Latest news with #Peace&Security
RNZ News
02-05-2025
- Politics
- RNZ News
How the US 'war on woke' and women risks weakening its own military capability
By Bethan Greener of US Secretary of Defence, Pete Hegseth, speaks as US President Donald Trump looks on during remarks to the Michigan National Guard at Selfridge Air National Guard Base in Warren, Michigan, on 29 April 2025. Photo: Jim Watson / AFP Analysis - With US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth's "proud" cancellation this week of the military's Women, Peace and Security (WPS) program, the "war on woke" has found its latest frontier - war itself. Stemming from a United Nations Security Council resolution in 2000, the WPS initiative aimed to increase the participation of women in public institutions, including in the security sector and peace-making roles. The WPS agenda aims to better understand how women, men, boys and girls experience war, peace and security differently. It increases operational effectiveness and supports the underlying goal of gender equality, described by the UN as the " number one predictor of peace ". In the military context, it emphasises the need to increase the participation of women and to better protect non-combatant women in war, particularly from the prevalence of conflict-related sexual violence. The decision to end the program as part of a wider war on diversity, equity and inclusion seems to assume national security and military power are incompatible with the promotion of racial and gender equality. In other words, it assumes certain types of people aren't really cut out to be "warfighters". And, it asserts that anything other than basic skill (such as weapons handling) undermines readiness and ability in warfare. History and the available evidence suggest both ideas are wrong. The archetypal warrior envisaged by Hegseth and others is one who relies on very traditional concepts of what constitutes a warrior and who that might be: not female, definitely not transgender, and ideally also not gay. Recent bans on transgender personnel in the US military, the removal of mandatory mental resilience training, and the " disappearance " from US museums and memorials of the records of the military contribution of women and minorities, reinforce these ideas. The ideal soldier, according to the new doctrine, is straight, white, physically fit, stoic and male. Yet people of all stripes have served their countries ably and with honour. This morning, I proudly ENDED the 'Women, Peace & Security' (WPS) program inside the @DeptofDefense . WPS is yet another woke divisive/social justice/Biden initiative that overburdens our commanders and troops — distracting from our core task: WAR-FIGHTING. WPS is a UNITED… Military service is allocated a privileged kind of status in society, despite (or perhaps because of) the ultimate sacrifice it can entail. That status has long been the preserve of men, often of a particular class or ethnicity. But women and minorities around the world have fought for the right to enter the military, often as part of broader campaigns for greater equality within society in general. But there remains resistance to these "interlopers". No matter their individual capabilities, women are painted as too physically weak, as a threat to combat percent7E:text=Integrating percent20women percent20into percent20special percent20operations percent20forces percent20poses percent20potential,readiness percent2C percent20cohesion percent2C percent20and percent20morale percent20essential percent20to percent20high-performing percent20teams unit cohesion, or a liability because of their particular health needs. Women, in particular, are often perceived as being too emotional or lacking authority for military command . Minorities are seen as requiring distracting rules about cultural sensitivity, presenting language challenges, or are stereotyped as not cut out for leadership. But problem-solving - a key military requirement - is best tackled with a range of views and approaches. Research from the business world shows diverse teams are more successful, including delivering higher financial returns. At a more granular level, we also know that minority groups have often outperformed other military units, as exemplified by the extraordinary feats of the New Zealand Māori Pioneer Battalion in World War I and the 28th Māori Battalion in World War II. Women, too, have proved themselves many times over, most recently in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. As well as matching the skills of their male counterparts, they also had different, useful approaches to roles such as intelligence gathering in conflict zones. US Marines taking part in a training exercise. Photo: AFP The competence of military personnel is not determined by sex, gender, sexuality or ethnicity. Rather, competence is determined by a combination of learned skills, training, education, physical ability,] mental agility, resilience, experience , interpersonal