Proactive and Passive Agency in Action: UN Responses to the War in Gaza (2023–2025)

The United Nations’ (UN) role in conflict management has become increasingly marginal, most starkly illustrated by its paralysis in responding to catastrophic conflicts such as the war in Gaza. While critiques often focus on the Security Council, less is known about whether the broader UN system has failed or how its bureaucracy engages with protracted conflicts. Drawing on sociological theories of international organizations, we advance the concept of proactive and passive agency, arguing that varied self-conceptions within UN bureaucracies, shaped by multifaceted pressures, delimit what actions are considered possible and appropriate. UN actors may proactively interpret and perform their mandates, adhere strictly to a narrow perception of what can/should be done, or distance themselves from conflict to avoid political risks. Focusing on the secretariat, humanitarian, and human rights bodies’ responses to Gaza between October 2023 and October 2025, we examine how they framed the conflict and deployed action. The analysis is based on a meticulous analysis of statements, reports, and documents published by the eight UN bureaucracies in question. Preliminary findings indicate that relief is prioritized over protection, neutrality over accountability-seeking, and conflict resolution remains marginal, though some actors pursue alternative actions through informal channels and inter-agency alliances. This paper contributes to debates on UN crises and organizational reform by demonstrating how the exercise of proactive or passive agency shapes the broader UN engagement in protracted conflicts.