In conversation with Martin Griffiths: How can a divided world address conflict?

Dr Patricia Lewis

Well, hello, everybody. It’s good to see so many people in the room, and also online. My name is Patricia Lewis. I’m the Research Director here for International Security, and it’s my great pleasure to be on the stage with Martin Griffiths. He’s someone I’ve known for a while, I’ve always admired, always wanted to know your views, Martin, and, welcome home…

Martin Griffiths

Thank you.

Dr Patricia Lewis

…you know, this is…

Martin Griffiths

Almost home.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Almost home, you were born in…

Martin Griffiths

It’s Wales, of course.

Dr Patricia Lewis

In Sri Lanka, of course.

Martin Griffiths

Yes, that was it, yeah.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Welsh heritage.

Martin Griffiths

Hmmm, Welsh heritage.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Educated at Quaker School in the UK.

Martin Griffiths

Yes, that’s right.

Dr Patricia Lewis

And, of course, SOAS.

Martin Griffiths

And SOAS, yes.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Yes, a very important…

Martin Griffiths

In this town.

Dr Patricia Lewis

…university.

Martin Griffiths

Yeah.

Dr Patricia Lewis

And you’ve – you were in the Foreign Office, you’ve had – you then went into the UN, and you’ve been then in the UN, in various forms, for almost your whole time, except when you and I were in Geneva together, when you were running the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue and doing an extraordinary job there, in all sorts of parts of the world, underneath the radar, as it were…

Martin Griffiths

Hmmm.

Dr Patricia Lewis

…doing a huge amount of conflict prevention and conflict meditation, and so on.

Martin Griffiths

Hmmm, yes.

Dr Patricia Lewis

So, it’s a real privilege to have you here at Chatham House.

Martin Griffiths

Thank you.

Dr Patricia Lewis

And you’ve just stepped down from being the OCHA Under-Secretary-General…

Martin Griffiths

Yeah.

Dr Patricia Lewis

…and, you know, that sort of tops out your career. And I think – we’ll get into this, but one of the key notes of your career, the whole way through, is what’s kept you going, and that’s this belief in humanity and hope, and I want you to talk about that.

Martin Griffiths

Sure.

Dr Patricia Lewis

But just before we came on, we thought that we might just take a minute, or less than a minute, a few seconds, to just think, right now, of all the people being affected by these wars that are going on right now, and, indeed, wars that have been happened before, who are being killed, maimed, their lives completely turned over, and there are so many of them, and they’re so brutal. So, maybe if we could just take a few seconds pause, would that be okay, just to do that [pause]?

So, Martin, thank you everybody, let’s begin with what’s going on at the moment. You know, we have what’s going on in Gaza, in Lebanon, what’s going on in Ukraine, what’s going on in Sudan, Yemen, which you know very well, obviously, you know, and many other places that you might want to touch on. What’s your view of what’s happening? And how do we move, particularly in these seemingly intractable conflicts that are going on at the moment, and you might want to focus on one or two of them, but we’ll remember all of them.

Martin Griffiths

And it’s a, you know, a key question, isn’t it? I think there’s two el – two, sort of, partner elements here. One is that it is true, I think it’s generally true at the moment, that almost all conflicts are not being resolved, and, you know, that wasn’t the case in the past. We shouldn’t take that for granted. We should understand why that’s happening, and there are different reasons for that, which I’ll come back to.

I tried, of course, in Yemen, and that’s gone backwards. And I know from all those years in HD, and elsewhere of mediation, that the – to get warring parties to stop fighting, is one of the most difficult things because, of course, their constituency, their base, is a fighting force who loses family members, who suffers terrible things and to say to them, “Okay, now it’s over,” is not easy. We ask a lot of them. And usually, of course, as we see again around the world today, they’re not really used to this kind of proposition. So, we are in a position of the most wars, I think, ever, since the Second World War, and not global yet, but it’s a very dismal thing.

There’s two things I want to comment on in this regard, Patricia. Number one, of course, the elephant in the room is impunity, we see that very strongly everywhere we look. One of the things that is very important to me is the killing of Humanitarian Aid Workers, I don’t say it’s the top issue in terms of impunity, but it is soaring, and there’s virtually nobody who has been investigated, indicted or convicted for such killings, so why wouldn’t you kill another Humanitarian Aid Worker who’s helping your enemy? ‘Cause you’re not going to suffer for it, and it’s a disgrace.

Number two, the amount of money spent on, sort of, what I was involved in, humanitarian aid around the world, which is, by the way, still impartial, neutral, and linked to need, not politics, it’s 20 – it’s 50% funded a couple of years ago, it’s going down, while the expenditure on military is, of course, as I said elsewhere, 2.4 trillion, I think it was a couple of years ago, we got, I think for our aid programmes around the world, about 25 to 30. We got half of what we needed.

So, the world is not looking favourably on the suffering of others or what to do about it, and that’s true – has been true for a long time, but it’s gathering a storm. So, before I look to the good things, it’s important, I think, to notice that what happens in Gaza doesn’t stay in Gaza, and, of course, we see that tragically in Lebanon. But it doesn’t stay in Gaza in terms of educating other people around the world in, why not do the same? Why not go to war? Why not? You’re not going to suffer for it, except in public reputation. You might win, go for it. And, of course, we’ve seen that vividly in Sudan.

In contrast to this miserable world we live in, and the impunity thing has been growing for years, it’s not arrived now in the last three, of course, but it’s a pattern, it’s a growing pattern. The other thing is, of course, that humanity, which, as you say, you know, I, sort of, nobly link myself to, or try to do that, has not diminished, it has not diminished. It seems to have diminished in the decisions of many of our leaders, but it has not diminished in the people like us around the world. And I have had the awful privilege, in recent years, of visiting many of these people, going to every crisis, going to the war, and you see again and again and again the extraordinary generosity, people risking their lives for their neighbours.

Burkina was the great example for me, Djibo, this small town in the middle of a Al-Qaeda battle with the government of Burkina Faso. It had been closed off from imports of food and goods by the fighting, which was surrounding the town, a town of about 70 or 80,000, 300,000 people were displaced right next to them. And, of course, everybody ran out of food and everything else.

