Category Archives: global

G77 Statement to High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

A statement from The Group of 77 at the United Nations

Statement on behalf of the Group of 77 and China by H.E. Mr. Alejandro Gil Fernández, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Economy and Planning of the Republic of Cuba, at the general debate of the high-level segment of the High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development under the auspices of ECOSOC (New York, 17 July 2023)


Image from Wikipedia

Her Excellency Ms. Lachezara Stoeva, President of ECOSOC,

I have the honor to deliver this statement on behalf of the G77 and China.

As we approach the midpoint of the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, we have witnessed how many are still lagging behind.

We meet today at a time of extremely critical juncture, in which developing countries face multiple challenges, particularly those concerning economic and social recovery from the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, enormous financial and debt difficulties, rising food prices, escalating climate emergency and an unbalanced economic order that perpetuates inequalities and poverty.

Humanity has before it a thick and complex set of documents, based on basic principles, which in theory are the basis for our sustainable development. However, the progress achieved is still insufficient for the realities of the poorest and most vulnerable. Let us not forget that poverty eradication is the greatest global challenge and an indispensable requirement for sustainable development.

The increasing global challenges, including the negative effects of climate change that threatens the very survival of many developing countries especially of Small Island developing states and deepen the vulnerability of all, the rising global interest rates, tightened financial conditions, high cost of debt and risks of debt distress, have deeply impacted economies in the Global South, especially in low and middle income countries. In this regard, the G77 and China expects to have a meaningful debate on the centrality of development finance to overcome those challenges.

Concrete actions by developed countries to deliver on previous commitments, as well as on the reform of the international financial architecture are essential for the transformation we are advocating.

Madam President,

It has been almost a decade since the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda. Multiple pledges have been made since then.

Contrary to the notion of progress, we find ourselves in a situation where our people is even more in need now than years before. The IMF is forecasting that a third of the global economy will be in recession in 2023. For the first time, UNDP has found that human development is falling in nine out of 10 countries.

The high cost of borrowing prevents the capacity of developing countries to invest in the SDGs and it also raises the risk of debt default. For developing countries in the Global South interest rates can be eight times higher than those in developed countries, as highlighted by the Secretary General, who has pointed out as well that today 25 developing economies are spending over 20 per cent of government revenues solely on servicing debt.

(article continued in right column)

Question for this article:

Sustainable Development Summits of States, What are the results?

(Article continued from the left column)

Madam President,

Since its inception, the G77 and China has been advocating for a new international economic order. Now it´s more evident than ever that these transformations cannot wait any longer. The UN Secretary General recently recognized that the Global Financial System is biased, morally bankrupt and skewed to benefit wealthy countries. This is no longer a plea only from developing countries.

The reform of the international financial architecture, especially of IMF and the World Bank, cannot continue to wait. We need to strengthen the participation of developing countries in international economic decision-making, norm-setting and global economic governance, so as in order to adapt to changes in the global economy. We look forward to fulfill the commitment of IMF to revisiting the adequacy of quotas and continuing the process of governance reform under the sixteenth general review of quotas and to conduct the shareholding review of the World Bank.

We welcome the UN Secretary-General’s proposal for an “SDG Stimulus” for developing countries, in particular the most in need and distressed countries, which aims at massively scaling up affordable long-term financing for development and aligning financing flows with the SDGs. We call upon the international community to follow up on the SG’s proposal.
We urge developed countries to fulfill their unmet ODA commitments to developing countries to achieve the target of 0.7 % of gross national income and 0.15 to 0.20 % of ODA to the least developed countries.

We urge the initiation of an United Nations intergovernmental process to establish measures that go beyond GDP in order to have a more inclusive approach to international cooperation and financing for development.

The Group emphasizes the need for special and differential treatment for developing countries in harnessing the developmental benefit of international trade and the importance of a multilateral trading system that relies on universal, rule-based, open, transparent, inclusive and non-discriminatory rules as embodied in the WTO agreements.

In this connection, the Group remains deeply concerned and rejects the increasing trend by developed countries to impose unilateral and protectionist measures that undermine the multilateral trading system and would constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination between countries or a disguised restriction on international trade, such as unilateral and discriminatory border adjustment mechanisms and taxes, negatively impacting the access of developing countries’ exports to the global markets.

The climate change agenda must be fully implemented in accordance with the UNFCCC and its Paris Agreement and upholding the principle of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. In this regard, it is critical to increase ambition on mitigation, adaptation and means of implementation, and materialize the provision and mobilization of resources by developed countries to tackle climate change. We are deeply disappointed that the goal to mobilize 100 billion dollars by developed countries per year up to 2020 was never met and we strongly call developed countries to fulfill this pledge. We also urge the full operationalization of the loss and damage fund by COP28.

It is critical an urgent promotion of technology transfer and capacity building as well as technological and scientific cooperation from developed to developing countries in order to foster sustainable development in its three dimensions and the full implementation of the 2030 Agenda.

Finally, we emphasize that as stated in the 2030 Agenda, States are strongly urged to refrain from promulgating and applying any unilateral economic, financial or trade measures not in accordance with international law and the Charter of the United Nations that impede the full achievement of economic and social development, particularly in developing countries.

Madam President,

The actions just mentioned have been enunciated in several occasions by the leaders of the Global South. The lack of progress must not be attributed to a lack of solutions. Actions are there. What it is required urgently is political will to implement what we all know is needed to overcome one of the most complex crises humanity has seen in the modern history.

We, as leaders from the developing world, have the responsibility to come all together and claim with a united voice the changes needed to ensure a sustainable future for the current and coming generations.

I thank you.

global, SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, United Nations,

National Coordinators of the UNESCO Associated Schools Network gather to reflect and share experiences

… EDUCATION FOR PEACE …

An article from UNESCO

National Coordinators of the UNESCO Associated Schools Network  reinforced the importance of the network as a laboratory of ideas for educational quality, innovation and transformation by endorsing the “70th Anniversary Declaration” as a result of the conference.

From 6-8 June 2023, the German National Commission for UNESCO and UNESCO ASPnet co-organized the global conference “Strengthening international collaboration towards peaceful and sustainable futures!” to gather 80 participants from 60 countries at the German Federal Foreign Office in Berlin and online.


