Joint UN-IPU Parliamentary Hearing

on Conflict Prevention and Peacebuilding

PM Meeting

panellists highlight staffing, funding weaknesses as they discuss

challenges, expectations facing peacebuilding commission

 

While lauding the establishment of the Peacebuilding Commission as a solid step towards United Nations reform, participants in this afternoon’s session of the joint United Nations and Inter-Parliamentary Union hearings voiced reservations about the poorly staffed Support Office and the low level of funding for the new organ’s work.

During a special discussion, “The Peacebuilding Commission: Challenges and Expectations”, which formed the second half of the theme “Conflict Prevention and Peacebuilding: Reinforcing the Key Role of the United Nations”, participants stressed the need for the organ to play a coordinating role -- as opposed to a management one -– and promoted the notion of “Parliament” as the Commission’s natural ally on the ground.

Leading the discussion this afternoon were three panellists: Antoine Kola Wolde Idji, President of the National Assembly of Benin; Graf Lambsdorf, Member of the European Parliament; and Ismael Abraao Gaspar Martins, Permanent Representative of Angola to the United Nations and Chairman of the Peacebuilding Commission.  The meeting was chaired by Margaret Mensah-Williams, Vice-Speaker of the National Assembly of Namibia.

Kicking off the discussion, Mr. Idji said that, as an international consultative organ, the Peacebuilding Commission was a useful tool so long as it obeyed the principles of balance and equity.  It was important that the Commission have adequate resources to achieve successful demobilization of former fighters -- one of the main components of the peacebuilding process.  An ex-combatant told to give up his Kalashnikov with no alternative means of survival would rather continue fighting.

Calling for more contributions to the Peacebuilding Fund, he said they would provide the Commission with the means to rebuild countries emerging from conflict and to assist those in emergency situations where the lack of funds was a major obstacle to progress.  Benin’s National Assembly attached great importance to the Peacebuilding Commission and a more dynamic relationship between the United Nations and parliaments around the world would help it overcome any obstacles that could inhibit its actions.  Benin supported fully the draft resolution on further cooperation between the United Nations and the Inter-Parliamentary Union.

Echoing that sentiment, Mr. Gaspar Martins said: “Our two organizations have the common objective of pursuing preventive action, to prevent conflicts from relapsing,” referring to the Peacebuilding Commission and the Inter-Parliamentary Union.  The granting to civil society of the right to participate in General Assembly and Security Council resolutions on peacebuilding had encouraged the Commission to consult with both non-governmental organizations and the private sector regarding peacebuilding activities.  Parliaments, too, had a central role in crisis prevention and recovery.

As the voice of the people, parliaments occupied, by definition, an important role in all fields of life, including the work of the Peacebuilding Commission, he said.  As such, the conclusions of the International Conference on Parliaments, Crisis, Prevention and Recovery -- jointly hosted in April by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the Government and Chamber of Representatives of Belgium, in association with the Inter-Parliamentary Union -- constituted an important tool in the Commission’s work.

The third panellist, Mr. Lambsdorf, said the Commission’s structure, while action-based in concept, was really a hybrid of both action and theory -- embodying philosophical ideals of inclusiveness through its incorporation of nations other than those directly affected by conflict.  The 2005 World Summit Outcome document, which formed the basis of the Peacebuilding Commission, stipulated the attachment to it of a small number of support staff, to be financed by the Secretariat.  Perhaps that was too modest, given the tasks assigned to the organ.

[When the General Assembly and the Security Council adopted joint resolutions to launch the Commission, seven members had been selected by the Security Council and seven more by the Economic and Social Council.  Five top providers of assessed contributions to United Nations budgets and of voluntary contributions to the Organization’s funds, programmes and agencies, including a standing Peacebuilding Fund, were also chosen as members, as were five top providers of military personnel and civilian police to United Nations missions.  A further seven members were elected by the General Assembly.]

Offering the European Parliament’s point of view, Mr. Lambsdorf said it expected the Commission to take a broad approach to peacebuilding by involving civil society and other partners, since the Governments of countries emerging from conflict were often so burdened by challenges that outside help was crucial.  However, its focus should be on providing strategic advice, while coordinating activities should be left to actors in the field.  “The Peacebuilding Commission should not be a micromanager,” he cautioned, stressing that its main task was to “advise, not substitute”.

As for the Commission’s efficient use of resources, he emphasized that parliamentarians must be concerned about that question, especially when taxpayers’ money was involved.  The European Commission had not been invited as an “institutional donor” under the current set-up -- and thus was not an active participant at the table -- despite its substantial contributions to development work.  As such, the European Parliament would be hard pressed to support decisions to contribute more to the Peacebuilding Fund, although it would strongly support any measures recommended by the Commission in the future.

In the ensuing discussion, a parliamentary representative from Pakistan said the Inter-Parliamentary Union must be an effective ally of the Peacebuilding Commission if its policies were to be properly implemented in individual countries.  The Commission was a “key step”, but it must adopt a non-politicized and collective approach to its work, while being provided with capacity and resources commensurate to its goals.

He pointed out that most conflicts took place in the developing world, many of them complex internal crises driven by the politics of poverty and scarcity.  They were also characterized by underdevelopment, political and social exclusion, ethnic and tribal rivalries, poor governance, inequitable power sharing, the illegal exploitation of natural resources, weapons proliferation and other factors.  More could be done through the use of non-partisan communication as a means to prevent conflict.

A parliamentary representative from Japan noted that the nature of security was changing to involve non-traditional aspects like water, food and energy security.  Subsequent to “9/11”, the need for international cooperation across national borders had become far more important.  For example, super-Powers could not function well without the support of a wider coalition.  A strengthened United Nations, working through the Peacebuilding Commission and the Human Rights Council, were steps in the right direction.

A delegate from Norway voiced enthusiasm for the “brand-new, innovative set-up at our disposal”, but cautioned that the Peacebuilding Commission could not build peace -– which required the work of domestic actors -- but it could best be used as an arena for dialogue on peace.  At the very centre of any peaceful community was a strong Government, and good governance should therefore be the top priority of any country.  The Commission should support efforts to bring about such an environment.

But a delegate from Switzerland concurred with the sentiment of almost all other speakers: the Peacebuilding Commission, despite its apparent weaknesses, would give new impetus to other necessary reforms.  Switzerland regretted the Security Council’s excessive influence on the Commission, which must try to work in a broad and flexible fashion.  Meanwhile, the international community must contribute to the new organ’s success.

Wrapping up the discussion, Pier Ferdinando Casini, President of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, said that to successfully overcome conflict, countries must promote a “culture of parliaments”.  There must be a balance of power within Government, without which peace would be fragile and shaky.  Parliaments should be seen as the primary democratic interlocutor, capable of managing the transition from conflict and promoting related issues, such as equal gender representation.

Other speakers this afternoon were parliamentary representatives from Romania, Spain, Sudan, Turkey, Viet Nam, Canada, Indonesia, Ireland and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record