Root Causes and Deep Drivers of Global Turbulence

Get Full Text in PDF

Abstract

“Desperate Hope”, which predates Trump’s return to power, articulates profound concern for the state of global civilisation, emphasizing the fragility of human resilience amidst escalating turbulence. It analyses systemic issues driving global instability and proposes pathways for sustainable progress. Some updated data is included here. The following analysis identifies the root causes and deep drivers of global turbulence as presented in the text, organized into thematic categories, evaluating interconnections. The essay’s central thesis is that the survival of our first truly planetary civilisation hinges on preserving universal values—enshrined in documents like the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Millennium Declaration, Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and more recently, the Pact for the Future—while addressing structural deficiencies in global governance.

1. Overview of the Text

“Desperate Hope” begins with a stark acknowledgment of global challenges: wars, climate change, pandemics, nuclear risks, market concentration, apex wealth, corruption, AI and governance failures. It is argued that these crises threaten the aspirations of humanity as outlined in foundational international frameworks, and the subsequent exponential growth in international treaties, conventions and global law. It critiques the outdated structures of global institutions, particularly the United Nations, and calls for reforms to address democratic deficits, incorporate new societal actors (e.g., civil society and corporations), and manage emerging domains like AI/QC, robotics, outer space, deep ocean and genetic resources. The essay concludes with a hopeful vision, emphasizing the need for collective action, ethical leadership, and a renewed commitment to universal human values and international obligations, to navigate the “perfect storm” of global turbulence and avert supremacist tyrannies.

2. Introduction

Human civilisation is much older than most people realise. It is not just an invention of ancient Sumerians, Egyptians, Greeks or Romans, let alone the cultures of the Indus, archaic Mesoamerica, or the Yangtze. Even long before Göbekli Tepe, humanity was engaged in sophisticated collaboration, producing the Palaeolithic Acheulian, Mousterian and Aurignacian industries, art and ornament going back hundreds of thousands of years, and evidence of musical instruments, cultures and spirituality, including apparently by our Neanderthal and possibly Denisovan predecessors.

The point of this recitation of antiquity is to debunk the exceptionalism claimed by some, notably now the ‘Third Rome’ (Moscow), in its neo-imperialism. There can be no room left today for unique claims to ancient heritage, let alone modern supremacism, whether in the Kremlin, Kyivan Rus, Jerusalem, Cairo, Brussels, Capitol Hill or any Forbidden City. Only lately have we achieved a global civilisation with agreed norms and laws, and with common global institutions, after hundreds of thousands of years of human effort. But our “progress” has led us to mass extinctions, as human domination exhausts our ecosystems and biosphere, and as a few egoistic strongmen dominate humanity itself, increasingly seeking survivalist “rapture” in a growing superstition of “end times”.

Yet genetics tells us we ALL descend from ancient civilisations of a thousand years or more ago. Ancient migrations with interweaving generations of DNA and the exponential magnitude of our ancestral genealogy as we multiply two by two by two, etcetera lead us to realise that, generally, for any individual alive a thousand years ago on any continent, either no descendants survive today, or almost all of those on that continent are so descended. In varying degrees, Europeans have a mix of Celtic, Roman, Gothic, Slav, and Barbarian ancestry, rooted in Yamnaya (20-50%), Neolithic farmer (20-50%), and hunter-gatherer (5-20%) DNA; and including Arab/Muslim (5-10% in Iberia, Balkans), Jewish (1-5% in central/eastern Europe), African (1-5% in the south), and Asiatic (1-10% in eastern Europe). With the exception of Africa, most of humanity has some Neanderthal/Denisovan DNA. Beyond cherishing our heritage, we must preserve the inherent human dignity of all peoples through the institutionalised solidarity painstakingly developed with decades of hitherto successful multilateralism. We are more than our nations, more than our myths, and need a globalisation of compassion and conscience, not a debasing instrumentalization of the person.

Multilateralism, which underpins the institutional expression of dialogue, negotiation, compromise, and common prioritisation on a global scale, espouses common values, as universal, and aspires to pluralism through diversity. We may think: much of this is in question today, but it has always been. The challenge is to understand the relative strengths, the trends, and the factors that play in determining interim outcomes, for there is no ultimate result—we are in a world of flux and of continuous evolution to a point, theoretical if not teleological, let alone theological, a fulfilment we know not, although Pierre Teilhard de Chardin and Vladimir Vernadsky had some thoughts on that in their Noosphere. Our time horizons are also paramount determinants and benchmarks, as we set goals with targets: the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030, de-carbonization by 2050, and so on. Our experience tells us we can progress, even if we falter presently.

An era of huge biodiversity loss and mass extinctions is upon us. Oceans and seas are polluted, with growing dead zones. Our atmosphere is increasingly toxic. Our potable water is scarce. Polar ice caps are melting and glaciers are disappearing. In 2020/2021, we lost seven years of human development, falling back to the position in 2016, slowly managing lately to recover somewhat, albeit not beyond the pre-COVID-19 pandemic level. Another deadly pandemic of catastrophic proportions looms, as well as the increasingly pervasive intrusion in all life forms of toxic PFAS “forever chemicals”.

It is getting worse: the Global Human Development Index (HDI) has not yet recovered beyond the level before the COVID-19 pandemic hit, with persistent inequalities between rich and poor nations, exacerbated by economic concentration and polarization, hindering full recovery—all factors that these latest developments will aggravate further. The latest 2023/2024 Human Development Report indicates the world is falling short. It may be more accurate to say it risks falling apart.

