RAPID RESPONSE BY UN KEY TO SAVING LIVES AND REDUCING COSTS, SPEAKERS STRESS IN PEACEKEEPING COMMITTEE, AS GENERAL DEBATE CONCLUDES

Special Committee on

Peacekeeping Operations

172^nd & 173^rd Meetings (AM & PM)

RAPID RESPONSE BY UN KEY TO SAVING LIVES AND REDUCING COSTS, SPEAKERS STRESS

IN PEACEKEEPING COMMITTEE, AS GENERAL DEBATE CONCLUDES

The Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations was told today that a more rapid response by the United Nations for additional forces in Sierra Leone to undertake certain peacekeeping and security tasks, within 30 days of the signing of the 1999 peace agreement, could have reduced the human and material costs, and shortened the conflict. 

In two meetings today to conclude the general debate of the Special Committee’s 2003 session, the representative of Sierra Leone said lessons could be learned in the final chapter of a generally successful peace operation.  Recalling the difficulties facing the Secretary-General in mobilizing troops for the expansion of the United Nations Mission in Sierra Leone, he warned that delays often frustrated combatants, encouraged re-armament, created security vacuums, provoked cease-fire violations, and further prolonged armed conflicts. 

It was only in February 2000, he continued, that the Security Council mandated UNAMSIL to provide protection to civilians under imminent threat of physical violence – well after thousands had fallen victim to war crimes and crimes against humanity.  Having learned from the Sierra Leone experience and to avert a possible humanitarian crisis, the Council recently took quick action and authorized peacekeepers in Cote d’Ivoire. 

Following yesterday’s daylong debate, opened by Under-Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations Jean-Marie Guéhenno and dominated by agreement to shift away from internal reform to improved functioning in the field, speakers today discussed the increasing complexity and multi-dimensional character of peace operations, as well as difficulties fulfilling the 30 to 90-day rapid deployment requirement.

The representative of Brazil said it must be ensured that the Organization had the necessary contingents -– military, civilian police, and civilians – to deploy quickly.  Deployment had become increasingly difficult for developing countries, especially since it must now occur within 30 to 90 days.  The other part of the equation concerned delays in reimbursement to troop contributing countries, which limited their ability to contribute personnel.  Thus, the rapid deployment requirement should be matched by “rapid reimbursement”.

Arrears due from past missions, including in Cambodia and Rwanda, had not yet been paid, said the Tunisian representative. Still, things were moving in the

right direction.  The Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) was playing a decisive role in mounting and managing several missions, sometimes at once, and,

since the adoption of Security Council resolution 1353 (2001), relations between the Council, the Secretariat and troop contributors had been improving.

In unstable post-conflict situations, stated the representative of Singapore, rapid deployment of a credible deterrent force into the theatre of operations was imperative.  Such a force positioned at the critical start of a peacekeeping operation would show that the United Nations “meant business”.  The Organization had learned that lesson well in Timor-Leste and Sierra Leone.  Indeed, contingency plans for worst-case scenarios demanded that the United Nations be ready with robust forces, and that meant more universal participation.

India’s representative said that while robust rules of engagement had been pursued in the reform phase, it would be extremely useful to undertake similar “rules of disengagement”. The expeditious liquidation of missions was of paramount importance.  That involved withdrawal of troops and the civilian component from the mission area, as well as speedy processing of claims, payments to the troop contributors and an eventual closing of the accounting books. 

The working group of the Special Committee will meet tomorrow to begin an informal thematic debate in closed session, at which it would hear briefings by the Civilian Police Division, including on the rule of law, and military aspects of rapid deployment.

Statements were also made today by the representatives of Namibia, Indonesia, Poland, Ukraine, Russian Federation, Malaysia, Morocco, Bangladesh, Thailand, Romania, Lebanon, Pakistan, South Africa, Serbia and Montenegro, Turkey, Nepal, Chile, and Malawi.  The Observers of Malta and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea also spoke.

The next formal meeting of the Special Committee will be announced in The Journal.

Background

The Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations met today to continue its general debate on a wide range of issues related to United Nations peacekeeping.  (For details of the session, please see Press Release GA/PK/177 of 3 March.)

Statements

VIJAY K. NAMBIAR (India) said that the forthcoming drawdowns of peacekeeping operations in 2003 should facilitate Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) to pursue more actively a number of priority activities.  While robust rules of engagement had been pursued in the post-Brahimi phase, it would be extremely useful to undertake similar “rules of disengagement”, so as to complete tasks in a timebound fashion.  Expeditious liquidation of missions was of paramount importance.  That involved withdrawal of troops and the civilian component from the mission area, as well as speedy processing of claims, payments to the troop contributors and an eventual closing of the accounting books. 

He urged greater coordination with the funds and programmes, and specialized agencies of the United Nations, as well as the Bretton Woods institutions during peacekeeping and the post-conflict peace-building phase.  A hasty retreat, however, could jeopardize the gains made by a peacekeeping operation.  Nevertheless, proper planning for a phased withdrawal should form an integral part of peacekeeping planning.  On budgetary issues, the DPKO had been relatively unconstrained by budgetary limitations in fulfilling its mandates, but that situation would not likely last forever.  Efforts should be made, therefore, to accomplish more from what was already available and on the table.  Additional resources were not a panacea for all ills, and not necessarily a “fix” for the endemic problems that plagued United Nations peacekeeping.

