Warpod

Saferworld

Every month, Charlie Linney and Lewis Brooks speak to a diverse group of practitioners, experts, and commentators from around the world to discuss the impacts of security policy on contemporary conflict. Join us to talk about the long-term implications of securitised interventions and policies, both for democratic controls over the use of force in Europe, the US and elsewhere and for the communities most impacted in places like the Middle East, the Sahel, the Horn of Africa, South America and South-East Asia.

  1. Rethinking UN counter-terrorism

    ١٥‏/١٢‏/٢٠٢٥

    Rethinking UN counter-terrorism

    In this episode we explore how the United Nations (UN) counter-terrorism architecture has expanded – and what it means for peace, human rights and multilateral action.  Over the past two decades, counter-terrorism has become one of the UN’s fastest-growing areas of work. From a small footprint with very limited capacity, to a dedicated UN Office of Counterterrorism with 200 staff, the counterterrorism agenda at the UN has seen dramatic growth. Yet despite UN Member State consensus on this agenda, many stakeholders have expressed concern that these developments run contrary to the founding ideals of the UN system. Given the clear harms that abusive counterterrorism measures have produced – for human rights, fundamental freedoms, civic space, peacebuilding and humanitarian action – is it time for the UN system to rethink its approach? As states prepare for major UN reforms and the 20-year review of the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, the decisions UN Member States take in 2026 will likely shape the multilateral system for years to come.  Ambika Satkunanathan and Ali Altiok join Jordan Street and Charlie Linney to discuss why multilateral counter-terrorism policy matters, why concerns about transparency and accountability are increasing, and what these shifts mean for civil society, local peace efforts and people living in conflict-affected contexts. They also explore how coalitions across peacebuilding, rights and security actors can work together to defend principled, prevention-focused approaches.  This conversation offers clear insights into the big questions facing the UN counterterrorism system – and why a more balanced, rights-affirming direction is essential for the UN’s credibility with people around the world.

    ٤٠ من الدقائق
  2. Where next for the UK Integrated Security Fund?

    ٢٥‏/٠٧‏/٢٠٢٤

    Where next for the UK Integrated Security Fund?

    With a new Labour government in power after the UK’s 2024 General Election, what does the future hold for the UK’s Integrated Security Fund (UK ISF)?   The UK ISF is a cross-government fund designed to address UK national security challenges, with a budget of approx. £1 billion. The idea of such a fund began in 2001 when a previous Labour government introduced the Conflict Pool, which evolved in 2015 to become the Conflict, Security and Stability Fund (CSSF), and evolved again in 2023 to become the UK Integrated Security Fund. It supports a wide range of projects around the world, from training overseas security forces to high-level dialogue between geopolitical rivals; and from supporting women’s rights organisations to tackle gender-based violence, to involvement in de-mining initiatives.   In this episode, we speak to Dr Gaurav Saini, co-founder of the Council for Strategic and Defense Research (CSDR), a think tank based in New Delhi, India. We also hear from Lewis Brooks, Saferworld’s UK Policy and Advocacy Advisor. We discuss their respective experiences of engaging with the UK ISF (and its previous iterations), including any gaps or challenges that stem from the national security approach it takes, and hear what they hope to see from the UK ISF moving forwards under a new government.  As Lewis Brooks says in the episode, “If you want to understand UK security and conflict policy around the world, then you need to understand this fund”.  Please note – the views, perspectives and opinions expressed in this podcast episode are those of the guests and do not necessarily represent the views of Saferworld as an organisation.

    ٣٧ من الدقائق
  3. How are UK political parties thinking about security policy?

    ٠١‏/٠٥‏/٢٠٢٤

    How are UK political parties thinking about security policy?

    The UK’s place in the world is changing, and so is the nature of the conflict around the world. With new risks and developing dynamics pulling policymakers and politicians in different directions, we spoke to great guests.   Olivia O'Sullivan is the Director of the UK in the World Programme at Chatham House and contributor to their podcast Independent Thinking.   Christine Cheng is senior lecturer in War Studies at King's College London.  Our discussion gives insight into how UK political parties approach security policy making and the various challenges they face. We cover the ways in which the UK’s major parties would respond to current conflicts and crises, the areas of consensus between their approaches, the difficulties in communicating foreign policy and security challenges to domestic populations, and the potential reorientation of the UK’s foreign policy under a prospective Labour government. We also spoke about the role of foreign policy and commentary on it in the upcoming UK election more broadly, and the need for inclusive and constructive debates on security challenges.  Saferworld, as a registered charity, is not politically affiliated in any way and is both politically neutral and impartial.  Please note – the views, perspectives and opinions expressed in this podcast episode are those of the guests and do not necessarily represent the views of Saferworld as an organisation.

    ٤١ من الدقائق

التقييمات والمراجعات

٥
من ٥
‫٢ من التقييمات‬

حول

Every month, Charlie Linney and Lewis Brooks speak to a diverse group of practitioners, experts, and commentators from around the world to discuss the impacts of security policy on contemporary conflict. Join us to talk about the long-term implications of securitised interventions and policies, both for democratic controls over the use of force in Europe, the US and elsewhere and for the communities most impacted in places like the Middle East, the Sahel, the Horn of Africa, South America and South-East Asia.