skills and leadership qualities. Any suggestion that military units are best served by being made up of only heterosexual men with "alpha" tendencies is undermined by the evidence. In fact, a monocultural, hypermasculine military may increase the potential for harassment, bullying or worse. Modern military roles also involve a much wider range of skills than the traditional and stereotypically male infantry tasks of digging, walking with a pack, firing guns and killing an enemy. In modern warfare, personnel may also need to engage in "hearts and minds" counterinsurgency, or in "grey zone" tactics, where specialisations in intelligence, cyber or drone piloting are more highly prized. Militaries are also much more likely to be deployed to non-warfighting roles, such as humanitarian aid and disaster relief. This isn't to say "controlled aggression" and other traditionally alpha-male attributes don't have their place. However, national military strategies increasingly stress the need to train ethical and compassionate soldiers to successfully carry out government objectives. The evolution of war requires the evolution of the military forces that fight them. The cancellation of the Women, Peace and Security program in the US threatens to put a stop to this process, at least in that country. Despite Pete Hegseth's claim to be increasing "warfighting" capability, then, there is a real chance the move will decrease operational effectiveness, situational awareness and problem-solving in conflict situations. Far from being peripheral, the Women, Peace and Security program is central to the future of all military activity, and to developing conceptions of war, peace and security. Hegseth's "proud moment" looks less like winning a "war on woke" and more like a retreat from an understanding of the value a diverse military has created. * Bethan Greener is an Associate Professor of Politics, Te Kunenga ki Pūrehuroa - Massey University This story was originally published on The Conversation.
Yahoo
01-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
A Commander's Case for Women, Peace, and Security
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PETE HEGSETH claims to be focused on 'lethality' and 'the warfighter,' yet he just proudly announced the end of a program that saves American lives and helps us win fights. 'This morning,' he said on April 29, 'I proudly ENDED the 'Women, Peace & Security' (WPS) program inside the @DeptofDefense,' calling it 'yet another woke divisive/social justice/Biden initiative that overburdens our commanders and troops—distracting from our core task: WAR-FIGHTING. WPS is a UNITED NATIONS program pushed by feminists and left-wing activists. Politicians fawn over it; troops HATE it.' First, the secretary seems to have overpromised. He's not ending the program, which is required by law, but, he explained, merely 'executive [sic] the minimum of WPS required by statute.' An anonymous administration official further walked back Hegseth's announcement in a statement to the Washington Post: ''Ending' refers to ending the Biden administration's woke WPS initiatives and returning the program to its original intent.' This shouldn't be surprising, considering the secretary of state, the secretary of homeland security, the national security advisor, and the president are all proud supporters of WPS. Second, I commanded one of the key initiatives that informed the WPS strategy and later the WPS Act, which codified in law the government's commitment to involving women in matters of war, peace, and security, and I have serious doubts about whether the program overburdened the force, distracted from 'war-fighting,' and irritated the troops. To support The Bulwark's mission, join our community, and get the best coverage of Trump 2.0 available anywhere, become a Bulwark+ member. IN 2008, I WAS COMMANDING THE 1ST Armored Division in northern Iraq when we began seeing a disturbing and confounding trend: an uptick in suicide bombings carried out by Iraqi women. A series of these attacks were executed in crowded markets, polling stations, and police checkpoints—places where the U.S.-Iraqi security posture was already strained. What made this tactic so effective, and so deadly, was that in traditional Iraqi society, male soldiers and police were prohibited from touching or searching women. And there weren't any female Iraqi police officers to close that gap. Al Qaeda in Iraq knew that our lack of women was a weakness. And they exploited it. At first, our intelligence analysts didn't fully understand the dynamics. We couldn't figure out why women were now involved in this al Qaeda network of death. It wasn't just tactical adaptation—it was social manipulation. Throughout our fifteen-month tour, fighting the insurgency didn't just mean lobbing ordnance at bad guys. We were also engaged in a broad campaign to improve governance in northern Iraq by helping local officials develop capacity in law, health, education, and justice. To