He reviewed components of peacekeeping, including strengthening cooperation with troop contributors, recruitment, best practices and lessons learned,

mission-planning, rule of law, rapid deployment, and training.  The United Nations should focus more on the requirements of the African continent instead of seeking to disengage from it by subcontracting peacekeeping to regional arrangements, whose role must be to reinforce, rather than replace, the United Nations.  Developed countries needed to shed their reluctance to participate in peacekeeping in Africa and should earmark sufficient funds for such operations.  India was proud of its long-standing commitment and contribution to peacekeeping operations in Africa.  At the same time, Member States should pay their assessed contributions, in full, on time and without conditions.  The DPKO should not shy away from explicitly stating that peacekeeping operations could not be run effectively in the face of non-receipt of contributions from Member States.

GERHARD THERON (Namibia) said that the further development and incorporation into peacekeeping missions of lessons learned, gender mainstreaming, discipline criteria, an enhanced rapid-deployment capability and strengthened peacekeeping capacities were vital to keep peacekeeping efforts effective.  He welcomed the establishment of the on-call list of military, civilian police and civilian personnel under the United Nations Standby Arrangements System (UNSAS).  He also stressed the urgent need for women to participate fully in all phases of peace processes.

He said that the ongoing consultation and cooperation between the United Nations and regional and subregional organizations remained critical, and welcomed the Secretariat’s involvement with the African Union in preparing proposals on Headquarters capacities and structures, as well as on an African Standby Force.  He was also pleased with the DPKO’s deepening involvement at the operational level in the enhancement of Africa’s peacekeeping capacity by providing training and advice.

Despite many positive developments, there were still a number of concerns in the relationship between the United Nations and Member States.  He associated himself with concerns expressed by developing countries on issues such as the rate of reimbursement and appointments to leadership positions at Headquarters and at missions.  Concerned about the negative impact that other situations, currently prominent in the news, could have on United Nations operations, he appealed to the international community to maintain its commitment to, and support for

United Nations peace operations in countries such as the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Sierra Leone, despite developments elsewhere.

MOCHAMAD SLAMET HIDAYAT (Indonesia) said that the first order of business for the United Nations was peacekeeping, a fundamental pillar in the maintenance of international peace and security.  At the same time, peacekeeping operations should observe the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter.  He welcomed the contributions of the Special Committee to the progress made in 2002.  He cited as examples of successes the work of the operations in Prevlaka, Ethiopia and Eritrea, Timor-Leste, and Sierra Leone.  Those advances were not surprising, as they could be traced to the understanding gained over the years by

Member States and the United Nations planners.  The Special Committee should also be proud of its role in that regard.

He said that peacekeeping was a series of interrelated tasks requiring much cooperation.  Thus, enhancing the DPKO was of particular importance, as was strengthened cooperation between the Security Council, troop contributors and the Secretariat.  Also important was to increase the countries still underrepresented within the DPKO, contrary to the regulations on equitable representation of the oversight services.  According to the Secretary-General’s report, that matter was beginning to be remedied.  Further, developing countries alone could not shoulder the burden of contributions to the operations; all Member States must meet that challenge.  He stressed the importance of enhancing the quality of strategic coordination as a critical component of success.  Another important element in the planning and execution of the operations was the need for sensitivity to local traditions and cultures.

Reiterating the need for all countries to have the opportunity to become contributors, he said that the United Nations should look at that issue in a comprehensive manner.  His country had always taken the peacekeeping challenge seriously, as its foreign policy had affirmed.  Indonesia had participated in

20 peacekeeping missions since 1956 and was currently establishing a national centre for peacekeeping operations.  It would continue to strive to improve the quality of its contributions to meet the required standard.  Despite promising developments in 2002, there was still room for improvement in the peacekeeping process.  The shift in focus to more field-related aspects was valid and merited further study by the Special Committee.

BEATA PEKSA-KRAWIEC (Poland) said that the experience of the men and women who had contributed to the successful outcome of operations in Timor-Leste, Prevlaka, and Bosnia and Herzegovina should be included into the work of the

Best Practices Unit.  One of the most important issues for her delegation was the safety and security of United Nations and associated personnel taking part in peacekeeping operations.  While progress had been made in the field, there was still room for improvement.

United Nations peacekeeping could only succeed with congruous mandates, objectives, and well-trained and properly-equipped military, police and civilian staff, who had the resources to plan, deploy and manage operations effectively, she said.  Therefore, she welcomed the efforts of the Special Committee to enhance rapid deployment, operational planning and management of operations, as well as standardization of training and rules of engagement, and she underlined the importance of the enhancement of the UNSAS.  Further improvements were required for the on-call list, especially regarding civilian police and civilian staff.

