As Fourth Committee Reviews Special Political Missions, Focus Centres Upon Separate Funding, Bolstering Response to Realities on Ground
Underscoring the increasing number, complexity and significance of special political missions, speakers at the Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization) today sought ways of enhancing the effectiveness of those operations, as they undertook a comprehensive review of the mechanism.
Presenting the Secretary-General’s report on special political missions, Jeffrey Feltman, Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs, described the discussion as timely, as the Organization faced multiple threats and challenges that tested its collective ability to respond to challenges.
Special political missions were at the forefront of the United Nations response to those challenges and served as a unique instrument at the disposal of the Organization. “They are, at their core, the most visible manifestation of the Secretary General’s good offices,” he added.
To cope with the rising security challenge to such missions, the United Nations had developed a number of options to minimize risks while maintaining their ability to implement mandates. Those included: enhanced cooperation with host Governments; deployment of United Nations security officers; cooperation with existing international or regionally-led military operations; and, in certain cases, deployment of guard units.
Referring to the Secretary General’s review of peace operations, Mr. Feltman said that the exercise would provide a timely opportunity to address the collective challenges faced by special political missions and peacekeeping operations and propose solutions. The panel would have to work with Member States and a wide array of stakeholders to draft credible and workable recommendations.
When the floor was opened for debate, representatives drew the Committee’s attention to several areas of priority such as the establishment of a separate fund for special political missions, ensuring clarity in deliberations, adhering to traditional guidelines of peacekeeping, setting clear and achievable mandates, and bolstering the ability of missions to respond to realities on the ground.
While the majority of special political missions were established by the Security Council, all were funded by the regular budget of the Organization, the representative of Brazil said, pointing to what he said constituted the single most important distortion in the budgetary process.
The representative of Japan, stating that decisions on such missions were made by an internal process of the Security Council, called for clarity in order to attain broad support from all Member States.
The delegate from India stressed the need to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the States in which special political missions operated, adding that clear mandates and greater consultation were needed vis-à-vis policy formulation in order to minimize “disconnect” with political reality.
Citing the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), the representative of the United States said missions must adapt to new realities on the ground. She expressed hope that the resolution being drafted would respect the delineation of responsibility among different United Nations organs and work to prevent duplication and overlapping of work.
Also speaking today were the representatives of Morocco (on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement), Thailand (on behalf of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)), European Union, Mexico, Finland, Cuba, Guatemala, Brazil, Indonesia, Libya, Switzerland, Australia, Maldives, Fiji, Russian Federation, Eritrea, Iraq, Algeria and Ethiopia.
The Committee will meet at 3 p.m. on 4 November to begin consideration of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).
Background
The Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization) met this afternoon to begin its review of special political missions, for which it had before it the report of the Secretary-General on Overall policy matters pertaining to special political missions (document A/69/325).
Introduction of Report
JEFFREY FELTMAN, Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs, presenting the Secretary-General’s report on special political missions, said this was a fitting time to discuss the subject and their importance in the overall United Nations peace and security architecture, as the Organization was facing multiple threats and challenges that tested its collective ability to respond.
Protracted conflict, violent political upheavals, terrorism, transnational organized crime and arms proliferation were common features of the world and threatened peace and stability in many countries. Special political missions were at the forefront of the United Nations response to those challenges and were a unique instrument at the disposal of the Organization. They were, at their core, the most visible manifestation of the Secretary General’s good offices.
The Secretary-General’s report built on the comprehensive document submitted in 2013, which was the first-ever policy report on special political missions presented to the General Assembly, he said. To cope with the rising security challenge, the United Nations had developed a number of options to minimize risks while maintaining a missions’ ability to implement their mandates. Those options included: enhanced cooperation with host Governments; deployment of United Nations security officers; cooperation with existing international or regionally-led military operations; and in certain cases, deployment of guard units.
He highlighted the Organization’s partnerships with regional and subregional organizations, which “are in the bloodstream of our work in DPA [Department of Political Affairs]”.
There was an increase in the regional focus of special political missions, he said, adding that the report addressed the Department’s commitment to geographical diversity and gender participation in those missions. Among the ways in which the Organization sought to achieve that objective was to have a specific focus in increasing the pool of women and representatives from different regions.
Referring to the Secretary General’s Review of Peace Operations announced last week, Mr. Feltman said it would provide a timely opportunity to address the collective challenges faced by special political missions and peacekeeping operations and to propose solutions. The panel would have to work with Member States and a wide array of stakeholders to draft credible and workable recommendations to strengthen those missions.
The complexity of mission mandates had increased significantly over the past years, he said, which had implications for the flexibility, nimbleness and overall resources of special political missions. The review should provide suggestions on how to improve staff security and mandate delivery in volatile environments. Resource and managerial requirements were areas that remained vital, he added.
Regular reports to the Fourth and Fifth Committees and regular interactions with Member States and Governments, mission-specific reports to the Security Council and General Assembly reflected the Department’s commitment to transparency and accountability. He pledged to continue to work towards the holding of regular, inclusive interactive dialogue with Member States on overall policy matters pertaining to special political missions.
The representative of Iran asked whether he had thought of merging the special political missions with peacekeeping operations.
Mr. Feltman said areas where both faced similar challenges were being looked into, and added that both were political tools that aimed at boosting political stability in countries coming out of conflict and seeking to build a political future. However, the tools also operated in different situations, and the review would look at the issue. Accordingly, he welcomed suggestions by Member States.
