 Good afternoon, everybody. My name is Gaye Tray Patel. I am the Director of Gender Advocacy at Care, USA, and also one of the co-authors of the framework we are here to discuss called Towards Feminist Foreign Policy for the United States. I want to first start off by thanking our host, New America, for having us here, as well as for our sponsors for bringing us together. It sometimes takes a village to get together a group of nearly a thousand of us, so we really appreciate everyone's support in getting this off the ground. And I want to welcome you, the audience. It is truly genuinely inspiring to see so many people from policymakers, do think tanks, to NGOs, to academics, to media personnel joining us to walk through some of the really important questions of our day, including how can the next era of US foreign policy sustainably and effectively advance social justice, peace, and security. We have panelists who will delve into the details of what a feminist foreign policy means. So let's set the scene first with a key question. What could a US foreign policy grounded in feminist principles mean for people around the world? There are many answers to this question, but for me, it really means leveraging the US's foreign policy, our foreign assistance, our diplomacy to sustainably lift nearly 734 million people out of poverty, and nearly 70 million people out of humanitarian crises. That means ensuring that we use the US's state of the art military only as a last resort, and that we prioritize diplomacy, development, international cooperation, and human rights at the, at the center. And finally, that we center our work in human rights and gender equality and inclusion and equity so that the millions of people around the world who are facing persecution or abuse or exploitation can live freely. So, when we question what a feminist foreign policy could mean for people around the world, we're looking at alleviating poverty and the discrimination that drives it. We're talking about enshrining our work in human rights and gender equity, both foreign and domestic. We're talking about promoting the voices of people who often remain unheard. And we're talking about advancing security and the broadest meaning of the word. This process was never going to be perfect. We, we know that a foreign policy platform could impact people, men, women and others all around the world. But over the course of about two years, we've been able to draw nearly 300 people into this work. We started in August 2019 where a group of foreign policy experts and gender quality advocates got together to really think through some of the foundational questions. What, how do we define a feminist foreign policy? What are the key principles and values that are important for a feminist foreign policy to a spouse? And what should a feminist foreign policy for the United States look like? From the very beginning of this process, we wanted to ground our framework, not only in what was possible and what was practical, but what was necessary in order to advance a world that was just, equitable and peaceful. The process was informed by consultations with feminists in over 150 organizations across nearly 40 countries. It was also based on the research review of other countries' feminist foreign policies. And at the time that included Canada, Sweden and France, now that list has grown to also Mexico. And it was also based on brainstorming sessions, thematic consultations, regional consultations, and open calls for input from many organizations, including many of the folks who are here today. And the final product, or not the final product, the product that we have here today that we're launching is a blueprint for what a feminist foreign policy would look like. It includes a definition for feminist foreign policy, key principles and thematic priorities, crosscutting recommendations, including proposed models of leadership for the government, agency and lover specific recommendations, and accountability mechanisms, including funding and data collections. So today we're going to talk through all of these details over the course of two panels. The first panel will walk us through this framework, including all of the topics I listed above. And the second panel will walk us through how this platform is situated within a broader framework, comparing and contrasting it to similar frameworks or related frameworks that have been proposed. Each panel will have a question and answer period and just a quick note on the questions and answers. We have nearly a thousand people with us today, which is amazing and fantastic. But because of that number, we actually have to disable the chat function. But please, if you have a question, please use the Q&A button at the bottom of your zoom screen to enter your question and we have a group of moderators who will curate them to make sure that the panelists can answer as many as possible. And since we're online, please also tweet along with us or use social media using the hashtag feminist foreign policy. So I'm going to turn it over now to our host, Heather Holbert. Heather is with the new America group and she is the director of new models of policy change project at the new America political forum. She is also a founding sister of this process and has been with it from the very beginning. So we're welcoming her warmly and I'm going to turn it over to you now, Heather. Thanks Gayatri. And I wish that I were able to be welcoming you all really and not just virtually to new America and congratulate you all for being here for being part of what I very much believe is the largest webinar new America has ever hosted. If feminism is all about breaking barriers, we've broken through at least one and maybe two iterations of new America's zoom conferencing system so far. And this may just be the largest event new America has hosted in our 20 year history. As we go along, I want to say if you want to check out the text of the document for yourself and look at the specific recommendations. As the two panels walk through a variety of topics, I believe you can go to the event page on new America's website for this event and find a link to the event to the document itself which which went live at noon today. So why is a think tank hosting this event. Why is it as a stuffy blobby DC think tank talking about feminism. At new America, we pride ourselves on being a community of innovative problem solvers, which is a description that is a little different from a typical think tank. But we think this project, both its concrete recommendations for remaking us foreign policy, but also the process that you just heard Gayatri describe in which hundreds of authors, advisors, reviewers and endorsers across a really wide range of issues and positions and around the world went about putting this document together is an innovative. It's an innovative way of doing the work of thinking about American foreign policy. And it's an innovation that responds to several different problems that we see problem number one, the way that we in the United States think about and perform the work of interacting with the rest of the world badly needs updated, but it's proven difficult to build popular and political support for even uncontroversial reforms, wonks across party lines agree that we need to rebalance military and diplomatic spending, bring younger, more diverse and more technologically savvy workers into government ranks and reform or restructure entire agencies and processes, but we haven't had a powerful base of support that would make it worthwhile for any Congress or administration to do that work up till now that is. Problem number two, not just think tanks, but government agencies, businesses, universities, advocacy groups to often put issues into silos that actually make it harder rather than easier to solve them. Is migration a domestic issue or an international one is reopening schools during covert an education issue or an economic issue. Is it a matter for local governments or something we can learn from cross national cooperation. And problem number three, especially but not only in the foreign and security policy sector, the life experiences of most of the people who make an influence policy. Don't come near to reflecting the enormous diversity of the life experiences of Americans and others who are affected by US foreign policy. The feminist lens that this project uses which lyric Thompson will lay out shortly is not one that gets much space in US policymaking circles, but it turns out to be an enormously useful tool for addressing those three problems, tearing down silos, incorporating a diversity of perspectives and using insights gained to challenge us to think not just about what US foreign policy does, but what the structures are that do it and how they could be better. The foreign policy space is not alone in seeing a feminist lenses uniquely relevant to the challenges before us right now. The state of Hawaii's women's commission has put forward a detailed plan for a feminist response to covert 19, and we're delighted to have their executive director courage Ebola Corollus on the call with us today. California Congresswoman Jackie Spire has called for such a plan at the national level, someone who's been either writing or reading think tank reports for an awfully long time. This foreign policy blueprint offers as much or more specific detail for reform as anything tank report you've ever seen. It offers so much detail that not all the authors and endorsers agree with every recommendation, which is an extraordinary reflection of the groups commitment with diversity, comfort with productive disagreement and comfort with each other. And it offers a roadmap to weave policies on issues such as climate change reproductive rights and health into the core of the US approach to the world. This report adds two things that think tank reports usually lack. The folks represented in the speakers and on the call represent an enormous constituency of supporters. And they represent an organic connection to one of the animating values of our time, a commitment to not just the rights, but the contributions of women and all people in groups in their uniqueness. Those qualities mean that feminist foreign policy is an idea and a coalition that we're going to hear a lot more from in the months and years ahead. And we at New America are enormously proud to have played this small part in presenting it back to you guys. Thank you, Heather. And thanks so much again to New America for hosting us. I want to lead us into our first panel and introduce our moderator lyric Thompson lyric is the senior director of advocacy for the International Center for Research on women and has been spearheading this effort for nearly two years. In her time working on this initiative she is one of the lead authors of the framework as well as one of the real visionaries behind this initiative. She has become an expert in what it means to have a feminist foreign policy and could probably quote in her sleep passages from the feminist foreign policies of Sweden, France, Canada, Mexico, and the processes of many more. So I'm going to turn it over to lyric who will be leading us through our first panel discussion, where expert panelists talk through the feminist foreign policy that we're proposing here today, including some of the key structures recommendations and lovers for implementation. So lyric take it away. Thank you so much Gayatri and I really appreciate your kind words and your work on this paper. You're one of our co authors you'll meet all four of us in this session today. And you'll also see that there's a number of folks on the acknowledgments slide you see here, who also played a key role in crafting this agenda so I just want to underscore that this isn't anyone organization or persons. However, it is truly to be a community vision and we're grateful to all the people who gave us your time shared expertise convened consultations connected us to networks helped us get this over the finish line, or more accurately the starting line, because we've really just begun our work together today by articulating this agenda we still have a lot of work to do to move the United States toward a more feminist foreign policy. So the strong start that is you'll see on the next slide, 50, more than 50 actually organizations who have endorsed with their logos, a number of prominent individuals, celebrities philanthropists press and the 1000 plus people who registered today really showing us that this is no niche issue which we're delighted to affirm. So we're here today to answer two questions. And that's it for the