Open Letter to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon

Generic thumbnail

Hans von Sponeck, Annabel McGoldrick, Richard Falk, Vicky Rossi, Christian Hårleman, Annette Schiffmann, Jan Oberg, Christina Spännar

Mr. Ban Ki-moon, UN Secretary-General
The United Nations
S-3800, United Nations,
New York, N.Y. 10017, USA

Dear Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon,

The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research would like to offer you our sincere best wishes for your tenure of office. We eagerly look forward to your leadership in the UN during this time of great challenges for humanity. We also would like to assure you that all our work over the past 20 years has been in strict adherence to the UN Charter, and we are proud to have co-operated in various ways with UN missions in various conflict zones.
TFF is just one of thousands of civil society organizations and we feel it is a duty to make a constructive contribution.
In this Open Letter we deal with a few selected themes and apply them to the conflicts in the Middle East.

Yours sincerely


Hans von Sponeck, Annabel McGoldrick, Richard Falk, Vicky Rossi, Christian Hårleman, Annette Schiffmann, Jan Oberg, Christina Spännar

Strengthening the UN Charter’s norms and ethics

Post-Cold War warfare, interventionism and the war on terror have caused an unprecedented erosion of the norms and values of the Charter and thus weakened the UN. The first sentence of the Charter Preamble – “to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war” – can be interpreted as an argument for the abolition of war. Article 1.1 states that peace shall be brought about by peaceful means; military means can be used only when everything else has been tried in vain. Further, Article 99 and 100 provide your office with special powers and the right of neutrality. It is of great importance, we believe, that the world be reminded once again of the independence of your office and that policy decisions can continuously benefit from this reality.

Until a revised UN Charter has been accepted by all, the current version must be propagated as fundamental, as indivisible and as applicable to every member. Indeed, the constructive, hope-inducing stories about the UN and its missions around the world must become visible and be told throughout the world media. As such, it is in the UN’s best interest to promote peace journalism in a media world, which at present is filled with violence.

The United Nations has the potential to become the united “conscience” of the global citizenry working on behalf of future generations. We express the hope that you will continue the work started by Kofi Annan to promote ethics within the UN system, including the Security Council and the General Assembly. Indeed, moral concerns must be given a voice in world politics.

Historically, the UN has always been an expression of the will of “we, the peoples”. Unfortunately, a large majority of humanity is only vaguely aware of the Charter’s words or the importance of its normativity. We urge you to take a global public relations initiative that propagates the above-mentioned and other UN norms.



Multilateralism and world order


One of the urgent present day challenges is to return the UN to multilateralism, to enable the UN to act for the benefit of the community of nations, rather than in the interest of individual member states. The UN remains the foundation stone, indeed the custodian, of multilateralism. It is the organization best suited to devise global policies that take both citizens and global governance beyond the nation-state into fundamental account.

It is reasonable to assume that significant de facto reforms of the UN and, thus, world politics would come about if two changes take place:


– if more member states, the most powerful in particular, finally decided to conduct their policies in accordance with the Charter;

– if the United Nations could be liberated from the constraints of the paradigm of geopolitics and outdated military security thinking.


The reform discussion conducted to date has focused on the UN itself but has not applied the same pressure to member states to duly reform their behaviour. However, in the words of the first Secretary-General, Trygve Lie, the UN will never be stronger or better than its members decide to make it. This statement remains profoundly true today and should be promoted in the reform discussion.

What do we mean by liberating the UN from geopolitics? From our perspective, there is a destructive tension between the Charter as norm and law, on the one hand, and member state geopolitics as practiced on the other. If decision-makers adhere to what could be called the horizon of feasibility, there will only be marginal reforms, and these reforms are likely to make the organization more effective and legitimate only in Real- and geo-political terms. Thus, the normative incoherence and tensions will remain and the UN will remain more “we, the governments” than “we, the peoples”.

Instead, it is the horizons of aspirations – such as people’s hopes and the ideals of the UN – that should be promoted systematically. This incoherence and tension can be overcome by minimizing the impact of geopolitics. We believe that the United Nations should be reformed in a manner that achieves primacy for the Charter’s goals and principles as well as begins to meet citizens’ aspirations for a peaceful, just world order.

