ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL HOLDS PANEL DISCUSSIONS ON TRANSITION FROM RELIEF TO DEVELOPMENT IN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO, BURUNDI

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL HOLDS PANEL DISCUSSIONS ON TRANSITION FROM RELIEF

TO DEVELOPMENT IN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO, BURUNDI

(Reissued as received.)

GENEVA, 13 July (UN Information Service) -- The Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) this afternoon held two panel discussions on the transition from relief to development in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and in Burundi.

Speaking in the first panel, on the Democratic Republic of the Congo, were Olivier Kamitatu Etsu, Minister for Planning, and Ross Mountain, Deputy Special Representative of the Secretary-General in that country.  Speaking in the second panel were Antoine Baza, Principal Counsellor for Political and Diplomatic Affairs at the Office of the First Vice-President of Burundi; Carolyn McAskie, Assistant Secretary-General for Peacebuilding Support; and Bintou Keita, representative of the United Nations Children’s Fund in Burundi.

Hjalmar Hannesson ( Iceland), Vice-President of the Economic and Social Council, introducing the first panel, stressed that over time it had become clear that assistance did not shift dramatically from relief to development, but rather there was a gradual transition as national authorities and stakeholders assumed responsibility for overseeing recovery efforts.  The United Nations system and its partners played a vital role in assisting Government recovery efforts.

Sally Fegan-Wyles, Director of the United Nations Development Group Office and moderator of the panel, said the Democratic Republic of the Congo was a good example for an evolving partnership with the United Nations and the World Bank.  The country was not only interesting because of the planning experience, but also because it embodied one controversial aspect of delivering as one, which was the empowered leadership of the United Nations country team.

Minister Etsu said that, following free democratic elections, the Democratic Republic of the Congo had changed considerably.  Solid commitments to bring stability to the institutions, peace-building and good governance were needed. Despite the demonstrated will of the people to freely choose their leaders, the maintenance of peace was taking place within a context weakened by crises and conflicts.  The rehabilitation of the basic infrastructure in the health and employment sectors was among the major projects that needed to be implemented.

Mr. Mountain said reform was much discussed, but if it was to work, it had to be implemented in the countries where people lived, worked, and died.  The Democratic Republic of the Congo had just held national, provincial, presidential and legislative elections for the first time in 10 years.  A structure of substantive programmes based directly on national priorities had been put together, ensuring a successful transition period in the country.

In the ensuring interactive dialogue, a wide range of questions and comments were made, including on the importance of the issue of transition from aid to development in terms of peace-keeping and combating poverty, the upsetting portrayal of the situation in the country as conveyed by the panellists and a need for an appropriate global partnership to remedy the situation, and the need for the United Nations to fulfil its role as the coordinator of the international community and to intensify efforts regarding inter-agency collaboration.

Among the speakers were the representatives of Luxembourg, Portugal (on behalf of the European Union), Belgium and Mexico.

Idriss Jazairy ( Algeria), Vice-President of the Economic and Social Council, introducing the second panel, said the case of Burundi was very different from that of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and yet useful lessons could be drawn from the latter case.  Burundi was also a test case when it came to the transition from relief to development, although one could argue that the transitional phase per se had, or at least should have, expired by now.

Daniel Lopez Acuna, Director of Recovery and Transition Programmes, Health Action in Crisis at the World Health Organization and the moderator of the panel, said Burundi ranked as the eighth poorest country in the world and had 100,000 internally displaced persons and refugees.  The nutrition situation remained fragile and there was food insecurity.  The challenges were daunting but at the same time, there were opportunities.

Mr. Baza said the crisis in Burundi had been so grave that the international community had felt compelled to act to meet the challenges, along with Burundi itself.  In order to end the war, the Government had signed peace and cease-fire agreements with the rebel forces.  The United Nations mission had made a major contribution, especially in setting up an interim Government to establish peace, supervising elections and the negotiation of peace agreements with the rebel movements, among other things.

Ms. Keita, said an integrated team was now in Burundi, managing the United Nations’ response in the country.  Priorities were defined, including peacebuilding and democratic governance, disarmament and the reform of the security sector, and the defence of human rights and combating impunity.  One of the main roles of the Peacebuilding Commission was to facilitate the dialogue in the country, bringing together the Government, civil society and the private sector.  Twelve projects had been adopted for financing by the Peacebuilding fund.