slides. Thank you, Angela. The first is what is a feminist foreign policy which we at least at ICW have been very keen to answer in the last number of years, but then more specifically, why can we do to get one in the United States. In the last this panel will present the paper which is live on new america's event webpage on ICW webpage and a number of partners. We are tweeting along with the hashtag feminist foreign policy. I'm going to walk you through the definition and key principles and issues, and then introduce to you panelists who will dig down into the details of those numerous policy recommendations that Heather mentioned. I want to say that we started this work first to define feminist foreign policy because while we were gratified to see a number of countries adopting the mantle. There wasn't a common definition or approach among them. And we were a little troubled by that as feminists fearing co-optation of the women's rights agenda without actually embracing or acknowledging the amount of resources and different policy choices that it would take to implement it. Pinkwashing, if you will. We were also as researchers and advocates and foreign policy professionals keenly aware that if we were going to ask the United States government to adopt a feminist foreign policy, we would need it to be able to say very clearly what that means and what it was meant to achieve. So first, we looked at the prototypes as guides we mentioned a number of countries that have done this, and we were gratified to know that from the mother of feminist foreign policy in Sweden to the new kid on the block in Mexico which just launched in January. Everybody can do this should do this. You don't have to be a rich country. And the United States is absolutely should be in play, but our definition not only takes the things that we liked most about other countries policies. It also answers where we heard from feminist activists around the world and in Washington and beyond and in the United States, but the United States really needed to break new ground. So I'm going to read this definition to you and I'll just say that it is long, but I will come back and break up little pieces of it to sort of help digest. What is feminist foreign policy then it's the policy of a state that defines its interactions with other states, as well as movements and non state actors in a manner that prioritizes peace, gender equality and environmental integrity, enshrines promotes and protects the human rights of all people seeks to disrupt colonial racist patriarchal and male dominated power structures and allocate significant resources, including research to achieve that vision. Feminist foreign policy is coherent in its approach across all levers of influence, anchored by the exercise of those values at home and co created with feminist activists groups and movements at home and abroad. So here you can see we did a number of things. We took Sweden's mnemonic device on women's rights resources and representation but we added that forth our research, because we believe that if this is going to be successful it really needs to be evidence based. Those are some good success factors or accountability factors as to what will make a feminist foreign policy successful and I'll say that accountability was probably the word we heard most in all of our consultations. Megan will go into the details on what we're calling for in a minute. But it doesn't necessarily say what the goals of the feminist foreign policy would be. So for us there's three people peace planet. A feminist foreign policy would seek to advance a more equitable, peaceful and sustainable world. It embraces human rights, including importantly those rights that are the most under attack, like sexual and reproductive rights. It seeks peace from advancing disarmament and diplomatic solutions to how women are involved in peace and security efforts. And it seeks to foster environmental integrity, which is not just climate justice in terms of disproportionate impacts on people, but also healthy ecosystems. So equitable for whom was another key question that emerged and probably our second most used term in the consultation process was intersectionality, which is the explicit approach we've adopted. I think Mexico did this as well. And for those who are unfamiliar with that term. It's more than just asking what about women in our analysis. It's using a power based analysis that looks at the multiple and intersecting streams of discrimination that render some people poorer and powerless in our societies, different policy choices benefit some disenfranchised others. And the feminist lens is that through which a different view of the world is possible. Another important piece here in this definition and key key principles is that of policy coherence. There's two main pieces of that the interplay between domestic and foreign policy and then how those values are embraced across different streams of foreign policy itself. On the first point, our foreign policy is often an attempt to project a better vision of ourselves abroad, and past us ambassadors of gender equality have indicated that one of the hardest conversations they had to have talking about women's rights and other countries was answering the question why the United States hasn't passed ratified sea, which is the international women's rights treaty or international era, if you will. This would need to be part of a larger suite of feminist policies like the feminist coven response that Heather mentioned at the top, in order to be successful. The other piece of the policy coherence is the full embrace of these principles, not only in the soft streams of power so sprinkling some women on an aid program or giving a good speech at the UN on women's day, but actually equally implementing them across hard and soft aid and trade diplomacy and defense and yes, immigration. So, final piece I'll touch on here is that it's not just the, the what of the policy, but the how and the who. And for us, this must be actively and collaboratively shaped by feminists, both inside and outside government. That's everything from parody pledges and diversity and inclusion to ensure our foreign policy apparatus looks more like America itself, but also actively and meaningfully engaging feminist activists outside of government women from the global south, who are intended to be the quote beneficiaries of programs, understanding what their goals are for us, foreign posture abroad, and making sure that these policy choices answer the goals that we share together. So that's a piece of cake, very simple agenda. And there's a lot to get into on the how this is where our fellow panelists are going to spend the next few minutes introducing key recommendations. First on the whole of government or the larger interagency cross cutting recommendations we have for everybody from the White House on down. And then specific agency recommendations and then we'll delve into the detail and the question and answer, which I'll again remind you to please enter your questions in the Q&A function at the bottom of your screen. And our team of moderators will work to address those. So, I'm going to turn it over to Sarah Sibol, who is the President of the Center for Health and Gender Equity and a key collaborator and founding mother of this paper to talk to us about those overarching structural reforms that we see as necessary for the United States to advance the feminist foreign policy. Welcome Sarah. Thank you Lyric and thank you Gayatri and and to our co-sponsors for today's launch. ICRW, Oxfam, WeDo, Change, PPFA, Smash Strategies, and Women of Color Advancing Peace and Security. And of course, thank you New America for hosting. I'm Sarah Sibol, President of Change. I'm just so encouraged by the number of you joining us at today's launch of our proposal for a U.S. feminist foreign policy. It's hard to believe that it was just a year ago when Lyric and a few others and I lamented about how misguided and disruptive our current U.S. foreign policy is. And that right now, more than ever, is exactly the right time for a U.S. foreign policy that is feminist. Thanks to the many consultations led by ICRW, Council on Foreign Relations, Rockefeller Foundation, Change, and others, there's a growing demand for U.S. feminist foreign policy. I'm grateful for the exchange of ideas, the policy solutions among U.S. and the global experts, the feminists and advocates across sectors who have contributed to this report, and especially to my colleagues who are on this call. For those of you who might not be convinced yet of a feminist foreign policy for the U.S., just consider the news over recent weeks. The Trump administration opened the door once again to sell weapons to Saudi Arabia, weapons that are used to kill civilians in Yemen, putting profit for the defense industry over human lives. The Trump administration fired the Inspector General at the State Department, shedding our top foreign policy agency of any accountability. And in the midst of a global health pandemic, the Trump administration has halted its funding to the World Health Organization. And just this week, USA sent a letter to the UN Secretary General demanding that the global health response to COVID-19 deny access to sexual and reproductive health services, including abortion, playing politics with women's lives. These are just a few examples of the countless ways our foreign policy is broken. As Lyric said, the world needs a principled foreign policy, one that embraces human rights for all, that embraces representative, that's representative, that is inclusive, that addresses multiple intersecting forms of discrimination, and one that promotes and protects bodily autonomy for women and girls and others in environmental integrity. Our proposal offers recommendations on how to implement these principles in US foreign policy. So today I'm going to give an overview of the models we propose for the high level leadership that is necessary for a feminist foreign policy. First and foremost, there must be presidential leadership and mainstreaming throughout current structures of foreign policy. In this model, the president announces that the US will adopt a feminist foreign policy. It will be co-created and implemented in consultation with feminists inside and outside the government, inside and outside of the United States. It will commit to an intersectional approach to gender equality throughout existing structures in the White House and executive agencies. The executive branch would then adopt a coherent and unified vision for feminist foreign policy, and each agency would articulate a series of commitments to implement it, policy, staffing, budget, legislative affairs, and communications. Each agency would need to appoint its own high level position focused exclusively on integrating the feminist foreign policy within the agency. High level leadership and cohesion will spur meaningful action and ensure that the agenda is mainstreamed across all relevant agencies. Second, our proposal recommends a senior leadership role responsible for its coordination, resourcing and execution, such as creation of a feminist inspector general or council in the White House. So in collaboration with the secretaries of each agency and civil society leaders from the US and around the world, this individual, a feminist foreign policy inspector general perhaps, would have a mandate from the president to lead the development implementation and reporting of a US feminist foreign policy. This official would oversee a robust budget and coordinate with relevant domestic agencies. It is critical that such a structure have authority, funding, and a mandate to meaningfully and transparently engage with civil society and the people and communities most impacted by US foreign policy, particularly women, LGBTQI individuals, sex workers, people with disabilities, and indigenous peoples. All stakeholders would provide an essential feedback loop to advise relevant agencies on the outcomes, goals and objectives against which progress should be measured. This is a particularly important feature to ensure that the feminist foreign policy is delivered in line with its intentions. And then finally, we include additional actions that we recommend to develop and implement feminist foreign policy across government. And these include radically increasing the budget available for implementation of this work, direct funding to local women led and gender focused organizations, achieve gender parity and political appointments, and mandate gender analysis to be standard practice and program implementation throughout