In the context of the 70th anniversary in November 2023, the conference provided a unique platform for National Coordinators, representatives of National Commissions and the International Coordination Unit to jointly develop new ideas for the network, to reflect on experiences and achievements from the past and present, and to explore ways and possibilities for a successful path to strengthen ASPnet for the future.

ASPnet – a treasure in our hands

For the opening, Assistant Director-General for Education, Ms Stefania Giannini, valued the network as a “treasure in our hands” and as “one of UNESCO`s most powerful networks” in implementing the organization`s values through education in a video message. She further encouraged the National Coordinators to commemorate the 70th anniversary as important milestone in the history of ASPnet through national celebrations as well as together with other countries to honour the global nature of the network.

Germany was one of the 16 Member States, which participated in the first “Scheme of co-ordinated experimental activities in Education for Living in a World Community” in 1953. This successful collaborative experiment evolved into today´s global network of over 12,000 educational institutions in 182 countries. Mr Luckscheiter, Secretary-General of the German National Commission, highlighted the important role of ASPnet schools as drivers for innovation and societal change:

“The schools are a mirror of society – and at the same time, they are bridges into the future. ASPnet has been this bridge to strong and democratic school cultures – from its very beginning as a little laboratory until today with a strong and important outreach.”

Responding to global challenges – Co-creating the future

For the last 70 years, ASPnet has demonstrated its role as a laboratory for innovative teaching methods and its ability to incorporate new topics and approaches into the classroom in response to global challenges and events.

(This article is continued in the column on the right.)

Question for this article:

What is the relation between peace and education?

Will UNESCO once again play a role in the culture of peace?

(Article continued from left column)

Ms Julie Saito, International Coordinator at UNESCO, drew a line from the first experiments on Rights of Women, study of other countries and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1953, to today’s school projects that retain ASPnet’s character as a laboratory of ideas and that, for example, engage students and teachers in shared learning experiences around the colonial past, promoting global citizenship education and intercultural learning.

“Our experimentation is the constant attempt to develop schools, to innovate, to pioneer, to make learning more meaningful and contemporary, to rethink education, to take into account global events and challenges and to empower all learners to assume active roles, both locally and globally, in building more peaceful, tolerant, inclusive and sustainable futures,” said Ms Saito.

Transforming the network for the future – Strengthening international collaboration

The central element of the conference were workshops by the International Coordination Unit around three core processes in transforming the network for the future. In participatory and action-oriented workshops and discussions, National Coordinators jointly explored possibilities for operationalising the new ASPnet Strategy 2022-2030 “Building peaceful and sustainable futures through transformative education”, tested the beta version of the new ASPnet community platform  or shared ideas for developing an ASPnet Young Ambassador initiative following the adopted resolution at the last UNESCO Executive Board. Further, National Coordinators were invited to share their good practices and engage in dialogues with fellow colleagues on how to strengthen transnational collaborations and school partnerships.

Mr Klaus Schilling, National Coordinator in Germany, highlighted in his closing the strengths of the network in learning together transnationally and in taking action for a better world: „The ASPnet Conference in Berlin was a strong boost to foster international collaboration and transformative learning within our network. New synergies between National Coordinators, new thematic and methodological approaches as well as clear strategies to empower students and teachers will help to dynamize cooperation within the ASPnet and to strengthen its contribution towards peaceful and sustainable futures. The rich presentations of the ASPnet Conference – for example on the pilot projects how to confront the colonial past in transnational dialogues as well as the example of Recreation Projects in solidarity with Ukraine show the enormous potential and commitment of its member institutions. ASPnet makes a real difference for another world.“

70th Anniversary Declaration of the UNESCO Associated Schools Network

At the end of the successful conference, the participants jointly endorsed the “70th Anniversary Declaration of the UNESCO Associated Schools Network”. Initiated by the ASPnet National Coordinator in Greece, Ms Vera Dilari, the declaration was the result of a co-creative process during the conference.

The declaration invites National Commissions for UNESCO, other UNESCO networks and entities, policy-makers, civil society, the private sector and other stakeholders to collaborate with ASPnet institutions, National Coordinators and the International Coordination Unit and to support and strengthen the UNESCO Associated Schools Network (ASPnet).

UNESCO ASPnet celebrates the 70th anniversary of the network under the theme “Fostering a culture of Peace and Sustainability through Transformative Education” through the country initiatives of ASPnet members as well as with a dedicated exhibition during the 42nd General Conference in November 2023.

EDUCATION FOR PEACE, global, United Nations,

Two analyses of the Paris Climate Summit

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

An article from Reuters

A statement from Greenpeace

Analysis by Reuters

A Paris summit to discuss reforming the world’s financial system scored some notable wins that should tee up greater action before climate talks later this year, though some participants were disappointed with progress to address poorer states’ debt.

The Summit for a New Global Financing Pact saw French President Macron host around 40 leaders, many from the Global South, to debate changes to multilateral finance institutions in the face of climate change and other development challenges.

Much of the discussion centred on the key requests of developing nations, framed through the “Bridgetown Initiative” led by Barbados leader Mia Mottley, and her adviser Avinash Persaud said he was pleased with the outcome of the talks.

“It’s a roadmap for genuine change,” he told Reuters on the sidelines of the talks. “What’s emerged here is a real … understanding of the scale and pace of what is required.”

Among the highlights were confirmation that the richer world will likely hit a long-overdue target of providing $100 billion annually in climate finance to poorer countries, a long-delayed debt deal for Zambia, and a package to boost Senegal’s renewable energy capacity.

The World Bank and others also said they would start adding clauses to lending terms that allow vulnerable states to suspend debt repayments when natural disaster strikes.

Yet it was the wording of the final statement from attendees and subtle changes in the tone of discussions behind the scenes that gave hope to Persaud that even greater change was coming.

Specifically, for the first time, the document acknowledged the potential need for richer countries to provide fresh money to multilateral development institutions like the World Bank. This came alongside a plan to draw on more of their current assets, to the tune of $200 billion over 10 years.

Another first was in the explicit target for multilateral development banks to leverage “at least” $100 billion a year in private sector capital when they lend.

(article continued in right column)

Question for this article:

Sustainable Development Summits of States, What are the results?

(Article continued from the left column)

A reference was also made to finding “new avenues for international taxation”, as well as other Bridgetown Initiative requests including offering investors foreign exchange guarantees.

