According to Arundhati Roy, « another world is not only possible, she is on her way. On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing. » Those who can’t hear her yet are forgiven, because there have not been many quiet days in the past couple years.
The invasion of Ukraine by Russia; the complicity of the US, the UK and to some extent the EU in the genocide taking place in Gaza; the contempt shown by a handful of countries including the US for the decisions of the International Criminal Court; the election of populist, extremist strongmen; the manipulation of globalised discourse; are all symptoms of the deep political, institutional and cultural polycrisis that has engulfed us. Since WWII, humanity’s collective project was to build peace, with a mixed result and many setbacks, but that was the collective objective, the reason d’être for the creation of the UN. Life expectancy, school enrolment, access to health, freedom of movement, kept increasing. Child mortality, violent deaths, illiteracy, kept decreasing, since 1945, globally. Until a few years ago, where this trend was reversed. We are witnessing the highest number of conflicts, a decrease in access to health, education and safety. The effects of climate change, with extreme weather conditions, storms, fires, rise of sea levels, have become unavoidable, causing destruction, displacement and generating new sources of conflict. A report from UN OCHA revealed that the year 2024 has become the deadliest on record for humanitarian personnel, with the recorded death of 281 aid workers globally, surpassing previous records.
According to the Global Peach Index (GPI 2024 Report), which measures the state of peacefulness based on data from 163 countries, 2023 has seen the highest number of countries to deteriorate in peacefulness in a single year since the inception of the index. There are currently 56 active conflicts, the most since the end of WWII, and 92 countries are engaged in a conflict beyond their borders. The report also notes that fewer conflicts are resolved, either militarily or through peace agreements: the number of conflicts that ended in the military victory a one side fell from 49 per cent in the 1970s to nine per cent in the 2010s, while conflicts that ended through peace agreements fell from 23 per cent to four per cent over the same period. « The combination of these factors means that the likelihood of another major conflict is higher than at any time since the inception of the GPI », concludes alarmingly the report.
Our world is broken.
And yet, we have one planet only, and we have no other option than learn to coexist and live in harmony, with each other and with the planet – or disappear as a species. In the face of such high levels of violence, mistrust, division and hatred, we need more active efforts to foster compassion, dialogue, understanding, and a renewed multilateralism. The human being has survived and thrived through cooperation, not through conflict or isolation.
According to the parable of the Long Spoons, one day God showed a human being the difference between heaven and hell. God opened the first door. In the room there was a large table covered with mountains of delicious, fragrant and mouth-watering food. But the people sitting around the table looked skinny, miserable and sickly. They had, tied to their arm, wooden spoons with very long handles and each found it possible to reach into the pots but because the handles were longer than their arms, they could not get the spoons back into their mouths. They appeared to be famished. God said, “You have seen Hell.” Behind the second door, the room was exactly the same. Around the large table with the large pots of wonderful food, people had the same long-handled spoons. But these ones were well nourished and plump, laughing and talking. They looked healthy and happy. They were using their spoons to feed one another.
1. More multilateralism
To stop the brutal violence we are witnessing, we need to summon the necessary political courage to respect and enforce what remains of international norms and standards if we do not want to reach an unprecedented level of barbarity, of « might is right » and of self-redress. Even if it lacks legitimacy, the Security Council is currently the only organ mandated with international peace and security, and its resolutions must be respected until we create a more representative and more efficient body (the best and quickest way would be to transfer its mandate to the General Assembly). Peace and security cannot be left to private groups who increase their wealth through the trade of weapons and fossile fuels – through destruction of humankind and of the environment.
What do we expect from states and from the organisations they create? Is it safe to entrust the official communication of governments, armed forces and of the UN, to a private tool owned by one individual? Is it ethical to destroy UNRWA in order to hand the humanitarian assistance (for the survivors?) to private companies?
We need to promote cooperation and interdependence. A renewed multilateralism can be devised within the new multipolar world. Countries like Brazil, Turkey, Nepal, South Africa, are partners for multilateralism, beyond blocks opposition. The EU can play an important role if it accepts to return to its roots (a peace project) and become a force for good. This is not the direction taken, but perhaps it should revisit its vision and political mandate.
The UN’s ‘Pact for the Future’ and ‘New Agenda for peace’ are a start, but to make an impact a serious, inclusive reflection is needed on how to take these tools out of their shelves and make them work. No country, no community, no human being should be excluded if we are to build a better world.
2. Make law, not war
These are the words of Benjamin Ferencz, a young (he was just 27), prosecutor who thanks to his talent, his courage and his persistence, secured the convictions of Nazi officers for war crimes and crimes against humanity at the Nuremberg trial. He advocated for the establishment of a permanent international court to prosecute war crimes – the ICC.
While a genocide has been broadcasted live for the past year and more, it has become clear that journalists, politicians, commentators, lack basic knowledge of international humanitarian law (IHL). Governments, armed forces, civil society groups must address this weakness and reflect on how to better disseminate and operationalise IHL.
It is equally important to defend and protect human rights defenders, and especially women human rights defenders, because most of the times it is women who are confronted on a daily basis with the sufferings of communities, and it is women who pay a disproportionate price when violence strikes.
3. Become a force for peace
The work of scientists like Tania Singer has shown that although these two words are often associated, there is a difference between compassion and empathy, and they mobilize different areas of our brain. While empathy refers to the ability to take the perspective of and feel the emotions of another, compassion is when those feelings and thoughts include awareness of suffering and the desire to help. Empathy involves feeling another person’s emotional experience as if it were one’s own. It is the general capacity to resonate with the feelings of another, including both the positive and the negative. Feeling another person’s negative emotional experience may lead to empathic distress, a self-oriented response to suffering. Compassion is the feeling of concern for another’s suffering, accompanied by the motivation to help alleviate the suffering. It involves paying attention to the condition of others/ourselves/the world, being moved by the suffering we witness, feeling the desire to help relieve that suffering, and taking action to alleviate it. Compassion is other-oriented, feeling for instead of feeling with the other. This difference helps to drive action instead of withdrawal.
In practice, there are no limits to compassion, because instead of draining our energies (as empathy can sometimes do), compassion generates more energy to understand and act. In our daily lives, in our social, political, professional roles, we can always make the choice of compassion. This is a simple and effective contribution to a more peaceful world.
One day, a guru asked: « and what if we were in paradise »? If we consider this question for a minute, and act for an hour as if we were in paradise, we will make one step in the direction of the other world Arundhati Roy is announcing.
According to Arundhati Roy, « another world is not only possible, she is on her way. On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing. » Those who can’t hear her yet are forgiven, because there have not been many quiet days in the past couple years.