#7/26 In Search of Moral Authority: Religion, Civilisations and the Return of Faith to International Affairs

Copyright © 2026

prepared by the Inclusive Society Institute

PO Box 12609

Mill Street

Cape Town, 8010

South Africa

235-515 NPO

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced

or transmitted in any form or by any means without the permission in

writing from the Global South Perspectives Network

DISCLAIMER

Views expressed in this report do not necessarily represent the views of

The coordinating entities or any of their office bearers

Original transcripts of the presentations made during a meeting held on 13 July 2026 have been summarised with the use of the AI tool and then edited and amended where necessary by the rapporteur for correctness and context.

JULY 2026

Rapporteur: Klaus Kotzé

CONTENTS

1 Introduction

2 A crisis of legitimacy rather than institutions

3 Beyond power: Recovering moral purpose

4 Religion's enduring contribution

5 From power towards responsibility

6 Towards a civilisation of love

7 Rreligion never left: Recovering trust, restoring conscience

8 The limits of political authority

9 Religion never returned, because it never left

10 Lessons from contemporary iran

11 The continuing public role of religion

12 Justice, consistency and moral credibility

13 A remarkable convergence

14 Rebuilding trust through moral leadership

15 Religion as conscience, rather than government

16 The importance of consistency

17 Dialogue in an age of polarisation

18 Faith in a multipolar world

19 Moral authority and the future of multilateralism

20 Emerging areas of consensus

21 Conclusion

Cover photo: istockphoto.com | Stock photo ID: 2254584978 & 487010246

1 INTRODUCTION

The Global South Perspectives Network (GSPN) convened another of its Open Consultation Monday discussions on 13 July 2026 to examine a question that is assuming increasing relevance in an international system marked by geopolitical rivalry, institutional paralysis and declining public trust: Can religion once again provide the moral authority that contemporary international affairs appear increasingly to lack?

Held under the theme "In Search of Moral Authority: Religion, Civilisations and the Return of Faith to International Affairs," the discussion brought together Archbishop Henryk Jagodziński, Apostolic Nuncio of the Holy See to South Africa and Botswana, and Dr Mohammad Taher Gholi Tabar, an Iranian scholar of comparative religion and specialist in interfaith dialogue. The discussion was moderated by the Inclusive Society Institute's Chief Executive Officer, Daryl Swanepoel, and attracted policy practitioners, diplomats, academics, former United Nations officials and civil society representatives from across the globe.

The discussion was particularly timely. Across much of the world, confidence in traditional political institutions is weakening. International organisations are increasingly criticised for their inability to prevent conflict, enforce international law consistently or command universal legitimacy. At the same time, geopolitical competition has intensified, military expenditure continues to rise and diplomacy is frequently overshadowed by the pursuit of strategic advantage. Against this backdrop, the discussion sought to explore whether religious traditions and institutions might once again contribute to rebuilding the ethical foundations upon which peaceful international cooperation ultimately depends.

Importantly, the discussion was not an argument for theocracy, nor for the replacement of secular governance by religious authority, instead, participants explored whether religion could once again serve as a source of moral guidance capable of informing political leadership, strengthening diplomacy and restoring trust in an increasingly fragmented international order.

The discussion quickly moved beyond theological questions. Instead, it became a thoughtful examination of the relationship between power and responsibility, morality and politics and the conditions necessary for rebuilding international trust.

2 A CRISIS OF LEGITIMACY RATHER THAN

INSTITUTIONS

In opening the discussion, the moderator observed that international affairs appear increasingly characterised by a widening gap between political power and moral leadership. While political institutions continue to exercise authority, questions are increasingly being asked about the legitimacy with which that authority is exercised.

The discussion therefore set out to explore whether religious institutions, many of which have retained significant moral credibility across centuries, could help provide ethical direction at a time when traditional political leadership is increasingly contested.

Archbishop Jagodziński developed this proposition by arguing that contemporary international affairs are experiencing not merely a crisis of governance, but a deeper crisis of moral authority itself.

