EU spotlights women's roles in security, defense
Hosting an event under the theme 'Towards More Resilient and Secure Democracies: Women in Security and Defense,' experts from South Korea and the EU highlighted the role of gender-responsive policies in strengthening democratic stability and resilience.
Moderated by Estonian Ambassador to Korea Sten Schwede, the event referenced EU-ROK Security and Defense partnership signed in November 2024. ROK stands for South Korea's official name, the Republic of Korea.
Under Frameworks 38 and 39 of the agreement, EU and South Korea pledge to implement the Women, Peace and Security Action agenda, integrating gender equality into security cooperation, and exchange best practices to enhance joint responses to geopolitical challenges.
Aligned with the principles of United Nations Security Council Resolution or UNSCR 1325, the delegation reaffirmed commitment to integrating gender equality into its Common Security and Defense Policy.
Adopted on 31 October 2000, UNSCR 1325 calls for increased women's participation in peace and security efforts and urges measures to protect women and girls from gender-based violence in conflict.
According to the EU delegation office, the year 2025 marks the 25th anniversary of the resolution's adoption, and the EU continues to promote gender-responsive security policies and women's participation in crisis management and peacebuilding efforts through its WPS action plan.
The plan sets participation and gender mainstreaming ― the integration of gender equality into policies, programs and services ― as well as leadership, prevention, protection and relief and recovery as six key objectives.
Delivering remarks ahead of the event, Maria Castillo Fernandez, EU ambassador to Korea, underscored the importance of gender-responsive policies in security and defense. Gender-responsive policies address the different needs and priorities of all people regardless of their sex.
'Ensuring women's full participation in security and defense decision-making is not just a matter of representation — it is a matter of strategic necessity," said Fernandez.
She emphasized that inclusive democracies require all voices, noting that gender-responsive policies boost effectiveness, trust in institutions and sustainable peace.
'Women bring unique perspectives and solutions to conflict resolution, peacebuilding and crisis management,' said the ambassador, advocating for amplifying inclusive, equitable and capable solutions to address evolving security challenges of the present.
Meanwhile, the event also highlighted Enhancing Security Cooperation In and With Asia and the Indo-Pacific (ESIWA+), by examining challenges, successes and opportunities in advancing women's participation in these fields.
ESIWA+ is an EU project that aims to enhance EU security and defense cooperation in counterterrorism, crisis management, cybersecurity and maritime security.
The project is co-funded by the European Commission, the German Federal Foreign Office and the French Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs.
sanjaykumar@heraldcorp.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Korea Herald
2 days ago
- Korea Herald
N. Korea rejects Seoul's reconciliatory overture as 'pipedream,' denies removing loudspeakers
The North Korean leader's influential sister on Thursday rebuffed a recent reconciliatory overture by South Korea as a "pipedream," denying Seoul's military claim that the North has removed some propaganda loudspeakers targeting Seoul along the inter-Korean border. "We have clarified on several occasions that we have no will to improve relations with the ROK ... and this conclusive stand and viewpoint will be fixed in our constitution in the future," Kim Yo-jong said in a statement. ROK stands for South Korea's official name, the Republic of Korea. The remarks came amid a series of reconciliatory gestures by the new Lee Jae Myung administration, from suspending propaganda broadcasts targeting the regime to dismantling Seoul's border-area loudspeakers and adjusting the annual summertime joint military exercise with Washington, all aimed at improving frayed ties with Pyongyang. The South Korean military said the North had removed some of its loudspeakers in response to Seoul's actions. During a Cabinet meeting earlier this week, Lee also noted the North was dismantling loudspeakers, expressing hope that these reciprocal measures would open the door to inter-Korean dialogue. Kim, vice department director of the North Korean ruling party's central committee, denied these claims. "It is unfounded unilateral supposition and a red herring. We have never removed loudspeakers installed on the border area and are not willing to remove them," she noted. Kim also warned that the recent adjustment to the upcoming Ulchi Freedom Shield joint military drills "does not deserve praise and will prove futile." Seoul has postponed nearly half of the roughly 40 drills under the exercise, scheduled for Aug. 18-28, to next month, apparently as part of an appeasement toward Pyongyang. Kim called it Seoul's "foolish calculation" to expect North Korea would respond to its reconciliatory actions, accusing Seoul of trying in fact to shift responsibility for escalating tensions onto the North and win international support. "Such a trick is nothing but a 'pipedream,' and it does not arouse our interest at all," she said. "Whether the ROK withdraws its loudspeakers or not, stops broadcasting or not, postpones its military exercises or not and downscales them or not, we do not care about them and are not interested in them," Kim also noted. The leader's sister reiterated Pyongyang's stance that it is not interested in resuming dialogue with the US as long as the focus remains on the country's denuclearization. "The special personal relations between the top leaders of the DPRK and the US will not be reflected in the policy and that if the US persists with the outdated way of thinking, the meeting between the top leaders will remain only the 'hope' of the US side," she said. Kim also rejected speculation that a message from North Korea could be delivered to US President Donald Trump via Russian President Vladimir Putin when the presidents meet for a summit in Alaska on Friday to discuss how to end the Russia-Ukraine war. "Why should we send a message to the US side?" she said. "We have nothing to do with the US." (Yonhap)
