Peacebuilding Team Initiative
Discussion Document Version 1.04
Introduction
The UN wants 2026-7 to be the year of Investing in Peace. The amounts invested by governments in peace-making are minuscule compared of the vast amounts invested in war-making.
It is proposed here that peace movements across the world should press their governments to create Peacemaking Teams within their Foreign Offices with a mandate to improve communications with countries they stand in a less than cordial relationship.
This discussion paper is being circulated in the hope of gathering discussion of and initial support for, focused governmental involvement in peacemaking initiatives.
Background
If peace were a drug, everyone would want to be on it. Compared to war, peace is far and away more pleasant, more prosperous, more productive, and more sustainable. Peace allows us to work to protect and repair society and the environment, to work to eliminate emissions of greenhouse gases.
Peace is also far less financially demanding than war, which should make it the top priority in today’s world where money is considered paramount.
War is based on mutual paranoia, whereas peace is based on mutual trust.
The world’s governments at present are spending about $2.7 billion per year on the arms trade, and this figure is on a rising trend. In comparison, the amount spent on peace is scarcely discernible. There is therefore room for a significant expansion of official peace-building efforts.
21st September 2026 was the International Day of Peace, and the UN declared that the theme this year should be Investing in Peace. One expression of this aspiration would be that governments should actually invest some serious money into new initiatives specifically designed to reduce international tension. International relations in times of peace and in times of tension
In peacetime there are multi-level, diverse contacts between nations, through trade, travel, cultural exchanges and many other channels.
In times of political tension between countries this contact is restricted to higher levels of government. Sanctions may reduce trade, travel may be discouraged, and cultural exchanges may be shut down. Contacts between countries may be limited to contact between Prime Minsters, Foreign Secretaries, and Security Services.
It is proposed here that these contacts should be expanded with the addition of a well-funded peace-building team.
Structure and function of the peace-building team
The proposed peace-building team (PBT) will be selected from high-level, able government officers and specialists who are committed to peace-building with the country with whom relations are strained. They will be drawn from the Treasury, the Ministry of Defence, and diplomacy, supplemented with advisers who are specialists in peace, conciliation and knowledge of the target nation.
The aim of the team will be to explore and develop contacts with individuals and organisation in the other nation – in embassies, high-level office holders and politicians and well as journalists intellectuals and ordinary people – with the aim of building trust between the two peoples.
They will seek to create open-ended dialogue on subjects such as the concern on either side about expenditure on military technology developments which are perceived as aggressive, as well as the general effect of military expenditure on spending on the welfare of society.
They will listen actively and empathically to their interlocutors’ views and perspectives, being ready to explore areas of provocation and misperception, and historic events which may affect present perceptions.
They will be conscious at all times of attempts on the part of the other Government to mislead, manipulate and corrupt them, while simultaneously seeking to create mutual trust. They will also be conscious of, and will resist, any attempts of their own Government to use members of the PBT as spies.
They will be careful not to compromise the security of their contacts by laying them open to charges of treason and subversion by the other Government.
They will have strict guidelines to avoid giving undertakings that their own Government will not support, and to avoid divulging information that their own Government wishes to retain.
They will seek to create outline plans for mutually beneficial agreements and mechanisms to be implemented at the time when tensions are resolved and relationships become normalised between the two countries.
The PBT will report back to the Foreign Secretary, who will relay important information to the Cabinet.
People support peace-building
A poll for Rethinking Security in July 2026 showed that 65% of British citizens (especially the 25-34 age group) thought that peace building was either very or fairly important. Even 53% of Reform UK voters though it was very or fairly important.
Therefore there is scope for a successful campaign to persuade Government to create a PeaceBuilding Team.
Conclusion
Given that in the final analysis, the future of international relationships is based either on mutual trust or mutual paranoia, and given that trusting relationships are more beneficial than relationships based on mutual paranoia, and given that vast amounts of financial resources are currently spent on the paraphernalia of paranoia, this paper seeks to set out how a relatively small amount of financial resource could be invested in mutual trust and peace-building.
Richard Lawson
Churchill, North Somerset
24/10/2026