Modern civilisation, he suggested, possesses unprecedented technological capability, military power and institutional sophistication. But despite these advances, humanity appears increasingly uncertain about the moral purposes those capabilities ought to serve. International institutions remain numerous, legal instruments continue to multiply and technological innovation accelerates at an extraordinary pace. Nevertheless, the international community struggles with the very questions that have always defined civilisation: What constitutes justice? What is peace? What responsibilities do nations owe one another? What limits ought to be placed upon political power? Ultimately, what does it mean to remain fully human in an age increasingly shaped by technology and competition?

These, he argued, are not technical questions. They are fundamentally moral questions.

According to the Archbishop, contemporary international relations often exhibit a paradox, in that states have become more interconnected than at any point in history, but trust between nations appears to be steadily eroding. Political leaders speak frequently of international cooperation while the very institutions established to facilitate that cooperation are increasingly questioned, weakened or bypassed. Humanity possesses extraordinary technological capabilities, including artificial intelligence, but continues to struggle with the ethical questions that technology itself cannot answer.

The consequence, he argued, is that international politics increasingly risks becoming an exercise in the management of power rather than the pursuit of justice.

3 BEYOND POWER: RECOVERING MORAL PURPOSE

Drawing extensively upon the recent papal encyclical Magnifica Humanitas, Archbishop Jagodziński argued that humanity currently faces two competing visions of civilisation.

The first is a civilisation founded primarily upon power - political power, technological dominance, economic strength and the pursuit of national advantage. It reflects what he described through the biblical metaphor of Babel: the belief that human progress can be secured principally through the accumulation of capability and the exercise of power.

The second vision is represented by Jerusalem, a civilisation patiently constructed upon responsibility, solidarity, justice and peace. Here, power is not rejected, but disciplined by moral purpose. Rather than asking simply how power can be expanded, this vision asks how power ought to be exercised.

This distinction framed much of the subsequent discussion.

The Archbishop argued that the central challenge confronting contemporary international affairs is therefore not merely what kind of international institutions should be created, but what kind of civilisation humanity ultimately seeks to build. Institutional reform, while important, cannot by itself restore legitimacy if the moral foundations underpinning those institutions continue to weaken.

4 RELIGION'S ENDURING CONTRIBUTION

Against this backdrop, Archbishop Jagodziński outlined several enduring contributions that religion can make to international affairs.

First, religion reminds political authority that no state, market, ideology or technology is absolute. There exists a moral order that transcends political power itself and thus religion therefore introduces a degree of humility into political decision-making by reminding leaders that authority ultimately carries ethical obligations beyond immediate national interest.

Second, religion affirms the inherent dignity of every human person and therefore individuals should never be reduced to mere citizens, consumers, workers, refugees, soldiers or statistical categories, because every person possesses an intrinsic worth that precedes political systems and cannot legitimately be diminished by them. This principle, participants noted, provides an essential ethical foundation for human rights, humanitarian law and international cooperation.

Third, religion preserves collective memory. Religious traditions carry within them humanity's experiences of persecution, exile, war, injustice, reconciliation and forgiveness. Such memory serves an important civilisational function by helping societies avoid repeating their greatest historical failures while simultaneously preserving hope that reconciliation remains possible.

Religion also creates communities of responsibility. Long before governments intervene, religious communities frequently establish schools, hospitals, charitable institutions and networks of social support. In doing so they generate habits of solidarity that extend beyond formal political institutions and contribute directly to social resilience.

Finally, religion preserves hope. Politics without hope, the Archbishop argued, easily descends into cynicism. Similarly, diplomacy without hope risks becoming little more than the management of perpetual conflict, faith traditions remind humanity that history need not remain imprisoned by its past and reconciliation always remains possible, however difficult contemporary circumstances may appear.

5 FROM POWER TOWARDS RESPONSIBILITY

One of the most significant contributions emerging from the Archbishop's address was his distinction between power and responsibility.

