers from relevant UN entities (dpko, dpa, ocha, unhcr, dda, unov, undp and unicef); and former untag personnel);
2. (b)current and former diplomats and officials from Ministries (Foreign Affairs, Defence, Women Affairs), Embassies, Permanent Missions to the UN, parliaments, and development agencies of various Member States;
3. (c)National Military Advisers and Police Inspectors;
4. (d)Directors of regional and international peacekeeping training centres;
5. (e)non-governmental organizations; and
6. (f)professors and researchers from leading academic institutions and research institutes on peace and conflict resolution.

A second instrumental element was that the Seminar, for the entire three-day duration, was energized and motivated by the impassioned and provocative presentations of outstanding women leaders, the galvanizing words of our Namibian hosts, and the vigorous plenary interventions during the opening day, which set expectations high for achieving concrete results. This momentum began, on 29 May, with our Namibian hosts: Hon. Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah (Minister for Women Affairs and Child Welfare), who welcomed the participants, and Hon. Gabriel Shihepo (Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Information and Broadcasting), who gave a rousing Official Opening statement. Fueling that momentum further, the two women who had served as pioneering female srsgs of UN peacekeeping missions – Dame Margaret Anstee (former srsg/unavem ii in 1992–1993) and Mrs. Elisabeth Rehn (former srsg/unmibh in 1998–1999) – played inspiring lead roles from the start and throughout the entire Seminar. Dame Anstee served as the Seminar’s Chairperson (in place of the Chief of dpko’s llu who could not attend) and gave the Keynote Address, and Mrs. Rehn was the Discussant during the session on “Gender Mainstreaming in Current Peace Support Operations” and a vital Working Group Chairperson (with whom I collaborated until the wee hours). During discussions over the three days, each of them were straightforward and bold in highlighting obstacles faced and lessons learned on the ground in leading missions in Angola and Bosnia and Herzegovina respectively, and in recommending specific actions that they felt were urgently needed to propel progress on gender mainstreaming and gender balance in missions. Their exceptional candor was not only refreshing and stimulating but also had an emboldening effect on the participants.

In her Keynote Address during the opening session, Dame Anstee candidly shared the high expectations and extreme pressures that she faced as the very first female srsg to be appointed to head a UN peacekeeping operation simply because she was a woman, and how it made it all the more important for her to succeed in that role. This was particularly revealing and striking to me as it was coming from someone who had served at the United Nations for over four decades (1952–1993) and was the first woman to rise to the rank of an Under-Secretary-General in 1987. After elaborating on her experience, including some telling moments and challenges in leading unavem ii in Angola, Dame Anstee then shared some of her recommendations for strengthening gender mainstreaming in missions. She presented five priority requirements: (1) the need to involve more women in planning for UN peace support operations and in peace negotiations, (2) the need for more women to be appointed as srsgs (and to be encouraged to serve in that position), and for Member States to put forth more senior women as candidates, (3) the need to enhance the role of women in peace support operations as they were increasingly being mandated with a peacebuilding role involving civil society, including for women to be at the peace table at the outset and every stage thereafter, (4) the need for institutions to enhance the role of women, and (5) the need to look at ways to get greater involvement of women at all levels of peace negotiations and peace processes, including “involving local women from the outset on the peace table and not just for picking up the pieces”. Related to these recommendations, Dame Anstee pointed out that there was a list of senior women available to serve as srsgs that had been established by a group of female Permanent Representatives to the UN, and also that more women needed to volunteer to serve in field missions. She further emphasized the importance of regular monitoring of peace support missions, and of obtaining “comparative results”.

A third key element relates to the trajectory in which the Seminar’s discussions and Working Groups progressed following the electrifying opening session on 29 May, particularly once it was decided that the Working Groups would pivot in a different direction than initially intended in order to produce the most effective outcome. To understand this development, it is important to recall that the Seminar was organized by dpko’s Lessons Learned Unit (llu) as part of an ongoing three-year Study project on “Mainstreaming a Gender Perspective in Multidimensional Peace Operations”, which also involved case studies focusing on four UN multidimensional missions (in Namibia, Cambodia, El Salvador, and Bosnia and Herzegovina) and on the civilian UN Observer Mission in South Africa (unomsa). The llu’s original intention was to obtain input from the Seminar participants primarily on the draft Study report’s section entitled “Checklist and Suggestions”, grouped under six areas of primary concern, which aimed to strengthen implementation of gender mainstreaming and gender balance in multidimensional peace support operations.

