World Governments Summit Launches Report Urging Secure Foundations for Future-Ready Cities

The World Governments Summit Organization has unveiled a major new report highlighting the critical role of urban security in shaping sustainable, livable cities of the future.
Developed in partnership with global consultancy Arthur D. Little, the report offers a roadmap for governments, civil society, and the private sector to build safer, more resilient urban environments.
Titled Urban Security: Enabling Cities of the Future , the report arrives amid accelerating global urban transformation driven by rapid infrastructure, technological, and socio-economic developments. It argues that while innovation can enhance a city's efficiency and appeal, long-term success hinges on prioritising safety and public security.
Drawing from in-depth analysis and case studies in Delhi, Singapore, and Buenos Aires, the study explores how crime forecasting, urban design, and coordinated governance contribute to secure, future-ready cities. Among its key findings is a measurable link between human development indicators—such as GDP per capita and the UN's Human Development Index—and lower crime rates. 'Security is not just a necessity—it's a catalyst for economic growth, investment, and social cohesion,'
said Reem Baggash, Deputy Director of Strategy at the World Governments Summit. 'Modernising our approach to urban security is essential to realising the full potential of tomorrow's cities.'
The report calls for a holistic approach that aligns national security standards with city-level reforms, enhanced policing, and new technologies like AI and blockchain. Alexander Buirski, Transformation Practice Leader at ADL, stressed the need for tailored, cross-sector solutions: 'Success demands collaboration, adaptability, and a clear understanding of how urbanisation and development intersect with safety.'
In a fast-changing world, the message is clear: secure cities are not optional—they are the foundation for progress.
News Source: Emirates News Agency

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

The National

4 hours ago

• The National

US attack on Iran could spark 'rat hole of retaliation', UN Secretary General warns

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres said on Sunday that the Middle East conflict is at risk of "descending into a rat hole of retaliation after retaliation", after the US strikes on Iran's nuclear sites. Mr Guterres was speaking at an emergency session of the Security Council focused on the expanding Israel-Iran conflict. The war began when Israel launched a "pre-emptive" strike against nuclear and military targets in Iran about 10 days ago. 'We must act immediately and decisively to halt the fighting and return to serious sustained negotiations on the Iran nuclear programme,' he added. He then urged all states to act with reason, restraint and urgency, pleading for all those present at the meeting to not give up on peace. Rafael Grossi, head the the UN's nuclear watchdog, said initial evidence suggested that Iran's Fordow and Natanz nuclear sites had been hit by powerful ground-penetrating missiles, while Isfahan's nuclear facility was hit by cruise missiles. He added that Iran has indicated there has been no increase in radiation levels near the three sites. 'I am ready to travel immediately and to engage with all relevant parties to help ensure the protection of nuclear facilities and the continued peaceful uses of nuclear technology in accordance with the agency's mandate,' Mr Grossi said. He said that the International Atomic Energy Agency was ready to send nuclear safety and security experts to Iran immediately. He warned of the consequences that might be felt as a result of the US strikes should Iran respond militarily. 'Let us not allow the window to close on diplomacy,' Mr Grossi said. The UK and France said that while they continue to agree that Iran must not be allowed to possess a nuclear weapon, they did not take any part in planning or carrying out the US attack on Iran's nuclear sites on Saturday. They also pushed for diplomacy to prevail, and urged Iran not to worsen the situation. China strongly condemned the US strikes. 'The actions of the US violate the UN Charter as well as Iran's sovereignty and territorial integrity,' China's ambassador to the UN Fu Cong said, calling for an immediate ceasefire to prevent an escalation. Russia's ambassador said the already delicate situation in Iran had been significantly aggravated by the US strikes. 'Washington once again shows its complete contempt for the international community and law,' Vasily Nebenzya said. China, Russia and Pakistan have issued a draft resolution calling for an unconditional ceasefire and a push for the protection of civilians affected in and around Iran. Days before the Saturday attack by the US, Iran called on Mr Guterres to invoke Article 99 of the UN Charter as the conflict with Israel continued. The article empowers the secretary general to bring to the Security Council's attention any matter that may threaten international peace and security. 'Failure to act at this pivotal and perilous moment would constitute a profound abdication of the Security Council's responsibilities,' said a letter sent to the UN, seen by The National. The US hit back against those accusations, calling Iran the world's foremost state sponsor of terror. "For 40 years, the Iranian government has called for death to America and death to Israel, and posed a constant menace to the US, and the entire world," US acting deputy ambassador Dorothy Shea said, claiming that a recent IAEA report conclusively showed that Tehran had continued to accelerate its nuclear capabilities. "Iran has long obfuscated its nuclear weapons programme and stonewalled good faith efforts in recent negotiations." Iran condemned the US and Israel's "brutal aggression". "Once again, the world has witnessed the blatant corruption of the US political system … and over the past 10 days, Israel has continued a barbaric assault on the international bodies," said Amir Iravani, Iran's ambassador to the UN. Mr Iravani insisted that Iran was interested only in peaceful nuclear energy. Israel blamed the UN Security Council for failing to check Iran's nuclear programme earlier. Israel has said Iran was within days of gaining a nuclear weapon. "You were silent, you were complicit, you were afraid, you were bystanders," Israeli ambassador to the UN Danny Danon told the council. "The United States acted not just for itself, but for every nation that values freedom over radicalism." He said that Iran's nuclear programme "was not a diplomatic puzzle – it was a loaded gun pointed at the heart of the international system and the stability of the world". The Gulf Co-operation Council, represented by Kuwait, repeated its call for de-escalation. "We call for an immediate cessation of military actions and exercise of maximum restraint, avoiding anything that could lead to a spillover of this conflict," said Faisal Al Enezi, charge d'affaires at Kuwait's mission to the UN. "GCC countries are firmly committed to support all regional and international efforts aiming at defusing this crisis and consolidating security and stability and to preserve the interests of peoples in the region and the world."