Power itself is not inherently problematic - nations will inevitably pursue legitimate national interests, maintain security capabilities and seek economic prosperity. The challenge, however, arises when power becomes detached from moral responsibility.

Throughout modern history, diplomacy has frequently been criticised as weakness and compromise has been portrayed as surrender. Archbishop Jagodziński rejected this characterisation. Diplomacy, he argued, requires precisely the opposite qualities: patience, humility, perseverance and the willingness to maintain dialogue even when disagreement appears irreconcilable. Speaking with one's adversaries should never be interpreted as legitimising them. Rather, it reflects recognition that today's adversary may become tomorrow's partner in peace.

The vocation of diplomacy is therefore to preserve communication when others seek confrontation; to listen when listening is uncomfortable; to search for goodwill even in deeply polarised circumstances; and above all to prevent the complete destruction of trust between nations. In this sense, diplomacy represents not weakness, but one of the highest expressions of moral courage.

This understanding led naturally to one of the discussion's most enduring themes, namely that the international order cannot be sustained indefinitely through deterrence alone, because stable peace ultimately requires relationships built upon trust, dialogue and shared ethical commitments.

6 TOWARDS A CIVILISATION OF LOVE

Perhaps the Archbishop's most compelling contribution was his call for a transition from what he described as a culture of power towards a civilisation of love.

This should not be understood sentimentally. Rather, it represents a demanding political and ethical programme. It requires transforming charity into structures of justice; converting interdependence into solidarity; replacing domination with service; and ensuring that differences become opportunities for dialogue rather than causes of conflict.

Importantly, this vision does not ask states to abandon legitimate national interests. Instead, it asks them to recognise that no national interest can ultimately be separated from the broader common good of humanity. Power remains necessary, but it must increasingly be exercised as responsibility. Politics remains essential, but it must be directed towards service. Technology remains indispensable, but it must serve humanity rather than displace it.

In developing this argument, Archbishop Jagodziński also drew upon the African philosophy of Ubuntu. The principle that "I am because we are" provides an important reminder that neither individuals, nor nations exist in isolation. Identity is formed through relationships, responsibility is shared, and no civilisation possesses all wisdom. In an increasingly interdependent world, this insight may prove indispensable for rebuilding a more legitimate international order.

It was an appropriate place to conclude the first part of the discussion. Having diagnosed the erosion of moral authority within contemporary international affairs, Archbishop Jagodziński offered a compelling framework through which religion might help restore the ethical foundations of diplomacy, international cooperation and global governance, not by replacing politics, but by reminding politics of the moral purposes it ultimately exists to serve.

7 RELIGION NEVER LEFT:  RECOVERING TRUST,

RESTORING CONSCIENCE

If Archbishop Henryk Jagodziński's presentation diagnosed the moral crisis confronting contemporary international affairs, Dr Mohammad Taher Gholi Tabar approached the same challenge from a different, yet remarkably complementary, perspective. Speaking both as a scholar of comparative religion and as an Iranian academic living through one of the most turbulent periods in his country's recent history, he argued that religion has never truly disappeared from international affairs. Rather, the assumption that politics could eventually replace religion as humanity's principal source of meaning and moral guidance has proven increasingly unsustainable.

His intervention shifted the discussion from institutions to people.

The fundamental question confronting humanity today, he suggested, is no longer simply who possesses the greatest military, economic or technological power. The more pressing question has become: Who can still be trusted? A distinction that proved significant throughout the remainder of the discussion.

For decades, international politics has largely measured influence through conventional indicators of power, where states compete to acquire greater military capability, technological superiority, economic leverage and geopolitical influence. While these capabilities remain important, they do not by themselves answer the questions that increasingly occupy ordinary citizens. The deeper concern is not merely who is strongest, but who consistently acts justly, who exercises power responsibly, and who can still command moral confidence.

The question of trust, therefore, has become inseparable from the question of legitimacy.

