(OPINION) In recent years, the global landscape has been marred by an alarming surge in violence, with researchers and experts describing the current era as one of the most violent in decades.

According to a comprehensive analysis by The Telegraph, at least 50 countries experienced armed conflict in the past year, a scale of global unrest not seen since the post-World War II era.

This article explores the factors contributing to this unprecedented wave of violence, drawing on data from the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data (ACLED) and insights from the Global Peace Index.

The Telegraph reports that 2024 marked a peak in global violence, with 56 active conflicts across 50 countries, one of the highest counts since 1946.

These conflicts range from the civil war in Myanmar to the ongoing war in Ukraine and the Israel-Hamas conflict in Gaza.

The data, compiled by ACLED and the Uppsala Conflict Data Programme, indicates that over 1 million fatalities have been recorded from armed conflicts between 2020 and 2024, surpassing the total death toll from conflicts between 2010 and 2019.

This sharp rise is largely attributed to three major conflicts: the 2021 military coup in Myanmar, Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, and the Israel-Hamas war that began in 2023.

These conflicts alone accounted for more than half of the fatalities recorded in 2024.

The distribution of violence has also become more widespread. Unlike previous decades, where conflicts were often concentrated in specific regions, 2024 saw every major region of the world grappling with significant levels of armed conflict.

Europe, driven by the war in Ukraine, accounted for 33% of global conflict-related deaths, while Gaza was identified as the most dangerous and violent place in 2024, with over 80% of its population exposed to conflict and at least 35,000 fatalities recorded.

One of the defining features of today’s conflicts is their complexity.

Clionadh Raleigh, the founder and director of ACLED, notes that the proliferation of armed groups has made conflicts more fragmented and harder to resolve.

In Myanmar, for instance, an estimated 3,000 new armed groups have emerged since the 2021 coup, adding to the already volatile mix of pre-existing factions.

This “constant churn” of groups, as Raleigh describes, complicates peace negotiations and prolongs violence.

The Telegraph highlights that conflicts are not only more widespread but also more deadly and intricate, with non-state actors and regional powers increasingly involved.

The Global Peace Index further underscores this trend, noting that fewer conflicts are being resolved through military victories or peace agreements.

This protracted nature of modern conflicts, coupled with their global reach, has led experts to estimate that at least one in six people worldwide is exposed to some level of conflict.

This figure reflects a significant increase in the human toll of violence compared to previous decades.

To understand the scale of the current crisis, it’s worth comparing it to historical benchmarks.

The Telegraph notes that the annual global death toll from armed conflicts has hovered around 200,000 since 2021, peaking at over 310,000 in 2022 following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

The only other time in recent history when the death toll exceeded 200,000 was during the 1994 Rwandan genocide, which claimed over 800,000 lives in a single year.

While the current death tolls do not reach the scale of the Rwandan genocide, the widespread nature of today’s conflicts and their cumulative impact signal a uniquely violent period.

This escalation challenges earlier optimistic narratives, such as those presented by Steven Pinker in his 2011 book, The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined.

Pinker argued that humanity was living in a relatively peaceful era, citing a decline in violence since World War II.

However, The Telegraph’s 2015 analysis questioned this view, pointing to a rise in global violence and a growing “peace gap” where peaceful countries became more stable while violent ones grew increasingly unstable.

The data from 2024 further undermines the notion of a “Long Peace,” suggesting that global violence is not only resurging but also becoming more pervasive.

Several factors are driving this surge in violence. The Telegraph identifies the interplay of geopolitical tensions, economic fragility, and the proliferation of non-state actors as key contributors.

For instance, the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East have disrupted global energy and food markets, exacerbating economic instability and fueling unrest in other regions.

Jamie Dimon, CEO of JP Morgan, warned in 2023 that the combination of these conflicts with fragile economies could have far-reaching consequences, describing the period as the “most dangerous time” in decades.

Moreover, the rise of extremist ideologies and the accessibility of online platforms have amplified the spread of violent rhetoric.

The Telegraph reports that extremist networks, emboldened by events like the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack, have contributed to a “shocking increase in extremist disruption and criminality.”

This trend is particularly evident in the UK, where protests and inflammatory rhetoric have heightened fears of rising terrorism threats.

The global economic impact of violence is staggering.

In 2014, The Telegraph reported that military and security spending, combined with the costs of interpersonal violence and terrorism, amounted to $14.3 trillion, equivalent to 13.4% of global GDP.

This figure has likely grown in recent years, given the escalation of conflicts and the increasing costs of managing their fallout, including refugee crises and humanitarian aid.

The UNHCR estimates that nearly 60 million people are now refugees or internally displaced due to conflict, the highest number since World War II.