On March 23, 2020, as COVID-19 was first appearing in many conflict-affected areas, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres issued a call for warring parties to cease hostilities and instead wage battle against the pandemic. Drawing on an examination of conflicts in Afghanistan, Colombia, Cameroon, Israel and Palestine, Libya, the Philippines, Syria, Ukraine, and elsewhere—this report looks at how COVID-19 has affected conflict parties’ interests, positions, and capacities, and provides recommendation for how the international community leverage the pandemic to promote peace.

Firefighters spray disinfectant along a road in Manila, Philippines, on April 6, 2020, in an effort to keep the coronavirus from spreading. (Photo by Jes Aznar/New York Times)
Firefighters spray disinfectant along a road in Manila, Philippines, on April 6, 2020, in an effort to keep the coronavirus from spreading. (Jes Aznar/New York Times)

Summary

  • Few bilateral or multilateral ceasefires related to the COVID-19 pandemic have been reached. The threat of the pandemic on conflict states, however, is steadily increasing in severity, creating an extreme humanitarian challenge.
  • The presence of a global pandemic alone might not change parties’ willingness to enter a ceasefire or any other political arrangement. Ceasefires, particularly humanitarian, serve specific purposes depending on the conflict context, but they do not always lead to comprehensive negotiations.
  • Approaches to COVID-19 ceasefires should be based on astute conflict analysis, the pandemic’s impact on party behavior, and the readiness of humanitarian interventions.
  • Women, nonviolent movements, and civil society are key sources of pressure to pause violence in order to address COVID-19. These groups are the most important factor in driving lasting, transformative, peaceful settlements.
  • Peacebuilding efforts should be deemed essential work and exempted from COVID-19 restrictions. Local, regional, and international peacebuilders should be provided with the equipment and knowledge needed to protect themselves from the virus.

About the Report

Drawing on the actions of the international community, domestic peacebuilders, and conflict parties in response to the COVID-19 crisis, this report explores the relationship between extreme humanitarian demand and the interests that drive conflict parties. Research for this report was coordinated by the Inclusive Peace Processes program in the Center for Applied Conflict Transformation at the United States Institute of Peace (USIP).

About the Author

Tyler Jess Thompson is a senior expert on negotiations and peace process support at USIP. He has advised conflict parties and governments on peace processes, civilian protection, and other negotiations across the globe. Paul Carter, Billy Ford, Sarhang Hamasaeed, Sloane Katelman, Neil Kritz, Leslie Minney, Ola Mohajer, Elizabeth Murray, Rachel Sullivan, Hodei Sultan, Jason Tower, Nate Wilson, and Mona Yacoubian provided their country-specific expertise.

Related Publications

Why the New U.S.-U.K.-Australia Partnership Is So Significant

Why the New U.S.-U.K.-Australia Partnership Is So Significant

Friday, September 17, 2021

By: Brian Harding; Carla Freeman, Ph.D; Mirna Galic; Henry Tugendhat; Rachel Vandenbrink

The United States and the United Kingdom have made the rare decision to share nuclear submarine propulsion technology with Australia in a move seen aimed at China. In a joint statement on September 15, the leaders of the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia announced the formation of a trilateral partnership — AUKUS — that, among other things, seeks to “strengthen the ability of each to support our security and defense interests.” USIP’s Brian Harding, Carla Freeman, Mirna Galic, Henry Tugendhat and Rachel Vandenbrink discuss the significance of the decision and what to expect next.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Global Policy

Twenty Years After 9/11, It’s Time to Prioritize Diplomacy and Development

Twenty Years After 9/11, It’s Time to Prioritize Diplomacy and Development

Monday, September 13, 2021

By: Mona Yacoubian

As we mark the somber 20th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks amid a global pandemic, the complexity of 21st century national security threats is all too evident. Another milestone — the end of the U.S. military intervention in Afghanistan — underscores the shortcomings of the United States response to this tragic terrorist attack: large-scale military interventions. We have seen that these multifaceted, transnational threats demand a whole-of-government approach with diplomacy, peacebuilding and development at the forefront. Twenty years after 9/11, as the United States pivots away from a “forever wars” posture, a renewed commitment to upgrade our diplomacy, peacebuilding and development toolkits should be prioritized. 

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Global Policy

View All Publications