Conflict Prevention and Peaceful Resolution of Disputes: High-level Open Debate*
Tomorrow (22 July), the Security Council will hold a high-level open debate on “Promoting International Peace and Security through Multilateralism and Peaceful Settlement of Disputes”. Mohammad Ishaq Dar, Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs, is expected to chair the meeting, which is a signature event of Pakistan’s July Council presidency. UN Secretary-General António Guterres is the anticipated briefer. More than 80 member states are expected to participate in the open debate.
The Security Council is also expected to vote on a draft resolution proposed by Pakistan on strengthening mechanisms for the peaceful settlement of disputes.
Open Debate
Pakistan has circulated a concept note ahead of tomorrow’s meeting, which highlights the growing challenge of unresolved disputes leading to protracted conflicts. These are exacerbated by geopolitical rivalries, non-compliance with international obligations, the non-implementation of Security Council resolutions, and the under-utilisation of the UN Charter’s Chapter VI tools—from negotiation and mediation to judicial settlement.
Despite the adoption of Security Council resolutions 1366 of 30 August 2001, 1625 of 14 September 2005, and 2171 of 21 August 2014 and some modest success over the years on this issue, UN efforts have been largely inadequate in preventing today’s conflicts. The declining and, in many cases, ineffective use of Chapter VI mechanisms worldwide in recent years has prompted calls for more decisive measures. Action 16 of the Pact for the Future, adopted by world leaders at the Summit of the Future in September 2024, urges political backing and adequate resourcing for all the tools envisaged under Chapter VI. (For background and more information, see the brief on conflict prevention and peaceful resolution of disputes in our July 2025 Monthly Forecast.)
The concept note for tomorrow’s meeting draws directly on Action 16 of the Pact for the Future by reaffirming the imperative of the pacific settlement of disputes and advocating for the intensified exercise of diplomacy and mediation, active use of the Secretary-General’s good offices, adequate resources for the UN to lead and support mediation and preventive diplomacy, and timely engagement with the Security Council on matters that may threaten international peace and security—all grounded in the political will required to realise the Pact’s vision of defusing tensions, promoting cooperation, and strengthening multilateral peace efforts.
Tomorrow’s meeting offers members an opportunity to refocus the Council on the fundamentals of Chapter VI, which many—including Pakistan—believe have been overshadowed by crisis management. It will allow speakers to reflect on ways to fully utilise Charter-mandated dispute settlement tools, close gaps in the implementation of past conflict prevention resolutions, empower the Secretary-General to lead preventive diplomacy, and broaden the Security Council’s remit beyond managing crises towards securing lasting peace.
The concept note poses four questions to help guide the discussion at tomorrow’s meeting:
- How can the Security Council better leverage the full potential of Charter-mandated tools for the pacific settlement of disputes?
- What challenges impede effective implementation of Council resolutions, and how can they be overcome?
- What more can be done to strengthen the Secretary-General’s role in preventive diplomacy?
- Beyond crisis management, what additional steps can the Security Council take for the peaceful settlement of disputes and resolving conflicts for lasting peace and security?
Guterres is likely to underscore that dialogue and diplomacy remain indispensable in today’s fractured world, reiterating that the pursuit of peace is at the very heart of the UN’s purpose. He is expected to urge member states to translate their commitments under Action 16 of the Pact for the Future into concrete cooperation to defuse tensions. He may also reaffirm the UN’s readiness to lead and support these vital preventive efforts, while emphasising the importance of ensuring that the organisation is adequately resourced to do so effectively.
Several member states are expected to reaffirm their full support for the Secretary-General’s good offices and the UN’s mediation capacity, including the work of the Mediation Support Unit of the Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs (DPPA). Many might point to specific crises in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa to illustrate how disputes not addressed through Chapter VI can quickly spiral into open violence, underscoring the imperative of exhausting every avenue for peaceful settlement before conflict erupts or reoccurs.
In light of the financing crisis facing the UN and the ongoing UN80 initiative of the Secretary-General for a more streamlined, impactful, and fiscally responsible organisation, budgetary considerations are poised to loom large in tomorrow’s open debate. Some delegations are expected to emphasise that, even in a constrained fiscal environment, conflict prevention and Chapter VI tools must remain a priority. They might note in this regard that prevention is more cost-effective than resolving conflicts. Others may caution that Action 16 commitments should be implemented efficiently, by leveraging existing resources and emphasising innovative methods to strengthen the UN’s preventive diplomacy and mediation capacities without incurring additional costs.
