Ukraine has brought us to another crossroads for humanity

EDMONTON—It’s a safe bet Canada’s defence spending will get a huge boost in the federal budget soon to be presented to Parliament. Defence Minister Anita Anand, reeling from the demands of the Ukraine war, is openly campaigning for more money and will present “aggressive options” to cabinet. The NATO leadership is demanding more resources, and Canada is made to feel like a laggard because the $22-billion we’re already spending annually on defence falls short of NATO’s magic number of two per cent of GDP. Once again, the powerful voices calling for more money for the military have far more resonance in the media and Parliament than those advocating stronger political and economic measures to build the conditions for peace. Clearly the present political system that relies so heavily on seeking peace through military strength has failed—again—tragically, as the heart-wrenching photos of innocent people slaughtered and uprooted in Ukraine show. Of course, the Russian invasion must be repelled, but the failed political system that led to the Ukraine disaster must be exposed. The suffering in Ukraine has touched a raw nerve in the West. Will we learn from this terrible experience? Human security today does not come from the barrel of a gun. It comes from preventive planning. At the end of the Cold War, the world had a marvellous chance to overhaul the international system to head off the rise of future despots. The UN secretary-general at the time, Boutros Boutros-Ghali, was commissioned by the Security Council to write An Agenda for Peace, which called for new structures to solidify peace in order to avoid a relapse into conflict. Such steps would include disarming the previously warring parties, the destruction of weapons, repatriating refugees, training security personnel, monitoring elections, advancing the protection of human rights, and reforming government institutions. He asked for a $1-billion UN peace endowment fund to finance the initial cost of new conflict resolution measures. The publication of An Agenda for Peace launched an extended debate. While the smaller states liked it, the major states saw it as an encroachment on their sovereignty. The move to build new peace structures fizzled out. Boutros-Ghali was denied a second term, and NATO started to enlarge. Defence budgets climbed, and today governments spend $2-trillion annually on arms. The UN, though valiantly expanding its humanitarian programs, was deliberately weakened in carrying out its primary mission of maintaining the peace and security of the world. Ukraine has brought us to another crossroads for humanity. Which path will we choose now: put more resources into building human security to prevent war, or build anew the modern means of warfare in a misguided effort to keep the peace? The current UN Secretary-General, Antonio Guterres, has produced a successor to the Agenda for Peace. It is called Our Common Agenda. It is a blueprint for dealing with the enormous risks facing humanity today ranging from the prolonged pandemic and climate deterioration to a renewed nuclear arms race and the new move into cyber warfare. In short, Guterres is calling for a serious effort to improve global governance, manage risks and safeguard the global commons and global public goods. He wants a Summit of the Future, to be held in 2023 at which states would plan together joint steps to build peace. This requires a common vision of peace and security in the face of new threats and vulnerabilities. I don’t hear such a vision being articulated by the Government of Canada. Canada already spends 20 times more on its military than diplomacy. The government’s present plans to spend $553-billion on defence in the next 20 years, for fighter jets and warships, dwarfs our contribution to the UN’s sustainable development programs. Canada clings to NATO, but NATO’s policies are increasingly outmoded. The UN, hobbled by the veto system, which enabled Russia, a permanent member of the Security Council, to literally get away with murder, also needs reforming. But the vision of the UN, to build the conditions for peace, is a far better approach than strengthening an already-bloated NATO. Canada spends about $200-million a year in UN assessments and $6.6-billion on international development assistance. But this is a small fraction of the funding demanded by NATO. Canada alone cannot be blamed for the aggrandizement of NATO, but, as an important middle power, can help to change the climate of thinking about a better way to build new security arrangements. Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland should be investing in more diplomacy, not more military. A slight glimmer of hope about future thinking for peace is offered by a new organization, Coalition for the UN We Need, a consortium of 3,300 civil society groups in 110 countries working on programs to advance Our Common Agenda. The coordinator of the coalition is Fergus Watt, a Canadian, and the Canadian Pugwash Group and Project Ploughshares are members. The people who work on these programs do not have guns. Douglas Roche is a former Senator and author. The Hill Times

Ukraine has brought us to another crossroads for humanity

Which path will we choose now: put more resources into building human security to prevent war, or build anew the modern means of warfare in a misguided effort to keep the peace?

Feds’ purchase of F-35s indicates Canada has given up on peace-building as best route to global security

A path to peace in a time of polycrisis

Peace movement in Canada has a new leader, it’s Cesar Jaramillo

Feds’ purchase of F-35s indicates Canada has given up on peace-building as best route to global security

Keep the focus on cancer during pandemic recovery

What a new health-care funding deal means for Canada

In politics and pro-leagues, true leaders must know when to go

Forty degrees below zero in the world of racial equity and inclusion

As election looms, a full-time pursuit of the trivial takes over federal politics

The last thing Ontario Liberal Party needs is walkover Liberal

The world doesn’t want another Cuban Missile Crisis

Canada needs to give more support to UN’s new Agenda for Peace

Influx of women into nuclear disarmament gives us hope, unless they work for a NATO country

World’s only surviving multilateral nuclear weapons treaty is on the verge of collapse

Canada’s absence at nuclear prohibition treaty meeting a disappointment

News

Get free news updates

Opinion

Submit a guest opinion article

resources

Advertise

subscribe

get help

Ukraine has brought us to another crossroads for humanity

Which path will we choose now: put more resources into building human security to prevent war, or build anew the modern means of warfare in a misguided effort to keep the peace?

Get The Foreign Policy and Diplomacy Newsletter