the government and conduct an analysis of environmental impacts and emissions resulting from US foreign policy activities. These recommendations are outlined in the report, which I hope you all will read and engage in discussions with those of us on this call and also your colleagues and others. Restructuring and reprioritization of US foreign policy is critical, especially now during the coronavirus pandemic. Our proposal for high level leadership is key to that restructuring. It's long past time that our national forum policy priorities change to reflect the fundamentally new world that we are living in. For too long, we've militarized our approach to foreign policy problems. And this has left us ill equipped to tackle today's most urgent crises, the coronavirus pandemic climate change, the rise of authoritarianism and attacks on human rights and gender equality. We need a new way forward, one that prioritizes the health and human rights of people, including sexual and reproductive health and rights, the well being of our planet, and the goal of a nonviolent peaceful world. I hope you all will join us in building a new US feminist foreign policy. Thank you. Thank you so much, Sarah, for giving us that excellent overview of the cross cutting or whole of government, as we say in Washington recommendations. High level leadership, feminist counselor inspector general mandatory gender analysis resources really putting our money where our mouths are. Thank you for that. We have lots to say about specific agency recommendations that build on and are in addition to those overarching recommendations Sarah shared. I would like to introduce our next panelist, Ambassador Bonnie Jenkins, who is the founder and executive director of women of color advancing peace and security, and another founding mother of this paper, who will cover a few of our recommendations for the traditional areas of foreign policy that we think of as the three days diplomacy development and defense. Welcome Bonnie. Eric, it's really an honor to be here with my colleagues. And I want to thank all of the organizations that have worked so hard on this on this paper, all of my colleagues who've worked on this paper. It's been really my pleasure to work with all of you to get to know all of you better. And I look forward to taking all of this to the next step. And I want to welcome everyone who's listening to this and watching this and hope that you will join us on our journey. So as lyric said, I'll be speaking about the three days development diplomacy and defense. And again, there are excellent recommendations and report. I certainly don't have time to go through all of them but I would like to encourage that all of you take the time to go through them because I think they're all excellent. Therefore, I'd like to start by just giving you some overall themes, some of them that you've already heard. The US foreign policy recognizes the need to increase the relevance of diplomacy and development and not to continue to rely too heavily on defense in our international relations need to use military as a last resort after other tools have been used. And we must include vulnerable communities in all of the three days, particularly as we try to address the type of challenges that we're going to be dealing with and continue to deal with even now in our international relations. On the issue of foreign assistance, foreign assistance accounts for less than 1% of the federal budget, and even less than that goes to support gender equity and inclusion issues. And a smaller portion goes to local women led and feminist organizations and grassroots gender equality movements. A US feminist foreign policy will promote gender equity through five ways. One is robust and transparent funding to promote gender equality and international development and humanitarian assistance. A second is gender analysis of all international development and humanitarian assistance activities. Third is consultation with and direct investment in local women led and women's rights organizations globally. Fourth is full funding for comprehensive sexual and reproductive health and rights, and fifth is a removal of harmful conditions tied to US forest assistance. There are a couple of things that you will see highlighted predominantly in the report. One focuses on self reporting. And one of the challenges that we're dealing with in terms of self reporting for assistance is that a lot of it is in fact self reported. So there's a difference in how states count things how they measure the impact of the work. One of the most widely used mechanisms to help with this assistance and trying to determine impact is the organization for economic cooperation and development or OECD development assistance committee. And it has a gender policy marker that has been very useful. And it's a qualitative statistical tool that members use to report annually on whether an aid activity is principally or significantly targeting gender equality. And it does provide the ability to compare country investments against one another. There would be more usefulness in terms of how donors make choices regarding the use of the markers. However, it is still a very good process and a very good way to figure out how countries are using aid on gender equity issues. Currently U.S. Foreign Assistance has several contingencies ranging from how goods and services are sourced and delivered to how trade agreements are shaped. These contingencies make assistance costlier to deliver and overall less effective. It is difficult to establish trust in implementing the services. Therefore, a feminist foreign policy recommends that all limiting conditions on U.S. foreign assistance be removed, such as the prioritization of U.S. private sector entities and faith-based organization through foreign assistance. The removal of conditions on U.S. foreign assistance would make assistance go a lot further. So I'm going to highlight few of the recommendations. One is to increase investment in gender equality as measured by DDAQ. Another is to prioritize co-creation and local ownership of foreign assistance. A third is allocate robust and transparent funding for gender equality and international development and through foreign assistance. Fourth is substantially increase direct investment in women-led and women's rights organizations. Another is to repeal the expanded Mexico City policy and ensure funding for sexual and reproductive health programs. And finally, align project targets to ensure achievement of the gender-related SDGs, Sustainable Development Goals. There are more recommendations in the report, and as I said earlier, I strongly encourage you to take the time to review them. Let's move on to diplomacy. A feminist foreign policy promotes working with allies, seeking solutions to diplomacy and the respectful law. It promotes an environment that is stable. Multilateral engagements, respect for the views of others, and inviting by international obligations, promote that sustainability, that predictability. This is not just a feminist foreign policy point, it's just common sense. And a feminist foreign policy brings in the voices of the voiceless, the vulnerable communities that are the focus of so many of our foreign policies. A feminist foreign policy promotes increased collaboration and cooperation among state and non-state actors. This includes championing equality. It supports mechanisms that facilitate cooperation and non-military conflict resolution and peaceful competition. It promotes the mitigation and the effects of climate change. It expands gender expertise through training and recruitment and the diversification of intelligence sources. And it advances the necessary transformation of the U.S. defense structure and decisions in line with various existing women, peace and security policy frameworks. And most of all, the U.S. must lead by example. So what are the summative recommendations on the diplomacy? One, appoint a high-level representative tasked with oversight of the feminist approach to diplomacy reporting to the Secretary of State. Second, more funding to state and prioritizing more diverse forum service core, particularly marginalized communities, including women, especially women of color, indigenous women, trans women and others. Adopt a zero tolerance policy on gender-based violence and workplace harassment. And finally, have some red lines for who to enter negotiations with, when to negotiate and when to leave. Finally, on defense. A feminist foreign policy promotes U.S. national security and defense operations that are transformed so that peace is the goal. Peace should be the aim of defense and leadership should embrace that goal and the militarization and the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons. U.S. military intervention should be at last resort again after utilizing the other tools that are available. Military action should be primarily defensive in nature and require a high standard of need. Military action is chosen, it should be carefully overseen to prevent mission creep. The doctrine and debate around the use of force and in particular nuclear weapons must center the impact of their use on humans, the environment and culture. Furthermore, a feminist foreign policy commits to preventing and responding to gender-based violence and conflict and to meaningfully include women and those who face discrimination in security forces, peace negotiation and peace conflict rebuilding. So what are the some of the recommendations for defense? There should be a nuclear strategy that recognizes women and vulnerable communities. As in the Department of State and the diplomacy recommendations, in defense there should create a new high level position charged with developing and overseeing implementation of a more feminist approach. We should re-engage with the global goal of nuclear disarmament and promote arms control and nonproliferation. We should lift the transgender service member ban. We should provide increased training on the women, peace and security agenda. We should encourage reporting of military assault or other gender-based violence and the retooling of internal policies to ensure the provision of childcare and spousal support. So once again, these are only a snapshot of what's in the report regarding foreign assistance, diplomacy and defense. And I strongly encourage you to look at the report, read the recommendations and help us carry them out. Thank you. Thank you so much, Ambassador Jenkins. And for our final panelist on this panel, you may have thought of diplomacy, defense and development, but you might not have considered what a feminist foreign policy would mean for trade or immigration. And very importantly, I mentioned at the top, accountability. What would an accountability framework look like for a feminist foreign policy? So I'm pleased to welcome Megan O'Donnell, who is the assistant director for the gender program and a senior policy analyst at the Center for Global Development. And again, one of our founding mothers, welcome. Thank you Lyric. And thanks so much to co-authors, collaborators and all of you tuning into this discussion. As Lyric said, I'll spend the next few minutes outlining our proposals on trade, immigration and the very important but ever amorphous topic of accountability. So first on trade, relative to the areas of development, diplomacy and even defense that Ambassador Jenkins just walked through, trade is not an area where countries have historically prioritized integrating a gender lens. Some pioneer governments, Canada, Chile, Argentina, Uruguay and Israel, have included gender-focused chapters into recent trade agreements, but to date these chapters have been non-binding. So how could the United States go farther? And what would a feminist trade policy look like for the United States? A few areas that the proposal highlights includes one, avoiding trade deals or at least not giving countries trade preferences if they have laws on the books that prevent women from equally benefiting from trade relations with the U.S. So concretely, if disjure discrimination exists in the form of laws that prevent women from working in certain sectors or equally accessing finances entrepreneurs, then the U.S. could refuse to afford countries trade preferences through the generalized system of preferences, GSP or specific programs such as one for sub-Saharan African countries under the African Growth and Opportunity Act, OGOA. Two, the U.S. could prioritize financial and technical assistance for local actors, trade unions, workers' rights and women's rights organizations as those best positioned