A stronger UN through intensified partnership with world civil society

Kofi Annan encouraged the UN to work more closely and effectively with the growing NGO sector and spoke about the “glue of common interests”. Undoubtedly, the capacity of the UN to promote peace on our planet depends crucially on its ability to strengthen its partnerships and cooperative initiatives with civil society organisations dedicated to the same aims. Thus, we encourage you to integrate into the UN system the findings of such groups as the Panel of Eminent Persons on United Nations–Civil Society Relations (2004).

One way to promote the ethos and norms of the world organisation would be to establish UN offices in all member states and to promote dialogues with governments and citizens. In order to bring the UN closer to people and people closer to the UN, it is of paramount importance that the UN re-vitalizes its Department of Public Information (DPI). Civil society has a right to be taken into account and to be considered a partner for peace. The DPI must not remain a mere printing facility for documentation; it needs to become people-sensitive so that people worldwide can understand and become involved because they see the UN as theirs.

The UN global summits of the 1990s should be revived. They created worldwide public awareness and were seeds of a globalizing democracy which is dearly needed in an age of exclusively economic and military globalization.

Human and global security

Peace is securing development and developing security. It stretches from the individual to the global community. We are convinced that global human security, understood as conflict-analysis and conflict-resolution through peacekeeping, peace-building, dialogue and reconciliation, must replace military-based national security – in short, peace by peaceful means.

While many UN missions have produced successes under difficult circumstances, member states’ conflict-management in, say, the former Yugoslavia (Kosovo and Bosnia-Hercegovina in particular), Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq have shown us the limitations of the predominantly military handling of conflicts. If human security in these places had been the primary goal, there would be more peace there than we find today. One lesson is that the arms trade prolongs conflicts and strengthens authoritarian leaders. Another is that economic sanctions invariably hit the innocent civilians rather than the leadership.

Security in today’s world means combating injustices and economic disparities. It means integrating diverse communities and appreciating cultural differences. It means providing health and education. It is transnational; it goes “below” the nation-states and it goes “above” them to the common global society.

Nuclear weapons are incompatible with security and peace. Nuclearism is based on terrorist thinking; developing nuclear weapons and integrating them into war-fighting doctrines holds the potential of deliberately bringing death and destruction to millions of innocent people. The Non-Proliferation Treaty is clear, but the very existence of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction is bound to further their proliferation.

The rather new idea of pre-emptive wars is extremely dangerous. This idea serves only the nuclear-haves and militates against the words and the spirit of the Charter. Article 51 of the UN Charter contains sufficient guidelines on how to appropriately handle issues of self-defence.

Promoting a keen awareness for these issues when policies are decided worldwide and holding governments accountable for pursuing human security will be a major challenge that we hope the UN together with regional bodies and NGOs will rise to. In particular, we encourage you to work for violence prevention rather than violent cures; one of the most important reforms would consist in establishing the proposed UN Emergency Peace Service, UNEPS.

Human security and UN reform will not come about free of charge, but they will cost only a fraction of the world’s military expenditures. What is lacking is political will and vision, not money. Consequently, the balance of civil and military investments in world affairs must be changed. The UN needs – and deserves – much larger resources. Members must step in, pay up and increase its small budget. Various other types of fund-raising must be tried, such as Tobin Tax-like mechanisms. We believe that citizens would be much happier to co-finance the UN than their government’s next war.

Human and global development

The geopolitical paradigm has brought the world the “war on terrorism”. While the number of deaths from terrorism worldwide is extremely low in comparison with poverty, hunger, AIDS, etc., this war diverts tremendous resources that are needed to solve much more urgent and “killing” problems.

Security is not only freedom from fear, it is also freedom from want; priority must be given to caring for the basic material and spiritual needs of those people most in need. If the 2015 Millennium Development Goals were to be realized, we would achieve a more just and stable world. This would undoubtedly undermine some of the grievances that seem to underpin the majority of terrorism. In the long run, hunting alleged terrorists and ignoring domestic laws, human rights and international law in the process will only aggravate the problem. The challenge is to tackle the deeper causes of global dissent.

