“We need perspective on gender”

World Women’s Day has been around for more than 100 years. Do we actually still need it?

This day is extremely important. Unfortunately, we are still far from the goal of gender equality and justice. According to calculations by the Swiss World Economic Forum, at the current rate, it will take 162 years before women are equally involved in politics and 169 years before they achieve equal participation in the economy. Of the 18 indicators representing the corresponding Sustainable Development Goal (SDG 5), significant progress has only been made in education and the participation of women in municipal administration. For all other indicators, there is still a long way to go.

Are we actually moving forward or have we perhaps taken steps backwards?

All in all, we're still moving in the right direction, but it’s just too slow. However, the following also applies: the progress that we have already made can be lost again, through crises and conflicts and through conservative gender roles. Progress is not a matter of course; it is a constant struggle that must be fought for. That’s why UN Women says “we have to push back the push-back”. In other words, we need to take measures against regression. Of course, the play on words sounds better.

Which factor is applying the brakes more? The crises and conflicts? Or autocratic regimes with traditional gender roles?

Both. In times of crisis, and there is now plenty of evidence to support this, women are more likely to become victims of sexual violence. They are also quickly reduced to their role as housewife and mother, as “caretakers”, and lose economic opportunities. This can be easily observed in many of the current crises and conflicts. The coronavirus pandemic presented us with a dramatic example of this. The first people to lose their – informal – jobs in India, for example, were women. The pandemic hit women much harder than men in many ways, all over the world. In addition, there is a growing number of dictators, autocrats and populists in democracies who usually create or want male-dominated regimes. We are seeing this very clearly in Argentina; the new right-wing president Javier Milei has abolished the Ministry of Women and wants to ban abortion, even after rape. Russia has recently eased domestic violence penalties. There are many examples like this. The risk of regression is therefore real and particularly high with such regimes.

There are various well-founded studies, from the World Bank to the OECD, that show that a country’s economic power increases when women are adequately involved. Why do men in power not understand this? It could also be of benefit to them, right?

These studies do indeed exist. Gross domestic product increases significantly if women are involved in economic life in line with their abilities and talents. It’s beyond doubt. But this is about power over women and about traditions that are apparently difficult to break, even if they are actually to a society’s detriment. Plus, men are often more willing to enter into conflicts – including distribution conflicts – than women. And they can better support each other.

So are women the reason that progress is moving at a snail’s pace?

It is primarily due to archaic structures that need to be broken down. But yes, we are part of the reason. Women need to take even more risks and be even more outspoken.

What is the situation like in development cooperation? For about a year now, the German Federal Government has been pursuing a feminist foreign and development policy. Do you think this makes sense and is effective?

Absolutely. With the three “R’s” – Rights, Resources, Representation – Ministers Svenja Schulze and Annalena Baerbock have hit the nail on the head. We know that development is not possible or sustainable without women. And we also know that peace processes are more stable when women have a say. I therefore consider it very sensible to consider foreign and development policy through the perspective of gender and to design it accordingly.

This also caused a lot of criticism, and was described with adjectives like “useless” and “ridiculous”. You do not agree with that?

Not at all. Firstly, it is simply unfair to limit the lives and opportunities of half of humanity. Fundamental rights are disregarded here. In addition, in my long career in development cooperation, I have repeatedly learned the difference it makes when all parts of the population are involved in the planning and design of a project, how a water project in Brazil, for example, suddenly worked and endured when men and women were involved. However, it is important to get the implementation right, not to overwhelm the partner countries, but to enter into a real dialogue on the best way towards more gender equality.

The world has changed. We are entering a new phase of geopolitical competition and global power struggles. In times like these, are we pulling ourselves out of the race for spheres of influence when we constantly set new conditions for cooperation, while others distribute money and build infrastructure without regard for human rights and women’s rights?

Germany is not alone in advocating this policy. Countries such as France and Canada have similar policies as well. There is a Gender Action Plan in the EU, which means that the EU is moving in the same direction. It is clear that the more donors that follow this approach, the easier it will be. In addition, some developing countries have now started to wake up, for example with regard to financing from China, because the aid is not as useful if you look closely. Firstly, because they are often loans that need to be repaid, which increases debt. And secondly, because the Chinese usually bring their own staff and set up infrastructure at record speed without paying attention to how this can be continued locally afterwards. There are a lot of problems. Germany, on the other hand, is regarded as a thorough and reliable partner.

So in your opinion, Germany will not lose its good reputation because it incorporates a feminist component into its cooperation?

I don’t believe so. And I also have specific comments about this. At the last annual meeting of the Asian Development Bank, the partners expressed very positive sentiments. They were full of praise for feminist foreign and development policy. And these were representatives of finance ministries, who are generally considered conservative. They see it as an important guarantor of progress and development. I myself was surprised by this extremely generous feedback.

You have seen many decades of German development policy. We certainly came a long way before we reached this feminist focus?

Yes, we did. This applies both to the projects and programmes themselves, but also to the number of women in the ministry and the implementing organisations. I started my career at KfW Development Bank in 1975; at that time, there were just three women were among the 300 “professionals”. It looked a little better in the ministry that I moved to after my KfW trainee period, but it didn‘t look rosy. When I became Director General at the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) in 2000, I was the first woman in this type of position, 40 years after the ministry was founded. Today, fortunately, the picture is very different – and is expected to change further due to the feminist development policy, which also has an internal effect.

Looking at the situation of women as a whole, what is your predominant feeling? Confidence or concern?

I remain optimistic because I have been able to observe progress over the years. That doesn’t mean that we can take our foot off the gas. This is absolutely necessary, and I am also committed to this both personally and on a voluntary basis at UN Women.

What is your prediction, how much longer will we still need Women's Day?

For a while yet, but hopefully not another 100 years.