Abstract Recent US/Israeli attacks on Iran and retaliations by Tehran have created new uncertainties for the future of the Middle East, and for the fate of the US 20-Point Plan for Gaza. These disruptions are occurring as the United Nations, a longstanding actor in the region, is retreating from its historic peace and security role. The Plan reflects a compelling logic of confluent regional interests and incentives, and also presents shortcomings, from which the UN can take a cue. With the US again a direct belligerent in the region, the space for US-led mediation efforts may become more restricted. The UN's role as a facilitator of long-term peace and stability may again become more relevant. Current mandate reviews and an upcoming change in leadership present the UN with an opportunity to re-engage. If the UN is to do so, the next Secretary General should consider moving along three related tracks: 1) Initiate high-level consultations with regional partners to gauge demand for its services and reassess its regional role; 2) Review its organisational footprint to establish a whole-of-region engagement; 3) Propose a structured, region-wide framework for dialogue and long-term cooperation in areas of collective security, economic, scientific and societal interest.
Costy et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: