Searching for a Global Peace and Security Architecture for the 21st Century

Searching for a Global Peace and Security Architecture for the 21st Century

On 29-30 September 2015, a two-day workshop took place in New York on "Searching for a Global Peace and Security Architecture for the 21st Century: Challenges and Perspectives,” organized by the Chumir Foundation for Ethics in Leadership, in cooperation with the Herbert C. Kelman Institute for Interactive Conflict Transformation and the International Crisis Group.  Participants representing academe, diplomacy, and non-governmental organizations debated critical issues related to structures, processes and policies of a future global peace and security architecture.

Proceeding from the basic premise that today's global system is in need of a world order that ensures peace and security for the long-term, participants referred to several transitions in history and political efforts toward the re-establishment of a stable 'governing order', in particular exploring the Congress of Vienna which gave rise to the Concert of Europe system in 1815, and which lasted nearly a hundred years.

There were differences of opinion as to how such a 21st century world order should be constructed: whether it is to be a new Concert of Powers with an initial membership of four, or alternatively 6 great power states; a G-20 with an expanded agenda; or a new institutional arrangement, similar to the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE), the predecessor of today's OSCE.

There would also be the need for a Track 1.5/Track 2 process in order to prepare the ground for such a 'Concert of Major Powers' arrangement. It was agreed that regardless of what institutional arrangement be adopted, that it would act complementarity to existing institutions, such as the UN Security Council.

While the Concert system adopted mechanisms regulating the relations of major European powers after the defeat of Napoleon, in doing so it had to address a series of complex questions that are still of relevance today - What political order is most likely to ensure peace and stability? How can the re-emergence of great power rivalry, holding the potential for instability and violent conflict, be prevented? How can one (re-) integrate former great powers in such a manner that they do not threaten existing structures?

Participants acknowledged that in today's international environment with its ever-increasing complexities, challenges and security threats, the tasks at hand are even more daunting then they were in 1815. These range from managing conflictual relations between the United States and Russia and accepting the emergence of China as a political player with an international agenda, to drawing in other influential collective actors, such as the European Union (EU), or states such as India or Brazil. Participants also agreed that states still matter, although they are ever more often in competition with non-state actors of various kinds, whether multinational corporations, international NGOs, or violent terrorist and militant groups. Making use of various tracks of engagement between state and non-state actors for purposes of dialogue facilitation was deemed essential in building a secure and peaceful world order. Ensuring prosperity and the welfare of citizens, managing climate change and the global economy, which is increasingly under duress, as well as burden-sharing in the delivery of common and public goods were also the subject of debate in envisioning a new global peace and security architecture.

As to norms and values guiding a 21st century architecture, it was agreed that unlike Europe of 1815, there is no universal value system at present. However, there are precedents as to states accepting common norms and values in institutional settings, such as within the United Nations. Some participants supported norms and values proposed in one of the working papers that could guide interaction among a new 21st Century Concert of Powers, including for example, recognizing a sense of urgency for co-operation and a common sense of responsibility; accepting equality among member states; renouncing the unilateral use of military force; and abiding by international law.

Discussions also focused on identity-driven processes such as the perseverance of national and ethnic identities and issues of self-determination, and interpretations thereof, that are likely to remain a challenge to any future peace and security architecture. The European experience of a supranational identity may offer some insights. Also psychologically-driven processes, whether on the individual or societal levels, were seen as meriting consideration, including addressing differences in interpretation as to intentions of political leaders and the conflicting narratives that exist at present, reducing anxieties that states and leaders may have of each other, and reestablishing mutual trust. The importance of thinking about conditions that are conducive to peace as well as enhancing the capacity of individuals to understand peace processes in a non-linear way are also crucial dynamics in our efforts toward creating sustainable peace.

Authors and Speakers:

  • Federico Rampini
    U.S. Chief Correspondent, La Repubblica
  • Orville Schell
    Arthur Ross Director of the Center on U.S.-China Relations, Asia Society
  • Zhe Sun
    Tsinghua University
  • Dmitri Trenin
    Director Carnegie Moscow Centre, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
  • Ivan Krastev
    Chairman of the Centre for Liberal Strategies, Permanent Fellow at Institute for Human Sciences
  • Joel Bell
    Founding Chairman and President, Chumir Foundation for Ethics in Leadership
  • Sean Cleary
    Executive Vice Chair, FutureWorld Foundation
  • John Arquilla
    US Naval Postgraduate School
  • Sergei Karaganov
    Dean, School of International Economics and Foreign Affairs, National Research University, Russia
  • Paul Collier
    Professor Oxford University, Director International Growth Centre, Director Centre for the Study of African Economies, Fellow St. Anthony’s College
TOP