Meeting of the Parliament

Meeting date: Tuesday, September 18, 2018

Official Report 1168KB pdf

---

United Nations International Day of Peace 2018

The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S5M-13646, in the name of Bill Kidd, on United Nations international day of peace 2018. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament recognises the UN International Day of Peace on 21 September 2018; highlights the work of the International Voluntary Service in promoting Peace Day 2018 in Scotland; acknowledges the UN understanding of peace to be structural, rather than just the absence of violence; notes that this understanding aligns with the UN Global Goals agenda, specifically Goal 16 of Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions, and further notes this year’s International Peace Day theme of “The Right to Peace”, which serves to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the Declaration of Human Rights.

17:02  

First of all, I thank all my colleagues who have stayed in the chamber, particularly those who signed and supported the motion that I now bring to debate. The motion recognises international day of peace 2018, which is celebrated on 21 September every year. This year, it falls on Friday of this week.

I welcome to the chamber members of the International Voluntary Service, who are working to raise the profile of this day in Scotland. Such promotion contributed to the debate taking place. On top of that, I thank and welcome to the chamber members of organisations that are part of the cross-party group on nuclear disarmament.

As we recognise this auspicious day, I would like to use the debate to explain what international peace looks like in practice, and why, as politicians, we have the capacity, mechanisms and responsibility to promote the UN international day of peace.

What does international peace actually look like? Does it mean no wars and no conflict? Ideally, yes it does. However, peace is a more useful concept when we use it as a goal for something complex and difficult, but not impossible to achieve. In international relations, the most prominent understanding of peace, seminally proposed by Johan Galtung in 1969, explained that peace relies on our capacity to create peace or, alternatively, our capacity to stop violence. Terming peace in that way stops it being an unattainable thing and makes it a real and tangible goal, towards which we can make a solid contribution.

Peace is the absence of violence. These days, we are lucky enough to live in times of peace in Scotland, but the normal experience of Scottish people nowadays is very different from what people had to live through and die for during large parts of the 20th century. Most notable is the sacrifice that was made by so many during world war one and world war two. Global peace day is an opportunity to recognise the contribution of all those who fought to provide peace for their children and grandchildren. As a result of their heavy and moving sacrifice, we can live in peace today.

The creation of a peaceful society for us to live in also allows us to consider a second layer to peace—a type of peace that involves the reduction of structural violence, or social inequality as it is better known these days. The United Nations global goals are one of the biggest movements towards reducing social inequality on an international scale. The goals provide action points for countries to tackle worldwide issues such as hunger and poverty, and give direction on how to promote quality education, renewable energy, innovation, infrastructure, climate change action, justice and human rights.

That routes back to the key point about our ability to reduce inequality. Structural violence or inequality, which the global goals work against, happens when a person’s wellbeing, whether mental or physical, is reduced below what it could and should reasonably be. Before the existence of institutions such as the United Nations, it would have been difficult to make an international effort to reduce hunger, but now we have a greater ability to do so.

I have a good example that explains the capacity to reduce violence or social inequality. If someone in the Victorian era had an illness such as cholera, they would have died from dehydration because, at the time, the medical profession did not know what cholera was or how to remedy it. Doctors did not have the knowledge or the ability to help such a person. However, if someone today were to lose their life to an easily preventable or remedied illness such as cholera, we could say that violence had been committed on that person.

If we have the capacity to reduce inequality, we must strive to find ways to do so. That could involve providing a fair distribution of medical supplies and access to doctors—the national health service is a fantastic example of that. If we have the ability to actively promote peace and the capacity to make a change, we have the responsibility to do so. As parliamentarians, we are privileged to be in a position to effect legislation that works towards peace. Whether by voting on the Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Bill to improve climate justice or by voting to enact the Child Poverty (Scotland) Act 2017, we have the ability to be ambitious in promoting peace.