There was still a need for improvement in pre-deployment training, she said, especially in the area of training for comprehensive missions, designed in cooperation with military, civilian police and mission support divisions.  Regional and subregional organizations could significantly contribute to peace and security building, especially while cooperating closely with United Nations missions, such as in Kosovo and Bosnia and Herzegovina.  Such organizations also had an important role in the field of conflict prevention.  The United Nations should work with those organizations on increasing its ability to prevent conflicts.

MARKIYAN KULYK (Ukraine) said that the changing nature and character of conflicts had substantially broadened the scope of United Nations peacekeeping activities and made them far more complex during the past decade.  The combined efforts of the Member States and the Secretariat during the past few years resulted in considerable strengthening of the Organization’s capabilities to support and conduct peacekeeping operations.

The improvement in the United Nations’ structures, systems and procedures, backed by additional financial and staff resources, was a real investment in the future and long-term success of United Nations peacekeeping, he said.  That should and, Ukraine was convinced, would be followed by the effective application by the DPKO of working methods and management culture, improvement in quality and substance of its activities.

He welcomed the progress made in enhancing the United Nations

rapid-deployment capability in order to act effectively when the situation warranted.  The success of peacekeeping operations, he felt, largely depended on the deployment of well-trained military and civilian police personnel.  There was a clear link between training and disciplinary issues.  Acts of misconduct, despite how rarely they occurred, harmed the local population, as well as undermined the credibility and authority of the United Nations, which was unacceptable.  He added that the important role played by United Nations peacekeeping around the world and the sacrifices made by individual peacekeepers deserved full recognition by the international community.

GENNADY M. GATILOV (Russian Federation) said that effective steps had been taken to improve the conceptual basis of peacekeeping and enhance the rapid deployment and preventive functions of the United Nations through the timely use of resources.  Collective efforts in those areas must continue to be underpinned by constant guidelines, including that the primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security lay with the Security Council.  There was also a need for greater cooperation on the part of the receiving parties and all parties to a conflict with United Nations missions.  Interaction between the United Nations and regional structures was also crucial.

He said that the Secretary-General’s report reflected the great amount of work that had been done to implement the recommendations of last year’s session.  The success of United Nations peacekeeping in the Balkans, Timor-Leste, Afghanistan and in a number of African countries had demonstrated that those operations, in their current multi-faceted form, were the best instrument for resolving a wide range of peace and security tasks.  An important result of the reforms had been the 50 per cent increase in the DPKO staff approved by the General Assembly.  There had been progress in implementing several of the Committee’s recommendations aimed at optimizing the appropriate structures of the Secretariat and the interaction among them, particularly between the DPKO and the Department of Political Affairs.  Internal reform within the DPKO had not yet yielded the desired results, however, and key posts remained vacant. 

Time should be devoted at the current session to the issue of improving fieldwork, including planning and preparation, the deployment of complex peacekeeping missions, strengthened coordination among the various components, and interaction with other international presences.  Regarding the dangerous regional dimension to certain conflicts, a strengthened DPKO would promote an effective solution.  Strategic planning for current and future operations, both in the field and within the Secretariat, was also vital.  He proposed the establishment, within the DPKO, of a special unit to gather, under one roof, the various mutually complementary aspects of planning multi-faceted operations.  For example, better use could be made of the Office of the Military Adviser of the Secretary-General.

RAMLI NIK (Malaysia) supported the strengthening of the Best Practices Unit to enable it to play a more active role in the development of generic guidelines, procedures and best practices for current and future use in peacekeeping operations.  In doing so, the Unit should consult with troop-contributing countries that had participated in the various United Nations peacekeeping missions, in order to benefit from their experiences.

He called for regular meetings between the Secretariat and the former force commanders and national contingent commanders, including battalion commanders, in an effort to develop a validation mechanism for lessons learned and good practices, as requested by the Special Committee last year.  In that regard, he hoped that the initiatives and other projects outlined in the Secretary-General’s report would be implemented without delay.  Equally important was the need to implement the concept of disarmament, demobilization and reintegration, which was crucial to ensure the success of peacekeeping missions.  He called for the review of the Principles and Guidelines on disarmament, demobilization and reintegration issued by the Secretariat in 1999.  The reintegration phase required detailed and proper planning in terms of security and socio-economic programmes.

He fully acknowledged that the dimension of peacekeeping operations had now become more challenging, thereby requiring well-trained peacekeepers capable of handling delicate situations.  In that regard, the development of the Standardized Generic Training Modules for the training of potential peacekeepers, and

training-related information-sharing with national peacekeeping centres by the DPKO were commendable steps.

MOHAMED BENNOUNA (Morocco) said that peacekeeping operations were the most important means available to Member States to arrive at the objective of maintaining international peace and security.  The global instability, which increased after the cold war, especially in Africa, heightened the need for the international community to address issues of economic development along with peacekeeping missions.  He acknowledged that peacekeeping had come a long way since the Brahimi Report, in terms of deployment and management.  He also noted the progress achieved, which he attributed largely to the reforms introduced in the DPKO.  Those changes had improved cooperation between the DPKO and troop-contributing countries, as well as management of peacekeeping missions in the field.