to engage in trade negotiations and ongoing collective bargaining to ensure women are being fairly compensated and working under safe conditions. And three, the U.S. could consider public procurement as an avenue for change. The latest figures reflect that governments on average spend $11 trillion annually on public procurement, amounting to 12% of global GDP, and the U.S. spends about 10% of its own GDP that way. So through public procurement, the United States has an untapped tool at its disposal to promote women's economic opportunities in setting targets for sourcing from women-owned firms and firms that prioritize gender equality in their operations. I'll note that these proposals are certainly ambitious, but they are not unprecedented. The World Bank already has a target in place related to sourcing from women-owned firms, and the United States has one for domestic sourcing. Senator Casey's office has led in the charge in beginning to consider issues of gender and trade. He and Congressman Blumenauer have issued a request to the GAO, the Government Accountability Office, to for the first time examine the impacts of U.S. trade relations on gender equality. And Senators Casey and Cortez Masto have been working on some proposals related to gender equality and trade, which should be released in the next couple of weeks. Next, immigration. This is another area where we need gender analysis to shed light on where U.S. immigration policies and restrictions have gender differential effects and where reforms are needed. Some of these policies are explicitly gendered currently. For example, in January 2020, the U.S. State Department issued a directive to consular offices asking women applying for a visa whether they are pregnant and to reject an application if an officer deems that a woman intends to remain in the U.S. after the birth of her child. But there are also policies that may seem gendered, excuse me, gender neutral on their face and nonetheless have gendered effects. The 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act privileged legal pathways for agricultural workers who were primarily men, but did not carve out the same pathways for domestic workers were primarily women. So policies that privilege high skilled workers as well may also discriminate against women, because the definition of skilled work has traditionally been confined to certain sectors and professions. Registered nurse positions, for example, that do not require a U.S. bachelor's degree, don't qualify as a specialty position under U.S. H1B visas in spite of labor shortages in the U.S. nursing sector, and what we're of course increasingly recognizing as the essential nature of these positions. And this is an area where as we know women predominate limiting their migration opportunities. And finally, accountability. So across all of the areas that Sarah and Pastor Jenkins and I have just discussed, how do we ensure that we go beyond words on paper? So civil society is able to track implementation of policy measures and hold the U.S. government accountable for progress. Now accountability as I've mentioned is a concept can be that can be quite abstract. So to make things a bit clearer for purposes of our paper, we use the following two part definition. First, accountability requires a process of government commitment making implementation and evaluation that is evidence based transparent and inclusive of individuals impacted. Second, accountability requires the generation of outcomes that do no harm and are desired by and beneficial to those impacted. So how do we get there? Well, Sarah and Ambassador Jenkins have touched on some pathways for strengthening accountability already increased in dedicated resources, inclusive processes and external validation of what's currently just self reported by the U.S. and other governments. Beyond what they've discussed, a big part of strengthening accountability will lie in specificity and transparency. The United States goals and objectives under a feminist foreign policy must be clearly stated, defined and reported against. To facilitate this, we recommend the use of a smart framework modeled after the one used by the open government partnership and other accountability platforms through which stated foreign policy objectives must be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time bound smart. And beyond the institution of a smart framework is critical from an accountability perspective as civil society is then better positioned to hold governments accountable for implementing well defined measurable objectives, rather than abstract aspirations for unrealistic goals. And with that, I'll hand back over to Lyric and look forward to your questions. Thank you. Thank you, Megan. We have several questions that have been submitted in the question and answer functions and thank you for doing that. And thank you to our team of moderators who have been reviewing and feeding those to me. We have more questions than we have time if we're going to get to our second panel so I'm going to ask three questions, any panelists and also if Heather or Gayatri would like to turn their camera or Mike back on and pipe in, you're more than welcome. These are the questions that we'll use to close us out in this first panel. So one on the different branches of government, which is to say what's Congress's role in all of this. Most of these proposals are admittedly executive branch oriented to similarly balance of power on this between political and then, you know, civil service, are you are you making these political appointees and and sort of a tie into this particular administration are you baking it in to to the sort of status quo. And then three, I think you'll you'll like this one very much, Megan, a question about our friends to the north, and they didn't do a whole feminist This question asks about they started with feminist aid. What would this have as in terms of an impact on the US Canada relationship and partnership and specific question about GBA plus. So I will roll call as I see you on my screen to give you opportunities to respond to any or all of those points. I'd ask each of you to do so in two minutes or less so that that we will end promptly at three for our second panel, starting with Sarah. Thank you. Thanks, we are thanks for all these great questions and I'm sorry we're not be able to get to more but this is just the beginning as we are said so I think first a lot of these my answer I'm going to take the first two and it is kind of like a both and you know the the role of Congress obviously is critical in this effort Congress, you know, they have the purse strings they hold the purse strings so absolutely and the idea with this report is we bring it to the hill we bring it to Congress and this is a whole of government in terms of Congress and an executive branch and that we know very well that you know we can have a president's budget, but in put in money take out money. But then the work goes to Congress so I think there is a critical role that Congress plays in this and I think also because we are talking about culture change. And so this gets to the second question about political appointees and such that we have to this is just because you have something on paper and I think we learned this a lot with the some of the gender strategies that came out during the Obama administration. Wonderful strategies, but you have to change the culture within the agencies within the institutions and I think that's what we are trying to get at in this report. And so there is a sense of yes there are roles to play on there always political appointees and at the same time. How do we really shift culture in our government so that there is a gender lens that there is a lens towards how do we achieve agreements peacefully. What are the impact and I think especially including the voices that elevating the voices of those impacted by US foreign policy I think is really the most important piece in all of that and I think if we can center the voices of those who are most impacted. I think that's how you achieve that culture shift in all branches of government. Thank you. Thank you and thank you Sarah for your remarks. Ambassador Jenkins you're next. Yes, thank you I mean Sarah pretty much kind of took my took everything else going to say because I wanted to focus on the first two questions because you know what we're really promoting here is something that will it's a strategy and it's a strategy in which we really have to look at the different parts of government. And even though we have highlighted in our report in our remarks, the administration and focusing on them. This won't change unless we really focus on all the different parts of the government. And that means we also not just have to work at the administration but also Congress and political pointy question is good, you know it's very good because we have to work with political appointees on this ensure that the culture is one that is promoted by those who come into government for short periods and leave government but also talk about the culture. That's what stays, you know that's what stays in a place and that's what's the toughest thing to change is the culture. So that is why it's important that political appointees that we're talking about appointing somebody Secretary of State. Somebody report to Secretary of State somebody who report to Secretary of Defense, whose main goal is to work on these issues within the gut within these departments to try and change the culture. But it's a good question because it's actually highlighting the fact that this is a strategy it has to be a strategy that goes beyond anyone brands that really does work in different parts of the culture that we need to change. Thank you, Ambassador Jenkins, Megan. I'll echo what's been said about the importance of all branches of government being integrated into the implementation of this grand vision and just to add that I think we have opportunities to build on momentum and models that are already in place so early last year we got for the first time the legal codification of gender analysis right mandated at USA ID. But this isn't in place across all government agencies so where can we look for models where Congress has already led and then expand right or scale those up and apply them more broadly. To your last question lyric on our part our partners are our neighbors to the north. Yeah, the question is absolutely right, you know in in 2017 when Canada launched its feminist international assistance policy it was framed that way. But I will note that alongside what Canada has decided to do within the international assistance space they've also led the charge, you know across other levers of foreign policy so the trade chapters that I mentioned you know those have been integrated by Canada into some of their bilateral trade agreements with South American countries with Israel. Same in the security and peacekeeping space where they've launched the LC initiative to prioritize funding and supporting women peacekeepers, but of course you know even the Canadians already out in front on some of these issues also have room to grow so to go back to some of the points that Ambassador Jenkins made around self reporting needs needing to move to external validation increased resources. You know the Canadians have the high level leadership and the the GBA plus gender analysis in place but there is room for growth and I think some of the recommendations that we include in this report could be equally applicable, you know across other countries as well. Thank you Megan. I'm going to take moderators prerogative to say a few things in response to a couple of these and then hand it to you guy a tree for your thoughts, particularly on the congressional question, or anything else you'd like to chime in as you introduce the next panel. So I also wanted to flag that we did have a question from Ashley Judd, who is an actor and author and activist who's also put her name on this agenda and we're grateful to her for her time. She wanted to know about the whether this proposal includes the Nordic model, particularly on sex trafficking and our focus on sexual and reproductive health and rights. We link back to the good marker Lancet definition on sexual and reproductive health and rights and also bodily autonomy. And we also hold up and lift up a number of the recommendations from the blueprint for reproductive justice that our second panel will talk about a bit more. Thank you for your leadership and for your question. The other piece that I wanted to mention is that someone from state has asked about whether