And the – I met, of course, people I wanted to meet there, and the women of the town, the original population, had completely run out of opportunities for food and they used to go across the line, the war line, s savage war, very dangerous at night, to collect what was left, leaves and salt, from neighbouring villages, and they brought them back and they shared them completely with their new, unexpected neighbours. I mean, if that isn’t a definition of humanity, I don’t know what it is. And this is cross-world, it’s cross-cultural, it’s across continents.

Tigray, a big war of a couple of years ago, I remember going there in 2021, and there were still places, small towns, villages, which have been deluged by displaced people. Local communities, and Tigray emptied their pockets, bankrupted their assets, to serve and feed and host these people before we got there. And that’s of universal truth, so our leaders are not loyal to the feelings of us ordinary people.

Dr Patricia Lewis

So, why is that? And how come they either get voted on or, at least, once they’re in, if they’re not voted in, so supported within the country in which people live, even though they’re making decisions which ordinary people in their ordinary lives would never make, what’s the disconnect here? What’s going on? And, most importantly, how do we begin to address it and fix it?

Martin Griffiths

Yeah, well, yeah, well, I think it is true for a start, there is a disconnect. I have been sitting in the Security Council quite a lot in the last six years, and what – and in the Yemen case, quite a lot of unity, by the way, around the table, in the case – in my OCHA, my humanitarian appearances, almost no unity. And you listen to people who are all in different ways – I mean, many very good people, so it’s not universal, talking at great length, at high concept, and le – losing the sense of the connection to people and the tragedy of families. Partly ‘cause they don’t visit, partly ‘cause they’ve been instructed not to by their capitals, and partly ‘cause it kind of is, that’s the way we do things.

This country has, for understandable reasons, especially given recent history of Russian interference in the British society and the killing that they have engineered here, has been very, very vocal, of course, on the invasion of Ukraine, as I think we all were. But it leads to a further, sort of, syndrome of, well, we’re not going to talk, we’re not going to connect, we’re going to condemn – actually condemning is probably the thing we do best, and it’s striking, and at the moment still understandable, and I would agree with it, now, that we’re still talking of the war, the war, the war, and not so much yet, but it’s beginning, the just peace.

And we should all be thinking of those things, and that leads me to one, I think, general point that I feel is right, from experience, when we were working together, Patricia, 25 years ago, mediation was on the up, wasn’t it? Political mediation, and we were all involved in that, and it was based on certain principles of disinterest, of neutrality, and it’s decreased enormously these days, because of the things that you’ve been talking about.

Mediation is now taken up by actors with interests. That’s not the mediation I understand, and it’s difficult not to have interests when people are so abusive of the human rights of others. But it’s an essential component, and it’s not there. It’s not getting funding, it’s not – the ex – the condition precedent, I think, I would go quite strongly on this, to ending wars, you see it in Sudan, for example, mediation hasn’t happened. It’s a bunch of countries which all have interests trying to do good, but they’re not using the history and experience of strong mediation organisations and individuals, le – we need them back. We need this government and others to fund them.

Dr Patricia Lewis

So, I mean, that brings me to the UN, which, of course, is such an important body, when it comes to providing the legal framework for providing the opportunities for discussion. You mentioned the Security Council, but it’s the corridors often outside the Security Council, the delegates’ lounge, and the General Assembly, which, you know, has proven itself time and time again to be able to…

Martin Griffiths

Hmmm.

Dr Patricia Lewis

…do some shimmy-shammy around the…

Martin Griffiths

Yeah.

Dr Patricia Lewis

…Security Council. So, there are ways, there are superb Diplomats out there who can negotiate, who can get to ‘yes.’

Martin Griffiths

Hmmm.

Dr Patricia Lewis

So, what’s happening that it’s so stuck? I mean, I know that the Security Council itself, which, of course, never worked properly during the Cold War, was suddenly, you know, suddenly had this flourishing and then, of course, closed down again, but we always knew – Diplomats always knew ways to get around this, and we’ve seen some very clever stuff recently.

Martin Griffiths

Hmmm hmm.

Dr Patricia Lewis

But has the moral authority of the UN diminished? Is that what’s happened? Is it that there’s less legitimacy of the UN? And if so, what do we do? How do we restore it?

Martin Griffiths

Yes, I think it has diminished. I would, as always, and there are people in this audience who’ve worked for the UN longer than I have, always say – there you are, Mark, so I speak carefully in the company of giants.

Dr Patricia Lewis

There’s probably a few people online, as well. Hello, everyone.

Martin Griffiths

Yes, exactly. Hello. We always distinguish between the organs in the UN and the staff of the UN, and it’s not a complete fair distinction, but it’s certainly interesting in this case. As you say, General Assembly has been re-energised. It was considered for many people like me to be a slightly more urban place, and it’s not, and there are these efforts that you’re referring to of ensuring that if you use a veto in the Security Council, you have to explain yourself in the General Assembly. It’s a very interesting rise, that’s a good thing, it’s not enough.

The UN, the geopolitics of the divide, you know, from Ukraine onwards has stultified, I think, the UN’s willingness and capacity to enter into what will inevitably be controversial diplomatic or mediation efforts, and they are much diminished now, as a result. I mean, who is really going to say, “Let’s have a go at mediation in Ukraine,” from the UN? Who is going to, from the UN, have a go at mediation in Gaza? The Secretary-General has publicly said that Israel would not allow the UN to have any role in the ending of the Gaza tragedy.

It needs to be, however, it’s not just about relying on the General Assembly energy. The Security Council, of course, needs to be reformed. I’m not optimistic at all about that, but the US, as you know, has been making some moves. Not yet sufficient, and not yet releasing the veto, which is the essential problem.

But beyond that, and perhaps the real important, and I think everybody knows this, bigger picture, is the way that the – because of Ukraine and Gaza, the sense of validity and moral authority of the West is draining out. We’ve seen, you know, the Global South has suffered terribly from the Ukraine war. We tried to do a little bit of help from the Black Sea, but it’s suffering terribly still, and it’s angry, in general, with the postures of the rest of us.

So, there needs to be a structured, systematic commitment by the UN to regain its moral authority, which – of which this is a key element, and we aren’t really seeing it. And I don’t think we should be thinking about another summit about it, you know, this is not a big room issue, this is a small room, and a series of small rooms to get that moving. It’s imperative. Everybody I meet says the same.