He called for strengthened interaction between Member States, especially troop-contributing countries, and the DPKO, so that they were better informed of the situation in field.  Regular contact between troop-contributing countries and the Security Council should also be continued and enhanced.  Participation by troop-contributing countries in the decision-making process had been acknowledged and should also continue.  He stressed that the reimbursement of

troop-contributing countries was important because most of them were developing countries that had assumed extra burdens and had to be compensated.  This had to be done for the sake of greater effectiveness in the field.  In that connection, the implementation of the Group of Eight Action Plan for Africa would assist the continent to undertake responsibility for its own security.

MUNSHI FAIZ AHMAD (Bangladesh) said that multidimensional peacekeeping operations were increasingly deployed in complex situations.  Disarmament, demobilization and reintegration of ex-combatants remained a genuine concern for the international community.  He observed that even with a political agreement in place among the parties to a conflict, often a vital role was played by the peacekeepers on the ground in making the first contact with target groups in difficult and uncertain environments.  Among the difficulties faced in

post-conflict situations was the break down or absence of the rule of law. 

On training, he said that the availability of well-trained and well-equipped troops was vital to the success of peacekeeping operations.  Only a handful of developing countries, Bangladesh among them, had been consistent in providing such troops.  He added that it was unjustifiable that senior leadership positions in the missions continued to elude some major contributors of units to those same missions.  In addition, he noted, even after the completion of recruitment for the additional positions in the DPKO, those troop-contributing countries had yet to be properly represented in relation to the size of their contribution to field missions.

JOSÉ ALBERTO ACCIOLY FRAGELLI (Brazil) said that the DPKO had completed important reforms, which reflected the need to assess that complex structure and to adapt to the new realities and challenges on the world stage.  It had been essential to implement changes in the managerial culture of the Department, which was starting to bear fruit through its strengthened strategic planning.  The process for rapid deployment had been completed, particularly with the reinforcement of the logistics base at Brindisi.  The Special Committee had helped create an efficient and dynamic structure in a position to implement peace operations in a timely manner.  Now, it must focus on ensuring that those efforts had not been in vain and that the Organization would have the necessary contingents –- military, civilian police, and civilians -- to deploy forces quickly. 

Recalling the Secretary-General’s view that participation in peacekeeping operations depended on the political will of nations, he said that was not always enough for developing countries.  Other elements were part of the equation, including material and financial difficulties.  That had made the participation of developing countries increasingly difficult, particularly when deployment must occur in 30 to 90 days.  Special attention should be given to the issue of reimbursement to the troop-contributing countries.  Delays in that connection limited their ability to contribute military, civilian police and civilian personnel.  It was in the effort to comply with the 30 to 90-day deployment requirement that that became especially difficult.  Thus, rapid deployment should be matched by “rapid reimbursement”.  The Rio Group last year requested a study linked specifically to the difficulties of rapid deployment.  Today, he reiterated the importance of such a study because debate on that question was indispensable.

Peace operations had increased in complexity and must be seen in their multi-dimensional character, he continued.  The military aspect was not an end in itself, but part of a multi-disciplinary response to complex situations.  The elements, therefore, must be seen as part of a process to prevent conflicts, promote internal political dialogue, provide humanitarian assistance, promote human rights and institution- and peace-building in post-conflict situations.  It was also necessary to review and better define the role of civilian police and other civilian personnel in peace operations.  Guidelines should be formulated to form a framework for civilian protection and domestic security, and contribute to the rebuilding process.  Representatives of the countries where operations were to be deployed should be included in the formulation of such guidelines.

KAIS KABTANI (Tunisia) said that peacekeeping operations were now confronting new challenges.  Conflicts were more complex in nature, scope and range, and required significantly more resources and support.  The DPKO continued to play a decisive role by mounting and managing several missions, sometimes at once, in the four corners of the world.  He appreciated the hard work done to restructure the Department and manage the tens of thousands of troops.  The focus should now rightly turn to better functioning in the field.  While progress had been made in terms of dialogue between the Secretariat and Member States, particularly the increase in the number of information meetings for troop contributors, there remained a need for better communication with the field components, through written reports for the troop contributors.  Transparency and ease of communication should be continued resolutely.

He said that since the adoption of Security Council resolution 1353 (2001), relations between the Security Council, the Secretariat and troop contributors had been moving in the right direction.  Tunisia had been among the first countries in the Council to call for institutionalizing consultations with the troop contributors, as recommended in the Brahimi report.  At the same time, peacekeeping could not replace the search for a final solution to conflicts; their underlying causes must be studied, particularly poverty and underdevelopment.  Consolidating a durable peace meant adopting an integrated strategy to remedy the causes of the conflict and prevent its recurrence.

