Bridging the Gap: Gender Equality as a Strategic Capability in EU-NATO Defence Cooperation

Executive Summary 

This paper examines gender equality not only as a normative commitment but as a strategic capability in European defence. Using Portugal’s Defence Action Plan for Equality (2019–2025) as a case study, it analyses how gender policies are implemented across institutional and operational levels.

While the 2022–2025 cycle shows strong execution (74,5%) and progress in institutionalisation, work–life balance, and women’s participation in missions, a critical gap persists: the limited operational integration of gender perspectives in planning and decision-making. This gap undermines the effectiveness and coherence of EU–NATO security cooperation.

The paper argues that closing this implementation gap is essential for enhancing operational performance and alliance credibility. It proposes targeted reforms for the 2026–2030 cycle, including operational mainstreaming, improved monitoring frameworks, and stronger alignment between political commitments and military practice.

Introduction

In the defence sector, gender equality has traditionally been framed as a normative commitment linked to democratic values and international obligations. However, this framing is insufficient considering the operational demands of the contemporary security environment. 

Despite significant institutional progress, the integration of gender perspectives into operational planning and decision-making continues to face challenges, revealing a gap between political commitments and implementation.

In a context shaped by hybrid threats and complex multinational operations, gender equality should be understood as a factor contributing to operational effectiveness (NATO, 2021). This article examines this implementation gap through the Portuguese case and its implications for EU–NATO defence cooperation.

The Portuguese case

Portugal provides a relevant case of progressive institutionalisation of gender equality in the defence sector, structured through successive cycles of planning, implementation, monitorization and evaluation.

The National Defence Action Plan for Equality (2022–2025) ensures continuity with the previous cycle, introducing a governance model based on cross-cutting accountability, systematic monitoring, and measurable indicators across four pillars: Equality, Work–Life Balance, Education and Training, and Women, Peace and Security (WPS).

According to the Ministry of National Defence (2025), 74,5% of the measures under this plan were fully implemented, 21,3% were partially implemented, and 4,2% were not implemented). 

Fully executed measures were concentrated in institutional and administrative domains, work–life balance mechanisms, awareness initiatives, and increased participation of women in missions. By contrast, partially implemented measures were concentrated in the operational domain, particularly those requiring integration of gender perspectives into planning processes, operational plans and orders, readiness directives, and military exercises. In these areas, application remained inconsistent across commands and often dependent on individual expertise rather than standardised procedures.

Non-implemented measures (4.2%) are largely linked to structural operational requirements, including the integration of gender analysis into planning cycles and evaluation mechanisms.

This distribution shows that the implementation gap is structurally concentrated in the operational dimension. While institutionalisation has been largely achieved, its translation into a consistent operational capability remains incomplete.

Why operational integration fails

Evidence from the 2022–2025 cycle indicates that the gap between institutional progress and operational integration is driven by structural and procedural factors.

First, there is an absence of standardised operational doctrine and procedural requirements. While strategic frameworks exist, they aren’t consistently translated into binding operational guidance, making integration discretionary rather than systematic.

Second, a gap persists between training and application. Training efforts remain largely conceptual and lack scenario-based exercises, planning tools, and operational templates, limiting their translation into decision-making processes.

Third, monitoring systems focus primarily on implementation compliance rather than operational impact. They measure completed actions but do not assess influence on planning quality or mission outcomes.

Finally, structural constraints—such as force composition, deployment cycles, and mission requirements—shape the conditions for integration and increase the need for clear procedures.

These factors indicate that the primary barrier is not resistance to gender equality, but the lack of procedural embeddedness within operational systems.

EU–NATO implications

The Portuguese case reflects a broader pattern across the Euro-Atlantic space: high political alignment coexists with uneven operational implementation. This generates three risks: fragmentation among allies, reduced effectiveness in multinational missions, and weakened strategic credibility.

While NATO’s WPS Policy (NATO, 2021) and the EU Gender Action Plan III (European Commission, 2020) set ambitious objectives, they remain insufficiently prescriptive at the operational level, contributing to persistent implementation gaps.

Reforms for 2026–2030

The evidence suggests the need to move beyond a compliance-based model towards gender equality as an operational capability within EU–NATO defence cooperation.

Mandatory Integration in Operational Planning

Gender perspectives should be embedded as a procedural requirement within NATO and EU planning frameworks, including the NATO Operational Planning Process (OPP), Operational Plans (OPLANs), Operational Orders (OPORDs), and multinational exercises. Minimum requirements for gender analysis should be established, and the role of Gender Advisors (GENADs) standardised across commands.

From Monitoring to Operational Impact Assessment

Evaluation frameworks should assess operational impact by measuring integration in decision-making and its influence on mission outcomes, supported by comparable indicators across allies.

5.3 Strengthening the Training–Operations Nexus

Education and training should be designed for operational application through scenario-based exercises, practical planning tools, integration of lessons learned into doctrine, and evaluation based on operational use. Pre-deployment training should include mission-specific gender integration.

Aligning Political Commitments with Structural Conditions

Implementation requires alignment between political objectives and structural conditions, including retention policies, incentives for international missions, and organisational support for sustained integration.

Bridging National Practice and International Frameworks

Portugal’s experience highlights the limits of existing frameworks, including United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 and NATO’s WPS Policy. While effective in promoting institutionalisation, they remain insufficiently prescriptive at the operational level, indicating the need for procedural standardisation.

Strategic implications

The Portuguese case shows that institutionalisation of the WPS agenda does not ensure operational integration.

This points to a broader structural challenge in aligning political commitment with implementation across the Euro-Atlantic space. For both the European Union and NATO, effectiveness depends on transforming WPS into a measurable and operationally embedded capability.

Without this shift, WPS risks remaining declaratory rather than contributing to operational effectiveness.

References

• European Commission (2020) EU Gender Action Plan III: An Ambitious Agenda for Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment in EU External Action 2021–2025. Brussels: European Commission.
• European External Action Service (2019) EU Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security (WPS) 2019–2024. Brussels: EEAS.
• Ministry of National Defence (Portugal) (2021) National Defence Sector Plan for Equality: Implementation Report 2019–2021. Lisbon: Ministry of National Defence.
• Ministry of National Defence (Portugal) (2025) National Defence Sector Plan for Equality: Implementation Report 2022–2025. Lisbon: Ministry of National Defence.
• NATO (2021) NATO Pol. Brusse
• NATO (2023) Summary of National Reports on Women, Peace and Security.
• United Nations Security Council (2000) Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security.
• United Nations (2023) Report of the Secretary-General on Women, Peace and Security. New York: United Nations.