“That was widely discussed here and (there’s) lots of support behind an initiative that’s happening outside of Paris, at the International Maritime Organisation in a couple weeks time, on a levy on shipping emissions,” Persaud added.

Still, the summit was not without its critics.

“Unfortunately, the Paris Summit has not provided the breakthrough needed to find the funding for our planet’s survival,” Teresa Anderson, Global Lead on Climate Justice for ActionAid International, said, pointing to new funding pledges being loans or temporary debt relief instead of grants.

All eyes now turn to more traditional events later in the year, including the International Monetary Fund and World Bank annual meetings, a G20 meeting in September and the COP28 climate talks in Dubai.

Persaud said his focus would be on making sure the plan to scale up multilateral development bank lending was in place by the time of annual meetings in October, and that pilot work began on reducing the cost of capital for developing countries.

The summit, held against a backdrop of criticism that the world is moving far too slowly to address climate change, was a success in that it delivered a roadmap requiring specific actions by specific dates, some observers said.

“They’ve got a clear timetable of what they want to see happen and it’s that timeline that puts the pressure on and means that it’s harder to just kick things into the long grass,” said Sonia Dunlop from think tank E3G.

Analysis by Greenpeace:

 President Macron’s Summit for a New Global Financing Pact ends with very limited progress to make polluters pay for the escalating costs of the climate crisis. Governments failed to commit to concrete and ambitious action to make the fossil fuel industry pay.  

Tracy Carty, Climate Politics Expert at Greenpeace International, said:

“The Summit ended with mild recognition of the need for new taxes to pay for climate action and identified a role for the G20 and COP28 to take them forward.  Taxing big polluters should be top of the agenda for these global moments, but rich country governments don’t have to wait to act – they already can and must introduce taxes on big polluters, above all the fossil fuel industry, to pay for loss and damage now.

“Silence on the fossil fuel industry paying for the mess they have caused was deafening at this Summit. Fossil fuel companies are racking up obscene profits, while millions in low-income countries pay the price as drought, floods, sea level rise and other climate catastrophes wreak havoc.” 

Pierre Terras, Head of Climate and Energy campaigns at Greenpeace France, said:

“President Macron’s promotion of fossil gas as an energy of transition during this Summit was totally irresponsible and resonates with his poor record of domestic climate in-action. Unsurprisingly, he also has fallen short in recognising the need to tax the fossil fuel companies to pay for the damage they have caused. Both nationally and globally, the French president seems stuck on protecting the wealthiest and the polluters.”

Europe, global, SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT,

Media Organizations From Global South Discuss Solidarity and Standing Up to Sanctions

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

An article by Mauro Ramos in Peoples Dispatch

At an event in Shanghai (May 8), representatives of media organizations from Asia, Africa, and Latin America highlighted the need for learning from and working with each other and building infrastructure to resist western hegemony


(Photo: Research Institute of International Communication at East China Normal University)

“The conflict imposed by the United States [on China] is partly due to the decline of Western control over science and technology. Gradually, neocolonial control over finance, resources, and science and technology has been exhausted, but the neocolonial structure remains with respect to Western control over weapons and information systems,” said Vijay Prashad, director of the Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research and Chief Correspondent of Globetrotter, at the opening of the “Communication as Solidarity” conference, organized by the School of Communication at East China Normal University along with several other Chinese entities in Shanghai. 

Besides representatives from Press TV,TeleSUR, RT and CGTN, the event also included members of progressive media organizations such as Pan African TV, ArgMedios, and Brasil de Fato, and over 100 researchers and media professionals from China, Ghana, Zambia, South Africa, Brazil, and Russia.  

Prashad said that Western powers have almost absolute control over information systems. “This control is exercised through Western domination of infrastructure, such as fiber optic cables, and human networks of information production, and through the ideological power of Western media established during colonial times.” 

One of the hosts of the meeting, Lu Xinyu, of the newly formed International Communication Research Institute at East China Normal University, said that the movement for a new order in the 1970s tried to solve the problem of the unbalanced global media structure, but failed. “So today we hope to have a new understanding of this issue: One aspect is the domination of the media by the West. That requires that we, the media and media organizations of the global South, work together.” 

Targets of sanctions and censorship by the Global North

The conference was attended by representatives of media organizations that have faced the brunt of censorship.

In 2010, US State Department documents leaked by WikiLeaks revealed that the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office had told the US embassy that the British government was “exploring ways to limit the operations of the IRIB’s Press TV service.” (IRIB = Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting)

In the document, the British chancellery stated that national and international law did not permit the withdrawal of Press TV’s license, but that a possibility could be open if more sanctions were imposed on Iran. 

Finally, in 2013, the Iranian state channel’s license was revoked in the UK for allegedly violating the country’s Communications Act. In the following years, the media outlet suffered several blocks on its YouTube and Gmail accounts, was banned from Facebook, had its website https://presstv.com/ confiscated, and late last year, the French satellite operator Eutelsat decided to take the channel off the air.

At different levels, many of the media organizations present at the meeting have been facing censorship, blockades, and sanctions imposed by the United States and Europe or right-wing governments, as in the case of TeleSUR. 

(Article continued in the column on the right)

Question related to this article:
 
How can media from the Global South break the media hegemony of the Global North?

Free flow of information, How is it important for a culture of peace?

(Article continued from the column on the left)

The multi-state-owned platform has already been removed from the programming of the National Telecommunications Corporation, a state-owned channel in Ecuador in 2018 under Lenín Moreno. After the coup against Evo Morales in Bolivia in 2019, the state-owned Entel under the de facto government of Jeanine Áñez, suspended the broadcast of the channel founded by Hugo Chávez.

In 2021, the UK withdrew CGTN‘s license on the grounds that it is directly controlled by a political party, which is not allowed in the country. RT, on the other hand, has been banned from all European territory and from platforms such as YouTube. The Spanish version of the channel on that platform had six million followers until it was taken down.   

In a debate about the search for sovereignty for the Global South media, the president of TeleSUR, Patricia Villegas, defended the need that the countries to develop their own platforms, such as satellites, servers, and social networks. “The content we’ve been building relies on borrowed highways that are owned by others who define and change the rules, block you whenever they want, according to the interests that they defend. So, if we want to continue to tell what really happens in each of these territories, we have to fight to build our own highways.”

