February 24 marks the anniversary of the start of the Russian “Special Military Operation” in Ukraine in 2022 which very quickly became a war with the large loss of life both military and civil, with the displacement of population, and a crackdown on opposition to the war. For three years, the war has continued, lap after lap. Although there were fears that the war might spread to neighboring countries, the fighting has been focused on Ukraine, and more recently on a small part of Russian territory attacked by Ukrainian forces. Can there be a realistic end to the armed conflict in sight?
On February 18, 2025, the United States (U.S.) Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, and the Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, met and discussed in part ending the armed conflict in Ukraine. They discussed a possible Putin-Trump summit that could be held in Saudi Arabia. Earlier, U.S. Army General Mark Milley had said, “There has to be a mutual recognition that military victory is probably, in the true sense of the word, not achievable through military means, and therefore, when there is an opportunity to negotiate, when peace can be achieved, seize it.”
However, the conflict is not one only between the USA and the Russian Federation; it also involves directly Ukraine. The Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, has stressed strongly that the Ukraine government leadership wants to play a key role in any negotiations. Certain European countries such as France, Germany, Poland and Turkey have been involved in different ways in the conflict as well as in proposing possible avenues of negotiation to bring the conflict to an end. The bargaining process could be lengthy, but also it could be short as there is “handwriting on the wall.”
One key aspect concerns the fate of four Ukrainian areas “annexed” by Russia, Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia largely controlled by Russian troops. President Putin has said, “These regions had been incorporated by the will of the people into the Russian Federation. This matter is closed forever and is no longer a matter of discussion.” However, the status of Crimea and the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics is at the core of what President Zelenskyy wants discussed.
(C) Homoatrox
“Made in War” is the mark of origin stamped upon nearly all States. Their size, their shape, their ethnic makeup is the result of wars. There are virtually no frontiers today that are not the results of wars: world wars, colonial struggles, annexations by victors, wars against indigenous populations. States were not created by reasonable negotiations based on ethnic or geographic characteristics. If frontiers can be modified only by the victors in wars, then there must be new imaginative transnational forms of cooperation. What is needed are not new frontiers but new states of mind.
From April 5 to 7, 2023, the President of France, Emmanuel Macron, was in China and urged that China could play a key role in bringing peace to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. President Xi Jinping had made a very general 12-point peace plan to resolve the Russia-Ukraine conflict – an indication that China is willing to play a peace-making role. China is probably the only country with the ability to influence Russian policymakers in a peaceful direction.
However, there are long historic and strategic aspects to the current armed conflict. Security crises are deeply influenced both by a sense of history and current perceptions. Thus, the Association of World Citizens (AWC) encourages the development of a renewed security architecture as was envisaged by the Helsinki Final Act and the creation of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). There will be much to do to re-create an environment of trust and confidence that has been weakened by this conflict. Nongovernmental Organizations should play an active and positive role.
(C) Bernard J. Henry/AWC
Prof. René Wadlow is President of the Association of World Citizens.
Mirjana Spoljaric, President of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), warned on February 6, 2025 that there is a serious erosion of respect for international humanitarian law. The ICRC is, through agreements signed with most governments, the chief agency for the respect of the Geneva Conventions, the heart of international humanitarian law.
The armed conflict in Ukraine now spreading to a part of Russia and the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, especially in the Gaza Strip, have led to the destruction of medical and educational facilities. Civilians have been directly targeted, prisoners of war abused, and hostages taken – all violations of international humanitarian law.
To this sad record of recent abuses must now be added the situation in Goma and the eastern area of the Democratic Republic of Congo. Humanitarian law should be respected by nongovernmental militias such as the M23 in Goma, but they have never signed an agreement to respect the Geneva Conventions. There have been discussions within the ICRC and other humanitarian aid agencies as to the role of nongovernmental militias with respect to international humanitarian law. These are vital discussions as the role of nongovernmental militias has become more frequent in armed conflicts.
The Association of World Citizens (AWC) played a key role in having a coalition of armed groups fighting in Burma to sign the Geneva Conventions. The signature was deposited with the Swiss Government which is the depository power for the Conventions. The signature was considered as only “symbolic” as not involving a government. However, the signature by the militias led to an exchange of prisoners showing that it was taken seriously by the Burmese government.
