Letters

SOUTH CAUCASUS: PEACE AT A CROSSROADS

The South Caucasus remains a region haunted by conflict. Decades of wars and displacement continue to shape the lives of Armenians, Azerbaijanis, and Georgians, leaving scars that are passed from one generation to the next. In August, a significant step toward reconciliation was taken when Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan signed a peace agreement at the White House. Their handshake was hailed as a potentially historic moment, opening the door to a new era. Yet for peace to become reality, the path ahead is long and fraught with challenges.

Civil society remains largely absent from peace and security policy in the region. Peacebuilding efforts often lack sustainability and inclusiveness, failing to bring in diverse voices and perspectives. Without deeper reflection on the traumas of past wars, experts warn, it will be difficult to build a shared vision of reconciliation.

During visits to Armenia and Azerbaijan earlier this year, I met with local experts and civil society representatives who underscored this point. Stories of loss, displacement, and destruction are strikingly similar across all three countries. These memories – if left unacknowledged – risk becoming entrenched as intergenerational trauma.

Each country now faces a critical juncture: Armenia, still reeling from the Second Karabakh War and the exodus from Nagorno-Karabakh (Artsakh), is seeking to redefine its national identity through the “Real Armenia Project.” The initiative, led by Prime Minister Pashinyan, emphasizes state-building, economic growth, and peace oriented policies.

Azerbaijan, victorious in regaining its ter- r i t o r i e s , celebrates President Aliyev as a national hero. Yet the plight of some 700,000 internally displaced persons from the First Karabakh War remains unresolved. Reconstruction and resettlement dominate the national agenda, while issues such as democracy, free speech, and human rights receive scant attention.

Georgia, once considered closest to the European Union, has drifted into democratic backsliding. Restrictive laws on civil society and the media have eroded Western trust. With Russia still entrenched in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and regional instability heightened by the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, Georgia’s democratic regression risks widening Moscow’s influence.

Given these dynamics, the role of civil society across the region is more urgent than ever. Scholars, experts, and community organizations in Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia can help move peacebuilding forward by reflecting on past experiences, developing shared narratives, and pressing for inclusive strategies that address root causes of conflict. p.Ultimately, the South Caucasus cannot achieve “positive peace” a peace grounded in justice, equality, and well-being—without democracy. Healing requires more than treaties; it demands open dialogue, recognition of trauma, and grassroots efforts to build trust across communities. Only then can the region begin to move toward a stable and prosperous future.

Letters

RE: GOING BEYOND GOEBBELS

Thomas G. Hedberg and Thomas J. Loughry have certainly tapped into an important issue. As advocates of media literacy know, progress in saving the world is unlikely if the role of information and is ignored.

The unchecked, profit-driven advances in communications technologies in recent decades have now added to the factors threatening us with extinction. Hedberg and Loughry amplify what Yuval Noah Harari, in his latest book, Nexus: A Brief History of Information Technologies from the Stone Age to AI, urges us to do: Develop some guard rails and urge policy makers to regulate the tech giants before it is too late.

OPEN LETTER TO PRIME MINISTER CARNEY:

Dear Prime Minister Carney:

Congratulations on becoming Prime Minister of Canada. You have assumed the responsibilities of leadership at a critical time in Canadian and world history.

Canada’s sovereignty, economy and the preservation of Canadian values will no doubt be among your highest priorities. As you have noted however, the well-being of Canadians can only be fully secured within a broader international context where rule of law prevails, human rights are respected, and the world is free of existential threats.

Your work as UN Special Envoy on Climate Action and Finance attests to your commitment to protecting our planet’s environment. Equally critical and quite possibly more immediate, is the threat to humanity posed by nuclear weapons – the ultimate weapon of mass destruction.

The nuclear arms control architecture has all but disintegrated. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran, the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty and Open Skies Treaty b e t w e e n the US and Russia have f a l t e r e d . P r o s p e c t s for renewal of New START in 2026 appear grim and both the US and Russia have lowered their respective thresholds for the use of nuclear weapons. One threatens “fire and fury” in another context while the other explicitly threatens to use nuclear weapons if third parties directly intervene in defence of a nation that it has invaded. India and Pakistan continue to square off in Kashmir, North Korea remains a threat to the Peninsula, Israel is at war and France and UK are considering extending their nuclear ‘umbrellas’ eastward.

Not one nuclear armed state has joined the 2017 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). Nor have any who are party to the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) begun to fulfill their Article VI legal obligation “to pursue effective measures relating to the cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.”

