The Human Consciousness Now...Our World in the Midst of Becoming...to What? Observe, contemplate Now.
UNITED NATIONS, Mar 6 2026 (IPS) - As military fighting breaks out across the Middle East with increasing frequency and intensity, the United Nations promises to ramp up its humanitarian response on the ground.
Armed attacks have been ongoing since February 28 when the United States and Israel launched airstrikes on Iran, who retaliated with their own airstrikes on Israel and Arab Gulf states, including the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar and Kuwait. Since then, military strikes have continued between these states, and the fighting has only exacerbated tensions in neighboring states. In Lebanon, military skirmishes have broken out between the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) and Hezbollah, which has led to a spike in internal displacements.
According to the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR), more than 330,000 people have been forcibly displaced in the last few days, mostly within their own countries. In Lebanon, nearly 84,000 people are seeking shelter in 400 collective sites. Within Iran, more than 1.6 million refugees, most from Afghanistan, have been forcibly displaced. Fighting along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan has led to the displacement of nearly 118,000 people in both countries.
These overlapping crises within one region marks what UN Under Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs called a “moment of great peril”, and an example of “increased linkages” between these humanitarian crises. Fletcher called for a de-escalation and an immediate end to the fighting, and for diplomatic dialogue and peaceful negotiation to resume, including between the parties involved.
Fletcher briefed reporters on Friday on the situation in the Middle East, announcing that the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) is “fully mobilized” across the region, preparing humanitarian teams and supplies into the affected areas. They have begun distributing food, aid and shelter to thousands of affected civilians across the region.
UN Under Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Tom Fletcher briefs reporters in New York on the situation in the Middle East. Credit: UN Web TV
Fletcher warned that as this war within the Middle East continued, there would be far-reaching consequences. “War doesn’t stay neatly within borders or on desktop military plans,” he said., referring to the impact on the global market and supply chains as the war disrupts access to commercial goods and energy sources. Of note, the Strait of Hormuz, a maritime corridor that borders Iran and a strategic route for oil and natural gas exports, has seen a near-total halt of traffic due to strikes in and around the channel, causing the global prices of gas and oil to surge. Fletcher warned that this will put greater strain on public services, food prices and even constrain humanitarian operations.
As humanitarian resources and global attention is drawn to the Middle East, Fletcher also raised concerns that this will divert attention away from other humanitarian crises in areas like the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, South Sudan and Ukraine, among others.
Humanitarian actors are scaling their response to the countries affected by the conflicts, notably in Iran. Since February 28, there have been over 1000 reported instances of damage to civilian infrastructure, and close to 1600 people have been injured or killed in the airstrikes.
The military strikes already have reported children among the casualties thus far. In Iran, about 180 children have been killed in airstrikes while they were in school, according to UNICEF. In a statement issued on March 5, they warned that such casualties stand as a “stark reminder of the brutality of war and violence” on children that affects families and generations thereafter. In Lebanon, since the escalation of hostilities seven children have been killed and 38 have been injured.
The conflict has also complicated humanitarian operations and essential supply routes. Ongoing missile airstrikes in the region have disrupted airspace. As other sources have reported, this has forced many commercial flights to be postponed or canceled as some countries in the region have closed their airspace. For humanitarian operations, airspace closure and security restrictions have affected the movement of supplies and personnel. On this, Fletcher noted that OCHA has already pre-positioned supplies and identified alternate routes to send supplies through.
“Humanitarian action is always harder in times of war, but this is of course when it is most needed,” said Fletcher. “…The humanitarian movement will, once again, meet this moment. We’ll continue to serve those who need us.”
This most recent conflict already risks moving beyond the borders of the Middle East. Reports have emerged from Türkiye of an Iranian missile heading into Turkish airspace that was then destroyed by NATO forces, and Azerbaijan has accused Iranian drones of attacking an airport building in the exclave of Nakhchivan.
“It is critical that this conflict does not extend even further into new areas and into bringing new countries into this conflict,” UN Spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric said on Friday.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres posted on X (formerly Twitter) to warn the attacks in the Middle East are causing “tremendous suffering and harm to civilians throughout the region”, and that the situation “could spiral beyond anyone’s control”. “It is time to stop the fighting and get to serious diplomatic negotiations. The stakes could not be higher.”
IPS UN Bureau Report
UNITED NATIONS, Mar 6 2026 (IPS) - Earlier this week World Meteorological Organization (WMO) announced that the weakening conditions of La Niña conditions are beginning to fade, with climate conditions transitioning toward ENSO-neutral —a phase in which neither El Niño nor La Niña is present and oceanic and atmospheric conditions in the tropical Pacific remain near average. The agency noted that this shift could lead to the development of El Niño later in the year, a pattern typically associated with rising global temperatures and an increased risk of extreme weather events worldwide.