The AWC has strongly supported the strengthening of international humanitarian law. International humanitarian law is a central core of the broader body of world law. The strengthening of respect for humanitarian law develops a base for the application of international law and such institutions as the World Court.
As Mirjana Spoljaric, a Swiss diplomat before she became President of the ICRC, has stressed, the world society is at a crucial moment. There is a need to reaffirm respect for humanitarian law. Unfortunately, such reaffirmation is not a high priority for most Ministries of Foreign Affairs. Thus, as the AWC has urged, most recently through its appeals of March 2022, October 2023 and October 2024, there is a real possibility for NGOs to take the lead.
Prof. René Wadlow is President of the Association of World Citizens.
The Imburi are spirits that are said to inhabit the forests of Gabon, in Equatorial Africa, and who cry out for those who can hear them at times of impending violence and danger. The Imburi are now crying out loudly on the increasing dangers and forced migration in Goma, capital of the North Kivu province of the Democratic Republic of Congo – democratic in name only.
The July 31, 2024 ceasefire agreement – never fully effective – has now been broken. Troops of the Tutsi-led militia known as M23 along with regular military of Rwanda are advancing toward Goma, the capital of North Kivu. The Association of World Citizens has members in Goma who keep us informed of the critical situation there – getting worse each day.
(C) UN News
People in the neighboring province of South Kivu are frightened and have started to flee. There are a large number of displaced persons in both North and South Kivu, and some have fled across the frontier into Burundi. Many people are living in displaced persons camps in difficult situations despite the efforts of the United Nations (UN), the International Committee of the Red Cross, and humanitarian aid organizations.
This eastern area of the Congo has been the scene of fighting at least since 1998 – in part as a result of the genocide in neighboring Rwanda in 1994. In mid-1994, more than one million Rwandan Hutu refugees poured into the Kivus, fleeing the advance of the Tutsi-led Rwandan Patriotic Front, which now comprises the government of Rwanda. Many of these Hutu were still armed, among them the “génocidaires” who, a couple of months before, had participated in the killing of some 800,000 Tutsi and moderate Hutu in Rwanda.
Today, there is still large-scale occurrence of serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law by all parties with massive displacement of populations, plundering of villages, systematic rape of women, summary executions and the use of child soldiers. There is a report from the UN Group of Experts on the Democratic Republic of Congo of December 27, 2024 which outlines clearly the disintegrating situation.
Thus, there is a need to create an enabling political environment which would help develop the rule of law and a vital civil society – a vast task that the Imburi are not sure will be carried quickly enough.
Prof. René Wadlow is President of the Association of World Citizens.
The January 20, 2025 inauguration of President Donald Trump has brought into sharp focus the turbulent and complex world society in which we live. As peacebuilders and citizens of the world, we face the same challenges as President Trump but with a different style and with far fewer resources at our command. We make plans but then are called to work for conflict resolution in unanticipated ways.
There are four policy challenges which face both President Trump and World Citizens: armed conflicts, currently ongoing and potential, persistent poverty in many areas, the erosion of international law and faith in multinational institutions, particularly the United Nations (UN), and the consequences of climate change.
The ongoing and potential armed conflicts are neither new nor unexpected. The Israeli-Palestinian tensions exist at least since 1936 and increased after the creation of the State of Israel. There may be some possibilities for negotiations in good faith. We must keep an eye open for possible actions.
Tensions with Iran are not new. The Soviet forces in part of Iran was the first conflict with which the UN had to deal in its early days. However, the rule by the Ayatollahs has made matters more complex.
The Russian-Ukrainian war grinds on with a large number of persons killed, wounded, and uprooted. Again, we must look to see if a ceasefire and negotiations are possible.
In Asia, the armed conflict in Myanmar between the military in power and the ethnic militias dates from the creation of the Burmese State at the end of the Second World War. A potential armed conflict between Mainland China and Taiwan dates from 1949 and the Nationalist government’s retreat to Taiwan. The potential armed conflict between the two Korean States dates from 1950 and the start of the Korean War.