defeat an insurgency, it's not enough just to destroy the enemy; a successful counterinsurgency force must also contribute to the advancement of the society. Our efforts were seeing progress, as rule of law, education, healthcare, and even business initiatives were countering the terrorist message. But I had neglected a key part of the Iraqi society: the women. The idea that eventually broke the problem came from a junior female soldier, who suggested something unusual: 'Sir, we should also hold a women's conference; they have a say in their future society, too.' It was, admittedly, an unconventional idea in a male-centric society. But I gave the task to all the female soldiers in our division to pull it off, and a few weeks later, we held that conference in Erbil with more than four hundred women from all of the provinces in northern Iraq—Arab and Kurdish. Get 30 day free trial Iraqi women—political leaders, educators, clerics, and civil society figures—gathered to talk about their role in securing their communities. My wife, Sue, opened the conference by addressing the group (through an interpreter) via a satellite video link from Germany. I was one of only two men in attendance, and it sent a clear message that my wife, not I or any other man, was opening the meeting. I was extremely proud when she said, 'We women must do more to stop the violence,' and the Iraqi women cheered. The spark came during the lunch break. One of the women approached me quietly and said, 'We can help stop the bombings. But we need you to help get Iraqi women recruits into our police academies.' We had built and were operating multiple police academies to train Iraq's next generation of male security forces. But the idea of allowing women to enroll—especially to take on active policing roles—met deep resistance from the Iraqi chief of police and the minister of the interior in Baghdad. Eventually, both relented. We started small: 27 women were enrolled. They graduated weeks later. Within months, more than 60 female officers were operating in public spaces across Diyala, Kirkuk, and Salah ad-Din provinces. They became the key to breaking the suicide-vest network. The breakthrough came when one of the rookie policewomen stopped a 15-year-old girl named Rania from entering a crowded market. Prevented from detonating her vest, she told interrogators she had been drugged and pushed toward a checkpoint by her own mother—a widow of a slain al Qaeda fighter. It turned out that many of the women wearing these vests were widows of slain al Qaeda fighters who had been told, after their husbands' deaths, there was nothing left for them. No future. No food. No marriage. No status. Many had been forced as teenagers into marrying Iraqi or foreign fighters in the first place and so faced a double social sanction: One for having been married to a terrorist, and another for being a young widow. 'Join your husband in the afterlife,' they were told, 'and in the process you can take as many infidels with you as you can.' We briefed Iraqi officials about Rania's testimony, emphasizing that many of these suicide bombers weren't valiant martyrs but abused and coerced victims of terrorism. Their story eventually became a major topic of discussion in Iraqi society, especially after a female radio host dubbed the policewomen 'Doves of Peace.' This wasn't just good counterterrorism—it was community transformation. By the time 1st Armored rotated home, not only was the female suicide-vest cell almost completely destroyed, but the overall level of violence in northern Iraq was down significantly and the Iraqi security forces were able to take the lead. Get 30 day free trial WHILE OUR EXPERIENCE in northern Iraq antedated the WPS strategy and the later WPS Act, it is precisely the kind of success story envisioned by the bipartisan champions of the program. Across many departments and agencies of the federal government, the program has four pillars: Participation: Ensuring women's meaningful involvement in decision-making about peace and security. Protection: Safeguarding women and girls from violence, coercion, and exploitation. Prevention: Addressing the root causes of conflict through inclusive and equitable approaches. Relief and Recovery: Promoting the roles of women in stabilizing communities and rebuilding post-conflict societies. Each of these principles was present in what we did in northern Iraq in 2008. And the result was not a 'woke distraction'—it was lives saved, violence deterred, and long-term security effectuated. Share With due respect to Secretary Hegseth, his definition of lethality is troublingly narrow. Yes, lethality can be found in a rifle shot or a perfectly executed combined-arms maneuver. But at the strategic level—where battles are shaped, alliances are built, and where 'warfighting' serves aims that promote American interests—lethality also depends on the ability to secure populations, disrupt enemy networks, and build coalitions of trust. Empowering women