Carolyn McAskie said the Peacebuilding Commission really did present a grand experiment and a grand opportunity.  Peacebuilding was the concept that had to inform everything in the post-conflict phase, and Burundi was the opportunity to do this, along with Sierra Leone.  The Burundians were well on-track for the peace process.  There was still an immense amount of work to be done, and the situation remained fragile.

Within the course of the second panel discussion, countries welcomed the importance of the Strategic Framework in Burundi.  However, it was mentioned that the country faced a number of challenges, such as the fight against impunity and the protection of human rights.  A question was raised on the immediate and most short-term challenges in the process of transition from relief to development.

Speaking in the discussion on Burundi were the representatives of Portugal (on behalf of the European Union), Russian Federation, China and Japan.

The Council will resume its meeting on Monday, 16 July at 10 a.m., when it will start its humanitarian affairs segment and hold a general discussion on special economic, humanitarian and disaster relief assistance.

Panel Discussion on Democratic Republic of Congo

HJALMAR HANNESSON ( Iceland), Vice-President of the Council, introducing the panel discussion, said that within the Council there had been discussions on transition from relief aid to development for over a decade.  Over time it had become clear that assistance did not shift dramatically from relief to development, but rather there was a gradual transition as national authorities and stakeholders assumed responsibility for overseeing recovery efforts.  The United Nations system and its partners played a vital role in assisting Governments in recovery efforts.  A vital role for it during transition was to establish a foundation for long-term development, whilst still responding to humanitarian needs.  This task was highly complex, and required a careful balancing of different types of development efforts that changed as time evolved.  The event should give a clear idea of the complexities involved in transition, and should cover post-conflict transition.

SALLY FEGAN-WYLES, Director of the United Nations Development Group Office, said that it was a privilege moderating the panel discussion this afternoon because of the importance of this area.  Quite good steps were being made forward.  The first panel would be about the good innovations in the Democratic Republic of Congo and the second on Burundi and the Peacebuilding Commission.  The Democratic Republic of Congo was a good example of an evolving partnership with the United Nations and the World Bank.  The Democratic Republic of Congo was not only interesting because of the planning experience, but also because it embodied one controversial aspect of delivering as one, which was the empowered leadership of the United Nations country team.  Ross Mountain was such an empowered leader of the United Nations country team in the Democratic Republic of Congo.  He ensured that what the United Nations did at that time in the country was the most appropriate that could be done, using all the assets of the country team.

ROSS MOUNTAIN, Deputy Special Representative of the Secretary-General for the Democratic Republic of Congo and Resident Coordinator, said many would agree that when really looking at the concrete efforts that had been made to be more effective in post-conflict countries, one had to wonder whether all the discussions were actually leading to better action.   Reform was much discussed, but if it were to work, it had to be implemented in the countries where people lived, worked, and died.  The Democratic Republic of Congo had just held national and provincial elections, Presidential and legislative elections for the first time in 10 years, and it now had a democratically elected Government for the first time in over 40 years.  The Programme of Action had grown out of the joint efforts of the Government and the international community to strengthen national ownership, improve coherence, and make funding more predictable and better focused.  During the transitional Government, UNDP and other donors had supported the Government during a consultative process that spanned the country and brought together thousands of people from the Government and civil society to debate the country’s priorities.  A structure of substantive programmes based directly on national priorities had been put together, and this was the key to ensuring that the transition period in the Democratic Republic of Congo was successful.

OLIVIER KAMITATU ETSU, Minister for Planning of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, said that following the free democratic elections that had taken place, the country had changed considerably.  Solid commitments to bring stability to the institutions, peace-building and good governance were needed.  Almost 80 per cent of the population was living below the poverty line.  The international community had facilitated the electoral process.  Despite the demonstrated will of the people to freely choose their leaders, the maintenance of peace was taking place within a context weakened by crises and conflicts.  In the security sector the efforts still had to bear fruit.  The aid absorption capacity had been diminished and the impact on the population was minimal.  This was when the lead role of the United Nations came in.  It was relevant and important in contributing to the stabilization of the situation.

There was a need of sustainable development in the post conflict area, Mr. Etsu said.  Responses had to be more flexible so that the Government could complement what was being done by the United Nations.  The rehabilitation of the basic infrastructure for the health and employment sectors was among the major projects that needed to be implemented.  On the question of leadership and national ownership of the development, it was an issue underway that would take some time.  The efforts of the World Bank, the African Development Bank and the European Union as well as other partners through various programmes aimed at strengthening the political structure of the Democratic Republic of Congo needed to be commended.  Inflation was constantly regressing.  Regarding economic growth, the growth rate was negative with minus 14 per cent in 1994.  Today, the growth trend had been reversed with a growth rate of 6.5 per cent.  However, a great deal remained to be done, also when it came to the security sector, combating corruption and improving the climate for business and investments in the country.