For the director of Brasil de Fato, Nina Fideles, the conference was significant “by the very fact of bringing together, over two days, people and media outlets from different countries, who could share experiences and ideas about communication from the Global South.”

“Besides the fact that we had the opportunity to learn more about the Chinese experience in relation to communication, we also learned about the economic and social model here and the country’s role reorienting the global geopolitical situation,” added Fideles.

The founder of the Post in Zambia, Fred M’membe, said that the meeting between the different media outlets was trailblazing. He also commented that media like TeleSUR, RT, and CGTN, among others, have a great responsibility to use the knowledge and resources they have to help create a new kind of media, a new way of communication. “Our adversaries, those who want to continue with the ideas of exploitation and humiliation of others, are investing billions of dollars around the world to consolidate their ideas of dominating the world,” said M’membe, who is also president of the Socialist Party of Zambia.

Progressive media and Pan-Africanism

Another axis of debate at the conference was the media scenario on the African continent, as well as the Pan-African agenda. Kambale Musavuli, director of Pan-African TV, said that Pan-Africanism has been taking root in the African continent and that the role of progressive media is essential to the project. 

“We have achieved Pan-Africanism at the political level by bringing the countries of the African Union together, but now we need the Pan-Africanism among the people. Where are the people? They are in the rural communities, and to reach them you need the media, radio, television, and newspapers. We are using the media, especially TV, to reach the people in remote areas. So, using community radio stations, using television stations run by progressive organizations, it will be possible to spread this vision of a united Africa under Pan-Africanism,” Musavuli explained.  

Kwesi Pratt Jr., founder of the channel, said that Africa’s image and history are permanently distorted by the hegemonic media. “There is a hysteria all over the world that prevents us from choosing our own friends and deciding our own destiny. The African reality today is: Those who colonized and enslaved us are exploiting and stealing our resources to maximize the profits of multinational corporations instead of developing Africa. This is the story we need to tell and we need to tell it in our own way, using our own instruments,” he said.

The conference saw the official inauguration of the International Communication Research Institute of East China Normal University, which will have Lu Xinyu as dean. 

This new institution seeks to contribute to the development of multi-level and multi-channel international communication platforms and networks for the countries and regions in the Global South.
 
(Thank you to the United National Antiwar Coalition for calling our attention to this article.)

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, global

2023 United Nations Resolution on the Culture of Peace

DISARMAMENT AND SECURITY .

Data from UN document of A/77/L.74 and Meeting coverage of 79th Meeting of GA 77th Session

The UN General Assembly adopted without a vote this year’s resolution for the culture of peace, presented as usual by the delegation of Bangladesh.

The resolution was sponsored by the following countries: Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Canada, China, Dominican Republic, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Germany, Honduras, Hungary, India, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Mauritania, Morocco, Nepal, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Qatar, Russian Federation, Singapore, Slovenia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu and Venezuela.


Photo from BNN

Following 40 preambular paragraphs which among other things recognized “the importance of the Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace, adopted by the General Assembly on 13 September 1999,” the resolution included the following 21 operative paragraphs:

1. Reiterates that the objective of the effective implementation of the Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace is to strengthen further the global movement for a culture of peace, and calls upon all concerned to renew their attention to this objective;

2. Invites Member States to continue to place greater emphasis on and expand their activities promoting a culture of peace at the national, regional and international levels and to ensure that peace and non-violence are fostered at all levels;

3. Invites the entities of the United Nations system, within their existing mandates, to integrate, as appropriate, the eight action areas of the Programme of Action into their programmes of activities, focusing on promoting a culture of peace and non-violence at the national, regional and international levels;

4. Commends the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization for strengthening efforts to mobilize all relevant stakeholders within and outside the United Nations system in support of a culture of peace, and invites the Organization to continue to enhance communication and outreach, including through the culture of peace website;

5. Commends the practical initiatives and actions by relevant United Nations bodies, including the United Nations Children’s Fund, the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UN-Women) and the University for Peace, as well as their activities in further promoting a culture of peace and non-violence, in particular the promotion of peace education and activities related to specific areas identified in the Programme of Action, and encourages them to continue and further strengthen and expand their efforts;

6. Stresses the importance of addressing the underlying drivers of violence and conflict to promote a culture of peace;

7. Encourages Member States, United Nations entities and other relevant actors to adopt a holistic approach to the cross-cutting dimensions of peace, development, humanitarian action and human rights in order to prevent the recurrence of conflict and build lasting peace;

8. Underlines that early childhood development contributes to the development of more peaceful societies through advancing equality, tolerance, human development and promoting human rights, and calls for investment in early childhood education, including through effective policies and practices, towards promoting a culture of peace;

(Article continued in right column)

(Click here for a version of this article in Spanish or click here for a version in French)

Question for this article:

What is the United Nations doing for a culture of peace?

(Article continued from left column)

9. Encourages Member States, United Nations entities, regional and subregional organizations and relevant actors to consider instituting mechanisms to involve youth in the promotion of a culture of peace, tolerance and intercultural and interreligious dialogue and develop, as appropriate, an understanding of respect for human dignity, pluralism and diversity, including, as appropriate, through education programmes, that could discourage their participation in acts of terrorism, violent extremism as and when conducive to terrorism, violence, xenophobia and all forms of discrimination;

10. Encourages the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations to increase its activities that focus on peace education and global citizenship education in order to enhance an understanding among young people of values such as peace, tolerance, openness, inclusion and mutual respect, which are essential in developing a culture of peace;

11. Encourages the United Nations peacebuilding architecture to continue to promote peacebuilding and sustaining peace activities, as outlined in its resolutions 72/276 and 75/201, and to advance a culture of peace and non-violence in postconflict peacebuilding efforts at the country level, and recognizes the important role of the Peacebuilding Commission in this regard;

12. Emphasizes the critical importance of an inclusive, resilient and sustainable recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic, and in this regard calls upon States to promote the values of a culture of peace, inter alia, in countering rising inequalities, discrimination, exclusion, hate crimes and violence;

13. Urges the appropriate authorities to provide age-appropriate education in children’s schools that builds a culture of peace and non-violence, including lessons in mutual understanding, respect, tolerance, active and global citizenship and human rights;

14. Encourages the involvement of media, especially the mass media, in promoting a culture of peace and non-violence, with particular regard to children and young people;