To steer discussions in that direction, the second session of the morning of 29 May featured three speakers who gave addresses that focused on the ongoing llu Study and draft report: (1) Professor Peter Wallensteen of the Department of Peace and Conflict Research at Uppsala University, who had assisted in preparing the draft Study and in providing researchers to undertake some of the case studies, (2) General Emmanuel Erskine/llu Senior Consultant (former untso Chief of Staff/1976–1978 and 1981–1986 and first unifil Force Commander/1978–1981), who delivered an address on behalf of Mr. Leonard Kapungu/Chief of the llu, and (3) Professor Judith Stiehm/llu Consultant (Department of Political Science/Florida International University), who made a presentation on the Study’s “Draft Principles and Guidelines for Mainstreaming a Gender Perspective in Multidimensional Peace Support Operations”. During the engaging discussions that followed, a major issue emerged among participants regarding whether the primary focus of the Seminar and Working Groups should be – as llu had planned – on reviewing the draft Study report’s “Checklist and Suggestions” or, instead, on formulating more action-oriented directives in order to produce an end product that would galvanize urgent action to be taken by all concerned. As the Seminar discussions and Working Group deliberations progressed, it was clear that the latter approach was on its way to prevail.

After the lunch break, there were two afternoon sessions with speakers, followed by plenary discussions, and then a final session on the announcement of the Working Groups. The first afternoon session was on “Gender Mainstreaming in Current Peace Support Operations” with former unmibh srsg Elisabeth Rehn as the Discussant, who had been the third female srsg to be appointed in the UN’s history in 1998 (after serving as Finland’s first female Minister of Defence in 1990–1994) and whom I had long admired as a principled and outspoken leader. In view of the Seminar’s theme, the session gave prominence to the two UN multidimensional peacekeeping missions that had each been vested with unprecedented executive governing authority and included the first-ever gender units in their structures: the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (unmik) established on 10 June 1999²¹ and the United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor (untaet) established on 25 October 1999.²²

As I was then serving as Chief of Staff to unmik srsg Bernard Kouchner (who later became French Minister of Foreign and European Affairs), I gave a presentation entitled “unmik’s Gender Challenge: Increasing the Levels of Women in Positions of Leadership and Governance in the Shared Administration of Kosovo”. Given that unmik was the first mission in which the UN was mandated to form an interim administration and held executive authority over judicial, legislative and other civil activities in the territory, I focused on the approaches taken by the Mission’s leadership to seize on this unique opportunity to actively promote increased women’s representation in positions of leadership and governance in Kosovo as well as on some of the constraints encountered. As srsg Kouchner had made this a priority for the year 2000, I shared the progress achieved to date in the appointment of women in the new central and municipal structures of the interim shared administration for Kosovo, which reflected that women were starting to regain a prominent role though the statistics were not yet nearly high enough. From a more personal perspective, I also shared how elated I was to be in Windhoek again almost ten years after having served as the untag Deputy Legal Adviser, and that I found it to be in stark contrast to the city that I had left in June 1990 which gave me real hope that the UN “transition mission” in Kosovo could ultimately be as effective as that carried out in Namibia.

To provide another perspective, Ms. Roma Bhattacharjea, Gender Policy Officer/unmik Office of Gender Affairs (within the Office of the srsg), then gave a presentation entitled “Setting the Stage: Lessons Learnt from the Experience of the Office of Gender Affairs in Kosovo”, which focused on progress and challenges faced in operationalizing that Office, undertaking strategies and actions to address the priority gender issues that had been identified, and fostering a process for gender mainstreaming throughout the Mission’s unique four-pillar structure. To provide insights on the experience in untaet, Ms. Sherrill Whittington, Chief of the Gender Affairs Unit (within the Office of the Deputy srsg for Governance and Public Administration), gave a presentation entitled “untaet: Gender Mainstreaming” which elaborated on the strategies and mechanisms pursued in the context of the Mission’s mandated tasks and executive authority powers for the administration of East Timor during its transition to independence as well as across all policies and programmes within the governance and public administration and the humanitarian assistance and emergency rehabilitation components.