the, whether the publication of the women peace and security national or agency implementation plans from our national strategy on that issue will prompt an update on this report. The women peace and security is definitely one of our priority issues that I mentioned earlier, and we will certainly be doing a lot more work in the days ahead to fill out and expand on some of the sections of this. So we do like the practice of agency implementation reports and accountability to to those goals that we set and look forward to seeing what's in those when those are out. I'd love to hand it back to you now. Thank you all panelists on panel one for your thoughts either on the congressional question or anything that spoke to you and over to introduce the next panel. Great. Thank you so much, Larry can thank you panelists that was fantastic and a really great walkthrough of the incredible work that we're hoping to catalyze in the coming years. Just a quick point on the congressional question. I think I agree with everything Sarah and Ambassador Jenkins and Megan said to that question. I think we also have to point out here at the power of representation. I mean, one of the biggest motivating factors for me to be involved in this was the historic surge of women in Congress themselves and how that representation has really motivated a generation and an entire community of people that see the power of representation and having inclusive processes and women represented in power making decisions or policy making decisions and power. So I think we really need to look to Congress to lead us and to set those standards and to drive them forward. And to that extent I do want to preview that we will be having an event on the hill. Soon eventually when when things are a bit back to normal, but that we already have champions in Congresswoman Frankel Congresswoman spear who are already willing to pick up the mantle on this. They're already really eager and interested in setting some standards developing a resolution to get some of these ideas on paper and and interesting. So please look forward to that and look out and for the policymakers who are on this webinar please join us for that when it when it happens. So thank you panelists wonderful to have everybody's voices and views and input. We're going to transition over to panel two. And I first want to start off by introducing our moderator, so we encrypt the growing is the director of policy and research at Oxfam America. And he's also been a leading member of this effort to frame a feminist foreign policy for the US. He is, as such an expert from the very beginning on some of the key principles and themes that cut across the various approaches. He's going to walk us through panel two, which will focus on comparing and contrasting this framework that we just heard about in in panel one with related frameworks that have been proposed on related topics on interlinked issues. So really walking us through how a feminist foreign policy can be situated within a broader community effort for for more responsive and responsible social justice policy making. So going I'm going to turn it over to you and looking forward to hearing from our panelists and panel two. Thanks. Thanks, Gayatri. Hope I hope you agree that was a great panel. I know this is a bit of a long session so if you have to get up and stretch your legs feel free to. Just to say again, I'm Gawain Kripke. I'm the policy director at Oxfam America here in Washington DC. And it's really exciting for me really an honor to be here today with all of you and thrilled that we have such a big turnout for this webinar. I know that there's excitement, not just in the small grouping of of activists and so forth that help put this together but in a much broader audience. It was about four years ago, around this time that I was just starting to think about a feminist foreign policy for the United States and I remember talking to lyric about that time, and wondering if maybe we should put together a little paper with some questions because there would soon be a new president who might be interested in new ideas, maybe maybe even a feminist foreign policy. So it goes back a ways even if we got sidetracked for a few years in the meantime. I think the ideas have developed and matured a lot in that time timeframe. What I found fascinating about it is that this exercise takes two really big and also contentious areas of thought and theory. So feminist thought and foreign policy and international relations and tries to bring them together, trying to apply the insights and innovations of feminist thought to the worldly area of of foreign policy, how to make them principles and operationalize them these concepts. And I think it's a really interesting exercise just on its own but also potentially transformational. The paper was the result of all the experts on these panels, but also a very wide consultation with other experts and other organizations. Of course, this paper wasn't isn't the only effort to try to apply feminist ideas to foreign policy. As was mentioned earlier there are initiatives in several other countries, which we tried to build on and learn from in this exercise but there's also been initiatives by other organizations. And that's what this panel is meant to do is to try to share the thinking and work that other initiatives trying to apply feminist ideas into a foreign policy have done. So each of the panelists is going to present some work that has been done. And that is adjacent to or maybe contributing to and in some cases maybe contrasting with the paperwork really seen today. Our first panelist is Susan Markham, who is the co founder of smash strategies, which helps companies and not for profit organizations understand that gender equity equality is good for business. She previously served as the senior gender coordinator at USA ID, and she'll be presenting on their paper operationalizing feminist foreign policy, Susan. Thanks so much going for introducing this panel. I'm going to talk today about a paper that smash strategies partnered with our secure future to write. It started out as a mapping exercise of the women peace and security sector as well as those in feminist foreign policy to see where these two sex or sectors overlapped the spoiler alert is they didn't overlap very much. But what we found from this was that While the paper that we were just going over the blueprint really helped me think about our aspirational desires for feminist foreign policy. This paper really relied on the expertise of myself and my business partner Stephanie Foster on how would we make this real how would we make a feminist foreign policy work in the US based on our government experience because the US is not Sweden. So for our paper, which we put out last fall is really focused on the implementing of a feminist foreign policy. So as you can see in the next slide, we have some of us very same principles that were in the other paper, our overall principles are to use gender equality to defend human rights and to protect fundamental freedoms. And then these were our operational principles. First we want to address power imbalances that exist between men and women, obviously, but also within our government structure and between the United States and other countries which are impacted by our foreign policy. The second operational principle is to utilize gender analysis to increase the range of issues that are discussed and the solutions considered. The next principle is to increase the number of feminist voices, promoting gender equality, and this is men and women who believe in feminist principles. And then the final operational principle was to increase the number of women leaders, and I can say when we did interviews for this paper. This was the one principle that everyone that we spoke with across the government in the government outside the government and across the political spectrum, everyone believed that increasing the number of women leaders in our foreign policy structure was important. We also had a set of recommendations in this paper, as you can see on the next slide, and the first five of them are very similar to the recommendations in the blueprint about institutional structure holding institutions and individuals accountable, diversifying the representation ensuring input from those affected and increasing resources. One of our recommendations we think complement what are in the blueprint, but they are a little bit different. One, we had to prioritize information and intelligence. And what we found here is that if we can build gender analysis into research, the intelligence gathering that exists, and into the reports that go on a daily basis to the White House to the NSC, and to other decision parts of the executive branch, that gender would be taken into account into our foreign policy. So we really want to prioritize that. And then second, we want to utilize new technologies across the government and from our missions and posts around the world back to DC, so that we are taking gender analysis and a gender point of view into account, whether it's in our communications in information sharing so we can make better decisions. We also, since the report came out last fall, as you can see in the next slide, we did some polling. Our secure future hold 1500 registered US voters for their views on foreign policy about who is represented in US foreign policy. If they considered themselves to be represented. And we also pulled the word feminist, because we struggled with how do we make this a conversation that cuts across communities and we didn't want the word feminist to shut some people out of the conversation, but we still went with it because we think it's the most, it's the most appropriate word to cover the values that we have a couple results from that 59% of respondents did not think that the people making US foreign policy decisions share their beliefs and interest, and this was regardless of political identification. We found that 48% of respondents did not think that women are sufficiently represented in the US, and surprisingly 58% of people 18 to 34 years old said that they did not think they were represented and that sticks out because that's 10 points higher than any other age group. And then finally we asked how if they would consider themselves feminist 59% of respondents did not think of them as feminist and here on one of the bigger breaks was between races, 47% of Hispanics and 49% of African Americans do consider themselves feminists, but only 30% of whites that were pulled said that. So moving ahead, we have been continuing our consultations around this paper and really how to make it more operational. We have continued consultations with mostly people who don't have gender in their title, former State Department and USA ID folks, foreign policy advisors on the Hill, and advisors to the presidential candidates earlier this year, and other thought leaders so we will be continuing to work on a paper, and a new 2.0 version will be coming out later this year. Thanks Colleen. Thank you so much. I'm going to run through these panelists and then we'll take some questions at the end just to remind you that there's a there should be a Q&A button and you can send some questions and we have some people going through them to try to funnel them upwards for the panel. So we have Jamila Bijio, who's a senior fellow on women and foreign policy at the Council on Foreign Relations. She's the former director of human rights and gender at the White House National Security Staff. And she'll be talking about some work she and colleagues have done on centering women in foreign policy. Jamila, are you ready? Ready. Thanks so much. Hello, it's a pleasure to join you all today in this incredible group of thought leaders. I've been doing related research at the Council on Foreign Relations with my colleague Rachel Vogelstein. And I'm thrilled to share our latest report with you all on understanding gender equality in foreign policy, what the United States can do. For this issue, having worked to advance gender equality through our positions in the Obama administration, promoting gender equality was part of my responsibilities when I served on the White House National Security Council staff and I worked on this issue at both the State and Defense departments. Next slide, please. Next to the issue of gender equality, the US government should do more than restore its approach in previous administrations. It's time to reimagine what is possible. We start by analyzing the gender quality approaches pursued by other countries. So as a first step in our report, we looked