8 THE LIMITS OF POLITICAL AUTHORITY

Dr Gholi Tabar argued that much of the contemporary crisis stems from growing public disappointment with political institutions rather than with the idea of international cooperation itself.

People have not abandoned the aspiration for multilateralism. Nor have they rejected diplomacy or international law. Instead, many increasingly question whether existing institutions continue to perform the purposes for which they were originally created.

Three questions, he suggested, increasingly confront international society.

• Can international institutions still fulfil the responsibilities they were established to perform?

• Can international law still protect all people equally, irrespective of political alignment?

• And can political leadership still inspire genuine public trust?

These are not abstract academic questions. They reflect concerns increasingly voiced by ordinary citizens across many parts of the world.

The implication is profound.

Institutional reform alone may not restore confidence if citizens believe that principles are applied selectively, that justice depends upon geopolitical interests, or that international norms are enforced inconsistently.

The discussion therefore began moving beyond questions of institutional design towards the deeper issue of moral consistency.

9 RELIGION NEVER RETURNED, BECAUSE IT NEVER

LEFT

One of the most thought-provoking arguments advanced during the discussion concerned the very premise upon which the session had been convened.

Dr Gholi Tabar questioned whether it was accurate to speak of the return of religion to international affairs.

Religion, he argued, never actually disappeared.

While secular political thought may have assumed that religion would gradually retreat into the private sphere, humanity never stopped asking the questions that religious traditions have historically sought to answer. Questions concerning justice, hope, suffering, meaning, forgiveness, responsibility and human dignity did not disappear simply because political institutions became more sophisticated.

Rather than witnessing the return of religion, contemporary society may simply be rediscovering something that had always remained present beneath the surface.

• Politics can organise society.

• Law can regulate conduct.

• Economics can distribute resources.

• Technology can expand human capability.

But none of these, by themselves, adequately answer humanity's enduring search for meaning or provide universally accepted moral direction.

This observation echoed, from a different intellectual tradition, Archbishop Jagodziński's earlier argument that technological advancement cannot substitute for moral purpose.

10 LESSONS FROM CONTEMPORARY IRAN

The discussion acquired particular immediacy when Dr Gholi Tabar reflected upon recent events in Iran.

Speaking personally, rather than politically, he described how periods of conflict had revealed something unexpected about where ordinary people increasingly seek moral leadership. During recent hostilities, many Iranian citizens, including scholars, academics and professionals from different religious backgrounds, had directed appeals not primarily towards political institutions or international organisations, but towards religious leaders, including the Pope.

The significance of this development, he argued, extends well beyond Iran itself.

Many of those making these appeals were neither Catholic nor Christian. Their actions reflected something deeper than religious affiliation. They reflected a belief that certain religious figures continue to possess a moral credibility capable of transcending geopolitical divisions.

Whether those appeals ultimately prove successful is almost secondary.

Their existence demonstrates that, during periods of profound uncertainty, many people instinctively continue to search for moral voices capable of speaking beyond political interests.

This observation also reinforced one of the discussion's recurring themes: legitimacy ultimately depends not merely upon formal authority but upon public confidence.

11 THE CONTINUING PUBLIC ROLE OF RELIGION

Dr Gholi Tabar rejected the common assumption that religion belongs exclusively within the private sphere.

Whether acknowledged or not, religion continues to influence elections, foreign policy, conflict, peacebuilding, humanitarian action and national identity across every region of the world.

This is true not only in the Middle East, Africa or Asia, but equally, albeit often less visibly, across Europe and North America.

The question, therefore, is no longer whether religion participates in public life. It already does.

The more important question is how religion ought to exercise that influence.

• Religion can become an instrument of reconciliation or division.

• It can encourage dialogue or justify exclusion.

• It can restrain political excess or be manipulated to legitimise it.

Its influence is therefore neither inherently constructive, nor inherently destructive. Much depends upon whether religious actors remain faithful to the ethical principles they profess.