Following these presentations on unmik and untaet, Mrs. Rehn,²³ as Discussant, contrasted her earlier experience in serving as a female srsg heading unmibh in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1998–1999, where she did not have the support of a gender unit. In her usual straightforward manner, she elaborated on her persistent efforts to increase gender mainstreaming and the number of women staff across the mission (particularly at the professional level) as well as on the challenges confronted, including as regards the conduct of the more than 2000 police officers within unmibh’s civilian police component (the “UN International Police Task Force”) vis-à-vis the local women. She highlighted the need for a stronger Code of Conduct for UN civilian police, as well as the “need to get better cooperation with UN agencies and bodies”. She also underscored that “rule of law is extremely important and women need to believe that their complaints will be heard in a proper judicial forum”. It was especially striking (and emotional for me) when, from a more human angle, she emphasized that, with all the pressures faced by the population such as the many missing persons and the mass graves, “it was important for the Mission to pay attention to the human problems of the people” and that there was a “need to reach grass-roots level interaction with women as they are aware of all problems”. In provocatively asking “What does it require to have a human face?”, she explained that she “had broken the rules by not accepting security around her when interacting with the local people”, who saw her “as a bit of a mother who will understand human problems so it was very important to be just with them”. She passionately asserted that “this is one way to make the Head of Mission more forthcoming to people and to be more human which is what the UN needs to be”. On leadership, she also bluntly stated that “[i]f we want women to participate in their own societies, the UN should serve as a role model” and cautioned that “[y]ou have to keep yourself as a woman to serve as a leader and don’t try to become a man”, which was especially poignant given her former role as Finland’s Minister of Defence. While listening to her, I was thinking to myself how those comments reflected the unique combination of attributes that made Mrs. Rehn a very special and courageous woman leader and compassionate human being – which is how I still feel today after collaborating with her over the years.

During the second afternoon session, Ms. Wanjiru Kihoro, Director and Founder of Abantu for Development (an ngo seeking to empower and train African women for leadership positions and address gender inequalities), gave a presentation on “Gender Implications of Peacekeeping and Reconstruction in Africa” which summarized the recommendations of a seminar held as part of a unifem- and sida-funded study. She explained that, for the first time, the seminar brought together military personnel, civilians and police to discuss a framework and actions for integrating a gender perspective in peacekeeping and reconstruction in Africa, and that she felt it was important to include “social issues-related support” within that framework. She further explained that she had been asked to present the recommendations at the Windhoek Seminar for feedback and to then discuss them at a forum to be held during the UN General Assembly’s Special Session on “Women 2000: Gender Equality, Development and Peace for the Twenty-First Century” (Beijing +5) in June. The recommendations, which included, among others, that there should be a gender unit in the United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (monuc) that had been recently established in November 1999, and that women peacekeepers should be deployed at all levels of a peacekeeping operation, were consistent with many that had been made by earlier speakers and participants.

These two afternoon sessions on 29 May led to very animated plenary discussions focusing on the many issues and challenges that had been raised in the presentations. Most of the interventions by participants related to the following: the functioning of the unprecedented gender units in unmik and untaet and the extent of their interaction and exchange of lessons learned; the degree of cooperation between each gender unit and relevant UN agencies in theatre; the advantages to be gained if higher-level and larger-staffed gender units were established in peace support missions (as initially proposed for unmik and untaet but later downgraded); the UN eligibility criteria for selection of Force Commanders and other high-ranking military positions which often preempt women from qualifying, such as command experience; the role of women’s non-governmental organizations and how they might coordinate on a gender approach with a peacekeeping mission; possible regional approaches to gender mainstreaming with the support of regional organizations, such as the Organization of African Unity; how media could be used to influence women and what feedback had been given; and the handling of obstacles to gender mainstreaming initiatives relating to attitudes of local elements within the host country.

