Excerpts from Virginia Gamba’s Presentation on "The Changing Role of Women in Internationl Peace and Security"
March 8, 2016
University Club
The Changing Nature of Peace and Security Means the Engagement of Women is Needed Even More Than Ever
“The question must be posed, are women entering the field of peace and security because they have been empowered to do so or is it because peace and security today needs the engagement of women more? The answer is both.”
“Most of the global campaigns and most of the information on security related themes in the nineties were led and managed by women starting with NGO actors such as Jody Williams and the prohibition of anti-personnel landmines campaign.”
”The last fifteen years have seen another turn in the concept of security. The emergence of global terror in 2001, and the return of military intervention as a tool of policy, took away much of the steam that had been built around the human security concept. In this harder world, most establishments did not see women as natural vehicles in the search for solutions to this new type of threat. This comes at a cost: terrorism like insurgencies engage both men and women. As such we need both to counteract it.”
“With this breakdown, women are at risk of being relegated to “soft” security areas, while men are also at risk of running with “hard” security agendas alone – this trend would diminish the capacity of both to impact on sustainable peace and security.”
“Governments, all of whom want and need peace, security and development, would do well to understand that the empowerment of women for leadership in international peace and security is not an issue of wanting women but of needing them to be there. Without the active engagement of women in international peace and security, there won’t be development or security or peace.”
The International Women’s Day Panel – University Club – 8 March, 2016
The Changing Nature of Peace and Security
Means the Engagement of Women is Needed Even More Than Ever
By Virginia Gamba
Women comprise one third of all senior staff at ASG/USG level in the United Nations. There are many governments in developed and developing states which boast female presidents, ministers of defence or police commissioners and, in most armed forces, women now form part of their professional corps. The number of women employed in the development, management and/or implementation of critical peace and security policies and practices has risen steadily since the 1970s. The reasons for this growth are debatable ranging from the development and execution of effective policies of empowerment to the pioneering work of individuals and small groups of professionals who opened the field for other women to occupy. The reasons can be many but the fact remains that over the last forty years the changes in the way women engage in peace and security go hand in hand with the changing nature of peace and security itself. The question must be posed, are women entering the field of peace and security because they have been empowered to do so or is it because peace and security today needs the engagement of women more? The answer is both.
If we resort to history, in the century prior to the start of the Cold War, the idea of peace was not very evident either in the actions or the words of governments. This was an era where Ministries of War, universal conscription and large armies were managed by men for men. It was the time for war “or” peace. This was also an era of excesses and greed. Wars of conquest were not outlawed. The role of women in this war machinery was non-existent or at best limited, as was their civic participation in governance. And yet, some women managed to build for themselves a role in supporting the delivery of instruments of the military, as did Florence Nightingale. Other women, at the other end of the war spectrum, carved out roles for themselves in resistance and liberation movements. Intelligence, information gathering and espionage, guerrilla warfare and the provision of administrative and medical needs of large armies were not roles denied to women and yet their efforts did not result in institutionalized acceptance of women in the construct of state security, including serving in the armed forces or security services. The military was for the military, and the military were men. Decision making in war, as well as doctrines, strategies and delivery, was dominated by the military until the end of the Second World War.
World orders change as a result of great upheavals and the development of new technologies. When war is a central part of policy, technologies emerging to serve it often lead to breakthroughs not just in fire power but in other areas of human development. Thus, the end of the Second World War brought incredible advancement in science as well as a deep distrust in peace. Armies were not demobilized and military industry was not converted to civilian uses. The development and possession of weapons of mass destruction became the cornerstone of a new world order. This is the time when the language of “war or peace” changed into one of “defence” first and the maintenance of “peace and security” second.
Wars of conquest became outlawed and Ministries of War became Ministries of Defence; the pursuit of war for political objectives turned into the pursuit or maintenance of peace and security as an end in itself. Central to this new era was the concept of nuclear deterrence. But, what has all of this to do with the changing role of women in peace and security? It has everything to do with it. First of all because the disasters of the great wars led to the decline of the military as decision makers, shifting peace, security and defence into civilian hands. Second, because the technologies that were needed for destruction or construction were firmly in the hands of scientists and engineers, and thirdly, because the doctrine of nuclear deterrence required not just capacity and capability to function but also communication and credibility. These requirements lay in the realm of a different type of skill. Universities rather than military colleges became the centre for research and development impacting on foreign and defence policies. With mathematical precision new professions emerged that would construct complex dynamics between enemies such as nuclear arms control, escalation ladders and capabilities of firing first if necessary. In other words, since defence became the realm of civilian specialists and the university the engine that produced them, it follows that civilian women found a gateway to engage in peace and security through the university.