Dr Patricia Lewis

And, presumably, it’s also regional, you know, that it’s being in the region, it’s being there?

Martin Griffiths

Yes, it is and, you know, the dangers, we see the British I think are evacuating their citizens from Lebanon.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Yeah.

Martin Griffiths

You know, very, very understandably, so you’re not – we’re not in the war zones. Humanitarian Aid Workers have the privilege of always being there, and, you know, sometimes being killed, but the evidence is not available and, of course, Journalists…

Dr Patricia Lewis

Journalists, yeah.

Martin Griffiths

…are often excluded. Sudan is really the obvious case, but look at the way that the Israeli Defence Forces took over the Al Jazeera office in Jerusalem, it’s a shocker. Journalists count as much as the rest of us, if not more. So, we’re not seeing the evidence. Remember the famine in – again, I’m looking at Mark Bowden, actually, the famine in Sudan and Ethiopia in the 80s, our days, was a shocker and it was on camera, wasn’t it? And we all lived vicariously, the tragedy and the wrongness of it.

We have famine now declared, finally, in Al-Fashir, in Sudan, we have technical data which suggests that even if the war finishes in 2025 in Sudan, 12 million will die, because of food insecurity, ‘cause of the spreading of that famine. And that’s a good i – that’s a positive note. I mean, obviously it isn’t, but it’s a shocker for all of us.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Hmmm.

Martin Griffiths

It’s off camera, ‘cause you can’t get there. We can’t, Journalists can’t, the government won’t let us, the war is dangerous, so we don’t see the truth of the consequences of our leaders’ decisions, and it is our leaders’ decisions, who do this.

Dr Patricia Lewis

So, citizens’ journalism on social media, etc., is often the only one that we’re seeing, and, of course, there’s all sorts of problems with that because of quality control…

Martin Griffiths

Yeah.

Dr Patricia Lewis

…disinformation, orchestrated campaigns of disinformation, not seeing all sides of the discussion, etc., and, also, those who are trying to get information out are then very vulnerable to the powers that be, and they try to get rid of them, shut them down, even kill them. Just to get us back to the situation at the moment in the Middle East and, you know, next week is the anniversary of the terrible atrocity on October the 7th, which kicked off this whole new phase.

Martin Griffiths

Hmmm.

Dr Patricia Lewis

The US and others have been trying to contain, if you like, this righteous anger, all round, and to keep it from escalating, but this looks increasingly precarious. Is – what would – can you give us some ideas of what you think, with all your knowledge, all your experience, might just work in this? You know, we’re doing a lot of work on conflict prevention, there are huge amounts of knowledge out there.

Martin Griffiths

Hmmm.

Dr Patricia Lewis

What we don’t have is a good evidence base of what works, where, when and how, but we’re trying to build that up now. There’s scholars all round the world sifting through data, using artificial intelligence, as well, you know, a bit like we find new medicines, and just trying to really think through the things that might work under different circumstances and provide the evidence base for that.

Now you’ve got a lifetime’s worth of evidence, if you like, and is there something that you think could transform the situation and prevent it from escalating?

Martin Griffiths

Can I just say one quick word? I’m not retiring. I haven’t ended my tortuous career.

Dr Patricia Lewis

You’ve just left the UN, now.

Martin Griffiths

This is the seventh time, I think, I’ve left the UN, so, you know, it’s an in and out job. It’s a…

Dr Patricia Lewis

How many retirement parties have you had?

Martin Griffiths

None, I just – I was horrified by that. No, no, no, so – because there’s so much to do, obviously.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Yeah.

Martin Griffiths

I think the absence of certain things, in the context of the Middle East, now as the Middle East crisis, are pretty clear, and, as you say, people are attending to them, but not in the halls of power. The first is, of course, that I understand why Israel invades its neighbour as it is today and yesterday reported, why wouldn’t they? What’s going to happen to them? Do you think that – you know, even the ICJ, with its heroic efforts, has not been able to get the provisional measures applied adequately into Gaza. Israel looks at its attacks on their enemies and our friends, the Lebanese people, as perfectly sensible for their own security, so, it’s a jungle.

Now…

Dr Patricia Lewis

But do you – would you say that’s very short-term thinking? Because in the long-term…

Martin Griffiths

Yeah.

Dr Patricia Lewis

…is this not going to affect Israel’s security negatively?

Martin Griffiths

Well, I think so, so that’s one of the things and I think that’s what I wanted…

Dr Patricia Lewis

Yeah.

Martin Griffiths

…one of the things to comment on. There’s – it’s obvious to anybody who’s spent, you know, in – a bit of time in wars and dealing with armed groups and terrorist groups, as well, that this kind of ground warfare, generally, doesn’t work. Yes, you kill people you want to kill, and that’s also a tragedy, but it creates a generation of jihadists, as we’ve heard so often, in the case of Gaza, and now in the case of Lebanon, and probably Syria, as a knock-on.

And the essential part of security, I think, you’re the expert, Patricia, is hope, a horizon, horizon for people to see that there is something better coming. And the de – the removal of hope for the Palestinian people and now the Lebanese people is an absolute sin worse than a crime, in some ways, and it’s very, very plainly being done. Where do we have the publicly accountable discussions on arrangements for post-war Palestine, Gaza and the West Bank, and their security, their right to their own governance, their, finally, let’s get to the promised statehood?

It’s not happening in public, it’s happening behind closed doors. There are enough leaks to tell us that it’s a discussion which excludes, largely, the Palestinians, and it doesn’t, as far as we know, the plans, and I think they’re pretty straightforward, provide for the security of Israel either. Regional security is not a single-state security, that’s always been the supposition. It didn’t work in terms of October the 7th. Hamas wasn’t normally active in those sorts of things, but they did, and they are part of the problem here. We don’t distinguish between the cruelty of killing civilians. It’s not a matter of, “You’re worse than I am,” it’s both are bad, and the anniversary is coming up.

So, the first thing is, if you want to stop a war, provide a vision of what is better than a war, and provide it publicly and work quietly with the parties, and don’t just talk publicly about, “They need to stop,” without actually going into the ditches and the trenches to try to make that happen.

