Here are six criteria for the charge of “Failure to Secure Peace” which is applicable to any world leader under the Peace Imperative to end all war for the purpose of focusing on human species survival.
1. Failure to broker peace agreements: A leader may be charged with failure to secure peace if they have been unable to successfully negotiate or facilitate peace agreements between conflicting parties or nations. This can be demonstrated by a lack of signed peace treaties or a continuing escalation of violence and conflict in the region under their leadership.
2. Continued violence and instability: If a leader has been in power for a significant period of time and the country or region under their leadership has experienced consistent violence, conflicts, or internal strife, this can be seen as a failure to secure peace. A leader’s inability to maintain stability and prevent violence indicates a failure to fulfill their duty of ensuring peace and security.
3. Lack of conflict resolution initiatives: A leader may be charged with failure to secure peace if they have not actively pursued initiatives or policies aimed at resolving ongoing conflicts. This can be observed through a lack of mediation efforts, peace talks, or diplomatic initiatives that could potentially bring about peace and stability.
4. Failure to address root causes of conflicts: A leader’s failure to address the root causes of conflicts can be seen as a failure to secure peace. If a leader does not address socio-economic disparities, political grievances, or other underlying factors that contribute to conflicts, they are neglecting to tackle the fundamental issues that prevent long-term peace.
5. Escalation of tensions: If a leader’s actions or rhetoric have contributed to an escalation of tensions and a breakdown in diplomatic relations, this can be considered evidence of a failure to secure peace. Provocative actions, inflammatory statements, or a lack of diplomatic tact can all undermine peacebuilding efforts and contribute to increased hostility between nations or conflicting parties.
6. Lack of efforts for reconciliation and forgiveness: A leader’s failure to promote reconciliation and forgiveness among divided communities or groups can be seen as a failure to secure peace. If there is a lack of policies or initiatives aimed at healing wounds, fostering dialogue, or promoting unity, the leader is not actively working towards building lasting peace and reconciliation.
It is important to note that the validity of these charges may vary depending on the specific context, the complexity of the conflicts involved, and the available evidence.
The criteria for failure to secure peace can include the failure to establish and maintain good relations with the parties involved, compromising the image of impartiality, and undermining the credibility and legitimacy of peacekeeping operations. Additionally, the absence of consent from the main parties involved can lead to a peacekeeping operation becoming a party to the conflict, and the use of force except in self-defense and defense of the mandate can also be a factor.
The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) principle emphasizes that if a state is manifestly failing to protect its populations, the international community must be prepared to take appropriate collective action, in a timely and decisive manner, through the Security Council, in accordance with the Charter, including Chapter VII, on a case-by-case basis and in cooperation with relevant regional organizations as appropriate, should peaceful means be inadequate and national authorities are manifestly failing to protect their populations from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and ethnic cleansing[1][4].
Citations:
[1] https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/content/repertoire/actions
[2] https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/principles-of-peacekeeping
[3] https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/trecms/pdf/AD1108235.pdf
[4] https://www.globalr2p.org/what-is-r2p/
[5] https://politicalviolenceataglance.org/2012/08/10/even-failed-peace-agreements-save-lives/