Specific careers emerged from the foundations of political, economic and social sciences and were called “strategic”, “defence” or “security” studies. Although few women engaged in these at the very beginning, more became interested in them with the passage of time. The end of conscription in many developed countries also brought about the professionalization of armed forces which, in turn, led to a different mix of civil-military relations which included university courses for military officers in the field of strategy. Defence and security was an issue of policy and as such the legislative had to involve itself in its understanding and oversight – careers opened up for women as political analysts first and eventually as military intelligence analysts. Scientists became more interested in the duality of their function in peace and in war and so groups and associations emerged, soon followed by non-governmental organizations, who wanted to understand and have input into the dynamics of defence and security. Journalists became specialized and war correspondents, such as Dickie Chappelle –a woman- were needed to bring information out of cold war conflicts such as Viet Nam. In all of these fields, during the seventies and eighties, women started to coalesce and engage. The efforts of individuals and small groups, using the university as their starting point, did breach the first walls of the establishment. From Academia emerged figures such as Catherine Kelleher and Nicole Ball among many others who broke the stereotypes of women in security, Kelleher becoming the first woman Ambassador of the United States to NATO and Ball becoming director of the National Security Archives in Washington D.C.
In the South, women were also emerging with Indira Ghandi being the first Defence Minister of India. It should be noted though that during the Cold War the South was less concerned with nuclear deterrence (which they did not possess) than with revolution and internal conflict. Women were present in large number in the conduct of insurgencies in the South. Many of them achieved military or police functions and positions in transitional governments at the end of conflict and became the base for opening these structures for women to follow, as happened in Nicaragua and South Africa in the nineties, to name but two examples.
Whether through university or insurgency, in both North and South, the efforts of individual women were not enough to break the traditional gender barriers keeping women away from the centrality of peace and security policies. More needed to be done and this could only be through the generation of empowerment. It was out of Maryland University that Kelleher created the WIIS platform – Women in International Security – an association of university lecturers and professors who served as mentors for female students and young female military officers to specialize in international security issues. And it was women like Ruth Adams who convinced global foundations to provide funds to encourage universities and non-governmental organizations to open the field of peace and security to women. By the end of the eighties, women in international peace and security were a fact and soon women also started to join the armed forces and security services as these professions were opened up to them. Women scholars wrote about nuclear policies and themes as Regina Cowen-Karp did on non-proliferation.
It is important to note here that the university effort to bring female students to security studies started to produce results in the late 1990s. But the provision of a place to study and the acquisition of expertise on security issues do not carry much weight if there are no job opportunities and careers open to women where they can accrue experience. The education and the opportunity to work in the field of security studies are both necessary if women aspire to obtain the expertise and experience needed to gain access to senior leadership positions in the field.
The imperatives of the Cold War for defence and security and the need to maintain international peace had opened a window of opportunity for women and it is possible to say that in the years leading to the momentous fall of the Berlin wall women were already active in the development and delivery of international peace and security. It would be interesting to research the influence that these women had in the development of new concepts such as the development of peace and cooperation architectures in Europe and beyond, the conversion of military industries, demobilization and reintegration strategies, and the containment of nuclear proliferation.
Up to the end of the eighties it was possible to state that although there were enlarged roles for civilians, in general, and women, in particular, in the field of peace and security, the field itself was still defined as dealing with international conflict and the maintenance of peace. However all of that changed with the end of the Cold War. For one, the United Nations in general and its Security Council in particular, gained in value as a tool for peace and security. Between 1989 and 1995 massive peace support operations entirely changed the old concept of peacekeeping operations. The new concepts were more akin to practical collective security exercises than the interposition of unarmed observers to guard a cease fire. Nevertheless, this short-lived moment where collective action would be primarily taken through the United Nations as an instrument for peace was soon overrun by realities on the ground.