The UN and other world institutions require radical surgery, greater representativity and democratisation, and dramatically boosted resources to restore global trust, security, and stability. The ‘Summit of the Future: Multilateral Solutions for a Better Tomorrow’ attempted to advance Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals, building on the SDG summit in 2023. What resulted is the Pact for the Future, adopted by world leaders, with its annexes: the Global Digital Compact and Declaration on Future Generations.† It focuses on a broad range of issues, including peace and security, sustainable development, climate change, digital cooperation, human rights, gender, youth and future generations, and the transformation of global governance.

Since the Pact was adopted on 22 September 2024, progress includes the UN General Assembly’s commitment to three 2025 dialogues, starting 28 March, to advance its 56 actions, and US$1.05 billion pledged for digital inclusion. However, US aid cutbacks, including a 90-day freeze and 83% USAID program cancellations, threaten implementation, risking millions of lives dependent on health and food aid. Tariff wars raise borrowing costs and disrupt trade, disproportionately impacting vulnerable nations like Burundi and Lesotho, exacerbating poverty and debt distress. Official Development Assistance (ODA) reductions by the US and some in Europe further strain financing for sustainable development, with global economic growth projected to slow to 2.8% in 2025. The Pact’s non-binding nature and geopolitical mistrust, evident in Russia’s amendment attempt, hinder enforcement, reflecting scepticism about multilateralism’s effectiveness. Civil society also faces challenges in leveraging UN reform for stronger multi-stakeholder engagement. Shrinking civic space, with only 2% of people in open civic environments, limits CSO advocacy. US aid cuts, tariff wars, and ODA reductions strain resources, hindering implementation. Currently, the estimated funding gap for the Pact and the SDGs is in the order of US$4 trillion annually, over half of which is investment required for the energy transition.

And it is from Africa that most growth will come in the future, its share of the world’s population is expected to increase from 10% to 28%, meaning over 1 in 4 people will be African, and mostly young. Whilst most ODA has focussed with great success on Africa in the early decades following de-colonisation (building health, education, institutions and investment), today corruption, including grand corruption of its leaders, has become a systemic plague, but also beyond Africa, including in America and Russia. But apart from the nefarious capital flight of corrupt leaders banking abroad, most developing countries in Africa and beyond benefit from the internal mobilisation of resources more than ODA, and the bulk of resources for post-conflict recovery are domestically generated. Many prefer fair trade to more aid. There appears no or little correlation between large ODA infusions and economic performance in countries with weak institutions, therefore, the role of ODA, whether catalytic, thematic, or as fiscal support must be challenged, and attuned to the declining resource base now emerging from altered US policies and the European push to defence and security.‡ Where the institutions of national governance are weak, corruption thrives; where they are very strong, less so. Declining ODA should therefore be primarily used to strengthen governance.

It is also time for the citizens of all nations to denounce the delinquency of the major superpowers, particularly, the Permanent Five (P5) members of the UN Security Council, in undermining multilateralism, and betraying in various ways and times, the hopes and aspirations of all humanity. At the foundation of the United Nations, a special custodial responsibility was granted to the top five powers, namely the “Veto” in the UN Security Council, in order to guarantee international peace and security and “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war”. Almost immediately, the Cold War began, with proxy conflicts hampering the progress of many newly independent states emerging from colonialism. Some former colonies broke up: Cyprus, Palestine, India-Pakistan and later offshoot Bangladesh. Yet many former imperial powers, especially P5 members Great Britain and France persisted with overseas territories, and the Treaty of Rome was partly shaped by discriminatory colonial policies (involving also former colonial powers Belgium, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain). Hence, the EU still bears some marks of colonialism in the treatment of various overseas territories of its members, going back to the Treaty of Rome.§ Vestigial colonial concepts haunt its trade policies with inequitable relations that perpetuated unequal exchange with former colonies. Replacement frameworks such as EPAs, may still prioritise benefits with Eurocentric narratives and policies. Nonetheless, the EU commitment to multilateralism, and the UDHR (along with its own Copenhagen Criteria/values, mutatis mutandis) distance it from its major members’ imperial past, but require better partnerships grounded in equality. At the same time, within the advanced industrialised world, it has been argued that it is, so far, the most successful voluntary constellation of states.¶

The USSR persisted until the end of the Cold War, with its fragmentation fostering ethnic conflicts elsewhere, and the often violent break-up or collapse of several states (Afghanistan, Czechoslovakia, Ethiopia/Eritrea, Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Yemen, Yugoslavia, etc). It did not take long for Russia, under Putin, to embark on destabilising its neighbours, such as Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine, now directly invaded. China has also robustly asserted its claims in the Himalayas, the South China Sea, and over Taiwan. And India and Pakistan remain at regular loggerheads over Kashmir. Venezuela versus Guyana, and Guatemala versus Belize, have at least referred their border disputes to the ICJ, pending. Other disputes persist, e.g. Argentina-Falklands/UK, Chile-Bolivia, Colombia-Nicaragua, Brazil-Uruguay, etc., without warfare. And yet over 40 armed conflicts rage in various places of the world, in most continents. So much for the UN Charter—but perhaps the absence of major armed conflict in Latin America in a measure of the maturity of their post-colonial relations, and a respect for the rule of law, through recourse to the ICJ, which should be seen as a credit to the UN system and multilateralism. But new threats are also made today by the USA to Greenland and Panama, following its kinetic interventions with its allies in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia and elsewhere, such as Central America, Korea and Vietnam in bygone decades.