Although these forecasts carry a degree of uncertainty— particularly during the boreal spring, when the well-known “spring predictability barrier” temporarily reduces the accuracy of ENSO predictions — they remain crucial for global climate preparedness measures. Early warnings of shifts between El Niño, La Niña, and neutral conditions give governments, industries, and humanitarian organizations essential time to prepare for disasters.
By informing disaster planning, protecting critical infrastructure, and guiding responses for climate-sensitive communities, these forecasts can help reduce damage, strengthen resilience, and potentially save millions of dollars in economic losses from extreme weather patterns.
“The WMO community will be carefully monitoring conditions in the coming months to inform decision-making,” said WMO Secretary-General Celeste Saulo, noting that the most recent El Niño event in 2023-2024 was one of the five strongest on record, contributing to the record-breaking global temperatures observed in 2024.
“Seasonal forecasts for El Niño and La Niña help us avert millions of dollars in economic losses and are essential planning tools for climate-sensitive sectors like agriculture, health, energy, and water management,” Saulo added. “They are also a key part of the climate intelligence provided by WMO to support humanitarian operations and disaster risk management, and thus save lives.”
According to forecasts from the WMO Global Producing Centres, there is a 60 percent chance that ENSO-neutral conditions will persist from March through May. From April to June, the likelihood of El Niño developing increases to approximately 70 percent. By May through July, the likelihood of ENSO-neutral conditions drops to around 60 percent, while the chance of El Niño rises to roughly 40 percent.
These projections suggest that global ocean temperatures will likely continue to rise as the year progresses, signaling a need for resilient climate-monitoring and preparatory efforts, particularly for the highly vulnerable populations in coastal regions in the Asia-Pacific.
“When El Niño develops, we’re likely to set a new global temperature record,” said climate scientist Jennifer Francis of the Woodwell Climate Research Center. “‘Normal” was left in the dust decades ago. And with this much heat in the system, everyone should buckle up for the extreme weather it will fuel.”
El Niño and La Niña are primarily driven by fluctuations in ocean and surrounding atmospheric conditions in the tropical Pacific region, with their impacts being exacerbated by human-induced climate change. Rising global temperatures have been found to amplify the frequency and severity of extreme weather events associated with these oscillations, including extensive droughts, prolonged monsoons, devastating floods, stronger tropical cyclones, heatwaves, and wildfires.
These shifts disrupt seasonal rainfall and temperature patterns, leading to biodiversity loss and widespread ecosystem degradation. Immediate consequences include growing food insecurity driven by declining crop yields and collapsing fisheries, along with heightened risks to human health, livelihoods, water security, and broader economic stability.
A joint study led by Professor Benjamin Horton, Dean of the School of Energy and Environment at City University of Hong Kong, in collaboration with researchers from Nanyang Technological University in Singapore, published in January, examined the long-term impacts of El Niño on human health. Titled Enduring Impacts of El Niño on Life Expectancy in Past and Future Climates, the study drew upon roughly six decades of findings from ten Pacific Rim countries, including the United States, Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, and Australia.
The study found that intensifying El Niño periods are having increasingly detrimental effects on human mortality rates and life expectancy, having notably increased over the past several years. Researchers found a strong correlation between gradually hotter El Niño events and infectious diseases, cardiovascular and respiratory illnesses, with children and the elderly facing heightened risks. The study also found a direct correlation between hotter El Niño periods and disruptions to healthcare systems as a result of infrastructure damage, which greatly compounds public health challenges.
Historically, the two strongest El Niño events on record — 1982-1983 and 1997-1998 — were linked with lowered life expectancy of approximately a year and one-third of a year, respectively, equivalent to economic losses of roughly USD 2.6 trillion and USD 4.7 trillion. In Hong Kong alone, the 1982-83 event resulted in an estimated 0.6 year decline in life expectancy and economic losses of nearly USD 15 billion, while the 1997-98 event resulted in a 0.4 year reduction and losses exceeding USD 5.8 billion.
Horton warned that intensifying El Niño events could reduce life expectancy across these regions by up to 2.8 years and generate cumulative losses of approximately $35 trillion by 2100. While the study does not provide region-level projections, current trends suggest that Hong Kong alone could face economic losses between USD 250 billion and USD 300 billion over the course of the century.
“El Niño is predictable,” Professor Horton said. “So, with the right planning, we can reduce its impacts. To mitigate El Niño events, countries and regions need strong early-warning systems, heat-health action plans, better water management, and protection for workers exposed to extreme heat. They also need resilient infrastructure, smarter agriculture that can cope with heatwaves, droughts, and heavy rainfall, and public health systems that are prepared for spikes in disease and pollution.”
IPS UN Bureau Report
TOKYO, Japan, Mar 6 2026 (IPS) - From the beginning, this project was a collaboration between student teams in Japan and Korea. Although we live in different countries, we shared one common question: How can young people reduce waste while supporting families facing food insecurities?
Our journey began with a problem we could see clearly in our communities.
In Japan, food insecurity often hides behind quiet dignity. According to a recent survey by Save the Children Japan, over 90 percent of low-income households with children reported struggling to afford enough food, with many families forced to cut back on even basic staples such as rice due to rising prices.