As I mentioned, the United Nations increases our ability to promote peace, as it provides the opportunity for collaboration. In 2001, the General Assembly of the United Nations voted to mark the international day of peace as a day of non-violence and ceasefire. Since coming into being, the day has allowed the delivery of aid to vulnerable groups in conflict zones. An incredible example of that is how the organisation Peace One Day has worked with UNICEF and the World Health Organization for the immunisation of 1.4 million children against polio in insecure southern and eastern regions of Afghanistan. Since 2007, the Taliban has put down arms recurrently as part of the global peace day ceasefire to allow safe passage for aid workers.

It is clear that, in many cases, we have the ability to make a difference. For me personally, that means working towards nuclear disarmament. I want weapons that indiscriminately kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people to be abolished.

I make a plea to people who are undecided about nuclear weapons: please use this peace day to look at the work of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, Parliamentarians for Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament or the Scottish Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament for further explanation of the humanitarian impact of such weapons. The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had survivors, but they were not physically recognisable to their loved ones. That cannot be allowed to happen again.

As many members know, ICAN won the Nobel peace prize last year for its work in bringing about the United Nations’ Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. The next major step for nuclear disarmament will be the UN high-level conference, which I will attend. There, we will count out $1 trillion, which is the amount of money that is wasted on nuclear weapons every year around the world.

Whether in this matter of importance or another, when members can promote peace, I implore them to do so. It can be complex or difficult, but it is not impossible.

17:10  

I thank Bill Kidd for his persistence in regularly bringing these issues to the Parliament. I want to contribute today mainly to celebrate the volunteers who, worldwide, do so much fantastic work in the name of peace. Bill Kidd gave an outline of some of that work.

Many people look at the UN’s declarations and at the different UN days that are held and think that they are not important, but they are truly important. They bring many people together and put the issues at the forefront. The declarations, including the global goals and the declarations that Bill Kidd talked about, that are made by the UN—by nations coming together—tie together to create a big picture with citizens coming together to say, “This is not right—we have to work to make our world a better place”.

Fifty years after the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the UN made its declaration on human rights defenders. That is another very important declaration. Human rights defenders are volunteers who go out to defend the human rights workers who ensure that structural peace is maintained.

I should probably declare an interest, in that I have been a member of Peace Brigades International for many years. At the moment, I am not able to help with its work to the degree that others can, but I hope that some day I might be able to help more. I thank the members who supported the motion that I lodged about Peace Brigades International, which does fantastic work in seven countries currently: Colombia, Guatemala, Honduras, Kenya, Indonesia, Mexico and Nepal. Those are countries that experience violent conflict and, as Bill Kidd outlined in his motion and as we know from the work that he does, conflict can be within as well as between nations, and it can be about internal oppression as well as external aggression. The philosophy of Peace Brigades International is that

“lasting transformation of conflicts cannot come from outside, but must be based on the capacity and desires of local people.”

The volunteers who promote peace—whether they are from the International Voluntary Service, of which there are many strands, or organisations that do very specific work, such as Peace Brigades International—show on the ground that there is a different way that can be useful. The work of trained volunteers for Peace Brigades International involves physical accompaniment, capacity development workshops, advocacy tours and raising concerns for human rights defenders, which is another way that people who work in the field come together. All those organisations that come together truly believe in peace and in promoting peace. The responsibility of those of us who are fortunate enough to live in a peaceful society is to try to spread peace to others.

I could go on about this for a long time, Presiding Officer, but I am looking at the clock. I thank the International Voluntary Service for promoting peace day 2018 here in Scotland, and I thank those who do more than just pay money to Peace Brigades International and who go out to do the hard work on the ground. I urge those who do not know an awful lot about those organisations to look into them more deeply.

17:14  

I am delighted to take part today and I congratulate and commend Bill Kidd on securing the debate.

Each year, the international day of peace is observed around the world on 21 September, as we have heard. The UN General Assembly has declared that this day is devoted to strengthening the ideas of peace, within and among the nations and their peoples. Giving peace a chance—that is what we need to do.