Every time in the past 25 years that the world has come together with a blueprint for the future of humanity, it is shortly scuppered or sabotaged by a direct superpower assault. America’s globalisation of its so-called “war against terror” in 2001, after the 9/11 attacks, immediately diverted resources from implementation of the Millennium Declaration and the Millennium Development Goals. It took fifteen more years after 2000 for the world to come together again in 2015 with of Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals. Only late last year, a new Pact for the Future was adopted. Now, the shocking and explicit denunciation of Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals by the US delegate to the UN General Assembly on 4 March 2025, itself deserves the strongest repudiation, as a crude attempt to sabotage the global consensus that tried back in 2015 to rebuild that pillar of multilateralism that was previously sundered by the American response to 9/11 terrorist attacks,**

Equally abrupt, arbitrary and harmful is the abandonment of the DAC/OECD target of 0.7% of members’ GNI by several donor countries, mostly European, and which must be resoundingly denounced as it jeopardises the relative achievements to date, and endangers the health and well-being of hundreds of millions of vulnerable people across the developing countries, especially in Africa,†† There are strong arguments therefore that ODA targets must be maintained, both to honour COP-29 obligations, but also to restore the path to SDG achievement and effectively implement the globally-agreed Pact for the Future. With political will, and international solidarity, this can be done while nonetheless reforming its delivery, and re-focussing it on the separation of powers, the rule of law, judicial and media independence, and civil society and women’s empowerment, all the while pursuing the fight against grand and petty corruption, and accelerating national implementation of the UN Convention Against Corruption. If these measures are pursued, with or without ODA support, the countries concerned will most likely prosper. They are sine qua non conditions for sustainable human development, which depends heavily on good governance.

That ODA and its intermediate agencies, including bilateral USAID-funded NGOs, and UN agencies, had become so dependent on US funds, often way beyond America’s share of assessed core UN budget percentage, has surprised many, and its cutbacks now shocked by their abruptness. Yet as much as it has been portrayed as a grievance for US taxpayers, it is also an awakening for more equitable burden-sharing, and indeed a need to re-focus and reform its delivery.

Against this background, the UN80 drive to trim bureaucracy by 20% or more and rationalise institutions and mandates must be correlated with the Pact for the Future, and the globally-agreed Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals. Other member states must be encouraged to step forward and increase their level of commitments to peace and security, and also to the achievement of the SDGs, which lag too far behind already. In this regard, more attention also needs to be paid to mediation for conflict prevention/resolution, and to the role the UN system can play in catalysing development where ODA and local resources are insufficient or absent.

The cutbacks and scarcity of resources as well as the general over-militarisation of “traditional peacekeeping” which was not part of the UN’s original design, also warrant a shift to greater reliance on civilian peace work, including unarmed civilian protection (UCP), a concept and methodology pioneered by Nonviolent Peaceforce, which has come to the fore in Mindanao/Philippines, Sri Lanka, the OPT, and Sudan, and been recognised in the UNSC and UNGA,‡‡ Equally, UNV’s role could be expanded, along the lines exemplified in the book “Volunteers against Conflict.”§§ The impact of militarisation on the SDGs also bears study.¶¶ UN advocacy can make more use of its peacekeeping successes, e.g. UNTAC (Cambodia), UNTAET (Timor Leste), UNMIK (Kosovo). This is also the 25th anniversary of the landmark UN Security Council resolution 1325, on Women Peace and Security, but progress has been slow, undermined by patriarchal norms, and resources are now in doubt following the US assault on DEI programmes.***

In all of this, we are challenged to advance welfare not warfare, yet global arms expenditures now total US$2.7 trillion, with 2024 recorded by SIPRI showing the steepest year-on-year rise since at least 1988 and marking the 10th consecutive year of increases, dominated by the China, Russia, and the USA—three of the P5 UN veto-wielding powers in whom our global security is paradoxically entrusted in the UN Security Council—joined by Germany and India to account for 60%.

There is grave urgency therefore, the risk rendered more acute by Russia’s abandonment of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (2010), on top of its launching the biggest war since World War Two, at the very heart of Europe, for over eleven years against Ukraine. The continued defiance of the UN Security Council and the International Court of Justice by Hamas and Israel in the ongoing devastation of Gaza further erodes the global rule of law. America’s effective abandonment of foreign aid, the Paris Agreement on climate change, tariff wars and denunciation of Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Accords, combined with some European reductions in ODA to favour re-armament and defence, place hundreds of millions at risk of starvation, death and the upheaval and collapse of many of the Least-Developed Countries, leading to a surge of failed states, regional wars, mass displacement and migration—the scale of which we have never seen before. Yet, at this precise moment of global jeopardy, the very institutions that the world has nurtured for the last 80 years (UN system), if not more (ICRC, founded in 1863), that can prevent or mitigate catastrophe, are being gutted with the most savage cuts ever, led by a hostile United States administration, followed by increasingly chauvinist régimes.

Clearly then, we urgently need a new global human security architecture that guarantees resilience in the face of mounting existential threats, posed equally by mass extinctions and biodiversity loss, climate change, pandemic disorder, migration upheavals, and growing geostrategic instability due to erosion of the rule of international law, and failures of global governance. We also need to ensure the permanent service and subordination of artificial intelligence to human control and our responsible authority.

