At the National Women's Day celebration last week, Raja Permaisuri Agong Tunku Azizah Aminah Maimunah Iskandariah asked that we listen to the voices of women fighting for their rights.
In particular, she reminded us that women as peacemakers at home can be a natural contributor to the peace-making process at the international level.
The idea of having a feminist foreign policy for Malaysia was announced by Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Abdullah in 2020.
In his bold foreign policy announcement, he promised a better representation of women in decision-making at the ministry as well as a gender-responsive budget that would walk the talk.
Today, the conversation continues. Feminism in foreign policy is not a term used regularly in most countries.
Admittedly, Sweden, Germany, France, Australia, New Zealand and Canada have put the policy in place.
In India and Indonesia, elements of feminism in foreign policy are visible and encouraging.
But having more women at the Foreign Ministry does not necessarily translate into a feminist foreign policy in the same way if a manufacturing plant employed more women on its production line.
This doesn't mean you are empowering women.
So what is a feminist foreign policy?
Is it about having more women in the workforce and having them make up the numbers?
Malaysia does not discriminate against female participation in the workforce.
In fact, there are more girls than boys in our mainstream universities.
Already, we see a growing number of women in the public sector. There will come a point when the number of women exceeds men in the workplace.
When this happens, a new gender policy will have to be put in place to balance the numbers once again.
Equality and equity may sound similar, but are worlds apart.
Feminism, therefore, is not so much about equal rights for both men and women.
It is more about the existing number of women being given the opportunity to be seen and heard. And it is about inclusivity in decision-making.
The ministry deals with numerous issues of high and low politics.
High politics include security, intervention, disarmament and peace-building efforts.
Low politics include human rights, trafficking of persons and other transborder social issues that do not affect the survival of the state.
Some issues — energy concerns, food security and climate change — lie in the middle.
High politics have traditionally been dealt with in a masculine voice, but studies now show that a feminine perspective can provide a breakthrough when there's a stalemate.
All subject matters can be dealt with holistically if diverse opinions are accepted and considered.
The contribution of people from different backgrounds, and gender, adds value to the problem-solving exercise.
This is the bedrock on which the concept of inclusion is built.
Therefore, beyond the buzz-word of feminism, there must be a clear, defined and structured policy and programme to enable inclusiveness to take place.
It is not so much about adding more chairs to the table. It is about adding to the diversity of viewpoints, and ultimately, of ideas.
A feminist perspective in conflict resolution would take into account that more women than men have poor safety nets, and are thus more adversely affected in armed conflicts.
Parity in numbers is a simple solution to a complex problem, but it does set the stage for increasing the possibility of an inclusive decision-making process.
A United Nations study found that "women's participation in peace processes results in a more durable and stable peace", perhaps because feminist thinking emphasises long-term rather than short-term gains.
A feminist foreign policy is not about singling out women from the male workforce.
It is about inclusiveness in discussion and decision-making.
After all, not all women are feminist and a growing number of men are known to have embraced feminism and feminist thought better than women.
A more inclusive foreign policy consideration will result in wider acceptance.
The authors are regular writers on foreign affairs' issues
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect those of the New Straits Times