at how a growing number of countries have begun in recent years to institutionalize gender quality and women's empowerment as a foreign priority. These efforts vary significantly, with the most comprehensive being that of a feminist foreign policy. We looked across three dimensions, leadership policy and resource allocation. In leadership, we found that countries established ambassadors and envoys for gender equality to promote women's issues abroad. Some countries are increasing the representation of women in high level diplomatic trade and defense both and in cabinet ministries, which you can see in the chart. Another key step is for senior leaders to issue public commitments to advance gender equality. This signals that doing so is the responsibility of both men and women and helps to shift culture. In policy, we documented a range of strategies and plans that provide guidance, set targets and increase accountability for countries gender equality commitments. And we found that these plans cover diplomatic, development, defense, economics and trade apparatuses. In research, we found in resources, we found that some nations have taken the critical step of ensuring their budgets match their political commitments. They've done so by establishing standalone funds for women's rights programs and organizations, earmarking a percentage of foreign assistance funds to support programs that advance gender equality, or conducting a gender analysis process for all government funding. Next slide please. As other governments take a systemic approach to elevating gender equality in foreign policy, we argue that the United States should not lie behind. That doing so would overlook a cost effective investment that would strengthen prosperity and stability and reap the benefits of women's empowerment globally. Our recommendations closely align with those you've heard today and in our report we ground them in lessons both from the strategies pursued by prior US administrations as well as other nations around the world. I'll share a few of these recommendations now. So in leadership, we recommend that the US government should pursue a more comprehensive government wide approach than it has in previous administrations, starting with a new higher level White House Council on gender equality and the appointment of high ranking full time officials across all cabinet agencies. On policy, the US government should follow the example of other countries and issue a government ride strategy. This would help to knit together the piecemeal policies from previous US administrations under one umbrella. It should also update existing policies such as the national security strategy. These should reflect the prioritization of gender equality as a domestic and global goal. And Congress should adopt legislation to advance gender equality worldwide which would codify a whole of government commitment. On resources following the example of countries such as Australia, France and the Netherlands, the State Department, USAID and MCC should target at least 20% of their budgets to advance the status of women and girls and there should be budgetary targets set across other departments and agencies as well. Building on the approach of Canada's Equality Fund, we recommend that overall US foreign assistance funding should include at least $500 million of direct support for local women led organizations which are proven drivers of change. And as in Canada and Sweden, all US foreign assistance programs should undergo gender analysis to ensure alignment with policies to advance gender equality. We also recommend that the US should invest in social science research to evaluate emerging efforts in support of gender equality. And finally, accountability is critical for too long in the United States and around the world, rhetoric on the importance of gender equality has not been matched by political or financial commitments. We recommend that the US government commit to transparency by publishing public annual progress reports by tracking resources dedicated to gender equality, and that Congress should continue to exercise oversight. These are just a sample of the recommendations that we include in our report that lay out a vision of how the next administration can imagine a new approach to foreign policy. And at the top of that list, it should focus on unlocking the potential of half the population, both because it is a moral obligation and because women's empowerment has been proven to fortify national security, make more efficient use of foreign aid and support democracy and long term stability around the world. So we see real opportunity in the US government adopting a whole of government, more effective, more resource approach to advancing gender equality. Thank you. Fantastic. Thank you so much. Next is Bridget Burns, who's the director of the women's environment and development organization and overseas coalition and has paper on the feminist green new deal. Bridget, are you ready. Yes, I am. Thank you so much going. It's wonderful to be here with all of you today. We do the women's environment and development organization was founded over almost 30 years ago now by a number of activists and feminists, including US Congresswoman Bella Abzug, who many of you might know and I think I was just brought to my attention that in Congresswoman Maxine Waters actually put forward a resolution to honor Bella in leading the way to creating a feminist presence in Congress. So I think that Bella would be really excited and proud of this moment in this conversation that we're having today. And the, the work that's guided we do has always been that feminist action is collective action so I think it's unsurprising of the really rich diversity of the groups that came together to envision and think about what a feminist foreign policy might look like. And it's also no surprise that in early 2019, as national momentum picked up the rallying cry for a green new deal here in the United States that feminists and climate justice leaders and activists turned toward each other in collective to define a set of principles for what this would look like from from a feminist perspective. And, and the first point of entry being that had to center gender justice. And so we know that here in the United States, for example, men represent approximately 72% of workers in energy and production, including workers in sectors at risk from shifts to a low carbon society, as well as those in sectors that will benefit from it. At the same time, we see women, particularly women of color, making up a vast percentage of frontline workers in care and education. And we know that care jobs are green jobs, but aren't receiving the pay and protective equipment that indicate that we as a society value and indeed rely on their work. Gender race and class are also determinants across numerous economic and health impacts of environmental degradation, increased disasters and pollution from extractive industries that drive climate change. And we also have numerous examples of women, including indigenous and grassroots women and communities on the front lines of these impacts, who are leading in radical solutions centered on a regenerative economy. And so in dialogue as you'll see on the next slide please, we outlined as a collective and I want to say this is very much a collective effort we do as part of that, but is doing so across a number of different organizations and activists. We work to put this vision on paper and to articulate what our collective feminist analysis looks like and you can see some of these here. And we've brought as you've seen some of the pictures, these principles to policymakers on the hill and to global spaces, global spaces such as the UN climate change negotiations. And within all of these principles what I want to really reiterate here is that we recognize that there's actually no such thing as domestic climate or environmental policy. That even in the context of a US Green New Deal, we must commit to global justice through diplomacy, international cooperation, and a real reckoning that the United States has been the world's largest historic carbon polluter. While those in the global south has suffered its worst impacts and even within that we know that there is a lot of injustice in terms of who is suffering first and worse. For we do both the feminist Green New Deal and the platform and the blueprint for a feminist foreign policy in the US are situated in the understanding that the current status quo is untenable for women and girls around the world, and to the goal of creating a livable and just planet for all. And we think the intentionality in building out agendas grounded in feminist principles allows for a deeply important conversation around the inadequacy, frankly, of efforts so far to deliver on gender equality, as they're often from systemic root causes, whether that be trade corporate power, environmental destruction, or militarism. And so, in the feminist foreign policy blueprint for for the United States we call for reengagement in the US of the US in the Paris and a full scale recommitment to the provision of climate finance. That's really reflective of ambition and equity, but we also understand that US global climate action is not simply about just joining the Paris agreement. It's also requires, for example, that all trade agreements follow a plunder pays principle, creating clear measures that prevent US industries, particularly with regards to fossil fuels from profiting off unregulated and uninhibited exploitation of laborers and environmental degradation. And one key aspect I think of the feminist Green New Deal and the principles we've put forward is that, and that requires real transformation in the norms of foreign policy is in respect for the rights of Indigenous peoples. So we know around the world that many people are made vulnerable by being deemed stateless by international systems. And many of those are Indigenous peoples who live in territories and sovereignty goes unrecognized by occupying powers, both those living under occupation abroad and closer to home. And we need a US foreign policy that recognizes sovereignty, both domestically and globally, and sees and underscores that Indigenous people hold rights over and protect 25% of the Earth's land surface and 80% of our remaining biodiversity with real enforcement of vital frameworks around free prior and informed consent. And on a final note here, I want to say that I think a critical part of the feminist foreign policy that's been put forward here in a vision is that it recognizes that to achieve and I quote directly to achieve the goal of a more peaceful equitable and healthy planet US National Security and defense operations must be transformed with peace being the ultimate aim of defense. In our reality, a warring world is a warming world. And so we believe the vision for feminist foreign policy serves to create the cracks in an antiquated understanding of national security towards a security centered on a peaceful and healthy planet investments in social protection and the ability to live free from violence persecution climate impacts and economic exploitation. And I think in terms of how these platforms are comparable that really speaks to the ultimate vision of a feminist Green New Deal. So I invite you to join to visit the website for the feminist Green New Deal that outlines further these principles. And I just thank you again to everyone who we've been able to work with on this call on putting forward this vision today. Thanks, Bridget. That's great. That's a lot of food for thought there. I think our last panelist is Jenny Vanier, who's the associate director of global advocacy at Planned Parenthood Federation of America. She works to protect and defend US funding and policies that advance sexual reproductive health and rights worldwide. She's worked in the movement for over a decade, and she'll be presenting the blueprint for sexual reproductive rights and health justice. Jenny, you ready? Yes. Thank you, Gawain. Please to be joining this group to introduce the blueprint for sexual and reproductive health rights and justice and offer some comparison between the blueprint and feminist foreign policy proposal for the US. So in July 2019, nearly 80 organizations joined together to develop and release a proactive policy agenda for a US Congress and administration that is fully supportive of reproductive rights with the aim of enacting a meaningful and substantive policy to advance sexual and reproductive health rights and justice for people in the US and around the world. Obviously, our world has changed