Peaceful coexistence, a value to be celebrated
28 January marks the first International Day of Peaceful Coexistence. Established less than a year ago by the United Nations General Assembly, it joins an almost endless list of days dedicated to subjects that are clearly fundamental to the future of humanity such as Global Resilience of Tourism (17 February), Tuna (2 May), Fair Play (19 May), Football (25 May) or Sustainable Gastronomy (18 June). And it is also legitimate to question the need to launch a new initiative when there are already ones for Harmony between Faiths (1 February), Human Fraternity (4 February), Social Justice (20 February), Conscience (5 April), Multilateralism and Diplomacy (24 April) and even the International Day of Living Together in Peace (16 May). And we limit ourselves to the first half of the year.
The answers can be succinct or articulate. One can see in the birth of the anniversary a manifestation, some would say the umpteenth, of the mission creep surrounding the UN. The Glass Palace, which appears helpless and irrelevant on the international political chessboard, seems to respond by multiplying declarations that are rich in rhetoric and poor in operational content. For others, however, it is a matter of recognising the fruitfulness of the global debate around the concept of a culture of peace, which has its roots in Cultura de Paz, an educational initiative developed in Peru in 1986, and in the Seville Declaration on Violence of the same year, in which a group of internationally renowned scientists, meeting under the aegis of UNESCO, argued that war is not inevitable by biological predisposition but a social invention. And that consequently "the same species that invented war is capable of inventing peace." It sounds naive, perhaps, but it is a response to those who seem to minimise the degree of agency of human beings, reduced to responding to a warlike primary instinct. In 1989, formal articulation was achieved in Abidjan at the International Congress on Peace in the Minds of Men, although it took 36 years to arrive at the result.
Whatever the correct interpretation of the birth of International Day, the sidereal distance separating the quest for peaceful coexistence from the rapidly (and perhaps dangerously) evolving Donroe doctrine stands out to the naked eye. Resolution A/RES/79/269 emphasises the importance of tolerance, respect for religious and cultural diversity and human rights. Inclusion, understanding, solidarity - none of these terms and concepts are mentioned in the document that creates the Board of Peace, an institution born from nothing, opaque, lacking accountability mechanisms and that one day not so far away may compete with the UN.
At a time of high international tensions, perhaps at levels not reached since the Cuba crisis of 1961, the Day is an opportunity to reaffirm sincere and convinced adherence to the principles that have enabled peaceful coexistence. Since 1945, at least in Europe, the Americas (except for the Falklands/Malvinas War) and Northeast Asia (since 1954), an unusually extended period of peace between nations. Which is not only the absence of conflict, but above all a complex dynamic process of participation and dialogue, respect and trust. Italy, small and with marginal influence on the global chessboard, cannot but be at the forefront in defending and promoting the equality of countries before international law, the prohibition of the use, or threat, of force, and the resolution of disputes through peaceful methods. Seeking the sympathy of those in power exposes one to their mood swings, weakens negotiating power from the outset and exposes one's side to derision and humiliation. Fortunately, examples of straight backs are beginning to be numerous and influential, from Mark Carney and Mette Frederikse (prime ministers of Canada and Denmark) to Christine Lagarde and Jacob Frey (mayor of Minneapolis). Perhaps they are even worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize nomination.
