Since the InterAction Council of former Heads of State and
Government last met in 2019, the world has grappled with
the most significant health crisis in a century – the
COVID-19 pandemic. In addition to being a public health
crisis, placing a strain on global healthcare systems and
resulting in millions of deaths, the pandemic created
significant social and economic disruption worldwide. The
global economy headed for recession, in large part due to
inflationary pressures resulting from government spending
that attempted to correct for suppressed economic
activities from lockdown mandates.
Then in 2022, in the immediate aftermath of the pandemic,
Russia initiated an aggressive land war against its
neighbour Ukraine, triggering the largest international
land war in Europe since the Second World War. The war
exacerbated the food and energy crises, which further
fuelled inflation and the global economic downturn. It
also exposed the existing global system as ineffective in
preserving peace and resolving conflicts.
One year later, there is no end in sight to the conflict.
The war has caused immense human suffering, with the
United Nations recording over 8,000 civilian deaths, 8
million refugees and 17.7 million in need of humanitarian
assistance. Western intelligence sources estimate that
over 345,000 Russian and Ukrainian soldiers have lost
their lives in the war.
It was against this backdrop that the InterAction Council
organized a High-Level Expert Group Meeting on "A new agenda for peace and security" on 15 May 2023 in Valletta, Malta, chaired by Bertie
Ahern. The meeting sought to re-articulate global
governance in our times to build a better tomorrow for
generations to come.
Peace in Europe: The role of diplomacy
The InterAction Council condemns Russia’s attack on
Ukraine, which was an illegal act of aggression in
violation of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which
“prohibits the threat or use of force and calls on all
Members to respect the sovereignty, territorial integrity
and political independence of other States.” In the
immediate future, the international community should take
all necessary means to find a path to cease hostilities
and protect civilians. Both parties should adhere to
international humanitarian law in the conduct of
hostilities. While international frameworks for
accountability for any violations already exist, the
sanctions regime may be effective at encouraging good
conduct and even a resolution. The European Union is
currently exploring how to use frozen Russian assets to
rebuild Ukraine.
Russia’s attack on Ukraine has exposed the limitations of
the current international system to govern international
peace and security. When a permanent member of the United
Nations Security Council wages an aggressive war, many
question whether the international institutions created to
prevent wars have failed. Maintaining international peace
and security was the basis for the creation of the United
Nations as well as regional organizations, such as the
European Union and the Organisation for Security and
Cooperation in Europe.
On the occasion of the 75th anniversary of the United
Nations in 2020, the global community came together to vow
its commitment to multilateralism. Member States called on
the Secretary-General to report back on recommendations to
address the many challenges facing the world. In 2021, he
launched Our Common Agenda, which sets out
the challenges facing the global community today and
called for a New Agenda For Peace. The
Secretary-General also appointed the High-Level Advisory
Board on Effective Multilateralism which finalized its
report, Breakthrough for People and Planet: Effective and
Inclusive Global Governance for Today and the Future in April this year. The report includes
comprehensive recommendations to reinforce the global
architecture for peace, security and finance, deliver just
transitions for climate and digitalization, and ensure
more equity and fairness in global decision-making. The
report also called for credible and coordinated
international efforts to tackle corruption, a key concern
of the InterAction Council. The Peacemaking
Reflection Group has also contributed with reflections on
how to improve the global system of governance.
One of the endemic governance issues to address within the
United Nations is the legitimacy of the Security Council,
wherein the five permanent members can exercise their veto
power on any issues. There are currently multiple parallel
proposals on the table for Security Council reform.
Expanding the membership of the Security Council to better
reflect the membership of the United Nations has been
discussed for years. Removing the veto of the permanent
five members would balance the power structures within the
Security Council. The Liechtenstein Veto initiative
proposes that permanent members explain to the General
Assembly their reasoning after using the veto.
The Ukraine crisis is by no means the first time that the
United Nations Security Council is incapacitated to
respond to threats to international peace and security.
During the Cold War, the Security Council was more often
than not faced with a stalemate as its permanent members
were adversaries with competing geopolitical interests.
Thus, the current situation is not new but a return to
the status quo before the end of the
Cold War. While the UN Charter bestows upon the Security
Council the primary responsibility to respond to threats
to international peace and security, its role is by no
means exclusive. In the past, when the organization was
faced with impasses due to the veto in the Security
Council, the UN General Assembly took on a more active
role in promoting peace and security. Today, once more,
the General Assembly should take a more prominent role in
the maintenance of international peace and security, in
accordance with the Charter. An example of this is
the Uniting for Peace resolution from
1950, which allows the General Assembly to take action on
peace and security when the Security Council is
incapacitated. Since 1950, the framework has been used 13
times. The rarely used article 27(3) of the Charter
requires that Security Council members abstain from voting
when they are party to a dispute under Chapter VI. In such
cases, a permanent member would not be able to use its
veto. However, it is questionable whether the voting rule
is applicable to Chapter VII concerning breaches to the
peace and acts of aggression. A viable option is that the
General Assembly requests an Advisory Opinion from the
International Court of Justice on the usage of the veto by
permanent members of the Security Council. Indeed,
existing options to improve governance within the UN
should be explored in parallel with more substantial
reforms.
It is imperative that Russia as a state is held
accountable for waging a war of aggression against Ukraine
and that individuals are held accountable for
international atrocity crimes committed in the war. The
crime of aggression is an international crime for which
the International Criminal Court has jurisdiction. Where
the ICC will not be able to prosecute and indict all
relevant actors for the crime of aggression, other options
should be explored. These may include national proceedings
under the principle of complementarity, proceedings in
third states based on universal jurisdiction or the
establishment of a special international tribunal for the
crime of aggression.
