Post-conflict Peace-building

Statement by Ambassador Munir Akram, Permanent Representative of Pakistan to the United Nations, in the Security Council Open Debate on Post-conflict Peace-building on 20 May 2008

Mr. President,

We welcome this open debate initiated by your government on an important subject. We align ourselves with the statement delivered by the representative of Jamaica on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement.

  1. Post-conflict peace-building is crucial for establishing peace and sustainable development in war torn countries. Together with conflict prevention and peacekeeping, peace-building must be part of a comprehensive response to complex crises. While this concept is well recognized, the challenge is to fully operationalize it in post-conflict stabilization efforts to ensure coherence and synergy between peacekeeping and peace-building activities from the very outset of the engagement of the United Nations and thus ensure a smooth transition from peacekeeping to conditions of self-sustaining peace and development.
  2. To ensure such synergy and effective peace-building, the 2005 World Summit recognized the need for a "dedicated institutional mechanism." This led to the establishment of the Peace-building Commission. Together with the Support Office and the Peace-building Fund, the Commission is now the central instrument for peace-building activities. The unique structure and composition of the PBC was conceived to bring together “all relevant actors to marshal resources and to advise on and propose integrated strategies for post-conflict peace-building and recovery.” Indeed, several issues reflected in the Presidency’s concept paper for this debate, e.g. the need to address the critical gaps in peace-building, constituted the basic rationale for the creation of the PBC and are indeed a part of its mandate. As the Non-Aligned Movement and others have pointed out, several of these issues are being discussed by the Commission in its various formats. We endorse the view that all efforts, including this debate, should aim at strengthening the role and mandate of the PBC.
  3. Coherence and integration of peace-building activities; and the provision of timely, adequate and sustained funding are objectives that can be best promoted by the Commission since all major stakeholders and partners are represented there. However, to ensure that this task is conducted effectively, the international community needs to evolve a common strategic vision of peace-building. This requires, first, greater convergence between the perspectives of the partners and the host countries, based primarily on the priorities and policies of the latter. National ownership and leadership are key for the success of peace-building. Secondly, all actors should demonstrate genuine political will and flexibility to ensure effective peace-building. Thirdly, to assure a comprehensive approach, the PBC must be involved in peace-building from the initial phases. The Security Council should, we believe, make use of paragraph 16 of resolution 60/180 to seek the advice of the PBC in situations where peacekeeping missions are still deployed. Empowerment of the Secretary-General’s Special Representatives to lead and coordinate peacekeeping and peace-building, of course are desirable, but should not supplant rather should supplement the authority and role of host governments.
  4. There is no doubt a requirement for adequate civilian expertise, particularly to support rule of law activities. Such capacity is already being provided by the UN in integrated missions. We also support the Standing Police Capacity. However, the concept of “rapidly deployable civilian capacities”, in large numbers, and as a standing structure or mechanism, needs further clarification with regard to its objectives and scope, its actual requirements and possible implications. A somewhat similar proposal, we recall, was made earlier by the Secretary-General to establish a civilian cadre of 2500 personnel. It became the object of numerous and legitimate questions and concerns. It should also be noted that civilian capacities with relevant experience and perspectives are normally available in the host countries, and among their diasporas, which can and should be harnessed and utilized. Mr. Brahimi’s comments this morning were very pertinent in this regard. The objective should be the durable development of national capacities, not steps to replace them. These are conclusions which we derive from the PBC’s discussions relating to the countries on its agenda.

Mr. President,

  1. The identification of gaps is a key step in formulating and implementing successful strategies. This should be done, not piecemeal but through an objective and comprehensive diagnosis of the situation. Experience has shown that the biggest and most ominous gap in peacekeeping and peace-building strategies is the failure to comprehend and address the root causes of conflicts. In particular, the issues of poverty and unemployment and the imperative of socio-economic development have remained largely neglected in plans and strategies. Post-conflict challenges in several countries are likely to become further exacerbated by the current global food crisis. This was mentioned in the PBC’s discussion on Sierra Leone yesterday. We still lack a strategy that would enable countries emerging from conflict to stand on their own feet to achieve self-sustained peace and development. Many promises of aid remain unfulfilled. Often, the benefit and effectiveness of such aid is open to question, a point raised by others including Mr. Brahimi in this discussion. One conclusion seems to be that such aid is best channeled through the budgets of the host governments. On the other hand, many countries afflicted by complex conflicts continue to be deprived of revenues and earnings from their own resources, due to unequal trade regimes, industrial-country agricultural subsidies, inability to process their raw materials etc. And, insufficient attention has been accorded to national and international mechanisms to halt the illegal exploitation of their natural resources or enable the concerned countries to make full use of these resources for the benefit of their own peoples.
  2. Thus, a fuller perspective of the peace-building challenges and the formulation of adequate response strategies is essential to achieve sustainable peace and development. Such a comprehensive approach can be best pursued through an inclusive and participatory process. The Pakistan delegation expects and hopes that to this end, this potential of the PBC will be fully utilized by all UN Member States, including by the members of the Security Council.

Thank you, Mr. President.