Collective and cooperative peace and security did not happen as it was meant to be, at least not everywhere. The decade of the nineties between the fall of the Berlin Wall and the fall of the twin towers finally positioned women at the heart of peace and security. The reason for this was the great shift in the definition of peace and security which became evident in the nineties. International peace and security, collective security, deterrence, arms control and other constructs of the recent past where not broad enough to encompass the international security situation nor provide feasible solutions to new emerging global threats in that respect. A world without the cold war was not necessarily a world devoid of conflict, far from it. International conflict lost some of its centrality when internal conflict emerged, post-conflict reconstruction processes and state and nation building challenges forced the international community to rethink security.
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) was first in vocalizing the inadequacy of state-centred security definitions. They presented a new construct: the human security concept. Through it they managed to explain that there can be no peace without security and there can be no security without development. Peace, Security and Development should be the new name of an old problem. Emerging threats to global peace started to be identified which mostly included non-military dimensions of security. Academics as well as non-governmental organizations and research think tanks identified many new dimensions to the security debate among which were the root causes of conflict, the economic dimensions of conflict, internal conflict, failed states, religious and ethnic wars, genocide, curbing and reducing the proliferation of small arms and light weapons, undertaking arms management practices, the prohibition of anti-personnel landmines and cluster munitions, the breakdown of law and order, corruption, the need to control trans-national organized crime, the fight against drug traffickers, blood diamonds and other illicit actions, the need to prevent chemical and biological weapons from emerging as viable weapons of mass destruction, the need to recommence discussions on nuclear disarmament vis-à-vis plain arms control… among others.
The broader definition of security brought many more professions and skills to the table in an effort to understand and contain the new dynamics of violence in a multidisciplinary and multidimensional manner. Many of these studies were led by women who came from different walks of life, had different expertise and skills but were the best placed to voice the problem of insecurity. These women, experts in their own fields either through study or through practice, had never considered themselves as belonging to the security studies field. Many of them were not academics but advocates or community leaders. Now, they found that they did not need to direct their steps towards security themes but rather to wait for the security themes to find them. Most of the global campaigns and most of the information on security related themes in the nineties were led and managed by women starting with NGO actors such as Jody Williams and the prohibition of anti-personnel landmines campaign.
The more new insecurities were studied, the more they found that women lay at the heart of the solution to these new threats to global peace. Governments soon took over from foundations to enlarge their support for improved gender policies and the empowerment of women across all walks of life. The concept of gender and the institutionalization of gender studies are also concomitant with the growth of women in both leadership and implementation of these international peace, security and development issues. The UN millennium goals clearly reflected the direction this new security definition was taking and women, as agents for both change and security, were at the core. Sadly, this remarkable addition of clearly identified human security problems to the academic, governmental and non-governmental agendas did not result in the empowerment of even more women into decision making roles in the realm of international peace and security. The identification of gender as a cornerstone for action and of the empowerment of women as the short cut to resolution of conflict resulted in over specialization in academia and in creation of special positions for women on these issues in their institutions and organizations, but these positions were not mainstreamed into security policies.
The last fifteen years have seen another turn in the concept of security. The emergence of global terror in 2001, and the return of military intervention as a tool of policy, took away much of the steam that had been built around the human security concept. In this harder world, most establishments did not see women as natural vehicles in the search for solutions to this new type of threat. This comes at a cost: terrorism like insurgencies engage both men and women. As such we need both to counteract it.
To make things worse, the fear of global terror and the lack of understanding as to how to resolve it have also led to the search for harder and narrower concepts of safety and security. Today, it is possible to say that there are fewer women in positions of decision making or action in international peace and security agendas than there were fifteen years ago. The rich cross cultural, multidimensional discussion of international peace and security has started to break up into components, the opposite of what led to the construct of the concept of human security in the first place. With this breakdown, women are at risk of being relegated to “soft” security areas, while men are also at risk of running with “hard” security agendas alone – this trend would diminish the capacity of both to impact on sustainable peace and security.
Looking to the future, a new definition of security is clearly discernible in the horizon. Global threats to the environment, issues related to global warming and climate change and the impact these will have in the resilience of overpopulated cities and on the capacity of countries to ensure sustained development, are gaining momentum. Coping with these threats will inevitably lead to a new construct for peace and security: one that is not just about peace, security and development but, fundamentally, about human survival.
Here, women scientists will come to the fore from the fields of meteorology, astronomy, medicine, oceanography, ecology and they will find themselves, like their sisters of the development and NGO world thrown into the heart of the field of peace and security. In conclusion, the role of women in international peace and security has greatly changed. This was due to education, empowerment and the command of knowledge on the ground. Women have risen to the challenge and engaged in security arenas because they have the capacity to do so. At the same time, the rapidly changing context in which security and insecurity are seen and perceived has moved closer to women.