Quite the opposite. All nine nuclear armed states are modernizing and e x p a n d i n g their nuclear arsenals and delivery systems and at least six non-nuclear states have signaled interest in developing their own nuclear capability. In short, the world is witnessing a new nuclear arms race and could be on the brink of a new era of nuclear weapons proliferation.

Add to this the very real possibility that non-state actors will acquire nuclear weapons and/or the ability to trigger a nuclear conflict through cyber warfare, along with the risk of accident or human miscalculation which have already taken humanity to the edge of nuclear disaster on numerous occasions.

Former Australian Foreign Minister, Gareth Evans, after in-depth review in the mid-1990s of the risks of another nuclear event concluded, “It has not been a result of good policy or good management that the world has avoided a nuclear weapons catastrophe for 70 years: Rather it has been sheer dumb luck.”

Global tensions have only increased since. The ‘Doomsday Clock’ established in 1947 by atomic scientists, has been advanced to 89 seconds to midnight, closer to “Doomsday” than at any point in history.

In addition to utter destruction within a nuclear blast radius and radioactive contamination that could encircle the globe, scientists estimate that the smoke and debris that would be ejected into the earth’s atmosphere from the detonation of less than 3% of the global stock of nuclear weapons would result in a nuclear winter that would last a decade or more. Widespread starvation would wipe out at least a third of humanity. A wider exchange of nuclear weapons could end life on earth as we know it, if not completely.

A Nanos national poll conducted in 2021 found that more than 80% of Canadians believe that nuclear weapons make the world more dangerous and should be eliminated, and that Canada can play an important role in this regard.

There has also been support in Parliament. Building upon former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau’s efforts in the 1980s to “suffocate the nuclear arms race”, in 2010 a motion was adopted unanimously by the House of Commons and Senate that “encourages the Government of Canada to engage in negotiations for a Nuclear Weapons Convention…and to deploy a major worldwide Canadian diplomatic initiative in support of preventing nuclear proliferation and increasing the rate of nuclear disarmament.” No significant action followed.

In 2018, the House of Commons Standing Committee on National Defence issued an all-Party recommendation: “That the Government of Canada take a leadership role within NATO in beginning the work necessary for achieving the NATO goal of creating the conditions for a world free of nuclear weapons. That this initiative be undertaken on an urgent basis in view of the increasing threat of nuclear conflict flowing from the renewed risk of nuclear proliferation, the deployment of so-called tactical nuclear weapons and changes in nuclear doctrines regarding lowering the threshold for first use of nuclear weapons by Russia and the US.” Again, no significant action was undertaken by the Government of the day.

On 21 September 2020, an historic and powerful Open Letter pleading for urgent action on nuclear disarmament was issued by 56 former senior office holders – statesmen all – including former UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, 3 Presidents, 11 Prime Ministers, 16 Ministers of Defence and 24 Foreign Ministers – 2 of whom served as S e c r e t a r y G e n e r a l of NATO. Among the signatories are former C a n a d i a n Prime Ministers Jean Chretien and John Turner, as well as former Ministers Lloyd Axworthy, Jean-Jacques Blais, Bill Graham, John McCallum and John Manley. Of note, signatories included individuals from 19 NATO states.

The late Pope Francis denounced nuclear weapons on innumerable occasions as well, insisting that nuclear disarmament must be “thorough and complete, and reach men’s very souls”. Religious leaders throughout the world echo his message.

Prime Minister, in your book ‘Values’ you cite several examples of past Canadian leadership on the international stage: Brian Mulroney driving sanctions against apartheid and the Montreal Protocol on chlorofluorocarbons, Lloyd Axworthy’s work to ban anti-personnel landmines and Grand Chief Littlechild’s pivotal role in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

One could add Lester Pearson’s role in settling the Suez crisis and establishing UN Peacekeeping, Canada’s prominent role in crafting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in establishing the International Criminal Court, codas for the Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict and the Commission on Intervention on State Sovereignty that prescribed the bold concept of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). So much to make Canada proud! Clearly, Canadian diplomacy can and has had major impact on global affairs.

As President of the G7 and member of the G20, the Commonwealth, la Francophonie and NATO, Canada is extremely well placed to play a leadership role on nuclear disarmament – to challenge the status quo and press NATO states to engage all nuclear-armed states to reverse the nuclear arms race and undertake negotiations leading to the total elimination of nuclear weapons. As many have said, “To get rid of them before they get rid of us!”