Beyond investigations and potential prosecutions at the
International Criminal Court, or in third states based on
universal jurisdiction, financial responsibility should be
explored. Third states have frozen vast amounts of Russian
assets. More than 1,200 Russian individuals, 120 entities,
and 19 banks have been sanctioned equaling approximately
$1.14 trillion. At least the EU, US and Canada are
currently exploring options of repurposing the frozen
assets for the benefit of Ukraine to cover the over 700
billion USD damages thus far caused by Russia’s
aggression. The legal aspects of when and how to
potentially confiscate the assets for the benefit of the
damages requires further thought. Several legal obstacles,
including sovereign immunity of states and property rights
need to be solved before such steps can be taken. In
addition, states need to keep in mind any potential
reparations that may be awarded to victims in future
proceedings by the International Criminal Court or in
potential judicial proceedings held in third states based
on universal jurisdiction. It should also be noted Russia
has confiscated Western owned assets present in Russia,
for example over 400 aircraft leased by Western companies,
and more recently, the assets of Uniper, a German energy
company and Fortum, a Finnish energy company.
Recommendations
- States and individuals responsible for aggression and grave violations must be held legally and financially accountable. In this regard, states should support efforts to investigate and prosecute the crime of aggression, and other violations, in Ukraine by the International Criminal Court, courts in third states or by a specialized international tribunal for the crime of aggression.
- States and international organizations should continue freezing Russian assets until there are mechanisms in place for confiscation and distribution of assets for the benefit of post-war reconstruction and victims of grave violations.
- In accordance with the roles bestowed upon it in the UN Charter, the General Assembly should immediately take action on international peace and security when the Security Council is unable to do so.
- Reinforce and reform existing international organizations. Provide them with adequate resources and mandates to increase their effectiveness, transparency, and accountability.
- The General Assembly should request the International Court of Justice to give an advisory opinion on the veto powers of the permanent members of the Security Council.
- Encourage countries to prioritize multilateral approaches over unilateral actions through diplomacy, negotiation, and compromise to resolve disputes and foster cooperation.
- Foster global science-based action and collaboration on pressing cross-border challenges such as climate change, pollution, public health, cybersecurity, gender parity and poverty alleviation
- Promote the adherence to and enforcement of international law and treaties. Encourage countries to ratify and implement key agreements, such as the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
- Encourage a culture of ethical and responsible citizenship and leadership anchored in accountability as laid out in the Universal Declaration on Human Responsibilities.
The war in Europe and its impact on energy and food
security
Russia’s aggression against Ukraine has not only brought
death to thousands, but it has also disrupted energy
infrastructure, impacted energy supply, and created
broader regional energy security implications. Russia has
always been a significant source of energy for Europe. In
2021, the EU imported more than 40% of its total gas
consumption, 27% of oil imports and 46% of coal imports
from Russia. Infrastructure was built, mainly pipelines,
to bring in Russian natural gas to accommodate European
energy needs. However, since the invasion in Ukraine, the
European Commission has committed to reaching independence
from Russian energy sources before 2030 using tactics such
as diversifying supplies, reducing demand and increasing
use of green energy.
The diversification of suppliers – namely, the U.S. – has
already significantly reduced the EU’s reliance on Russian
gas, which now accounts for only 17 percent of the EU’s
import needs.
Reliance on renewable energy sources comes with its own
challenges, as the infrastructure needed to support a
transition to green energy is heavily reliant on precious
minerals. Currently, this industry is highly concentrated:
China, for example, is responsible for processing around
35 percent of global supplies of nickel, 50 to 70 percent
of lithium and cobalt, and almost 90 percent of rare earth
elements. The majority of precious minerals mined for
renewable energy production and storage are also located
in some of the most unstable countries in the
world.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, food exports from
Ukraine have been severely disrupted. Ukraine’s main food
exports (wheat, barley and sunflower) were responsible for
feeding 400 million people worldwide. Russia and Ukraine
together produce over 40 percent of Africa’s total wheat
supply. Before the war, the World Food Programme bought
half of its stock from Ukraine. The conflict has impacted
food insecurity by disrupting agricultural activities,
displacing farmers, restricting access to markets, and
hampering the delivery of humanitarian aid, with a local,
regional and global reach. The consequences of a food
security crisis are severe. It can lead to malnutrition,
increased vulnerability to diseases, and even death.
Social unrest, migration, and conflicts can arise as a
result of food shortages, further exacerbating the
situation.
Resolving the conflict and addressing these impacts are
crucial to improving food and energy security in the
region.
Recommendations:
- Enhance energy security measures at both regional and global levels by diversifying energy sources and supply routes to reduce dependence on a single country or region.
- Encourage investments in alternative energy sources, renewable energy, energy efficiency, and sustainable practices to decrease reliance on fossil fuels.
- Enhance international energy governance frameworks and mechanisms to address the geopolitical implications of the energy crises.
- Facilitate and support diplomatic efforts to ensure that grain transports can continue from Ukraine.
- Explore FAO’s recommendation to implement a Food Import Financing Facility (FIFF) which would help vulnerable countries in food import financing costs during emergencies.
- Develop and implement policies that prioritize food security, sustainable agriculture, and rural development. Revise current subsidy policies that distort global food trade.