The Japan and Korean team of all 11 students presented ‘The Co-creation of Youth from Waste to Hope’ at the 9th Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD 9) Thematic Event. Credit: Ticad 9
The Japanese team leader, Karuta Yamamoto, and the Korean team presented ‘What we want in Africa for the future’ at the Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea, during TICAD 9.
Japan and Korea Team Leader, Karuta Yamamoto and Emma Shin, in an interview with UNFPA Seoul. Credit: Karuta Yamamoto
The Korean team set up a shop at a bazaar at Arumjigi, Seoul, Korea. Credit: Karuta Yamamoto
Single-parent households—most led by mothers—face especially high levels of food hardship and are often compelled to make painful decisions about how limited budgets are spent. For some families, this means choosing between symbolic moments of celebration and everyday nutrition. A ¥3,000 Christmas cake may represent joy for one household, but for another, that same amount must stretch to five kilograms of rice—enough to feed a family for several days.
At the same time, vast amounts of edible food are wasted in Japan. Official statistics show that millions of tons of food are discarded annually in Japan, much of it still edible. Seasonal items such as Christmas cakes, which cannot be sold after December 25, are frequently thrown away. This contrast—waste on one side and hunger on the other—reflects the global challenge addressed by SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production.
As students in Japan and Korea, we asked ourselves, “What role can we play in closing this gap?”
We knew that awareness alone would not change habits. enough. Instead of telling people to feel guilty about food waste, we decided to take action together.
We began locally, but with shared purpose.
In Japan, students at Dalton Tokyo Senior High School noticed that mandarin oranges—one of the country’s most common fruits—often go uneaten, with peels and seeds discarded. In Korea, students identified a different issue: more than 150,000 tons of used coffee grounds are discarded each year, contributing to landfill emissions and greenhouse gas emissions.
Different materials.
One shared goal.
Rather than seeing waste as the end of a product’s life, we saw it as a beginning.
Research shows that citrus peels contain essential oils that can be used in soaps and cleaning products. Studies in Korea also demonstrate that spent coffee grounds can be processed into sustainable biomaterials suitable for eco-friendly design and 3D printing. Plantable seed paper—made from recycled paper embedded with seeds—is another example of how waste can be transformed into something regenerative.
Inspired by these ideas, our student teams turned theory into action.
Japanese students created handmade soaps using discarded citrus peels.
Handmade soaps using discarded citrus peels. Credit: Karuta Yamamoto
The soaps ready for sale. Credit: Karuta Yamamoto
Korean students developed 3D-printed clip-on vases incorporating recycled coffee grounds, encouraging people to reuse empty bottles and cups instead of discarding them.
The Korean students developed 3D-printed clip-on vases incorporating recycled coffee grounds. Credit: Karuta Yamamoto
They also produced plantable seed paper from recycled materials, allowing waste to literally grow into flowers and herbs.
Korean students produced plantable seed paper from recycled materials. Credit: Karuta Yamamoto.
These products were not sold as charity goods. Instead, they were shared as examples of responsible consumption—showing that waste can have a second life through our design. Through this work, we directly supported SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production, which calls for reducing waste through recycling and reuse, and SDG 13: Climate Action, by lowering emissions through upcycling.
At the same time, the funds raised had a clear purpose.
The profits were used to support families facing food insecurity. In Japan, we donated to single-mother families with hospitalized children through the NPO Keep Mama Smiling (see main photo for the opinion piece).
They also provided essential cooking ingredients to the Karuizawa Food Bank. By connecting environmental action with helping families in need, our project also supported SDG 2: Zero Hunger.
The group provided cooking ingredients to the Karuizawa Food Bank. Credit: Karuta Yamamoto
Through this experience, we learned that caring for the planet and caring for people are not separate goals. Waste reduction and hunger relief became connected in one youth-led effort—turning environmental responsibility into community solidarity.
But our collaboration did not stop in Japan and Korea.
Through a partnership with the OneSmile Foundation—an organization that transforms digital smiles into donations—we connected our local initiatives to a global challenge. During workshops, we learned that school meal donations in Lesotho had stopped the previous year. Without reliable meals, many students were struggling to focus in class.
Together, our Japanese and Korean teams raised over 300,000 Japanese yen.
The Japanese and Korean teams celebrate their fundraising efforts. Credit: Karuta Yamamoto
Working with local partners in Lesotho, we organized a community-based food support initiative at Rasetimela High School, which serves 863 students. School feeding programs play a critical role in Lesotho, and recent disruptions have left many students more vulnerable to hunger.
Students at Rasetimela High School in Lesotho receive donations of food. Courtesy: Rasetimela High School
Ninety-one of the most vulnerable students were selected through transparent criteria, including those supported by social welfare programs and those who had previously relied on international assistance. Each selected family received staple foods such as rice and corn flour to make a local staple called pap. Distribution was organized near the school to ensure safety and allow parents to collect the supplies securely.
