The R for Reality Check: Feminist Realism for the new BHOS policy paper

 

In the new Dutch policy paper on Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation (referred to after this by its Dutch acronym BHOS), the Cabinet is choosing to ‘Do What The Netherlands Is Good At’. Rightfully so. Worldwide, the Netherlands is at the forefront of gender equality and women’s rights. WO=MEN Dutch Gender Platform is pleased that these are once again integrated in the BHOS policy.  

 

The policy paper outlines certain priorities where the Netherlands has built up expertise and experience in recent years. One of these is investing in sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR). Others are Dutch investments in women’s and local leadership, support to women entrepreneurs, and the protection of women’s human rights defenders online and offline. It is good to see that these issues are prioritised. 

 

Some of the BHOS policy contents appear to be framed by a Feminist Foreign Policy, as previously announced last May. As is the case of Sweden, the Dutch Cabinet is designing the BHOS policy with four Rs in mind: Rights (protect women’s rights), Resources (funds must also be used for women), Representation (women must be included in policy-making and implementation), and Reality Check (no unwanted negative effects for women). 

 

These four Rs give the Cabinet the means to systematically include gender equality and women’s rights in all BHOS policy. But the reality is that these means are not yet systematically rolled out. We therefore call on the Cabinet to up its ambitions and grab the opportunities that now arise with both hands. 

 

The R for Reality Check  

Looking at the BHOS policy paper from a feminist perspective, a few issues jump out. 

 

= A feminist BHOS policy needs a human rights approach and policy coherence 

 

The Cabinet is opting for a feminist foreign policy ‘because women and LGBTIQ+- people have the same rights as men, and must have equal opportunities’. And rightly so. A human rights approach must be at the heart of a solid feminist BHOS policy.  

 

The Cabinet is addressing this in parts of the policy. It will put its efforts in the civil space of organisations and the protection of women’s human rights defenders. However, continuity is lacking. The Cabinet will work on conflict prevention and long lasting peace but it is not aligned with existing (financial) commitments about the empowerment and rights of women and girls in these processes. No reference whatsoever is made to the fourth National Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security (NAP 1325-IV) in which the Cabinet works with civil society partners on inclusive peace and security.

 

In addition, the trade and investment policy lacks a human rights approach. A gender responsive due diligence requirement for companies would be logical. This would mean that in every step of their due diligence process, companies would need to consider the potential different effects of their operations on women and men. In International Corporate Social Responsibility (ICSR) legislation, in the current criteria for companies that want to use the private sector tools and that want to join trade missions. Women are now primarily referred to as added value for the Netherlands’ economic benefit.

 

The reality is that gender equality and women’s rights will drop off the agenda if they are merely considered a positive side effect or a tool to reach other goals. This was evident when the COVID-19 crisis broke out. We also saw this in the political coups such as in Sudan and Myanmar where women and young people who went out on the streets demanding change but were then sidelined. Instead of being an integral part of policy, gender equality became a side issue: ‘not right now’.  

 

 

= Supporting women leaders in fragile contexts and crises requires guts and leadership  

 

The Netherlands is supporting local and women’s leadership in fragile and politically unstable contexts. This is admirable as it takes guts and leadership. In all their diversity, local women and youth (particularly girls) leaders and human rights defenders are fighting for an equal share of power, the right to self-determination, a place at the negotiating table, land rights, access to emergency support and so on. They are questioning old power structures and traditions. They work in volatile circumstances and continuously face resistance. The Cabinet is supporting their work, and rightly so. In the long term it will help the world become more just and peaceful.  

 

In stark contrast to this boldness and leadership, is its tendency towards increased risk management. The development cooperation sector is one of the most heavily controlled sectors in the country. Yet, the Cabinet is pushing for more elaborate due diligence and increased oversight of project implementation, as well as for modular programming. This may involve pausing or ending parts of a programme if a conflict or crisis arises to divert the budget to other activities.  

 

Any malpractice in the sector must of course be dealt with firmly. But the reality is that increasing regulatory pressure and the lack of flexible core funding is making the work and ownership of local women’s rights organisations impossible. Women and young community leaders and human rights defenders are already constantly adapting. They are the ones who best know their context, the dangers and the opportunities. They need to be able to quickly adapt to societal and political developments in order to do their work effectively. The lack of flexible core funding, whereby organisations themselves can decide how to use their funding,­ the sudden termination of (some of) the support, and the ignoring of serious risks assessments that they themselves make, all undermine local ownership and leadership in all areas. 

 

Give real space to women and local leadership. Dare to invest on the basis of the reality of local women leaders and human rights defenders in all their diversity. Take risk mitigation measures on the basis of analyses by local and Dutch civil society. Dare to continue investing in women and local leadership even when crises or conflicts arise.  

 

= The commitment to digitisation requires recognising and acknowledging the digital divide  

 

In its foreign trade agenda, the Cabinet expresses strong commitment to the digital transition. This is a logical and useful objective as it generates a lot of opportunities. Civil society organisations saw this too during the COVID-19 pandemic. They were able to stay in touch with local partners through online platforms and apps, important information could be shared, and services could continue. Online platforms are also often the life blood of women human rights defenders. Retaining access to these platforms is critical. So it is only right that the Cabinet also commits to the online protection of defenders.  

 

At the same time, the reality is that women and girls themselves are the ones with insufficient access to digital resources. Fewer women and girls have their own mobile telephones, laptops, subscriptions, internet connections or access to WiFi than men and boys. Fewer women and girls are sufficiently trained to use digital resources than men and boys. This mostly applies to women and girls in rural areas and to women with auditory and/or visual disabilities. Simply supporting digitisation without considering these differences between women, girls, men and boys in all their diversity can increase gender inequality. Furthermore, it is crucial that greater attention is paid to privacy rights, especially those of people in vulnerable positions, during the digital transition.  

 

Invest in equal access to and knowledge of digital resources as a precondition for the digital transition.  

 

In the BHOS policy paper, the Cabinet expresses its intention that women and LGBTIQ+- people have the same rights and opportunities as men. The reality is that apart from gender, factors such as age, ethnicity, sexual orientation, mental or physical disabilities, religion and socio-economic class make a significant difference in people’s rights and opportunities.  

 

Girls who are human rights defenders in Colombia and Kenya are not recognised by governments as political actors. So they are not heard in the UN spaces dealing with human rights abuses. Indigenous women who fight to keep their land and natural resources face the same issue. As do local women farmers who are often disproportionately affected by climate change and biodiversity loss. They are not heard by the relevant policy-makers because of their ethnicity or socio economic status. Women workers in the informal sector who earn their money as sex workers, cleaners or market sellers fell by the wayside in COVID-19 measures. People with disabilities, including a relatively high proportion of women and elderly people, have less access to emergency aid as a matter of course. Transgender people face severe discrimination in refugee camps.  

 

When designing and implementing policy, always consider the intersection of gender and other factors that impact people’s equal rights and opportunities.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

About WO=MEN WO=MEN Dutch Gender Platform is the Dutch network of women’s rights, diaspora and development cooperation organisations, entrepreneurs, soldiers, academics and activists who work for gender equality and women’s rights worldwide. WO=MEN is the biggest network in Europe in this area. For more information see www.wo-men.nl.