Back in 2015, the United Nations member states adopted the ideas of 17 sustainable development goals, because they understood that it would not be possible to build a peaceful world without taking steps to achieve economic and social development for everyone to ensure that their rights were protected—that is vital. The goals cover a broad range of ideas including poverty, hunger, health, education, climate change, gender equality, water, energy, environment and social justice. Each and every one of them plays a part to ensure that we can achieve the goals that are set. The goals are the blueprint to achieve a better and more sustainable future for us all and a peaceful future. They address the global challenges that we all face, including those that are related to inequality, climate, the environment, justice and peace. We all have responsibility for them, and they should be achieved by 2030.

The theme for the international day of peace in 2018 is “The Right to Peace—the Universal Declaration of Human Rights at 70”. We thank all those who have played a part. We have heard about world war one, and we will also commemorate anniversaries including those for world war two. Individuals gave of their time, their talent and their lives to secure peace for all of us, and it is vital that we remember them.

The theme celebrates human rights. The idea that we should ensure human rights was a milestone. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was drafted by representatives with different legal and cultural backgrounds from all regions of the world and was vital. Back on 10 December 1948, a common standard was achieved for peoples of all nations. The universal declaration is the most translated document in the world; it is available in more than 500 languages and is as relevant today as it was on the day that it was adopted.

The declaration states in article 3 that

“Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person”.

Those elements build on the foundations of freedom, justice and peace around the world. All of us in society can play our part. It is important that we take these steps in our day-to-day lives. Each and every one of us in the chamber has an opportunity to do that. We can promote human rights. We can work with human rights. We can ensure human rights in our work, our home environments, our education in schools and colleges and even around the dinner table; if we talk about human rights, we can use the opportunities to ensure that human rights are everyone’s rights. We have the responsibility to maintain them to help to keep peace.

A peaceful society is one in which there is justice and equality for everyone. To fulfil that end, the UN’s prophecy is very true:

“Peace will enable a sustainable environment to take shape and a sustainable environment will ... help ... promote peace.”

17:18  

I congratulate Bill Kidd on his motion and thank him for the opportunity to debate such an important issue as peace in the lead-up to the international day on 21 September. I recognise the member’s tireless efforts: his travels to significant meetings across the globe to represent Scotland in the peace movement and his other work, including in the cross-party group in the Scottish Parliament on nuclear disarmament.

This year, we celebrate the 70th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a milestone document in the history of human rights, which—as Alexander Stewart said—states in article 3 that

“Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security”,

building the foundation of justice, freedom and peace among peoples and nations. Yet, many times, these fundamental principles that recognise our dignity and inalienable basic rights as human beings are being breached, not only in war-torn countries, dictatorship nations and developing states, but here.

We all have the right to peace in our homes, our communities and our countries and between countries. Sometimes we see peace as the mere absence of conflict and believe that we have achieved it in all its forms and shapes. We forget that peace is hardly ever a permanent status of the human race, but rather a fragile condition that we must pursue and protect at all times. We must all consider recommitting to working to reduce what Bill Kidd highlighted as structural inequalities globally and here in Scotland. We can and must continue to be leaders in climate change, for example, and on the other issues from right across Parliament, as well as the global sustainable development goals.

Even though we, in our free, democratic, reasonably prosperous and reasonably equal country are striving for peace, we still face major challenges when it comes to guaranteeing our citizens’ safety, and that will always be the case as long as nuclear weapons are on our soil. While we still have weapons of mass destruction, as well as the requirement to transport them, I am not quite sure that we can describe our nation as peaceful.

I have not been involved in the peace movement as much as other members have been, but I have been involved for a long time now and I strongly believe that today, more than ever, we need to bring more young people into the dialogue and ensure they have the appropriate knowledge and adequate tools to influence change and achieve lasting results.

In July, I had the honour to speak at the peace campaigning academy organised by CND education. It was a three-day event at which young people learned more about nuclear weapons and, more important, they found out about lobbying activities so that they can lobby us as their parliamentarians, communication tactics and ways to engage more in legislative processes. It was incredible and inspiring to be part of the peace academy along with Bill Kidd and Ross Greer, who were also there to share their ideas, and to hear about so many people’s commitment.