in conflict zones is not a 'soft' strategy—it's a force multiplier. It produces better intelligence, enhances legitimacy, and reduces the grievances that feed insurgency. We did not set out to create a women's rights movement in Iraq. We were trying to stop the killing. And we succeeded, because we recognized that the path to security runs through society, not just the battlefield. Our female soldiers weren't intent on empowering women for ideological reasons, but because they knew they might be uniquely positioned to solve a problem that men could not. That insight wasn't unique to our war. As Kathleen McInnes of the Center for Strategic and International Studies has pointed out, In Afghanistan, for example, U.S. Female Engagement Teams helped tactical and operational level commanders better understand the human terrain of battle spaces, therefore improving kinetic and non-kinetic targeting. Simultaneously, partner forces also became aware that the intentional presence of women in kinetic fights could have a strategic impact. Kurdish women's units were fierce fighters against the Islamic State in part due to their combat effectiveness but also because of the reputational damage to Islamic State fighters being forced to fight—and lose—to women. In Ukraine, upwards of 60,000 women are serving in the military, including on the front lines, and women's networks are critical components of anti-Russian resistance networks. That is what WPS stands for: the strategic inclusion of half the population in the fight against instability, terror, conflict and chaos. The WPS program reflects the reality that modern combat is not simply about force and lethality—it is about legitimacy, alliances, information, and the ability to create peaceful solutions that endure. Killing this program won't make the U.S. military more lethal. But it might make it half blind. Share
Time of India
30-04-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Why did Pete Hegseth scrap Pentagon's Women, Peace and Security program that Trump once championed?
Pete Hegseth , US Defense Secretary, has abruptly banished the Pentagon's Women, Peace and Security program as part of his crusade against diversity and equity. He dismissed it as woke divisive/social justice/Biden initiative' despite it being a signature Donald Trump achievement from his first term. #Pahalgam Terrorist Attack PM Modi-led 'Super Cabinet' reviews J&K security arrangements Pakistan's General Asim Munir is itching for a fight. Are his soldiers willing? India planning to launch military strike against Pakistan within 24 to 36 hours, claims Pak minister 'This morning, I proudly ENDED the 'Women, Peace & Security' (WPS) program inside the [Department of Defense]. WPS is yet another woke divisive/social justice/Biden initiative that overburdens our commanders and troops — distracting from our core task: WAR-FIGHTING," Hegseth wrote in a post on X, formerly known as Twitter. The defense secretary added the program was 'pushed by feminists and left-wing activists', claiming 'Politicians fawn over it; troops HATE it.' As the program is under federal statute and can't be outright killed by Hegseth alone, he said the Pentagon would comply with the minimum requirements of the WPS and fight to end the program during the department's next appropriations process. ALSO READ: Trump as next Pope? US President says 'that would be my number one choice?', leaves internet in splits Why is Hegseth's decision raising eyebrows? The Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) program is a bipartisan effort established by U.S. law in 2017 during President Donald Trump's administration. Its goal is to enhance the involvement of women in global peacekeeping, conflict resolution, and security initiatives. The program is rooted in a 2000 United Nations Security Council resolution that highlighted both the disproportionate impact of conflict on women and their vital contributions to peace and stability. WPS efforts often prioritize placing women in military and diplomatic roles, particularly in regions where cultural or religious norms restrict the effectiveness of male personnel. Live Events The decision taken by Pete Hegseth is raising eyebrows as the initiative was established during Trump's first administration when he signed the Women, Peace and Security Act in 2017, making the United States the first country in the world to codify standalone legislation on the matter. The Trump campaign even courted women voters by citing the initiative as one of its top accomplishments for women on its website. Attempting to square this circle, Hegseth later claimed the Biden administration had 'distorted & weaponized' the original program. 