Governments, all of whom want and need peace, security and development, would do well to understand that the empowerment of women for leadership in international peace and security is not an issue of “wanting” women but of “needing” them to be there. Without the active engagement of women in international peace and security, there won’t be development or security or peace.
"Not Just One Day…"
March 20, 2016
Every year, on 8 March, we celebrate International Women's Day.
This day is not about flowers and chocolates, but about highlighting the existing global gender disparities and the need to push for gender equality and equal rights between women and men in all societies. The work to achieve the global goal of gender equality must however be extended to every day of the year.
The argument for supporting global gender equality is very clear to me: everyone—men as well as women—and society as a whole stands to gain from it. Women are untapped resources in many countries, and it's only by fully including women in the political and economic spheres of the society that a country can achieve its full potential.
Countries that support women’s political and economic empowerment tend to be more inclusive, responsive and prosperous. It is thus evident that the work for gender equality and the empowerment of women is not just an issue for women. It is a global challenge that countries should accept not only because it the right thing to do, but because it serves the interest of society as a whole.
Gender equality and women's empowerment needs to be approached from many directions. It involves striving for better political representation of women at all levels: starting with local government all the way to national and international leadership. It also involves ensuring that young girls and women have equal access to training and education, as well as to the labor market. And it certainly involves changing attitudes towards gender equality and women's empowerment, and here I think positive changes are underway, not least among the younger generation.
Global challenges requires global efforts, but not only by part of humankind. As much as individual societies stand to gain from gender equality, so does the international community. Women as well as men need to be involved in the global efforts to make the world a better place to live for generations.
A Conversation With Ms. Vesna Pusić And
Ms. Elisabeth Lindenmayer
April 07, 2016
Columbia University
by Ourania S. Yancopoulos
Summary: A conversation with nominee for United Nations Secretary-General (UNSG), Ms. Vesna Pusić of Croatia, and former Assistant Secretary-General, Ms. Elisabeth Lindenmayer, was held on April 7, 2016 at 7:00 p.m. Introductions were made by WomanSG’s Campaign Chair, Dr. Jean Krasno, in which she discussed the “completely revolutionary” new UNSG election process. Ms. Lindenmayer started the discussion by describing the post of United Nations “S-G” as that of “the UN’s scapegoat” and perhaps “the worst job on earth.” Ms. Pusić responded discussing important implications of the new UNSG selection process, the difficulties and challenges of being UNSG, and her vision for the future of the United Nations. The event was co-sponsored by the UN Studies Working Group, Columbia University’s UN Studies Specialization SIPA, and the WomanSG campaign.
Ms. Ourania S. Yancopoulos, Columbia University, Political Science, Statistics
Regarding the new UNSG selection process, Ms. Lindenmayer noted that the newly added transparency is crucial because the UN Security Council has now been made aware of the number of qualified female candidates. She added that since there is so much expectation for a woman S-G it would be much more difficult to justify the choice of a man. Based on experiences from her former vantage as Assistant Secretary-General under S-G Kofi Annan, she emphasized that transparency is the General Assembly’s most effective capacity for limiting the power of the P-5. Obfuscating during the selection processes of previous Secretaries-General, the Security Council can behave “like squids” she said, “They squirt dark ink at you.”
Ms. Lindenmayer continued by describing the post of UNSG as the “worst job on earth” because of the Organization’s tendency to use the Secretary-General as its “scapegoat.” From her own experiences working with S-G Annan, she noted that the position requires great skills in leadership, management, and “of course,” diplomacy. Recognizing Ms. Pusić’s impressive experiences and tremendous qualifications, she turned the floor over, asking the nominee for a summation of her vision for the future of the United Nations.
Photo credit: Luc Kordas
Discussing outcomes of the new S-G appointment process, Ms. Pusić noted raised interest in the UNSG, in the election/selection process, and the UN at large. For the first time, the qualifications, characteristics, and skills of each candidate are conveyed in an open and transparent process for all members of the global public and civil society. Such public exposure pressures the UN to uphold not only the interests – political and otherwise – of UN Member States, but also those of global civil society. Ms. Pusić admitted, “It is my feeling, that if the next UNSG does not come out of Eastern Europe, it may upset some people internally, but no one outside the UN system. But, if the new S-G were not a woman, we would see reaction from people outside the UN. Because [the prospect of the first woman UNSG] is what raised interest in this whole process and in the United Nations.”