![[Barry Eichengreen] Trump in the Falklands](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwimg.heraldcorp.com%2Fnews%2Fcms%2F2025%2F08%2F13%2Fnews-p.v1.20250813.a3871433fb2942c597c102c3ec8f87d9_T1.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
Korea Herald
2 days ago
- Korea Herald
[Barry Eichengreen] Trump in the Falklands
US President Donald Trump's trade war resembles nothing so much as UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's Falklands War in 1982: One side deploys massive force, and the other withdraws with its tail between its legs. Of 57 countries and territories included in Trump's 'Liberation Day' list of targets for 'reciprocal' tariffs, just three — Brazil, Canada and China — are credibly threatening retaliation against the United States. The Heard and McDonald Islands, populated only by penguins, were understandably supine. But it is more than a little surprising that so many others have taken US aggression lying down, given expectations of tit-for-tat retaliation. The European Commission's agreement with the US is especially stunning in this respect. The Commission has accepted Trump's 15 percent baseline tariff, with exemptions only for aircraft parts, critical minerals and a couple of other items. US duties on steel, copper and aluminum remain at 50 percent. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has pledged that Europe will buy additional US energy and invest $600 billion in the US, although it is questionable whether such commitments are in fact within the Commission's remit. The Trump administration claims further that Europe will import more agricultural goods and loosen its restrictions on digital trade. In return, the EU receives basically nothing, only a US promise not to impose still higher tariffs, at least for now. Moreover, the deal enhances US exporters' access to European markets, while Europe's exporters face additional barriers in the US. Von der Leyen hails this agreement as putting an end to an extended period of tariff uncertainty, although for how long greater certainty lasts remains, well, uncertain. The outcome is widely seen as a sign of the EU's weakness, and there is more than a little merit to this view. The Commission had to negotiate an agreement on behalf of 27 countries with different positions on how aggressively Europe should respond. In France, there was considerable support for the idea that it was important to face down a bully. In Germany, by contrast, policy was shaped by automotive and machinery industries desperate to retain access to the US market on terms at least not grossly inferior to those obtained by Japan, South Korea and the United Kingdom. These differences left the Commission with little wiggle room. Then there is the fact that the EU continues to rely on the US for weaponry, and that it needs America's help in supporting Ukraine. Europe recognizes this vulnerability and is seeking to build up its defense and geopolitical capacities independent of the US. But substantial progress in this direction will take years. Europe likewise lacks a pressure point analogous to China's control of rare earth refining, which allows the Chinese government to threaten targeted retaliation by cutting off an essential input required by US high-tech industries and by the country's defense complex. Finally, like other economies contemplating how to respond, Europe faces a 'madman' problem. Normally, the strongest argument for retaliating is to deter further aggression. A rational leader will understand that launching a trade war, much like launching a conventional war, will provoke a counterattack in which his country suffers as much as his opponent's. But this strategy works only when leaders are rational. Trump's trade-policy decisions are clearly guided by an irrational belief in tariffs — 'the most beautiful word in the dictionary,' as he puts it — and by the perverse satisfaction he derives from punishing opponents and even allies, regardless of the costs to the US itself. Negotiators, not only in Europe, had good reason to fear that Trump would meet retaliation with retaliation, resulting in escalation and further damage. There is, however, a contrary view that Europe has shown strength, not weakness, in its response to Trump's trade war. Meeting tariffs with tariffs, especially when these have no deterrent effect, is simply a way of shooting oneself in the economic foot. Higher import prices fuel inflation and hurt consumers, and taxing imported inputs, as the US is doing, makes domestic production more costly and less efficient. At the same time, less import competition encourages rent seeking: Domestic producers will lobby for tariff concessions and make campaign contributions to obtain them. Thus, Europe has shown its wisdom in shunning self-destructive measures. It now needs to follow up by ratifying its free trade agreement with Latin America's Mercosur bloc, solidifying its trade relations with China, and recommitting to the multilateral trading system, whether the US participates in it or not. Something else that Trump's trade war and Thatcher's Falklands War have in common is their utility in distracting attention from their instigators' domestic problems — in Thatcher's case an unemployment crisis, and in Trump's the questions about the extent of his ties to the convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, who hanged himself while awaiting trial on federal sex-trafficking charges. Helped by her victory in the South Atlantic, Thatcher would reign for eight more years. The US constitution prevents Trump from serving as president until 2033. Or so we are led to believe. Barry Eichengreen Barry Eichengreen, a professor of economics and political science at the University of California, Berkeley, is the author, most recently, of 'In Defense of Public Debt' (Oxford University Press, 2021). The views expressed here are the writer's own. — Ed.