Some participants may call on the Security Council to develop a more strategic partnership with the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) in support of the UN’s conflict prevention and peacebuilding efforts. There may be references to the review of the Peacebuilding Architecture that is currently underway, including discussion of how the Council and the PBC can work together more effectively to prevent conflicts and support UN efforts to ensure lasting peace.
Several delegations may also underline the inextricable links among development, peace and security, and human rights—arguing that this interdependence reinforces the case for Resident Coordinators (RCs) to play a greater role in political engagement and the exercise of good offices. As the UN faces a tightening fiscal environment, empowering RCs to undertake early, context-specific diplomacy offers a cost-effective way to prevent escalation, bridge peace and development agendas, and make full use of existing UN presence in different contexts.
Negotiations on the Draft Resolution
It seems that the negotiations on the draft resolution were relatively smooth. Pakistan circulated the first draft of the text on 2 July. After two rounds of negotiations, it circulated a revised text on 17 July and placed it under a 24-hour silence procedure. Russia broke silence, followed by the US, the UK, and several European Council members, who coordinated informally. After two more silence procedures, Pakistan circulated the fourth revised draft on 21 July and put it directly in blue without an additional silence procedure.
Pakistan opted for a draft text that draws heavily on previously agreed language and on Action 16 of the Pact for the Future. The draft resolution in blue commits the Security Council to the UN Charter’s pacific settlement tools, including through utilising the investigative mechanism outlined in Article 34. It also urges all member states to use Article 33 mechanisms for dispute resolution; to support the Secretary-General’s mediation and preventive diplomacy efforts, which should involve well-trained experts that are geographically and linguistically diverse; to enhance cooperation with regional bodies and civil society; and to promote inclusive participation, especially of women and youth, in conflict prevention and dispute resolution efforts. The draft text in blue requests that the Secretary-General submit recommendations for further strengthening the mechanisms for the peaceful settlement of disputes one year after the resolution’s adoption, and that the Council convene an open debate to review them.
While the original draft envisaged an annual, standing debate on conflict prevention—akin to the Council’s annual open debates on thematic issues such as the protection of civilians, women, peace and security (WPS), and children and armed conflict—some Council members objected to a yearly cycle, citing concerns about potential budgetary implications. These members insisted that future discussions be limited to reviewing the Secretary-General’s recommendations one year after adoption—and thereafter only as decided by the Council—to safeguard preventive diplomacy tools without imposing new financial burdens.
Some members proposed language specifying that Chapter VI tools should be anchored in international humanitarian law (IHL)—reaffirming non-derogable norms like the prohibition on the use of force and the protection of civilians—and accompanied by clear accountability pathways, whether judicial, arbitral, or hybrid. One European Council member, backed by several other members, requested the addition of language on Article 27(3) of the UN Charter, which requires the recusal of any member state party to a dispute from voting on a Chapter VI resolution. Others rejected references to Article 27(3) and cautioned against mentioning binding referral mechanisms that could erode state consent. The final text was softened to recommend the use of suitable peaceful settlement procedures—encouraging but not mandating Chapter VI mechanisms—and makes no explicit reference to IHL.
France and Slovenia, supported by other European members, encouraged stronger language on WPS and the role of civil society. Despite initial resistance from the US and others, the final text emphasises “the importance of integrating inclusive approaches to peaceful settlement of disputes, also ensuring full, equal and meaningful participation of women, and meaningful participation of youth in conflict prevention and dispute resolution efforts”, although references to “safe” participation were ultimately dropped in an apparent compromise.
Some members supported incorporating references to early warning mechanisms alongside diplomatic, mediation, and confidence-building measures to prevent disputes from escalating, highlighting the value of informal early warning exchanges, such as those between Council members and PBC chairs. However, others cautioned against discussing situations not on the Council’s agenda. In an apparent compromise, references to early warning were removed from the text’s operative paragraphs, while one reference was retained in the preambular section.
___________________________________________________________
**Post-script: On 22 July, the Security Council unanimously adopted resolution 2788 on strengthening mechanisms for the peaceful settlement of disputes.
