The Sudan case shows that the world already has several tools to prevent or stop mass atrocities. They are imperfect, but they can work better if citizens understand and demand their use.

1. UNITING FOR PEACE (U4P)

What it is: A UN General Assembly mechanism (from 1950) that allows the Assembly to act when the Security Council is paralyzed by a veto.

• What it can do:

Convene an emergency session.
Condemn aggression or mass atrocities.
Recommend sanctions, arms embargoes, and protective missions.

• What it cannot do:

It cannot legally force the Security Council or states to act.
It cannot “authorize” the use of force; it can only recommend.

• Why it matters: U4P can put political and moral pressure on veto-wielding states, force a global public debate, and help build coalitions for action.

2. RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT (R2P)

• What it is: A political commitment (2005) that:

States must protect their own populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity.
The international community must help them—and, if they fail, must consider collective action.

• How it works in practice:

Any coercive action (such as sanctions or the use of force) still needs Security Council approval.
Without that approval, R2P remains more of a promise than a guarantee.

• Why it mattered in Sudan:
  Even with clear early warnings at Al-Fashir, the Security Council never approved robust protection measures. The concept was not matched by implementation.

3. ARTICLE 51 AND COLLECTIVE SELF-DEFENCE

• What it is: A provision in the UN Charter recognizing the right of individual or collective self-defence if a state is attacked.

• How it could be used:

If the Security Council is blocked, a state under attack can ask other states to help defend it.
In theory, legitimate authorities or forces representing targeted civilians might seek such support.

• Risks:
  It can escalate into wider war and is politically contentious. However, it is one of the few legal pathways available when the Security Council fails completely.

4. UN EMERGENCY PEACE SERVICE (UNEPS)

• What it is: A proposed standing UN “emergency service” made up of military, police, and civilian personnel directly employed by the UN.

• Why it’s different from peacekeeping:

Traditional peacekeeping depends on states volunteering troops—often a process that takes months.
UNEPS would be permanently ready and deployable within days.

• What it could do:

Arrive early in crises.
Protect civilians.
Help stabilize situations before they collapse into full-scale war or genocide.

• Why it matters:
  In Sudan, a UNEPS-type force might have deterred or limited atrocities during the early stages of the conflict and at Al-Fashir.

5. THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT (ICC)

• What it is: A permanent court in The Hague that prosecutes individuals for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.

How cases start:

A State Party to the Rome Statute asks for an investigation.
The UN Security Council refers a situation.
The ICC Prosecutor opens an investigation on their own initiative (with judges’ approval).

• Limits:

Civil society cannot directly “file a case,” but it can supply evidence and pressure states to act.
The court depends on states to arrest suspects.

• Why it matters in prevention:
  The credible risk of prosecution can deter some leaders from committing mass atrocities. In Sudan, existing ICC jurisdiction over Darfur has not yet been fully used for the recent massacres.

WHAT YOU CAN DO NEXT

You don’t need to be a diplomat to strengthen these tools. The Preventing War Inquiry shows how informed citizens can shape the agenda. Here are concrete steps:

1. PRESS YOUR GOVERNMENT TO USE UNITING FOR PEACE AND R2P Write to your elected representatives (MPs, senators, parliamentarians) and ask them to: Support the use of Uniting for Peace when the Security Council is blocked, especially in situations like Sudan. Publicly endorse stronger, earlier use of Responsibility to Protect when mass atrocities are clearly developing. Mention Sudan and Al-Fashir as examples of what happens when these mechanisms are not used or are delayed.

2. ADVOCATE FOR 1% OF GDP FOR PEACEKEEPING AND FOR UNEPS Support the idea that at least 1% of national GDP be devoted to UN peacekeeping and peacebuilding, especially if much more is being allocated to military spending.

• Ask your government to:
  Back the creation of a UN Emergency Peace Service (UNEPS).
  Take a leadership role (as Canada once did) in building international support for a rapid, standing UN force.
  Use simple language: “If we can mobilize for war in days, we should be able to mobilize for peace just as fast.”

3. STRENGTHEN THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT If your country is a party to the Rome Statute: *Urge your government to call for ICC investigations when there is strong evidence of genocide or crimes against humanity, as in Sudan. *Demand that your country arrest and surrender any ICC-indicted suspects who enter its territory. *Support human rights organizations that: *Document atrocities. *Share evidence with the UN and ICC. *Train local groups to safely collect testimonies and data.

4. JOIN OR START A CITIZEN INQUIRY OR STUDY CIRCLE Use the Preventing War Inquiry as a model:

• Gather a small group (online or in person).
• Choose a conflict or risk area.
• Study U4P, R2P, UNEPS, ICC, and related tools.
• Draft your own recommendations and send them to:
• Elected officials.
• Foreign ministries.
• Local and national media.
• Share recordings, summaries, and briefing notes publicly, as Project Save the World has done with Sudan.

5. PUSH FOR RESPONSIBLE TRADE AND ARMS POLICIES Ask your government to:

• Halt arms exports to regimes engaged in war crimes or likely future atrocities.
• Enforce arms embargoes already in place.
• Investigate and prosecute illicit arms deals that fuel wars like Sudan’s.
• Support campaigns that track and expose your country’s arms sales and military cooperation agreements.

6. SUPPORT PEACE EDUCATION AND PUBLIC AWARENESS Encourage schools, universities, unions, and community groups to:

• Teach about the UN, international law, and nonviolent conflict resolution.
• Use real cases—like Sudan—to illustrate how prevention can fail and how it might succeed.
• Share materials (including this article and the video of the Sudan meeting) within your networks.

None of these actions alone will prevent the next war. But together, they build the political and moral pressure that makes it harder for governments to ignore atrocities and easier for them to choose prevention over indifference.

The Preventing War Inquiry shows that ordinary citizens can understand the “gobbledygook” of international law, apply it to real crises, and demand better options. The next step is for more people to join them.