15. Commends civil society, non-governmental organizations and young people for their activities in further promoting a culture of peace and non-violence, including through their campaign to raise awareness on a culture of peace and the peaceful settlement of disputes;

16. Encourages civil society and non-governmental organizations to further strengthen their efforts to promote a culture of peace, inter alia, by adopting their own programme of activities to complement the initiatives of Member States, the United Nations system and other international and regional organizations, in line with the Declaration and Programme of Action;

17. Invites Member States, all entities of the United Nations system and civil society organizations to accord increasing attention to their observance of the International Day of Peace on 21 September each year as a day of global ceasefire and non-violence, in accordance with its resolution 55/282 of 7 September 2001, and of the International Day of Non-Violence on 2 October, in accordance with its resolution 61/271 of 15 June 2007;

18. Requests the President of the General Assembly to consider convening a high-level forum, as appropriate and within existing resources, devoted to the implementation of the Programme of Action on the occasion of the anniversary of its adoption, on or around 13 September, and requests the Secretariat to provide required logistical support for its effective organization within their respective mandates and existing resources;

19. Invites the Secretary-General, within existing resources, in consultation with the Member States and taking into account the observations of civil society organizations, to explore mechanisms and strategies, in particular strategies in the sphere of information and communications technology, for the implementation of the Declaration and Programme of Action and to initiate outreach efforts to increase global awareness of the Programme of Action and its eight areas of action aimed at their implementation, including through public information activities by the Department of Global Communications of the Secretariat;

20. Requests the Secretary-General to submit to the General Assembly at its seventy-ninth session a report, within existing resources, on actions taken by Member States, on the basis of information provided by them, and those taken system-wide by all concerned entities of the United Nations to implement the present resolution;

21. Decides to include in the provisional agenda of its seventy-eighth session the item entitled “Culture of peace”.

Following the presentation by Bangladesh, the resolution was welcomed by Brunei Darussalam, speaking for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), by Venezuela, speaking on behalf of the Group of Friends in Defence of the Charter of the United Nations, by Barbados, speaking on behalf of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM). Other speakers were from Syria, Malaysia, Morocco, United Arab Emirates, Equatorial Guinea and Iran, and an exchange of criticisms between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, global, United Nations,

Beyond borders: Why new ‘high seas’ treaty is critical for the world

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

An article from the United Nations

The UN’s 193 Member States adopted a landmark legally binding marine biodiversity agreement on Monday (June 19) following nearly two decades of fierce negotiations over forging a common wave of conservation and sustainability in the high seas beyond national boundaries – covering two thirds of the planet’s oceans. Here are five key points on why it is important for the world..


© Nuno Vasco Rodrigues/UN World Oceans Day 2023 A team of scientific divers assess the marine biodiversity on the top of a seamount in Porto Santo, Madeira, Portugal.

1. Fresh protection beyond borders

While countries are responsible for the conservation and sustainable use of waterways under their national jurisdiction, the high seas now have added protection from such destructive trends as pollution and unsustainable fishing activities.

Adopted by the Intergovernmental Conference on Marine Biodiversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ), the “high seas” treaty aims at taking stewardship of the ocean on behalf of present and future generations, in line with the Convention on the Law of the Sea.

The new agreement contains 75 articles that aim at protecting, caring for, and ensuring the responsible use of the marine environment, maintaining the integrity of ocean ecosystems, and conserving the inherent value of marine biological diversity.

“The ocean is the lifeblood of our planet, and today, you have pumped new life and hope to give the ocean a fighting chance,” the UN Secretary-General António Guterres told delegates on Monday.

2. Cleaner oceans

Toxic chemicals and millions of tons of plastic waste are flooding into coastal ecosystems, killing or injuring fish, sea turtles, seabirds, and marine mammals, and making their way into the food chain and ultimately being consumed by humans.

More than 17 million metric tons of plastic entered the world’s ocean in 2021, making up 85 per cent of marine litter, and projections are expected to double or triple each year by 2040, according to the latest Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) report.

According to UN estimates, by 2050, there could be more plastic in the sea than fish unless action is taken.

(article continued in right column)

Question for this article:

If we can connect up the planet through Internet, can’t we agree to preserve the planet?

(Article continued from the left column)

The treaty aims at strengthening resilience and contains provisions based on the polluter-pays principle as well as mechanisms for disputes.

Under the treaty’s provisions, parties must assess potential environmental impacts of any planned activities beyond their jurisdictions.

3. Sustainably managing fish stocks

More than one third of global fish stocks are over-exploited, according to the UN.

The treaty underlines the importance of capacity building and the transfer of marine technology, including the development and strengthening of institutional capacity and national regulatory frameworks or mechanisms.

This includes increasing collaboration among regional seas organizations and regional fisheries management organizations.

4. Lowering temperatures

Global heating is pushing ocean temperatures to new heights, fueling more frequent and intense storms, rising sea levels, and the salinization of coastal lands and aquifers.

Addressing these urgent concerns, the treaty offers guidance, including through an integrated approach to ocean management that builds ecosystem resilience to tackle the adverse effects of climate change and ocean acidification, and maintains and restores ecosystem integrity, including carbon cycling services.

Treaty provisions also recognize the rights and traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples and local communities, the freedom of scientific research, and need for the fair and equitable sharing of benefits.

5. Vital for realizing 2030 Agenda

The new agreement “is critical to addressing the threats facing the ocean, and to the success of ocean-related goals and targets, including the 2030 Agenda, the UN chief said on Monday.

Some of the goals and targets include Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 14, which aims at, among other things, preventing and significantly reducing marine pollution of all kinds by 2025, and ending overfishing through science-based management plans in order to restore fish stocks in the shortest time feasible.

The new agreement will enable the establishment of area-based management tools, including marine protected areas, to conserve and sustainably manage vital habitats and species in the high seas and the international seabed area.

The treaty also considers the special circumstances facing small-island and landlocked developing nations.

“We have a new tool,” UN General Assembly President Csaba Kőrösi told the Intergovernmental Conference delegates on Monday. “This landmark achievement bears witness to your collective commitment to the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction. Together, you laid the foundation for a better stewardship of our seas, ensuring their survival for generations to come.”