The armed conflicts in Africa are no longer in the headlines, but they date from the early 1960s and the breakup of the European Empires: the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, the States of the Sahel.
Thus, we all have a poor record of armed conflict prevention and mediation. Armed conflicts should remain at the top of both the governmental and nongovernmental agenda for action.
(C) U.S. Embassy France on Instagram
Persistent Poverty: Despite the UN Decades for Development, the Sustainable Development Goals, and Article 22 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states that everyone is entitled to the economic, social, and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and free development of his personality, persistent poverty exists in many parts of the world. One consequence of persistent poverty is migration from poorer to richer areas, both within countries and from poorer to richer States. Migration is a hotly debated issue in many countries, as right-wing nationalist groups make anti-migration their battle cry. Migration is likely to become an even more heated topic of debate as President Trump tries to carry out his proposal for a mass deportation of immigrants from the USA.
Linked to persistent poverty are trade issues and the protectionist trends in many countries. President Trump has proposed higher tariffs for good coming into the USA. This policy may set off tariff wars. Obviously to counter persistent poverty, world development policies must be improved – easier said than done!
The Erosion of International Law and Faith in Multinational Institutions: Armed conflicts and persistent poverty are closely related to the third issue: the receding United States (U.S.) involvement with the UN, the World Bank, the IMF, the World Court and other multinational organizations. Some of the foreign policy authorities appointed by President Trump are overtly critical of the UN and the International Criminal Court. There has already been an Executive Order to halt U.S. funding of the World Health Organization. However, there is no unifying vision of what a new world society would involve. The battle cry of “Make America Great Again”, if repeated by each State for itself, “Make Panama Great Again”, could be a loud concert but not conducive to positive decision making.
The Consequences of Climate Change: The fourth major group of issues concerns the consequences of climate change and the ways to lessen its impact. During the campaign for the presidency, Trump threatened to pull the USA out of the Paris Climate Agreement, and he has now signed an Executive Order doing so. The issue of climate change has been brought to the world agenda by scientists on the one hand, and by Nongovernmental Organizations and popular, often youth-led efforts, on the other hand. It is likely that these vital efforts related to climate change will continue despite climate policy resistance by some in the Trump administration.
President Trump said during his inaugural ceremony that “The Golden Age of America begins now… We stand on the verge of the four greatest years in American history.” We will have to watch closely and judge in four years. What is sure for peacebuilders and citizens of the world is that we stand on the verge of four more years of serious challenges. Thus, there is a need for cooperative and courageous action.
Prof. René Wadlow is President of the Association of World Citizens.
Genocide is the most extreme consequence of racial discrimination and ethnic hatred. Genocide has as its aim the destruction, wholly or in part, of a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group as such. The term was proposed by the legal scholar Raphael Lemkin, drawing on the Greek genos (people or tribe) and the Latin –cide (to kill) (1). The policies and war crimes of the Nazi German government were foremost on the minds of those who drafted the Genocide Convention, but the policy was not limited to the Nazis (2).
The Genocide Convention is a landmark in the efforts to develop a system of universally accepted standards which promote an equitable world order for all members of the human family to live in dignity. Four articles are at the heart of this Convention and are here quoted in full to understand the process of implementation proposed by the Association of World Citizens (AWC), especially of the need for an improved early warning system.
Article I
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Unlike most humanitarian international law which sets out standards but does not establish punishment, Article III sets out that the following acts shall be punishable:
(a) Genocide;
(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;
(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
(d) Attempt to commit genocide;
(e) Complicity in genocide
Article IV
Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.
Article VIII
Any Contracting Party may call upon the competent organs of the United Nations to take such action under the Charter of the United Nations as they consider appropriate for the prevention and suppression of acts of genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III.
Raphael Lemkin (C) Center for Jewish History, New York City
Numerous reports have reached the Secretariat of the United Nations (UN) of actual, or potential, situations of genocide: mass killings; cases of slavery and slavery-like practices, in many instances with a strong racial, ethnic, and religious connotation — with children as the main victims, in the sense of article II (b) and (c). Despite factual evidence of these genocides and mass killings as in Sudan, the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Burundi, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sierra Leone and in other places, no Contracting Party to the Genocide Convention has called for any action under article VIII of the Convention.
