Prioritising Development Policy on the Security Agenda

By: Sawsan Chebli

Last month, the Munich Security Conference (MSC) was held against a backdrop of growing geopolitical tensions and increasingly pessimistic projections regarding the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (Global Goals) by 2030. The resounding consensus from the conference was a bleak outlook for the coming years, with the G7 believing they will be less secure and wealthy in ten years’ time.

This year’s Munich Security Report, ominously titled “Lose/Lose?” explores the vulnerable position many nations now find themselves in. Quite troublingly, the report concludes that governments are increasingly focusing less on the benefits of global cooperation. Additionally, funding continues to priority militarization over development policy, failing to properly address our security needs.

Our planet is in danger. Conflicts are becoming longer, bloodier, and more difficult to resolve. We have crises with our food systems and climate, and migration that threatens worldwide security and peace. After the Hamas massacre we are witnessing one of the deadliest wars in modern history in Gaza, the number of civilians, mainly children killed by Israel in such a short time is unprecedented. In addition, we are witnessing a sharp rise in violence against women and attacks on women’s rights worldwide.

?Being a child of Palestinian refugees I am an optimist by nature. But these days I am pessimistic about our ability to heal the planet. In recent years we have seen growing militarization with global defense spending increasing by 9% to a record $2.2tn during 2023; and is likely to increase further. AI is also becoming militarized. What frustrates me deeply is that as opposed to investing more in development aid – around the globe we are instead seeing massive cuts. The dominant thinking is that peace and security can only be achieved by more weapons and increasing our deterrence capacities – including nuclear deterrence. Development policy and development spending are considered to be of secondary importance. That’s a fallacy.

I was delighted to see Goals House push against these norms to put development policy at the heart of this year’s MSC agenda by drawing on the power of the Global Goals framework. Goals House brought together stakeholders from a wide variety of backgrounds - including Ban Ki-Moon, The 8th Secretary General of the UN. The focus of the evening was on the relationship between development and security, and finding creative and collaborative solutions for balancing both dimensions on the global stage and how global financing can support this.

?Goals House also emphasised having more women involved in the conversation at Munich. Many of the global issues we are facing today disproportionately affect women – and for decades a lack of representation in business, policymaking circles, and global forums held us back. The global problems we face need to be tackled by diverse stakeholders that make sure that a sustainable transition is also an equitable one.

Two years ago, I shared a photo from the CEO lunch at MSC, as I was appalled by the lack of diversity in the room. I have been coming to MSC for years, and even just a few years ago, such a wealth of representation at the conference was unimaginable.

At the Goals House?x?POLITICO?nightcap, hosted as a part of the official MSC agenda, which explicitly focused on the critical role women play in fostering peace, democracy, sustainable and economic development around the world – the room looked very different. The event featured strong female leaders, including?Suzanne Lynch,?Executive Director and Global Playbook Author,?POLITICO;?Anne McElvoy, Power Play podcast,?POLITICO;?Julie Teigland, EMEIA Managing Partner and Global Leader, Women, Fast Forward,?EY; and?Dr Alaa Murabit, Director of Programme Advocacy and Communications, Health,?Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Militarization has not made the world. And I refuse to accept that there the mere thinking of alternatives is regarded as na?ve. I am a strong advocate for Feminist Foreign and Development policy. In both concepts the individual is the main reference point of security. It is not the state nor state actors. It puts the focus on human security and by doing so it challenges the increasing militarization of the world. Feminist Foreign Policy believes that overcoming violence based on gender, religion, ethnicity is basis for achieving peace and human security. It is more of this thinking and adaption in policies that we need.

We can’t ignore that the world is becoming more unlivable for an increasing number of people. We can’t ignore that children and women are the greatest victims. I know there are many of us who are fighting for these causes – and partners like Goals House give me hope.

?