We are at an “existential” moment where not only is multilateralism being challenged, as it has been acutely in recent years, but the entire post-1945 architecture, i.e. the UN system, that underpins it is being assaulted and degraded. This is not “reform”, but demolition and destruction. But the transition to “a new era”, multi-polar or whatever it can be called, does not warrant such deliberate systemic dilapidation—for which no coherent plan (other than Agenda 2030 & SDGs) has been discussed let alone negotiated by member states, or the wider cohort of what might be called “stakeholder multilateralism” as distinct from state-holder multilateralism. In the past few decades of accelerated change, technology, and mass social media, we have lived through the birth of the first truly global civilisation—now, to preserve it from fragmentation and destruction by predatory greed and narrow narcissistic chauvinism, we must mature it into a truly global conscience—diverse, egalitarian, and inclusive,  and resoundingly reject the denunciation of those concepts.

In this regard, we need to explore the dynamic between populism, liberalism and multilateralism; but also the core values of the UN system; the evolving role of the inter-governmental processes, and the complementarity with civil society and other vectors of influence, including corporate, as these affect the global commons on land, sea, and in air and outer space. These factors together will determine our priority challenges, and the consequent imperatives for structural and constituency reforms and resources of the UN, and indeed the Bretton Woods institutions, and other global instruments, at global and subsidiary levels. We need shared ethics for common laws.

Following on various appeals to the UN Secretary-General since April 2022, a group of former UN officials joined forces in a Peacemaking Reflection Group to actively advocate UN System reform and address imperatives for peace and justice, and other existential challenges. This work has been facilitated by the Foundation for Global Governance and Sustainability. Benefitting from a decade of such interactions including in the Global Baku Forum, the author presented an early version of his essay “Desperate Hope” at the 37th Annual Plenary Meeting of the InterAction Council, an independent international organisation of former heads of state and government, held in May 2023 in Valletta, Malta.

The analysis below now organizes the root causes and drivers into four thematic categories: (i) Geopolitical and Security Failures, (ii) Environmental and Resource Crises, (iii) Governance and Institutional Deficiencies, and (iv) Socioeconomic and Ethical Disparities. Each category is explored with reference to the argued narratives, updated to May 2025 where possible, and supported by direct references to the text.

(i) Geopolitical and Security Failures

The essay identifies geopolitical tensions and security failures as primary drivers of global turbulence, rooted in the persistence of conflict, nuclear proliferation, the assault on multilateralism, the erosion of human security, and the debasing of human dignity.

Root Causes

• Ongoing Wars and Conflicts: Over the past decade, the number of armed conflicts worldwide has risen, reaching 59 state-based conflicts in 2023, the highest since 1946. Conflict-related deaths surged, with 170,700 fatalities in 2023, driven by major wars in Ukraine, Gaza, Myanmar, and Sudan, where genocide is being normalised. These conflicts reflect a failure to uphold the UN Charter’s principles of peace and security, exacerbating human suffering and destabilizing regions. Artificial intelligence (AI) in military applications, including drone warfare, increases risks of escalation, e.g., Israeli AI/Lavender failures in Gaza.
• Breakdown of Multilateralism: The essay points to a “failure to deliver on nuclear non-proliferation” and the undermining of arms control agreements, such as the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. This erosion of multilateral frameworks weakens the global security architecture.
• Nuclear Proliferation Risks: The essay highlights the “risk of nuclear catastrophe” as a critical threat, noting that the Doomsday Clock was set at 89 seconds to midnight in January 2025, closer than ever. This underscores the failure of non-proliferation regimes and escalation of tensions among nuclear powers, lately between India and Pakistan. Ongoing concerns include Russia’s suspension of the New START treaty, North Korea’s expansion of its nuclear arsenal, and America’s costly nuclear modernization program.

Deep Drivers

• Erosion of Trust in International Norms: It is argued that the “profound democratic deficit” in institutions like the UN Security Council and the IFIs reflects a broader erosion of trust in international norms. Veto powers held by UNSC permanent members stifle collective action, perpetuating impunity and conflict.
• Power Rivalries and Hegemonic Ambitions: The essay implicitly critiques the competitive dynamics among major powers (e.g., the U.S., Russia, China), which fuel arms races and proxy conflicts. The text laments that these rivalries prioritize narrow national interests over collective security, undermining global stability.
• Militarization of Emerging Domains: The essay notes the proliferation of satellites by state and corporate actors (e.g., Amazon, OneWeb, Boeing) and the ambitions of U.S. Space Command, Russia, and China in outer space. This militarization of new frontiers risks extending terrestrial conflicts into space, amplifying global insecurity.

Analysis

Geopolitical and security failures are deeply interconnected with other drivers of turbulence. For example, conflicts exacerbate environmental degradation (e.g., destruction in war zones) and strain governance systems, while nuclear risks amplify the stakes of diplomatic failures. The essay lays emphasis on the UN Charter as the guiding framework for reinvigorating multilateralism, and as essential to mitigating these drivers.

(ii) Environmental and Resource Crises

Environmental degradation and resource mismanagement are accelerating existential threats, driven by climate change, biodiversity loss, and exploitation of the global commons. Greenhouse gas emissions must decline by 43% by 2030 to limit warming to 1.5°C. US policy shifts pose drastic obstacles. The scale of extinctions is most alarming.

