Nuclear deterrence, forgotten crises and the weight of words in global conflicts. On the occasion of the World Day of Peace, Archbishop Paul Richard Gallagher, Vatican Secretary for Relations with States and International Organisations, offers an assessment of the world order at the beginning of 2026. From geopolitical fragmentation to humanitarian crises that have been normalised, the British prelate underlines the role of the Holy See as the “critical conscience” of the international system and calls for the need for “verifiable gestures” to achieve genuine reconciliation.
Your Excellency, the Pope speaks of a “disarmed and disarming” peace. In a world founded on deterrence, what realistic steps could indicate a change of paradigm?
During the Cold War, nuclear deterrence was sometimes accepted as a provisional balancing measure, while concerted efforts were being made to work towards progressive disarmament. Various international conventions were subsequently signed with the aim of limiting the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and nuclear weapons in particular. Unfortunately, this effort has remained incomplete. It is worth noting that as commitment to disarmament and peace has diminished, the fight against hunger, poverty and forced migration has also been neglected, together with the promotion of fundamental human rights.
What has been lost with the abandonment of the path of progressive disarmament?
True peace is not the result of disarmament alone; it is founded on trust and peaceful relations among peoples. Only genuine peace guarantees integral security, which cannot be reduced to purely military concerns. In the current context, marked by a certain “international disorder”,
We cannot resign ourselves to a purely confrontational logic, in which relations among peoples risk closing in on fear of the other and thus on the dominance of force.
We must not forget that the path of dialogue is always possible, indeed desirable, an “humble and persevering” dialogue, as Pope Leo XIV urges us, to help bring about a change of course, to rebuild relations of trust, and for the good of all humanity.
There is talk of a crisis of the international order, of a return to blocs or of an unstable pluralism. Which scenario seems most realistic to you?
The scenario we are experiencing is not simply multipolar: it is profoundly unstable. We are not witnessing an orderly return to the blocs of the past, but rather a fragmentation in which
Alliances are fluid, law is often subordinated to force and fear becomes a political criterion.
We see this clearly in Ukraine, the Middle East, the Red Sea, the Sahel and other parts of the world.
In this framework of instability, what space remains for the Holy See as a credible mediator?
Pope Leo XIV has warned against the spread of a sense of powerlessness that is in fact a form of surrender: when the result of human choices is deemed inevitable, clarity of judgement is lost. In this context, the Holy See does not present itself as a geopolitical actor among others, but as the critical conscience of the international system, a sentinel in the night who already glimpses the dawn, calling for responsibility, for law and for the centrality of the person. Its credibility as a mediator stems from its refusal to accept war as normal and from its capacity to remain firmly anchored in the dignity of the persons and peoples involved.
Media polarisation seems to have a direct impact on the dynamics of conflicts. How much does language weigh today in the construction or failure of peace?
It weighs enormously. Today language does not merely describe conflicts: it often precedes them, prepares them and fuels them.
Simplification, the demonisation of the adversary, the systematic use of fear and a war psychosis make peace unspeakable even before it becomes impracticable.
This concerns both the media and political communication. A climate is created in which compromise is perceived as weakness and the enemy is dehumanised.
What concrete consequences does this dynamic have on the diplomatic level?
The Pope has recalled that peace fails when it becomes unsayable, when one can no longer find “the right words” to imagine it as near. A language that renounces truth and complexity constructs a distorted world, in which compromise appears as betrayal and violence as necessity. At the diplomatic level too, this is one of the main obstacles to peace. The Holy See continues to insist on a language that does not divide or fuel fear and hatred, but that unites and makes mutual recognition possible, even among adversaries.
The Secretariat of State of the Holy See
The Secretariat of State directly assists the Roman Pontiff in the exercise of his universal mission. It is structured into three Sections: General Affairs, Relations with States and International Organisations, and Diplomatic Personnel. In particular, the Section for Relations with States oversees the Holy See’s diplomatic relations, the conclusion of international agreements and representation in multilateral bodies, acting as a stable interlocutor between the Church and the international community.
Many humanitarian crises remain on the margins of international attention. Which ones risk being ignored in 2026?
The greatest risk for 2026 is that of normalising the emergency. I am thinking in particular of several areas of sub-Saharan Africa, populations affected by forgotten conflicts, and the humanitarian consequences of climate crises, which exacerbate already existing tensions. Certain situations in the Middle East also risk being read solely through a strategic lens, losing sight of their human impact.
What has the Pope denounced with regard to this “normalisation of the emergency”?
Pope Leo XIV has clearly denounced a worrying dynamic:
As rearmament spending grows enormously, the capacity to see the victims diminishes.
When security is conceived almost exclusively in armed terms, everything that does not fit this logic becomes invisible.
What urgent steps should be taken?
The urgent steps are well known: protection of civilians, access to humanitarian aid, support for the most exposed populations, renewed commitment to conflict prevention and the strengthening of supranational institutions. Without this change of perspective, the risk is that indifference becomes structural. This touches on another worrying aspect: open conflict hotspots have multiplied and expanded over time to such an extent that
There is almost no space left in public attention for “minor crises”, such as poverty, corruption, discrimination and the exploitation of people.
These are the crises that increasingly risk slipping into oblivion. It is here that the Church and the Holy See can do much, by drawing attention to them and working for the good of each and all.
In a context of mistrust and social fragility, what does educating for peace mean today?
Peace comes from God. Justifying violence with religion insults the Trinitarian God who is love. Educating for peace today means countering a culture of closure and confrontation that runs not only through international relations but also through societies within States. Pope Leo XIV has insisted on the link between peace and social cohesion, recalling that there can be no peace among nations unless trust is first rebuilt within communities.
What concrete sign can a country give to begin 2026 as a time of genuine reconciliation?
The Jubilee is coming to an end, but it is always time for reconciliation. A concrete sign to begin 2026 could be the choice of verifiable, not symbolic, gestures: reopening interrupted channels of dialogue, supporting joint humanitarian initiatives even among countries in tension, respecting agreements already signed, and promoting policies that reduce inequalities and exclusion. As the Pope has recalled, peace is not born of grand declarations, but of concrete decisions that show another path is possible and practicable.