In less than 48 hours, attacks and counter attacks have shaken West Asia, killed hundreds, injured hundreds more, caused panic and chaos, and destroyed infrastructure, with ripple effects even felt in adjoining regions. Unlike the attacks that took place in June 2025, those launched on 28 February 2026 caused the death of the leader of Iran. This has significant repercussions with Iran having to respond, and in doing so they claim to be targeting US interest in the region, but those interests are located in neighbouring countries. This has resulted in an extremely volatile situation that has the tendency to escalate, until and unless those at war take a step back and understand the risks posed.
While the debate rages on the legitimacy, magnitude and impact of the attacks, the world is perilously close to mayhem and it is the responsibility of governments around the world to take a stance.
Expressions of concern are important. Presidents and Prime Ministers across the world have expressed concern and called for caution. Such expressions convey sentiments to protagonists to be mindful of opinion, but such expressions individually by leaders in different countries are not sufficient at critical moments in history. Joint stances and collective action are what count, and member states of the United Nations have a responsibility to step forward and call for an emergency session of the General Assembly which is of utmost importance at this stage. Whilst leaders themselves may not be able to travel to New York, it is the duty of Permanent Representatives to meet and explore options out of the current stalemate.
Diplomacy has been the main recourse for decades. The United Nations has averted a third World War owing to effective diplomacy. In this 80th year of its existence the global body can play a pioneering role as it has on numerous occasions in the past. At the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis, it was a South Asian, at the helm in New York - U. Thant - who was able to effectively mediate and ensure a reduction of tension. Thant brought the world back from the brink. If not for his mediatory role, the world would have very likely seen the impact of nuclear weapons as Kennedy, Khrushchev and Castro all remained determined to traverse their individual paths.
Thant, who was at the time the Acting Secretary General, having been sworn in for a year following the tragic death of Dag Hammarskjöld, was able to diplomatic engage with all concerned, and he had the backing of the rest of the world. The most important tool in his armoury however was the strong support that he received from the White House and Kremlin, where both saw him as a neutral personality, with the best interests of the global community. This was his biggest asset, an asset which unfortunately Antonio Guterres does not possess, through no fault of his own.
Iran hails from one of the oldest civilizations on the planet. It is a country of the Non-Aligned Movement, it is a partner in the G77 grouping, it is also member state of the Global South. For too long Member States of all these bodies have taken a back seat, and kept lamenting, especially over the growing power of the United States of America, and its heightened degree of influence in capitals around the world. It is absolutely correct that America is the world’s leading economy, and leader on the world stage, but it is also a country that espouses democracy. In a democratic environment there can be dissent, there can be differences of opinion, and there can be the adoption of different courses of action. It is through diplomacy that such differences are ironed out, and not by mere submission. America is against the dictatorial ideals in certain quarters of the world, and needs to be engaged with diplomatically, with national positions explained.
It is inspiring that the current leadership of America is attempting to make their country great, again. It is also imperative for the leadership of other countries to make their countries great too. While national interest is paramount, what might be concerning is the level of dependency on America, and therefore the hesitancy to step forward at this time, for fear of reprisals. However, it is also essential to remember once again that democracy is the common bedrock of most our countries. We must possess the ability to agree on some issues, and to agree to disagree, on others. It is only through skilled diplomacy that such efforts can be realised.
At this time, the world needs peace. The head of state of a country of the Global South has been assassinated and much violence is ensuing. For this to stop, there has to be a collection of voices from around the world. These have to collectively emanate from the United Nations, which is at the heart of global affairs. For too long the UN has had to step in when the crisis has escalated and is blowing out of proportion. This is yet another situation where the UN needs to step in, but Member States have a crucial responsibility to strengthen the body. Regional groupings have potential but it is only through a global call for an end to the violence, that a reduction in tension will occur.
Member States must be proactive in calling for an Emergency Session of the United Nations General Assembly. Such an Emergency Session will send out a strong message to conflicting parties to stop their actions and return to negotiations and use diplomacy as their means of engagement.
From the first Emergency Session of the UNGA that took place in November 1956 at the height of the Suez Crisis, to the eleventh session in 2022 and 2023 over the Russian invasion of Ukraine, there has been a dominance of issues emanating from West Asia that have warranted such sessions. It is through diplomatic engagement that ways can be found to initially halt the violence and fear, and thereafter address further issues.
Lest we forget, the Vietnam War ended chiefly due to opposition from the American public. People made a difference by calling on their government to withdraw and end the hostilities as thousands had been killed and injured. It was the millions turning out in demonstrations that turned the tide from support for the war effort to opposition. There has to be momentum. Momentum must come from Member States who take concerted action to thwart the escalation of violence and the potential of much greater destruction.
This momentum must be encouraged by reaching out beyond the Global South. While it is understood that countries of the developed world have issues with Iran, the need of the hour is an end to the hostilities, and this is where the Global South can partner with much of the developed world. It is in the interest of the entire global community to see an end to the attacks, irrespective of individual positions on Iran.
The Global South alone comprises of between 80% and 85% of the world population. Collectively the Global South can do so much to support each other but has tended to traverse differing paths owing to varied reasons. The current moment is a golden opportunity for the Global South to come together, include much of the developed world, and demand an end to the bombings which are making an oil-rich region highly volatile.
An Emergency Session of the UNGA might not be viewed positively by the main protagonists, but it is certainly the way forward for the rest of the world, that does not want an entire region to go up in flames. It would also constitute collective action of the majority on the planet, which is how democracies function.