since July 2019, but one reality is unfortunately consistent, and that is across the country and around the world, there have been increasingly hostile attacks on reproductive autonomy and rights. Even amid the current pandemic, we are seeing these attacks persist with efforts to undermine sexual and reproductive health care as essential care. And the blueprint is intended to present a unified US domestic and foreign policy agenda, recognizing that transformational shifts in policy and decision making have to start at home. But also that no plan to improve sexual and reproductive health and rights is complete if it does not include a vision for how US foreign policy can advance the health and rights of people around the world. Next slide. The blueprint is grounded and the fundamental belief that in order for individuals to be free and equal, they must be able to exercise complete autonomy over their bodies. This foundation is also shared in the feminist foreign policy proposal launched today. While the blueprint contains many policy proposals, it lays out five principles as a broad frame for what we are fighting for. Ensure sexual and reproductive health care is accessible for all people. Ensure discriminatory barriers and health care are eliminated. Ensure research and innovation, advanced sexual and reproductive health rights and justice now and in the future. Ensure health rights, justice and wellness for all communities. And ensure that judges and executive officials advance sexual and reproductive health rights and justice. Foreign policy recommendations are integrated throughout the blueprint and several elements are also reflected in the feminist foreign policy proposal launched today. Some of these include a comprehensive definition for sexual and reproductive health and rights to guide policy and program priorities. Repeal of the global gag rule. Repeal of the Helms amendment, which is a barrier to abortion access for people around the world and supporting US funding for global reproductive health programs. Next slide. All of the proposals that we've discussed during this panel recognize that we're at a transformational moment and we were even before the current COVID-19 pandemic. We are at a time when there is hope and a need for a bold vision and also a time when communities that experience the greatest structural barriers to equality to health and to human rights are facing unprecedented attacks. The blueprint and feminist foreign policy proposals presented today really reflects the reality that we will need to both undo many harmful policies and at the same time advance a bold proactive agenda. In addition to some of the themes that are presented in the feminist foreign policy proposals, I think another challenge that we've continued to address. And discuss amongst our community and our movement is the tension between mainstreaming feminist priorities across the government versus standalone roles and structures to advance these priorities. And we dig into that a lot in the feminist foreign policy proposal, as well as address it in the blueprint. While it's important to have structure and supports in place at the highest levels of the executive branch, as many of the panelists today have shared, we also have to be supporting these principles and other areas of government. The blueprint in particular highlights how the federal judiciary and the people appointed to serve in those roles shape the laws and policies that impact our rights and livelihoods. And while gender parity across high level roles is one important element, it's also critical for us to support, train higher and appoint leaders who have a range of diverse identities. So that the people making an implementing policy reflects the diversity and experiences of those impacted by it. And I think one of the biggest differences between the blueprint and feminist foreign policy, although certainly a challenge that many of us have thought about and continue to grapple with is the blueprint is really grounded in domestic policy. It's a firm recognition that we cannot develop us policies to advance sexual and reproductive health and rights around the world. If we are not focused on advancing these rights and ensuring access in our own country. And I think for a feminist foreign policy and for that to happen in the US, we also have to embrace and live these feminist values in our own communities. It's really inspiring to me that all of the agendas discussed today, even if they have slightly different areas of focus, whether it's security, climate or healthcare access. All are focused fundamentally on structural change and shifting the balance of power to change the way that we build policies and programs to center people and communities. And I think what's especially powerful about the feminist foreign policy is that it's one framework to bring all of these proposals together to have a unified and comprehensive agenda to hold US foreign policy to a higher standard that advances the goals of gender equality, human rights, peace and environmental integrity. And I can speak for PPSA and I know many of my colleagues that we know that now is the time to be loud about what we need and loud and bold about our vision for the world we want. Great, thank you. I hope you'll agree that those are great presentations on really important products that are connected to the feminist foreign policy paper that we're releasing today. Some of them predated it and contributed or somewhere are parallel to it. We have a bit of time. Thanks very much to the panelists for being on time. So we do have a bit of time for some questions. I'm going to take a couple at a time and then invite panelists to respond. So I'll just read them off here. I have a question from Liz Ford of the Guardian, asking, what are the next steps with this proposed feminist foreign policy, and do they to some extent depend on who wins the election in November. So that's one question. And a related question is, as from Ashley Subramanian Montgomery, as the feminist foreign policy moves to the hill and similar seats of power, what strategies are built out to continue including the voices and representation of marginalized women and underrepresented groups. Two, I think, interesting questions. Really, I'd invite any of the panelists to respond. Does anyone want to step up? I will. If that's okay. One thing, although for the US, this is a campaign and a political year. We also have to think of the larger international context. This is also an anniversary for the Beijing Declaration for UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on women peace and security. And so, although it is within the US context, this was written, and we would hope the current and future administrations will take a look at this. The rest of the world continues to move on on gender equality. They continue more and more countries every month are declaring a feminist foreign policy. And so we, as a collective, I think are working to just keep the US thinking about this issue and moving it ahead within our discussions, regardless of what happens in the campaigns. Obviously, many of the organizations on this call do not engage directly with politics, but this is in a way above partisanship is a policy idea that we help hope that the executive branch, as well as members of Congress, people across the decision making community in the US look at these and think about what part they can do to forward a feminist foreign policy regardless of politics. That's the reason. Anybody else want to take a turn. What's the next step and how do we make sure that marginalized and underrepresented groups are part of it. Jenny. Is it just me or do it. Jenny, I don't hear you. Sorry about that. Better now. Yes. Great. I'm happy to jump in on that. I know for the blueprint for sexual and reproductive health rights and justice and the feminist foreign policy proposal. There were not only a large number of organizations at the table, but also a number of follow up and related consultations intended to engage communities and organizations, not just from the US or the US policy space, but also from local non-governmental organizations and communities most impacted. I will say, I think that is the greatest challenge that we have facing us in terms of operationalizing these proposals because they really require us drastically changing the way that we do business to do it in, you know, a more inclusive way, making sure that the people who are most impacted by policies and programs or who are the ones directly receiving services are really the ones driving what the needs and what policies and programs are being shaped to be. And that that requires a fundamental change in how non-governmental organizations like ours operate and also how governments and other international agencies operate. And I think that's probably the biggest challenge we have to address and continue to push ourselves on. Thanks. I was going to come in on the question in terms of next steps as well. I think one of the real beauties of the groups that have been and the diversity of the groups that have been engaging around this is the different spheres of influence and kind of analysis of power that we all have and that we can all reach on the fact that these conversations and even the way that this was set up, not just as the launch of one vision and one report, but creating space to share the complementary visions that are happening. It means that we are trying to work in collective and in complementarity to other processes that are happening. So we are following very closely as a global advocacy organization discussions around multilateralism. It's the 75th anniversary of the United Nations. The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development have put out a really interesting analysis on calling for a new multilateralism and a global Green New Deal. And we have here feminist principles that we've been working on from the context of the feminist Green New Deal that we're now thinking about with partners around the world in terms of what is a feminist global Green New Deal look like. And we know that those conversations will have to work hand in hand with not only discussions around what does feminist foreign policy look like in the US, but also what does feminist foreign policy look like in other countries. How do we learn from each other? And I think ICRW and a lot of the organizations who've been doing and leading these conversations have managed to create that space in that collective where we're not, we are ourselves in our analysis that some of the challenges we face is the siloed approach to these issues. We are not taking a siloed approach to how we envision this action. So I think in the question of how do we move forward if there isn't a shift in our administration in our, in our own country is that we continue to build out on that I'm not taking a siloed approach to how we push forward this systemic and ambitious vision. Great, thanks. I have a question from Sarah, Andrew being sorry if I said it wrong, asking broadly speaking how can feminist political scientists best help support the project. She's thinking about putting together a special academic journal on reimagining politics. Any, any thoughts from the panelists about how political scientists can engage and support. Come in here. So it's a fabulous question and thrilled that you've put this on the table because it is critical that we connect more with conversations happening in international relations schools and through international relations research. One area that we do know is that there, there does need to be more rigorous data collection and evaluation of strategies and commitments to support gender quality we do need more systematic monitoring of existing gender quality efforts, so that these findings can help inform us policies and programs and those of other nations. We also needed to connect to broader foreign policy thinking and broader foreign policy research so that these ideas are connected at the at all levels and that students have exposure in their education programs that how they learn about international relations how they learn about foreign policy includes the concepts laid out here and the vision laid out here of the priorities of a feminist foreign policy. All students should be exposed to that all research institutions should be including this in their coursework and we very much want to see it highlighted in in the research being produced in academia. So please do proceed with that journal and let us know how we can all contribute and support that work. Anyone else want to come in on how can