SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON PEACEKEEPING CONCLUDES 2001 SESSION; APPROVES REPORT ON COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF OPERATIONS

Special Committee on

Peacekeeping Operations

165^th Meeting (AM)

SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON PEACEKEEPING CONCLUDES 2001 SESSION;

APPROVES REPORT ON COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF OPERATIONS

The Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations this morning concluded its 2001 session by approving, without a vote, its report on the comprehensive review of the whole question of peacekeeping operations in all their aspects.

At its 162nd meeting on 18 June, an open-ended Working Group was established to consider the substance of the Committee's mandate and to submit a report for the Committee's consideration and approval, followed by submission to the General Assembly.  The Working Group held a series of meetings between 20 and 27 July and prepared the report approved today.

Michel Duval (Canada), Vice Chairman, Chair of the Working Group and Acting Rapporteur, presented the report.  He said that it offered a clear and timely expression of the Committee's priorities, and provided a valuable blueprint for the enhancement of the United Nations peacekeeping capacity.

He said the report asked the Security Council to consider the possibility of implementing the recommendations of the Panel on United Nations Peace Operations, pertaining to the strengthening of cooperation between troop-contributing countries, the Council and the Secretariat.  It further asked the Council to give serious and timely consideration to proposals for a new mechanism of consultation between the Council and troop-contributing countries.

He said a number of initiatives had been recommended to strengthen the planning, management and mission support functions of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations.  Those included the creation of a Director of Management in the Office of the Under-Secretary-General; strengthening the Peacekeeping Best Practices Unit; and the creation of a small new unit in the Office of Mission Support to assist in developing overall policy guidance for administrative support.

In the area of operational planning, the Special Committee reiterates its support for Integrated Mission Task Forces and recommends further strengthening of the Office of Operations, so that the latter could give due attention to planning, mission support, and consultation with Member States.  The report also recommended enhanced capacity for the Situation Centre as a vital component of strengthening the overall coordination function assigned to the Office.

Mr. Duval said the Special Committee reiterated its call for the Secretariat to continue working towards the 30/90-day rapid deployment goals, and endorsed the

concept of a strategic reserve at the United Nations Logistic Base in Brindisi. The report also called for recommendations on how strategic lift could be better prearranged, and for consultations on the elaboration of mechanisms to enhance the United Nations Standby Arrangements System.  It supported further strengthening of the Department's civilian recruitment processes, including through creation of a new section in the restructured Personnel Management and Support Service.

The report, he said that the report expressed support for an upgrade of Mine Action Service and supported the creation of limited capability in the Civilian Police Division to assist on criminal law and judicial issues.

The key issue of safety and security of United Nations and associated personnel was also stressed.  Moreover, the report further recommends more attention to security issues by the Secretariat in the planning phase of operations, as well as by the Council, when formulating mandates.  Attention to gender awareness and gender mainstreaming for peacekeeping personnel at Headquarters and in the field was also encouraged.

He said the report also underlined the importance of consultation on issues such as investigations into misconduct allegations and the observance of international humanitarian law.  It recommended various measures to enhance the training of peacekeepers and called for the establishment of a small support secretariat to service the Executive Committee on Peace and Security.

The report also includes Annex I, which lists all Member States and Observers that participated in the 2001 regular session of the Committee, and Annex II, which includes a list of seminars and conferences hosted by Member States since the last regular session of the Committee.

The Secretary of the Special Committee, Andrew Grene, said the report had made a number of recommendations, proposals and conclusions with programme budget implications.  The additional requirements were $2 million for the regular budget for the biennium 2002-2003, and $25 million for the support budget, starting 1 January 2002 to 30 June 2002.  The statement on programme budget implications would be submitted to the Assembly to be considered along with the report.

Closing the session, Special Committee Chairman Arthur C. Mbanefo expressed his sincere appreciation to all the members of the Committee for their contributions to the successful conclusion of the session's work.

The Committee also adopted its agenda this morning without a vote.

The representatives of Jordan (on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement), Belgium (on behalf of the European Union), India and Algeria also made statements this morning.

The other Vice-Chairs of the Committee for the 2001 session of the Committee were Arnoldo M. Listre (Argentina), Motohide Yoshikawa (Japan), and Waldemar Baranowski (Poland).  Hossam Zaki (Egypt) was the Rapporteur.

Highlights of 2001 session

In the course of this session, the Committee’s deliberations centred on a comprehensive review of all aspects of United Nations peace operations in the wake of the recommendations of the Special Panel on United Nations Peace Operations.  At the request of the Secretary-General, that panel, headed by Lakhdar Brahimi, had undertaken a major assessment of the shortcomings of the Organization's existing peacekeeping operations.  The report presenting the Panel's subsequent frank and specific recommendations focused not only on politics and strategy, but also emphasized where improvement was needed in operational and organizational aspects of the system.

To facilitate its discussions, the Committee had before it the Secretary-General's follow-up report on implementation of the recommendations of the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations and the Panel on United Nations Peace Operations (document A/55/977).  That report represents a distillation of suggestions from individuals acquainted with various aspects of conflict prevention and peace-building, with what the Department of Peacekeeping Operations was doing well, and what might be done better.  It argues that while the United Nations has had many peacekeeping successes, performance could significantly improve if certain changes were brought to structures, systems and procedures, and if additional resources were provided.

Opening the session, Jean-Marie Guéhenno, Under-Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations, said that he was happy to stand before the Committee with what he believed were some solid proposals, building on the fine work of the Committee and the Panel on United Nations Peace Operations.  The spirit of the Secretary-General’s report could be summed up in four words:  “We can do better.”  The report was very candid in highlighting all the areas in which improvements were needed.