This cross-border effort—connecting students, NGOs, local leaders, and communities—reflects the spirit of SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals.
Although we live in different countries, climates, and cultures, this experience reshaped how we understand global cooperation. The students in Lesotho were not distant beneficiaries. We became peers in a shared world.
They became peers in a shared world. Courtesy: Rasetimela High School
As young people, we often believe our impact is limited because we do not control large resources. This project challenged that belief. We learned that we can create change by designing solutions, raising awareness, and working together.
We even tried to measure what we called a “Happiness Index” by counting the smiles of students who received support. Those smiles reminded us that sustainability is not only environmental or economic—it is human.
Our experience shows that youth are not just future leaders. We are active contributors today. When creativity meets collaboration, waste can become opportunity, and local action can grow into global solidarity.
Turning waste into hope is not an abstract idea.
It is a choice—and young people are already making it.
Edited by Dr Hanna Yoon
IPS UN Bureau Report
IPS UN Bureau Report
MIYAGI PREFECTURE, Japan, Mar 6 2026 (IPS) - I recently came across a statistic that stopped me in my tracks.
According to the World Health Organization (WHO), Japan has the highest suicide rate among the G7 countries. Even more alarming, suicide is the leading cause of death among people in their teens and twenties. Among elementary, junior high, and high school students, the most common factors linked to suicide are “school-related issues,” including academic pressure and difficulties with peer relationships.
At the same time, the number of children who do not attend school is rising every year. In 2023, Japan’s Ministry of Education reported that more than 340,000 elementary and junior high school students were chronically absent—a record high. These two realities are not separate problems. They are deeply connected.
Truancy is often misunderstood as a lack of motivation or discipline. In reality, it is rooted in complex emotional and psychological struggles that cannot be reduced to a single cause. Rather than treating truancy itself as the problem, society must ask a deeper question: Are we creating environments where young people feel safe, accepted, and understood?
I know this struggle firsthand. I began missing school just three days after entering junior high. My family had lived overseas for many years due to my parents’ work, and returning to Japan left me emotionally exhausted. I found comfort in playing online games with close friends I had made abroad, but while I was holding on to those connections, I missed the chance to build new ones at my new school. Before I realized it, I was caught in a cycle of frequent absences that lasted nearly three years.
What helped me break that cycle was not a dramatic intervention but a small and unexpected turning point. I joined a monthly, off-campus workshop focused on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). To my surprise, students from my school were also participating. Because we shared a genuine interest in global issues, conversation came naturally as we worked together on projects. Eventually, we began spending time together outside the workshop. For the first time in a long while, I started looking forward to going to school again.
That experience taught me a powerful lesson: shared interests and common ground are the foundation of human connection.
Learn about the Internet of Things (IoT) using a toy. ‘Let’s upcycle’ workshop with the One Smile Foundation. Credit: Ippei Takemura
What’s the importance of gender in Japan? Workshop with Plan International, Japan. Credit: Ippei Takemura
Provide children with free meals made from food that is close to its expiry date. Workshop with Karuizawa Food Bank. Credit: Ippei Takemura
A place where someone feels safe and comfortable is different for everyone. Sociologist Ray Oldenburg describes this idea through the concept of a “Third Place”—a space that exists beyond home (the first place) and school or work (the second place). Third places allow people to relax, connect, and simply be themselves. Finding such a place was the catalyst that inspired me to want to create similar spaces for others.
Social connection is not optional for human beings. It is essential for mental and physical health, helping to reduce stress, strengthen cognitive function, and foster a sense of belonging. However, people connect at different speeds. Some are naturally outgoing, while others need time and distance before they feel ready to engage. A truly inclusive third place respects these differences.
Based on my experiences, I believe there are three key elements that make a third place successful. First, it must include both spaces for solitude and spaces for interaction, with a clear separation between the two. Some people need time to observe and feel comfortable before speaking. A quiet area allows them to exist without pressure and to join others when they are ready.
Second, there should be shared activities. When people gather around common interests—whether environmental issues, crafts, or sports—conversation becomes easier, and relationships develop more naturally.
Finally, many people struggle to take the first step socially. Having facilitators or mentors who can gently initiate activities or conversations can make a huge difference.
One place that embodies these principles is the Moriumius Summer Camp in Miyagi Prefecture, which I have attended since elementary school. In high school, I joined for the first time as a staff intern. The organizers intentionally build community by using shared work as a catalyst for connection.
Campers collaborate on everyday tasks such as cooking (photo ①), preparing fish, starting fires (photo ②), and cleaning. These shared responsibilities create trust and a sense of equality. Beyond that, participants can deepen relationships through activities aligned with their interests, including crafts (photo ③), marine sports, gardening, and farming. During one workshop, I befriended an elementary school student who was making a bamboo fishing rod and shaping slate into a knife. We connected naturally through our shared love of creating things. Because everyone at the camp already enjoys outdoor life, friendships form more easily—and shared hobbies strengthen them even further.