Root Causes

• Climate Change and Extreme Weather: These are immediate challenges, cited in the 2023 IPCC report’s warnings of worsening impacts over the next 30 years. These phenomena disrupt ecosystems, economies, and human livelihoods. Record-breaking global temperatures in 2023–2024, with a 66% probability of exceeding 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels by 2027, exacerbate the crisis.
• Biodiversity Loss and Pollution: The author references “ecological overshoot” and pollution as contributors to environmental collapse, which threaten food security and public health. The rate of extinction is alarmingly high, with species loss occurring at 1,000 to 10,000 times the natural background rate. Scientists estimate 10,000 to 100,000 species vanish annually, driven by human activities like habitat destruction, climate change, pollution, and overexploitation.
• Exploitation of Global Commons: Unregulated appropriation of genetic material and the proliferation of satellites in outer space are examples of mismanaged global commons. These activities risk long-term harm to shared resources.

Deep Drivers

• Unsustainable Economic Models: The prioritization of short-term economic gains over sustainability drives deforestation, overfishing, and fossil fuel dependency. Alternative investments and partnerships are needed to achieve the SDGs, as current economic systems are misaligned with planetary boundaries and financial flows for mitigation are 3-6 times below needed levels. Market concentration warrants regulation of global conglomerates, as well as of the obscene concentration of wealth in the hands of the 1%.
• Technological Overreach: Concern about genetically-modified organisms and satellite proliferation reveals unchecked technological advancement without ethical oversight. This overreach amplifies environmental and biosecurity risks.
• Lack of Global Cooperation: The absence of an Outer Space equivalent to the International Seabed Authority, reflects a failure to establish cooperative frameworks for managing shared resources. This gap enables a race to exploit space, and equally, genetic resources, exacerbating environmental risks.

Analysis

Environmental crises are a cross-cutting driver of turbulence, amplifying geopolitical tensions (e.g., resource conflicts) and socioeconomic disparities (e.g., climate-induced migration). A focus on the global commons aligns with emerging scholarship on planetary boundaries, and also addresses specific actors (e.g., fossil fuel industries) or structural incentives (e.g., capitalism’s growth imperative). The call for bio-ethical standards and governance reforms suggests a pathway to address these drivers, in tandem with tripartite collaboration, e.g., between governments, civil society, and the private sector, as in the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative.

(iii) Governance and Institutional Deficiencies

The accelerating rate of change exceeds the adaptive capacity of existing global governance; hence, outdated and unrepresentative global governance structures are a root cause of turbulence, failing to address modern challenges or include new societal actors. This translates into SDG failures: The 2025 UN World Economic Situation and Prospects report notes only 17% of SDG targets are on track, 33% stalled, and 50% weak or reversed. Geopolitical tensions, climate and debt crises, especially in LDCs, are key barriers.

Root Causes

• Democratic Deficit in Global Institutions: The essay critiques the UN Security Council’s “fossilized” composition, particularly the veto power of its five permanent members, which still paralyzes decision-making and perpetuates impunity, despite the recent Liechtenstein veto initiative of the UNGA in 2022.
• Exclusion of Non-State Actors: Civil society organizations, corporate giants, and digital media are “new forces” still excluded from global governance. This exclusion limits the legitimacy and effectiveness of institutions like the UN.
• Failure to Adapt to New Domains: The text highlights the absence of adequate governance frameworks for outer space and genetic resources, allowing unchecked exploitation by states and corporations.

Deep Drivers

• Resistance to Structural Reform: Entrenched interests—particularly those of powerful states—resist reforms that would democratize global governance. This resistance preserves an anachronistic system unfit for 21st-century challenges.
• Fragmentation of Global Leadership: There is a lack of cohesive leadership, with very low integrity standards for many national leaders, and most national leaders prioritizing domestic agendas over global cooperation. This fragmentation undermines collective responses to crises like pandemics or climate change, and has been decried by The Elders and others.
• Erosion of Universal Values: The “progress of our planetary civilization” depends on universal values (e.g., human rights, rule of law), but these are undermined by governance failures and the rise of authoritarianism. This erosion weakens the moral foundation of global cooperation. Systemic and leadership corruption aggravates this. The erosion is mirrored in the erosion of trust in democracy, government, science and religion and the emergence of corrupt populist leaders spreading fear, doubt, and falsehood in their treacherous march to autocracy.

Analysis

Governance deficiencies are a linchpin of global turbulence, as they impede coordinated responses to other crises. Proposals for new UN chambers (e.g., for civil society and corporations) and a parliamentary network are innovative but face practical hurdles, such as securing consensus among member states. Governments’ focus on the UN reflects an institutionalist perspective, but overlooks the role of regional organizations or grassroots movements in addressing governance gaps. The call for “radical” reform of the UN Security Council is compelling and many proposals advanced include those through the Peacemaking Reflection Group, to overcome the veto-wielding states’ opposition. We need stake-holder governance, not partial state-holder dominance.

(iv) Socioeconomic and Ethical Disparities

Socioeconomic inequalities and ethical failures act as deep drivers of turbulence, manifesting in poverty, exclusion, and the erosion of human dignity. The focus on the SDGs as a framework for addressing poverty and sustainability is validated by 2025 data showing persistent gaps, particularly in LMICs. Calling for partnerships aligns with the UN emphasis on global cooperation, but slow progress underscores concerns about governance failures and ethical disparities as drivers of turbulence.

