By Shobha Shukla
While health, gender and other sustainable development goals are reeling under severe funding cuts, governments of richer nations are increasing defence budgets. More shocking is that the same governments who are raising spending on militarisation, are the ones committing to ‘peace’ at a global meet on financing for development and refusing on debt cancellation for the Global South nations.
In June 2025, a meeting of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and its allies was held which pledged to increase defence spending to 5% of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2035. “Yet these same countries – the same NATO countries – during negotiations of 4th Financing for Development Conference of the UN (FfD4), refused to include a reference to debt cancellation for the Global South. This increased commitment to militarisation without relieving the persistent debt crisis remains a major gap in the FfD4 process,” said Swetha Sridhar, Senior Global Policy Research Officer at Fos Feminista.
“This is the money (5% rise in budgets for militarisation) they are taking off from programmes on gender equality and human rights (including human right to health),” said Mabel Bianco, physician activist from Latin America and founding president of FEIM (foundation for studies and research on women).
A Feminist Forum was organised right before the FfD4 began. “Feminist Forum’s Political Declaration importantly called for deescalating wars and ending territorial invasions and genocide – nothing less from this is acceptable,” said Sai Jyothirmai Racherla, Deputy Executive Director of ARROW (Asian-Pacific Resource and Research Centre for Women).
Agrees Lidy Nacpil, coordinator of Asian People’s Movement on Debt and Development (APMDD): “I would echo what Political Declaration of Feminist Forum organised before FfD4 said that no real financing justice can be reached without an urgent end to escalating wars, territorial invasions and genocides, in Gaza, Sudan, Democratic Republic of Congo and other places.”
“There is a growing realisation of debt. Global North has plundered Global South for centuries. Systematic accountability for the historical role of the Global North in causing and perpetuating the debt crises in the Global South, along with reparations and non-debt creating finance are central demands for a feminist transformation of the existing international financial architecture,” responded Zainab Shumail of Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development (APWLD).
Global South is reeling under perennial debt and debt servicing. But governments at FfD4 shy away from addressing this issue. Unless we go for structural reforms, stop privatisation of public services – so that public health, education and social support are fully funded – how will we deliver on SDGs where no one is left behind?
The global financing architecture must be geared towards the realisation of a gender-just economy in which financing for development will result in equitable outcomes and fair distribution of resources that promotes social, economic, and environmental justice, instead of just providing lip service.
This was being discussed at a SHE & Rights (Sexual Health with Equity & Rights) session co-hosted by International Conference on Family Planning (ICFP) 2025, Family Planning News Network (FPNN), Global Center for Health Diplomacy and Inclusion (CeHDI), International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), Asian-Pacific Resource and Research Centre for Women (ARROW), Women’s Global Network for Reproductive Rights (WGNRR), Asia Pacific Media Alliance for Health and Development (APCAT Media) and CNS.
FfD4 failed to deliver on feminist agenda
“Feminist agenda refers to a gender transformative economic system that is based on rights to justice, care, and equality for everyone urgently. This was central to the Political Declaration of Feminist Forum held before the FfD4 in Seville, Spain. But FfD4 failed to deliver on gender equality and feminist agenda,” said Sai Jyothirmai Racherla.
“FfD4 compromised on the ambition that was warranted as per the urgency of our current times, and lack of political will which is required to embrace the much-needed bold reforms,” said Lidy Nacpil.
“FfD4 outcome document was influenced and shaped by main ‘blockers’ of any real progress. These ‘blockers’ were Global North countries, and this is not a surprising fact. There was very active undermining and opposition to the proposals for actionable mandates for the transformation of the international debt and aid architectures. This transformation is vital to address the colonial and patriarchal legacies that plague the current financial architecture. There was a lack of transparency throughout the whole FfD4 negotiation process. Accountability of the process was absent and restrictions of civil society participation which continued up to – and even worsened during the Seville FfD4 conference – were major impediments,” added Lidy Nacpil.
She explained further that: “FfD4 failed because the FFD4 outcomes failed to make meaningful progress on establishing a global financing framework that we have always demanded for many years which should be centred on human rights, promote the stability of the biosphere and brings all planetary boundaries back to a safe zone and uphold the principle of CBDR (Common But Differentiated Responsibilities). This framework should address the redistribution of care work which is predominantly done by women and acknowledges and addresses the racial dimension of SDGs.”
“FfD4 outcome document also failed to prioritise public financing for high quality essential services and move beyond an over reliance on private finance to fill in development financing gaps. It failed to address the equity for income distribution. It failed to strengthen and uphold democratic space and civic participation. And it failed to call for reparations for the economic and environmental harm caused by colonialism, patriarchy, slavery, and resource extraction from the global south,” Lidy added.
The FfD4 outcome document should have included a clear commitment to shift away from so-called debt resolution mechanisms which are dominated by creditors. It should have taken us steps forward for a process towards a UN Framework Convention on Sovereign Debt – which was among the strong calls given by civil society.
Connect the dots: Debt, tax, trade, justice and feminist agenda
“Issues of debt, tax, trade, and justice are all deeply intertwined with a feminist agenda for sexual and reproductive health, rights and justice. For example, we know that financial autonomy translates to greater bodily autonomy. We also know that gendered impacts of poverty leave marginalised communities unable to access services for sexual and reproductive health and rights,” said Swetha Sridhar.
Agrees Mabel Bianco: “FfD4 compromise document is so weak. For example, it mentions the access of universal health coverage but not about sexual and reproductive health. But this is what we urgently need because it is not possible to reach development if we are not having these rights recognised – including access to safe abortion.”
“Since FfD4 outcome document is so weak, we must consider that this is not the end, rather it is just the beginning of our further struggles to achieve gender justice and human rights. We are also going to find strength in struggles and align with other like-minded movements advocating for rights around the UN. We are going to put in what we need. We are not resigning of our principles, ideas, or our proposals. If you read the Political Declaration of Feminist Forum held before FfD4, this is what we need. We need to continue resisting and fighting till we achieve our goals,” added Mabel Bianco.
“For the young people, especially young girls and women, we need to request them to consider and recognise that what we reached before (in terms of gender equality and rights) is not forever. We need to keep fighting to be sure that we do not lose these gains made towards gender equality – and move towards delivering on all sustainable goals and targets,” said Mabel.
“We are not going to stop until we deliver on gender equality. We will continue to do our work to demand for a right-based, environmentally-just, de-colonial, intersectional, sustainable, and person-centred economic model. We need such an economic model in current times where care, reparations, redistribution and accountability remain central. We must reform financial architecture so that it can guarantee long-term flexible, inclusive, and equitable financing for development. We also need to restructure the global economic governance because currently it is very Global North heavy. We need to have Global South parity. We need to include democratisation of the decision-making processes across the international financial institutions and the multilateral development banks,” concludes Sai Jyothirmai Racherla.
(The writer is an award-winning founding Managing Editor and Executive Director of Citizen News Service)