The vast majority of nations and peoples of the world would celebrate such a profoundly important initiative from Canada. Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones have already been established in Latin America and the Caribbean, the South Pacific, Southeast Asia, Africa and Central Asia – involving 138 of the 193 UN member states. Indeed, a high percentage of the population in most nations support nuclear disarmament, even if their governments may not at this time.

August 6th of this year will mark 80 years since atomic horror was unleashed upon the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Such unspeakable inhumanity must never be permitted to occur again. This much we owe to our children and to future generations. We respectfully urge you and your government to pursue nuclear disarmament with resolve, determination and urgency – as though another nuclear event were imminent – because it very well could be.

With warmest regards and best wishes for success throughout your tenure as Prime Minister of Canada.

Letters

NAVIGATING IN THE INFORMATION BATTLEFIELD

In an era where global military spending has skyrocketed to a staggering $2.7 trillion and more than 50 armed conflicts rage, the quest for peace is forgotten. With over two billion people, a quarter of humanity, living in conflict-affected areas, the need for clear, credible information has never been more critical.

War seeks to hide human rights violations, deaths, and the true extent of suffering and destruction. AI tools, major search engines, and social media cannot be relied on to expose corruption or demand accountability from weapons contractors. So, human-curated resources play a vital role. Non-profit initiatives compile resources on conflict, military, nuclear weapons and peaceful alternatives. The mainstream media rarely covers the dealings of arms manufacturers, traders, and their investors. The arms industry in 2023 was valued at over $632 billion. This highly lucrative trade leads to longer and deadlier conflicts, grave human rights abuses, and siphons public funds from essential social, health, and environmental budgets.

Let’s learn from the successes of pacifists and nonviolent campaigns, replicate their strategies, and use peace education to build tolerance, compassion, and kindness.

LET’S USE GREEN BONDS

Accelerate everything. Everywhere. All at once. Then find more things to accelerate. Clean, renewable energy systems will win the fight against fossil fuels. Fossil fuels as the dominant energy source will not last my lifetime (and I’m not a young man). Markets will see to that now, not policy.

That doesn’t mean we’ve solved climate. Instead, we continue to accelerate in the wrong direction. It’s too late for the inevitable decline of fossil energy to reduce climate risk to manageable levels.The role of climate policy is now to accelerate the inevitable.

In the early 2000s, I worked on a Green Bond policy initiative as an Action Canada fellow. Though a little dated, it applies today – with a tweak or two. Given Prime Minister Carney’s revival of Sustainability Bonds, it’s time to put it out there again.

It’s a simple idea – a Victory Bond for climate – that gives the public a way to invest in our collective security with a federal backstop. People buy gov-backed bonds. That low-cost capital is low-cost debt for low-carbon energy projects. But there’s important nuance today.

There was once a need to accelerate deployment of existing clean technologies that deliver immediate emission reductions. But that ship has sailed. The focus now should be on providing market pull for next-generation higher-risk technologies that can open up new market segments. If you’re a fan of nuclear, look to SMRs, or carbon capture. There are lots of Canadian startups itching to get on the field. The long-term benefit? Build a Canadian renewable energy technology economy to export next-generation cleantech globally.

This is not a bond backed by government and deployed by the private sector -an arms-length private financial institution, overseen by a board of private sector experts in energy and government representatives. Compensation can be geared toward the unambiguous efficiency measure of cost to the government per tonne of emissions reduction.

Risk (primarily defaulted loans) is mitigated through sound governance and oversight, a limited bond issue size, capital matching from borrowers and liens on assets.

There are now some great programs in place to support next-gen cleantech – in particular the Canada Growth Fund (CGF): the savviest program I’ve seen in Canada. The Green Bond rewards CGF (and others) for taking the risk.

Heck – if the private sector saw that low-cost project finance on the horizon, maybe all those pension funds who currently refuse might finally play ball.

The most significant cost exposure to the government is defaulted loans. Liability appears as a contingent liability, represented by a percentage of the total bond issue. Our upper-bound estimate back then was a total cost to the government capped at 25% of the bond issue, but the actual rate should be much lower, maybe 10%. If you translate that to a cost per tonne of CO2, it’s estimated at between $1 – $12.88 (obviously a lot assumptions and detail.

As an investment, it’s lousy. But that’s not the point. As a cost of emissions reduction, it beats any government program I’ve seen! And that’s to say nothing of the economic upside of export-driven nascent Canadian global champions. Green Bonds. What’s old is new again.