Ms. Pusić also provided a summary of her now-published vision statement, which addresses much needed changes in the Organization’s three main pillars: Peace and Security, Development, and Human Rights. Ms. Pusić said that to succeed in politics in general, and in the UN specifically, leaders must abstain from universally accepted cynicism: “You have to care.” Recognizing the complexities and challenges of heading an organization made up of 193 Member States, Ms. Pusić emphasized her passion and the need for change without being overly ambitious: “I certainly will not reform the UN, but it’s very important that it’s there.”
In the realm of Peace and Security, Ms. Pusić emphasized the role of diplomacy: “Talking is essential. While sometimes talking may be boring, relative to war, boring is great.” Noting inexcusable violence and recent abuse by UN peacekeepers, Ms. Pusić recommends the UN rely more on negotiators and developing the skills of negotiators, rather than on soldiers. Specifically, Ms. Pusić is eager to develop a system of “intellectual property” when it comes to learning from past UN-led reconciliation efforts, so that moving forward, negotiation and mediation can be something the UN specializes, and continues to uphold a tradition in. She also noted the “tremendous possibility for improvement” by requiring more women take part in peace processes.
Photo credit: Luc Kordas
On Development, Ms. Pusić emphasized the need for an “initiative of small donors” that would encourage middle-income countries, not currently engaged in development assistance, into becoming donors. Not only would this increase aid capabilities overall, but it could also reduce the divide between big, rich donor countries and smaller receiver countries. She emphasized that just as energy policy is a part of every nation’s foreign policy, so too should development cooperation be.
Ms. Pusić explained that violations of Human Rights are the best indicator of something going wrong in a country. As a key indicator, Ms. Pusić believes it is enough to look at women’s rights: “If you want to get a good picture of what’s going on in country look at the women, and if you want to start changing things in a country, start with the women.”
Closing Remarks: Ms. Pusić was asked to specify what she would do in her first 90 days as UNSG.
In her response Ms. Pusić prioritized hiring the right people.
There has been much criticism of the UN published recently, from widely read sources like the New York Times to blogs like Global Peace Operations Review – often written by former UN personnel. Chief complaints are made on the current hiring process, especially the lack of transparency in appointing top UN officials. Ms. Pusić addressed the issue directly: “The key is to prioritize and appoint people smarter than you.” She said that as S-G she would meet with senior personnel regularly to go through key priorities and delegate tasks: “You can’t do everything yourself and you have to have people you really trust.”
The UNSG can also introduce new talent from different countries as second, third, or fourth in command. Over time these people would develop the knowledge, skills, and experience that could make them very valuable to that particular portfolio without creating conflict: “By investing in change in the future of the Organization this way, no one would formally say ‘Oh, you cannot change this.’ You avoid creating conflict and introduce the possibility of change over time.”
Finally, Ms. Pusić emphasized the important function of UNSG as diplomat: “As Secretary-General, you don’t have the power to change the policies of a country. What you are tasked with is to, regardless of how big a country is, go and try to talk to that [transgressor] country- not with an audience, but one-on-one. There’s not much you can do if they throw you out, but this is a risk you should take. I know this is considered controversial, but to raise concerns with a country should be the onus of the Secretary-General.”
Ms. Lindenmayer ended her comments suggesting what Ms. Pusić might contribute to the Secretary- Generalship as a woman: “Men and women are very different. Women look at power as a contribution, rather than as power for power’s sake. The reason you are going for UNSG comes from your past and what you believe. That’s why you are running. This is true leadership - you believe in something, push for it, and believe in your power to do it. You see yourself as a genuine contribution and decide on priorities based on your beliefs.”
Ms. Pusić’s closing message for the student’s in the audience was this: “I am here - a woman from a small country on the lower right hand corner of the European map. You can do whatever you want. Go for it. I have no idea whether I will be the UN’s next Secretary-General. But I am comfortable caring for something. Be comfortable caring for something. Care about it. Maybe you don’t feel certain in the outcome, but if you are certain this is something you want to do…go there.”
