In 1982, the United Nations General Assembly agreed to declare an International Day of Peace. In 2001, it issued Resolution No. 55/282 stipulating that Sept. 21 shall thenceforth be observed as a day of global ceasefire and nonviolence—an invitation to all nations and people to honor a cessation of hostilities for the duration of the day.
Thirty-three years later, the International Day of Peace came at a time of deadly violence and conflicts worldwide. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said: “I call on all warring parties to lay down their weapons and observe a global ceasefire. To them I say, stop the killings and the destruction, and create space for lasting peace.” But despite Ban’s words, as doves were released at the UN headquarters in New York as the symbolic hope of peace, the day was marked with the scourge of war, callous terrorist attacks, even the refugee crisis.
The question must be asked: Is the world becoming more peaceful?
It seems that this year, the international community commemorated World Peace Day by seeding violence instead of cementing peace. In Japan, the contentious security bills enabling Japanese troops to engage in combat overseas were passed. In the South China Sea, the territorial dispute continues, with the contending parties increasing their assertive activities. And North Korea has found justification for further developing its nuclear power.
In the Middle East and North Africa, Syria’s devastating political upheaval promises no peaceful future, unleashing a refugee crisis in Europe. The Islamic State’s brutal aggressions and governance continue unabated. In the Arabian peninsula, a Saudi-led coalition has been pelting Houthi rebels with air strikes, affecting innocent civilians. Many random terrorist attacks have been occurring in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Nigeria, while in Africa, countries are engulfed in violent protests.
It’s as if the planet was marking a World Investing Violence Day rather than a World Peace Day.
How does the Global Peace Index (GPI) 2015, produced by the Institute for Economics and Peace, gauge the situation based on the level of safety and security in society, the extent of domestic or international conflict, and the degree of militarization?
According to GPI 2015, the situation remained stable compared with 2014, but still registered a worse performance than in 2008. Four out of the nine geographical regions experienced an improvement in peace while five became less peaceful. The most substantial change in the index was recorded for the Middle East and North Africa, which now ranks as the most violent region, overtaking South Asia (including Afghanistan).
Europe maintained its position as the most peaceful region in the world.
Since 2014, 81 countries have become more peaceful and 78 countries less peaceful. Iceland came out on top as the most peaceful country in the world, and Syria, the most violent.
GPI 2015 also states that the intensity of armed conflict has increased dramatically, with the number of people killed in conflicts globally rising more than 3.5 times—from 49,000 in 2010 to 180,000 in 2014. Total deaths from terrorism in 2014 increased by 9 percent to an estimated 20,000. Almost 1 percent of the world’s population is now made up of refugees or internally displaced persons—the highest level since 1945, and still expected to surge.
The impact of violence on the global economy has reached $14.3 trillion, or 13.4 percent of global GDP in the last year, or equivalent to the combined economies of Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Spain and the United Kingdom.
Indeed, per GPI 2015, it was a distressing International Day of Peace. However, there are blessings in disguise waiting to challenge global leaders to initiate and cement long-lasting peace:
Firstly, a change in mindset is indispensable. Rather than waiting until a conflict breaks out and then deploying humanitarian response, timely concrete actions to prevent conflict and then sustain peace need to be continuously afforded.
Secondly, new world-power states must show their assertiveness to bring about global peace according to international law. They cannot flout regulations to serve their own interest. There is also a need to ease the paranoia in status-quo power states in their response to the rise of other states. Too often, the international community recklessly prefers militarized responses in managing threats. Such responses can prove effective in the immediate context of temporarily stopping violence or threats, but they often tend to address symptoms rather than root causes.
Lastly, for ongoing conflict there is no better suggestion than embodying peacemaking by initiating more space for dialogues. This peacemaking also needs to be buttressed with peacebuilding and peacekeeping in order to make the peace permanent.
From its inception, the International Day of Peace has never been just a celebration day, but a day to afford peace to reign globally. I am personally looking forward to seeing an International Day of Peace marked by the awareness of conflicting parties of the necessity to embrace peacemaking and foster peacebuilding measures.
Dimas Kuncoro Jati is an international law researcher based in Jakarta. He is a member of the Foreign Policy Community of Indonesia.