As Mr. Nicodème Ruhashyankiko of the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities wrote in his study of proposed mechanisms for the study of information on genocide and genocidal practices “A number of allegations of genocide have been made since the adoption of the 1948 Convention. In the absence of a prompt investigation of these allegations by an impartial body, it has not been possible to determine whether they were well-founded. Either they have given rise to sterile controversy or, because of the political circumstances, nothing further has been heard about them.”
Yet the need for speedy preventive measures has been repeatedly underlined by UN Officials. On December 8, 1998, in his address at UNESCO, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan said “Many thought, no doubt, that the horrors of the Second World War — the camps, the cruelty, the exterminations, the Holocaust — could not happen again. And yet they have, in Cambodia, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, in Rwanda. Our time — this decade even — has shown us that man’s capacity for evil knows no limits. Genocide — the destruction of an entire people on the basis of ethnic or national origins — is now a word of our time, too, a stark and haunting reminder of why our vigilance must be eternal.”
In her address Translating words into action to the UN General Assembly on December 10, 1998, the then High Commissioner for Human Rights, Ms. Mary Robinson, declared “The international community’s record in responding to, let alone preventing, gross human rights abuses does not give grounds for encouragement. Genocide is the most flagrant abuse of human rights imaginable. Genocide was vivid in the minds of those who framed the Universal Declaration, working as they did in the aftermath of the Second World War. The slogan then was ‘never again’. Yet genocide and mass killing have happened again — and have happened before the eyes of us all — in Rwanda, Cambodia, the former Yugoslavia and other parts of the globe.”
In a telegram sent from Paris in December 1948, Raphael Lemkin asked Ms. William Dick Sporberg, a member of the United States Committee for a United Nations (UN) Genocide Convention, to organize a cable campaign to persuade the United States Mission to the UN to support the adoption of the convention. Until the very last minute, no efforts were to be spared if the Genocide Convention was to come to existence and make the hopes of a whole generation traumatized by wide-scale extermination come true. (C) Google Cultural Institute/Center for Jewish History
We need to heed the early warning signs of genocide. Officially directed massacres of civilians of whatever numbers cannot be tolerated, for the organizers of genocide must not believe that more widespread killing will be ignored. Yet killing is not the only warning sign. The Convention drafters, recalling the radio addresses of Hitler and the constant flow of words and images, set out as punishable acts “direct and public incitement to commit genocide”. The Genocide Convention, in its provisions concerning public incitement, sets the limits of political discourse. It is well documented that public incitement — whether by Governments or certain non-governmental actors, including political movements — to discriminate against, to separate forcibly, to deport or physically eliminate large categories of the population of a given State, or the population of a State in its entirety, just because they belong to certain racial, ethnic, or religious groups, sooner or later leads to war. It is also evident that, at the present time, in a globalized world, even local conflicts have a direct impact on international peace and security in general. Therefore, the Genocide Convention is also a constant reminder of the need to moderate political discourse, especially constant and repeated accusations against a religious, ethnic, and social category of persons. Had this been done in Rwanda, with regard to the Radio Mille Collines, perhaps that premeditated and announced genocide could have been avoided or mitigated.
For the UN to be effective in the prevention of genocide, there needs to be an authoritative body which can investigate and monitor a situation well in advance of the outbreak of violence. As has been noted, any Party to the Genocide Convention (and most States are Parties) can bring evidence to the UN Security Council, but none has. In the light of repeated failures and due to pressure from nongovernmental organizations, the Secretary-General has named an individual advisor on genocide to the UN Secretariat. However, he is one advisor among many, and there is no public access to the information that he may receive.
Therefore, a relevant existing body must be strengthened to be able to deal with the first signs of tensions, especially “direct and public incitement to commit genocide.” The Committee for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) created to monitor the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination would be the appropriate body to strengthen, especially by increasing its resources and the number of UN Secretariat members which service the CERD. Through its urgent procedure mechanisms, CERD has the possibility of taking early-warning measures aimed at preventing existing strife from escalating into conflicts, and to respond to problems requiring immediate attention. A stronger CERD more able to investigate fully situations should mark the world’s commitment to the high standards of world law set out in the Genocide Convention.
