The New Agenda for Peace serves as a stark warning that the damage being done now will have significant implications for humanity’s future wellbeing, safety, and stability.
Author: Cedric de Coning
-
-
Many Western countries and BRICS members may have more shared interests than the doomsday headlines suggest.
-
Contrary to perceptions, there is compelling scientific evidence in the IPCC’s AR6 report that climate change constitutes a risk to peace and security.
-
One of the most enduring lessons learned over the past 75 years of peacekeeping is that peace cannot be imposed.
-
Context-specific approaches to peacebuilding that empower local agency are key to the self-sustainability of peace processes.
-
Actions to address the effects of climate challenges can contribute to sustaining peace, while peacebuilding initiatives can, at times, also strengthen the capacity of communities to adapt to climate change.
-
The ways forward are clear. If they are taken, Security Council leadership on addressing climate-related security risks—underpinned by a thematic resolution—is still in prospect.
-
How we choose to adapt to and mitigate climate change can either cause harm, including potentially triggering conflict, or it can contribute to sustaining peace.
-
Climate- and conflict-affected countries are trapped in a negative spiral where climate change undermines the ability to cope with conflict, and conflict undermines the resilience to cope with climate change.
-
Although MINUSMA’s support to the G5 Sahel Force has been essential and critical, a number of challenges have prevented the force from fully benefitting from the support provided by the UN.