Campers help with cooking. Credit: Ippei Takemura
Campers can collaborate on starting fires and cleaning. Credit: Ippei Takemura
Participants can deepen relationships through activities aligned with their interests, including crafts. Credit: Ippei Takemura
A place can be more than just an escape. It can be the first step toward healing, renewed confidence, and hope. When young people find a space where they feel safe enough to be themselves, they often rediscover the courage to reconnect—with others, with learning, and with their own sense of possibility.
This is why I want to continue supporting the creation of spaces that can become “someone’s own place”—places where young people feel seen, valued, and free to grow at their own pace. Sometimes, finding the right space is all it takes for someone to realize that they belong.
Yet this need for belonging is not unique to one school or one country. Around the world, young people are facing increasing isolation, academic pressure, and mental health challenges. Rising youth suicide rates and growing school disengagement reflect a global crisis. When young people are left without spaces where they feel safe, heard, and supported, the consequences extend far beyond classrooms and households—they shape the future of entire societies.
Creating and protecting “third places,” therefore, is not merely a personal or local effort; it is a global responsibility. Governments, schools, communities, and international organizations must work together to invest in inclusive environments where young people can connect through shared interests, express themselves without fear, and rebuild a sense of belonging. Doing so directly supports the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-Being) and SDG 4 (Quality Education), by addressing mental health, social inclusion, and equitable access to supportive learning spaces.
Every young person deserves a place where they feel safe enough to take their first step forward. By listening to youth voices and turning commitment into action, we can move from awareness to impact—and from isolation to hope. The future depends not only on how we educate young people but also on whether we give them places where they truly belong.
Edited by Dr Hanna Yoon
IPS UN Bureau Report
TOKYO, Japan, Mar 6 2026 (IPS) - Around the world, conflicts often begin not with violence, but with assumptions. When people judge others before understanding them, labels replace dialogue—and division replaces trust. For young people growing up in an increasingly polarized world, learning to listen may be one of the most powerful tools for peace.
“We unilaterally assume that people we have never met are demons—and repeat the same mistakes.”
This line from the anime Attack on Titan made me stop and think. In the story, enemies who were taught to hate each other finally meet and realize they are human beings with fears, families, and dreams.
But this pattern is not fiction. Throughout history, societies have judged others before understanding them. During the Crusades, opposing sides saw each other only as threats. In modern times, media narratives and online discussions sometimes simplify complex issues into “good” versus “evil.” Once labels are applied, empathy becomes difficult.
Conversation time with children who live in the slum areas in Ghaziabad, India. Credit: Miko Nakano
Even justice systems are not immune to bias. The Hakamata case in Japan, widely reported by BBC News, raised serious concerns about how media pressure and unreliable evidence can influence judicial decisions. The case showed how justice can be compromised when assumptions take priority over careful examination of facts and individual voices. Around the world, wrongful convictions and discrimination continue to demonstrate how easily fairness can be undermined when judgment replaces understanding.
This is why SDG 16—peace, justice, and strong institutions—matters. Peace is not only about ending wars. It is about building societies where people are heard before they are judged.
Conversation about education with Yoshimasa Hayashi, Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications of Japan, at the National High School Future Conference, House of Councilors Members’ Office Building, Tokyo, Japan. Credit: Miko Nakano
My awareness of this issue began in elementary school. A classmate was widely labeled as “strange,” and many students avoided her. One day, she spoke openly about the pain of being ignored. Listening to her changed my perspective. I realized how easily we can judge someone without ever asking why.
Instead of keeping this reflection to myself, I decided to take action.
In junior high school, I helped organize small discussion circles during class activities where students could share experiences of being misunderstood or judged. We created simple rules: listen without interrupting, ask questions before assuming, and respect differences. At first, conversations were awkward. But over time, students began speaking more openly. Some admitted they had judged others too quickly. Others shared experiences of feeling excluded.
These small conversations changed the atmosphere in our classroom. They did not solve every problem, but they created space for listening.
I later learned that young people around the world are doing similar work. Programs like Seeds of Peace and Generation Global bring together youth from different backgrounds to engage in dialogue across conflict lines. Their work shows that listening is not passive—it is an active form of peacebuilding.
As young people, we may not control institutions or governments yet. But we shape the culture around us every day—in classrooms, online spaces, and communities. If we normalize quick labeling and division, conflict grows. If we normalize listening, trust grows.
Building peaceful societies begins long before political negotiations. It begins when we ask “why” instead of assuming. It begins when we recognize that every person has a story that deserves to be heard.
In a world facing rising polarization and mistrust, choosing to listen may seem small. But it is not weak. It is foundational.
Peace does not start in courtrooms or parliaments alone.
It starts in conversations.
And young people are ready to lead them.
Edited by Dr Hanna Yoon
IPS UN Bureau Report
Excerpt:
Youth voice on SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
NEW YORK, Mar 6 2026 (IPS) - In recent months, the language surrounding the escalating confrontation between the United States, Israel, and Iran has taken on a tone that should trouble anyone concerned with global peace.