Ms. Ourania S. Yancopoulos, Columbia University, Political Science, Statistics
A Conversation With Ms. Natalia Gherman And
Dr. Jean Krasno
April 14, 2016
United Nations Association of New York
by Ourania S. Yancopoulos
Summary: A conversation with nominee for United Nations Secretary-General (UNSG), Ms. Natalia Gherman of Moldova, and WomanSG Campaign Chair, Dr. Jean Krasno, was held April 14, 2016 at 7:00 p.m. Dr. Krasno introduced the importance of the new UNSG selection process, further asking Ms. Gherman to elaborate on her personal background and experiences in Moldova’s public service. Ms. Gherman related these experiences, highlighting the way in which these cultivated skills and characteristics inform the standards, she believes, the next S-G should uphold. Among these, she emphasized high moral standards, integrity, as well as good and honest communication – not only when interacting with the world’s top diplomats, but also with global civil society.
This event was co-sponsored by the United Nations Association of New York (UNA-NY) and the WomanSG campaign.
Ms. Gherman opened her response stating it is both a “noble and fair idea” that the next UNSG be a woman: “It is only fair to expect that in 70 years of the UN’s existence, a woman lead the organization.” She added that while there is a need for gender balance in the UN’s highest post, there is also a need for equitable geographic representation. Since the UN’s founding there has never been an S-G from Eastern Europe- a region underrepresented not only at the highest level, but also throughout the greater UN system. Due to this representative inequity, Ms. Gherman stated firmly, “The world’s top diplomat need not only be a woman, but a woman from Eastern Europe.”
On her nomination for next UNSG, Ms. Gherman said: “I decided to participate in this competition because of my professional qualifications and merits in Moldova, and because it allows me the opportunity to present myself, carry my message, and inform audiences around the world about my values, principles, and vision for a better United Nations. I hope to be successful for all of us Eastern Europeans and for all of us women.”
As part of the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the Republic of Moldova was granted its independence on August 27, 1991, just as Ms. Gherman was joining the country’s diplomatic service. While in the Service, Ms. Gherman engaged heavily in state building and construction. Emphasizing her master’s degree in War Studies from King’s College in London, Ms. Gherman cited how this experiential background has added to her confidence as an S-G candidate, “Because the classic UN agenda focuses on maintaining international peace and security.”
A career diplomat with a slough of posts at the ambassadorial level, Ms. Gherman steadily rose through the ranks of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, prominently serving as both Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister. Throughout these various high-level, public service appointments, Ms. Gherman met the challenges of domestic instability and conflict, as well as economic, and financial crises, with aplomb. She was often forced to make tough political decisions while coping with challenges of development and human rights violations. Influential in her country’s integration into the European Union, Ms. Gherman served as Chief Negotiator in Moldova’s Association Agreement, leading Moldova to become an associated country to the EU. This process granted Moldova’s citizens the right to travel within the EU visa-free, something Ms. Gherman believes “is very important, because mobility is an intrinsic human right for us all.”
When asked about essential skills for the UNSG, Ms. Gherman chose high moral standards and integrity: “The S-G is the leader of the organization that represents all citizens of the world. Only with the highest moral standards and integrity can she then lead by example and demand the same attitude of others.” The S-G’s role as negotiator is also key: “To be successful the UN has to stay united.” The S-G, then, has to be “a unifier and enabler of consensus. As S-G, you have to provide good offices for Member States with different positions, to find common interests, and then build on those common interests to advance.” As a consensus builder the next S-G must be a good manager too: “The S-G is tasked with running the Secretariat – with thousands of employees from different countries, backgrounds, and linguistic skills – as a team.”
When discussing the 21st century media climate, Ms. Gherman spoke on its dynamic role in connecting the S-G with civil society: “We can’t succeed in achieving our goals without the media. The next S-G must find time, everyday, to send messages of partnership to civil society, because civil societies are the agents of change.” She said it would be important for the S-G to “talk honestly with the media,” and hoped that through honest communication, the media would become a partner: “We don’t hear the positive stories very often. We don’t hear the heroic deeds of thousands of men and women who are risking their lives for the citizens of the world.” She called good communication skills “indispensible,” and emphasized the need for the next S-G to be multilingual. She herself is proficient in four languages including English, German, Romanian, and Russian: “Member States are looking for an articulate communicator this time because if we are going to succeed, we need to win the public. Without winning the public, and engaging young people, it will be very difficult for the UN to make a difference.”
