Securing the seas: UN mandate for maritime peace

Including both western and Global South navies would enhance legitimacy and maintain strategic balance. It reinforces a fundamental principle: The seas are a global commons, and their security must be collectively ensured.

The emerging frontier of conflict is no longer land alone — it is the sea. From the Strait of Hormuz to the South China Sea, maritime spaces are rapidly becoming arenas of strategic contestation. These waters carry the lifeblood of the global economy—energy flows, trade routes, and supply chains. Any disruption here is not regional; it is systemic, with immediate global consequences. Nearly one-fifth of global oil consumption transits through the Strait of Hormuz, underlining its strategic fragility.

Unilateral military responses are increasingly insufficient to secure critical chokepoints such as Hormuz. Evolving deterrence dynamics in the region have altered the strategic balance.

Decades of reliance on unilateral actions and bilateral escort arrangements appear to be reaching their limits. Even recent multilateral efforts, including the April 2026 London Summit, where 40 nations aligned to address the situation, did not yield a durable consensus. This reflects a broader gap in institutionalised approaches to maritime security.

Recent high-level political engagements leading to a temporary easing of tensions linked to the Strait of Hormuz underscore the ad hoc and fragile nature of current crisis management mechanisms. Such developments highlight how critical global chokepoints continue to be managed through reactive and transactional arrangements rather than stable institutional frameworks.

French President Emmanuel Macron has cautioned that weakening adherence to the United Nations Charter risks eroding the credibility required to prevent conflict. A UN-led approach can reduce perceptions of bloc politics and power projection, thereby lowering escalation risks. Any sustainable solution must therefore be anchored within a UN framework, the only platform with universal legitimacy.

Maritime peacemaking

The United Nations’ peacekeeping architecture remains largely designed for land-based conflicts. This structural mismatch is increasingly evident in the current maritime environment.

Traditional peacekeeping evolved in an era of clearly defined wars and ceasefires. Today’s maritime tensions are fluid—shaped by grey-zone tactics, calibrated brinkmanship, and the persistent risk of escalation without formal war.

The absence of neutral, UN-backed maritime rules of engagement increases the risk of miscalculation. In such an environment, deterrence without institutional structure becomes inherently unstable.

A strategic shift is required from passive observation to active maritime peacemaking and peacebuilding. The UN is uniquely positioned to anchor such an effort.

There is precedent. The UNIFIL Maritime Task Force, operational since 2006, has demonstrated the feasibility of UN-led maritime security operations in supporting Lebanon’s sovereignty and monitoring its waters. This experience offers a foundation for expanding UN engagement into broader maritime domain operations.

Building on this, the UN can extend its mandate to help secure critical global sea lanes.

Pathway for action

The way forward is both practical and grounded in established UN processes.

It may begin with an emergency special session of the UN General Assembly—challenging, but feasible—to elevate maritime security as a global priority and frame secure sea lanes as a shared international responsibility.

This can be followed by a UN Security Council resolution providing the necessary legal mandate. The council has authorised complex land-based missions; extending this framework to maritime domains is both logical and timely.

Once authorised, the UN can activate its institutional mechanisms—force generation, command structures, and operational guidelines—drawing on decades of peacekeeping experience. A clearly time-bound mandate, supported by periodic review mechanisms, can address concerns over mission creep.

Coalition of willing

The operational core can rest on a coalition of the willing. Capable naval powers and maritime nations can contribute assets, such as ships, surveillance systems, and expertise, operating under UN authorisation.

This hybrid model combines legitimacy with capability, ensuring both accountability and effectiveness. It distributes responsibility, enables coordinated deployment, and sustains presence in sensitive regions.

Inclusion of both western and Global South navies would enhance legitimacy and maintain strategic balance. Above all, it reinforces a fundamental principle: The seas are a global commons, and their security must be collectively ensured.

Maritime stability cannot be sustained by naval presence alone. A parallel emphasis on peacebuilding is essential—strengthening regional maritime cooperation, enhancing coastal security capacities, and supporting dispute resolution mechanisms.

Targeted capacity-building for littoral states can promote long-term sustainability and reduce dependency. Stability at sea remains closely linked to governance on land.

A global necessity

Scepticism around expanding UN mandates is understandable. Yet the greater risk lies in inaction.

Unregulated competition in maritime spaces could disrupt global trade, heighten tensions, and undermine international stability. The consequences are already visible.

Delayed multilateral responses have historically resulted in significantly higher economic and strategic costs. The UN does not lack the tools, it possesses institutional experience, established frameworks, and global credibility. What is required is the political will to adapt these instruments to evolving realities.

A UN-led maritime peacekeeping and peacebuilding framework can be both practical and effective. However, its success will ultimately depend on alignment with the political interests of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council: The United States, Russia, China, France, and the United Kingdom.

Enduring maritime stability lies at the intersection of global necessity and great power consensus.

The seas have always connected the world. Today, they also expose its vulnerabilities. Securing them cannot be left to fragmented efforts. It requires a coordinated, legitimate, and forward-looking response.

A UN-mandated maritime peace mission, anchored in a coalition of the willing, is no longer merely a strategic option. It is a global necessity. This is a cause that calls for wider global awareness and engagement

kiranbediofficial@gmail.com

Kiran Bedi is a former police adviser to the UN Secretary-General (peacekeeping operations under Kofi Annan). Singh is a Chhattisgarh-cadre IPS officer and author of a book on the United Nations Peacebuilding Commission. Views expressed are personal.