September 2026 Reflections on Peace: A Culture of Peace at the United Nations by Melissa Wild | UPEACE NY
On September 2, 2026, Melissa Wild, Founder and Executive Director of UPEACE NY, delivered the University for Peace remarks at the United Nations High-Level Forum on the Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace.
Her remarks reflected on what it means to move from commitments toward the daily practice of peace, highlighting women’s leadership, inclusion, critical self-reflection, interdependence, and the importance of building relationships across divides.
Read the Full Remarks
Below, you can read both versions of Melissa Wild’s intervention:
3-Minute Version
10-Minute Version
UN High-Level Forum on the Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace
Intervention by the University for Peace Permanent Observer Mission
Statement prepared by: Melissa Wild, Special Advisor
09.02.2026
The 3-minute version
Madame President, distinguished delegates,
The University for Peace welcomes the opportunity to contribute to this High-Level Forum.
As Co-Chair for the United Nations Academic Impact SDG Hub for SDG 16, and regular participants in the Commission on the Status of women, UPEACE recognizes the centrality of the interdependence of international peace and security, sustainable development, human rights, and reaffirms the explicit link made between the women, peace and security agenda and access to justice for all.
In fact much of what today’s theme reflects is interdependence. Yet, we are witnessing an increased fragmentation and intentional erosion of this sense of interdependence, with polarization, hate, and violent competition as its replacements.
I consider two core practices historically rooted in the systems of care facilitated - meaning led - by women and feminist leaders worldwide as most effective in preventing conflict and promoting peace. These two practices are: critical self-reflection and inclusion rather than “othering”.
First, critical self-reflection empowers us to consider impacts to safety and wellbeing of those around us. This is modeled through the intersectional feminist framework at the core of the UPEACE curriculum. This framework ensures that peace is understood in the context of an interdependent system, where supporting and uplifting those with the least ensures wellbeing for all. It also involves reflection on one’s own positionality within this interdependent system - We extend this approach through UPEACE NY Women, a multigenerational working group recently launched through our New York office.
Secondly, women’s leadership is a practice in “inclusion” over “othering” – While “othering” creates conditions for construction of an enemy, laying the foundation for systemic racism by which global inequality, war, and certainly gender discrimination and disregard and persecution for the LGBTQ+ community occurs and is considered an acceptable or necessary part of social order and control, “inclusion” as a framework for leadership in peace breaks down barriers to seeing the human dignity and worth of all people.
The University for Peace creates learning environments that model and foster a practice in both self-reflection and inclusion, where women make up more than sixty-five percent of our trained leaders over the past four decades actively contributing today to peacebuilding around the world.
I am proud to be able to be here speaking on behalf of peace, on behalf of an institution that opened the door for me, as an example, to take a leadership role in this space. Yet I know that my presence alone does not represent a completeness in our institution’s efforts to ensure women’s leadership, nor an intersectional feminist lens, is integrated across the university infrastructure. While goals are critical anchors to measure our progress, achieving a “culture of peace” requires a commitment to practice that sustains. This is why the University for Peace’s core saying, “if you want peace, work for peace,” remains ever more important today.
We must be willing to engage in critical self-reflection, as institutions, as individuals, and as individuals within institutions, as to whether or not our daily choices, the compromises we make for the sake of staying relevant, liked, funded, our resolutions and national policies, uphold this commitment to a culture of peace – We must ask ourselves, is it predicated on a practice of “othering” or rather a practice of “including?” This is how we return to interdependence, a foundational orientation of a culture of peace.
Thank you for your time, distinguished delegates.
This statement was prepared by Melissa Wild, with a note of thanks:
Thank you to those who supported: Rebecca Arnieri, Angelica Sanchez, Krista Smith; those who supported and encouraged my representing the University for Peace here today: our Permanent Observer Ramu Damodaran, and our Vice Rector Juan Carlos Sainz-Borgo; and to those educators who defined and exemplify the practice of peace for me at the University for Peace and beyond: Gabriela Montero, Olivia Sylvester, Adriana Salcedo, Mariateresa Garrido, Uzma Rashid, and Stephanie Knox.
UN High-Level Forum on the Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace
Intervention by the University for Peace Permanent Observer Mission
Statement prepared by: Melissa Wild, Special Advisor
09.02.2026
The 10-minute version
Madame President, distinguished delegates,
The University for Peace welcomes the opportunity to contribute to this High-Level Forum.