Learn more about how the UN is working to protect the world’s oceans here.

global, SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, United Nations,

United Nations: Values of Compassion, Respect, Human Fraternity ‘Best Antidote to Poison of Discord, Division’, Secretary-General Tells Security Council

. TOLERANCE & SOLIDARITY .

An article from the United Nations

The declaration “Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together” — co-authored by Pope Francis and the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar, Ahmed Al-Tayeb — is a model for compassion and human solidarity, United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres told the Security Council today, as speakers warned against a groundswell of xenophobia, racism and intolerance, anti-Muslim hatred, virulent antisemitism and attacks on minority Christian communities.


Pope Francis and Ahmed el-Tayeb sign the Document on Human Fraternity

António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations, said that hatred of the other is a common denominator to the escalation of conflict and a conduit for atrocity crimes.  Today, “social media has equipped hatemongers with a global bullhorn for bile”, and unverified assertions or outright lies are placed on an equal footing with facts and science.  Hate-fuelled language is moving from the margins to the mainstream, triggering real-life violence, he observed, noting that in Myanmar, social media has been exploited to demonize the Rohingya minority, inciting attacks and violence.  In Iraq, the recent proliferation of hate speech targeting Yazidis in Sinjar has stoked fears among the community that it will once again be the target of atrocity crimes.

Accordingly, he outlined concrete measures to make the digital space more inclusive and safer, including through the Global Digital Compact for an open, free, inclusive and secure digital future for all.  Calling for a surge in education financing, peacebuilding and global solidarity, he said that the values of compassion, respect and human fraternity are “our best antidote to the poison of discord and division”.  He further emphasized that it is the duty of religious leaders to prevent instrumentalization of hatred amidst their followers.

Ahmed Al-Tayeb, Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Al-Sharif and Chairman of the Muslim Council of Elders, rejected claims that Islam is a religion of the sword or war, insisting that war is only acceptable for self-defence.  Urging the international community to move away from pointless conflicts, he noted tragedies caused by wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  In Syria, Libya and Yemen, ancient civilizations have been destroyed, and these lands have become battlegrounds forcing their people to flee. Highlighting efforts made by religious leaders to promote human fraternity, he said Al-Azhar Al-Sharif aims to identify shared responsibilities in addressing climate change and the escalating wars.

(continued in right column)

Question related to this article:
 
How can different faiths work together for understanding and harmony?

What is the United Nations doing for a culture of peace?

(continued from left column)

“It seems […] that we are going backwards in history, with the rise of myopic, extremist, resentful and aggressive nationalisms that have kindled conflicts which are not only anachronistic and outdated, but even more violent,” said Paul Richard Gallagher, Secretary for Relations with States for the Observer State of the Holy See, speaking on behalf of Pope Francis. Today’s globalized world is experiencing the famine of fraternity, whose worst effect is armed conflict and war, he said, adding that to make peace a reality, the international community “must move away from the logic of the legitimacy of war”.  There is still time to write a new chapter of peace in history, he said.

In the ensuing debate, speakers underscored that human fraternity can help build a better world and advance peace, recognizing the significant role of community and religious leaders in cultivating tolerance.

The representative of the United Arab Emirates said the world is facing the highest number of armed conflicts since the Second World War, with 2 billion people living in places affected by conflict, while extremism has become a tool for inciting violence.  Spotlighting the challenges experienced by the Arab region, she drew attention to a draft resolution — submitted to the Council by her country and the United Kingdom — which seeks to address the threats of hate speech, racism and other forms of extremism in conflict situations.

Echoing his support for the draft, the speaker for the United Kingdom underscored that religious minorities have time and again been targeted in conflict, including the Yazidis in Iraq, the Rohingya in Myanmar and the Baha’i in Houthi-controlled areas of Yemen.  Religious communities and leaders can play a unique role in conflict prevention, reconciliation and peacebuilding initiatives, including at the grassroots level, where inter-religious and intercultural dialogue can help build trust between communities, he said.

Adding to that, Mozambique’s delegate emphasized that places of worship such as churches, mosques and synagogues should not be used as incubators of religious extremists or as battlefields.  Instead, they must be used for the purpose of peace and human fraternity.  Dialogue plays a key role in reversing this dangerous trend, she observed, noting the importance of peacebuilding mechanisms in addressing intolerance, hate speech, racism and other manifestations of extremism.

The universal premise of achieving a culture of peace seems to be increasingly distant, cautioned the representative of Ecuador, pointing to the unprecedented number of displaced persons, the devastation caused by natural hazards and the resurgence of hate speech.  Focusing on the roots of conflicts and the adoption of timely prevention measures is key to sustain the peacebuilding agenda, he said, highlighting the potential of preventive diplomacy to avoid escalations in violence.

For his part, China’s delegate rejected the concept of superior or inferior civilizations and cited attempts to transform or replace other civilizations as “disastrous” when applied to practice.  Specifically, he recalled that white supremacy wreaked devastation in Asia and Africa.  Nonetheless, he pointed to encouraging developments in the Middle East, including the resumption of diplomatic ties between Saudi Arabia and Iran — an outcome of the Beijing dialogue — setting off reconciliation in the region.  Also, he said that developments such as Syria’s return to the League of Arab States inject positive energy into the unity of regional countries.

global, TOLERANCE & SOLIDARITY, United Nations,

A global analysis of violence against women defenders in environmental conflicts

. . WOMEN’S EQUALITY . .

Excerpts from publication by Dalena Tran & Ksenija Hanaček in Nature

Abstract

Women environmental defenders face retaliation for mobilizing against extractive and polluting projects, which perpetrate violence against Indigenous, minority, poor and rural communities. The issue matters because it highlights the gendered nature of extractive violence and the urgent need to address the systemic patterns of violence that affect women defenders, who are often overlooked and underreported. Here we analyse violence against women defenders in environmental conflicts around the world. We use data from the Environmental Justice Atlas and employ log-linear and binomial regressions to find statistically significant patterns in displacement, repression, criminalization, violent targeting and assassinations committed against women defenders in extractive conflicts.


(Click on image to enlarge)

Statistical results indicate that violence against women defenders is concentrated among mining, agribusiness and industrial conflicts in the geographical South. Repression, criminalization and violent targeting are closely linked, while displacement and assassination appear as extreme outcomes when conflict violence worsens. Women defenders experience high rates of violence regardless of countries’ governance accountability and gender equality. This work contributes to the broader sustainability agenda by highlighting the need to address the impacts of extractive activities on women.