Across television studios, online sermons, and political commentary, some American preachers and commentators have begun describing the conflict not merely as geopolitics or national security, but as a “holy war.”
Reporting in outlets such as The Guardian, along with coverage in other international media, has noted the growing number of Christian nationalist and Evangelical voices framing the Middle Eastern conflict in explicitly theological terms.
Certain Evangelical preachers in the United States have long interpreted tensions involving Israel through apocalyptic or biblical narratives. In these interpretations, the confrontation with Iran is sometimes presented as part of a divinely ordained struggle between good and evil.
In sermons broadcast online and amplified through social media, the war is described as a moment in which believers must stand with Israel in a battle perceived as spiritually consequential – even leading to ‘the rapture’.
The rhetoric is not limited to pulpits. Some former military figures and commentators have echoed similar themes, invoking civilizational language that portrays the confrontation with Iran as part of a broader clash between Judeo-Christian civilization and an Islamic adversary.
When such language enters strategic discourse, it transforms political conflict into something far more dangerous: a war imbued with sacred meaning.
History shows that once wars are framed as sacred struggles, compromise becomes nearly impossible. Political conflicts can, at least in theory, be negotiated. Holy wars, by contrast, are perceived as battles for divine truth. In that framing, negotiation is betrayal.
This phenomenon is not unique to the current Middle Eastern crisis. Religious legitimization of war has surfaced repeatedly in contemporary conflicts. At the outbreak of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, for example, the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Kirill, framed the war in spiritual terms.
In sermons and public statements, he suggested the conflict represented a metaphysical struggle over the moral future of the Russian world. The language of spiritual warfare, cultural purification, and civilizational defence became intertwined with political justification for military action.
Such rhetoric matters. When religious authority sanctifies violence, it grants moral legitimacy to warfare and discourages dissent among believers. Faith communities that might otherwise advocate peace can become mobilized behind nationalistic or militaristic agendas.
We are therefore witnessing something deeply unsettling: the return of explicitly religious language to modern warfare. For decades after the Second World War, global diplomacy attempted—imperfectly but deliberately—to frame conflicts primarily in political and legal terms.
International institutions, treaties, and multilateral frameworks were designed to prevent precisely the kind of civilizational framing that once fueled centuries of bloodshed.
Yet the present moment suggests that these restraints are weakening. Wars are again being narrated as existential struggles between belief systems. Political leaders, clergy, and media personalities increasingly draw upon religious symbolism to rally support.
The danger is not simply rhetorical. When wars are sacralized, they risk becoming limitless conflicts, unconstrained by borders or diplomacy.
The Collapse of Multilateralism and the Silence of Faith Institutions
For years, I have written and spoken about the uneasy relationship between religion, global governance, and peacebuilding. In articles as well as in interviews and public lectures, I have repeatedly warned that governments and intergovernmental entities have failed to develop a coherent framework for engaging religions constructively in international affairs.
Faith-based organizations today are everywhere. They participate in humanitarian work, development programs, diplomacy initiatives, and interfaith dialogues. International institutions increasingly acknowledge the importance of religious actors in peacebuilding and development. Conferences, seminars, department programmes, global initiatives on “religion and …” or “faith and …” are not only commonplace, but proliferating.
Yet despite this apparent proliferation of engagement, the deeper structural problem remains unresolved: religious actors themselves remain profoundly fragmented, as are the political protagonists dealing with them.
Rather than forming robust alliances capable of confronting violence carried out in the name of religion, many faith organizations continue to operate within narrow institutional or theological boundaries. Interfaith initiatives exist, but they often remain symbolic—highly visible yet limited in their capacity to challenge political power or mobilize believers at scale.
I have argued that religious organizations too often underestimate their responsibility in shaping public narratives around conflict, and doing so together. When religion is invoked to legitimize violence, silence from religious leaders becomes complicity.
At the same time, the broader international system that might once have moderated such dynamics is itself under strain. The erosion of multilateralism has been one of the defining features of the past decade. International institutions that once served as mediators of global crises increasingly appear weakened or sidelined.
The United Nations Security Council remains gridlocked. International law is invoked selectively – if at all. Great-power competition has returned with renewed intensity. In such an environment, appeals to universal norms carry less weight.
Alongside this institutional weakening has come a worrying rise in authoritarianism worldwide. Governments across regions have adopted increasingly illiberal practices—restricting civil liberties, marginalizing minorities, and suppressing dissent. In many cases, religion is instrumentalized to reinforce nationalist narratives or legitimize political authority.
This combination—the decline of multilateral governance and the rise of politicized religion—creates a volatile global environment. Without strong international frameworks to mediate disputes, imperialist narratives and actions gain traction – as in Trump’s and Netanyahu’s war against Iran. Religion, ethnicity, and culture become tools through which political conflicts are interpreted and mobilized.