The Middle East

Many of the above issues come together in the Middle Eastern cluster of conflicts. While this conflict formation as a whole is extremely complex and has hardened because of its long history, it is not impossible to imagine a Middle East in peace, democracy and prosperity within, say, a decade or two.

Addressing the various interlocking strands of conflict in the Middle East is undoubtedly the most urgent peace, security and development priority at the present time. The role and capacity of the United Nations is being severely challenged as warfare persists and menacingly threatens to spread further.

We wonder whether the UN can discover the means to act constructively and creatively within such a setting? The organization must do all that it can, but it must not pretend to do more than it can reasonably expect to do. A frustrated mission will foster an impression of futility that will only please the enemies of the UN, and make other facets of its work more difficult. This was allowed to happen in the Balkans during the 1990s and must not now be repeated in the Middle East.

We acknowledge the strong temptation to avoid any UN initiatives in the Middle East, given these considerations, but we would instead urge a modest and exploratory approach that does not promise a great deal at first, but would be ready to seize any opportunity that arose for the UN to be of help, including through the diplomacy of its leading official.

In this regard, it likely will not be possible for you as Secretary-General to do more in the immediate future than offer your good offices with respect to either the Israel-Palestine conflict or the Iraq War. The UN is a member of “the Quartet” and in that role should support only a balanced peace process by taking into account Palestinian rights under international law, something not done during the seven years of the Oslo peace process.

As for Iraq, the UN must not be drawn into the conflict until there is a clear end to foreign occupation, including a commitment to remove foreign military bases. Once withdrawal is firmly underway, to the extent that the legitimate representatives of the Iraqi people seek a UN peacekeeping and peacebuilding presence, such a possibility should be entertained. A prerequisite would be realism and a clear mandate, as well as conditions which are likely to contribute to peace and fairness for all segments of Iraqi society, including assurances from member states of adequate funding and respect for the independence of the mission.

The biggest initiative that could be taken under UN auspices in this period would be to convene a regional conference – governments, regional organizations and NGOs together – on peace, security, and development in the Middle East. The goals of such a conference should include:


– adopting a mutual non-aggression declaration together with all participating governments and an agreement to establish a zone free of weapons of mass destruction in the region in adherence to UN Security Council resolution 687/1991,Art 14;

– agreeing that all nuclear energy programs should be internationally monitored;

– agreeing to destroy the existing stockpiles of WMD under international supervision;

– arranging for the elimination of any foreign military presence in the region.


Participating governments would, in turn, commit to maintain a stable oil policy with respect to supply and prices.
Such a conference would not be meaningful or feasible unless Israel, Iran, and Turkey were invited and agreed to participate. Non-regional actors such as the EU, China, India, and the United States should serve only as co-convenors and take part only as observers and endorsers, and if asked, as guarantors.


We know that these ideas and proposals are neither completely new nor modest. We know there are many other items on your agenda as new Secretary-General. We know that you will meet resistance from various governments and powerful groups when trying to realize the goals of the United Nations and promote the Charter’s fundamental values. But rest assured that, to the extent that you build on partnerships with civil societies around the world, your task may be a bit less difficult and a bit more possible.

We pledge our fullest support to you and your colleagues as you carry out your considerable responsibilities.

Sincerely and with best wishes,

Hans von Sponeck,
Annabel McGoldrick,
Richard Falk,
Vicky Rossi,
Christian Hårleman,
Annette Schiffmann,
Jan Oberg,
Christina Spännar

