Miriam MONA MUKALAZI

Lead Africa Policy Programme with a focus on Peace & Security, Vienna Institute for International Dialogue and Cooperation

Big states cannot cover it all. Smaller European states are stepping in, creating influence through niche politics. Ultimately, the argument that smaller states need to identify WPS areas where they can bring real added value has the potential to create influence based on outside-the-box thinking.

The Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda is often discussed through the lens of major European powers, such as the United Kingdom, France and Germany. And although smaller European states, especially the Nordic countries, are recognised as crucial WPS actors, the contributions of other countries, such as Austria, Ireland and Czechia, remain comparatively under the radar. Sustaining the WPS agenda requires stronger alliances and broader coalitions. It is therefore worth examining what smaller states can contribute when using their niche. The relevance lies not simply in filling gaps left by larger powers, but in how smaller states can use their specific expertise to foster impactful WPS practices. 

Niche power in practice

Niche power can refer to the ability of smaller states to exercise influence beyond their purely material capabilities by drawing on specific assets and comparative advantages. However, once a niche is found, it does not automatically translate into political influence or substantive change. Putting a niche policy into practice may include expertise in disarmament, diplomatic access due to a country’s geographic location, or coalition-building within the non-aligned movement. Within the WPS agenda, this could involve using multilateral platforms, such as the United Nations (UN) or the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), to advance neglected pillars of WPS, or creating opportunities for civil society briefers to shape policy debates in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). 

Czechia: civil society engagement

Czechia illustrates how smaller states can contribute to the WPS agenda through civil society engagement and regional exchange. The international summer school Feminist Futures for Foreign Policy brings scholars and practitioners to Prague, connecting debates in Central and Eastern Europe with established WPS experts. This is particularly relevant in a context where feminist approaches to foreign policy are facing a strong political backlash. 

Ireland: coalition-building

Ireland, together with Kenya and Mexico, initiated the WPS Presidency Trio, coordinating commitments across their consecutive UN Security Council (UNSC) presidencies. The trio aimed to integrate WPS into the UNSC’s work, strengthen gender perspectives in country-specific discussions and increase the participation of women civil society briefers. Additionally, the initiative helped establish a model that was subsequently adopted by other UNSC members. This initiative therefore shows how Global South-Global North coalition-building can extend influence beyond a single presidency. 

Austria: specialised expertise

Austria’s long-standing commitment to military non-alignment provides a unique position for coalition-building through multilateral forums such as the UN and OSCE. As Austria develops its new national action plan (NAP) on WPS, the challenge is to translate this diplomatic positioning into concrete policy outcomes and link it to Austria’s specific expertise. For example, its experience in nuclear disarmament and the prohibition of anti-personnel mines could offer opportunities to integrate gender perspectives into arms control and disarmament. 

These three examples illustrate different ways in which smaller states can exercise niche topics, spaces and power. However, a lack of political will at the national level, insufficient financial resources, and gaps between UNSC resolutions and regional implementation often constrain the ways in which smaller states carry out their WPS efforts.

From niche to impact

While it is a reality that smaller European states sometimes use WPS to advance their national interests, these interests should not come at the expense of shared international peacebuilding commitments. Identifying niche topics is certainly more valuable when it contributes to the realisation of the WPS agenda than when it serves primarily as a tool of European influence. It cannot be ignored, however, that finding a niche bears the risk of recreating the logic of coloniality – the persistence of structures of power even after the formal end of colonial administrations – leaving European actors in control of agendas, funding and the terms of participation. European states should therefore use their niche diplomatic access and resources to support context-defined priorities, broaden participation and build more equal partnerships. In times of global power shifts, this is particularly significant when partnering with civil society networks, regional organisations and states from the Global South. If smaller European states recognise that expertise does not give them the authority to determine priorities on behalf of others, then using a niche could also entail challenging established patterns of South-North cooperation.

States of all sizes in Europe and beyond sometimes promote WPS because it advances their strategic interests, demonstrates a commitment to feminist policies, or serves both purposes simultaneously. While these motivations can overlap, their value ultimately depends on the effort that states are willing to put into their WPS engagement. In short, niche power does not matter when it is used only symbolically to fill gaps left by larger powers — but it is of enormous value when it advances the four pillars of the WPS agenda in practice and ensures the overall goal of long-lasting peace.

Photo credits: OSCE/Igor Schimbător