The Munich Security Conference (MSC) is an annual meeting that brings together nearly five hundred key players in foreign policy, international security and defence issues.\u00a0 It is attended by dozens of heads of state and government worldwide, ministers of defence and foreign affairs, diplomats, military representatives, business leaders, experts and non-governmental organizations.\u00a0 It was launched in 1963 by former German military officer Ewald-Heinrich von Kleist to define the security policies of the United States and its allies. With the end of the Cold War, it became the main forum on the subject.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The 59th<\/sup> Conference was held from 17-19 February. While several burning global issues were discussed \u2013 from economic security to climate, environmental and food security \u2013 most of the debates focused on the war in Ukraine and from a national and international security perspective limited to defence doctrines.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In a speech marking the first anniversary of the invasion, the Ukrainian Prime Minister, Volodymyr Zelensky<\/strong>, demanded \u201cspeed in the delivery of weapons\u201d, and Olaf Scholz and Emmanuel Macron encouraged arms production.\u00a0 Likewise, the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell, stated that \u201cless applause and more arms supplies\u201d were needed.\u00a0 He advocated the European Peace Facility as a short-term response, \u201cwhich can commit its resources to provide ammunition to Ukraine quickly.\u201d\u00a0 In the medium term, Borrell said, the solution lies in \u201cgreatly increasing the capacity of our defence industry.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Similarly, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen<\/strong> called for a joint effort to increase ammunition production. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken<\/strong> initiated a discussion on incentives to keep military production lines open.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In closing remarks, this year\u2019s MSC chair, Christoph Heusgen,<\/strong> concluded that the event had demonstrated \u201cstrong transatlantic solidarity\u201d and said that Europe in general, and Germany in particular, needed an unquestionable increase on defence spending to be able to better respond to new challenges.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although the conference slogan<\/strong> was \u201cpeace through dialogue,\u201d paradoxically, diplomatic mechanisms have disappeared from the lexicon and priorities. Rearmament and the promotion of the military-industrial complex have been the decisive and common elements of the speeches.\u00a0 However, what kind of peace are we thinking of if war is dehumanized?\u00a0 Where are the lessons learned from other conflicts?\u00a0 What security are we talking about when those who shoot the guns and those who are shot at are left out of the picture?\u00a0 How can we envision the limits and new, more favourable scenarios if the arms race is, by nature, abusive and blinding?<\/p>\n\n\n\n The MSC has once again emphasized<\/strong> the state’s security and not the people’s security.\u00a0 The meeting was \u2013 yet again \u2013 a key event for the arms industry lobbies. Its main outcome was a litany of justifications for NATO\u2019s arms policy and the outline of a common strategy against Russia and China.\u00a0 The lack of security and aid \u2013 other than military \u2013 for civilians in eastern Ukraine or the Middle East betrays Europe\u2019s questionable commitment to its values or its unwillingness to redefine them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For this reason, coinciding with the gathering, thousands of people participated in a pacifist march through the centre of Munich over the weekend, calling for an end to rearmament and peace in Ukraine through dialogue and not through military means.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is also worth highlighting that, despite being in the minority, some conference participants defended the urgency of avoiding a militarized vision.\u00a0 For example, the Vice President of Colombia, Francia M\u00e1rquez, called world leaders to implement \u201ca new international order that puts life at the centre.\u201d\u00a0 M\u00e1rquez argued that discussing who wins and who loses in a war does not solve anything.\u00a0 \u201cIn a war, humanity loses. \u00a0We need to implement a demilitarized vision of cooperation because true security is not achieved with weapons.\u201d\u00a0 Therefore, in defence of a right to security (or of a security of rights?), we must ask ourselves: Do we want people at the service of states, or states at the service of people?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson<\/strong> stated during a panel discussion that, in his view, Europe already had a security architecture: \u201cIt makes more sense to talk about using it than changing it,\u201d he added.\u00a0 However, with intensifying competition between the major powers, rising geopolitical tensions and growing dissatisfaction with the order based on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, it should be a universal humanitarian imperative to ban nuclear weapons and pursue progressive disarmament.\u00a0 Far from focusing diplomatic efforts on achieving this goal, the meeting leaves more questions than answers about a solution to this war and the architecture of a real collective and common security that would, in turn, prevent the eruption or escalation of new crises and armed conflicts.\u00a0 This false European security will remain elusive without a renewed and reformed order.\u00a0 We must commit ourselves to strategies of peace, not to war games.\u00a0 And to implement them on the ground, not behind closed doors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n