Related Posts

LONDON – So far so good, at least on the wider level. While internally Iraq seems on the edge of chaos, the much heralded clash of civilizations between the Muslim and Judaeo-Christian worlds has yet to become apparent. We have anger and despair aplenty in the Arab and Muslim worlds. But very little rushing to the standard and there was no great pilgrimage of warriors to join the fight, as happened when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan twenty years ago, and then, having driven the Red Army out, were left to ferment in that mountainous redoubt. With the armaments supplied by the CIA the mujahidin were transformed into Al Qaeda that became, for a relatively brief moment as these things go, ‘the greatest threat to the homeland that America has ever known.’ Nevertheless a ‘Cold War’ between much of the Muslim world and the West is certainly in full swing. Winston...
The Challenge of Nuclear Weaponsin the Twenty-first CenturyA Path Forward The peoples and governments of the world face an urgent challenge relating to weaponry of mass destruction and particularly to nuclear weaponry.  At the crossroads of technology, terrorism, geopolitical ambition, and policies of preemption are new and potent dangers for humanity. Despite ending the nuclear standoff of the Cold War era, nuclear weaponry is again menacing the peoples of the world with catastrophic possibilities.  We recognize the need for any government to pursue its security interests in accordance with international law; and further, we recognize that distinctive threats to these interests now exist as a result of an active international terrorist network having declared war on the United States and its allies. Nonetheless, we reject the assessment of the current US administration that upgrading a reliance on nuclear weapons is in any sense justified as a response. We find it...
By Karin Wegestal MP, the Social Democratic Partyon behalf of the Swedish Committee for Solidarity with the Yugoslav People During the last decade, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has received more than 500,000 refugees from Croatia and Bosnia, and another 300,000 internally displaced persons, mainly from the province Kosovo and Metohia. For a country with about ten million inhabitants, such an influx of homeless people is obviously a very heavy burden – even under peaceful conditions. But in addition to that, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has been the subject to sanctions from the western powers for close to ten years and its infrastructure was badly hurt through Nato’s intense bombardment during 78 days in 1999. The result of all this is that Yugoslavia, once the most developed industrial country in Eastern Europe, is today the poorest country in Europe. In Serbia excluding Kosovo, with about ten million inhabitants and...

Recent Articles

Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...

TFF on Substack

Discover and subscribe to more peace materials on TFF Substack

Most Popular

Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Read More
Living-Peace-Sign-Budapest-copy
Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
b54a1f10-8c65-4f0b-9dd5-4abc0a7d04cc_2659x2659
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
010
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Screenshot 2026-10-02 011738
Jan ObergPhD, director, The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research, TFFLund, Sweden October 2, 2026 This is my full original manuscript. The Chinese Academy of Social Science, CASS, makes two publications out if it. 1. China’s Five-year plan emphasized the capabilities of basic research and original innovation. It is regarded as the goal of the future social development, which, as required, should be significantly enhanced. Can you comment on the importance of original innovation in research and academic study? I believe it is easier to define “original innovation” in the natural sciences than in social sciences. The breaking points of what constitutes something new, or innovative, are not quite as sharp in the latter. But in both fields it is about opening up something that was closed, unseen, unexplored before – making manifest what was earlier latent. Innovations come in many forms and shapes – naming something that was not...
arctic-circle-map
The agreement is catastrophic both because of what it says and what it doesn’t mention. It reduces further the major asset of security policies: Freedom of action. Jan Oberg TFF director September 25, 2026 A couple of hours before the agreement was signed on September 22, 2026, I published the following 13 hypotheses about what it would most likely contain on TFF Substack (in English). I was wrong on only the first point. Contrary to what Trump had written on his Truth Social platform, it does not appear to come into force immediately. In fact, it turned out to be worse than even I had anticipated. After these hypotheses now come a number of reflections in light of what the agreement actually contains, and does not contain, as well as the way in which it has generally been presented by major media outlets and by the public-service broadcaster DR. My...
girl-5894831_1280
Below are TFF-related media mentions, comments, videos and social media posts published elsewhere but not on this homepage. We happen to catch and list only a fraction. Regarding video comments and debates, we recommend that you go to the TFF Video Channel on Substack where many of them are reproduced. Jan Oberg is a contributor to China Daily – 52 million daily clicks – and Global Times, CGTN and CCTV (the national television), China Investment, Xinhua News Agency and several others. Articles and videos on these media very often multiply into countless Chinese (and Western media) that re-post them from these main media. Thanks to The China Academy, his analyses, interviews and comments are frequently posted on YouTube channels such as Thinkers Forum and Wave Media. These videos are often re-posted on Bilibili (China’s YouTube), the China Content Center on TikTok, and on the Chinese edition of TikTok, Douyin.com. This means reaching hundreds of millions of viewers worldwide over a year. While there are too many to catch on all these...