Fostering Peace through International Institutions - Essay Example

Fostering peace through international s al affiliation Fostering peace through international s The world today has become an interdependent place, where every nation must rely on others in order to achieve prosperity. In order to manage this interdependence, the world needs to be at peace and ensure sustainable relationships. The management of this peaceful co-existence may be difficult owing to the fact that there are religious, ideological, and ethnic differences among different people in the globe. It is the duty of political leaders, international institutions and citizens of every nation to ensure that peace is fostered within and without their borders. In recent times, state apparatus in conjunction with international institutions have been working towards the prevention of wars and conflicts, thus promoting peace. In this essay, we discuss some of the factors that may promote both external and internal conflicts. We also discuss the role of international institutions in fostering peace around the globe. Factors fuelling conflicts Ethnicity People of different ethnicities have strived to co-exist and use their differences for mutual benefits over the centuries. However, today, ethnicity is seen a factor that contributes to violence and lack of peace among people of different ethnic backgrounds. Many ethnic-based clashes are as a result of disproportionate allocation of resources and underrepresentation of some ethnic groups in state affairs1. When the state is unable to fully cater for the needs of each ethnic community, the latter are forced to act within their capacity to get what they want. In the process, such communities may end up offending members of another community, resulting in conflict. Religion The globe today continues to experience different religions, some authentic and others that are just coming up. Each religion has its own doctrines taught to its followers. The most predominant teachings in whatever religion cover the subject of peace and war2. The only problem comes when some religions teach their faithful to participate in “holy wars” in the name of fighting for their religion. These wars are usually waged against other religions whose teachings differ from those preached by the said religion. The politicking of such wars leads to supremacy battles to determine the superior religion. In the end, people die, while others are permanently maimed all in the name of “holy wars”. Religious intolerance has been witnessed in countries such as Sri Lanka, Iran, Nigeria, and Northern Ireland. A typical example of the extent of religious violence is the Islamic led attacks on the Twin Towers in the U.S in September 2001. However, there are those religious actors, a majority of who believe in the supremacy of peace over war. Most religious leaders have been involved in conflict resolution processes, regardless of the faith they profess. Ideology and nationalism In some cases, conflicts occur among nation and individuals based on differences in ideologies. The cultural, economic, and political lives of citizens within a nation are governed by certain ideologies. When nations differ on what ideologies are superior to which, then the ensuing supremacy battles are bound to cause conflicts. Just like religion, some nations try to force others to embrace their ideologies3. Ideology and nationalism are two concepts that go together in as far as governance is concerned. In nationalism, citizens take up some national identities that differentiate them from other nationals. In some cases, clashes in national identities may lead to misunderstandings and conflicts. Supremacy battles based on ideologies and nationalistic feelings are, therefore, catalysts of conflicts. Role of international institutions in conflict resolution Compared to the past centuries, the 21st century has witnessed considerably fewer conflicts especially those resulting in war. However, this does not mean that the world has finally achieved peace, far from it. Most nations are no longer in control of peaceful relations with other nations, as each country endeavors to be superior. To this end, the role of achieving balance in international and national relations has largely been left to international institutions. The latter are charged with the responsibility of arbitrating among conflicting parties and bringing about mutual benefits. International organizations have been at the fore-front in establishing global peace. The new millennium came with a lot of challenges as far as maintaining world order is concerned. The globe had to deal with the reality of the September 11 attacks on the U.S, the war in Afghanistan and Iraq, and prevalent civil unrest especially in third world countries. At the front position in trying to bring about conflict resolution has been the United Nations. Through the mandate of its Security Council and secretariat, the United Nations has often sent peace keeping forces to war torn areas to restore peace4. For example, since the wars broke out in Iraq and Somalia, the United Nations has helped bring about tranquility by fighting against the insurgents and protecting civilians from danger. In addition to bringing about peace through force, the International Criminal Court also prosecutes people who are believed to have instigated violence against innocent civilians. For example, Charles Taylor, former Liberian president was convicted at the court in 2012, for committing crimes against humanity. There are different regional institutions that help nations within their territory achieve peace. Different nations are signatories to different regional organizations and are thus bound by the terms and conditions of the latter. Such institutions are important in acting as mediators in conflict situations and bringing about resolution. An example of these organizations is the Organization of American States (OAS) that has been instrumental in conflict resolution among its members. For example, in the long standing conflict between Honduras and Nicaragua, OAS was influential in bringing about an agreement in 20055. Nicaragua and Honduras owe their peaceful co-existence to OAS. In the early 2000s a global campaign dubbed “UBUNTU” was launched to spearhead peace initiatives all over the world. Creating more democratic avenues for conflict resolution was one of the objectives of UBUNTU6. Accordingly, all nations around the globe have equal access to resources, thus bringing to an end the greediness of developed nations. Under UBUNTU, all countries are treated equally regardless of their ethnic, religious, economic, and ideological differences. UBUNTU does not only foster peace among nations, but also among individuals. It advocates for everyone to act in a manner that is likely to bring peace to other people. The efforts of international institutions have, however been hampered by increased globalization and a state where political independence is slowly being overtaken by free global markets. In order to ensure that there is free trade among countries globally; institutions such as the World Trade Organization seek to have a global system of conducting liberal trade. This way, any issues or conflicts arising from economic transactions can be handled by the organization, thus fostering peace. In summary, as the world continually becomes a global village of the 21st century, more conflicts are bound to arise. These conflicts may be based on religion, ethnicity, nationality, and even ideology. Nation states have progressively lost control over resolving these conflicts and have handed the mantle over to international institutions. Actors in these international institutions have played the role of mediators among conflicting parties and helped them reach amicable conclusions. Sometimes, international institutions, especially the United Nations have been forced to use legal and martial measures to end conflicts. The use of campaigns such as “UBUNTU” has also been embraced by international organizations, in pursuit of peace. Conclusively, the role played by international institutions in fostering world peace cannot be underestimated. Were it not for institutions such as the United Nations, most of humanity would be suffering in war today. Accordingly, such institutions deserve to have their autonomy respected. The decisions made by international organizations concerning peace should be just and fair, without favoring any sides. Critics have, however, argued that most organizations are puppets of first world countries and that they always favor the latter in their decisions7. If at all these allegations are true, then global peace will remain to be a mirage until international institutions stop being biased and treat everyone equally and justly. References Boulding, E. 2000. Cultures of Peace: The Hidden Side of History. New York: Syracuse University Press. Hampson, F., & Crocker, C. 2007. Leashing the Dogs of War: Conflict Management in a Divided World. New York: US Institute Of Peace Press. Rittberger, V. 2008. Strategies for Peace: Contributions of International Organizations, States, and Non-State Actors. Leverkusen: Barbara Budrich Publishers. Russet, B. 2011. Hegemony and Democracy. New York: Routledge. Ubuntu Forum Secretariat. 2009. Reforming International Institutions: Another World Is Possible. New York: Earthscan. Read More