Root Causes

• Persistent Poverty and Inequality: In 2024, 8.8% of the global population (700 million people) lived below the $2.15/day poverty line, with progress stalled by conflicts, climate impacts, and economic slowdowns. The SDGs’ goal is to eradicate poverty of billions who still live in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) without access to climate-smart development, which perpetuates cycles of deprivation and instability.
• Social Exclusion and Marginalization: As America actively now undermines DEI (diversity, equality and inclusion) globally, increasing exclusion based on race, gender, or socioeconomic status fuels social unrest, undermines cohesion and warrants urgent renewed emphasis on universal human rights. The Trump attack on DEI undermines the very ethos on which human development is predicated.
• Ethical Lapses in Technology and Business: Proprietary appropriation of genetic material and unchecked corporate orbital satellites reflect a broad failure to prioritize ethical considerations in technological and economic pursuits.

Deep Drivers

• Capitalism’s Inequitable Outcomes: The author critiques global capitalism’s role in concentrating wealth and power, as seen in the call for partnerships to support LMICs’ renewable energy transitions. This suggests that market-driven systems exacerbate disparities. A shift from shareholder to CSR-based stakeholder capitalism and a return to socially based regulation would help.
• Moral Disengagement: The essay’s focus on universal values points to a deeper driver: the disengagement of individuals, corporations, and governments from ethical responsibilities. This is evident in the exploitation of genetic resources and the prioritization of profit over sustainability.
• Cultural and Ideological Polarization: A renewed drive for a global civilization based on human rights would counter the cultural and ideological divides that fuel turbulence. Divergence risks are borne out in the World Values Survey, which highlights ongoing cultural shifts, with unequal socioeconomic development driving transitions toward emancipative self-expression versus conservatism.

Analysis

Socioeconomic and ethical disparities are both cause and consequence of global turbulence, interacting with geopolitical, environmental, and governance drivers. For example, poverty exacerbates climate vulnerability, while ethical lapses in technology amplify biosecurity risks. The emphasis on universal values as a unifying force is aspirational but may underestimate the challenge of reconciling diverse cultural and ideological perspectives. Stakeholder partnerships offer progress, but need scaling up.

3. Interconnections and the Systemic Nature of Turbulence

Such analysis reveals that the root causes and drivers of global turbulence are deeply interconnected, forming a “perfect storm” of crises. For instance:

• Geopolitical Conflicts (e.g., Ukraine) exacerbate environmental degradation through resource destruction and divert resources from climate action.
• Environmental Crises, such as climate-induced migration, fuel socioeconomic disparities and strain governance systems, leading to social unrest.
• Governance Deficiencies, e.g., the UN’s & IFI’s democratic deficits impede coordinated responses to security, environmental & socioeconomic challenges.
• Ethical Lapses in technology and business amplify risks across all domains, from biosecurity to outer space militarization.

This systemic interplay underscores the argument that addressing turbulence requires holistic reforms that integrate security, sustainability, governance, and ethics. The vision of “one civilization” based on universal values serves as a normative framework to unify these efforts, but the complexity of achieving consensus in an increasingly fragmented world demands a global prise de conscience. To idle and await a catastrophic “Eureka!” may already be terminal, too late, and render the path to human extinction irreversible.

The current shift of many prominent OECD members away from ODA towards dramatically increasing investments in security and defence, i.e. in arms and warfare capability, reflects a gross failure of global political leadership and diplomacy to obviate risk and renew trust, but most of all, compromises the global goals of development, ecological sustainability, and human fulfilment, i.e. it is a direct assault on human security and our existential survival not only as a global civilisation, but as a species.

4. Implication

The author’s “Desperate Hope” analysis identifies the root causes and deep drivers of global turbulence as a complex interplay of geopolitical and security failures, environmental and resource crises, governance and institutional deficiencies, and socioeconomic and ethical disparities. These drivers are rooted in systemic issues—power rivalries, unsustainable economic models, resistance to reform, and moral disengagement—that perpetuate a cycle of instability. A vision for addressing these challenges centres on revitalizing global governance, prioritizing universal values, and fostering inclusive partnerships. While ambitious, the essay’s proposals face significant practical and political hurdles, necessitating further exploration of implementation strategies and grassroots engagement. Ultimately, this analysis endeavours to promote a compelling framework for understanding global turbulence and a hopeful, albeit challenging, pathway toward a sustainable future.

5. Meeting the Challenge

Hence, to address current global turbulence, a comprehensive strategy is needed, rooted in universal values, systemic reforms and international cooperation. Below is a structured breakdown of recommendations, incorporating UN reforms, tackling corruption and market concentration, and aligning with principles of the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

5.1. Uphold Universal Values and International Frameworks

Preserving foundational principles is essential for global stability.

• Reinforce Commitment to UN Frameworks: Fully implement the UN Charter, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Pact for the Future, and SDGs through actionable policies and sustained investments.
• Strengthen Partnerships: Foster collaboration among governments, international organizations, and civil society to ensure inclusive progress toward these goals, bolstering the role of women in particular.
• UN Reform: Expand representation—reform the UN General Assembly to better represent the global south, including enhanced voice for civil society (not just as ECOSOC-accredited NGOs), ensuring equitable decision-making and addressing disparities in the global commons. Ditto for the BWI/IFIs and other such bodies.

5.2. Strengthen Global Governance and the Rule of Law

Robust international law enforcement is critical to mitigate instability.