Korea Herald
2 days ago
- Korea Herald
Zelenskiy in Berlin for online meeting with Trump, European leaders
BERLIN/KYIV (Reuters) -- Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy visited Berlin on Wednesday for a German-hosted virtual meeting with Donald Trump and European leaders, two days before the US president meets Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska. Europe's leaders are trying to drive home the perils of selling out Kyiv's interests at the first US-Russia summit since 2021. Trump has said the Alaska talks will be a "feel-out" meeting as he pursues a ceasefire in Moscow's war on Ukraine, having said last week, to consternation in Kyiv and Europe, that any deal would involve "some swapping of territories." Zelenskiy shook hands with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz before disappearing into bilateral talks. The two men will take part in a video conference with the leaders of Finland, France, Britain, Italy, Poland and the European Union at 2 p.m., local time. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte will also attend. Trump and Vice President JD Vance will join the call at 3 p.m. "Will be speaking to European Leaders in a short while. They are great people who want to see a deal done," Trump wrote on Truth Social. The unpredictability of the summit in Alaska has fuelled Europeans' fears that the US and Russia could take far-reaching decisions over their heads and even seek to coerce Ukraine into an unfavorable deal. "We are focusing now to ensure that it does not happen -- engaging with US partners and staying coordinated and united on the European side," said one senior official from Eastern Europe. Wary of angering Trump, European leaders have repeatedly said they welcome his efforts while stressing that there should be no deal about Ukraine -- almost a fifth of which Russia has occupied -- without Ukraine's participation. Trump's administration tempered expectations on Tuesday, telling reporters the summit would be a "listening exercise" for him to hear what it would take to get to a deal. Trump's agreement last week to the summit was an abrupt shift after weeks of voicing frustration with Putin for resisting the US peace initiative. Trump said his envoy had made "great progress" at talks in Moscow. Half a dozen senior European officials told Reuters that they see a risk of a deal being struck that is unfavorable for Europe and Ukraine's security. They said European unity would be vital if that happened. After the meeting with Trump, the "coalition of the willing," a group of countries working on plans to support Ukraine in the event of a ceasefire, will also convene online. A Gallup poll released last week found that 69 percent of Ukrainians favor a negotiated end to the war as soon as possible. But polls also indicate Ukrainians do not want peace at any cost if that means crushing concessions. Ahead of the calls, Zelenskiy said it would be impossible for Kyiv to agree to a deal that would require it to withdraw its troops from the eastern Donbas region, a large swathe of which is already occupied by Russia. That, he told reporters on Tuesday, would deprive Ukraine of a vast defensive network in the region, easing the way for a Russian push deeper into Ukraine in the future. He said territorial issues could only be discussed once a ceasefire was in place and Ukraine had received security guarantees. Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Alexei Fadeev said Moscow's stance had not changed since it was set out by Putin in June 2024. As preconditions for a ceasefire and the start of negotiations, the Kremlin leader had demanded that Ukraine withdraw its forces from four regions that Russia has claimed as its own but does not fully control, and formally renounce its plans to join NATO. Kyiv swiftly rejected the conditions as tantamount to surrender.