The second related thing I think is that the region, never mind the wider world, but the Arab region, also, doesn’t have an aligned view on what should be the pathway. They’re not being asked in a systematic way, by the way, if I was one of them in Qatar or Emirates or Jordan, I’d be pretty annoyed about that. But an aligned view of the region of the Arab region is incredibly important to support its own people. Palestine is part of their own people.

Again, it’s excluded, and we in rooms like this, and your work talk about it, but it’s not really on the table for diplomacy at the moment. I mean, the security of one people only arises from the security of all, that is such an old worked experience, and it’s not being applied here. Hope, mutual security, serious, publicly criticised and examined and cross-examined arrangements, thinking about what happens after the war is essential throughout a war. You don’t wait for the beginnings of the end to do that. You do it early because you provide people with that essential – ordinary people like us, essential hope. People die without hope.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Hmmm.

Martin Griffiths

It’s really that simple. They give up, they get sick, they die, their voices are diminished, and we condemn them to a silent death. Not right.

Dr Patricia Lewis

So, hope, vision, right? So, an example to give us this hope and vision of where it’s worked. You mentioned in Burkina Faso, where you’ve seen real ordinary people, but where has it worked in the past with leadership that you’ve seen? I mean, I can look to the North East of Ireland, the relationships that transformed…

Martin Griffiths

Yeah.

Dr Patricia Lewis

…over that whole area in my lifetime, which was so hard to imagine when I was a child, but, you know, so there is that possibility. South Africa nearly went to civil war, extraordinary leadership that we saw there, from all sorts of, you know, civil society through to people in office.

Martin Griffiths

Hmmm.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Can you give us some hope? Some idea of a parallel or not quite par – nothing’s ever parallel, but that could inspire us to think that it’s not impossible right now to end what’s going on?

Martin Griffiths

Of course, if we were to concede that this is impossible, we might as well just go home and…

Dr Patricia Lewis

Yeah, well, a lot of people are just going home.

Martin Griffiths

I know, but not us, I hope.

Dr Patricia Lewis

No, we’re here.

Martin Griffiths

We’re in the de – we’re in the trenches, right?

Dr Patricia Lewis

Yeah.

Martin Griffiths

Nice trench, by the way.

Dr Patricia Lewis

As trenches go.

Martin Griffiths

As trenches go, it’s pretty good. No, we know, first of all, that it is es – an essential responsibility of every individual to not lose hope and to not lose effort, not just nice hope at home, but effort. Secondly, we know, and you’ve cited the exam – the South African example, it’s fascinating. It was indeed, you know, amazing leadership. It was resolved. It’s not still quite resolved, as we know, and it wasn’t just the leadership, it was the people working with, and against sometimes, the new leadership, the Mandela period, but it resolved it. The whole resolution of conflicts in Latin America, and, you know, Guatemala and others.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Colombia, of course.

Martin Griffiths

Colombia, Colombia is an astonishing, astonishing – so, we don’t talk about those things ‘cause they’re not quite as interesting, including to the media, as the passions and tragedies of war. So, we look at the big current conflicts, we notice, as I said earlier, that they’re not being resolved. There’s a reason for that. Nobody in our leaderships is being held to account for their own failure to, for example, not export arms to the parties, as so in – also the case in Sudan, and so forth. But we are determined, I think, as an alliance of people across the world, to change that, and that’s the revolution that we should be thinking about, because it can work.it has worked, it’ll work again.

It also needs really, really professional efforts, I think that, for example, of mediation, as well as, in, you know, my community of humanitarian aid. You know, if you look at Sudan, just to move away from Gaza for a moment, there have been, you know, significant recent efforts, in July and August, of efforts in Geneva, in fact, to mediate between the parties. There was the Jeddah process, I was, sort of, a – I was an onlooker to that at the time. But they haven’t worked, and I think there are a number of reasons for that. It’s always the case in wars, you know, we used to talk about “ripeness for peace,” and we – I don’t think any of us really liked that concept, but the Generals are keen to keep fighting.

We hear rumours now that maybe the – that’s slipping a bit, but it’s still going on, and the attack, of course, on the Emirati Ambassador’s residence, was a – you know, it was a shocking reminder that it’s still continuing. But what has been absent, in all those efforts by states, states, all of them determined, committed, but with interests, is the preparation for any talks, and for managing the talks without too much ambition.

In all these talks in Geneva and Jeddah, in the early days, “Let’s have a full ceasefire,” you know, you wouldn’t propose that in any early stage of an effort to resolve a conflict. And I think Mediators and others and yourselves and experts know that. So, it needs that kind of attention, that kind of preparation, from a – from these sources, and that gives it half a chance, and half a chance is a lot better than what we’ve got at the moment. So…

Dr Patricia Lewis

And where…

Martin Griffiths

…there are things to do…

Dr Patricia Lewis

…can I just…

Martin Griffiths

…and – yeah.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Just on one thing, you know, where we’ve seen peace efforts get traction, it’s often been because of community leadership and also women’s leadership.

Martin Griffiths

Hmmm.

Dr Patricia Lewis

And if you look at Colombia, you’ve got this diversity of representation in that peace process. So, it’s part of the problem that once you go to war, it, sort of, narrows down to these, sort of, mostly men, you know, doing things that increase their own personal power. Is it partly that? Is there a psychological aspect to this, and a societal aspect to this, that we need to kind of embed before these, sort of, things kick off? Is this it?

Martin Griffiths

Yeah, my experience when I was mediating was – this was before 2021, was very strongly that almost there’s one thing warring parties can agree, that is not to involve civil society.

Dr Patricia Lewis

That’s true.

Martin Griffiths

You know, let’s keep them out, right?

Dr Patricia Lewis

Including negotiations at the UN, isn’t it? That’s the same thing.

Martin Griffiths

Yeah, well, there you go. Well, they’re not – yeah, exactly.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Yeah.

Martin Griffiths

They’re not present, and it’s difficult to do so. I remember being involved in one mediation in Europe, where it specifically – I was specifically told, and this was in the Humanitarian Dialogue Centre, that we shouldn’t get involved with the local population, or even civil society in that country. But, crazy stuff, because, of course, they’re the reference point, and that’s – they’re also, hopefully, the beneficiaries, and it worked in that country.