My thanks go to Quakers in Scotland for its briefing for tonight’s debate, which also notes the value of peace education for young people. The active involvement of younger generations is fundamental to ensuring that we create and sustain a society that is aware of the social issues and challenges of its communities and has the knowledge and power to shape its future.

I conclude by quoting a wonderful sentence from Mr Masashi, a survivor of the 1945 Hiroshima bombings, who said:

“Humans cannot coexist with nuclear weapons. Let us work together for a world of peace.”

17:23  

I join other members in congratulating Bill Kidd on bringing this debate to the chamber and thanking him for all the other work that he does. The UN international day of peace has a nice ring to it. I only wish that some people would show respect to the UN with regard to matters such as adhering to international law.

It is reassuring to hear my colleague Claudia Beamish talking about the peace academy and the work that went on with Ross Greer and Bill Kidd. The future lies in empowering young people and that way is to be commended.

The motion notes that the UN’s understanding of peace is

“structural, rather than just the absence of violence”

and that is clearly the case.

I look at some of the terminology that is used on the issue and I note that the UN Security Council asked the then general secretary Boutros Boutros-Ghali in 1992 to examine ways of improving peacekeeping and peace enforcement. Those are key phrases. In the paper “Agenda for Change”, he used the word “peace-building”, which means post-conflict social and political reconstruction activities. Peace is often associated with the aftermath of great terror that has been visited, invariably on the most vulnerable in our communities. Peace-building is also about preventing a repetition of that, and that will be achieved by dialogue, not by a proliferation of weapons, whatever they might be.

Peace-building is distinguished from peacekeeping and peacemaking by its insistence on society-wide reconciliation. The role of truth and reconciliation work in relation to conflict is to be commended; we have seen that work happening in South Africa and in the Balkans and I hope that it will continue to be the case in the north of Ireland. It is about state building, and that is about valuing the citizen. The citizen can play a role in prevention. Talking has never harmed anyone and we cannot commend it enough.

A number of mentions have been made of Trident and wasted money. I think that all arms money is wasted money; it is wasted energy. There are opportunities for citizens to display their position on that by encouraging divestment.

On the particulars of the motion, I thank the International Voluntary Service for its outstanding work. I looked at some of its values on its website, which I will shamelessly plagiarise now. The first value that is mentioned is service, involving

“locally led action for social change”.

I think that everyone in the chamber would commend that. As the IVS points out, that in turn supports behavioural change. If we are going to have sustainable peace, every effort must be made to reduce violence where it exists and to resolve conflict.

Respect is another value that is mentioned and I think that respect is key. It is about respecting and indeed valuing each other’s differences. The IVS states:

“We celebrate differences in nationality, ethnicity, gender and background.”

I think that the world is richer for all our differences, not weaker because of them.

Integrity is another of the IVS values, as is ambition. We all have ambitions—we have some very refined ambitions regarding nuances of policies here. However, surely the one thing that we can all throw our weight behind is an ambition to see a world where there is collaboration and innovation—two of the other values listed by the IVS—and, most important, where there is peace.

Mention has been made of water, food and education as part of the UN global goals agenda, and of human rights. Human rights bring with them responsibilities; we all have responsibilities and I think that there is a tendency in the so-called civilised west to think that a lot of these issues are for the third world or the developing world, call it what you will. The Scottish Greens have a mantra of people, planet and peace; we would see those as being the priorities—in common with a lot of the individual members in here, I think.

I thank Bill for bringing his motion to the chamber and I commend the motion.

I gently remind members to use full names in the chamber, please.

17:27  

On UN international day of peace 2018, we will devote ourselves to strengthening the ideals of peace within and among all nations and peoples. A peaceful society is one in which there is justice and equality for everyone.

I am very grateful to my colleague Bill Kidd for securing this important debate, which means that we can come together to observe, as many others will around the world, international day of peace. Bill Kidd has many years of service to the peace movement; I am hugely grateful for all his hard work and commitment to the cause.