'Biden ruined EVERYTHING, including 'Women, Peace & Security,'' he insisted. ALSO READ: Complete tax cut in US soon? President Trump again drops big hint on its elimination through tariffs The 2017 Women, Peace and Security Act was penned by current Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, then a member of the House representing South Dakota, and Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.). The Senate's version of the law was co-sponsored by current Secretary of State Marco Rubio, then a Florida senator. Rubio lauded the Women, Peace and Security Act earlier this month, saying it was 'the first law passed by any country in the world focused on protecting women and promoting their participation in society.' And Trump's national security adviser, Mike Waltz, a former House member for Florida, was a founding member of the WPS Caucus when he was in Congress. The law was intended to promote the participation of women in all aspects of overseas conflict prevention, management and resolution, as well as postconflict relief and recovery efforts, to be implemented at the State Department, Pentagon and other government agencies. Ivanka Trump lauded the initiative in 2019, saying she was 'proud to announce' that Colombia would also develop a WPS National Action Plan. '@POTUS signed into law Women, Peace and Security, making the United States the 1st country in the world to enact #WPS legislation,' she said in a tweet in 2019. ALSO READ: 'Hostile, political act': White House vs Amazon after tech giant planned to disclose cost of US tariffs on its website The WPS program, which originated from a 2000 United Nations security council resolution, was first created to boost women's participation in peace and security planning and protect women from violence in conflict situations. Iterations of the program have since been widely adopted globally as research has shown that peace agreements with women's participation are more durable.
Express Tribune
30-04-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
Hegseth 'proudly' terminates Pentagon's Women, Peace, and Security program
US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth speaks with the media during his first official arrival at the Pentagon as Secretary in Washington, DC, January 27, 2025. Photo: AFP Listen to article US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced the termination of the Pentagon's Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) program, labeling it a 'woke' initiative that detracts from the military's primary mission of warfighting. Hegseth stated, 'This morning, I proudly ENDED the 'Women, Peace & Security' (WPS) program inside the [Department of Defense]. WPS is yet another woke divisive/social justice/Biden initiative that overburdens our commanders and troops — distracting from our core task: WAR-FIGHTING.' The WPS program was established during President Donald Trump's first term through the Women, Peace, and Security Act of 2017, signed into law on October 6, 2017. The Act was co-authored by then-Representative Kristi Noem (R-SD) and co-sponsored by Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), both of whom are now serving in the Trump administration. Despite its bipartisan origins, Hegseth criticised the program's evolution under the Biden administration, claiming it had been 'distorted & weaponised.' He pledged to comply with the minimum legal requirements of the WPS program while seeking to defund it in the next budget cycle. The decision has drawn criticism from both Republican and Democratic lawmakers. Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), a co-author of the original legislation, expressed concern that ending the program would weaken the country's global standing and undermine the strategic advantages it provides to US forces. Representative Lois Frankel (D-FL), co-chair of the WPS Caucus, called the move 'outrageous and reckless,' emphasizing that the initiative is grounded in decades of research and bipartisan law. Former Trump administration officials, including Ivanka Trump and National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, had previously supported the WPS program for its strategic benefits in promoting women's roles in peace and security efforts. The Pentagon has not yet clarified the specific changes that will occur following Hegseth's announcement. However, the Department of Defense has previously commended the release of the 2023 US WPS Strategy and National Action Plan, highlighting its alignment with national security objectives and the integration of gender perspectives in defense operations.
Irish Independent
30-04-2025
- Politics
- Irish Independent
Pete Hegseth boasts of ending ‘woke' DEI programme signed into law by Donald Trump
©UK Independent Yesterday at 21:30 Pete Hegseth announced yesterday that he 'proudly' put an end to a Department of Defence programme – one that US president Donald Trump signed into law in 2017. In the latest blunder from within the department, defence secretary Mr Hegseth posted on social media announcing that he 'proudly ENDED' the Women, Peace & Security programme. Register for free to read this story Register and create a profile to get access to our free stories. You'll also unlock more free stories each week.