This distinction would become an important point of convergence during the wider discussion.

Throughout the consultation there was broad agreement that religion should never be employed to legitimise violence, nationalism or exclusion. Instead, its greatest contribution lies in its capacity to remind political leaders that ethical limits exist beyond immediate political advantage.

12 JUSTICE, CONSISTENCY AND MORAL CREDIBILITY

Another important thread running through Dr Gholi Tabar's presentation concerned the relationship between justice and consistency.

Citizens increasingly become disillusioned, he argued, when identical actions are judged differently depending upon who commits them. Such inconsistency gradually erodes confidence not only in individual governments, but in international norms themselves.

People continue to seek justice.

The difficulty arises when justice appears contingent upon geopolitical alignment, rather than universally applied principles.

It is precisely at this point, he suggested, that religion can continue performing an important corrective function, not by exercising political authority itself, but by reminding political authority of ethical standards that transcend changing alliances or shifting political interests.

This proposition resonated strongly with earlier observations concerning the erosion of trust in international institutions.

13 A REMARKABLE CONVERGENCE

Although Archbishop Jagodziński and Dr Gholi Tabar approached the discussion from different religious traditions and different personal experiences, their presentations converged in several striking respects.

• Both rejected the notion that religion should seek political domination.

• Neither argued for the replacement of secular governance by religious authority.

• Instead, both maintained that religion performs its most valuable public function when it serves as the conscience of political life.

• Both speakers also agreed that humanity currently confronts a crisis that is fundamentally moral rather than institutional.

• Institutional reform remains important.

• Diplomatic innovation remains necessary.

• Multilateral institutions undoubtedly require renewal.

But none of these reforms, they suggested, will prove durable unless accompanied by a recovery of the ethical principles that originally justified international cooperation.

• Power, detached from responsibility, inevitably loses legitimacy.

• Diplomacy, detached from trust, gradually becomes procedural, rather than transformative.

• Law, detached from consistent moral application, loses authority.

• And international institutions, detached from the confidence of those they exist to serve, eventually struggle to command either respect or compliance.

By the conclusion of the two keynote presentations, a broader proposition had therefore begun to emerge.

The discussion was no longer simply about religion.

It had become a discussion about the moral architecture necessary for sustaining peaceful international order itself.

If the twentieth century concentrated primarily upon constructing institutions capable of preventing conflict, the twenty-first century may increasingly require rebuilding the ethical foundations upon which those institutions ultimately depend.

That proposition would become even more apparent during the extensive discussion that followed, as participants from different regions, professions and faith traditions explored how moral authority might once again contribute to restoring trust, strengthening diplomacy and renewing multilateral cooperation in an increasingly fragmented world.

14 REBUILDING TRUST THROUGH MORAL

LEADERSHIP

The keynote presentations established a common premise: that contemporary international affairs are experiencing a crisis of moral legitimacy alongside the more familiar geopolitical and institutional challenges. The discussion that followed broadened this proposition considerably. Participants approached the subject from different religious traditions, regions and professional backgrounds, but a number of recurring themes emerged with striking consistency.

While differences remained regarding the appropriate relationship between religion and the state, there was broad agreement that the discussion should not be understood as advocating a greater political role for religious institutions. Rather, participants repeatedly returned to the proposition that religion's most valuable contribution lies in helping political leaders, international institutions and civil society recover a moral vocabulary capable of guiding public life beyond narrow calculations of national interest.

Throughout the discussion, participants distinguished carefully between religious authority and moral authority. The former belongs to particular faith traditions. The latter possesses a broader relevance that can speak across cultures, religions and even secular philosophical traditions. It was this second form of authority that many regarded as increasingly absent from contemporary international affairs.

15 RELIGION AS CONSCIENCE, RATHER THAN

GOVERNMENT

One of the strongest themes emerging from the wider discussion concerned the proper role of religion within public life.

