 For most of us, peace is the norm. We have an abstract view of how life would be without it. Generations before us weren't that lucky. Coming from Iper in Belgium and West Flanders, close to the battlefields of the First World War, I often get reminded of that. Whilst many of us take peace for granted, others still experience today the unimaginable cruelty that comes with armed conflicts, killings, terror, death. And whilst the horrors of armed conflict have remained the same, the types of conflicts we are seeing today have changed. Indeed, since a couple of decades, the world has increasingly moved from interstate to intrastate conflicts. Nations have to large extent stopped fighting each other. But on a subnational level, the warlike conflicts between opposed religious, ethnic, tribal or regional groups are more prevalent than ever. The repercussions of these conflicts are also increasingly felt in peaceful parts of the world. Through vivid and rapid media reports, the geographical distance seems smaller than ever. In addition, acts of terrorism also have immidiatized in recent years have put security issues on the top of local, national and international agendas. The so-called Diobilization of Terrorism, which is increasingly based on loose networks or lone wolves, who are rather unpredictably using everyday items as weapons, contributes to the perception that even in peaceful societies, really nobody is safe. This is why I believe that on International Peace Day, on the 21st of September, we need to be reminded that sustained peace cannot be achieved only through traditional methods aimed at interstate conflict. We also need an increased focus on security issues on the local and on the subnational level. And there I would like to highlight three important steps. Number one, new forms of security threats require innovative solutions which are adopted by civilians, the police and law enforcement agencies. In this regard, correct and timely information, for instance, is essential, since fabricated news and disinformation can both ignite and aggravate conflicts. The police needs to be given the tools and legal measures to prevent and limit the impact of conflict and violence, whilst on the other side also safeguarding citizens' fundamental rights. And civil society has a role to play to decrease tensions to prevent dangers from occurring and create inclusive societies. Ultimately, political, religious and cultural leaders have the opportunity and responsibility to appease and prevent conflict through their messages and actions. Which brings me to my second point. Security and peace require both horizontal and vertical mobilization across a broad range of actors, including governments, international organizations, parliament, civil society, the academic community and the media, but also the individuals, the citizens. This mobilization is one of our greatest challenges and it will require collaboration at the international level and the way down to the very local level, in the cities, the suburbs, the towns and villages. Thirdly, last but not least, it is hard to dispute that poor governance, corruption and the lack of trust in institutions is anything but detrimental for societies. This is why all measures that lead to the implementation of SDG 16 and the development of accountable strong institutions should be seen as an important measure not only for development and good governance, but ultimately for sustainable peace.