By Reneva Fourie
Peace, development and meeting humanitarian needs are interconnected and crucial for progress. When there is peace, it becomes easier to implement lasting solutions to issues such as poverty and displacement. However, today’s conflicts and crises show a noticeable lack of empathy.
We have become passive participants in human-engineered disasters, where bodies upon bodies pile up and disease and hunger devour the lives that remain. It is imperative that individuals and governments redouble their efforts to actively champion peace in order to restore a sense of compassion and decency to the world.
One of the countries that prides itself on its peace efforts is the United States of America (US) as reflected in its 2022 ten-year ‘Strategy to Prevent Conflict and Promote Stability’. For the period, $300 million has been designated for initiatives to prevent conflicts, stabilise conflict situations, foster partnerships for stability, and improve the management of resources for peace efforts.
Achieving the strategy’s objectives involves integrating all US foreign policy instruments, including diplomacy, foreign assistance, defence support and security cooperation, trade and investment, sanctions and other financial pressure mechanisms, intelligence, analysis, and strategic communications.
The problem is that the strategy is not designed to foster global peace but to bolster specific nations that can serve as economic and security partners to the US to advance its interests. Those outside this framework are seen either as adversaries or potential adversaries, making them subject to destabilisation.
It is disconcerting that the US-based Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs reports that the US government conducted “counterterrorism operations” in 78 countries between 2021 and 2023. These included airstrikes and ground operations that were conducted in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Syria and Yemen. This is slightly less than the 85 countries where the Trump administration conducted these so-called operations between 2018 and 2020.
The figures exclude military information support operations or psychological operations, including sanctions, explicitly targeting countries identified as its primary threats, like Russia, China and Iran, and socialist-leaning countries like Cuba, Venezuela and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. It also excludes counterterrorism-related arms sales to foreign governments, all US special operations forces deployments and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operations.
In 2024, there was a noticeable increase in military operations involving the United States. For instance, in one day – February 2 – according to a report in the New York Times, the US carried out airstrikes on over 85 targets in Syria and Iraq. Additionally, the combined US and British airstrikes in Yemen during the first half of this year were estimated to be around 452.
In the context of Israel’s attacks on Gaza, the US continues to fuel the aggression despite presenting itself as the primary peace broker between the Israelis and Palestinians. It must be recalled that the US vetoed UN Security Council resolutions calling for a humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza three times.
Furthermore, since October 7, it has provided Israel with weapons packages totalling billions of dollars, with the most recent amounting to $20 billion. To date, the US has completed 500 air deliveries of weapons and 107 shipments of military supplies by sea.
Then, its historical involvement in the conflict aside, as of February 2022, the US has not been focused on facilitating a peace deal between the warring parties in Ukraine as per its 2022 strategy. Instead, it has been fomenting an old, hostile obsession with Russia.
Besides massive media support, humanitarian aid and the imposition of sanctions on Russia and Belarus, the US Department of State reports that it has supplied Ukraine with over $55.4 billion in military aid since the war began. It is worth noting that the targets of the Ukrainian government are not only Russian soldiers but also the local inhabitants of the Donetsk and Luhansk Republics who identify as Russian.
When reviewing some of the figures as collated by the Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs, it is ghastly to comprehend that in this century alone, a single country, which regards itself as the champion of world peace, has been responsible for the direct deaths of almost a million people.
US-initiated post-9/11 wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and elsewhere are estimated to have, as at March 2023, directly resulted in the deaths of between 877,594 and 912,013 people in the affected countries and 27,731 US military personnel, contractors, and allied troops. Indirect fatalities and fatalities since April 2023 are yet to be collated. If we want a more stable world, the place to start is obvious. The US has to seriously review its foreign policy stance.
While the US and its allies need to play a more constructive role in championing world peace, we, too, have a responsibility to drive the preservation of life. Creating a more peaceful society necessitates that governments and citizens prioritise the implementation of all seven UN categories of human security within their spheres of influence.
This involves ensuring economic security by promoting sufficient employment and social infrastructure, as well as guaranteeing access to nutritious food and affordable, reliable healthcare. It is crucial to prioritise sustainable development and environmental preservation. Moreover, protecting individuals from crime, violence, gender-based violence, and child abuse is imperative.
Equally important is the need to promote acceptance and tolerance within and among communities. Public governance should be equitable, participatory, free from repression and respectful of human rights. These values are the bedrock of a peaceful society.
It is easy to assign the responsibility for peace to superpowers, including the US. However, the fabric of nations is woven by its populace, whose influence weighs significantly on the decisions made by their leaders. Citizens bear the ultimate responsibility in granting authorisation for the use of force in military conflicts. It is incumbent on us not only to foster societal stability but also to hold governments accountable. We have the power to shape the future we want to live in.
* Dr Reneva Fourie is a policy analyst specialising in governance, development and security
** The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL or Independent Media