Middle East Eye

13 hours ago

• Middle East Eye

After US attack, Iran could reconsider its nuclear strategy

On Sunday, US President Donald Trump publicly announced: "The US military carried out massive precision strikes on the three key nuclear facilities in the Iranian regime: Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success. Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated." Following the attack, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned that the use of force by the United States against Iran today is a dangerous escalation in a region already on the edge - and a direct threat to international peace and security. On 13 June, Israel launched a series of coordinated air and cyber strikes targeting key Iranian nuclear and military infrastructure, killing several nuclear scientists and high level military commanders. In response, Iran retaliated with hundreds of missile and drone strikes against military and intelligence installations in Israel. Israel's main objective was not about Iran's nuclear programme. Since the early 1990s, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly claimed each year that Iran would build a nuclear bomb within a year or two. This has been a lie repeated for over 30 years. The truth is that by attacking Iran, Netanyahu's main objective is to overthrow the government, create instability in the country, and turn Iran - like Syria, Lebanon, and Libya - into a failed state and then break it apart. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters The consequences of US and Israeli military attacks will haunt the region, and beyond, for years to come. Here, I will highlight the key consequences of such an attack. Netanyahu's trap There is no doubt that Israel coordinated its attack on Iran with the US, Europe, and Nato, and continued the war with their direct and indirect support. Netanyahu has been trying to drag the US into a war with Iran since the 1990s, but all US presidents avoided such a trap. US attacks Iran: What are the Islamic Republic's options? Read More » Under Netanyahu's pressure, Trump killed the Iran nuclear deal, which was adopted by UN Security Council Resolution 2231, during his first term and launched a military strike against Iran's nuclear sites just months into his second term. Netanyahu praised Trump's decision to attack Iran. "Congratulations, President Trump. Your bold decision to target Iran's nuclear facilities with the awesome and righteous might of the United States will change history," he said. Ironically, the attack came after Trump's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, and Iranian Foriegn Minister Abbas Araghchi agreed that the first three rounds of nuclear talks in Oman and Italy could be a credible base for an agreement. An informed Iranian source told me: "The key elements of the deal between Witkoff and Araghchi were agreed upon over three rounds of negotiations in Muscat and Rome. The deal was as follows: Iran would accept maximum nuclear inspections and transparency, including implementation of the Additional Protocol and Subsidiary Arrangements Code 3.1 - the highest international mechanisms for inspecting a country's nuclear programme." The source added: "Second, Iran would convert or export its existing stockpile of 60-percent enriched uranium, which is sufficient to build 10 nuclear bombs. Third, Iran would halt its current high-level enrichment at 60 percent and 20 percent and reduce it to the level of civil purposes, which is 3.67 percent. Finally, Iran would fully cooperate with the IAEA to resolve all technical ambiguities. "In return, the United States would lift the nuclear-related sanctions. It was agreed that the technical teams of both sides would draft the final agreement based on these four points. But suddenly, after a call between Netanyahu and Trump, the American side stopped sending its technical team to Muscat and, in a 180-degree shift in its position, demanded the complete shutdown of Iran's peaceful enrichment programme. "This shift delayed the agreement until Trump's two-month deadline expired - and while the sixth round was set for day 63, Israel launched an attack on Iran on day 61. This was Israel's trap - designed to drag the US and Trump into a war with Iran." Israel's failure Foreign ministers from Britain, France and Germany, as well as the EU's high representative for foreign affairs and security policy, Kaja Kallas, held talks with Araghchi on Friday and agreed to meet again within a week. The E3/EU ministers were encouraged to meet the Iranian foreign minister because on 19 June, Trump gave a two-week window for diplomacy. "Last week, we were in negotiations with the US when Israel decided to blow up that diplomacy. This week, we held talks with the E3/EU when the US decided to blow up that diplomacy. What conclusion would you draw?" Araghchi wrote to Britain and the EU High Representative. Israel, the only country in the Middle East that actually possesses nuclear weapons, cannot credibly claim to be fighting against nuclear proliferation The US decision to attack Iran shows that Israel not only failed in its 10-day military operation against Tehran, but was on the verge of defeat. Why would