In introducing novel ideas for the September 2024 Summit of the Future and New Agenda for Peace, this report seeks to encourage more ambitious, forward looking thinking and deliberation on global... Show moreIn introducing novel ideas for the September 2024 Summit of the Future and New Agenda for Peace, this report seeks to encourage more ambitious, forward looking thinking and deliberation on global governance renewal and innovation. The world needs better ways to manage its many, growing problems. Engaging new voices, instruments, networks, knowledge, and structures is the key to coping with today’s and future global challenges, which include, but are not limited to, renewed Great Power tensions, deepening Global North-South divides, virulent nationalism, runway climate change, and unconstrained artificial intelligence. Against this backdrop, the inaugural Global Governance Innovation Report (GGIR) aims to inform and advance debates on improving global governance, and to spur action to that end, drawing on insights from two new tools: a Global Governance Index and a Global Governance Survey. Encouraging greater ambition in preparations for the September 2024 Summit of the Future in New York and a New Agenda for Peace, the report offers proactive measures to better prevent, and failing that, limit the escalation of deadly conflict; reconsiders disarmament measures to boost conditions for conflict management and resolution; and proposes a next generation humanitarian action architecture to save more lives when conflict prevention and mitigation fail. Central to a strategy for change, GGIR’23 introduces five steps for mobilizing a broad-based, smart coalition of governments and civil society groups to maximize the generational opportunity afforded by next year’s Summit, to better ensure “the future we want and the United Nations we need” for present and future generations. Show less
As a complement to the background note on the positions concerning the 14 April 2018 military response to the poison gas attack on Douma assumed by the Netherlands and key allies, the present note... Show moreAs a complement to the background note on the positions concerning the 14 April 2018 military response to the poison gas attack on Douma assumed by the Netherlands and key allies, the present note provides a general overview of the relevant legal norms and the academic debate surrounding the issues of interstate use of force and humanitarian intervention, including reform proposals for the way forward. It does not claim to provide an exhaustive treatment of the subjects covered and the available literature on them. Rather, its intention is to provide context, background, and stimulate debate among the members of the Expert Group. Show less
The use of Western military forces for the stabilisation of (post) conflict states has become common practice. At times at cautious approach is taken, yet often its use is seen to be the answer to... Show moreThe use of Western military forces for the stabilisation of (post) conflict states has become common practice. At times at cautious approach is taken, yet often its use is seen to be the answer to the provision of international security. This study seeks to answer prominent and pressings questions as to why and how it is decided to use military means in Western states. It specifically draws attention to the actions of senior civil and military decision-makers in both the Netherlands and the United Kingdom whilst deciding to engage their forces contributing to NATO__s expansion into South Afghanistan. The careful reconstruction of their actions and decisions, based on about one-hundred interviews and archive material, provides an insight into the black-box of decision-making and challenges theoretical prescriptions on civil military relations and strategy. Show less