• UN Reform: Revitalize the Security Council—restructure it by limiting veto power and adding permanent seats for underrepresented regions, such as Africa and Latin America, to improve its effectiveness in addressing global conflicts.
• Law Reform: e.g., empower the International Criminal Court (ICC) and enhance the effectiveness of the International Court of Justice (ICJ): increase the ICC’s jurisdiction and funding to hold rogue actors accountable, ensuring justice for violations that destabilize global peace; add penalties for non-compliance by any states with ICJ rulings on states’ responsibilities.
• Enhance Legal Compliance: Advance the national constitutional and legislative reforms required to implement the UN Pact for the Future (and other treaty obligations), and monitor/support compliance by governments and their societies. Promote national reforms to align with international law, addressing violations through stronger enforcement mechanisms.

5.3. Tackle Corruption to Restore Trust and Equity

Corruption undermines stability and must be addressed systematically.

• Global Cooperation Against Corruption: Fully implement the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC), with countries sharing resources to dismantle cross-border corrupt networks; strengthen the enforcement of criminal laws in order to punish and deter leaders who are corrupt and regularly violate human rights, and to create opportunities for the democratic process to replace them with leaders dedicated to serving their citizens.
• Create an International Anti-Corruption Court: As called for by the European Parliament, and led by Integrity Initiatives International (III), create an Anti-Corruption Taskforce—establish a dedicated UN body to monitor and combat global grand corruption in cooperation with Transparency International, providing technical assistance to nations and fostering accountability.
• Empower Civil Society: Establish independent oversight bodies, and support independent investigative media and grassroots movements to expose corruption and organised crime, fostering a culture of integrity and transparency.

5.4. Address Market Concentration to Promote Economic Fairness

Economic inequality, fuelled by monopolies, exacerbates global unrest.

• Strengthen Anti-trust Regulations: Enforce laws to prevent anti-competitive practices like price-fixing or predatory mergers, ensuring fair markets.
• Regulate Multinational Corporations: Develop a global treaty on global corporations; coordinate to close regulatory gaps exploited by global firms, enforce CSR, ensuring MNCs contribute to more equitable economic systems.
• Support Small Businesses: Promote social enterprise, and SMEs through tax incentives, access to credit, and market access programs to foster competition, innovation, green technology and resilience.
• UN Reform – Establish Economic Equity Mechanisms: Create a UN-led initiative to monitor market concentration in collaboration with Bretton Woods Institutions (WB, IMF, IFC) and advocate for policies that reduce wealth disparities, ensuring fair economic opportunities globally.

5.5. Foster Human Dignity Through Multilateralism and Solidarity

Collective action is key to overcoming global challenges.

• Restore Human Development: Growing disparities, exacerbated by automation and pandemics, demand social protection, empowerment, and debt relief. Consider catalytic boosters to increase national, regional and global HDI rates.
• Promote Multilateral Efforts: Support joint initiatives on climate, health, and inequality, such as the Paris Agreement and global vaccine distribution programs.
• Include Non-State Actors: Engage NGOs and grassroots movements in decision-making to ensure diverse perspectives in global governance.
• UN Reform – Enhance Multilateral Platforms: Strengthen UN bodies like the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) to better coordinate global responses to shared challenges, ensuring solidarity in action. Reform the Trusteeship Council.

5.6. Balance Rights with Responsibilities in a Globalized World

A balanced approach ensures rights are exercised responsibly.

• Codify Responsibilities: Establish clear responsibilities through law that duty-bearers fulfil obligations at international, institutional or personal level, ensuring rights’ enjoyment does not enable harm, violence or spread disinformation.
• Promote Accountability: Use national laws and global agreements to hold countries, governments, corporations and individuals accountable for actions that undermine societal stability.
• UN Reform – Develop A Global Responsibilities Charter: Lead the creation of a UN-backed charter outlining responsibilities alongside rights, fostering a more harmonious global order, and based on the InterAction Council’s “Universal Declaration of Human Responsibilities.”†††

5.7. Transform Civic Education for a Global Civil Society

Education is vital for building a values-driven global community.

• Prioritize Global Citizenship: Integrate critical thinking, empathy, and cross-cultural understanding into curricula to foster a sense of shared humanity.
• Leverage Technology: Use social media and online platforms to facilitate global dialogue and raise awareness of universal values.
• UN Reform – Launch A Global Civic Empowerment Initiative: Establish a central monitoring system that integrates civic empowerment into strategic foresight, exploring systems and best practices to promote global conscience & solidarity.
• Empower UNESCO: To support countries by establishing better standards of civic education, enabling audits of curricula and a Global Culture for Peace.

6. Conclusion

In summary, to preserve planetary civilisation, global governance must uphold the UN Charter, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and SDGs. This requires advancing international law, reforming institutions, and enforcing accountability to prevent violations of treaty obligations, global conventions, and fundamental freedoms. Economic growth must respect finite resources, addressing waste and pollution, to sustain ecosystems. The OECD-G20 Inclusive Framework’s 15% minimum tax rate for multinationals should bolster public finances, fostering inclusion and human security.

Human dignity demands inclusive, transparent governance models that embrace diversity and foster ethical dialogue, prioritizing environmental stewardship, biodiversity, and climate action through partnerships across governments, civil society, and corporations. Civil society needs space to flourish, supported by transformed civic education and anti-corruption measures under the UN Convention Against Corruption. Transparent consultations, funding, and women’s leadership can empower citizen engagement, amplified by social media, to drive political reform and accountability.