During the final session of the afternoon of 29 May on “Announcement of Working Groups”, the Seminar pivoted to a discussion of the three Working Groups to be formed and the designated Chairpersons and Rapporteurs, and how they would proceed throughout the next day to be able to present their reports on the morning of 31 May (the final day) for discussion and consolidation. As mentioned earlier, the llu’s original intention was to establish three Working Groups (listed in the Seminar Programme) to review the draft Study report’s “Checklist and Suggestions” and present feedback for their finalization. However, a consensus quickly emerged among the experienced and field-tested participants – including Chair Anstee and Mrs. Rehn – that it would be more productive for the Working Groups to instead try to formulate action-oriented recommendations that would be presented more as directives rather than as discretionary guidelines and would focus on the nine areas that had been identified as particularly critical for strengthening and implementing gender mainstreaming and gender balance in peace support operations. On this issue, Chair Anstee explained that she “would like to formulate specific recommendations, and would also like to engage entities outside the UN Secretariat”, and referred to the Security Council and regional organizations. As regards the breakdown of the Working Groups, I recall that the titles were adjusted from those listed on the Programme, and I considered myself fortunate to be part of Working Group iii on “Planning, Organization, Implementation and Monitoring of Gender Mainstreaming in Multidimensional Peace Support Operations” which had an operational focus and was chaired by Mrs. Rehn whom I knew. While the Working Group meetings were to officially start their work the next morning and continue throughout the day, the respective Chairpersons and Members engaged in informal discussions and brainstorming during dinner and the entire evening, including myself (especially with Mrs. Rehn).

When our Working Group met with Mrs. Rehn the next morning (30 May), we first discussed the most productive approach to take and agreed that, rather than the narrower task originally assigned by the organizers, it was important to focus our discussions on the entire cycle of a peacekeeping mission and the critical measures needed at each phase to foster gender mainstreaming and gender balance, as each had a “knock-on” effect with consequences for the next phase. On that basis, and taking account of the priority issues raised during the presentations and plenary discussions on the previous day as well as our informal brainstorming evening, the Working Group agreed that we should try to formulate and cluster our recommended actions under the following six broad headings that could be adjusted as we progressed: (1) Negotiations in furtherance of ceasefire and/or peace agreements, (2) Planning of UN peacekeeping operations and proposed operational plans, (3) Solicitation of personnel contribution and recruitment, (4) Training, (5) Implementation mechanisms, and (6) Monitoring, evaluation and accountability.

Our Working Group began tackling this task with steadfast determination to craft a document in the format of a directive that would clearly set out the required actions to be taken at each stage. From my experience in then having served in five UN peacekeeping operations (as a Legal Adviser in three) as well as in the UN Office of Legal Affairs (within the peacekeeping cluster) and dpko, I firmly believed that this approach to our task would yield the best results but would not be easy, as it required that we take account of UN/dpko guidelines and operational procedures that applied at each phase of the mission cycle in order to strategize on the critical “entry points” for gender mainstreaming. As my legal and peacekeeping functions during assignments in the field and at UN Headquarters extensively involved the review and application of such guidelines and procedures, I found it fulfilling to be able to use that experience in strategizing with Mrs. Rehn – a seasoned srsg veteran – and the others to identify the optimum actions to implement gender mainstreaming at each mission phase. However, given that the Seminar presentations and discussions had raised a broad range of suggested requirements to strengthen gender mainstreaming (including gender balance) in peace support missions, a main challenge for the Working Group was to prioritize the actions that would likely be the most crucial and effective to ensure that gender mainstreaming would be systematically operationalized at every stage. With that strategy, and using the draft headings for our framework, we engaged in in-depth discussions and eventually decided to focus on UN/dpko practices and procedures applicable at specific critical junctures throughout the mission cycle, including the following:

