By Cesar Jaramillo
Published in The Ploughshares Monitor Winter 2024
I often say that being an optimist is in my job description. Not always an easy task in today’s world.
Civilians at risk
The Guardian has reported that as many as 150,000 people, many civilians, have been killed in the civil war in Sudan that began in 2023. Millions have been forced from their homes, most going to Chad, one of the poorest countries in the world. To add insult to injury, aid agencies are warning that the severity of the recent famine in Ethiopia could pale in comparison with the famine that is imminent in Sudan.
But the world does not seem to care. The states that could assist the displaced and injured are not stepping up. What a bleak picture – just one snapshot of our troubled world.
In Gaza, more than two per cent of the entire population (more than 43,000 of a total population of approximately 2.1 million) had been killed as of October. If this same level of disaster were to occur in Canada, the number of dead would be more than 800,000. It’s very likely that each of us would know somebody who had died – or be dead ourselves.
Now is the time for all the people who desire a peaceful world, one that ensures basic human rights for all people on Earth, to work harder, smarter, and with greater determination.
The 1949 Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols are the foundation of international humanitarian law (IHL). They should be deemed sacred and final, settling for all time what can and cannot be done during war. Their primary function is to protect noncombatants, not only innocent civilians, but military personnel who serve as medics or who have become prisoners of war, as well as aid workers.
Today these rules are being trampled into the ground. And it is not a matter of isolated violations. These laws are being systematically, persistently, shamelessly disregarded, with an alarming lack of accountability or restraint. And we know because these abuses are being documented to an extent never before known in the history of the world. Some violators are terrorists whom we know to be lawless; however, IHL is also being violated by states that, despite their committing truly barbarous acts in war, claim to be on the side of civilization.
The West, some elements of which are major arms manufacturers and exporters, is watching in silence or timidity or complicity as a sacred, hard-won regime of norms and laws about what is acceptable in times of conflict is crumbling before our eyes. It is truly troubling to watch both the carnage and the lack of caring from bystanders.
Nuclear war in our future?
There is no clarity on how the war in Ukraine will end. This conflict, with one nuclear-armed state facing another state backed by nuclear-armed allies, has brought the world perilously close to nuclear warfare. The risk of a nuclear detonation, leading to catastrophic escalation, cannot be overstated.
If the greatest threat today lies in the potential use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine, then stepping back from this precipice is imperative. We must ask ourselves: under what conditions might these weapons be used, and how can we prevent that outcome? Alarmingly, current actions seem to move us in the opposite direction.
Nuclear deterrence is not a myth; it’s a potent yet deeply flawed doctrine that permeates every aspect of this conflict. The West’s commitment to a military victory in Ukraine, however understandable, fails to account for the realities imposed by nuclear deterrence. All parties must recognize that the very possession of these weapons dangerously reshapes the dynamics of the conflict.
We must accept that a decisive military victory in Ukraine is not likely – because the spectre of nuclear warfare looms too large. This conflict underscores the catastrophic risks that are intrinsic to any situation involving nuclear arms. The consequences of relying on the perilous doctrine of nuclear deterrence exceed what the world can bear.
The risks of AI-enhanced tech
Other developments also threaten our world. Consider some recent advances in military technology, particularly certain applications of artificial intelligence (AI).
Some of the new AI-enhanced tech is truly marvelous. I have a friend who loves his new electric car, which can do most of the driving unassisted. Applications of AI are set to revolutionize medicine. And some of this tech may help us crack seemingly insurmountable problems related to our changing climate.
But even seemingly benign technology is being integrated into military systems. This is happening even as I write and as you read these words. Contemporary military systems, including uncrewed aerial vehicles and drones, while not fully autonomous, are still very advanced. And they’re being tested and deployed right now – in Gaza and Ukraine and elsewhere.
Soon these systems will be able to make critical life-and-death decisions without human intervention. They will select a target, zero in, and then execute deadly force – all without human instruction or control. The establishment of clear normative restrictions on the use of AI in military systems, defining what is acceptable and what must be prohibited, is imperative to prevent the unrestrained deployment of autonomous lethal force.
Space as a warfighting domain
Troubling developments are also taking place in outer space. While space might seem too remote to cause us harm, activities in outer space have geopolitical implications right here on Earth.
Space has become a strategic domain for military purposes. Space-based capabilities are being used right now – in Ukraine and Gaza and elsewhere. This growing reliance on space for military operations escalates the risks of confrontation and highlights the urgent need for regulation.
The international community, with Canada’s support and leadership, must prioritize the development of a normative regime for outer space – one that can safeguard this shared frontier, ensuring it remains a realm for peaceful and cooperative use rather than becoming another battleground. Establishing clear boundaries and rules for military activities in space is essential if we are to prevent crises with far-reaching impacts on Earth.
Failing to control the international arms trade
We can’t escape the implications of a flourishing international arms trade. Before 2014, the arms trade was pretty much a free-for-all. Project Ploughshares and many others in civil society were advocating for the adoption of an international arms trade treaty. A popular slogan pointed to an essential truth when it claimed that there were more regulations for the trade in bananas than for the trade in guns, and more and better standards by weight, shape, and country of origin.
In 2014, the international community came together and, finally, created a regime that would ensure that there would be some risk assessment, some level of accountability: the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). Its underlying rule: Countries don’t sell weapons when they have good reason to believe that the weapons will be misused.
The theory was great.
However, a decade later, the 10th Conference of States Parties to the Arms Trade Treaty was held and revealed that the practice has not lived up to the promise (see article by Kelsey Gallagher in this issue). Arms dealers have been arming recipients that cannot be trusted. As we have shown in previous issues of The Monitor, they have sold weapons to human-rights abusers like the rulers of Saudi Arabia; to the government of
Türkiye, which has diverted Canadian-made weapons to Libya and Nagorno-Karabakh; and to the government of Israel, which has destroyed large parts of Gaza and killed thousands of innocent civilians.
The flow of arms into conflicted regions continues even when we see that these weapons are being used to violate human rights and when the exporters have legal obligations under the Arms Trade Treaty and similar regimes.
The ATT regime has experienced an erosion in credibility, for good reason. The states with the loftiest rhetoric about promotion and protection of human rights are the same ones that are selling these weapons to these bad actors. More troubling signs.
No time to despair
So, what do we do? Throw up our hands in despair?
No. Now is the time for all the people who desire a peaceful world, one that ensures basic human rights for all people on Earth, to work harder, smarter, and with greater determination.
Canadians need to focus on Canada. We need to figure out how to re-energize Canada’s security diplomacy. We need to ensure that our government uses Canadian resources as a force for good in the world.
We need to think about creating effective peace operations. We must examine the flaws of current operations and determine how they can be improved. We need to design peace forces that can respond to a changing, multifaceted conflict environment. We need to deploy technologies that protect people.
We need to remain optimistic and preserve hope in a process that will restore peace and promote human security for us all.
At Project Ploughshares, we remain steadfast. Despite the formidable challenges, we will not succumb to despair. We will continue working tirelessly to find solutions, however vexing the challenges before us may be.
But we cannot do this alone. Now, more than ever, we need the support of those who believe in our mission – those who understand that building a more secure and just world requires commitment, resilience, and solidarity. We invite all friends of Ploughshares to stand with us as we continue this essential work, undeterred and united in hope.