————————————————————————————–
Notes
1) Raphael Lemkin, Axis Rule in Occupied Europe (Washington: Carnegie Endowment for World Peace, 1944)
2) For a good overview, see: Samantha Power, A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide (New York: Basic Books, 2002)
3) E/CN.4/Sub.2/1778/416, Para 61
Prof. René Wadlow is President of the Association of World Citizens.
Sudan’s armed conflict which began on April 15, 2023 is between two former allies. On one side is General Abdel Fattah Al Burham of the Sudanese Armed Forces; on the other side is General Mohamed Hamdan Dagulo, known by his battle name of Hemedhi of the Rapid Support Forces. The conflict, which has spread to 14 of the 18 provinces of Sudan, has killed and wounded tens of thousands of civilians, displaced nearly 8 million people, and forced over two million to flee to neighboring countries. The agriculture of the country is disorganized, and many people face acute hunger.
There has been an appalling range of human rights and international humanitarian law violations including indiscriminate airstrikes and shelling against civilians, hospitals, and vital water services. The warring parties and their respective militia allies have made rape a weapon of war and have organized markets where women are sold for sexual slavery.
Rape harms not only the woman raped but also the whole family system. Often, the husband repudiates his wife. The whole family may scorn her. In a country where “the family” is a wide circle of people, the repudiated woman has few people to whom to turn for support. As was done by the “Islamic State” (IS, or Da’esh) in Iraq and Syria, sexual slave markets have been created where women are bought or exchanged.
So far, efforts by the United Nations (UN) and regional governments for a ceasefire and negotiations have not led to constructive action. Thus, the conflictual situation requires close cooperation among UN agencies, humanitarian and peace Nongovernmental Organizations.
Prof. René Wadlow is President of the Association of World Citizens.
The armed conflicts in the Middle East: Israel-Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Yemen have led to increased violations of International Humanitarian Law. Medical facilities and medical personnel have been attacked; civilians have been targeted, educational facilities destroyed. Therefore, the Association of World Citizens (AWC) makes an urgent call for the respect of International Humanitarian Law. This must be a joint effort of governments and Nongovernmental Organizations.
Regular military personnel of all countries are theoretically informed of the rules of the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949, and the Protocol Additional adopted in 1977.
When the 1949 Geneva Conventions were drafted and adopted, it was possible to spell out in considerable detail rules regarding prisoners of war and the protection of civilians, in particular Common Article 3 (so called because it is found in all four Conventions) provides that “each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions: Persons taking no active part in the hostilities … shall in all circumstances be treated humanely without any adverse distinction founded on race, color, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.”
The importance of Common Article 3 should not be underestimated. It sets out in straightforward terms important protections that all parties to a conflict must respect. In order to meet the need for additional protection, international humanitarian law has evolved to cover not only international armed conflict but also internal armed conflict. Today, international human rights standards are also considered part of international humanitarian law, thus providing additional protection for vulnerable population groups such as women, children, and minorities.
As situations of internal violence and strife proliferate, abuses committed by non-State actors, such as armed militias, are increasing concerns. Fundamental standards of international humanitarian law are intended to ensure the effective protection of human beings in all situations. The standards are clear. (1)
There are two major weaknesses in the effectiveness of international humanitarian law. The first is that many people do not know that it exists and that they are bound by its norms. Thus, there is an important role for greater promotional activities, the dissemination of information through general education, specific training of the military, outreach to armed militias, and cooperation with a wide range of nongovernmental organizations.
The second weakness is that violations of international humanitarian law are rarely punished. Governments too often tolerate these violations. Few soldiers are tried, or courtmartialed, for the violations of international humanitarian law. This weakness is even more true of nongovernmental militias and armed groups.
In fact, most violations of international humanitarian law are not actions of individual soldiers or militia members carried away by a sudden rush of anger, fear, a desire of revenge or a sudden sexual urge to rape a woman. Soldiers and militia members violating the norms of international humanitarian law are acting on orders of their commanders.