The theme for 2018 is “The Right to Peace—The Universal Declaration of Human Rights at 70”, celebrating of the 70th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which is a milestone document in the history of human rights. Drafted by representatives from different legal and cultural backgrounds from all regions of the world, the declaration was adopted by the UN General Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948 as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations. The universal declaration is the most translated document in the world: it is available in more than 500 languages. It is as relevant today as it was on the day on which it was adopted.

The universal declaration states, in article 3:

“Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.”

Those elements build the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world, but the universal declaration does not include a separate article on the right to peace. That is why, this year, we are being asked to think about what “the right to peace” means. Those who wish to get involved in that global discussion can share their thoughts and ideas on social media using #peaceday and #standup4humanrights.

When I think about peace, I think about more than the absence of violence or war. I think, too, about a just and equal society in which everyone can achieve their full potential, in which no one is left behind and in which we help, nurture and protect those who need it.

Of course, as well as thinking and talking, we can all act. As individuals, we can seek peaceful resolution of conflict in our everyday lives when disagreements arise around us. Even taking small steps, we can be part of the solution. We can prevent an injustice in our groups of friends in school, college or the workplace. We can adopt a non-violent approach to solving and reporting potential crimes, including online bullying. We can speak up when others are at risk, and we can simply stand with others. Whether we choose to do that at the dinner table, in the street, at school, in a workplace, in the media, in a Parliament or at a nuclear submarine base, it all matters and it all helps. Human rights are everyone’s rights. On international peace day, let us remember that we can all act, and that each and every one of us can stand up for rights every day.

17:30  

I welcome the United Nations international day of peace and I thank Bill Kidd for bringing this members’ business debate to the chamber. This Friday, nations around the world will mark their commitment to peace on a day that has been shared globally since 1981.

Peace should never be taken for granted, so having time to recognise its significance in our everyday lives must be appreciated. Peace is inherently linked to our rights as citizens and humans. Only by having those rights secured and protected can nations and individuals regain their dignity. Together, they act as the core foundation for a peaceful society, wherever we are.

I am sure that Parliament will join me in supporting the good work of the United Nations, which is an organisation that has worked long and hard to prevent the onset of wars in some of the most dangerous environments. It serves to calm disputes, to restore peace when armed conflict arises and to promote lasting peace for countries that have emerged from the troubles of war. I pay tribute to the United Nations for its tireless efforts, which are evident in its many peacekeeping missions throughout the years. We can look back on its contribution to the restoration of stability in Sierra Leone, Namibia and Cambodia, among others.

I am sorry to interrupt, Mr Corry. I can hear you, but I suspect that others cannot, because your microphone is pointing away from you.

I beg your pardon.

Before you continue, I will just say that I hope that you will, if the official report staff did not hear you, be able to pass your material to them, rather than rehearse it.

I apologise. I will do that.

Thank you.

As I said, I pay tribute to the United Nations for its tireless efforts, which are evident in its many peacekeeping missions throughout the years.

I fully agree with Maurice Corry’s point about respect for the United Nations. In his opinion, does that apply to resolutions that are passed that condemn countries or which ask countries to act in line with international law—for instance, Israel?

That depends on the circumstances, and every situation is different. There is no common plan for every one. We have to be very careful before making a judgment, in that case.

The UN believes that its successes help to foster a culture of peace that opens the door for vital development goals to be reached, including eradication of poverty and hunger, promotion of universal education and reduction of child mortality.

The international day of peace offers us time to reflect not only on how nations co-operate with each other, but on what more can be done actively to obtain freedom, opportunity and protection. From my experience in the armed forces, I have witnessed what life is like for people who do not live in countries that are free from war and injustice. Having had those military experiences, I can wholly appreciate the security that we enjoy within our borders, while favouring deterrence by the presence of UN forces, which has been of enormous benefit in the prevention of land conflict. I believe that that is a necessity that we should appreciate in our goal of lasting security and the acceptance of every human right.

This year, the theme for peace day is “The Right to Peace—The Universal Declaration of Human Rights at 70”. The universal declaration is a monumental document that charts the necessity of human rights and sets a shared high standard for their protection.