Participants recognised that history offers numerous examples in which religion has been manipulated to justify conflict, nationalism, intolerance and political domination. Such abuses cannot simply be ignored when considering religion's contemporary role in international affairs.

Equally, however, many argued that these distortions should not obscure religion's far more enduring contribution to civilisation. Throughout history, religious traditions have frequently stood alongside the poor, defended human dignity, challenged injustice, mediated conflicts and reminded political authorities that their power remains subject to ethical restraint.

This distinction proved important.

The discussion was therefore less concerned with religion exercising political authority than with religion exercising moral influence. Participants suggested that religious institutions often possess a unique capacity to remind societies of ethical principles that transcend electoral cycles, geopolitical rivalries or changing ideological fashions.

Indeed, several participants observed that many of history's most influential advocates for peace, reconciliation and justice drew their inspiration from deeply held religious convictions while simultaneously respecting pluralism and democratic governance.

16 THE IMPORTANCE OF CONSISTENCY

A second recurring theme concerned the relationship between moral authority and consistency.

Participants observed that public confidence in international institutions is not eroded simply because difficult political decisions must be made. Rather, confidence declines when similar situations appear to be treated differently depending upon the political identity or strategic importance of those involved.

This concern extended beyond governments to encompass international organisations, legal institutions, humanitarian actors and the broader international community.

The discussion repeatedly returned to the proposition that moral authority cannot be claimed. It must be earned.

Institutions acquire legitimacy when their principles are applied consistently, even where doing so proves politically inconvenient. Conversely, perceived inconsistency gradually weakens confidence, regardless of the formal authority those institutions may continue to possess.

Participants therefore suggested that restoring confidence in multilateralism will require more than structural reform. It will also require renewed commitment to fairness, impartiality and ethical consistency in the application of international norms.

17 DIALOGUE IN AN AGE OF POLARISATION

Another important area of consensus concerned the growing erosion of meaningful dialogue within international affairs.

Several participants expressed concern that contemporary political discourse increasingly encourages confrontation, rather than understanding, such a social media, geopolitical rivalry and ideological polarisation that frequently reward certainty over reflection and denunciation over engagement.

Against this backdrop, the discussion repeatedly emphasised dialogue not merely as a diplomatic technique, but as a moral responsibility.

Dialogue does not require agreement. Nor does engagement imply endorsement. Rather, dialogue reflects recognition that durable peace almost always begins with the willingness to continue speaking when disagreement appears most profound.

This observation closely echoed Archbishop Jagodziński's earlier defence of diplomacy while also reinforcing Dr Gholi Tabar's emphasis upon interfaith engagement. Participants noted that genuine dialogue requires intellectual humility, the recognition that no individual, nation, civilisation or religious tradition possesses a monopoly on wisdom.

Several contributors further observed that the willingness to listen respectfully across profound differences represents one of the defining characteristics of mature societies.

18 FAITH IN A MULTIPOLAR WORLD

The discussion also explored the implications of religion within an increasingly multipolar international order.

Participants observed that assumptions regarding secularisation have often reflected historical experiences, rather than universal patterns of political development. Across much of Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East, religion continues to occupy a central place within public life and remains an important source of social identity, ethical reflection and community organisation.

As the centre of gravity within international politics gradually becomes more geographically and culturally diverse, greater attention will therefore need to be given to the role that faith traditions continue to play in shaping public attitudes, diplomacy and international cooperation.

Importantly, participants stressed that recognising religion's continuing public significance should not be confused with endorsing religious exclusivity.

On the contrary, the discussion repeatedly affirmed the importance of interfaith dialogue precisely because contemporary international cooperation increasingly requires engagement across different civilisational traditions.

In this respect, religious diversity need not become a source of conflict.

Properly understood, it can become an important resource for building mutual understanding.

19 MORAL AUTHORITY AND THE FUTURE OF

MULTILATERALISM

Perhaps the most significant conclusion emerging from the discussion was that contemporary multilateralism cannot be renewed solely through institutional redesign.