Discussion

In the course of the interactive discussion, speakers raised a range of questions and issues, including the importance of the transition between relief and development in terms of peacekeeping and combating poverty; the upsetting portrayal of the situation in the country as conveyed by the panellists and a need for an appropriate global partnership to remedy the situation; the need of the United Nations to fulfil its role as the coordinator of the international community, and to intensify efforts regarding inter-agency collaboration, the simplification and harmonisation of administrative procedures and funding structures; the need to deepen the collaboration between the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions; the exit strategies of humanitarian agencies, and how the question of the return and reintegration of refugees and internally displaced persons had been taken into account in the national planning process, among others; and, with regards to coordination, what were the major challenges and complications that had come up among agencies and between the agencies and the national Government.

Concluding Remarks

Mr. ETSU said coordinating mechanisms could not be set up immediately.  First of all, mindsets had to change and an information system had to be established.  It existed now and contained databases, bringing together all needed data for using it as a management tool.  On the transition from aid to development, the efforts needed to focus on helping the internally displaced persons but also to help the state’s efforts to ensure the proper administration.  Over and beyond ensuring reintegration of internally displaced persons, capacity building was necessary.  With regard to access to basic services, the country had an emergency programme for education, the funds for which would be allocated by the World Bank.  The initial results of it would be seen in 2008 and 2009.  Impunity was a major problem.  Reforming the army and the police was highly relevant in this regard.  The truth and reconciliation commission had not come up with any results.  Communication with the population at large was being improved.  Quarterly evaluation of efforts was taking place as a follow-up action.

Mr. MOUNTAIN said the Minister had responded fully on sexual and gender-based violence - it was a sad truth that this continued, and there was a joint initiative between the Government and various United Nations organizations in this respect.  The issue of impunity was crucial, and military as well as civilian justice needed to be reinforced in this regard.  Attention should be paid to the reconstruction of the country at this time, but if ex-combatants were not lodged firmly back into communities, then they would always find guns and start problems again.  There was a consensus that the reduction of school fees needed to be carried out in a phased manner.  If the Government was to be able to show benefits to the population, the issue was how to allow kids to get back into school, and that calculation took into account the amount of potential the country had to get hold of its resources to support this in the long run.  After years of extraordinary misrule, the Democratic Republic of Congo was today making extraordinary progress.

Ms. FEGAN-WYLES underlined the concept of the integrated mission of the United Nations working in the Democratic Republic of Congo.  All parts of the United Nations family were working there together ensuring that the Government’s difficult job there was eased a little bit.

Panel Discussion on Burundi

IDRISS JAZAIRY ( Algeria), Vice-President of the Council, introducing the panel discussion on Burundi, said the case of Burundi was very different from that of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and yet useful lessons could be drawn from the Democratic Republic of Congo case.  Burundi was also a test case when it came to the transition from relief to development, although one could argue that the transitional phase per se had, or at least should have, expired by now.  Together with that of Sierra Leone, the case of Burundi was being considered by the newly established Peacebuilding Commission.

DANIEL LOPEZ ACUNA, Director of Recovery and Transition Programmes, Health Action in Crises at the World Health Organization, said that this was a timely discussion where the focus on Burundi was renewed.  There was no quick fix for the complicated situation.  Burundi ranked as the eighth poorest country in the world and had 100,000 internally displaced persons and refugees.  The nutrition situation remained fragile because of food insecurity.  The functioning of the health sector was hampered by many factors.  Economic development became thus a central pillar that needed to be undertaken to improve the situation.  The challenges were daunting but at the same time, there were opportunities.

ANTOINE BAZA, Principal Counsellor for Political and Diplomatic Affairs, Office of the First Vice-President of Burundi, said the crisis had been so grave that the international community had felt compelled to act to meet the challenges, along with Burundi itself.  In order to end the war, the Government had signed peace and cease-fire agreements with the rebel forces.   The United Nations mission had made a major contribution, especially in setting up an interim Government to establish peace, supervising elections and the negotiation of peace agreements with the rebel movements, among other things.  The challenges involved in peace-building were many, and there was a need for basic minimum development to achieve peace.  Peace was also essential for real development and real social peace.  The Government was doing its best, but had a long way to go in order to, among other things, channel an independent army and police force, ensure the disarmament, demobilisation, and reinsertion of ex-combatants, and fortify civil society.  The lack of resources could jeopardise the peace and re-development efforts.