Without freedom of expression, the right to partake in public affairs and the right to live in a free and just world, individuals cannot enjoy a lasting and genuine culture of peace within their nations. In the current international climate, human trafficking, murder and sexual violence are still major threats to our aim to have peaceful societies. Unthinkable and widespread atrocities in nations including Syria and Somalia lead to mass displacement and civil unrest. The theme for this week’s international day of peace asks us what the right to peace means to us. It surely means that further international co-operation and the support of the United Nations are needed to deal with the challenges that such nations face.

We can participate in peace day this Friday in a wealth of ways, whether through our schools, sports, the arts or the environment. I am pleased that the international day of peace will be highlighted in events throughout Scotland. The University of Dundee is offering a talk on the democracy and security of the Gambia, which is entering a new political era and seeks to strengthen its links with international partners. Allanton world peace sanctuary in Dumfriesshire provides the opportunity to plant peace poles, which are universally recognised as a symbol for peace. It is estimated that more than 200,000 peace poles have been planted around the world since the project began in Japan in 1976. In Glasgow, the public are invited to participate in one minute’s silence followed by meditation to acknowledge and celebrate peace day.

I hope that, with this year’s international day of peace, we recognise what has been done, and what can still be done, to further co-operation within and among nations.

Two members still wish to speak in the debate. Therefore, I am minded to accept a motion without notice, under rule 8.14.3 of the standing orders, to extend the debate by up to 30 minutes.

Motion moved,

That, under Rule 8.14.3, the debate be extended by up to 30 minutes.—[Bill Kidd]

Motion agreed to.

17:36  

I, too, thank Bill Kidd for bringing the debate to the chamber and for his long-standing commitment to peace and to ridding the world of nuclear weapons.

The theme of this year’s international day of peace is “The Right to Peace—The Universal Declaration of Human Rights at 70”. That is entirely fitting, because everyone has a right to peace. It is a fundamental human right but, sadly, that right is being eroded throughout the world, as we witness horrific scenes of needless violence and wars taking place in far too many places. The heartbreaking scenes that we see daily on the news of children suffering as collateral damage or, in some cases, being specifically targeted, defy belief. How can humanity become so badly eroded in a person, or collectively in a regime, that that is thought to be acceptable? The world looks on helplessly as children suffer in Syria, the Yemen and places that have yet to make the headlines. How many more must die or be maimed before the regimes that are responsible stop the killing?

The Quakers’ briefing, for which I thank them, states their belief that Scotland can lead other countries in peace, and that peace is, far from being passive, an active thing that must be pursued, encouraged and performed continually to exist. There is a difference between merely keeping the peace and actively encouraging conflict resolution. The Quakers rightly say that, when the world appears to be so divided and is becoming less tolerant and compassionate, Scotland should make a commitment to learning about and modelling peace as a first step to becoming a world leader in the area.

There is nothing that I—and, I suspect, everyone in the chamber—would want more, but until the Westminster Government stops sending arms to regimes that use them to maim children and to cause widespread and horrific suffering, the killing will go on. Our nation—the nation of Scotland—cannot become a peacekeeper or actively encourage conflict resolution until it has control over its own independent defence industry. I say to the Westminster Government that it must not send arms to countries that kill children in my name, my family’s name or Scotland’s name.

My 98-year-old father-in-law, who is now sadly in his last months, fled for his life in a coal ship from Dunkirk. Like all veterans, he lost best friends and saw things that a 17-year-old should never have to see or do. Until recently, he said little about his traumatic experience during the second world war, but the family now knows that he believes that wars do not solve anything and that peaceful resolution must be sought at all costs. I agree with him, despite the achievements and sacrifices that many people made in that war, which had a legitimate aim.

We can never stop countries engaging in civil war or stop a country committing violence against its people. However, I say again that we must not be enablers and that we must not use force on a quest for peace. We know from experience in Iraq and Afghanistan that it does not work. Neither should we forget that war has not broken out between European countries while they have been members of the European Union—but that is another debate entirely.

