Many analysts contend that the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) introduced by the United Nations Development Programme and adopted by many world leaders in September 2015 continue to lack the inclusion of certain fundamental principles, such as defense and security. Although the UN reaffirms their notions of peace and stability according to the targets of Sustainability Goal 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions), much of those objectives do not mention the need to address state militaristic corruption and sustainable fiscal progress in the defense sector. It is also interesting to note that the framework for the SDGs derives from the Millenium Development Goals implemented in 2000, which also did not include any mention of addressing security and defense.
As a result, since the turn of the century, displacement of persons due to violence has been exacerbated by many inter-regional conflicts and wars. A record 79.5 million persons have been forcibly displaced at the end of 2019 according to a report published by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. At least 100 million persons were forced to flee their homes during the last 10 years alone, as forced displacement and statelessness has remained high on the UN agenda in recent years and continues to generate much needed discussion within global policy forums. Furthermore, several major crises have contributed to the displacement of persons, two of which have been the result of warfare and violence exacerbated by regional militaristic forces – the Syrian conflict and South Sudan’s post-independence fallout.
Solutions that would assist in security and defense reforms would involve several UN agencies addressing not only the reduction in flow of illegal arms, but also criminalizing the corruption that pervades defence and security institutions and ensuring they work for citizens, not just those in power. Moreover, fiscal governance must be taken into account to ensure that defense spending is not disproportionately allocated from the overall state budget while not addressing other pertinent issues such as public health, education, and infrastructure. Although there are many agencies that work towards peacekeeping and bilateral solutions amongst nations and agencies alike, not having a forthcoming target that addresses military corruption cannot advance the overall goal of global peace and security.
Sources:
https://www.ft.com/content/af202f82-72be-11e7-aca6-c6bd07df1a3c
https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/peace-justice/
https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/sustainable-development-goals/goal-16-peace-justice-and-strong-institutions.html
https://www.csmonitor.com/World/2019/0619/UN-Record-71-million-people-displaced-by-war-and-violence
Tim,
You raise and interesting point–one that has been a real “prickly pear” for the United Nations. Given the central role of defense and military spending in a realist world, this has been a subject that most countries simply do not want to discuss in multilateral fora. Some states, like China, also do not report accurately on their defense spending to conceal the actual size of the military.
And then, as you indicate, there are governments that are actively involved in using their military and/or state security apparatus to subjugate their own people. In a number of countries, this is necessary because the autocratic ruler either seized or maintains power illegally. On some occasions, the UN and other multilateral bodies have been willing to agree to sanctions against individuals engaged in repression, corruption or brutal military activities. Just recently, the EU has voted to sanction individuals involved with Alexander Lukashenko’s sham reelection vote and subsequent use of state security against demonstrators. But this has had little deterrent effect so far.
–Professor Wallerstein