1. (a)the process for ceasefire and peace agreement negotiations, including for selection of the negotiating team;
2. (b)dpko-led mission planning and the composition of an assessment team for a potential peace support operation;
3. (c)the Secretary-General’s initial report to the Security Council proposing the mandate and operational concept for a new mission, and dpko briefings to the Council, General Assembly, Member States and other relevant bodies;
4. (d)the formulation of Security Council resolutions establishing or extending peace support operations;
5. (e)the modalities, terms of reference, and eligibility criteria for solicitation of Member State military/police contributions and for civilian personnel recruitment for missions, including leadership positions;
6. (f)pre-deployment training standards and programmes for military, police and civilian personnel for missions, and induction and in-theatre briefings;
7. (g)the functions, roles and funding of mission gender units/advisers and related directives;
8. (h)the codes of conduct for mission personnel and the investigation mechanisms and procedures for allegations of sexual-based violations; and
9. (i)the format and mechanisms for reporting on missions as well as for the monitoring and evaluation of missions at field and Headquarters levels.

This turned out to be an intensive and rigorous process for our Working Group in terms of deciding both on the most impactful actions to recommend at each phase and on how best to formulate them in an effective and streamlined format. At the end of our Working Group’s more than five hours of productive deliberations on our draft text that day, I was nonetheless concerned about the Seminar’s approaching deadline for the reports of the three Working Groups to be presented the next morning. I therefore spoke with Mrs. Rehn who agreed that those interested could meet with her again after dinner in the conference room to further review our draft text. Just before dinner, there was also a meeting of the Chairpersons of the three Working Groups and the Rapporteurs.

I vividly remember that a few members of our Working Group attended the resumed discussions after dinner in the small conference room but gradually left as the night progressed, and I remained alone with Mrs. Rehn and the llu Rapporteur until the early hours of the next morning. We continued to brainstorm and refine the formulation of each of the actions recommended in the draft text, augmenting and revising as needed, until we were satisfied. While we were exhausted, I remember it as a very uplifting collaborative process because we were fueled by the prospect that the final combined product of the three Working Groups could make a real difference for women in the end.

(3) The plenary discussion of the Working Group reports led to a consensus on the Seminar’s outcome documents and a strategic approach for their transmittal to UN Headquarters

On 31 May, the Seminar’s final morning began with an address entitled “The Way Ahead” by Ambassador Shaharyar Khan (former srsg/United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda (unamir) appointed in July 1994 during the Rwandan genocide) to set the stage for the presentation of the three Working Group reports and the subsequent plenary discussions. At the outset, Amb. Khan explained that, while serving in unamir as a male srsg dealing mostly with Rwandan women, he “felt handicapped without a gender unit or adviser” and that “perhaps the Mission would have been much more successful if he had had such a unit”. After indicating that he would focus on “how far we have come on gender sensitivity, the grey areas, and the way ahead”, he began by emphasizing, on a positive note, that “Namibia is a good example and has a provision in its Constitution which requires gender equality so that everyone is constitutionally bound to respect this principle”. Amb. Khan further raised that “Namibia will soon become President of the UN Security Council in October 2000 so perhaps our reflections here can be reflected in the presidency of the Security Council”, and also noted that Namibia’s Minister for Women Affairs and Child Welfare, Hon. Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah, would be going to the UN General Assembly’s Special Session on “Beijing +5” in New York in June. He cited to some further progress made on the gender front, including that “there is now a principle of gender rights in peacekeeping” and that the past five years had shown that “women are more involved in peacekeeping and peacebuilding”, and posited that “women are equated with peace” and not war. He then mentioned some of the grey areas “where the real opposition lies”, particularly from elements “within the social fabric of certain countries which do not allow women to be part of a peacekeeping operation”, while pointing out that this was “neither a moral nor rational position”. On the way forward, Amb. Khan explained that there were “the three Es in the objectives to pave the road ahead”, which he defined as Evolution, Education (“the electorate that sends those to New York”) and Edict (“the demand to include gender sensitivity”).