Thus, the only sold response is an act of conscience to refuse an order of a military or militia higher up and refuse to torture, to bomb a medical facility, to shoot a prisoner, to harm a child, and to rape a woman. Conscience, that inner voice which discerns what is right from wrong and encourages right action is the value on which we can build the defense of international humanitarian law. The defense of conscience to refuse unjust orders is a large task but a crucial action for moving toward a law-based world society.
Notes
(1) For useful guides to international humanitarian law see:
D. Schindler and J. Toman, The Laws of Armed Conflicts (Martinus Nihjoff Publishers, 1988)
H. McCoubrey and N.D. White, International Law and Armed Conflicts (Dartmouth Publishing Co., 1992)
Prof. René Wadlow is President of the Association of World Citizens.
October 7-8, 2024 will mark one year of armed conflict between Israeli forces and the Hamas militia – an armed conflict which grinds on and has spread.
On October 8, 2023, in light of the October 7 Hamas attack and the start of the Israeli response in the Gaza Strip, the Association of World Citizens called for five immediate steps that it hoped would create a climate of dialogue and the start of negotiations in good faith. The proposals were posted on the World Citizens’ website, sent to the Israeli Missions to the United Nations (UN) and to groups that might have avenues of communication with Hamas.
“As Citizens of the World, we call for a ceasefire in the Israeli-Palestinian armed conflict;
For the release of all hostages held by Hamas and other Palestinian groups;
For the release of all Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails, often under administrative detention without trial;
For preventing the extension of the conflict to the Lebanon frontier through negotiations with Hezbollah;
For preventing an increase in violence on the West Bank among Israeli settlers and Palestinian villages;
For the start of negotiations in good faith for a political solution that ensures freedom and the collective safety of Israelis and Palestinians.”
(C) Ted Eytan
A year later, the armed violence has increased: in Gaza with a high number of persons killed, wounded and displaced, on the West Bank, in Lebanon, has expanded to Iran and brought in elements of the conflict in Yemen.
There have been relevant resolutions of the UN General Assembly, of the International Court of Justice, and appeals for a ceasefire and negotiations from many Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs).
Due to the spiraling growth of destruction, as NGOs we must continue and increase our efforts.
Prof. René Wadlow is President of the Association of World Citizens.
Antonio Guterres, the United Nations (UN) Secretary General, said in his opening remarks to the UN General Assembly on September 24, 2024, “Gaza is a nonstop nightmare that threatens to take the entire region with it. Look no further than Lebanon. We should all be alarmed by the escalation. Lebanon is on the brink. The people of Lebanon – the people of Israel – and the people of the world – cannot afford Lebanon to become another Gaza.”
Lebanon may have already moved over the brink. Israeli strikes on Lebanon on September 23 killed at least 356 people and injured more than 1,200 others. Hezbollah deputy chief Naim Qassem has just said, “We have entered a new phase – an open-ended battle of reckoning.” Until now, Hezbollah has designed its attacks to stay below the threshold of a full-scale conflagration, but these deadly exchanges of fire carry a high risk of miscalculation, spiraling violence upward.
A rapid escalation in recent days, starting with the attack on Hezbollah members via booby-trapped pagers and walkie-talkies followed by Israeli bombardments, has raised the specter of a new phase in the conflict with a possible ground invasion by Israeli troops as in 1982 and 2006. There are fears that Iran could be drawn into the fighting. The new Iranian President, Masoud Pezeshkian, speaking at the UN General Assembly also on September 24, demanded a global response to the Lebanon situation, “not to allow Lebanon to become another Gaza.”
In 2007, young people from Beirut posing with a Hezbollah flag on the ruins of the Khiam prison formerly run by the pro-Israeli South Lebanon Army (C) Paul Keller
Hezbollah is supported by Iran but not fully under Iranian control. Hassan Nasrallah, the Secretary-General of Hezbollah, has in recent days made widely watched television talks attacking Israeli politics and indicating continuing Hezbollah support for the Palestinians in Gaza, saying that a ceasefire in Gaza was necessary before any negotiations with Hezbollah could take place. Since negotiations for a ceasefire in Gaza seem unlikely for the moment, Hezbollah’s current campaign is likely to continue. In addition, recent tensions in the West Bank between Israeli settlers, Israeli soldiers and Palestinians in settled villages have added more heat to the general tensions in the area.