Trying to put the report in context, he said that the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, which was less than 10 years old, was over-stretched, overwhelmed and exhausted, struggling to keep pace with increasingly complex demands.  Echoing the report, he said it was no longer possible to perpetuate the “gifted amateurism” that had characterized the Organization's approach to peacekeeping.  The lives of staff were at stake, and that issue should not be treated lightly.  The way the Department planned operations needed to be institutionalized, better structured, made more inclusive. It was also necessary to significantly enhance rapid and effective deployment practices, and to improve relations with the field missions.

Addressing some of the possible concerns of the Special Committee, he said that it was not a secret that the issue of additional staff for the Department of Peacekeeping Operations featured prominently in that respect.  Indeed, the report referred to the assessment that the Department would need an additional 150 posts, above and beyond the almost 500 currently authorized, in order to achieve dramatic improvements in all the key areas of work.  He did not expect the Committee to hand out a blank cheque for the additional staff.  Indeed, any request for additional resources would need to be justified, on a post-by-post basis, in a subsequent budget submission. 

He went on to say that he anticipated many questions about the proposals to enhance rapid deployment, especially given the nine-digit dollar figure suggested to support the global logistics strategy.  On the issue of the Information and Strategic Analysis Secretariat and the proposed alternative to it, he said that it was no secret that the issue of information and its analysis, particularly on a system-wide basis, raised all sorts of questions. 

As the Committee’s two-day general debate began, many delegations expressed appreciation for the comprehensive nature of the Secretary-General’s report and the serious approach to the problems of United Nations peacekeeping.  Several speakers said that the document provided a clear picture of the needs, addressing both the additional requirements and the need for better use of existing funds. The representative of Egypt added that while the comprehensive review of peacekeeping operations was indeed commendable, the work should by no means be considered complete.  It was now up to the Committee, as well as other relevant bodies, to give the Secretariat the necessary mandate to ensure implementation of the report’s recommendations.

The representative of India said that the Secretary-General’s report on the implementation of peacekeeping reform showed that even if peacekeeping was not out of joint, the Department of Peacekeeping Operations was.  What it boiled down to was that the Department needed more bodies and money.  Was there any department in the United Nations that, after a decade of zero-growth budgets, did not?  He added that the review had found a general reluctance in the Department to shoulder risks and responsibilities, but did not address the real problem -- the absence of political guidance which had often made crises worse, leaving blue helmets in a limbo.  The new Peacekeeping Department must have the courage to lead and guide the forces entrusted to its care.

With significant institutional change and increased support, the United Nations would be better equipped to execute the critical peacekeeping and peace-building tasks assigned to it, Canada’s representative said.  Instead of micro-managing the Peacekeeping Department, it was necessary to focus on the capacities needed within the Secretariat.  The representative of Sweden (on behalf of the European Union and associated States) stressed the need to standardize the planning and conduct procedures, and to clearly define chains of command and decision-making.  Emphasizing the importance of better coordination at every level, he said that it was also necessary to improve the selection process of future mission leadership.

The representative of Chile, speaking on behalf of the Rio Group, said efforts to strengthen the Department should promote efficiency and interrelationship with other bodies and agencies.  The work of the Department should always be transparent, and its make-up should strive towards both geographic and gender balance.  Other delegations also stressed the importance of effective consultation with troop-contributing countries, the importance of effective exit strategies, the need to include a gender component in peacekeeping operations, and the importance of ensuring the safety of United Nations and associated personnel.

Also during the general debate, delegations discussed the safety and security of personnel; information gathering and analysis; the main functions of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations; the role of the United Nations

Logistics Base at Brindisi, Italy; and proposals for enhancing the United Nations rapid response capability.

The representative of the United States said one area needing increased emphasis was civilian policing.  His Government supported additional capacity for the Peacekeeping Department.  He added that on-call rosters and other rapid deployment tools were important for effective United Nations crisis response.  If the 30-90 day deployment standard were to be more than a political mark on the wall, Member States would have to contribute as conscientiously as they could to standby arrangements, as well as to resources for pre-positioned equipment of some scale.

Speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, the representative of Jordan said that the establishment of new operations or the extension of existing mandates should not be based only on the consent of the parties, but also on the non-use of force, impartiality, clearly defined mandates and secure financing.  On strengthening the Department, he echoed the sentiments of many delegations, adding that while it was important to increase the number of posts, it would be more important from a moral standpoint to first reimburse troop-contributing countries that had been waiting for years for complete contingent-owned equipment reimbursement. 

The representative of Zambia said it was surprising that while funds for reimbursing suppliers of services were readily available, funds for equipment contributors were not, with troop contributors now owed millions of dollars.  Both the Secretariat and the Brahimi Panel had complained about deployment of ill-equipped troops, but reimbursement of countries’ contingent-owned equipment costs could be applied to adequately prepare troops.  Instead of stocking the Logistics Base, troop contributors could be reimbursed so that they could purchase their own equipment.  In his national capacity, Committee Chairman Arthur Mbanefo (Nigeria) called on all States to live up to their obligations and pay their dues on time and without reservations.

Committee Background

The Special Committee, established by the General Assembly in 1965, was mandated to conduct a comprehensive review of all issues relating to peacekeeping. It reports to the Assembly through the Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization) on its work.  The Committee's membership is made up of 100 United Nations Member States, mostly past or current contributors of peacekeeping personnel.  Other Member States also participate in the work of the Committee and its working groups as observers.

During this session, the Committee re-elected Arthur Mbanefo of Nigeria as the Chairman of the Special Committee, and elected Arnoldo Listre of Argentina, Michel Duval of Canada, Motohide Yoshikawa of Japan and Zbigniew Szlek of Poland as the four Vice-Chairmen.  Hossam Zaki of Egypt was elected Rapporteur.

* *** *