Faith-based organizations, despite their potential influence, have struggled to counter this trend effectively. Some remain focused on humanitarian services rather than confronting the ideological narratives that legitimize violence. Most hesitate to challenge political authorities with whom they maintain close relationships, and seek financial and/or political backing.
As a result, the global religious landscape today is marked by a paradox: religion is increasingly present in global discourse, yet its potential as a force for peace remains under-realized.
Islamophobia and the Seeds of a Wider Religious Conflict
Perhaps the most troubling dimension of the present moment is the resurgence of Islamophobia as a powerful political force in international discourse.
For more than two decades following the attacks of September 11, 2001, narratives portraying Islam as inherently linked to extremism became deeply embedded in political rhetoric and media representation across many Western societies.
Despite sustained efforts by scholars, religious leaders, and civil society actors to challenge these narratives, they continue to shape public perceptions.
In the context of the current confrontation with Iran, such narratives risk reinforcing the perception that the conflict is not merely geopolitical but civilizational. When Iran is framed not simply as a state actor but as a representative of a threatening Islamic force, the conflict becomes symbolically larger than any single nation.
The danger is clear: political wars are becoming interpreted as religious wars.
If such framing takes hold, the implications extend far beyond the Middle East. Conflicts that are perceived as religious struggles can mobilize believers across borders. They can radicalize communities, fuel sectarian polarization, and undermine the fragile coexistence of diverse religious populations.
History provides sobering examples. The European wars of religion in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries devastated entire regions, entangling political power struggles with theological disputes. Once religious identity became intertwined with warfare, violence spread across kingdoms and empires.
Today’s globalized world is even more interconnected. Diaspora communities, digital media, and transnational networks allow narratives of conflict to circulate instantly across continents. A war perceived as targeting Islam could ignite tensions in communities thousands of miles away from the battlefield.
Similarly, religious nationalism in multiple regions—whether Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, or Muslim—has been gaining strength in recent years. When one religiously framed conflict emerges, it can reinforce others. Narratives of civilizational struggle feed upon each other.
As the confrontation between the United States, Israel, and Iran becomes widely interpreted through a religious lens, the consequences may be profound. Christian–Muslim tensions, already strained in many contexts, could escalate dramatically. Such conflicts would not respect national borders. They would unfold within societies, across communities, and through global networks of believers.
Ironically, this escalation occurs at a time when religious leaders frequently emphasize the peace-promoting teachings of their traditions. Interfaith initiatives celebrate dialogue, coexistence, and shared values. Religious texts across traditions contain powerful injunctions toward compassion, justice, and reconciliation.
Yet these ideals remain fragile when confronted with political realities.
If religious institutions fail to challenge narratives that sanctify violence, they risk becoming spectators to a new era of religious conflict. Worse still, they may be drawn into it.
Are “Religions” Truly for Peace?
We may therefore be standing at the threshold of a profoundly dangerous historical moment.
Religious language is once again being used to justify war. Political conflicts are increasingly framed as civilizational struggles. Multilateral institutions that once mediated global disputes appear weakened. And faith communities—despite their moral authority—have yet to mount a unified challenge to the narratives that sacralize violence.
None of this means that religion inevitably leads to war. On the contrary, religious traditions contain some of humanity’s most powerful ethical teachings about peace, justice, and compassion. Faith communities have played vital roles in reconciliation processes, humanitarian action, and social movements for justice.
But these possibilities are not automatic. They depend on conscious choices by religious leaders, institutions, and believers.
If religious actors allow their traditions to be mobilized in support of political violence, then religion will become part of the problem rather than the solution.
The question confronting us today is therefore both urgent and uncomfortable.
At a moment when wars are increasingly described as sacred struggles, when geopolitical conflicts are interpreted through religious narratives, and when Islamophobia and other forms of religious prejudice continue to spread, we must ask ourselves: How are religions truly forces for peace?
Prof. Azza Karam, PhD. is President, Lead Integrity
IPS UN Bureau
UNITED NATIONS, Mar 6 2026 (IPS) - As artificial intelligence (AI) threatens to dominate every aspect of human lives —including political, economic, social and cultural –there is also the danger of the potential militarization of AI.
The integration of AI into nuclear command, control, and communications (NC3) systems, as well as its use in military decision-making, introduces severe, unprecedented risks to global security, according to one report.
Key negative effects include the acceleration of decision-making to “machine speed” (leaving little time for human judgment), increased vulnerability to cyberattacks, and the erosion of strategic stability.
According to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, command and control of nuclear weapons is a delicate and complicated system, designed to prevent error while ensuring reliability under high-pressure conditions.
In environments where vast amounts of data shape high-stakes outcomes, artificial intelligence has become a natural consideration.
“The integration of a rapidly evolving technology raises fundamental questions about responsibility, data quality, and system reliability. When a single error could have irreversible consequences, how can confidence be built around the integration of machine learning into systems that have long relied on human judgment and oversight?”
“What guardrails should be maintained? Where are the opportunities for international collaboration and consensus?”