Progress in strengthening the system of standby forces and resources had been welcome, as well as the procurement and management of strategic deployment stocks at Brindisi, he said.  Tunisia had joined the system of standby arrangements in June 1999 under a memorandum agreement with the United Nations and it had continued to communicate with the DPKO within the required timeframes.  He attached importance to strengthening relations between the United Nations and the African Union, particularly in strengthening the Union’s capacity for conflict prevention and management.  He welcomed the positive international trend towards developing African peacekeeping capacity and called for the continued commitment by the international community to discharge its responsibilities and support for peace efforts in Africa.  Regarding reimbursements, he regretted that arrears related to past missions, including in Cambodia and Rwanda, had not yet been paid.

SYLVESTER E. ROWE (Sierra Leone) expressed appreciation to the

troop-contributing countries and the DPKO for bringing Sierra Leone to its present stage, which could be described as the preface to the closing chapter of a successful peace operation.  In Sierra Leone, more than 72,000 combatants had been disarmed and demobilized and more than 42,000 weapons had been collected and destroyed.  Rapid deployment remained the core issue and should be accorded priority in the Committee’s work.  Given that no peace mission could be undertaken without military, police and civilian personnel, and appropriate logistics, he had come to realize that the United Nations response to conflict was not merely one of deployment of peacekeeping operations, but of rapid deployment.

He said that the 30 to 90-day timeline for the deployment of peacekeeping operations was “not unreasonable” and should be maintained as the target for future operations.  Of course, some operations were more complex than others.  He shared the Secretary-General’s view that the political will of Member States to deploy well-trained and equipped troops and police “in a timely manner” was a determining factor for assuring rapid deployment.  The United Nations should be constantly reminded, however, of the serious consequences inherent in delays to respond speedily and efficiently to requests for the deployment of peacekeepers in areas of armed conflict. 

Indeed, he said, there was a lesson to be learned from the Sierra Leone experience.  Delays often created frustrations on the part of combatants, particularly young rebels, encouraged re-armament, created security vacuums, provoked ceasefire violations, and further prolonged armed conflicts.  That was why his Government had wanted the deployment of additional forces within 30 days of the signing of the 1999 Lome Peace Agreement to undertake several peacekeeping and security functions, and six weeks after signing that Agreement for a neutral peacekeeping force comprising of the Economic Community of West African States' Monitoring Observer Group (ECOMOG) and the United Nations Observer Mission in Sierra Leone (UNOMSIL), to commence the process of disarmament, demobilization and reintegration. 

He recalled the difficulties facing the Secretary-General in mobilizing troops for UNAMSIL’s expansion.  That was not a belated criticism, he said, but an example of lessons learned.  Rapid response could have reduced the human and material costs, as well as the duration of the conflict.  Rapid deployment was not only a means of ending armed conflict, but also of averting an escalation and spillover of such conflicts. 

In some instances, he said, the rapid deployment of robust peacekeeping operations could also pre-empt unilateral action under the controversial phenomenon called “humanitarian intervention”.  It was only in February 2000 that the Security Council, through the adoption of resolution 1289 (2000), mandated UNAMSIL to provide protection to civilians under imminent threat of physical violence.  That was well after thousands of innocent civilians had become victims of heinous war crimes and crimes against humanity.  Learning from the Sierra Leone experience and attempting to avert a possible humanitarian crisis, the Council took quick action, under resolution 1464 (2003), to authorize the present peacekeeping troops in Côte d’Ivoire. 

CHUCHAI KASEMSARN (Thailand) said that because his country attached high importance to the safety of United Nations peacekeepers, it was pleased with ongoing efforts in the past year to improve their safety.  The incorporation of the key principles and provisions contained in the Convention on the Safety and Security of United Nations and Associated Personnel into various status-of-forces agreements between the United Nations and the host countries were important steps forward.

In addition to improving the safety of peacekeepers in areas of operations, the capabilities of the United Nations to analyze and provide accurate and reliable threat assessments should be enhanced, he said.  Such assessments and related information would be helpful for troop-contributing countries in their decision-making regarding participation in peacekeeping missions, as well as in the training of the appropriate personnel to meet specific mission requirements.  Further, safety was a paramount factor in obtaining the cooperation and consent of Member States, with regard to the deployment of peacekeepers, including preventive deployment.

He welcomed greater cooperation and consultations between the

troop-contributing countries, the Security Council and the Secretariat and hoped that those would continue to be enhanced.  Enhanced dialogue among the relevant entities on peacekeeping was a positive example of the improvement in the working methods of the Council.  He also noted that prolonged delays in reimbursement to troop-contributing countries had to be avoided and, in that regard, welcomed the recent progress that had been made on the reimbursement issue.

ALEXANDRINA RUSU (Romania) said she remained deeply concerned when acts of misconduct committed by peacekeepers occurred in United Nations peacekeeping operations.  With the understanding that the best way to avoid such unfortunate situations was prevention, Romania supported total adherence to and respect for the code of conduct by national contingents. 

She said that it should not be forgotten that the local population had already experienced the trauma of conflict and that, among other duties, the peacekeepers had the obligation to alleviate as much suffering as possible.  In cases of the misconduct of peacekeeping personnel, it was imperative that the United Nations promoted a policy of “zero tolerance”, she urged.  In that context, she reiterated the proposal put forward during the general debate last fall concerning the early functioning of the “ombudsperson” position in United Nations peacekeeping missions.

