|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on UN Sustainable Development (Nov26/02) Penang, 4 Nov (Kanaga Raja) — Conflicts affect the realization of the right to development, as well as other human rights, a United Nations human rights expert has said, calling on States and companies to move away from funding “war economies” towards investing in a “peace economy”. In his report (A/81/187) to the 81st session of the United Nations General Assembly in New York, the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to development, Surya Deva, said that the highest number of conflicts since the Second World War are obstructing the achievement of human rights and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. “Peace is a precondition for development. To be sustainable, peace must be rooted in human rights and address prevailing discriminations and injustices,” said Mr Deva. Mr Deva highlighted that conflicts divert much-needed resources away from the realisation of human rights, the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals and the financing of a just transition to a green economy. “Conflicts have unfortunately become a profitable business for some States and companies. Through unlawful invasions, some States are expanding their territorial boundaries, while others are grabbing the natural resources – including critical minerals – of invaded countries,” he said. “Similarly, many companies in sectors such as arms and weapons, technology, natural resources and construction are profiteering from conflicts and wars,” the expert added. The report identifies multiple intertwined root causes and drivers of conflicts: fight for control over natural resources, colonialism, both in its historical legacy and the current neo-colonial traits, inequalities, political exclusions and corruption and human rights violations. “The right to development provides a foundation for the international community to make a shift from war economies to a peace economy,” the Special Rapporteur stressed. In this regard, he set out a roadmap for a peace economy – comprising foundational, preventive, institutional and deterrent components – to achieve this required shift to leave no one behind. According to the report, peace is a precondition for development. To be sustainable, peace must be rooted in human rights and address prevailing discriminations and injustices. “Peacebuilding should also involve the participation of people, especially those who are disproportionately affected by conflicts, such as children, women and minorities.” At the same time, Mr Deva said development must be inclusive, sustainable and participatory in order to support peace. He said despite a strong acceptance of this trinity between peace and security, development and human rights in numerous instruments and multilateral declarations, peace has become elusive in practice, and that conflicts are a major peace disrupter. He said conflicts result in the loss of innocent lives and in gender-based violence. They pollute the environment and destroy biodiversity. Conflicts destroy homes, schools, hospitals and public infrastructure. They also trigger forced displacement of people and increase the cost of living. According to the expert, conflicts divert resources away from the realization of human rights, the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals and the financing of a just transition to a green economy. Moreover, conflicts widen the trust deficit between States and challenge multilateralism. Conflicts rarely settle disputes or address the root causes of conflicts. Rather, conflicts often build the foundation for future conflicts by inflicting violence, triggering international crimes and perpetuating injustices, the report argued. It said despite these well-documented harms associated with conflicts, the world has been witnessing the highest number of conflicts since the Second World War. In his report, the Special Rapporteur elaborates on the nexus of peace with human rights, development, gender quality and the environment, and also unpacks the root causes of conflicts, which disrupt peace. It is especially crucial to understand the political economy of conflicts and expose the neo-colonial roots of conflicts, he emphasized. The nexus between peace and security, sustainable development and human rights is widely accepted at the normative and policy levels. However, the peace nexus goes beyond this trinity, Mr Deva noted. PEACE NEXUS Peace is often seen as absence of conflicts. This is a negative dimension of peace. In this narrow understanding of peace, the focus is on the absence of physical violence, said the report. However, in a broad sense, peace means “absence of structural violence” – this positive dimension of peace demands social justice, it added. Positive peace is “an optimal environment under which human potential can flourish” and would thus require the expansion of freedoms that people enjoy. Mr Deva said expanding those freedoms entails respect for human rights and the rule of law, the absence of corruption, the fair distribution of economic benefits, active, free and meaningful participation in decision- making, development within planetary boundaries, and mutual respect and acceptance of diversities. In this context, he noted that maintaining international peace and security is the principal purpose of the United Nations. The report pointed out that to achieve this goal, Article 1 of the Charter of the United Nations provides for taking effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace. It also stresses the settlement of international disputes by peaceful means and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law. It said that over the years, the United Nations has employed special political missions as a key tool to prevent conflict, support peace processes and assist in building a sustainable peace. The number of such missions has increased significantly since the mid-1990s, which reflects the escalation in conflicts in the last three decades. The report said the nexus between peace and