The New Peace Agenda: building resilience to global challenges.
Unitar 17 April 2024, Geneva.
Ahmedou Ould Abdallah, president centre4s, former UN SG Special Representative.
Dear Chair,
Dear participants,
There could be no more appropriate time, than this one, to convening this conference on "the New Peace Agenda: a more effective multilateral action for peace."
Indeed today, peace is in disarray all over the world: in Ukraine, Gaza and in many often forgotten places: Libya, Sahel, Sudan, east Congo, Burma, etc. Moreover, in addition to various human losses, wars catastrophic effects on environment and climate are enormous and shouldn't be ignored or minimized. Therefore debating on World Peace should be a permanent quest by all.
In that context, I would like all of us to congratulate UNITAR leadership and staff for convening this conference on "the New Peace Agenda " Being the first to organize such a conference - a plea to ending violence and promoting peace and development - deserves recognition and effective support.
Dear participants,
Right after the end of the Cold war, the United Nations have adopted a much welcome and timely "Peace Agenda" in 1992. Hopes for an "Eternal Peace " have then prospered. They were a strong appeals to governments, as well as to the UN Charter recognized citizens, "we the people, "to engage for peace.
Today in a much more fragile international environment, the "2023 New Peace Agenda" is no doubt timely. More importantly, it is a reminder that Global Peace should be a permanent and sustained global quest by all: governments and citizens, public as well as private organizations. Accordingly, today conference deserves a strong backing in its call inviting participants and others to support peace. Moreover, it recommends approaches to help achieve concrete results.
In that connection, the New Peace Agenda with its main recommendations, has advantages and deserves large support. Indeed, there is no alternative to being optimistic despite all ongoing present international crises and wars.
The New Peace Agenda main objectives.
The New Peace Agenda covers issues of importance to a lasting peace: strategic risks including nuclear, geopolitical divisions, climate changes, massive migrations, etc. Its main objectives evolve around conflicts prevention and thus they deserve international support as well as continued up dating from the Secretariat.
At global level, priority should be given to conflicts prevention by addressing geopolitical strategic risks. These include, as priorities, the need to eliminate nuclear risks. Also the call to sustaining peace, climate protection and security is indeed important to all. A third objective - strengthening peace operations and addressing peace enforcement in conflict affected regions - cannot be ignored. That complex point deserves informed discussion. A fourth recommendation calls for elaborating and adopting new effective policies for potential conflict areas. To that end, efforts should be made to prevent weapons mass circulations. That arms issue also deserves serious discussion. Finally the fifth recommendation calls for building a stronger collective security, an important as well as a perpetual request.
These New Peace Agenda main objectives deserve effective support, especially at people levels, as governments are often confronted to their own rationalities or ambiguities on these matters.
The world over, these issues are of present and long term importance to all. That is well illustrated with figures in the New Agenda for Peace: about a quarter of world population is at war, uncontrolled devastating climate insecurity, massive migrations within and between continents, exclusions and decline of democracies in most countries.
What next for peace?
While the New Agenda for Peace should be welcome and supported, it is, more than its 1992 predecessor, facing much tougher realities. Indeed the present international environment is not conducive to optimism. Still, these difficulties must be overcome to ensure the New Peace Agenda overall credibility and subsequent effectiveness.
Today, the world is much more connected through all kinds of social networks than in 1992. Furthermore, news, information, rumors or manipulations, are massive and often accessible free of charge. The Agenda for Peace can't ignore this new context. It can't either ignore that people are as well informed, including by fake news, and sometimes even more than their own governments. Thus, governments' messages, when they do exist, are most often lesser convincing. At the same time, international organizations are paralyzed, addressing a series of ongoing civil and inter - states wars. Worse, that paralysis is of public knowledge as it is amplified by unassuming messages between citizens. Therefore the credibility of the international system - not only the United Nations - is seriously threatened from within States.
Therefore, governments and International institutions legitimacy is at great risk. Indeed, no Peace Agenda could maintain legitimacy or gain support and credibility if populations can witness, live, wars going on with massive human and material destruction. And in total impunity of any perpetrator. International institutions legality is still there but for how long if their legitimacy is not?
In this context, the old and endless negotiations on reforming the UN Security Council to help strengthening its credibility, legitimacy and effectiveness need to reach a conclusion. However, given its extreme complexity, I see no early resolution of those discussions. The issue should be included in the New Peace Agenda priorities and in our present and future meetings.
Reforming the composition of the United Nations Security Council - 15 members (of which 5 permanents) - is a huge undertaking involving vital political interests in each of the world regions. In Asia: Japan, India or Pakistan are potential candidates, but what does China and its veto power think of that? In Latin America: Brazil, Argentina or Mexico, which will lead: language or economic power? In Europe toujours la France et le Royaume - Uni mais sans l'Allemagne ou l'Italie and the continued second war heritage? In Africa: Egypt, Ethiopia, Nigeria, South Africa or democratic countries Botswana, Cape Verde or Senegal all trues democracies?
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
Still, beyond these countries, there is also the US Senate with its veto power on the American presidents' decisions on foreign affairs matters. Would it accept a reform suppressing or generalizing the veto power? Without the USA membership, the SDN has collapsed, will the UN do better? In other words, a UN reform is indeed required; still it should be based on pragmatism rather than on ideology.
Today, our Unitar conference should be part of the process preparing the next Summit of the Future - September 2024 - intended to revive the multilateral system.
In fine and more practically, Unitar may have to play an unexpected role in preventing the international legitimacy from falling further apart. With more wars overflowing all over our planet and millions of interconnected frustrated citizen, today conference could be the beginning of a new process. Working with private sector, independent organization and colleagues from the UN Secretariat, Unitar could think on how, with "we the people," it cand propose reforms for the well-being of all people and states as well. And in particular of Global Peace.
Thank you for your attention.