the US intervene if Israel had not been in a crisis? Israel, the only country in the Middle East that actually possesses nuclear weapons, with as many as 400 nuclear bombs according to some estimates, cannot credibly claim to be fighting against nuclear proliferation. Moreover, all reports from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and US intelligence agencies over the past 20 years have consistently confirmed that there is no evidence of the Iranian nuclear programme pursuing weaponisation. "We do not have at this point, if you ask me, at this time, any tangible proof that there is a programme, or a plan, to fabricate, to manufacture a nuclear weapon," said the UN nuclear chief. The key point is that there was no immediate and serious threat. The claim that Iran has enough enriched stockpiles to build 10 bombs in two weeks is only half the truth. The other half is that - even if Iran decided to build a bomb - it would take them one to two years to develop the delivery systems, such as nuclear warheads. "There was no imminent threat that Iran was weaponising its nuclear programme before Israel's attack began," according to the American Arms Control Association. NPT: A political tool This is the first time that two nuclear-armed countries have launched a military attack on a non-nuclear country. This demonstrates that the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), specifically for the US and Israel, has merely been used as a political tool. "Israel was not attacked by Iran - it started that war; the United States was not attacked by Iran - it started this confrontation at this point," said Trita Parsi, the executive vice president of the Quincy Institute. The US military attack on Iran is a clear violation of the UN Charter. "The United States, a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, has committed a grave violation of the UN Charter, international law and the NPT by attacking Iran's peaceful nuclear installations," said the Iranian foriegn minister. Trump's national security team either failed to properly assess the consequences of a US military attack on Iran, or they were unable to dissuade Trump. A new nuclear strategy In any case, this event has further revealed the extent of Netanyahu's influence over the White House. "This war was provoked by Benjamin Netanyahu for his own political survival, and Donald Trump has willingly handed him American military power to prolong it. The United States is not anyone's proxy army, and our troops are not bargaining chips," said Congresswoman Bonnie Watson Coleman. It is only natural that following the US military attack, Iran would reconsider its nuclear strategy, including its continued membership in the NPT The prespective from Tehran is that the attacks by these two nuclear-armed countries revealed that the NPT not only has no real value, but is in fact harmful. Countries like North Korea, India, Pakistan and Israel, that rejected the treaty and developed nuclear weapons have remained immune from military attacks by nuclear weapons. It is only natural that following the military attack by Israel and the United States, Iran would reconsider its nuclear strategy, including its continued membership in the NPT. Iran has suffered irreparable damage, but the negative consequences of this attack are not limited to Iran alone - they will also harm the United States and jeopardise regional peace and security. The current war may have no clear winner or loser. Instead, both Iran and Israel, along with the US, face the prospect of mutual destruction, regional destabilisation and long-term national trauma. In such a scenario, all parties would lose far more than they could ever gain. The international community must act decisively to deescalate the situation. Failure to do so risks plunging the Middle East - and possibly beyond - into a catastrophic conflict. The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.

The National

13 hours ago

• The National

UAE pushes for diplomacy and dialogue after US strikes on Iran

The UAE has expressed concern over the tensions in the region and attacks on Iranian nuclear sites. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement on Sunday that stressed the importance of prioritising diplomacy and dialogue to resolve disputes in ways that "promote stability, prosperity and justice". It called on the international community to intensify efforts to achieve a comprehensive solution to protect the region from the "devastating consequences" of the Israel-Iran conflict. It emphasised the need for "immediate de-escalation to avoid serious repercussions and spare the region from being pulled into deeper levels of instability", state news agency Wam reported. The UAE also urged the UN and Security Council to "uphold their responsibilities through serious efforts to address the region's long-standing issues, which now stand at a critical juncture and pose an increasing threat to regional and international peace and security". The ministry reaffirmed the UAE's support for "serious engagement to address critical issues through negotiation" and emphasised the importance of "drawing lessons from the region's historical experiences and past conflicts".