the local scientists support the effort. I have another question from Claire wall in asking, how can we engage with members of Congress and politicians, but also with non academics and regular Americans who know who don't know much about this how do we talk to both politicians but also regular people who may not be as steeped in feminism or foreign policy. Any thoughts on that. Well, I mean I would just say start talking to your neighbors and your friends and your family. It's always interesting to me when reporters go out and they talk to people about health care or unemployment or things and people seem to have issues and then they ask them about foreign policy and often people will say oh well you know I'm sure there's some experts in Washington who have a say about that but really we're all impacted by foreign policy the US foreign policy so whether it's Syria or China North Korea or what's going on in South or Central America. It impacts all of our lives and that's why a feminist foreign policy is important so I would just start by having this conversation, you know what does security mean to you. Does it mean nuclear bombs or does it mean the ability to walk home at night from work or from going out with friends and how do you how would you increase our security how do we feel about that so I love academics and I love the work that we're doing at think tanks but I think also just having real conversations with people about what security means and how foreign policy impacts that so climate change right how do you feel secure about natural disasters you know our personal reproductive health immigration trade these all impact our daily lives and in a way I think COVID has really shown us how all of these issues connect with each other but in sometimes I think we need to take the words foreign policy out of the conversation just talk about how do you feel secure what makes you feel secure and how can we all work together towards that. Thanks. Yeah, I can also jump in that in our experience at Planned Parenthood you know we have a number of young people and youth organizers to get really excited when thinking about foreign policy whether they're thinking about it in a foreign policy frame or otherwise but see that their health their human rights are very interconnected and see themselves as part of a global community and I think we have a real opportunity for young people who are leading the movement today and we'll be leading the movement far in the future to really work with them engage them and make sure that we're kind of thinking about a single global approach to all of this. And I think in terms of engaging members of Congress, a lot of members of Congress, especially in our experience working on sexual and reproductive health and rights, they're very much seeing the attacks on our rights that are happening, whether it's in their state or at a federal level, through, you know, things that are happening in the Supreme Court, and they're not always as, you know, aware of maybe what might be happening globally. I think what we've seen over the last several years is members of Congress really get engaged on where sexual and reproductive health matters globally and really build up leadership and championship of those issues and recognition that if we're fighting for something here in our own country we should be fighting for it for people around the world. Thank you. I would add as well on the congressional point just to highlight for everyone that there is bipartisan leadership on a whole range of gender quality issues right now on the Hill so just in the last few years. Laws have been passed related to promoting women's participation in peace and security processes, laws on girls education globally, and a law on the importance of women's economic empowerment. We've also seen more funding for the Defense Department's work to support women's contributions to security. And really, you know, there's a broad range of support and interest from bipartisan offices on the Hill. So there really is an opportunity there to continue the conversation to continue the outreach, and really encourage folks to, you know, speak to representatives and share the importance of these issues. And just to note there really is an opportunity there that many of us are, you know, sharing this research and seeing the strength of leadership on the Hill to continue to think about how the US government can lead on gender quality and foreign policy issues. So on the topic of engaging other audiences. I think Susan's the polling research she presented I think is really interesting, partly because you see the differences in different races and how they whether they identify as also, I think one of the most remarkable differences is generational young people are much more comfortable identifying as feminist than older people. And so we see a very big demographic shift happening in terms of being open to the feminist identity and also feminist ideas. So, I think there's a lot of hope in in young people coming up and engaging them more I think in this debate is is is a is a likely productive activity. I want to give the panelists a chance to make any closing remarks and then we're going to turn it turn it back and thanks very much for your patience. I mean, I just wanted to come in on that last point as well I think, and for me it, it may marry is a lot to the question of what can political scientists be doing and what others have been saying here. I think that the incredible opportunity to use, you know, this moment that we're in right now. Someone had someone had asked before I think like do we do we think that this moment in the coven crisis means that we will be able to present a challenge to actually advancing this and I think it's just the opposite. I think we're in a moment where we are seeing the impossible become possible and where we're finally asking questions that are deep enough and structural enough in terms of why have we ordered things in this way when they're not working when they're not providing social protection. And I would hope particularly those young people who are engaging in conversations now around international relations, maybe using textbooks from 50 years when they're actually using something like this report on feminist foreign policy and this blueprint to think not just about how it changes their understanding of issues such as security, but how we can work to actually operationalize this. Great. Any final comments. I want to make a note on the question of how we include marginalized women from earlier and, and just to highlight that when we're talking about the importance of the US government consulting with civil society more and engaging civil society in the policy process to understand what the priority should be what the work should be done that isn't not that should not just be done in Washington. So we're thinking about that as the work of embassies and USAID missions around the world that they should be consulting with local women leaders representing diverse communities in their countries representing rural, urban, different education levels to really bring different perspectives that should be directly shaping and informing US government policy in a given country and the programs and priorities that we do. And part of a commitment to lifting up women's leadership, women's voices, supporting that to form more effective policies as an outcome should be undertaken by our embassies and by our USAID missions in the country. And that's something that you know ambassadors USAID mission directors you know as we're talking about the importance of leadership that this is again not just by the president or by the cabinet secretaries but it's down to our ambassadors and our USAID mission and our combatant commanders that they are committed to this and and our engaging women in and women led organizations in in true dialogue and true conversation to help inform more effective policies. Great thanks. Thanks panelists very much. It was a great and glad we got to respond to some questions. I want to send it back to Lyric and Gayatri to close us out and thanks everyone for attending and for this exciting day for all of us. Thanks Gawain and thanks panel two for giving us a good sense of all of those additional great ideas from which this this paper really benefited that we presented at the top. I did want to circle back on the question the specific question about what is the next steps or plan for this agenda. I'm going to go ahead and report a feminist foreign policy in the United States paper. As I mentioned in the first panel, this is really the starting line. It took years and of work and consultation to get to the paper but now we go about the process of advocating for what's inside of it. That I would I would characterize as a short medium and long term effort. It starts today and there were congressional staff attending today. Gayatri mentioned the leadership of particularly Congress women ankle and spear, who had hoped to host our launch event for this, which would have limited our numbers beyond what we were able to achieve in zoom but would have given us this precise flavor of what the congressional next steps could be on this. So stay tuned. And then also that in a 2021 time horizon. Yes, we would we would assume that we would put forward a hundred day agenda that there would be a whole robust advocacy effort among the more than 50 organizations who came together on this thing and indeed there can still be more. There is a live sign on link on the ICW web page where the paper lives the paper lives on a number of websites, but if you would like to continue, you know, add your logo and be a part of that broader advocacy effort. You can actually upload that there and become a part of the advocacy strategy and next steps on this. So thank you. I am thrilled and excited by this conversation and Gayatri back to you. Wonderful. Thank you so much panel to and lyric and going it really appreciate your insights and just really excited about this effort. It was fantastic to hear from so many of you. The values that we're putting forward and the vision that we're really trying to shape of a feminist foreign policy that's focused on human rights on equality on inclusion on representation one that takes bodily integrity and a life free from violence and to one that promotes environmental justice and integrity and really ground our work and the power that the United States has in the world in inclusion and representation and and and makes it an accountable and an effective process. So thank you so much for highlighting those themes and for really giving them some life. And the paper is, as Larry said a starting point we really, you know, this is not the end. We will, as mentioned be taking the vision forward to Capitol Hill. We will be working with whoever wins in November to make sure that these are some of the principles that get integrated going forward. And our advocacy is going to be an uphill battle but it's one that we are all motivated by and we hope that you will join us. So as Larry mentioned it's not too late to join the movement. We will be sending a follow up email to all the registrants and if you're interested in endorsing as an organization or as an individual. Please do so on the ICRW website, because you know it's really our sincere intention for this framework not to just be a paper that people study but something that really becomes a living document something that becomes the basis for a new way of thinking about foreign policy and how the United States can promote social justice around the world. So thank you everyone for being here. Thank you again to our host, New America, and to our sponsors and to all of our panelists our collaborators our sponsors our guests really appreciate this this grounds for all of interest and support and looking forward to continuing the discussion. Thank you. If folks who are still on would turn their cameras back on for one second we will take an incomplete screenshot of this glorious event. Okay I have one everyone else who wants one have one. This is where if I had ordered the confetti cannon. But congratulations and thanks everyone again and thank you to our amazing amazing amazing events team which ran several events and a board meeting today. I'm just overwhelmed. And I think we will all we will all look forward to hearing from Lyric about future celebrations and next steps. Yeah, thank you Heather. Thank you team. Thank you everybody. And we do have happy hour on the calendar next Wednesday if you want to do that. Congrats. Thank you. Congrats everyone. Thank you. Thank you. Bye.