Dr. Yiorghos Leventis
Founder & Director of International Security Forum (ISF)
Executive Director of the International Security Forum since its establishment in 2009. The ISF is an independent think tank based in Λευκωσία (Lefkosia/Nicosia), the capital of Cyprus.
Dr Leventis studied in the U.K, where he conducted extensive research in The National Archives producing his doctoral thesis on the Political Struggle for Self-Determination in Cyprus under British colonial rule (1940s).
Dr Leventis read B.A. in Economic & Social Studies, University of Manchester (1990), M.A. in Peace Studies (1992) and Ph.D. in European Studies, University of Bradford (1998). He had been a Visiting Research Associate, King’s College, University of London (1999-2000) and an External Research Associate of the Hellenic Foundation for European & Foreign Policy (1999-2000). In the years 2004-06 he was based in Tokyo sponsored by the Japanese Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) for a Visiting Scholarship at the National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies (GRIPS). Simultaneously, JSPS-UNU Postdoctoral Fellow, Peace & Governance Programme, United Nations University, HQ, Tokyo.
How do you see the role of disarmament and non-proliferation efforts in promoting global stability today?
The role of disarmament and non-proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) is absolutely vital to promoting stability in today’s emerging multipolar world characterized by an increasing number of armed conflicts. In fact, today at the end of the first quarter of the 21st century, we are experiencing the highest number of armed confrontations around the globe since the end of the Second World War.
Characteristically, the Uppsala Conflict Data Program, UCDP, in Sweden declared in a press release last June: ‘Never before have there been so many armed conflicts across the globe. In 2023, the number of conflicts involving states totaled 59, the highest number ever since the data collection’s starting point in 1946.’ The prestigious Uppsala initiative recorded about 71,000 deaths in the war in Ukraine, while for Israel’s war against Hamas recorded 22,000 deaths. As we are approaching the end of 2024 the two major wars in Eurasia still rage on, if anything intensified, thereby the number of casualties at least doubled.
As the deadly Ukraine-Russia war passed its 1000-day mark, at the eve of his stepdown from office, US President Joe Biden took a decision in the wrong direction allowing the Kiev regime to use US provided long-range ATACMS missiles to fire them into Russian territory. As if this was not provocative enough for the Kremlin, the senile American politician gave also the green line to Kiev for the use of anti-personnel mines banned by the Ottawa Treaty (Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention, 1997, effective 1 March 1997) of which, ironically, the US is not a signatory whereas Ukraine is – to be fair of the major military powers neither Russia nor China, nor India, nor Pakistan signed up.
The point here appears abundantly clear: big manufacturing and export powers of lethal armaments refuse to join the noble cause of not banning war but even making the conducting of war more humane …
What are some priority areas for UN reform, and how could these reforms strengthen the organization's role in global governance?
The very fact that, as stated above, almost one third of the UN member-state list (59 out of 193) is currently involved in the conduct of war speaks volumes about the failure of the UNO to deliver on its prime mission of promoting peace and stability through the amicable solution of disputes that arise between MS. The UNO has become dysfunctional, edging towards irrelevance as far as the peaceful resolution of conflicts is concerned. The Security Council, reflecting an outdated balance of power at the end of WWII needs badly to be reformed in order to reflect the balance of power of today’s emerging multi-polar world. The veto power reserved for the current permanent members of the SC (widely known in UN jargon as the P5) has for long years been emasculating this prime world organization from its vital decision-making role in global governance. Only yesterday, we witnessed the latest example of such paralysis: the US exercised its veto power to block the unanimously voted draft resolution calling for the obvious with respect to the war in Gaza: priority in achieving a ceasefire to stop the carnage of innocent civilians.
The revision of the UN Charter is long due. It is the dire need of our trying times. After all the UN Charter itself, unaltered since its coming into force in 1945, calls for a review every ten years. Alas, no revision has taken place. Here is a to – do list of revision, in a nutshell: first and foremost, the veto power needs to be abolished. Second, the synthesis of the Security Council needs to reflect the global balance of economic and political power. It needs to include poles and blocks of power in today’s rapidly emerging multi-polar world.
Third, some sort of effective enforcement mechanism for decisions democratically taken on the basis of multilateralism needs to be devised and implemented accordingly.
It is absolutely pertinent to bring in at this point the largely forgotten existence in the UNO structure of an institution chartered to serve the purposes of “peaceful coexistence between peoples having different cultures, languages and social systems and peaceful relations between States and the maintenance of peace and security (Article 1: Purposes and Structure). This is no other than the United Nations University whose mission is to perform the role of the strategic think tank of the UN and its agencies. Since I was privileged and sad enough at the same time to discover the substantial malfunctions and inefficiencies serving for two years as core staff of UNU Peace & Governance Programme, I can tell that this institution instead of being the vanguard of the UN system it is the poor relative. Poorly funded, understaffed, no wonder it grossly underperforms.
How might power-sharing arrangements contribute to peace and stability in regions experiencing conflict or political division?
My answer is positive: well-worked out equitable power-sharing arrangements could be the solid foundation for the resolution of extremely convoluted and intractable conflicts. Such a frozen conflict/political division is the grim and sad dismemberment of my island Cyprus – by and large an unfinished decolonization project.
In this light, allow me to bring to the attention of our readers the recent agreement between the United Kingdom, the former colonial power, and Mauritius, partially independent since 1968, for the transfer of sovereignty, thereby power, of the Chagos Archipelago to the latter. Despite the clause for the leasing of the Diego Garcia base for 99 years this negotiated deal after thirteen rounds of talks is a pointer to the right direction in the conduct of international affairs.
Comments