Main

Extractivism refers to projects extracting natural resources for exportation. It is an inherently unequal process often inciting extractivist violence, or the institutionalized use of brute force to displace and dominate communities for extractive and polluting projects such as mines or plantations. The extractive process frequently involves militarizing communities and assassinating environmental defenders, those advocating to protect environmental and human rights5. Such violence is typically justified by dehumanizing people and denying them agency through systematically excluding them from economic, social, political and cultural activities (for example, through classism, racialization and gendering). Extractive violence is also connected to ecocide, the notion that environmental destruction is criminal and has devastating genocidal impacts on affected communities dependent on the health of their environments for physical, spiritual, and cultural wellbeing. Genocidal outcomes are those exterminating and persecuting groups, assimilating survivors and erasing their culture.

Current literature describes a connection between colonial extractive attitudes, ecocide and genocide of Indigenous peoples, minorities, the poor and rural communities1. Ecocide typically begins with land grabbing, or forcefully dispossessing communities of their lands and natural resources. Such usurpation is secured through legal and institutional structures such as land ownership regimes disrupting common law tenure. This colonial control is also reinforced through covertly and overtly discriminatory ideological and discursive practices. Ensuing ecological destruction then becomes genocidal when causing conditions fundamentally threatening a group’s cultural and physical existence. More specifically, direct physical violence gives way to indirect forms of extermination through undermining place-based livelihoods, such as deforestation causing food instability, pollution causing health impacts, or structural inequalities increasing vulnerability to violence and ecological consequences.

There has been increasing attention to the ecocide–genocide nexus through environmental defender killings as well as slow violence wherein people suffer from long-term environmental harms. This study contributes an ecocide–genocide–gender connection to such literature. Violence against women environmental defenders (WEDs) is overlooked, and extractive violence is gendered. Corporations and states typically concentrate power among men during project negotiations, limiting women’s autonomy and normalizing their oppression. WEDs face retaliation because mobilizing defies gender expectations of docility (lack of retaliation) and sacrifice (absorption of extractive consequences).

(continued in right column)

Questions for this article

Protecting women and girls against violence, Is progress being made?

(continued from left column)

Assassinations are the most visible form of direct violence, but all threats to women defenders are difficult to document owing to censorship and a lack of dat. Lacking documentation of violence against women especially is also prevalent owing to discursive discrimination against women treating the loss of their lives as normal, deserved and ‘ungrievable. To address this gap, this article examines 523 cases from the Environmental Justice Atlas (EJAtlas) involving WEDs, 81 of which involve WEDs assassinated for their advocacy. Routine assassinations of WEDs are not isolated incidences, but rather political tactics forcefully making way for extractivism. Media reports often focus on gruesome details to sensationalize yet trivialize WEDs’ struggles, often not recording names, let alone their struggle. Patterns of extractive violence against women thus remain overlooked.

In this Article, we address the following questions: (1) Where and under which circumstances do WEDs experience different forms of violence leading up to their assassinations? (2) How do structural patterns of violence affect women defenders? Log-linear regression traced distributions of violence against WEDs across conflict types, commodities and impacts. Binomial regression then addressed structural patterns in countries where WEDs were assassinated. This article contributes global patterns of violence against WEDs. We broaden analyses to circumstances leading up to and including assassinations because ecocide is not limited to killings, but rather encompasses displacement, repression, criminalization and violent targeting. Given our statistical approach and the nature of the material, we are aware of the potential dehumanization of WEDs’ circumstances and denial of their agency. However, quantitative data analysis using a large, representative sample is necessary for strengthening arguments that patterns of violence against women defenders found in qualitative, locally focused case studies are not outliers, but rather are occurring worldwide.
Results

Regarding circumstances informing WED assassinations, extrajudicial killings predominantly occurred in Latin America, Asia and Africa. Many cases were in the Philippines, Brazil, Colombia and Mexico (Fig. 1). Even in Southern cases, some in Costa Rica, Kenya, Rwanda and Saint Lucia targeted Global North expatriates. The data are skewed towards the Philippines. There were 19 WED assassination cases, more than double compared with Colombia in second place. Some Philippines cases were massacres or serial killings, assassinating 26 WEDs across 19 cases, whereas cases elsewhere targeted one or two at a time.

Figure 2 shows that the types of conflict with high statistical significance (P ≤ 0.05) of violence against WEDs were biomass and land, mineral extraction and industrial and utilities conflicts. The distribution of violence throughout biomass and land conflicts (n = 146) was that nearly half of all corresponding cases involved repression (41%), criminalization (43%) and violent targeting (48%) of women defenders. . . .

Discussion (excerpts)

. . . . Overall, an ecocide–genocide–gender connection is thus apparent in how assassinations and extractive violence were situated within contexts producing gender-specific vulnerabilities for women defenders. Ecocidal dispossession of lands and resources, as many of the EJAtlas cases corroborate, often began upon intrusion of masculinized extractive industries into communities. Genocide caused cultural and physical erasure of peoples standing in the way of extractivism, and ecocide further accomplished such erasure through undermining women’s agency. As occurred in the deadliest countries towards WEDs, changing land ownership regimes8 used patriarchal ideologies to foster ecocidal conditions (extermination, persecution, survivor assimilation and cultural erasure) emboldening violence in subtly gendered manifestations of repression, criminalization, violent targeting and assassination.

The ecocide of Indigenous peoples across Southeast Asian EJAtlas cases, for example, has distinctly gendered aspects. Many Southeast Asian Indigenous peoples formerly had alternative gender cosmologies beyond man–woman binaries and with relatively more egalitarian power relations. Colonization goes beyond territorial invasion. Consequently, colonization and ensuing extractive land grabbing brought new legal, administrative and market structures concentrating (often militarized) power among men. We argue that, through discrimination and violence, these institutions committed ecocidal–genocidal–gendered violence by exterminating and persecuting Indigenous community leaders, erasing formerly egalitarian gender roles and relations, and assimilating survivors into marginalized, binary and unequal gendered labour and social divisions.