The issue is what can be done now to prevent escalation and reduce tensions. A first step is to stress respect for international humanitarian law – often cited by the Association of World Citizens (AWC). Hospitals, medical facilities, educational institutions have been destroyed in the exchanges of fire. There is a need for resolute action on the violations of humanitarian law. Regular military personnel of all countries are theoretically informed of the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949 and the Protocol Additional adopted in 1977 in light of the experiences of the war in Vietnam. Today, international human rights standards are also considered part of international humanitarian law, thus providing additional protection for vulnerable population groups such as women, children and minorities.
A possible second phase is the “good offices” function of the UN Secretary-General. It is certain that the UN Secretariat is concerned, but their ability for action may be very limited.
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres
It is not clear what governments at the UN can do. The Security Council has been blocked on many issues by the veto. The resolutions of the General Assembly are “recommendations” with little follow up in practice.
A 21-day ceasefire proposal has just been set out at the UN by France and the USA but rejected by Israel.
There may be some role for non-official mediation carried out by groups representing religious, academic, or charitable organizations. One advantage of non-official mediation is that all concerned are aware that such mediation is genuinely impartial seeking only a reduction of suffering caused by the conflicts. The disadvantage is that non-official mediators lack the resources, political, economic or military on which governmental mediators can draw.
It is certain that strong measures are needed to prevent escalation. Vision and creativity are important factors. The role of nongovernmental organizations in consultative status with the UN such as the AWC may be able to play a role in these dangerous times.
Prof. René Wadlow is President of the Association of World Citizens.
The United Nations (UN) Independent International Fact-Finding Mission for the Sudan chaired by Mohamed Chande Othman of Tanzania said, in its first Report of September 6, 2024, that Sudan’s warring parties, the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces as well as their respective militia allies, have committed an appalling range of human rights and international humanitarian law violations including indiscriminate airstrikes and shelling against civilians, schools, hospitals, and vital water services.
The current armed conflict which began on April 15, 2023 between two former allies is led, on the one side, by General Abdel Fattah Al Burham of the Sudanese Armed Forces and, on the other, by General Mohamed Hamdan Dagulo, known by his battle name of Hemedhi, of the Rapid Support Forces. The conflict, which has spread to 14 of the 18 provinces of Sudan, has killed and wounded tens of thousands of civilians, displaced nearly 8 million people and forced two million to flee to neighboring countries and beyond.
Mohamed Chamde Othman (C) U.S. Government
As the Fact-Finding Mission Report highlights, the warring parties targeted civilians through rape, sexual slavery and other forms of sexual violence, arbitrary arrest as well as torture and ill-treatment. Assaults have been carried out against ethnic minorities, in particular the Masalit in West Darfur.
The Fact-Finding Mission, mandated by the Human Rights Council in October 2023, carried out a wide range of discussions and interviews. As the Expert Member of the Mission Mona Rishmawi said, “These findings should serve as a wakeup call to the international community to take decisive action to support survivors, their families and affected communities and hold perpetrators accountable. A comprehensive approach to transitional justice is vital for addressing the root causes of the conflict and ensuring accountability.”
Mona Rishmawi
Efforts for a ceasefire and the start of negotiations by the Personal Envoy for the Sudan of the UN Secretary-General have led to no advances. Thus, wider action is needed. Mohamed Othman has said, “The international community must support the Sudanese aspiration for an inclusive and representative civilian government that respects the rights of all citizens, fostering a path toward equality, justice and sustainable peace in Sudan.” In light of the many difficulties, he has called for sending UN peacekeeping forces to Sudan. “Given the failure of the warring parties to spare civilians, it is imperative that an independent and impartial force with a mandate to safeguard civilians be deployed without delay. The protection of the civilian population is paramount, and all parties must comply with their obligations under international law and immediately and unconditionally cease all attacks on the civilian population.”
As the deployment of an independent and impartial force depends on the UN Security Council the focus for action shifts from the Human Rights Council to the Security Council. We appeal for vitally needed action now.
Prof. René Wadlow is President of the Association of World Citizens.
Association of World Citizens 