human rights is made clear in the opening preambular paragraph of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, where it stated that “recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world”. It is widely accepted that sustainable development cannot be realized without peace and security, and peace and security will be at risk without sustainable development, Mr Deva argued. A 2024 study found that the incidence of poverty was two to three times higher on average in conflict-affected areas. “The lack of peace means that resources that could have gone to eliminate poverty and hunger, provide quality education and health services, ensure access to potable water, achieve gender equality or support a just transition to a green economy are being diverted to fund war economies,” he underlined. In this regard, he said increased military spending adversely impacts the achievement of sustainable development in diverse ways. For example, a 1 per cent increase in military spending in low- and middle-income countries is linked to an almost equal reduction in public health services – thus risking the rights to health and life of people in those countries. Countries affected by active armed conflicts spent 4.4 per cent of their GDP on the military in 2024 on average, compared with 1.9 per cent in countries without armed conflict, said the report. It said that military expenditure in the Russian Federation has risen by nearly 300 per cent since the pre-war year of 2021, increasing from about $39 billion to about $147 billion in 2025. Germany is similarly proposing to significantly increase its defence budget in coming years: from around 62.40 billion euros in 2025 to 153 billion euros by 2029. Increased military expenditure also adversely affects development owing to the need for an increase in tax rates and public debt or a reduction in official development assistance (ODA), said Mr Deva. For example, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has committed to reducing ODA from 0.5 to 0.3 per cent of its gross national income and reallocate that funding to the military, while Japan plans to raise taxes specifically to fund its military build-up. There are indications that global military expenditures will continue to increase in coming years, while ODA is projected to decline, said the report, noting that ODA – which is a tiny percentage of global military expenditure – has decreased significantly since 2023. For example, five countries – Germany, the United States of America, the United Kingdom, Japan and France – alone accounted for 95.7 per cent of the total decline of ODA in 2025. On the other hand, only four countries met the target of allocating 0.7 per cent of gross national income to ODA in 2025: Denmark, Luxembourg, Norway and Sweden. The Special Rapporteur said that there is a close connection between peace and gender equality, pointing out that conflicts and wars have masculine characteristics. “Research indicates that gender-equal societies are more peaceful. At the same time, peace is essential to achieve substantive gender equality because conflicts tend to exacerbate gender-based violence. Girls and women suffer disproportionately in post-conflict situations, including during forced displacement and refugee situations.” However, the report said girls and women are not mere victims of conflicts. When girls and women are enabled as agents of change, they contribute to creating a more inclusive, peaceful and sustainable world. “Their participation in peace negotiations contributes to the quality and durability of peace, as recognized in Security Council resolution 1325 (2000),” said Mr Deva. CONFLICTS While peace is fundamental and possible, conflicts regularly disrupt peace. Conflicts are costly: not merely in terms of the human cost and the damage to the environment but also in financial terms (including the cost of repairing the damage caused by conflicts), according to the Special Rapporteur. He said conflicts result in the loss of innocent lives. For example, the civil war in the Sudan has killed hundreds of thousands of people, while the civil war in Yemen had resulted in about 377,000 deaths by the end of 2021. Conflicts have also resulted in the forced internal displacement of millions of people all over the world, Mr Deva added. For example, clashes in South Sudan have caused the displacement of more than 2.3 million people within the country. More disturbingly, the expert said that the use of new and automated technologies in conflicts, which reduces fatalities among soldiers and in turn reduces the political cost, is likely to increase the propensity of States and non-State actors to initiate and continue conflicts. He said while it is difficult to estimate accurately the entire financial cost of conflicts, the cost of armed conflicts amounted to $1.02 trillion in 2017, an increase by 106 per cent over the previous 11 years. The report said estimates show that the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita of countries that experience a civil war for four years would be expected to contract by about 18 per cent. Conflict has damaged nearly one-third of pre-conflict gross capital stock in the Syrian Arab Republic, with direct physical damage estimated at $108 billion. More significantly, the report said in an interconnected world, conflicts in one region have a ripple effect in other regions. For example, the Russian invasion of Ukraine increased global food, fuel and fertilizer prices, while the 2026 aggression against the Islamic Republic of Iran disrupted energy markets and supply chains – thus contributing to the global cost-of-living crisis. Highlighting the current state of play, the report said in 2025, the Uppsala Conflict Data Program recorded the highest number of State-based conflicts (65 conflicts across 35 countries) since 1946. About 245,000 people were killed in these conflicts during the course of the year 2025. Between 2021 and 2025, more than 930,000 people were killed in conflicts – about the same as the total number recorded in the 20-year period