Pro-life diplomats and advocacy groups connected to the Geneva Consensus Declaration are working to create a new “pro-life and pro-family” core group of United Nations member states, aiming to counter the influence of existing coalitions that promote abortion access and LGBT rights within UN negotiations.
The initiative surfaced publicly during this year’s UN General Assembly High-Level Week in New York, where officials from Geneva Consensus countries and conservative NGOs met around a series of side events on women’s health, life, and the family. Reporting from The Washington Stand described the effort as a bid to formalize cooperation among like-minded governments by creating a core group analogous to the long-standing LGBT rights core group that coordinates strategy and language across UN resolutions.
These plans are closely tied to the Geneva Consensus Declaration, a joint statement first launched in 2020 by the United States under the Trump administration and a cross-regional group of nations from every continent. According to a briefing carried by Live Action, the declaration commits signatories to improving women’s health, defending human life before birth, respecting national sovereignty, and affirming the family as “foundational to society,” while explicitly stating that there is no international right to abortion and no obligation for states to fund or facilitate it. A recent update from the Center for Family and Human Rights, or C-Fam, reported that three countries—Mauritania, Argentina, and the Dominican Republic—joined the coalition in the past year, bringing the number of participating governments to 43 in its working alliance and 46 total signatories to the declaration, with representatives gathering at an annual commemoration luncheon on Capitol Hill.
The momentum was evident at the UN as well. A report by The Washington Stand highlighted what organizers viewed as recent diplomatic gains, including Colombia’s withdrawal from the UN LGBT rights core group and the accession of Trinidad and Tobago, Honduras, and Algeria to the Geneva Consensus Declaration coalition. In interviews, pro-life advocates argued that establishing a new core group inside the UN would help balance what they see as an institutional tilt toward progressive positions on sexual and reproductive rights, giving pro-life and pro-family governments a more organized voice during negotiations on documents produced by bodies such as the Commission on the Status of Women and the Commission on Population and Development.
Parallel to the governmental effort, a large coalition of non-governmental organizations has been launched under the banner “Civil Society for the Geneva Consensus Declaration.” In a recent “Friday Fax” dispatch, C-Fam announced that more than 100 civil society groups from around the world have joined the network, which is meant to mirror and support the governmental alliance. The coalition’s leaders include C-Fam, Family Watch International, the Heritage Foundation, Alliance Defending Freedom, the Global Center for Human Rights, and the Institute for Women’s Health, according to the release on C-Fam’s website. The same announcement noted that the coalition’s website is now available in all six official UN languages and is open to additional organizations that affirm the declaration’s commitments on life, family, and sovereignty.
The push for a pro-life core group comes amid an ongoing, high-profile struggle over gender, sexuality, and family policy at the UN. Research published by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace describes how conservative religiously affiliated networks and governments have increasingly coordinated to resist references to “sexual and reproductive health and rights” and protections related to sexual orientation and gender identity in UN texts, often framing their efforts as a defense of “traditional family” and opposition to what they call “gender ideology.” A submission by Outright International on sexuality and colonialism similarly notes the prominent role of U.S.-based conservative Christian organizations such as C-Fam, Family Watch International, and allied networks in UN spaces in New York, arguing that these groups work with sympathetic states to promote restrictive positions on LGBT rights.
Critics from LGBT advocacy organizations and some member states warn that a formal pro-life, pro-family core group could deepen polarization in UN negotiations and make it more difficult to achieve consensus on language protecting women and LGBT people. They point to existing structures like the LGBT core group—which brings together governments and NGOs committed to advancing sexual orientation and gender identity protections—as examples of how organized blocs can significantly shape outcomes in resolutions and political declarations. For their part, Geneva Consensus advocates insist that their planned core group would simply provide proportional representation for states that reject an international right to abortion and prefer policies that promote what they describe as the natural family, arguing that they have been underrepresented in informal power structures at the UN.
Diplomats and NGO leaders involved in the Geneva Consensus alliance have not publicly released a detailed timetable or official membership list for the proposed pro-life core group, and no formal announcement appears yet on UN websites. However, statements from participants at recent Geneva Consensus events indicate that discussions are ongoing with multiple governments about how the core group would function and coordinate during upcoming UN meetings. With the Commission on the Status of Women and other major negotiating sessions approaching in the UN calendar, both supporters and opponents expect the next months to reveal whether the pro-life, pro-family alliance can translate its growing numbers into a recognized core group that shapes the drafting of future global agreements.