During Ms. Gherman’s April 13th presentation as part of the UNSG General Assembly dialogues, featuring prominently among the concerns of Member States was a perceived difficulty for an S-G to remain impartial and independent: “There is great expectation for the next S-G to be more of a leader than before, and more of an independent, professional diplomat. The world isn’t getting any safer and something has to be changed this time. This change needs to come from the management style of the Secretary-General.” Mentioning a unified call from the people of the world and UN Member States for a more proactive S-G than before Ms. Gherman committed to utilizing Article 99 of the UN Charter- a provision that allows the S-G to bring potential threats affecting international peace and security before the Security Council. She said that perhaps, if enacted previously, “it could have eliminated a lot of conflict situations.”
Referencing new research exposing great gender imbalance within the UN’s ASG and USG ranks, Dr. Krasno asked what a woman could specifically bring to the post of Secretary-General. Ms. Gherman said the next S-G must have “the willpower” to create a gender-balanced Secretariat. Addressing previous underrepresentation of women within Moldova’s public service, she said that in order to achieve gender balance in top political levels, one has “to constantly think and work for it.” Recent initiatives she led in Moldova’s Foreign Service recruitment strategy greatly affected the last incoming class of young professionals, with a historic 60% female majority. Regarding gender-balance for top UN senior appointments, she said it was up to Member States to provide qualified female candidates for consideration: “Once you have the good candidates, you can prioritize the appointment of women with similar qualifications to men, to get a gender-balanced Secretariat.” She said that a woman S-G will “be keen on this important part of UN Secretariat reform.”
As for the qualities a woman might bring to the Secretary-Generalship, Ms. Gherman said that women are instinctually different from men: “I believe women are natural pacifiers: we instinctively search for a peaceful environment. We look for long-term stability and peace because this is how we raise our children and create our families.” After mentioning her 23-year-old son, she again emphasized how much women just “want our children to live in peace.”
According to Ms. Gherman a woman S-G is just the beginning, as there needs to be more women involved in the optimization of the international peace and security agenda: “Women naturally seek to transpose peace into working environments and culture. This is why I want more women to be empowered and involved in peace-making, peace-building, and rehabilitation situations.” She added, “Women are often more pragmatic than men. At all jobs they are ready to advance in small steps, in the right direction. We are more patient. We can endure more. And we are very target and goal-oriented. These characteristics are relevant to the post of UNSG because very seldom can we achieve results fast. Instead, we have to be tactful, diplomatic, and firm that commitments have to be honored. Women are well-placed to do a delicate, but firm job.”
Answering questions from the floor Ms. Gherman noted Moldova’s ongoing conflict in the Transnistria region, and her experience at the negotiation tables therein. She confirmed that such first-hand experience would help her tend to the UN’s unresolved conflicts.
Responding to a question regarding the ongoing refugee crisis, Ms. Gherman said that the massive numbers of refugees requires a well-coordinated response. Emphasizing the need for proper mechanisms to ensure protection, decent conditions, and human rights, she also stressed the need for adequate financial resources. To raise such resources Ms. Gherman spoke on the importance of partnerships and the requisite spirit of inter-governmental comradery needed to change the narrative of migration altogether: “We should never grow into divided societies. Instead, [migrants] must be seen as features that might actually strengthen society by means of diversity. The UN should never have to face such challenges alone- we must assemble and deliver as one.”
Ending with remarks on the current and future relevance of the United Nations, Ms. Gherman believes the future of the UN is linked to change: “My point of view is that the UN needs a fresh approach to conserve it.” Regarding the important role played by the United Nations in the development and formation of her own country, she said that while the UN is valuable and well placed, it can also be modified for the better. In this spirit she declared: “We don’t have to be elitist. We can just go public. We can just go the people- understand them, listen to them, be honest about what we can do and what we can’t. And if we can’t do something, we can make those partnerships relevant to people and to local communities.”
Emphasizing the role and impact of civil society Ms. Gherman concluded: “The UN should support communities. If we can do this then we are relevant. The motto of agenda 2030 is ‘leave no one behind,’ and this is exactly how we need to change the mindset of whatever we are doing in the United Nations.”
Left-to-right: WomanSG Communications Coordinator Arielle Hernandez Lavadenz, WomanSG Contributor Nia Yancopoulos, WomanSG Content & Design Coordinator Dorota Piotrowska, UNSG Official Nominee Natalia Gherman of Moldova, WomanSG Chair Jean Krasno, WomanSG Core Committee Member Gillian Sorensen, and WomanSG Strategy Coordinator Kristen Miller