prior to 2021. Over the past decade, non-State conflicts have also increased. Some of these conflicts are fuelled or sustained by States’ use of proxy wars or States’ illicit financing of terror groups. Illegal wars in clear breach of international law are being waged, allegedly in the name of peace and human rights, said the report. It said conflicts have become a profitable business for some States and companies. Through unlawful invasions, some States are expanding their territorial boundaries, while others are grabbing the natural resources – including critical minerals – of invaded countries. Mr Deva said that by fuelling a war narrative and nationalism, certain Governments are able to deflect from their failures to improve good governance and/or achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Like some States, many companies in sectors such as arms and weapons, technology, natural resources and construction are profiteering from conflicts and wars, he pointed out. “Revenues of the world’s 100 largest arms-producing and military services companies reached $679 billion in 2024, a 26 per cent increase over the decade 2015-2024.” Notably, the report said companies in the United States, with nearly half of all global arms revenues in 2024, remain the dominant suppliers of arms and weapons in the world. “Investors are also reaping benefits from conflicts. A 2024 study shows that the Russian Federation-Ukraine conflict brought significant positive returns in the stocks of 81.4 per cent of defence companies sampled. In addition, there are businesses indulging in money-laundering and the financing of terrorism.” Businesses in conflict-affected areas are expected to conduct heightened human rights due diligence in order to identify the impacts of their activities on human rights as well as on conflicts, Mr Deva stressed. “Some companies have taken steps to prevent or mitigate adverse impacts, including by not entering or exiting conflict sites. However, many companies continue to find a business case in directly or indirectly supporting conflicts or at least benefiting from them.” According to the Special Rapporteur, there are multiple intertwined root causes and drivers of conflicts. He said territorial disputes are a main cause of conflicts. The disputes over territories could be underpinned by historical, economic, strategic or symbolic reasons. “Economic opportunity is another root cause of conflicts. Control over natural resources, especially in fragile States, is a case in point. At times, the expansion of territories may be driven by a desire to lay claim to natural resources.” More importantly, Mr Deva said that colonialism – both in its historical legacy and the current neo-colonial traits – remains a major root cause of conflicts. Post-imperial conflicts exist. Research has indicated that post-colonial societies are more prone to civil violence than non-colonized societies, he added. The imposition of artificial borders and the exploitation of natural resources by colonial powers, resulting in poverty and/or inequalities, continue to have a lingering effect on conflicts, the report said. In modern times, invasions to export democracy and human rights or unilateral coercive measures, when used selectively for political purposes, can also be regarded as a colonial enterprise that undermines the ability of the targeted countries to fulfil the basic human conditions for peace, it added. Continued colonialism and occupations hit at the heart of self-determination. The presence of military bases in third countries is another form of colonialism, it further said. For instance, the Special Rapporteur said that the United States is estimated to have some 750 to 800 military bases across approximately 80 countries and territories. However, Mr Deva said: “The efficacy of such bases in preventing conflicts or sustaining peace is questionable.” In addition, he said overseas military bases negatively affect the human rights of local people, for example, by causing environmental pollution and leading to the exploitation and commodification of women. ROAD MAP The Special Rapporteur believes that a shift is needed from war economies to a peace economy, proposing a holistic road map for States, United Nations entities, companies, civil society organizations and other actors to bring about this shift. Pointing out that piecemeal approaches cannot prevent conflicts and sustain peace, Mr Deva cited Mahatma Gandhi as having observed: “Peace will not come out of a clash of arms but out of justice lived and done by unarmed nations in the face of odds.” Sustaining peace, in essence, requires creating conditions for justice (social, political, economic, gender, climate and digital) at all levels (local, provincial, national, regional and international), the expert argued. Against this backdrop, the Special Rapporteur proposed a road map for a peace economy comprising four inter-related and complementary components: (a) Foundational component addresses the root causes and drivers of conflicts so that various triggers of conflicts are reduced, if not eliminated completely; (b) Preventive component envisages taking proactive measures to prevent the escalation of conflicts; (c) Institutional component creates a fair and inclusive institutional architecture at various levels to support peace; (d) Deterrent component establishes effective mechanisms to hold accountable actors, howsoever powerful, who indulge in unlawful behaviour. “To achieve a peace economy, States must invest in dignified life for all, reduce inequalities, address the political economy of conflicts, promote human rights-based good governance, build multilateralism and a culture of peace, reinvigorate disarmament, strengthen early warning systems and preventive diplomacy, focus on collective security, reform the Security Council and strengthen accountability for international crimes,” Mr Deva said. “Peace is possible and is the best guarantee for national security. Sustaining peace is also far less expensive than funding war economies,” he concluded. +
|
||