I was reminded – I was in Jordan recently, talking about the Middle East efforts, and I was told by a very – one of their leaders, that, “Please don’t ever forget civil society,” so you had powerful voices, that was a woman, by the way.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Hmmm, of course.

Martin Griffiths

Exactly, and most Mediators are men, there you go. But it’s obvious that you need to create those links. You need to leverage the knowledge, the energy, the relevance and the legitimacy of civil society. In Sudan, once again, I’m looking at Mark Bowden, who spent a lot of time there, and it’s all your fault, Mark.

Dr Patricia Lewis

I might give you a right to reply, Mark.

Martin Griffiths

Yeah, that’s right, and just one last point, and Sudan is a poster boy for this, because the talks are between Generals and militaries, and you, kind of, know that you need to start that way, and I did it when I was involved in Indonesia many years ago, but you shouldn’t end there. And the extraordinary courage, for example, of the Emergency Rooms, in Khartoum and around the country, and it’s not as if they’re not there, relevant, and actually deeply impartial, impressive, given the misery that they’re surrounded with.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Medical…

Martin Griffiths

Medical help for their communities, their neighbourhood.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Extraordinary people.

Martin Griffiths

It’s amazing. Sudan is not poor with these people, and it’s their country, so, of course, you have to make sure. You should be accountable, as anyone involved in mediation, for the absence of them or not. Annan, in Kenya in 2008, remember that, a, sort of, masterclass of mediation, he spent his time – I remember, I was there from time-to-time, he spent his time meeting the Chamber of Commerce, the media, the Red Cross organisation, the NGOs in Kenya, the Aga Khan Foundation, the civil society, all the time, he made sure that he was consulting them.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Yeah.

Martin Griffiths

It can be done.

Dr Patricia Lewis

It can be done, and we do know how to do it.

Martin Griffiths

Yes.

Dr Patricia Lewis

We just keep forgetting.

Martin Griffiths

We just don’t, hmmm.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Yeah, there are novels about this.

Martin Griffiths

Yeah.

Dr Patricia Lewis

I’m going to turn now to the audience and ask for questions. I also have some great questions online and a lot of outpouring of thanks for you, Martin, which I’m not going to be able to…

Martin Griffiths

Oh, come on.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Well, let’s just say…

Martin Griffiths

We’ve got 20 minutes, yeah.

Dr Patricia Lewis

…that everyone’s saying, “Thank you for your service,” as the Americans would say, but also for the great conversation, you know, for everything.

Martin Griffiths

Thank you.

Dr Patricia Lewis

So, I’ll give you that big thanks from everybody online, and I’m sure in the room as well. Martin, do you want right of reply?

Martin Griffiths

Mark.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Sorry, Mark, not Martin, Mark.

Mark Bowden

Not the right to reply, no, but I’d love to.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Do you want to start? Do you want to kick us off, as your name has been mentioned in dispatches?

Martin Griffiths

Ruthlessly exploited, yeah.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Can you wait for a microphone so that everybody online can hear it, as well? Thank you.

Mark Bowden

Thank you. Well, let me return the compliment to Martin, who I think has been one of the great Emergency Relief Co-ordinators that the UN has seen, and one of the most effective, so…

Dr Patricia Lewis

And he’s not retiring…

Mark Bowden

And he’s not retiring.

Dr Patricia Lewis

…which is such a relief, I can’t tell you.

Mark Bowden

None of us retire.

Martin Griffiths

Look at him. You’re the poster boy for that, yeah.

Mark Bowden

None of us retire, so not retiring, Martin. But the question I have is both related to Sudan, and more generally, about the capacity of the UN and humanitarian actors to remain – retain independence. And I wonder how far – I mean, this relates also to the issues of impunity…

Martin Griffiths

Yeah.

Mark Bowden

…how far the strictures of recognition – I mean, Sudan, the problems of working only through Port Sudan, Myanmar is another example, how far the UN is hobbling itself in terms of allowing humanitarian freedom and independence and constraining its own operations in that way.

And, secondly, whether there needs to be more emphasis, and what vision you see for the General Assembly, in terms of addressing the issues of impunity and accountability? Because I think these are the two, sort of, fundamental issues of humanitarian reform.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Thank you. Do you want to…?

Martin Griffiths

Yeah, yeah, sure, yeah.

Dr Patricia Lewis

And then I can go out to some more.

Martin Griffiths

Okay, yeah. I think Mark’s obviously right in his first point, and then he went into some details. But these are the two issues, aren’t they? How do we deal with impunity? And how do we deal with neutrality for humanitarian benefits and protection? You know, I was just in New York, like, you know, so many people were last week for the big meetings of the day, and the Summit of the Future and the General Assembly, and I was not part of it, and I was so happy for that.

But it is an entirely member state set of meetings. It’s run by Diplomats, it’s run by, you know, officials, and that’s how the UN was set up, of course, I mean, it’s not a surprise, it’s a member state organisation. That’s not the way you’re going to address impunity, I think. And the dealings, as we saw in the Summit of the Future, and the deals that were made and the spoilers that came and went, and – is illustration of that.

The General Assembly is a vehicle, but it needs a lot more help and I think direction and suggestion as to how to play that role. The Global South discussion, I think, is an important one, but, like everything else, it needs proper assessment and preparation, and it’s not there yet. I think what is necessary is – among many other things, Mark, is like in Sudan and elsewhere, we need to challenge publicly, including, of course, in London and elsewhere as you have, with Martin and others, not me, the idea that sovereignty trump’s all. You know, in Sudan, and I have had obviously direct experience of this, it’s been an impediment to the other sovereign obligation, which is caring for your own people, and it shouldn’t stand.

And Annan, in his period as Secretary-General, wrote about this, and he tried to do something about this, and he could, of course, being African, he had more credibility than us, and it hasn’t really worked. And I think if you talk about the new power moving away from the West to the South, it’s going to be a big issue, you know, we know that sovereignty is really important to new countries, it’s a vital privilege and asset.

