At the beginning of 2025, the world held on to a glimmer of hope—however modest—for renewed efforts toward peace in several global conflict zones. Sadly, as the months have passed, these hopes have steadily diminished, giving way to rising despair and a worsening geopolitical climate.
Even the faintest possibility of a peace agreement, no matter how limited, must not be undervalued. Each such opening offers a vital opportunity to reduce suffering and lay foundations for dialogue. However, the broader state of international peace efforts remains deeply troubling.
In Gaza, horrifying proposals for mass displacement are being advanced even as daily violence, starvation, and civilian deaths continue unabated. The prospect of a large-scale external expulsion of Gaza’s population is not only inhumane but could have far-reaching and devastating consequences.
Elsewhere, negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program are stagnating, hindered by inflexible positions among hawkish Western elements that are irreconcilable with Tehran’s stance. Complicating matters further is the underlying question of how Palestinian issues—whether overtly or as part of an implicit understanding—are factored into any potential US-Iran agreement.
Meanwhile, the conflict between Russia and Ukraine shows little sign of abating. The chances of not only ending the war but doing so in a spirit of reconciliation have grown increasingly bleak. Worryingly, discussions of the war escalating into a nuclear or even a global conflict—once deemed unthinkable—are resurfacing.
Africa, too, finds itself in turmoil. A belt of conflict stretches from Sudan through South Sudan and periodically erupts in places like Congo and Rwanda, exacting a steep human cost. In South Asia, while an early ceasefire brought a temporary pause in confrontation, it has left behind deepened hostilities and mistrust.
New theaters of tension are emerging. Strategic ambitions in Greenland could spark further power rivalries in the Arctic, an ecologically fragile zone already under severe stress. Most ominously, the shadow of a potential war between the United States and China looms large. If European nations persist in their aggressive stance toward Russia, this too could spiral into a conflict far more catastrophic than the current war in Ukraine.
In short, not only are crucial peace negotiations failing to make meaningful progress, but the global situation is deteriorating toward more entrenched and widespread conflict. The United Nations, once seen as a primary peace-building institution, is increasingly sidelined, leaving the world to rely on fragmented, ad hoc efforts. These efforts, lacking broader coherence or moral authority, often produce fragile ceasefires rather than lasting resolutions—many ending in “frozen” conflicts with no genuine reconciliation.
While each new round of peace talks draws media attention, it is becoming painfully evident that progress is unlikely as long as negotiating parties cling to narrow self-interests and refuse to embrace a more holistic vision of peace.
Such a vision cannot emerge spontaneously. It requires deliberate and sustained effort at multiple levels.
First, a global coalition of senior diplomats—many now retired—as well as academics and leaders with a lifelong commitment to peace, must be convened to lay the intellectual and moral groundwork for successful negotiations. Their collective wisdom could help shape a broader, more principled peace paradigm.
Second, there must be a grassroots revival of the peace movement—stronger, more sustained, and more deeply rooted in communities worldwide. Such a movement should not only pressure political leaders to pursue peace with justice but also help shape public opinion to value dialogue over dominance.
If these dual efforts are pursued sincerely—with the active backing of the UN and numerous civil society organizations already working toward justice and peace—a more robust and far-reaching framework for peace can emerge. Within this broader framework, the chances of successful peace negotiations improve significantly.
This paradigm must be grounded in the clear recognition that today’s world—armed with weapons of mass destruction and plagued by environmental crises—cannot afford endless cycles of conflict. In a global order where wars last longer and sow deeper divisions, no nation or individual remains safe. And without international cooperation, we will fail to resolve the existential threats posed by climate change, biodiversity loss, and resource depletion.
It is time to reject the outdated logic of domination and destruction. Instead, a new global peace ethic must rise—one that prioritizes collective well-being over narrow nationalism. Negotiations must be driven by an unwavering commitment to world peace and the will to resolve conflict with goodwill, empathy, and justice.
Only then can humanity hope to build a future free of war, where our children and grandchildren inherit a world defined not by ruins, but by reconciliation.
---
Bharat Dogra is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Planet in Peril, Saving Earth for Children, Earth without Borders, Man over Machine, and A Day in 2071
Comments