On Tuesday, March 22, UN Women held a Civil Society Briefing with the facilitator for the Agreed Conclusions, Ambassador of Germany to the UN Antje Leendertse. Ambassador Leendertse said there is an optimistic and constructive spirit in the negotiations. She told us (not direct quotes, but closely following the transcription of the briefing):
CSW66 is the first time the Commission has addressed this priority theme, so we are in uncharted waters. Now, two days before CSW concludes, we are at the stage when we must reach agreements. We want to agree to the Conclusions because we – the world, the planet, Member States and Civil Society – all need the Agreed Conclusions as a blueprint with operative conclusions as a reference for the work we need to do.
We are currently going through the text to identify the stumbling blocks and contentious language. Some countries are more ambitious than others, as always. We want to make progress where possible, but also embrace all the different viewpoints. The stumbling blocks are the usual ones: definitions of women’s rights, representation and resources – here I hope we can return to previously agreed language from earlier CSWs, and try to find common ground. Other points where there is disagreement include sexual and reproductive health and rights, the human rights agenda, gender-based violence (which is especially important in disasters and displacement). There are also different viewpoints between developing and developed countries. This is also a major issue in COP negotiations, but we cannot re-negotiate COP at CSW. There are also interferences from references to other agreements, for example on migration. The Global Compact for Migration will be reviewed next month, so delegations are hesitant to make commitments on migration at CSW.
The operative conclusions are the most important, and where we have the least struggles. There are more differences in the preamble, where in complicated UN language, you create the basis and the backdrop for our work. Then we have the operative conclusions, where we will get easier agreement, because everybody understands, even the most reluctant and non-feminist nations, that we have to do something for women and girls all over the world. I will circulate a new revised text Thursday (March 24) evening. Then it will be crunch time, like always, and of course on Friday. Wish me luck, that we will get a good agreement where we don't lose what we have already won in the last years. We hope to make some steps forward, maybe on the progressive, ambitious side, but we will also have new conclusions, new language which future generations can refer to, when they implement something, all over the world.
Ambassador Leendertse responded to suggestions from the participants.
The preamble text should mention CEDAW General Recommendations, specifically on the gender-related dimensions of disaster risk reduction in the context of climate change and on trafficking in women and girls in the context of global migration. These are particularly important and relevant given that Russia invaded the Ukraine on the same day that the zero draft was sent out.
We have to make compromises on language to be able to reach consensus. For example, do we use gender-transformative, gender-responsive or gender-sensitive? Lists are always a problem – widows, rural women, disabilities etc. We want to be inclusive but it can detract when repeated often. Some delegations want to play on the north-south divide, which is ultimately to the detriment of women. As facilitator, I can not introduce language; it must come from the Member States, so do lobby your governments on these issues.
It is inspiring and motivating to hear from civil society; you give me new ideas to go back into the negotiations. And it is civil society – you – who will make the Agreed Conclusions a living document after CSW is over.
In conclusion, Lopa Banerjee recalled that CSW is not just these two weeks in New York. The strength of CSW, and the reason that these negotiations are so important, and that the Ambassador as facilitator is spending so much time ensuring a robust set of conclusions, is because of what happens after Friday in the lives of women and girls in all the countries of the world. This is what is crucial: the negotiations lead to decisions which end up defining policy around gender equality in the context of climate change.