Reforming the International Order: Towards a New Humanitarian Paradigm
As the 79th session of the United Nations General Assembly was held this week, the current global landscape is marked by profound uncertainty and instability, with the international order facing significant challenges such as man against man, modern war and its dire consequences; man against nature, including disease and climate change; and man-made disasters – all of which transcend national boundaries.
Although the world has been spared from armed conflict involving the major nuclear power, there has been 150 "small” wars since 1945, mostly in the Third World. According to the Global Peace Index, the world is at a crossroads, with 56 ongoing conflicts – the most since the Second World War. The world does not need another war to forge a new world order. Instead, we must seek to build a system based on cooperation, mutual understanding, and respect for shared human dignity. Peaceful dialogue and collaboration should guide the creation of a more just and sustainable global future.
The United Nations was established in 1945, following the Second World War, with the primary aim of maintaining international peace and security. As Sundeep Waslekar explains in his book, A World without War: The History, Politics, and Resolution of Conflict, the UN has ignored its peace and security objectives – the primary reason for which it was set up.
No region has borne the brunt of the flaws and inequities of the UN’s failure in achieving peace and disarmament more than the West Asia and North Africa (WANA) region. The consistent failure to address the root causes of the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the overall fragmentation of societies has profoundly destabilized the region’s social fabric; fostering division and hatred rather than pluralism and respect for human dignity. Although it is called the United Nations Organization, it functions as a ‘United Governments Organization’. Therefore, it is time for a transformative shift towards a ‘United Peoples Organizations’ driven by civil society, which would empower individuals and communities to become stakeholders in their own futures.
New International Humanitarian Order
In the 1980s, Jordan led the call for the implementation of a New International Humanitarian Order. 28 members, including the six Security Council members joined the call, where we prioritised the safeguarding the dignity and right to life of every person and of the future generations. The UN General Assembly Resolution 120 in the 42nd Session in 1987 recognised the importance of further improving a comprehensive international framework which takes fully into account existing instruments relating to humanitarian questions as well as the need for addressing those aspects which are not yet adequately covered. This is especially pertinent during war and conflict.
The implementation of a New International Humanitarian Order seeks to transcend the limitations of the current international framework by emphasizing intra-independence, cultural affinity, and a renewed focus on human dignity and the right to life for future generations. By prioritising these principles, the New Order could pave the way for a more just, stable, and sustainable global order.
At the core of this Order should be the Responsibility to Protect – known as R2P. An international norm that seeks to ensure that the international community never again fails to halt the mass atrocity of crimes against humanity. Yet, we have failed to acknowledge the Responsibility to both Protect and Respect.
A new Principle of Humanity should indeed become a cornerstone of national and international policymaking. This principle would emphasise the inherent dignity and rights of all individuals, ensuring that policies promote not only immediate relief but long-term stability as well.
The United Nations in 2005 adopted the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) at the World Summit. By augmenting the Responsibility to Protect with a Responsibility to Respect, governments would be obligated to address systemic inequalities, pursue inclusive social justice, fostering conditions that prioritize human dignity and thus help prevent conflict. Such a commitment could guide policy frameworks, creating conditions for peace that are rooted in respect, fairness, and shared responsibility.
Breaking the Cycle of Violence: Inclusive Dialogue and Sustainable Solutions
Breaking the cycle of violence in the WANA region requires a comprehensive and multifaceted approach, one that addresses both immediate conflicts and underlying structural issues as well. The lack of regional institutions that can foster dialogue and cooperation is indeed a key challenge, and the establishment of such bodies could provide the foundation for lasting peace.
The decentralization of an Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) in of itself is a step forward. To compliment the idea of a United Peoples Organization, the creation of a Levant Citizens’ Assembly – similar to the Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly – would help address the root causes of violence and foster regional dialogue. By creating regional platforms for economic, social, and political discourse, this structure would empower local voices and allow each region to articulate its authentic perspectives, challenges, and aspirations. These institutions could serve as platforms for collective problem solving on issues like security, economic integration, and social development. They would encourage multi-stakeholder dialogue, bringing together governments and civil society to discuss policy solutions and strategies for peace.
In essence, the creation of robust regional institutions would be vital for addressing the gridlock that hinders progress towards lasting peace. These institutions would provide platforms for dialogue, foster cooperation, and help address the region’s many challenges through a collective approach grounded in mutual respect and human dignity.