A global resilience network, under UN leadership, could convert military assets for disaster relief and civilian protection, managing displacement and humanitarian crises. Regulating global corporations through a legal convention would ensure competition, limit capital concentration, and curb speculative practices, enabling fair entrepreneurship. Digital governance must align with universal values, using Big Data to advance human rights and reduce digital divides, and enable strategic foresight along with early warning and crisis prevention, while regulating AI and social media to protect privacy and inclusion. Conflict resolution requires strengthened mediation and Track II diplomacy, led primarily by compassionate women leaders and civil society.

Ending impunity for crimes against humanity necessitates universal adoption of the ICC/Rome Statute and compliance with the International Court of Justice. UN reforms must accelerate, creating multi-stakeholder chambers for civil society and corporations, reforming the Security Council’s veto and membership, and establishing authorities for global commons like outer space. These steps, building beyond the 1995 Commission on Global Governance, are critical for a meta-national UN to secure peace, disarmament, and sustainability this decade and beyond.

Apart from the beleaguered primacy of the United Nations, and the incremental participation of current national leaders-in-office in the World Economic Forum since 1974, there are now several networks of former heads of state/government and other world leaders active in advocacy for global cooperation to deal with humanity’s various challenges. Most notably, and in order of their creation, these include the InterAction Council (1983), the Council of Women World Leaders (1996), the Club de Madrid (2001), the Global Leadership Foundation (2004), the Elders (2007), and the Nizami Ganjavi International Center (2012).

With overlapping members and sometimes shared agendas, these represent a considerable vector of strategic influence for change, the more so when they combine with broad-based civil society movements, especially those representing the younger generations, and engage with the current powers-that-be. Working together, they could focus on advancing the following:

Low-hanging Fruits:

1. Empower civil society’s ability to engage in global policy decisions.
2. Advance the role of women in all areas of human endeavour.
3. Implement and enforce the UN Convention against Corruption.
4. Ratify the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
5. Build capacities for mediation, negotiation and conflict resolution.
6. Revive disarmament and conversion of military assets for peaceful use.
7. Shift stakeholder capitalism towards accelerated decarbonisation.
8. Through a global treaty, enforce standards on global corporations.
9. Adhere to the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative.
10. Enforce treaties on the Law of the Sea and Outer Space.

UN Reforms:

1. Convene a General Conference to revise the UN Charter (Art. 109)
2. Move “We the Peoples” from state-holder to stake-holder governance
3. UNGA to adopt the Universal Declaration on Human Responsibilities.
4. Establish UN civil society and parliamentary chambers.
5. Reform the UN Security Council, the Trusteeship Council, etc.
6. Establish a Global Resilience or Human Security Council and network.
7. Increase UN funding and support to civil society.
8. Support the UN Futures Lab with a global collective intelligence system.

Overcoming global turbulence requires a holistic approach: upholding international frameworks, strengthening global governance, tackling corruption and market concentration, promoting solidarity, balancing rights with responsibilities, and transforming civic education, and advancing women’s equal leadership against the revisionist cultivation of toxic patriarchy. UN reforms—such as expanding representation, empowering the ICC, restructuring the Security Council, and creating new initiatives for anti-corruption and economic and social equity—are integral to this strategy. By implementing these recommendations, humanity can address the root causes of instability and build a more equitable, stable, and sustainable world order.

To these ends, world leaders should also be enjoined to extoll the vision of a world based on human dignity and universal values, and upholding the highest standards of leadership, integrity and competence. In this regard, mandates and action to promote women’s equal participation in all levels of leadership will be most important, worldwide.

Whether seeking refuge or prosperity, by flight or adventure, for hundreds of thousands of years humans have left their past behind, and moved, sought new lives, and made new beginnings. Such migrations have incubated new peoples, forged new nations, and generated new cultures. Succeeding generations have passed on memory, myth or mystery, in heritage or hermeneutics, to guide their next travellers in their journeys through life. Today, the enjoyment of thought, expression, dialogue, community, with literature, art and music, through film, broadcast and social media have become new tools to escape confined personal realities, imagine better prospects, and broaden experience with wider frames of reference to interpret both past and present and enable more holistic aspirations in new pathways of human fulfilment. Our new travel, telecommunications and global networking have brought about a planetary civilization. Now, having filled our world and agreed on our universal values, it is more important than ever to find better ways of living together, with new openness, new learning, new engagement, new trust, new synergies, and new or reformed institutions.

Part of this must be to rein in the currently unbridled power of mega-corporations and the über-rich, reducing rising disparities in wealth and power, and enabling civil society, and government, judiciary, and legislature to withstand and curtail the influence of capital and its tendency to drive for state and regulatory capture. Civil society has led the way in the past to successfully take on the tobacco industry, big pharma, oil and extractive corporations, and food and agriculture. There is no reason why it should not now take on media concentration, the digital giants, and the arms and weapons industries.

In the tale of a healed broken femur 15,000 years ago, Margaret Mead is said to have mused that it was a sign of civilisation: Helping someone else through difficulty is where civilisation starts:

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens
can change the world; for, indeed, that’s all who ever have.

It is time for us to realise that our conquest of this planet has placed all life in the greatest peril of mass extinction, as we also face the destruction of human civilisation. But it is also the dawn of our first truly global civilisation, a time of our greatest capability and promise, and an enormous moral obligation to guarantee inter-generational equity.

For some, it is half-full, for others, half-empty. Unless we mend its cracks, we will never fulfil it, but hold a broken chalice in our hands, beyond redemption.