Of course, peace is not just about stopping war; it is about how we live our lives in common humanity, as Bill Kidd outlined and as many others have said.

António Guterres, the secretary-general of the United Nations, has asked us all to speak up for gender equality, to promote inclusive societies and to do our part at school, work and home while talking to friends and family to stand up for human rights and call out those who abuse them. Every step counts. Let us all act to promote and defend human rights for all, in the name of lasting peace for us and for future generations.

17:40  

I thank my colleague Bill Kidd for the opportunity to speak in this debate. I admit that I had not intended to speak but his speech was so powerful, compelling and moving that I felt moved to respond and share some of my thoughts.

Before I do so, I welcome Ben Macpherson to his new role. I know that he is a champion campaigner for peace at home and internationally, and I have every confidence that he will excel in his new position. I very much look forward to his response to this debate.

Two days ago, I had the great pleasure of attending a service in Paisley abbey to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Royal Air Force and to remember the sacrifice over the past century of airmen and women, particularly in the battle of Britain. Listening to the remarks during this debate, I reflected on that service and thought about two of the key lessons that we learn from the two global catastrophes of the first and second world wars, with particular regard to what they tell us about peace and how fragile it is.

It is well known to any high school student of history that the first world war can perhaps be characterised as having happened by accident or as the result of misunderstanding, misreading and people being compelled into taking action. Clearly, there were events that led up to it, but it was a conflict that no one wanted or needed and which, until very shortly before it occurred, not many people saw coming. That speaks to the importance of communication, understanding, giving people the benefit of the doubt, a willingness to empathise with other people and understand their positions and situations and the need to take opportunities to steer off catastrophe long before it happens.

The lessons from how the second world war came about are somewhat different. They concern issues around the gradual erosion of what is fundamental to peace: civic society; an independent judiciary; free, open and transparent elections; a strong democracy; a free press; and the ability to criticise. Fundamentally, however, what is required in such societies is a willingness on our parts to engage and communicate with each other and a common set of understandings of what counts as truth and fact. The lessons that can be learned from the decay of Weimar into what emerged in Germany in the 1930s, and the consequent conflagration that engulfed Europe, are as valuable as ever.

We are in a global society, particularly in the west, that has seen the rise of fake news and of tribal and entrenched politics where the two sides cannot speak to each other and instead seek the easy media hit rather than searching for the truth, simplifying issues rather than admitting complexity. That is a danger, because it can result in the breakdown of civil society. The common thread throughout the debate has been that peace is not something that is natural; it is something that is hard won. It is something that must be built and rebuilt constantly. It is such a fragile entity.

As we mark the UN international day of peace 2018—as we look across the world and look at our democratic and civic institutions that are under threat from extremes on both sides of the political spectrum—it is imperative that we recommit ourselves to building peace not just in a global sense, but at home, with regard to how we conduct ourselves in our daily lives and in our attitudes towards each other. I hope that that is a message that will resonate from this chamber today.

17:45  

It is a privilege to conclude this illuminating and important debate. As other members have done, I thank Bill Kidd for securing the debate. It is important for all of us to think about not just the day of peace, but the wider points that have been described and commented on by several members.

The subject of the motion is of interest to me not just in my capacity as Minister for Europe, Migration and International Development; it is close to me on a personal level. I declare an interest: as an idealistic 20-year-old who was disheartened by the Iraq war in 2003 but who was determined to do something in the cause of peace, I walked from Edinburgh to London to raise awareness of peace day that year. I then worked for Peace One Day, which Bill Kidd mentioned, in 2005.

I did that work because I believed then—as I believe now—that a more peaceful world is possible. By spreading awareness through debates such as this and through the activism that has been described by members across the chamber, we can promote a more peaceful world. Peace day gives us the chance to reflect and act on that sense of common purpose. In support of peace day, the former secretary-general of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, who sadly passed away this summer, said that any moment, whether it is a day or a week, when people can get the competence to pause, to think and to reflect on what they are doing to their own people and to the environment will be a great achievement

“and I will support it 100%”.