Amb. Khan’s address was followed by a session entitled “Presentation of Working Group Reports and Discussion”, and then, after a short tea break, a further two-hour session for plenary discussions. My recollection is that, driven by the high level of enthusiasm and determination that prevailed from the start, the three Working Group Chairpersons, Members, and Rapporteurs had already engaged quite extensively in informal discussions since the previous day, including over dinner, on each Group’s recommendations for action as well as on a strategy for next steps. As a result, an informal consensus had emerged that the recommended actions of the respective Working Groups should be consolidated into the format of a single action plan clustered under appropriate headings, with an accompanying Declaration, and be forwarded to UN Headquarters. So, by the time we reached the session for the presentation of the reports of the three Working Groups and then engaged in plenary discussions, we had benefited from this informal consensus which enabled us to quickly make a formal decision that the Seminar would present its outcome in the form of a “Windhoek Declaration” and accompanying “Namibia Plan of Action on Mainstreaming a Gender Perspective in Multidimensional Peace Support Operations”. The Working Group Chairpersons, Members and Rapporteurs therefore focused most of their efforts during the plenary session on combining and streamlining the texts of each Working Group’s recommended actions into a consistent format for incorporation in the Plan of Action and grouping the actions under the relevant headings, as well as on reviewing and refining the Declaration text. I continued to work closely with Mrs. Rehn in providing suggested revisions to both documents, and we were pleased that our Working Group’s text was basically incorporated in its entirety within the Plan of Action. As the participants shared a major concern that the Declaration must emphasize the need for high-level commitment by the key players to implement the Plan of Action and initiate the necessary follow-up measures, we ensured that the Declaration concluded with the following recommendation: “[T]he seminar recommends the Namibia Plan of Action and urges the Secretary-General to ensure that appropriate follow-up measures are taken to implement it, in consultation with Member States, and that periodic progress reviews are undertaken.”

One outstanding issue that was raised during the plenary discussions led by Chairperson Anstee and Minister Nandi-Ndaitwah (which evolved into the Closing Ceremony) was how to most effectively transmit the Windhoek Declaration and accompanying Namibia Plan of Action to UN Headquarters in order to gain high visibility and buy-in for implementation, including who would be the most appropriate signatory and the addressee. Considering that Namibia hosted the Seminar and was a member of the Security Council (and would assume its presidency in October 2000), participants agreed that it would be most appropriate for the Government of Namibia to transmit the Windhoek Declaration and accompanying Plan of Action under a letter addressed to the UN Secretary-General. As regards the transmittal letter, I made the suggestion that it would seem important for the letter to specifically ask the Secretary-General to have the Declaration and Plan of Action distributed as an official document of both the UN Security Council and the General Assembly (then under the presidency of Namibia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs) because the recommended actions would require follow-up and implementation by the broader UN system, the UN legislative bodies, and Member States. I mentioned that it would also ensure that the Declaration and Plan of Action would be forever recorded as an official UN document of both the Security Council and the General Assembly. The plenary endorsed my suggestion, and there was much enthusiasm among the participants. Everyone was especially excited because we believed that, given that Namibia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Theo-Ben Gurirab was then President of the UN General Assembly and would preside over its 23^rd Special Session (Beijing +5) in June 2000 and also that Namibia was serving on the Security Council and would assume its presidency in October, the Windhoek Declaration’s urgent appeal for appropriate follow-up measures to be taken to implement the Plan of Action would be supported. We all felt overjoyed that our three days of intense discussions and strategizing had reached such a climax.