As Co-Chair for the United Nations Academic Impact SDG Hub for SDG 16, and regular participants in the Commission on the Status of women, UPEACE recognizes the centrality of the interdependence of international peace and security, sustainable development, human rights, and reaffirms the explicit link made between the women, peace and security agenda and access to justice for all.
In fact much of what today’s theme reflects is the interdependency of our countries’, institutions’ and communities’ goals, needs, pursuits of justice. Yet, we are witnessing an increased fragmentation and intentional erosion of this sense of interdependence, with polarization, hate, and violent competition as its replacements.
I consider two core practices historically rooted in the systems of care facilitated - meaning led - by women and feminist leaders worldwide as most effective in preventing conflict and promoting peace. These two practices are: critical self-reflection and inclusion rather than “othering”.
First, critical self-reflection empowers us to consider impacts to safety and wellbeing of those around us. This is modeled through the intersectional feminist framework which is core to the peace and conflict studies curriculum at the University for Peace. This framework ensures that peace is understood in the context of an interdependent system, where supporting and uplifting those with the least ensures wellbeing for all. In an intersectional feminist approach to peace and conflict transformation, reflecting on one’s own positionality within this interdependent system is how we prepare leaders across the world today. We extend this approach through UPEACE NY Women, a multigenerational working group recently launched through our New York office, which acts as a thought partner, ensuring we stay true to an intersectional feminist lens as we pursue peace in today’s and tomorrow’s context.
Secondly, women’s leadership is a practice in “inclusion” over “othering” – Many have named their concern for the ways human beings create categories that establish conditions for construction of an enemy, laying the foundation for systemic racism by which global inequality, war, and certainly gender discrimination and disregard and persecution for the LGBTQ+ community occurs and is considered an acceptable or necessary part of social order and control.
An intersectional feminist perspective puts inclusion at the center of peace work, and in the context of peace education, this looks like creating learning environments for breaking down barriers to seeing the human dignity and worth of all people.
The University for Peace illustrates the value of this investment in peace education: more than sixty-five percent of the leaders trained over the past four decades are women, many of whom are contributing today to peacebuilding and conflict resolution around the world. Be it through the recent work of our PhD graduate from our Global Center of Peace Innovation, Michelle Helman, who developed an evidence-based design framework to support leaders in navigating organizational culture change processes, or through the work of Olivia Sylvester in helping to facilitate inclusion and recognition of the indigenous Huetar peoples, whose land the University for Peace sits on, the women and gender diverse students, staff, and faculty that have passed through the University for Peace are a testament to the intersectional feminist lens, both in its triumphs and in its challenges, where inclusion over “othering” is modeled and nourished.
I am proud to be able to be here speaking on behalf of peace, on behalf of an institution that opened the door for me, as an example, to take a leadership role in this space. Yet I know that my presence alone does not represent a completeness in our institution’s efforts to ensure women’s leadership nor, importantly, an intersectional feminist lens, is integrated across the university infrastructure, nor the United Nations’ for that matter. While goals are critical anchors to measure our progress, achieving a “culture of peace”, one that is gender inclusive at all levels, is not a goal to achieve by a completeness and then rest, rather the goal is a commitment to practice. This is why the University for Peace’s core saying, “if you want peace, work for peace,” remains ever more important today.
We must be willing to engage in critical self-reflection, as institutions, as individuals, and as individuals within institutions, as to whether or not our daily choices, the compromises we make for the sake of staying relevant, liked, funded, our resolutions and national policies, uphold this commitment to a culture of peace – We must ask ourselves, is it predicated on a practice of “othering” or rather a practice of “including?” This is how we return to interdependence, a foundational orientation of a culture of peace.
I must conclude by acknowledging by name those directly involved in supporting my delivery of these remarks today — Thank you to those who supported the write-up of these remarks: Rebecca Arnieri, Angelica Sanchez, Krista Smith; those who supported and encouraged my representing the University for Peace here today: our Permanent Observer Ramu Damodaran, and our Vice Rector Juan Carlos Sainz-Borgo; and to those educators who defined and exemplify the practice of peace for me at the University for Peace and beyond: Gabriela Montero, Olivia Sylvester, Adriana Salcedo, Mariateresa Garrido, Uzma Rashid, and Stephanie Knox.
Thank you for your time, distinguished delegates.
PDF versions of both remarks are available below.