Regarding gender issues, she said Romania was highly interested in a briefing from the Secretariat regarding progress made in mainstreaming a gender perspective in the policy towards United Nations missions.  The decrease last year in the selection and participation of women in peacekeeping operations was of concern, and she encouraged the Secretariat to make all efforts to overcome the existing imbalance.  In addition, she appreciated the Secretariat’s decision to keep as a high priority the improvement of dialogue and cooperation with the troop-contributing countries.

IBRAHIM ASSAF (Lebanon) compared international peacekeepers to a utopian international army, as the peacekeepers were functioning under the highest international authority and operating in 15 tense regions around the world.  The Secretary-General’s report had shown that attempts were still under way to improve operations, as guided by the recommendations of the Committee.  Efforts were ongoing to improve such aspects as the process of disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration, as well as the rapid deployment of forces and the safe provision of air and sea transport.  Better management of field operations was another central element, as was strengthened coordination between the Organization and troop contributors.

He emphasized the importance of adhering to the general principles for such operations, especially those relating to agreement between the parties, impartiality, and respect for the sovereignty of countries and non-interference in their internal affairs.  Contributions by developing countries should not be limited only to providing material and equipment.  Choosing leaders of international peacekeeping forces should be done in accordance with the contributions made by each country.  He also stressed the need to deal with the root causes of conflicts and not only with results. 

The Secretary-General’s report had referred to the successful conclusion of three operations in 2002.  Mr. Assaf encouraged him to call for the completion of operations in the Middle East –- United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) and United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) –- the latter being the oldest United Nations peacekeeping operation.

MUNIR AKRAM (Pakistan) called for greater representation for developing and troop-contributing countries in the DPKO and hoped that the reimbursement process, including costs from ongoing missions, would also be expedited.  He urged the uniform application of the United Nations rules of engagement in peacekeeping operations, as the lack of universal application would likely jeopardize the lives of peacekeepers and those under their protection.  Pakistan had been a leading advocate of triangular cooperation between the troop contributors, the Security Council and the Secretariat.  It had called for the creation of mechanisms aimed at enhancing consultations with the Council, not only in drawing up mandates, but also in their implementation. 

So far, he continued, briefings held in joint meetings of the Council and the troop-contributing countries had fallen short of that objective.  Although there was immense value in keeping the contributors informed, the meetings had not encompassed the result-oriented objectives of the consultation mechanisms that had been proposed.  The high priority that the Secretariat accorded to cooperation with the troop contributors was welcome, but it was very important to take them into confidence at each stage of a mission.  After all, troop contributors regarded themselves as integral stakeholders of a mission and their views would likely add value to those of the Secretariat. 

In a review of some of the priority areas mentioned in the

Secretary-General’s report, he stressed that the views of at least the major contributors should be incorporated into any mission assessment.  Security-sector reform was one of the most sensitive areas of peace-building and the United Nations would have to ensure that that process was inclusive rather than exclusive.  Successful disarmament, demobilization and reintegration depended upon the political will of the warring parties, the financial will of the donor community, and ensuring that arms were not smuggled across borders.  On the rule of law, while he agreed that the United Nations should consult more closely with local actors, that process should not be dictated by one or more of the armed factions.  Regarding training, the aim should be to improve training standards rather than instituting a uniform training doctrine for all those wishing to contribute troops and personnel.

GRAHAM MAITLAND (South Africa) said that an enhanced and effectively functioning Best Practices Unit could play an important role in initiating an open, frank, continuous dialogue between Member States and the Secretariat, thereby establishing a transparent working relationship between them.  Such interaction could go beyond the annual sessions of the Special Committee.  Further, while welcoming the intention of the Unit to establish networks with research centres and institutes in Member States, he emphasized that such contacts should target centres and institutes in the South.

He continued to believe in the importance of gender mainstreaming in peacekeeping operations and reiterated his support for the addition of gender expertise in the Best Practices Unit.  He also noted that recent experiences demonstrated the close linkage between a successful disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programme and the restructuring of national military structure in a post-conflict situation.  The sensitive timeframes for conducting those activities and the involvement of a wide range of actors required careful planning and coordination.

The development of a strategy in dealing with those challenges was welcome and he looked forward to a detailed discussion with the Secretariat on the matter.  Such a strategy should clearly outline the exact role and contribution of peacekeeping operations, especially in relation to other actors.  He concurred with the Secretary-General’s perspectives on the key ingredients that would ensure a successful disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programme.  In that regard, he re-emphasized the importance of early and predictable funding for such programmes, as recognized by the Group of Eight in its Kananaskis Action Plan for Africa.  Of particular concern was the lack of funding for the later but crucial stages of disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programmes, including the reintegration of former combatants.

