|
|
Madam Chair,
Pakistan appreciates your continued stewardship of the Special Committee.
We thank the President of the General Assembly and the Deputy Secretary General for their remarks this morning.
The extensive briefings over the last couple of months have provided us with an overview of the role of UN peacekeeping in the maintenance of international peace and security, and have also highlighted the accomplishments, noted the setbacks, and drawn our attention to a range of challenges that we need to collectively address.
We align ourselves with the statement made by Morocco on behalf on the Non-Aligned Movement.
Madam Chair,
I would like begin by paying tribute to the blue helmets, who continue the noble mission of keeping peace, restoring stability, protecting lives and bringing hope to millions affected by conflict. We pay homage to all the peacekeepers who have laid down their lives while serving under the UN flag.
Pakistan has a longstanding commitment to UN peacekeeping, and as a leading troop-contributor, we have a significant stake in its success. In the last ten years, that have experienced a significant surge in demand for UN peacekeeping, roughly one out of every ten peacekeepers has been a Pakistani. This, despite the pressing security demands back home.
Here in New York, Pakistan has worked with other member states and the Secretariat to promote shared objectives and reach common ground as we continue to evolve peacekeeping policy and practice and strengthen the peacekeeping architecture in face of the changing nature of conflict, new requirements and emerging trends.
Security Council Resolution 2086 of January 2013, adopted under Pakistan’s Presidency, was a landmark in this regard.
Madam Chair,
The outcome of our meeting this year would feed into the report of the High-Level Independent Panel on Peace Operations, convened by the Secretary General last year. Some members of the Panel, including the Chair, visited Islamabad last month and had substantive meetings there. We hope that these discussions would serve as a good input for the Panel’s report. We look forward to discussing the Report of the Secretary General on the subject later this year.
The mandate of this forum is comprehensive review of the whole question of peacekeeping operations. Any new ideas and proposals concerning PKOs should be subjected to thorough consideration by this Committee.
Let me now make a few specific points:
First, notwithstanding the evolving nature of conflict and the multidimensional approach that the UN has adopted to address complex crises, the basic principles of peacekeeping, including consent of parties, impartiality and non-use of force, except in self-defence and in the defence of the mandate, remain essential for success. The broad support, legitimacy and credibility that UN peacekeeping has come to enjoy over the years is predicated on these principles.
UN peacekeeping is fundamentally different from peace enforcement. This distinction must be maintained. Venturing into gray zones would confuse the mission, erode the neutrality of peacekeeping and undermine its reputation and success, besides imperiling the safety and security of peacekeepers. Measures agreed on an exceptional basis, such as the Force Intervention Brigade in the DRC, should remain an exception.
Second, concerns over the safety and security of peacekeepers have increased in recent years. Nature of conflict, proliferation of armed groups and other elements in the field, including criminality, transnational organized crime and terrorist threats have all contributed to this. Complex mandates, including protection of civilians, also endanger peacekeepers. They are often faced with overwhelming situations beyond their capabilities and resources.
Third, bulk of the current peacekeeping engagement is in multidimensional missions. Holistic approaches to the inter-linked political, security, humanitarian, human rights and development challenges in complex internal crises necessitate that we continue to improve strategies for complex peacekeeping operations, including the critical peace-building tasks.
Fourth, clear, precise and achievable mandates, backed by adequate resources, are critical. Early inclusion/engagement of TCCs/PCCs in the mandate formation phase would create a buy-in and help devise achievable mandates. A two-phased approach, as proposed by the Brahimi Panel, could be looked into as a possibility.
Decisions on renewal, transition and drawdown of missions should be based on sound assessment of the ground situation and progress on implementation of mandates in close coordination and consultation with troop and police contributing countries. What we have recently seen is that, especially at the time of drawdowns, TCCs/PCCs are not kept in the loop by the Secretariat, leading to planning difficulties.
Fifth, adequate military and police capacities remain crucial in mission configurations. Rapid deployment in response to crisis situations continues to be a serious challenge that must be addressed in all earnest. Recent experience has exposed the limits of inter-mission cooperation. We must work for a credible and long-term solution to this long-standing requirement. We see inter-mission cooperation as an interim measure in the regional context.
Sixth, we should continue to modernize peacekeeping and equip our missions with new technologies for better situational awareness and operational effectiveness. Operational and legal questions regarding the use of this technology, including state sovereignty, adherence to principles and confidentiality of data must be adequately addressed.
Seventh, capability driven approach would enhance effectiveness of missions. Professional, well-trained and well-equipped peacekeepers are at the core of this approach. Partnerships with TCCs/PCCs and with regional and sub-regional organizations must be harnessed in this light. Preparation of United Nations Military Units Manual (UNMUM) could become a source of guidance. Pakistan has concluded its work as chair of the Aviation Manual group.
Eighth, the situation where peacekeepers are continuously being asked to do more with less is unsustainable. UN peacekeeping, apart from being successful, is highly cost effective. We need to act credibly on: providing adequate resources to missions to effectively carry out their diverse mandates; and, put in place fair, realistic and permanent mechanisms for review and updating of troop costs and COE reimbursement rates.
And lastly, protection of civilians is an important mandate in many missions. Primary responsibility in this regard rests with the authorities of the concerned state. Where mandated, in keeping with the principles of peacekeeping, and in support of the host state, peacekeepers should meet their obligations relating to the protection of civilians. The recent courageous action of Pakistani troops in UNAMID is an example of robust protection of civilians while adhering to these principles. Through robust posturing and preventive diplomacy, it was able to avert a bloodbath.
Overly robust peacekeeping mandates could jeopardize the neutrality of peacekeepers, making them party to the conflict. If one part of a peacekeeping operation uses force, the whole mission risks becoming embroiled. Some kind of differentiation between them could be explored.
Madam Chair,
All of these and a host of other issues require close collaboration among the major stakeholders – the police and troop contributing countries, the Security Council and the Secretariat. Strengthening this triangular cooperation is for the collective good of peacekeeping. That is why it is so crucial to consult and take on board views of TCCs from the outset and throughout the various stages of a mission. This was also the one common thread that emerged from the Asian regional consultations with the High-Level Panel last month.
Madam Chair,
Peacekeeping is a collective endeavor of the entire UN membership. It draws strength from our collective political will. All of us must pool our human, financial and material resources for the success of this enterprise.
Thank you