Introduction The further development of the UN Human Rights Con­vention in the modern era, in a multilateralism that serves all people of the world, is also the greatest challenge in the 21st century. Fundamental civil liberties agreed and negoti­ated in the UN are being undermined. Militarization which is the reliance on violence to counter violence, and war profiteering have become global engines of capitalism that dominate the arenas of international politics. These dynam­ics disproportionately affect vulnerable groups, particularly women. In many war zones, especially across Asia, Middle East, Africa, and other marginalized regions of the world, the number of people struggling simply to survive is rising at an alarming pace. Globally, peace is commonly understood through three interrelated concepts: negative peace 1 , positive peace, and hybrid peace 2 . Negative peace basically refers to the absence of direct violence or armed conflict- such as war, terrorism, or physical aggression. While important, this definition does not address the root causes of conflict or the presence of structural inequalities. In contrast, positive peace encompasses the presence of social justice, equal­ity, human rights, and conditions that enable individuals and communities to thrive. It recognizes that true peace must involve fairness, dignity, and access to basic needs. Hybrid peace, emerging from critiques of one-size-fits-all peacebuilding models, emphasizes the need to combine internationally recognized peace norms with local, cultur­ally grounded mechanisms for reconciliation and justice. This approach leverages the contributions of grassroots actors, traditional authorities, and indigenous practices in shaping sustainable and inclusive peace. In this light, the African philosophy of Ubuntu 3 “I am because we are” together with feminist perspectives of gender justice and other nationally developed approach­es, becomes part of the peace dish, each bringing unique strengths in times of crisis, challenging structural inequal­ities, and rooting peace in justice, dignity, and care. The enduring networks of feminist movements and women’s groups, combined with international norms and communi­ty-rooted feminist organizing, anchor multilateral agree­ments in lived realities and create pathways for inclusive, lasting, and transformative peace, deepening our under­standing of what it truly means to build and sustain peace. The United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security that was adopted in 2000 seemed to have opened the floodgates to women’s par­ticipation in peace processes. However, long before the adoption of this resolution, women had been contributing to peace processes in multiple ways both through formal and informal efforts, highlighting how the First World War affected men and women differently, and emphasizing the unique contributions that women brought to the peace process. The Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom(WILPF), which was created in 1915 to protest the war, called for mediation, dialogue and the inclusion of women in peace processes 4 . Beyond protests, they engaged advocacy to influence policy and advanced arguments that shaped early feminist anti-military discourse 5 . Despite women’s activism for peace from as far back as the first world war, coupled with the adoption of resolu­tion 1325 in the year 2000, the Women, Peace and Secu­rity Agenda remains unknown in many parts of the world and women peacebuilders are still struggling to grasp a full understanding of the women’s peace agenda and how to implement it. In Cameroon for example, although being on its second-generation National Action Plan, its implementation has been very weak. Many women and structures are unaware of this instrument and how to incorporate it in peace processes. In Benin, the first-gener­ation Action Plan is yet to be rolled out, which is indica­tive of low levels of awareness of 1325 among women-led organizations and women peacebuilders. What may account for this is the fact that armed conflicts are not present in every context and such often serve as a stimu­lus for women’s large-scale involvement in peace building. Regions that have experienced repeated and prolonged conflicts have often witnessed more organized women’s movement for peace, while others are only encountering such conflicts in the 21st century and hence are in the earlier stages of mobilisation. At the same time, systemic barriers persist which constrain the capacities of women and feminist organisations to mobilize, lead and influence peace processes. The nature of wars and conflicts are different, and conflict dynamics must be considered contextually to appropriate­ly understand how it affects men, women, boys, girls and all genders. Where societies are heavily patriarchal and cultures and traditions valorise male power and domi­nance, women’s voices take second place and their ability to contribute to peacebuilding is relegated to informal spaces within the home and immediate community. It is therefore interesting to bring together the body of knowl­edge that feminists have built over the years to situate women within conflict and peace discourses and how such efforts have directly led to the surge in women’s move­ments for peace across Africa. For us to do that, we must explore existing notions of conflicts and wars. 1 Galtung,J.(1969).“Violence, Peace, and Peace Research.” Journal of Peace Research. 2 MacGinty,R.(2010).“Hybrid Peace: The Interaction BetweenTop-Down and Bottom-Up Peace.” Security Dialogue. 3 Ubuntu, a Southern African ethic of interdependence and collective humanity, is often summarized as“I am because we are”(Ramose, 2002) 4 WILPF.(1915).Report of the International Congress of Women at The Hague. 5 WILPF Archives(1919–1925), available online at www.wilpf.org. 5 Gender Justice Competence Center Sub-Saharan Africa