DEJAN ŠAHOVIĆ (Serbia and Montenegro) said that in order to enhance

United Nations peacekeeping capabilities, it was important to further strengthen the cooperation between the troop-contributing countries, Security Council and Secretariat.  To that end, a number of important steps had already been taken.  He was satisfied that the Secretary-General’s reports before the Special Committee singled out that issue as one of the priorities for the Secretariat in 2003.  One of the important elements of that cooperation was a better representation of the troop-contributing countries, as well as of the currently unrepresented and/or under-represented countries, in the DPKO. 

Special attention should be paid to the strengthening of the rule of law, as it constituted a key element in the strategy for the long-term settlement of conflicts, he said.  It was also important that once rule of law-related activities were incorporated in the mandate of a peacekeeping operation, peacekeepers themselves abided by the rule of law, so as not to undermine their credibility in promoting those values.

One of the possible ways to meet the challenges of today’s complex peacekeeping operations was through cooperation with regional organizations, due to their vast expertise and experience in certain areas, and their ability to pursue a more local-sensitive approach.  Cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations could bear fruit provided that their respective competencies were clearly defined and did not overlap.

The successful discharging of the mandate of a peacekeeping operation depended on the level of the operation’s mandate.  Many tasks within the mandate of peacekeeping operations could only be accomplished in cooperation with host countries.  Further, he said, such cooperation should in all cases be institutionalized through status-of-military agreements and status-of-forces agreements.  By creating a legal basis for relations between a peacekeeping operation and its host country, important issues would be regulated, while many potential legal, technical and other difficulties would be avoided, thus contributing to more effective discharging of the mandate of a peacekeeping operation.

MEHMET KEMAL BOZAY (Turkey) said that rapid deployment had today become the norm rather than the exception.  In order to cope with overwhelming developments, additional concrete steps had to be taken to enhance the rapid-deployment capacity of the United Nations.  To that end, Turkey had joined the UNSAS and the military “on-call list”, and expressed interest in the Secretariat’s work on a civilian police on-call roster and on civilian rapid-deployment capacity.  Because Turkey was aware of the importance of the civilian police dimension of peacekeeping operations, it supported capacity increases in the Civilian Police Division.  The logistics dimension of rapid deployment also needed special attention. 

He said that his country was ready to contribute to enhancing the training capacity of the United Nations in the area of peacekeeping, and offered the use of the Partnership for Peace Training Center, established in Ankara in 1998.  He also welcomed efforts to develop training capacities within peacekeeping missions.  On cooperation between troop-contributing countries and the Secretariat, he said that workshops and courses on United Nations peacekeeping issues organized by the Secretariat were also beneficial for those countries.  Further, the rule-of-law dimension of peacekeeping needed a thorough analysis and it was vital in conducting that analysis for the United Nations to consult much more closely with national actors in the countries concerned.  In addition, he shared the views on enhancing African peacekeeping capacity to meet the urgent requirements of peacekeeping on the continent.

YAP ONG HENG (Singapore) said that lessons learned would be derived from both setbacks and achievements, and those lessons must be translated into best practices for application in the planning and execution of current and future operations.  The DPKO had started off on the right foot by strengthening the

Best Practices Unit, initiating studies on several missions, and making plans to work with national research and academic institutions.  The Department must create a culture within the Secretariat of learning lessons and applying best practices whenever peace missions were planned and put into operation. 

He said that in unstable post-conflict situations, it was necessary to rapidly deploy a credible deterrent force into the theatre of operations.  Such a force positioned at the critical start of a peacekeeping operation would show that the United Nations “meant business”.  The Organization learned that lesson well in Timor-Leste and Sierra Leone.  On rapid deployment, the DPKO should be congratulated for significantly enhancing United Nations’ capability by putting together the critical elements -– personnel, materiel, and financial support.  Establishing the Strategic Deployment Stocks was on target and the recent conduct of a rapid-deployment exercise in Brindisi was timely. 

Considerable improvements had also been made in the personnel side of the rapid-deployment capability, including through the military personnel “on-call” list system, he said.  Following rapid deployment, the peacekeepers must have the effective capacity to carry out their mandates, including deterring local actors.  In contingency plans for worst-case scenarios, the United Nations should be ready with robust forces – well-trained and well-equipped.  That meant more universal participation.  Developing countries had been actively supplying troops and should continue to do so, but the developed countries should also do their part.  International peace and security was a collective responsibility.  While work was under way to strengthen regional peacekeeping capacities, peacekeeping operations should not be left solely to regional arrangements or neighbouring countries.

NARAYAN DEV PANT (Nepal) said it was encouraging that 2002 was a success story for United Nations peacekeeping.  Undoubtedly, that success was due to the reforms and strengthening of the operations, subsequent to the Brahimi recommendations.  Despite certain innovations, however, much remained to be done.  Appointments in the DPKO should be fully transparent and reflect equitable geographical representation.  Similarly, clear and tenable criteria should be in place with respect to downsizing missions. 

He said that the concept of the rule of law remained a major issue and merited careful consideration, including by the Special Committee.  There was a clear need to bridge the gap between the Security Council, the Secretariat and troop contributors.  Proper training at all levels was also crucial.  In that context, he requested the Secretariat to take an early decision on the pending United Nations logistics courses in Nepal.  The UNSAS was critical to rapid deployment.  Nepal was giving serious thought to pledging both military and civilian police personnel in keeping with its commitment to peace.  The United Nations should assist such countries by providing equipment wherever gaps arose.

