Deficit Has Stalled Disarmament Efforts – UN Representative

Adedeji Ebo, is currently Director and Deputy to the High Representative, UN Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA), He spoke about the challenges facing multilateralism and how international arms control adaptive response.

Question: Your work focuses on conventional weapons disarmament. How do the strategies, partnerships, andpp goals differ from those in chemical or nuclear disarmament?

Adedeji Ebo: Categorizing disarmament by weapon types (conventional, nuclear, biological, chemical) is of limited value, as weapons and conflict domains are interconnected. For example, technological advancements increase risks, like cyberattacks on nuclear systems. Disarmament is about people, not just weapons, and is a political process reliant on cooperation and political will. Efforts like the 1997 Antipersonnel Mine Ban Convention show how states, civil society, and survivors can make a difference. Most countries have committed to banning these weapons, but adherence to treaties depends on political will. Small arms fuel conflict and crime, with 260,000 deaths in 2021 alone. Meanwhile, 12,500 nuclear weapons still threaten global security. While disarmament approaches differ—WMDs focus on elimination, conventional weapons on control—the core goal remains peace. Strategies and partnerships, involving states and civil society, are consistent across all weapon types.

Question: Secretary-General Guterres once spoke of a “trust deficit disorder,” noting a loss of faith in political institutions. UNODA’s strategic plan also references this issue in multilateralism. Do you agree with this assessment, and has your experience supported or challenged this view?

Adedeji Ebo: Unfortunately, the trust deficit is not only persisting but growing. The Secretary-General recently said the world is at an “inflection point in history,” with people “turning their backs on the values of trust and solidarity.” Yet, trust and solidarity are essential for a peaceful and sustainable future. Our global response and multilateral system are indeed struggling to effectively address today’s complex and rapidly evolving challenges.

Question: Has the decline in faith in multilateralism affected your work in disarmament?

Adedeji Ebo: Unfortunately, yes. The trust deficit has stalled disarmament efforts, as insecurity and instability grow. Disarmament reflects the state of global affairs, and as trust diminishes, nations tend to arm rather than disarm. The risk of nuclear weapons use is the highest in decades, and advances in conventional and emerging technologies like AI and drones are complicating conflicts, including in cyber and space domains. Geopolitical tensions are rising, and without trust, disarmament faces bleak prospects. The imbalance in the global political system only deepens this crisis, affecting stability and security.

Question: Is multilateral disarmament more effective than bilateral efforts, like a non-proliferation treaty between Russia and the U.S.?

Adedeji Ebo: Multilateral solutions are more effective because they create obligations for a larger group of countries, ideally with universal application. International norms and institutions supporting peace and security are stronger when more nations are involved.

Question: How do your disarmament projects impact faith in multilateral cooperation?

Adedeji Ebo: Just as resorting to arms in response to the “trust deficit disorder” is a choice, so is cooperation. Multilateral efforts build trust and enhance the prospects for disarmament. The UN’s “New Agenda for Peace” emphasizes disarmament, arms control, and non-proliferation, advocating for global, regional, and national solutions. It focuses on human-centered disarmament, controlling conventional weapons, regulating new technologies, and fostering confidence-building measures.

Question: has the range of stakeholders in disarmament efforts expanded, and what some of the newer, unconventional players?

Adedeji Ebo: Addressing global challenges requires diverse partnerships. Engaging with various stakeholders amplifies the UN’s voice, integrates different perspectives, and enhances our disarmament efforts. Our 2020 stakeholder mapping revealed over 100 entities, including regional organizations, think tanks, and civil society, with 40% of our activities coordinated with these groups. Newer players include climate change advocates and youth, through initiatives like Youth4Disarmament. We are developing a partnership strategy to better align with our mission and values, integrate non-traditional partners, and involve youth in disarmament. This approach aims to diversify support and build a culture of peace through education and engagement.

Question: How can disarmament link to development and human rights? Are these processes simultaneous, or does disarmament need to progress first for sustainable development?

Adedeji Ebo: The connection between disarmament and development is well-established. Article 26 of the UN Charter links disarmament to economic well-being, and Agenda 2030 includes disarmament in sustainable development through Action . The New Agenda for Peace emphasizes how disarmament can directly support development and UN processes. For example, controlling small arms and light weapons (SALW) helps prevent violence and fosters sustainable peace. Disarmament and development are mutually reinforcing: progress in one area supports progress in the other. The Secretary-General’s New Agenda for Peace promotes a holistic, people-centered approach, integrating disarmament with development and human rights. Our Office is working to bridge traditional silos, integrating disarmament into development agendas through initiatives like SALIENT and by incorporating SALW issues into UN country analyses and development frameworks.

Question: Global military spending in 2022, largely due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. While this setback affects disarmament efforts short-term, could it boost support for multilateral disarmament in the long run?

Adedeji Ebo: The global security landscape is increasingly complex, with rising military expenditures driven by geopolitical tensions and modernization of weapons. SIPRI’s data shows military spending reached $2,240 billion in 2022, a 3.7% increase from the previous year. This trend, accelerated by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, is expected to continue. In this volatile environment, transparency is crucial for arms control and disarmament. It builds confidence, prevents miscalculations, and encourages mutual restraint. By promoting transparency and awareness of multilateral instruments like the UN Register of Conventional Arms, we can support disarmament. The increase in military spending could, paradoxically, foster support for disarmament if it prompts a global reassessment of priorities. However, if it fuels fears of inevitable conflict, it could have the opposite effect. The outcome depends on our collective response.