So, there is a need for closed room consultations about how to address these issues and, thus, how to empower the UN. The UN is driven, obviously, like you, direct experience of this, driven by the interests of member states. It needs to be a little bit more – this is a weird thing to say, a little bit more independent. And there was a lot of controversy about the access to the North West of Syria after the earthquake, and I was criticised quite a lot, and I think I apologised for it, as well, you know, an interpretation of the law that was not a universal consensus, but quite a strong one, about the rights of the sovereign government. And, of course, I spent a lot of time with – in Damascus with President Assad and others on this, and we found a compromise, but we didn’t solve a problem, that’s really – there’s the mounting up of unsolved problems is why we see the world today.

So, there needs to be a much more determined, not necessarily by UN societies, but by us, the bigger us, with new partners around the world, to get involved in this. There needs to be much more an understanding about humanitarian diplomacy, this old and now new concept, old thing, frankly, and now, you know, a big discussion point, which is barely understood by most of us. I think I tried to define it in an aeroplane the other day, because I didn’t really know what was involved, so we need to do that.

And we also need to – I was at a meeting last week in New York with very interesting people, heads of human rights organisations and others, and some humanitarian, and I was doing a briefing under Crisis Action, the organisation here in Britain, Nicola Reindorp, Mark Malloch Brown, first, and then me. And what was the focus was, we know that the world is a horrible place and we know that there’s impunity, we’ve seen the trend going up, what are we going to do about it? What is the practical measures that we can take?

How do we empower even more, despite Congress and others, the International Criminal Court, the Prosecutor is trying, yeah, I won’t go there, and the International Court of Justice, of course, has been an extraordinary – like the GA, is an extraordinary new thing, and they were created for that. How do we do that? Practical measures now, not high concept, not good diplomacy, but practicalities. It’s a project that we need to do, and we need to get people around the table who know what they’re thinking.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Do you think part of the problem is that…

Martin Griffiths

It’s not a…

Dr Patricia Lewis

….when we do…

Martin Griffiths

It’s not a solution.

Dr Patricia Lewis

…when we do negotiate these things, when people negotiate these things, it’s done mostly in a period where there is an opening to do it and, in other words, it’s, sort of, a period of sunshine? But then we don’t weatherproof the agreements for when the storms come, when the relationships break down, we create these agreements for – at a – in a period of better relationships.

Martin Griffiths

Well, it’s certainly true, if you look at the ICC, as you know, was set up proudly and gloriously with the UN setting it up as a, sort of, linked entity. And we now talk about double standards towards it, including by the former government here, but that’s not new. We didn’t resolve that at the beginning. We weren’t able to through diplomacy. The US always dismissed it and famously have threatened to put it out of business on the ca – in the case of the Gaza problem, which is, you know, an astonishing move. But it’s unresolved issues, the unresolved issue, obviously, of the Palestinian statehood has led to where we are today. You don’t move on from problems, you try to resolve them.

Look what is not happening in Afghanistan…

Dr Patricia Lewis

Hmmm.

Martin Griffiths

…you know, it’s a long way away now, I mean, so it’s, sort of, you know, we can wave it off. We haven’t resolved the issues in Afghanistan. We haven’t resolved the tension between the Taliban’s refusal of all rights of women and girls to any kind of normal life, and international engagement with them to persuade them of their obligations, but also the welfare of their people. We’ve tried, a lot of us have tried.

Dr Patricia Lewis

We have someone online actually who worked with you on the MoU, with the previous Taliban regime, Mumtaz Akhundzada, I’ve probably pronounced that incorrectly, forgive me, Mumtaz, who is actually asking exactly this question.

Martin Griffiths

Why aren’t we doing this?

Dr Patricia Lewis

Yeah, why aren’t we doing this?

Martin Griffiths

I mean, the power, correctly, of women to insist on their rights everywhere is something which is a bedrock of humanity anyway, so it’s not an optional extra, it’s a central core issue. But, as a humanitarian, I’m one, and I went to Kabul quite frequently to talk to Afghan NGOs, women-LED NGOs, in particular, women’s organisations, to say, “What do we – what are we supposed to do now another dreadful edict has been passed by Kandahar?” They said, “Well, don’t make us suffer twice. You know, for God sake, don’t run away, don’t take aid away,” which a lot of countries did, and still it’s way down as a result of this.

The pariah state problem is that people suffer twice for the evil of their rulers. And it’s true about – in many countries, Syria, Sudan, Afghanistan, Myanmar, an absence of development assistance, the absurdities that you have to go through in Syria over these many years as to how to provide primary education for people. You can’t do it through the Damascus structures, you have to create your own new organisation to pay for the Primary School Teacher, this is absurd, very much more expensive and probably less quality. We’ve got to stop the way in which the world’s indignation, often understandable, is left as the only man standing.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Hmmm. Alright, I’m going to the room and I’ve got some more online, but if I can go to the back there, Tim, please, thanks.

Tim Wilsey

Yeah, thanks, Martin, that’s a really, really interesting talk. Tim Wilsey at King’s College London.

Martin Griffiths

Oh my goodness.

Tim Wilsey

Yeah, what I – actually, just briefly on Afghanistan. I mean, the thing about Afghanistan was we lost a war. The West pulled out of Afghanistan and the Taliban was left the winner. Actually, the mistake was the negotiation in Doha, and the terms of the negotiation in Doha, and what we then, sort of, imposed on an Afghan Government that had been kept out of the loop. So, it’s a curious case actually of bad peace-making rather than bad war-making, if you see what I mean?

But what I wanted to ask you was something slightly different. I mean, one was a comment on what you and Patricia said, so, South Africa, obviously, was a fantastic outcome, and if you remember, at the same time, there were the Oslo Peace Accords on the two-state solution, there was Eastern Europe, you know, joining – joined – joining Western Europe…

Martin Griffiths

Hmmm.

Tim Wilsey

…all sorts of things. So, peace broke out in the – in that period between the end of the Cold War and 9/11, that unipolar moment, which made it so much easier, ‘cause nothing was contested. Mow, everything is contested again. So, that was, sort of, a point I was going to make, that it – peace-making becomes difficult when the world is contested.