While the speedy reimbursement of troops and equipment costs would enhance the capacity of poor countries to contribute to peace operations, he stressed that Member States should also strive to clear their dues in time, in full and without condition.  He reaffirmed his country’s commitment to participate in future peace operations at the call of the United Nations.  He encouraged everyone to work together, with the Organization at center stage, to achieve the shared goal of maintaining international peace and security.

JAIME ACUÑA (Chile) said that his country’s interest and determination to contribute to peacekeeping in the world was reflected in the fact that Chile had participated in the activities of peacekeeping since its inception.  That determination continued today through the country’s participation and hosting of various workshops and seminars on peacekeeping.  Chile would continue to provide support for the cause of maintaining peace around the world.

ISAAC C. LAMBA (Malawi) commended the DPKO for the positive developments in transforming and strengthening Headquarters capacity and for ensuring the more rapid deployment of peacekeepers.  He reaffirmed Malawi’s support for, and continued participation in all peacekeeping initiatives.  In response to the call by the DPKO, it had participated in operations in Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Kosovo.  It had also participated in regional and international forums, where issues of conflict resolution, peacekeeping and peace-building had been discussed.  It would continue to do its part to contribute to enhanced international peace and security.

He said that, in the spirit of transparency and equal representation, he wished to encourage the field commanders in mission areas, especially in United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUC), to deploy and rotate all military observers fairly in all sectors, rather than always keeping some away from dangerous areas.  That practice had engendered low morale among the troops and led to questions about who was more expendable, thereby destroying the principle of unity of purpose in the field operations.  While he was pleased at the positive attitude towards enhancing African peacekeeping capacity, he was concerned about the lack of adequate resources and materials, which hindered those efforts.  Malawi had also requested training assistance, materials and equipment, in order to contribute a larger and better-trained contingent in the future. 

JOSE ANTONIO LINATI-BOSCH (Malta), speaking in his capacity as an observer, said that his country was ready to collaborate with the United Nations in peacekeeping operations and noted that the complexity of problems that faced peacekeeping forces was greater than in the past.  Added to the difficult conditions that peacekeeping forces had to confront in armed conflicts were the extra perils of the ravages of disease, which killed peacekeepers and civilians alike.  The disease factor had to be carefully weighed in when considering the mobilization of financial, material and human resources. 

Close cooperation between the United Nations Secretariat, Member States and all other entities involved in peacekeeping operations had acquired a more relevant role.  Peacekeeping should, therefore, be carried out under the leadership of a coordinating agency.

The protection and security of peacekeeping personnel was a matter of special concern to Malta, he said, noting that there had been more than 1,800 fatalities in peacekeeping operations since 1948.  It was imperative for the international community to mobilize its collective will and start taking concrete steps to protect personnel and prevent further casualties.

PAK GIL YON (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea), speaking as an observer, said that cold war remnants still had not been totally eliminated and new forms of conflict and strife proliferated around the world.  That situation demanded that peacekeeping operations conform fully and consistently to the roles

entrusted to them by the international community.  The imposition of peace by military means alone was a denial and destruction of peace.  Thus, peacekeeping activities presupposing the use of force could not be regarded as true peace activities. 

He said that all United Nations peacekeeping activities should be carried out on the basis of respect for sovereignty, non-interference in the internal affairs of States, and strict neutrality.  The Security Council should pay much more attention to observing those principles when deciding upon peacekeeping operations, so as to prevent them from being used by certain countries for their own political and military gains.  Failure to prevent peace operations from being used by big powers for their own political purpose would compromise the overwhelming majority of the United Nations.  So far, misuse of peacekeeping operations by certain powers had not yet been entirely avoided. 

It was “abnormal” for United States troops stationed in South Korea to fly the flag of the United Nations for more than half a century, when they did not receive any instruction or financial assistance from the United Nations, he stated.  The “UN forces” were merely “U.S. forces”.  Member States, therefore, should pay due attention to bringing about the dissolution of the “UN Command”, by no longer allowing the United States to abuse the sacred United Nations name and flag in South Korea.  Today, withdrawal of United States forces from South Korea had become an “urgent demand and an irresistible trend”.  If the United States kept pursuing its policy of military presence in South Korea, lending a deaf ear to the voices at home and abroad, it would stand more strongly censured and rejected, inside and outside.

Since yesterday, he continued, the United States had begun to stage

large-scale nuclear war exercises in South Korea under the simulated conditions of an actual war, while massively bolstering its troops there.  That was part of its premeditated military operation to stifle the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea with preemptive nuclear strikes.  That dangerous situation and the escalation of tensions on the Korean peninsula clearly showed “from where the U.S.-publicized real threat and blackmail come”.  If the United States “acts in reason”, the nuclear crisis on the Korean peninsula might be settled smoothly.  However, if it continued military pressure as it now stood, the present situation would lead to “catastrophic explosion”. 

* *** *