What Is the Idea of Peace-building?
Building peace in countries such as Lebanon, which suffered from wars, has been a major topic in the discussions of the United Nations Security Council since the end of the Cold War in 1990. The United Nations Security Council held a historic summit in 1992, after the end of the civil war, which was similar to the Versailles Summit and the Yalta Summit in 1945, on the eve of the end of the Second World War. The United Nations Security Council asked the Secretary-General of the United Nations to summarize his vision for the principles to be adopted by the international community to ensure international peace and security in the world.
Indeed, the Secretary-General executed this demand. The Secretary-General presented several guiding principles that included the concept of Post Conflict Peacebuilding to help countries that suffered internal wars and needed help, such as Lebanon, to restore peace, and rebuild their national system. Projects in this regard should align with existing developments undertaken by the international community since 1990, including the need to enable these countries to achieve sustainable growth. The Secretary-General considered that post-war peace-building is a necessary principle to maintain international peace and security.
In 1995, The UN formed an open working group for all UN members to discuss this issue. The primary elements of this principle were possible to identify. However, distinct reasons and circumstances that led to those wars, made it impossible to reach an agreement on a single text. Therefore, this issue remains, until now, on the agenda of the Security Council.
A report from the World Bank revealed that countries emerging from conflicts are facing extraordinary development and security challenges as they move towards economic recovery. Most of these countries experienced increased growth after the end of the war. Foreign aid helps it make the most of the peace dividend, especially to promote growth. Good governance is also closely related to growth. However, it has been observed that in post-violent war societies, aid has failed to influence the situation. Civil wars, the most common type of violent, large-scale, prolonged, and brutal conflict, continue to harm societies even after they have ended. It is unclear what types of assistance and the nature of the aid needed to promote peace and development, nor is it clear what policies should prioritize. Case studies are required in order to understand better the relationship between social security guarantees and economic stability.
The World Bank report emphasized that the impact of United Nations missions did not necessarily lead to economic growth. Indeed, the efforts made to rebuild peace in Lebanon so far have not led to the intended results.
The Security Council decided in 2005 to establish the Peacebuilding Commission, as an intergovernmental advisory body, with a permanent organizing committee responsible for developing its rules of procedure and defining its working methods. During the subsequent years, the Security Council urged all countries, United Nations organizations, and its specialized agencies to provide more ideas that would improve coordination between relevant actors, to achieve a beneficial result in the post-conflict peace-building process.
The United Nations, however, has not been able to use its mechanism for deterring hostilities and preventing wars as stipulated in its Charter. Thirty years since the end of the Cold War, and about twenty-five years since the adoption of the principles presented by the Secretary-General, including post-conflict peace-building, the world is still stunned by continuing wars. Some wars inherited from the Cold War are ongoing, such as the war in Lebanon. New wars, more terrible than the previous ones, were born. The Arab countries neighboring Lebanon were subject to civil wars, bloodshed, and frightful criminal acts, which reached the state of genocide. Despite all this, the United Nations did not move to stop it. Why? The militia groups that emerged during wars still possess weapons, equipment, money, strength, and technological expertise, exceeding the capabilities and power of the official armies of the countries in which they operate. These militia groups owned the decision of war and peace in those countries, attacked other countries, and turned the country in which they resided into a battlefield. How did that happen? Where is the United Nations in all of this? Is it sufficient to say that these militias are part of a civil conflict?
The nature of the war and the wars on Lebanon’s land varied, but they did not end. Lebanon is still exposed to new battles and suffers from a lack of security and the world’s divided political stands. Lebanese are still scattered. Local milias still control war and peace decisions. These militias do not respect state law. These militias adopt a strategy and an ideology drawn from their relationships with foreign governments. As long as these militias receive foreign support, they would not care about international peace and security resulting from their activities nor about Security Council resolutions related to them. Those militias were able to seize power in the country and divide the national wealth among them. Some of them confess that they receive funding, support, armament, and training from the army of a foreign country. Despite this, the United Nations was not able to end this reality. The UN issued several resolutions addressing these militias but failed to implement them. So why? How can the Lebanese and the United Nations rebuild peace in Lebanon in light of this reality? Then, how is such a situation described in international law? Are the concerned foreign governments supporting this militia subject to the crime of aggression?
The Coordinator of Humanitarian Aid in Lebanon, responsible for coordinating post-conflict peace-building programs in Lebanon, said that Lebanon is a wealthy country because it enjoys great human wealth. Why have the UN programs not succeeded so far in saving Lebanon?
The Lebanese Organization for Peace-building and Sustainable Development (LOPSD) was created to answer these questions and bring forward a national program that could serve the international community to help Lebanon.
Of course, what concerns the Organization is its scientific duty, in addition to serving peace in Lebanon and national unity. We, citizens, have lived through events in Lebanon since their beginnings, and we must reveal them honestly, as we have known and experienced, not only in the spirit of the researcher but also with the zeal of the concerned citizen. By focusing on the causes and results, and suggesting solutions, the founders of the Organization assume that they serve not only the Lebanese national interest but also the UN-relevant discussions.