Peace, a victim of vested Interests

The idea of peace is much more complicated than the phenomenon of war, for the reason that, it involves political, economic, social, cultural and religious issues of the diverse races and nations of the world. That is to say, all problems emanate from man. In modern materialistic societies which have been badly conflict-ridden, for ensuring peace and protection of human rights diplomacy is of prime importance.

Peace as understood, is the absence of hostility or the existence of healthy or newly healed interpersonal or international relationship, safety in matters of social or economic welfare, the knowledge of equality and fairness in political relationship. In international relationship peace essentially refers to the absence of a war or conflict. In the new context, the concept of peace would be the existence of a political and economic environment where each nation, society or individual human being is truly free from the control of any powerful person or powerful nation, free from poverty, hunger, indignities, every individual human being must be free to explore the limits of his/her potential.

Today peace is threaded, more than anything else by poverty, unjust economic order and absence of democracy, essentially in the sense of human liberty. In a world pervaded with violence and disputes, the struggle for peace becomes a must. Societies torn to the point of disintegration by civil war or violence are societies with regulatory mechanism; the bodies which exist to settle conflict are wrapped or even paralyzed.

The idea behind the creation of United Nations was saving future generation from the scourge of war. The founders lived a devastation of two world wars. The UN ought to be the upholders of peace and security. The primary objective to prevent the escalation of war and help to restore peace following the outbreak of armed conflicts and promote lasting peace in societies emerging from war, but the aim has been lost.

Founded in 1945 after World War II the United Nations was created to replace the defunct League of Nations, in order to restore an order among the nations by providing a platform for dialogue that could somehow rescue the world for the prevalent crises. But unfortunately, the UN by and large has failed to perform those duties. No doubt, the organisation was set up to mediate between state-to-state crises. But from Philistine to Indian occupied Kashmir, global conflict has changed and seemingly, it’s no longer fit for the purpose.

There are many reasons behind the UN’s inability to stop the bloodshed of innocent people around the world’s most disturbed regions. The disturbing truth is that the world’s primary institution to deal with war and enter state conflicts is itself dead.

The culture of peace means tolerance, non-violence and justice. More leaders are tempted and seek to bolster their influence or diminish that of their rival’s by meddling in foreign conflict. Multilateralism and its constraints are under siege, challenged by more transactional, zero-sum politics. Instrument of collective action, such as UN Security Council are paralysed:

If one area has borne the brunt of international lawlessness over the past year, it is the humanitarian crises. There is a dramatic rise in the number of conflicts, with devastating humanitarian, social and economic costs.

At least 70 conflicts involve non-state actors, a historic high. The past five years have seen worsening trends across conflicts indicator: more wars, more people killed and civilians increasingly targeted.

Conflict and peace both are inherent traits of human nature. While conflicts lead society towards destruction, peace paves the way for development and progress. UN lost pacifism, which is why, the decades old disputes are yet to be settled. As of now, UN has adopted many resolutions to maintain peace and protect human rights worldwide. As good a place as any to witness, the slow decline of the post-second world war global order is the UN Security Council. The key task was restoring order to a shattered post-war world. There was this tremendous enthusiasm for thinking, that war had come to an end and it was exciting to think that these countries could work together.

Too many UN resolutions passed since 1948, what did they bring? Nothing so far! The dispute over Kashmir seems too lost in the mere magnum of endless disputes, such as the attribution of a state to Palestine. We don’t need more resolutions; we need to actually start protecting and safe guard the rights of the people suffering.

As long as the UN is the indebted to the US like countries, peace like situation will be a distant dream. The countries whom UN has vested veto powers have never moved an inch over their personal interest. That is why the most valid and historically recognised disputed of the world has not been settled owing to the reasons of lacking interests of the veto powers. The result of this is violence, terrorism, killings and destructions. In order to let peace prevail, UN has to exercise powers independently without being a rubber stamp.

The writer is a peace activist