BINTOU KEITA, Representative of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) in Burundi, said that it was important to recall that the role of the United Nations was particular because of the integrated mission that had been referred to by Antoine Baza.  Now, an integrated team was in Burundi, managing the United Nations’ response there.  It did so by moving forward the processes like the property action plan, which was part of the poverty reduction programme.  Combating HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis as well as sustainable reintegration of the population was being undertaken.  Priorities were defined, including peacebuilding and democratic governance, disarmament and the reform of the security sector, and the defence of human rights and combating impunity.  There was a common reference framework for response and work for all agencies.  Along with this, the question was how the support of the Government and the country as a whole could be ensured.  There were joint United Nations teams helping the Government with plans, such as the emergency plan or the integrated framework, carried out in partnership with the Peacebuilding Commission.  One of the main roles of the Peacebuilding Commission was to facilitate the dialogue in the country, bringing together the Government, civil society and the private sector.  Twelve projects had been adopted for financing by the Peacebuilding fund.

CAROLYN McASKIE, Assistant Secretary-General for Peacebuilding Support, said the Peacebuilding Commission really did present a grand experiment and a grand opportunity.  The international community had been discussing how to help countries out of transition and through the period between peace and to development, and had realised that it was not getting this right.  It had therefore realised that it had to build a number of new institutions.  Burundi was an opportunity to finally get it right.  The peacebuilding architecture was the opportunity to do something different, and hopefully get a new result.   Peacebuilding was the concept that had to inform everything in the post-conflict phase, and Burundi was the opportunity to do this, along with Sierra Leone.  The Burundians were well on-track for the peace process.  There was still an immense amount of work to be done, and the situation remained fragile.  The Peacebuilding Commission represented for Burundi an opportunity for the international community to realise that it had to do things differently, and to realise that it was the critical issues which Burundi and its partners could agree on that would help to bring the situation forward, and there should be an analysis of the difference between peace and violent conflict in a country like Burundi.

Discussion

Within the course of the general discussion, speakers raised a range of questions and issues and welcomed the importance of the Strategic Framework in Burundi.  However, the country faced a number of challenges, such as the fight against impunity and the protection of human rights.  A question was raised on the immediate and most short-term challenges in the process of transition from relief to development.  Another speaker said that the peacebuilding process in Burundi was followed with keen interest.  Coordination and cooperation between the Peacebuilding Commission and the Economic and Social Council needed to be strengthened as each had experience in dealing with countries in post-conflict situations.  It was asked whether there was the intention to organize in the future a joint meeting between the Peacebuilding Commission and ECOSOC, looking at the example of similar conferences that had already taken place.

Concluding Remarks

Mr. BAZA said Burundi had no infrastructure, everything had been destroyed, and rebuilding capacity required resources.  One of the major challenges was the disarmament of the civilian population, as not only was the crisis a long-lasting one, but the whole region had been in turmoil.  There was also a need to resettle combatants, and deal with the question of capacity building and human resources, but this was also a question of money.  There had been a brain drain and a loss of life, with the departure of the skilled who were now required for the necessary reconstruction.

Ms. KEITA said between political and humanitarian principles.  There was a way in Burundi for the humanitarian agencies to work altogether without being caught in the political dimensions on how to retain the independence to fulfil the mandate.  In the broader sense of assisting the vulnerable people, UNICEF still had its common framework and Memorandum of Understanding.

Ms. McASKIE, said Member States should address the difficulties of engaging civil society.  A lot of interesting work had been done on the ground with civil society.  On inequitable funding between countries, this was an issue that should be addressed with a very different model of fundraising than that which had been used before.  No donor could put money into every country, except for the universal donors -- the donor countries made choices that were logical from the national point of view.  However, this caused holes in the jigsaw puzzle.

Mr. ACUNA said the discussion had made clear how complex a process of peacebuilding in a post-war conflict area was.  All of the processes had to take place simultaneously.  The United Nations needed to go out of the box to find solutions.  The peacebuilding process was a process and needed to be like the glue bringing the different pieces together.

Mr. JAZAIRY ( Algeria) said it was important that conceptually one distinguished between relief, recovery and development because the response of the United Nations family was different in each case.  It was more supply driven by the relief stage.  The increasing ownership by the affected country should be maintained.  It was important to reinforce the Government at every stage.  An empowering process should take place.  There were some institutional consequences, such as an inter-agency standing committee framework.  An institutional consequence from the United Nations point of view was for example the involvement of the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record