As Bill Kidd referenced, that sense of reflection can have significant practical implications, whether it is the International Voluntary Service raising awareness in Scotland, as I did through my walk to London and as others have done through their activism to create peace in our communities, or whether it is what Bill Kidd described as the real practical lifesaving implications of peace day. For example, the World Health Organization, UNICEF and the Afghan Ministry of Public Health immunised 1.4 million children against polio in 2007 and 1.6 million children against polio in 2008. That shows that the concepts of peace can have a real impact on saving lives and protecting communities.

It is clear from the debate that Scotland has a role to play as a nation that does its bit to promote peace overseas and endeavours to be a good global citizen. Our domestic policies should reflect the fair and sustainable approach that we aim to achieve in our international engagement.

One of the key contributions that Scotland can make to promoting peace is our commitment to all the UN goals, not just goal 16, as part of the structural peace-building that other members have mentioned. The global goals provide an integrated framework to achieve a better and more sustainable future for all, by addressing common challenges that relate to poverty, inequality, the climate, peace and justice.

The Scottish Government has made a dual commitment to the global goals, through our domestic work in Scotland and through our contribution to international development work. Our international development strategy outlines the approach that we will take between now and 2030 to help to reduce global poverty and promote sustainable development and human rights.

Partnership and collaboration will continue to be the foundation for our future development work. We will build on our existing bilateral partnerships with Malawi, Zambia, Rwanda and Pakistan, and work across borders in pursuit of those goals by addressing the shared challenges that our world faces. We also have our humanitarian emergency fund for moments of crisis.

We are conscious that, in order to act with credibility in other places, we must work to protect and promote human rights and to address poverty and inequalities here in Scotland. That is why our domestic policy has at its heart sustainable and inclusive economic growth and our commitment to a fairer Scotland.

Just as we are committed to achieving greater social justice, so we are committed to protecting human rights. The UN’s 2030 agenda for sustainable development is grounded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was adopted 70 years ago.

We in Scotland are committed to giving further and better effect to the international human rights standards that the declaration encapsulates. That commitment to making rights real in people’s everyday lives is reflected in the new national performance framework, which has an explicit human rights indicator. It is also demonstrated by the Scottish Government’s work to fulfil our obligations across the seven core UN human rights treaties to which the UK is a party. That includes measures to tackle poverty and promote fair work; to eliminate racial discrimination; to promote gender equality and disabled people’s rights; and to use the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child as a framework to embed children’s rights in all decision making, which is particularly important in this year of young people.

As the programme for government demonstrates, equality is firmly embedded throughout all the Government’s activities. That starts at the heart of Government, where we have one of the few gender-balanced Cabinets in the world.

All that matters when aspiring to the ideal of peace day. As other members have said, creating the structural conditions to support international peace at a domestic level supports global societies that are managing inequalities and conflict.

In our refreshed international framework, we have embedded a focus on tackling inequality. That approach means that all our international engagement is guided by our commitment to the universally recognised values that are enshrined in human rights treaties. Such work includes the support that we provide to refugees, asylum seekers and our communities through the pioneering and collaborative approach of our new Scots refugee assistance strategy.

Much can be said about peace day and Scotland’s role in it. Scotland has a unique contribution to offer the world through our people’s expertise in education, health improvement, climate change, renewable energy, human rights and research, along with our innovative partnership approach to international development, which will continue to evolve through our international development work. We already make a significant contribution by sharing our particular knowledge, skills and technical expertise globally, and we will continue to do so. By taking a fair, sustainable and inclusive approach, we demonstrate that we are a country that promotes human rights and democratic values and which supports the structures and global efforts to promote international peace.

In this time of flux and challenge, peace day on Friday and in the years ahead provides a chance to promote ceasefire and non-violence not just for 24 hours but in the wider context of social justice, the global goals and sustainable development. In that spirit, and in the words of Kofi Annan that I quoted, I support peace day 100 per cent and encourage all to mark it this Friday in what they do on social media, in their communities or in their everyday lives.

Meeting closed at 17:53.