Ecocide rewrites WEDs’ histories and bodies as inferior and deserving of extermination. Ecocidal control of populations2 then occurs as fear of and actually experienced gendered (lethal) violence not only deters mobilizations but also creates impunity as women are less able to mobilize safely and openly. Moreover, while most cases do not explicitly report WED involvement or violence, this reflects representational and mobilization inequalities. For instance, there is a difference in how Indigenous and non-Indigenous women defenders negotiate and are impacted by extractive violence in different ways. Such intersectional differences exist and should be explored in future work.

global, WOMEN'S EQUALITY

Brazil President Lula’s speech to the G7

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION .

A publication by the Government of Brazil

(Editor’s note; News media in the US and Europe headlined the decisions of the G7 countries (US, UK, Canada, France, Italy, Germany and Japan) in their recent meeting in Hiroshima that supported Ukraine president Zelensky and that attacked the “economic coercion.” of China and Russia. They fail to mention the following alternative vision presented at the meeting by Brazilian President Lula.)


In the official photo, the President of Brazil was placed between the Presidents of the Comores and Vietnam, while the President of the United States was placed between the Presidents of Canada and France.

Hiroshima is a propitious setting for a reflection on the catastrophic consequences of all types of conflict. This reflection is urgent and necessary. Today, the risk of nuclear war is at its highest level since the height of the Cold War.

In 1945, the UN was founded to prevent a new World War. However, the multilateral mechanisms for conflict prevention and resolution no longer work.

The world is no longer the same. Traditional wars continue to break out, and we see worrying setbacks in the nuclear non-proliferation regime, which necessarily will have to include the dimension of disarmament.

Nuclear weapons are not a source of security, but an instrument of mass destruction that denies our own humanity and threatens the continuity of life on Earth.

As long as nuclear weapons exist, there will always be the possibility of their use.

For this reason, Brazil was actively engaged in the negotiations of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which we hope to be able to ratify soon.

In line with the United Nations Charter, we strongly condemn the use of force as a means of dispute settlement. We condemn the violation of Ukraine’s territorial integrity.

At the same time, as fighting continues, the human suffering, loss of life and destruction of homes increase.

(Article continued in the column on the right)

Questions related to this article:

Where in the world can we find good leadership today?

Latin America, has it taken the lead in the struggle for a culture of peace?

(Article continued from the column on the left)

I have repeated to exhaustion that it is necessary to talk about peace. No solution will last unless it is based on dialogue. We need to work to open room for negotiations.

At the same time, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the challenges to peace and security currently plaguing the world go far beyond Europe.

Israelis and Palestinians, Armenians and Azerbaijanis, Kosovars and Serbs need peace. Yemenis, Syrians, Libyans and Sudanese all deserve to live in peace. These conflicts should receive the same degree of international attention.

In Haiti, we need to act quickly to alleviate the suffering of a population torn apart by tragedy. The scourge to which the Haitian people is subject is the result of decades of indifference to the country’s real needs. For years, Brazil has been saying that Haiti’s problem is not just one of security, but, above all, one of development.

The gap between these challenges and the global governance we have continues to grow. The lack of a reform of the Security Council is the unavoidable component of the problem.

The Council is more paralyzed than ever. Permanent members continue the long tradition of waging unauthorized wars, whether in pursuit of territorial expansion or in pursuit of regime change.

Even without being able to prevent or resolve conflicts through the Council, some countries insist on expanding its agenda more and more, bringing in new themes that should be dealt with in other bodies of the UN system.

The result is that today we have a Council that does not deal with the old problems, nor the current ones, much less the future ones.

Brazil has lived in peace with its neighbors for over 150 years. We made Latin America a region without nuclear weapons. We are also proud of having built, together with African neighbors, a zone of peace and nuclear non-proliferation in the South Atlantic.

We are witnessing the emergence of a multipolar order that, if well received and nurtured, can benefit all.

The multipolarity that Brazil seeks is based on the primacy of International Law and the promotion of multilateralism.

Re-enacting the Cold War would be foolish.

Dividing the world into East and West or North and South would be as anachronistic as it is innocuous.

It is necessary to break with the logic of exclusive alliances and false clashes of civilizations.

It is urgent to reinforce the idea that cooperation, respecting differences, is the right path to follow.

Thank you very much.

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, global, Latin America,

16 May: International Day of Living Together in Peace

DISARMAMENT AND SECURITY .

An article from the United Nations

United in differences and diversity

Living together in peace is all about accepting differences and having the ability to listen to, recognize, respect and appreciate others, as well as living in a peaceful and united way.

The UN General-Assembly, in its resolution 72/130, declared 16 May the International Day of Living Together in Peace, as a means of regularly mobilizing the efforts of the international community to promote peace, tolerance, inclusion, understanding and solidarity. The Day aims to uphold the desire to live and act together, united in differences and diversity, in order to build a sustainable world of peace, solidarity and harmony.


Doves are released during the “Flame of Peace” ceremony in which arms were destroyed to mark the beginning of the country’s disarmament and reconciliation process in Bouake, Côte d’Ivoire. PHOTO: ©UN /Basile Zoma

The Day invites countries to further promote reconciliation to help to ensure peace and sustainable development, including by working with communities, faith leaders and other relevant actors, through reconciliatory measures and acts of service and by encouraging forgiveness and compassion among individuals.

Question for this article:

What is the United Nations doing for a culture of peace?

Background

Following the devastation of the Second World War, the United Nations was established to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war. One of its purposes is to achieve international cooperation in solving international problems, including by promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion.

In 1997, the General-Assembly proclaimed – by its resolution 52/15  — the year 2000 as the “International Year for a Culture of Peace”. In 1998, it proclaimed the period 2001-2010 as the “International Decade for a Culture of Peace and Non-Violence for Children of the World.”

In 1999, The General-Assembly adopted, by resolution 53/243, the Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace, which serves as the universal mandate for the international community, particularly the United Nations system, to promote a culture of peace and non-violence that benefits all of humanity, including future generations.

The declaration came about as a result of the long-held and cherished concept — contained within the Constitution of UNESCO — that “since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the defenses of peace must be constructed.” The Declaration embraces the principle that peace is not merely the absence of conflict, but also requires a positive, dynamic participatory process, in which dialogue is encouraged and conflicts are resolved in a spirit of mutual understanding and cooperation.

The Declaration also recognizes that to fulfill such an aspiration, there is a need to eliminate all forms of discrimination and intolerance, including those based on race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, property, disability, birth or other status.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, global, United Nations,