By Andrew C. Miller

Many Americans assert that the new millennium marked the dawn of another “American Century.” The Chinese are equally convinced that the twenty-first century belongs to them. Some foreign policy scholars even foresee a “Canadian Century.” But this state level analysis may be outmoded altogether, with no one country having the most important impact on global affairs over the next century. Perhaps the world’s greatest arbiters will be its three billion women.

With Julia Gillard’s formation of a coalition government in Australia, the global community reached a little-recognized milestone. For the first time in history, women hold either the top foreign policy post or lead a government in at least one country on every continent. Europe has German Prime Minister Angela Merkel; Liberian President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf took the honor of becoming Africa’s first female head of state; Prime Minister Shiekh Hasina leads Bangladesh in Asia; there is Argentinean President Kristina Kirchner in South America; and, for North America of course, Secretary of State Hilary Clinton has the top job in Foggy Bottom.

The speed at which women are stepping into leadership roles is nothing short of extraordinary. In one of many recent developments, women became the majority of the Swiss cabinet as of September of this year – a remarkable achievement considering female suffrage was not instituted in the country until 1971. In a globalized world, public sector positions are not the only leadership roles that matter. Multinational firms have risen to prominence in the international arena, and women are increasingly becoming stewards in this sector as well. The first female CEO of a Dow Jones listed company was not appointed until 1999 (Carly Fiorina at Hewlett-Packard), but now fifteen women head Fortune 500 companies. Another marker was set last year when the Xerox Corporation conducted the first woman-to-woman hand-off of the chief executive role.

Despite these gains, women have yet to reach a critical mass where they can substantially reshape an international system still entrenched in male-dominated global politics. The modern international system dates back to 1648 when central Europe’s top diplomats signed a series of treaties known collectively as the Peace of Westphalia. While globalization has chipped away at this established system, its two most fundamental principles – hierarchy and sovereignty – remain firmly in place to this day. These principles are on clear display at the United Nations where a handful of nations led by the Security Council Permanent 5 members – United States, United Kingdom, Russia, France, and China – largely set the agenda of global affairs. And state sovereignty, which gives governments an unquestioned right to rule over their own territory, is enshrined in the UN Charter.

What makes this system male-oriented? One has to look no further than today’s workplace for the answer. As the management consultancy Caliper found in a 2005 study comparing male and female leadership styles, the men “tend force their perspective and convince through the strength of their position.” This tendency plays itself out on the international stage innumerable times every year. It explains in part Iran’s drive for nuclear weapons in order to strengthen its regional influence. Or, China’s increasing willingness to prod and coerce its neighbors by withholding key mineral exports.

But given the speed at which women are moving into foreign policy leadership roles, they could soon have a transformative impact on the international system. The question is: how? Let’s take the Caliper study as the basis for the analysis. According to the consultancy’s research, women possess four distinct leadership traits relative to their male counterparts: inclusivity, persuasiveness, perseverance, and risk-taking. As more women begin to make decisions at the international level, these distinctive qualities could profoundly influence global politics.

Inclusivity: Caliper generally found that women approach leadership in a more inclusive manner, leaning on team building as a method of problem solving and decision-making. The dominance of this leadership style could present a challenge to the state-centric approach of the international system. A renewed emphasis will likely be placed on multilateral forums for building and gaining consensuses on global issues while unilateral action will become increasingly rare.

Persuasiveness: the Caliper results emphasized that women leaders are more persuasive than their male counterparts. This could be the result of a comparatively higher degree of emotional intelligence, which heightens their ability to identify the desires and grievances of others, as found in a similar study at Springfield College. As result, female heads of states and top diplomats will likely try to persuade rather than push their counterparts to adopt amenable positions. This could lead to a greater emphasis on diplomacy and less on instruments of pressure such as economic sanctions and military force. In other words, carrots (as opposed to sticks) will be the norm.

Perseverance: Caliper also found that women exhibited an attitude of “learning from adversity and carrying on.” This trait may mean that women can more effectively overcome the impact of natural disasters and conflict. There is no way to prevent a hurricane or earthquake, but recovery phases could be shorter with women in charge. Development and disaster relief experts largely agree that the determination to “carry on” is a necessity for success in post-conflict reconstruction. Perhaps Haitians recognized this fact when they gave former first lady and constitutional scholar Mirlande Manigat the greatest share of the vote in the first round of their recent presidential elections.

Risk-taking: finally, women leaders were more likely to take risks according to Caliper. These results are congruent with a 2006 study by Australian sociologists that found women are generally more transformational. Thus, the cookie-cutter approach to dealing with global problems will likely be out the door, so policies developed for one issue will not necessarily be applied to another. Adaptation will become an increasingly prevalent aspect of the global system, and tradition alone will be seen less and less as a viable reason for unquestioned adherence to established rules.

When Helene Gayle, CEO of the prominent aid group CARE International, was asked by Foreign Policy magazine how Middle East Peace could be achieved, she simply responded “if women have a larger say.” I think she may be on to something. Let’s briefly apply our identified traits to other pressing global issues: climate change requires global action (inclusivity); the World Trade Organization (WTO) must find a consensus to adopt the long-stalled Doha Round (persuasiveness); failed states such as Somalia and possibly even North Korea in the future will require reconstruction (perseverance); and, fighting transnational terrorism does not always fit with the traditional rules of war (risk-taking).

As these problems deepen and more global challenges arise, it is becoming increasingly clear that the United States, China, or any one country cannot solve them alone. Thankfully, we are living in the Female Century.

About the Author

Andrew C. Miller is a master’s candidate at Georgetown University’s Walsh School of Foreign Service focusing on international relations and security issues. Prior to attending the Walsh School, he worked on USAID-funded projects in Iraq and Afghanistan. He holds a B.A. from the Elliot School of International Affairs at George Washington University.