Tariq Rauf, former Head of Verification and Security Policy at the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), told IPS the role of and integration of Artificial Generative Intelligence (AGI) raises some of the most consequential questions of our technological era.
The integration of AGI into nuclear command, control, and communications (NC3) systems is not merely an engineering challenge — it is a civilizational one.
The Problem of Machine Speed
Perhaps the most alarming aspect of the integration of AGI into NC3 systems, he pointed out, is the compression of decision-making timelines to “machine speed.” Nuclear strategy has historically depended on deliberate human judgment — the ability of decision-makers to pause, assess ambiguous data, consult advisors, and choose restraint even under pressure or attack.
AGI systems, by contrast, are designed to process and respond at velocities no human can match. In a crisis, this creates a dangerous paradox: the very speed that makes AGI attractive also makes meaningful human oversight nearly impossible.
“If an AGI system misidentifies a sensor anomaly as an incoming missile — something that has happened with human-operated systems before, as the 1983 Soviet false alarm incident illustrates — the window for correction could shrink from minutes to seconds.”
The margin for error in nuclear decision-making has always been uncomfortably thin; AGI risks eliminating it entirely, said Rauf.
Data Quality and System Reliability
Data quality and integrity are foundational concerns regarding AGI. Machine learning systems are only as reliable as the data on which they are trained, he argued.
“Nuclear environments present unique ultra complex challenges: they involve rare, high-stakes events with limited historical data, adversarial actors who may deliberately feed misinformation into sensor networks, and geopolitical contexts that shift faster than training datasets can capture”.
An AGI system that confidently acts on corrupted or misrepresented data in a nuclear context could trigger escalation based on a fiction. Worse still, the opacity of many machine learning models — the so-called “black box” problem — means that even system designers may not be able to explain why a particular output was generated, let alone correct it in real time, declared Rauf.
Vladislav Chernavskikh, Researcher, Weapons of Mass Destruction Programme, at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) told IPS existing state approaches to AI-nuclear nexus already broadly converge on the principle of retaining human control in nuclear decision making, yet there is no consensus on how this should be defined or operationalized.
A formal recognition of this principle by nuclear-weapon states and elaboration of what human control constitutes in this context and how it can manifest in the nuclear weapons domain can be one of the first steps towards minimising risks, he declared.
At the AI Impact Summit in New Delhi last month, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said the future of AI cannot be decided by a handful of countries and the whims of a few billionaires.
Last year, the General Assembly took two decisive steps, he said.
First, by creating an Independent International Scientific Panel on Artificial Intelligence, and second, by launching a Global Dialogue on AI Governance within the UN, where all countries, together with the private sector, academia and civil society, can all have a voice.
He told participants at the summit that real impact means technology that improves lives and protects the planet. And he called on them to build AI for everyone, with dignity as the default setting.
UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric told reporters last month, the Secretary-General is not calling for the United Nations to rule over AI. He’s calling for – and has put in place – an architecture with the help of Member States to try to ensure that everybody gets a seat at the table.
And as he said: “AI will and has already impacted all of us. It is vital that those countries who may not have the technology also have a voice and that science and fairness be put at the centre of AI.”
Responsibility and Accountability
In a further analysis, Rauf said when AGI recommendations or autonomous actions contribute to catastrophic outcomes, the question of accountability becomes deeply problematic.
Traditional chains of command assign clear human responsibility at each decision point. AGI integration fractures this clarity. Is it the software developer, the military commander, the government that deployed the system, or the algorithm itself that bears responsibility for a miscalculation? he asked.
The absence of clear accountability frameworks is not just a legal or ethical problem — it is a strategic one, because adversaries and allies alike need to understand who is in control and what decision logic is being applied.
Cyberattack Vulnerability
AGI-enhanced or dependent NC3 systems also expand the attack surface for adversaries. Sophisticated cyberattacks — including adversarial inputs designed to manipulate AGI outputs — could potentially spoof or blind these systems in ways that are difficult to detect until it is too late. The integration of AGI thus creates new vectors for destabilization that did not exist in earlier nuclear architectures, said Rauf.
The Case for International Collaboration
Despite these alarming challenges, international collaboration could be a potential avenue for managing risk. Confidence-building measures, shared technical standards, and bilateral or multilateral ‘enforceable’ agreements on the limits of AGI autonomy in nuclear systems could help preserve strategic stability.
Arms control history, said Rauf, shows that even adversaries can agree on rules that serve mutual interests in survival. Extending that tradition to AGI-enabled NC3 systems is urgently needed — before the technology outpaces diplomacy entirely.
“The integration of AGI into nuclear systems technically might be inevitable. Whether it is managed wisely is a political and moral choice that remains very much open and seems beyond the intellectual, moral/ethical processing capabilities of today’s civil and military ‘leaders’, declared Rauf.
This article is brought to you by IPS NORAM, in collaboration with INPS Japan and Soka Gakkai International, in consultative status with the UN’s Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).
IPS UN Bureau Report