Introduction

In 2014, Sweden implemented a new foreign policy approach called Feminist Foreign Policy (FFP), that has recently been revoked by the conservative party in power. This controversial and commonly misunderstood policy approach has now been adopted by sixteen countries in both Europe and the Americas, including France, Germany, Spain, and Canada. This policy implementation has great implications for Europe’s approach to both foreign policy and gender equality in the realms of female diplomacy and economic development. FFP has been shaping the methods by which transatlantic governments conduct their foreign policy, and with its continued adoption, it could present new methods and standards for gender equality in the developed world.

What Is Feminist Foreign Policy and How Is It Interpreted?

Feminist Foreign Policy is a new phenomenon that is widely under-researched in international relations. Although it has a broad definition and can have various interpretations, most scholars agree that FFP is a policy approach which emphasizes gender equality as a key component in interacting with other states. Additionally, FFP highlights the importance of resource allocation by providing visibility to marginalized groups within foreign affairs, including in diplomacy and international aid. 

UN Women has stated that the goal of implementing FFP is to increase the visibility and cohesion of a government’s actions on gender equality. There is no one correct way to implement this type of policy, but it provides a foundation for advancing feminist goals within all sectors of a government. Additionally, FFP provides greater opportunities for women to participate in diplomacy and leadership positions. Although the goal of FFP is different in every nation, it is a framework in which states can align their domestic and foreign policies. All FFP initiatives aim to disrupt male-dominated power structures, creating a more gender-equal society and emphasizing gender equality within foreign policy. It is true that some FFP approaches are more effective than others, based on implementation tactics and allocation of resources. Regardless, work by Lyric Thompson, the founder of the Feminist Foreign Policy Collaborative, shows that although there is a wide variety of interpretations and implementation of FFP, its focus on advancing and closing gender disparity gaps is a noteworthy accomplishment for feminists across the globe. 

In an analysis of a variety of countries’ FFPs, there appears to be one goal in common: decreasing gender disparities through improving women’s visibility. Each state that has implemented FFP has allocated time and money to reach its slated gendered goals. For example, Germany is currently considering the gender-specific impacts on both foreign investments and climate packages. Using FFP, Spain created impact advisory committees collecting impact data and providing recommendations to improve the policy. Furthermore, after implementing FFP, the Mexican government recently decriminalized abortion and reached its goal to have equal gender representation (50%) in elected government positions. The Canadian government has also embraced FFP, taking a broader human rights approach to their policies and working to promote equality in underdeveloped countries, such as Colombia. These are spaces of visibility for women in government and foreign policy, which are both known to be traditionally male-dominated fields. 

What Are the Implications for Transatlantic Relations?

In 2014, Swedish Prime Minister Margot Wallström, the first to adopt FFP in Sweden, saw a chance to expand opportunities for feminists in foreign policy initiatives and to embody feminist ideals within all sectors of government. However, this new feminist era in Sweden’s foreign policy proved short-lived; in 2022,  current Swedish Prime MinisterTobias Billström revoked the country’s FFP, citing concerns that the “feminist” label had become more important than the actual contents of the policy. Though not necessarily representative of a global shift in FFP’s implementation, the Swedish government’s decision has caused confusion among other governments and feminist scholars, particularly given the country’s role as an FFP leader. Additionally, considering the recent rise in public support for far-right parties in Germany, Spain, and France, Billström’s decision to revoke Sweden’s FFP risks further weakening the position of feminist policies throughout Europe. 

Feminist Foreign Policy in the U.S.

            In the United States, the adoption of FFP is unlikely to receive the support necessary due to the rise in polarization within the government. Nevertheless, the U.S. is in a unique political moment due to Kamala Harris’s role as the first female vice president and the increasing focus on women’s voices in the executive branch. A push for more female representation within foreign affairs remains a definite possibility and would be the best FFP approach for the U.S., should the Biden Administration remain in office for a second term. 

Advances and Concerns 

            In terms of international cooperation on gender equality, the 2023 launch of the G7 Gender Equality Advisory Committee (comprised of the U.S., Japan, and the EU) suggests that uplifting women’s position remains a key global issue. However, there have been no reports of discussions about the implementation of FFP within the transatlantic space; while the term is mentioned and discussed as a small part of country relations, there are no dedicated working groups for FFP within the G7 Gender Equality Advisory Committee. Most of the conversations and advances in feminist foreign policy are made within feminist organizations, which are then translated to governments through lobbying efforts. Moving forward, feminist relations can be strengthened through increased government cooperation on the topic of FFP, as governments can provide greater cohesion to the movement and help clarify its goals. All these actions can better support current government implementations of FFP, as well as provide a model for other nations who are considering similar policies.  

Overall, there is a lack of data collection and research within nations about FFP’s real-world impact, which often causes confusion about the policies’ purpose. Additionally, many scholars argue that the wide variety of interpretations of FFP creates a lack of consensus on what makes these policies feminist. Regardless, the one thing that can be learned from this scholarly debate is that the wide interpretations of this policy approach make it difficult to see its benefits. For the nations that have adopted a feminist approach to foreign policy, there is a general understanding that an intersectional approach which incorporates diverse identities is necessary to reach full gender equality. An intersectional approach to foreign policy in the transatlantic space can strengthen cohesion between nations on gender equality, but only with greater cooperation and discussion among governments to better align policy goals. It is true that there are varying approaches to feminist foreign policy and that it has broad implications for a nation; however, with better communication between feminist governments across borders, nations can better transmit the impacts of FFP policy initiatives.