THINK PIECE 01 Summary • policy is driven by current events and practical strategies to deal with urgent challenges need to be devised fast. These policies are mostly short-term and ad hoc ones. Yet, they often have serious long­term consequences for security orders. • perfect model of a state exercising a legitimate monopoly on the use of force over a given territory has probably never been fully implemented. Nevertheless, a large number of fragile and less-developed states worldwide aspire to functioning monopolies on the use of force. • changes in the arena of peace and security policy and new challenges like the broad­ening of security concepts or the privatization and commercializa­tion of force have further compli­cated security provision, too. • reflection group shall focus on concept and practice of the monopoly on the use of force as a central pillar of security order. It shall look beyond day-to-day policy and provide orientation for the longer term developments of security provision for the 21st century. 1 Is there a need for new peace and security rules in the twenty-first century? Herbert Wulf, Mely Caballero-Anthony and Marius Müller-Hennig This background paper provides orientation from the perspective of the chairs and the organizers for the initial phase of the reflection group. The contribution should be understood as preliminary orienta­tion, whereas the concrete roadmap and conceptual orientation for the reflection group are subject to discussion and agreements at the kick-off conference in Singapore. 1. Political motivation: – Why discuss the state monopoly on use of force? While large parts of the world live in an unprecedented era of peace and security, the headlines of recent decades from countries like Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Ukraine, the DR Congo and many others remind us that a peaceful order is by no means universal or permanent. A range of different forms of conflict and violence threaten human and state security at the local, regional and global levels: organized crime, large-scale violence, lethal use of force by states, rebellions, interna­tional rivalries, conventional inter-state wars, civil wars, proxy wars, and military interventions. The persistence and recurrence of large-scale conflicts and organized violence casts doubt on the effectiveness of political institutions and social norms in the prevention of organized violence. Given that pub­lic discussions about peace and security policy are obviously largely driven by current events, practical strategies to deal with the most urgent challenges usually need to be devised fast – and seem to required ever more frequently. The mostly short-term, ad hoc policies that are pursued, such as cease-fire agreements, sanctions against warring parties, delivery of weaponry, and military or so-called humanitarian interventions, however, often have serious long-term consequences for the institutions responsible for the legitimate means of force and violence. And, as a result, fundamental changes have emerged in international law and national security-related rules. This is the case when, for example, governments allow shipping com­panies to hire armed private security agencies to provide protection against piracy or when»coalitions of the willing« intervene to protect human rights or prevent state terror.