Discussions surrounding Security Council reform, voting arrangements, financing mechanisms and institutional representation remain important. But participants suggested that these structural questions ultimately rest upon a more fundamental issue.

Why should nations trust one another sufficiently to cooperate?

No institutional arrangement can fully answer that question.

Trust depends upon confidence that political actors will behave responsibly, that commitments will be honoured, that justice will be pursued consistently and that power will remain subject to ethical restraint.

In this sense, the discussion suggested that moral authority should not be viewed as an optional supplement to international affairs. It constitutes one of the essential foundations upon which sustainable international cooperation ultimately depends.

Religion, participants argued, may therefore possess renewed relevance, not because it offers ready-made political solutions, but because it continues to preserve ethical traditions capable of informing political judgement.

20 EMERGING AREAS OF CONSENSUS

While participants represented different cultures, faith traditions and intellectual perspectives, several broad areas of consensus became apparent during the discussion.

• Contemporary international affairs face not only geopolitical competition but an underlying crisis of moral legitimacy.

• Rebuilding confidence in international institutions requires greater consistency, fairness and ethical integrity alongside institutional reform.

• Religion should neither dominate politics nor retreat entirely from public life, rather, its greatest contribution lies in nurturing moral responsibility, protecting human dignity and encouraging dialogue across political and civilisational divides.

• Diplomacy remains indispensable, and even where differences appear irreconcilable, maintaining communication remains preferable to allowing distrust to become permanent.

• Finally, participants broadly agreed that humanity's greatest contemporary challenge is not merely the management of power but ensuring that power remains accountable to principles that transcend immediate political interests.

21 CONCLUSION

The discussion concluded without attempting to resolve every question surrounding the relationship between religion and international affairs. Nor was that its purpose.

Its value lay elsewhere.

By bringing together perspectives from different religious traditions and different regions of the world, the consultation demonstrated that the search for moral authority is not confined to any single civilisation or faith community. Rather, it reflects a growing recognition that international politics cannot indefinitely sustain legitimacy through institutional authority alone.

• Power remains indispensable.

• Institutions continue to remain essential.

• Law remains fundamental.

But each ultimately depends upon deeper ethical foundations if it is to command enduring public confidence.

The discussion also challenged the widespread assumption that modernity inevitably requires religion to retreat from public life and instead, participants suggested that contemporary international affairs may be entering a period in which faith traditions once again contribute, not by exercising political power, but by reminding political leaders of the moral responsibilities that necessarily accompany power.

And so, in this sense, the discussion's most enduring contribution may have been its insistence that the future of international cooperation depends not only upon creating stronger institutions, but also upon cultivating stronger moral foundations.

For societies seeking to navigate an increasingly fragmented international landscape, that may prove to be one of the defining challenges of our age.

The search for moral authority, the discussion ultimately suggested, is therefore not a search for greater power.

It is a search for greater wisdom in the exercise of power.

And that may be one of the most important conversations the international community can have.

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

This report has been published by the Inclusive Society Institute on behalf of the Global South Perspectives Network

Global South Perspectives Network (GSPN) is an international coalition founded in 2022 by HumanizaCom, the Foundation for Global Governance and Sustainability (FOGGS), and the Inclusive Society Institute (ISI). It brings together think tanks and experts from Latin America, the Caribbean, Africa, and the Middle East to amplify Global South voices in global governance debates.

GSPN works to strengthen Southern representation in decision-making, focusing on United Nations reform and multilateralism. Through research, dialogue, and advocacy, it promotes equitable partnerships between the Global South and North.

Key initiatives include the 2023 report Global South Perspectives on Global Governance Reform, presented at a UN workshop in New York, and events such as the 2024 UN Civil Society workshop in Nairobi.

GSPN’s mission is to ensure Global South nations are equal partners in shaping global policy, fostering a fair, inclusive, and sustainable international order.

Email: info@inclusivesociety.org.za

Phone: +27 (0) 21 201 1589

Web: www.inclusivesociety.org.za