(1) The Namibia Plan of Action’s required measures are mirrored in the UN Security Council’s calls for action in resolution 1325 (2000)

The impact of the two historic “blueprint” documents produced by the Windhoek Seminar participants is clearly reflected in the text of Security Council resolution 1325 itself, starting with its strong preambular text in which the Council “[r]ecogniz[ed] the urgent need to mainstream a gender perspective into peacekeeping operations, and in this regard not[ed] the Windhoek Declaration and the Namibia Plan of Action on Mainstreaming a Gender Perspective in Multidimensional Peace Support Operations (S/2000/963)”.²⁷ Even more importantly, in the resolution’s operative paragraphs, the Council called on Member States, the Secretary-General, all actors involved, and all parties to armed conflict to respectively take a number of actions that largely correspond with those among the 38 required measures listed in the Namibia Plan of Action. As just one of many examples, in the resolution, the Council “[u]rges the Secretary-General to appoint more women as special representatives and envoys to pursue good offices on his behalf, and in this regard calls on Member States to provide candidates to the Secretary-General, for inclusion in a regularly updated centralized roster”, and “[f]urther urges [him] to seek to expand the role and contribution of women in United Nations field-based operations, and especially among military observers, civilian police, human rights and humanitarian personnel”.²⁸ Such requested action had in fact been amplified and prioritized in the Namibia Plan of Action, which more expansively stipulated, among its eight listed “Leadership” and “Recruitment” requirements, the following:

1. •In accordance with the Secretary-General’s target of 50 percent women in managerial and decision-making positions, more determined efforts must be made to select and appoint female Special Representatives of the Secretary-General and senior field staff for peace support operations.
2. •A comprehensive database with information specifically on female candidates with qualifications, both military and civilian, should be maintained.
3. •In dpko an Advisory Board should be set up, preferably with qualified external participation, to ensure that this database and existing lists of female candidates are given due consideration.
4. •The United Nations must set an example by rapidly increasing the number of senior female civilian personnel in peace support operations in all relevant Headquarters departments, including dpko, and in the field.
5. •Member States should be asked to increase the number of women in their military and civilian police forces who are qualified to serve in peace support operations at all levels, including the most senior. To this end, a stronger mechanism than the current note verbale to troop-contributing Nations should be developed. Requests to troop-contributing nations could be tailor-made to nations who are known to have suitable female staff, while other potential troop-contributing nations could be encouraged to develop longer-term strategies to increase the number and rank of female personnel in their respective forces.
6. •The terms of reference, including eligibility requirements, for all heads of mission components and their personnel should be reviewed and modified to facilitate the increased participation of women, and, depending on the outcome of that review, special measures should be taken to secure this goal.²⁹

As another example, the Council’s resolution “urges the Secretary-General to ensure that, where appropriate, field operations include a gender component”,³⁰ which echoes the Plan of Action’s even more robust call that “[a] gender affairs unit is crucial for effective gender mainstreaming and should be a standard component of all missions” and “should be adequately funded and staffed at appropriate levels and should have direct access to senior decision-makers”.³¹

It is also significant that the Security Council, in the resolution’s penultimate operative paragraph, underscored the need for timely implementation of gender mainstreaming and progress oversight as it “[r]equests the Secretary-General, where appropriate, to include in his reporting to the Security Council progress on gender mainstreaming throughout peacekeeping missions and all other aspects relating to women and girls”.³² The Council’s request aligns with the Plan of Action’s strong emphasis on “Monitoring, Evaluation and Accountability”, which includes the following among the seven required measures:

1. •Accountability for all issues relating to gender mainstreaming at the field level should be at the highest level, vested in the Secretary-General’s Special Representative, who should be assigned the responsibility of ensuring that gender mainstreaming is implemented in all areas and components of the mission.
2. •Monitoring and evaluation mechanisms to assess the implementation of the United Nations gender mainstreaming objectives should be established at United Nations Headquarters and at peacekeeping missions, in consultation with the Division for the Advancement of Women.
3. •The current format of reporting, particularly with regard to situation reports and periodic reports of the Secretary-General, should include progress on gender mainstreaming throughout peacekeeping missions.
4. •There should be periodic and end-of-mission evaluations, led by an independent external team, of the degree to which the United Nations gender mainstreaming approach and objectives have been integrated into all policies and activities of each peace support operation. The first studies should be on East Timor and Kosovo.³³