But my other point I wanted to ask you is about, what about social media? Because it seems to me that is a new thing since, you know, since – obviously since the 9/11 period, and I don’t know what your experience is, but it does seem to have a polarising effect. You very, very rarely, on social media, see a balanced opinion on what’s happening in the Middle East, for example.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Thank you. I’m not going to – I’m going to go to a couple of more people, because otherwise we’re not going to have time. So, a woman there, please, thank you.

Iona Allan

Hi, I’m Iona Allan with The World Today magazine at Chatham House, and previously UN, as well. So, you spoke – or Patricia, kind of, spoke more about, kind of, draining away of the UN’s moral authority…

Martin Griffiths

Hmmm.

Iona Allan

…and my question is, you know, in today, in 2024, do you think the UN’s efforts are best served in trying to regain the kind of moral authority it perhaps had in the 1980s or 90s, or in supporting other actors, potentially like regional actors and structures, which perhaps have more legitimacy? So, I mean, another way of framing it is to what extent does this kind of decentralisation, perhaps, of moral authority and of diplomacy and mediation, to what extent can that be a good thing? And is it perhaps more fit for purpose in this, kind of, more fragmented world?

Dr Patricia Lewis

Great, and one more question at the back there, ‘cause you’ve had your hand up for a while, and I know lots of other people have too, so, sorry.

Dominic Dudley

Thank you. Dominic Dudley, Gulf States Newsletter. I wanted to ask you about Yemen, what’s the vision for what’s better than a war there? And does that involve a single-state, or might it break into two or more? And is it – how much harder is it to reach a resolution there against the backdrop of what’s happening in Gaza and Lebanon?

Dr Patricia Lewis

And can I say that there’s a couple of other things – well, several other things that come up online that you might want to weave in. One is about North Korea.

Martin Griffiths

Hmmm.

Dr Patricia Lewis

What to do? Well, it’s a wider question than that, but also about Tigray and food as a weapon, if you like, which, you know, the – so the whole issue of, sort of, of food security, the issue of sanctions, the, sort of, intractable decisions maybe making things much worse.

Martin Griffiths

I remember I was in a – just take that last point, Patricia, I was in a meeting that – of a committee that I chaired in OCHA of the international humanitarian agencies. It’s called the Interagency Standing Committee, and it has UN and non-UN there, and we were talking about Afghanistan. And everybody in the room, of course, was humanitarian, and they all took the opportunity to express their doubts about the sanctions impact in Afghanistan, and elsewhere.

There was one who didn’t, who was saying, “No, we need to impose sanctions on Afghanistan because of the dreadful behaviour of the Taliban and we need to punish them.” And, of course, that person was a human rights person, and it’s understandable, right? But there’s – it’s – that was the purpose of the meeting last week, we need to stop these siloed differences because it divides us, and we can, of course there’s overlap.

I think that sanctions, US and others, need to be used as incentives and not only as punitive, and I was talking to some US officials about that last week. It’s time to say, “We will lift sanctions if you do the right thing.” It’s not an absurd idea, but it’s not an idea which is observed globally…

Dr Patricia Lewis

Hmmm.

Martin Griffiths

…and it’s an obvious mess if you think about it for a moment. That’s not to say you would get rid of sanctions, they are expressions of public, you know, hostility to what’s going on, which is sensible, but you need to use them in a constructive way, I would say, of course, being – where I come from.

I think the – I’m not sure about devolving to the region because, we’ve tried that. The African Union was very slow to solve the Tigray War, and that it was there in that country. It – well, it eventually did a – I think a pr – job, I actually am one of those people who think that Obasanjo is a great man, and I think that was helpful. The ASEAN has not really got into the weeds on Myanmar, despite the extraordinary efforts of [inaudible – 54:38] from Indonesia, when they were then the Presidency, but they’ve, sort of, fallen down.

So, regions alone they – I would say the obvious, of course, they must be involved, so it’s not devolution, it’s inclusion. They have assets, they have experience, they have things to say which the eerie towers of New York and Geneva don’t have. But it – you – one should not think that the UN should be – should abandon its responsibilities, which we all created it for, and hand it onto somebody else as a, sort of, way out of their problem. The somebody else should be telling the UN what should – what to do, not to take it all themselves. And I think that would be more positive.

But your question is an important one, because it says that we need to – it’s not just reform of the Security Council, back to your question, it’s how do we make this system fit for purpose? And I believe that it needs obviously a – it’s one of those inflection points now, because of the way the world is, and the way it hasn’t been able – the UN in its organs and Secretariat hasn’t been able to stop these wars that we’re talking about. So, it’s an important thing, Tim, important, but I think it would di – be different. I would approach it in a different way. The assets of regions are assets, but not substitutes.

Tim’s point was about the issue of timing, I think, wasn’t it? You had two points, Tim, one was on the issue of timing which is on Afghanistan, and the fact that the war was lost in a bad way, and I agree with that, I mean, I think it’s self-evident, isn’t it? And it was self-evident in terms of the evacuation which has been much debated, of course, across the world.

I remember meeting a – I’ve dealt with the Taliban, as you know, Tim, for a very long time, since 1982, in fact, I discovered the other day, and I was talking to one of the senior Taliban after they arrived in Kabul, you know, that – in those – September of 2021. And this was from a very, very powerful family within the Taliban, he said, “We don’t know how to govern. We know how to fight, but you must help us to govern.”

And we’ve seen that, although, it’s interesting that, you know, tax is raised, and, you know, the trains run more or less on time, security is much better, but it doesn’t solve the problem, and we yet need to solve them. So, wars ending is your point, isn’t it, is a very, very serious matter, and that’s why I said that about the future of Gaza. We need to know how to end the war, and, of course, the 2006 invasion of Lebanon…

Dr Patricia Lewis

Have an idea about what will happen next. This is…

Martin Griffiths

It’s what’s the follow-up? What’s the vision?

Dr Patricia Lewis

Yeah.

Martin Griffiths

Is it accountable to the people involved, not just the leaders? Is it publicly debated? On the whole, not, that wasn’t really, was it?

Dr Patricia Lewis

Hmmm.

Martin Griffiths

I mean, it was an extraordinary, sort of, to and fro in Washington about, “Shall we name a date for our withdrawal?” Well, then you’d sold the farm. So, I’d agree with you, managing the end of wars is as difficult as starting to resolve them.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Hmmm. So, I’ve got a couple more questions in the room, and I will also take a couple of things have cropped up online, so if I could perhaps go to my colleague, Julia.

