Peacebuilding Commission: Statement by Herman Schaper on the occasion of the PBC Organizational Committee
Statement by H.E. Herman Schaper
Permanent Representative of the Kingdom of the Netherlands to the United Nations
on the occasion of the PBC Organizational Committee
New York, 20 July 2012
Thank you very much for organizing this consultation on the upcoming SG report on peace building in the aftermath of conflict. The Peacebuilding Commission is the appropriate forum to discuss these overarching peace building issues. I also thank PBSO for their introduction and overview of the upcoming SG report. We welcome the focus on inclusivity, institutional development, mutual accountability and sustaining international support.
I would like to make some preliminary comments on the provided overview. Four points:
First, we believe that much progress has been made since the SG-report in 2009 on “Peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict”. Many of the elements in the Agenda for Action of that report have been implemented or are being implemented. Peacebuilding features regularly in Security Council mandates. Assigning roles and responsibilities within the UN-system is moving forward, including the Global Focal Point on Rule of Law. The Peacebuilding Fund has found a clear niche. This progress makes the UN more effective on the ground to the benefit of post-conflict countries. But that being said, the task ahead of us is still immense.
For instance, the growing recognition of the interrelationship between the three pillars of the United Nations and the need to bring peace & security, development and human rights & international law together more consistently.
Second, attention for peace building has enormously increased outside the UN itself, including for example by the World Bank in its World Development Report 2011. Also, we have seen a substantial increase in programs and activities on the ground by member states, NGO’s and IFI’s. The establishment of the G7+ of self-proclaimed fragile states, and the agreement in Busan on the New Deal are also important steps where countries take national ownership for their own development. Exactly as it should be. This is very good news, and should be recognized and supported, also in the new SG-report.
The New Deal, CivCap and PBC all represent a strengthened focus on national ownership and will help to deepen mutual commitment and accountability to peace building. The PBC could further support this by providing political accompaniment and marshaling resources for those pilot countries which feature on the PBC-agenda and where New Deal Compacts are established between governments and international partners.
Thirdly, we would welcome a focus on the UN-system itself as did the previous report. Some important mechanisms have been established, especially the Integrated Mission Planning Processes and Global Focal Points to improve cooperation between peacekeeping and political missions, and UN Country Teams. However, implementation has been mixed in our view and need constant attention.
We would therefore be interested in an assessment of the progress and possible further action to deepen this cooperation. This could be complemented with emerging issues that need our collective attention, for example the transition process from missions to UNCT’s and monitoring and evaluation through benchmarks of joint UN efforts.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, we hope that this report will include a forward looking vision and action oriented agenda with concrete proposals to ensure that this report will guide the membership as well as the UN family in the next couple of years in their engagement in peace building.