In addition, the Council’s invitation to the Secretary-General “to carry out a study on the impact of armed conflict on women and girls, the role of women in peace-building and the gender dimensions of peace processes and conflict resolution” and “to submit a report to the Security Council on the results of this study and to make this available to all Member States of the United Nations”³⁴ is in line with the Namibia Plan of Action’s call that “[r]esearch should be encouraged on the short- and long-term effects of the gender dimension of peace support operations on the host country population” and “should be designed to strengthen host country research capacity, in particular that of women researchers”.³⁵

(2) Member States embraced the Windhoek Declaration and Namibia Plan of Action during the first UN Security Council open debate on “Women and Peace and Security”

The impact of the Windhoek Seminar’s two historic outcome documents is also strikingly visible in the statements made by Member States during the UN Security Council’s first thematic open debate on “Women and peace and security” held on 24 and 25 October 2000 under Namibia’s presidency³⁶ that, together with the Arria-formula meeting held on 23 October, preceded the adoption of landmark resolution 1325 on 31 October. In their statements, 8 of the 15 Security Council members and 12 of the 26 non-Council members explicitly expressed support for the Windhoek Declaration and the Namibia Plan of Action,³⁷ with some citing to and commending particular recommended actions presented in them. In addition, many other Member States conveyed support for various proposed measures included in the Plan of Action without specifically referring to it.

A few Member States (e.g., Australia, Canada, Jamaica)⁴² also welcomed dpko’s Report on “Mainstreaming a Gender Perspective in Multidimensional Peace Operations” (issued in July 2000 in preliminary form),⁴³ which incorporated many of the recommendations of the Windhoek Declaration and the Namibia Plan of Action and was based on a three-year Study undertaken by the Lessons Learned Unit (llu) in cooperation with the UN Division for the Advancement of Women/Department of Economic and Social Affairs.

In addition, Liechtenstein welcomed the Windhoek Declaration and the Plan of Action’s proposal that “an advisory board should be set up within the Department of Peacekeeping Operations to ensure that a comprehensive database as well as existing lists of female candidates be given due consideration”, and pointed out that “gender issues need to be mainstreamed into the actions that will result from this debate and, in particular, also in the implementation of the recommendations contained in the Brahimi report, which lacks a chapter on gender”. In also asserting that “[e]very attempt towards democratization and peace-building must be based on fundamental values, including the principles of gender equality,” and that “[w]omen must therefore be participants in all peace processes and at any stage of these processes”, the Permanent Representative noted that “[t]oday’s debate is a concrete step towards realizing this goal”.⁴⁷

In concluding, he pointed out that “[t]he views expressed today indicate that the maintenance of peace and security is a collective effort” which “should therefore involve all women and men for our common good”, and urged: “To that end, let us put our words into deeds to make this, our one world, a peaceful and secure place for this and future generations.”⁵⁰

With the focus on implementation, various Member States specifically embraced the Windhoek Declaration’s urgent call for the Secretary-General to ensure follow-up action to implement the Namibia Plan of Action. As just a few examples, India, in emphasizing the “need to take practical and effective steps to mitigate the impact of conflict on women and to enhance their ability to restore and preserve peace”, stated that “[t]he Namibia Plan of Action on Mainstreaming a Gender Perspective in Multidimensional Peace Support Operations has many useful elements” and that “[w]e support the call in the Windhoek Declaration of 31 May 2000 urging the Secretary-General to ensure that appropriate follow-up measures are taken to implement this Plan of Action, in consultation with Member States”.⁵¹ Similarly, Tanzania expressed that it “supports the Namibia Plan of Action and the call made to the Secretary-General to ensure that appropriate follow-up measures are undertaken to implement it”, and further called on the international community and Governments “to intensify efforts aimed at the realization of the objective [for women to play an equal part in security and maintaining peace], including the enhancement of the role of women in various phases of the transition to peace and post-conflict reconstruction”.⁵²

From my decades of UN work, I feel confident to say that the undeniable impact that the Windhoek Declaration and the Namibia Plan of Action had on the Security Council, as reflected above, is no small feat, especially when compared to end products of other UN seminars. It is all the more striking given that the thematic topic of women, peace and security had long been considered by some Council Members – including among the permanent five – as too “soft” for inclusion in the Council’s agenda.