Julia Cournoyer

Hi, I’m Julia Cournoyer. I’m a Researcher in the International Security Programme here at Chatham House. I wondered if you could speak a bit more about what you think is the future of UN peacekeeping? Are we seeing, sort of, the beginning of the end? And, if so, is there anything that the Security Council can do to, sort of, improve the effectiveness of these operations?

Dr Patricia Lewis

And then at the front here, a very patient person, and all of you been very patient, my apologies for not being able to get to everyone.

Michael Shrimpton

Michael Shrimpton, Intelligence Author and Commentator. In my left-wing youth, Martin, I was persuaded by that lovely man, Malcolm Harper, to join the UN Association, and I was a great supporter of the UN in my youth. Now, I’m older and marginally to the right of centre, I’m sadly forced to agree with my old friend, Henry Kissinger, who was shamefully murdered, as you may know, in November last year, that we have arrived now at a position where we’ve returned to realpolitik, and that collective security has failed. Would you agree with that?

Dr Patricia Lewis

And then online, we’ve had questions about UN peacekeeping, which we’ve not really addressed, I mean, certainly the – sort of, the other side of the coin as it were. And then an interesting question as to “why do we, you know, keep on insisting on keeping borders? Would it – should we have a more relaxed attitude to changing borders?” I thought I’d end with an easy question.

Martin Griffiths

MSF, come in the room, yeah. I think realpolitik is a cover for bad behaviour, actually. I mean, I’m, you know – that’s how I see it, and the consequence we see all around the world. We need always, and that’s why the UN was founded, and that’s why so many organisations, as you know, were founded, including the ones I’ve worked in, was to escape from the wilfulness of leaders and provide a, sort of, correlati – sorry, a rectification according to certain values and principles, and now, in particular, and powerfully, laws, which have been long there and long abused, and that seem to be even more abused day-by-day.

So, that’s why we need the UN, but we need the UN to be, your question, fit for purpose. And that means, I think, and it goes a bit to the borders question, Patricia, that means that we need to be a little bit more open about the issues of state control of their own people, of their own future. We need to have a discussion about it, it should not be taboo. It obviously needs careful management in the sake of the – case of the UN, because it’s a member state organisation, but it’s not off the table.

We expect the United Nations to talk to us and to think what we are thinking, as well. And it’s no more clear to me than now that that’s missing. And this last week, I think what was probably wonderful in many ways, but it was a reminder of that. That means the Secretariat, of course, needs to be embraced and to step out to do more mediation, despite the fact that the parties, the governments, the permanent members, may not like it.

I remember when Secretary-General Guterres went to Moscow to see President Putin befo – and got agreement on the two – by the way, two big issues that were agreed between parties, the Black Sea, eventually, and this extraordinary operation to get people out of Mariupol and Azovstal. And he went there and he was specifically told by one of the leaders of one of the permanent members not to go because he’ll be played by Putin. He was so angry at this that I think it made his journey even quicker. But, you know, you should not tell the Secretary-General not to do what he’s there for. He does have to speak to…

Dr Patricia Lewis

Everyone else thought he was a bit slow.

Martin Griffiths

Let’s not go there, Patricia. So – and borders is a really – I mean, it’s – you know, I’m trying to step carefully around sovereignty, but is a really important issue. And do you remember that great speech in the Security Council a year or two ago, by Martin Kimani?

Dr Patricia Lewis

Oh yes, King’s College graduate, very proud.

Martin Griffiths

There we are, the mother of all parliaments and all that.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Yeah, it was fantastic, yeah.

Martin Griffiths

A wonderful man, a good friend from all those days. But I was in the hou – in the room, when he made that speech about borders, and, you know, he’s a – just a – well, he was the Kenyan Ambassador to the UN and he was a member of the Security Council, and he said, “Borders were set up by you,” pointing at the – you know, the permanent members and the British and the Americans and others. He exaggerated to make an important point, obviously, but he said, “We’ve had to deal with that problem all our lives, and there is no going back from these borders.”

I think he then went on to say, “We have to live with them, to change them now,” look what happened in India, you know, “would be a very difficult point.” So, we have to live with that. But we don’t have to live, and that’s why MSF was set up, we don’t have to live with the rights of certain communities to actually work across borders.

I think the humanitarian community – there’s this big discussion in the humanitarian community. It was the Syria case, it’s also the Sudan case, law – there’s international humanitarian law which asserts that you must, in principle, get the agreement of the host government, but that you should not make that a veto on your action.

Now, for the UN, and I know I’ve discussed it a lot when – in my recent years with the UN leadership, that’s very difficult because, of course, Security Council would jump up and down, and so would the member states, but it’s a right which is not observed. It’s time for us to rethink it, and I hope, revitalise it.

Dr Patricia Lewis

Martin, I know that there are many more questions. I think you’ve given us an hour of your time, where you’ve covered an enormous amount of issues, scope, conflicts. I think everyone in this room and online could do with another hour, which is you should always leave them wanting more in my view. And I think you’ve done that, too, in stepping down from UN, we’re all wanting more.

Martin Griffiths

You’ll get more.

Dr Patricia Lewis

So – oh, we’re going to get more, and it’ll be Martin Griffiths Unleashed, I think, is that the title of the book?

Martin Griffiths

I was going to set up an organisation called the Office of Martin Griffiths, until my son and daughter, one of whom is here, said, “I don’t think OMG is going to go over too well. Papa, you’re not God.” Okay.

Dr Patricia Lewis

I don’t know, it mi…

Martin Griffiths

I loved it.

Dr Patricia Lewis

It might express some – yeah.

Martin Griffiths

I think it’s the right thing, it’s truth, right?

Dr Patricia Lewis

So thank you, thank you very much. Thank you for everything you’ve done, but, also – and what you’re going to do, ‘cause I think, you know, you’ve clearly got fire in you, and it’s – you know, you’ve got some time now to do something. And thank you for being here today…

Martin Griffiths

That’s alright.

Dr Patricia Lewis

…and giving us your time when you’re in London [applause].