The representative of Mexico asked how important it was for the Department to have a separate account to finance special political missions. Mr. Feltman said that was ultimately a question for Member States, adding it was important for finding a way address the backstopping. The goal was to make special political missions as effective as possible.
ABDERRAZZAK LAASSEL (Morocco), speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, supported all efforts aimed at achieving the effectiveness of special political missions. The Movement attached great importance to reaching consensus among Member States on the development of those missions. Mandates needed to be clear and achievable and integrated planning approaches way key to achieving the link between policy formulation and their implementation on the ground. The Movement reiterated the importance of sovereignty, territorial integrity and the primary role of the General Assembly and Security Council in the maintenance of international peace and security in accordance with the Charter. The Secretary-General should provide support on all policy matters pertaining to special political missions to ensure transparency, accountability and balanced geographical representation. He took note of the increase in the financial requirements of special political missions. To enhance efficiency and transparency, the Movement requested that special political missions be financed under the same criteria as peacekeeping operations.
NORACHIT SINHASENI (Thailand) spoke on behalf of ASEAN and associated himself with the Non-Aligned Movement. ASEAN welcomed the completion of the mandate of the United Nations Integrated Peacebuilding Office in Sierra Leone (UNIPSIL) in March and the transfer of its responsibilities to the United Nations country team there. In the Central African Republic, the worsening security situation meant the United Nations Integrated Peacebuilding Office had been subsumed into the newly created peacekeeping operation, the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA). Those two situations reminded the international community that local conditions could be fluid and had to be given due consideration. The new mission’s progress should be reviewed regularly, based on objective criteria and in close consultation with the host country.
ASEAN welcomed the United Nations commitment to carry out gender equality in the special political missions, particularly in senior level positions, he said. The success of those missions depended on the right partners, and that included cooperation between regional partners and a strategic partnership between the missions and the wider United Nations system.
IOANNIS VRAILAS, speaking on behalf of the European Union delegation, said special political missions should remain a flexible instrument in efforts to maintain international peace and security. The Union was prepared to contribute to the review of peacekeeping operations and special political missions. A system-wide and flexible approach was necessary to deal with conflict and crises. The Union agreed with the Secretary-General’s view that close partnerships with regional and subregional organizations were a key element of special political missions. The Union remained a committed partner in all areas, including strengthening conflict prevention capacities such as mediation and early warning; long-term partnerships in development; economic cooperation; and trade.
RICARDO ALDAY GONZÁLEZ (Mexico) said that special political missions remained a priority, as they were the principal instrument to bringing about peace and security. He welcomed the independent panel reviewing peacekeeping operations and special political missions; adding that Mexico would continue to cooperate in that process. Noting the deployment of peacekeeping operations and special political missions in the same country at the same time, he said that that situation demonstrated the changes in the needs of the Organization. On the issue of guard units, he drew attention to the need to be able to define where and why those units were being deployed. More transparency and accountability were necessary, as was greater participation by all Member States in that matter. Interactive dialogue on general policy issues related to special political missions was important and the panel should offer the opportunity for such dialogue this year.
KAI SAUER (Finland) said the non-permanent nature of the special political missions meant they required flexible mechanisms for deployment and support. Dialogue could help point the way forward and shape the role of Member States in supporting those missions. They were becoming more complex and there needed to be limits on their mandates, so they would be operational and effective. “We need to define those limits,” he said. The missions did not operate in a vacuum, but had synergies with peacekeeping operations and peacebuilding activities. The missions had a vital role in implementing Security Council resolution 1325 (2000) on women, peace and security. Finland was a staunch supporter of the missions, which were a key part of the Organization’s conflict prevention tool kit and at the centre of its peace and security architecture.
DAVID FORÉS RODRÍGUEZ (Cuba), associating himself with the Non-Aligned Movement, said special political missions should be developed jointly by Member States based on democratic action in the General Assembly. Missions must be regulated by the guiding principles of peacekeeping operations such as respect for national sovereignty and non-interference. Each mission should be entrusted with clear mandates through an intergovernmental process and provided adequate financial resources, in order to maintain the credibility and legitimacy of the United Nations. The Movement had proposed a separate account for special political missions, he said, and urged the Secretary-General to present an annual report on mission-related issues and conduct a comprehensive and transparent review.
MÓNICA BOLAÑOS PÉREZ (Guatemala), associating herself with the Non-Aligned Movement, noted the importance of eliminating the information gap regarding special political missions, and added that regular reports were fundamental to bringing transparency and accountability to those missions. Guatemala welcomed the high-level panel that would evaluate peacekeeping operations and special political missions. Clear rules and procedures in the establishment and implementation of those missions were extremely important, and they would also help to understand the limitations and costs of the missions. It was regrettable that the latest report did not sufficiently highlight transparency and accountability, and that only one interactive dialogue on special political missions took place at a time of many challenges and increasingly complex mandates. She requested the establishment of three distinct budgets — a regular, peacekeeping operations and special political mission budget — that each had their own system of financing.
GUILHERME DE AGUAIR PATRIOTA (Brazil) said special political missions involved tasks inscribed in the very heart of the mandate of the United Nations. Due to their growing complexity, field-based special political missions were increasingly acquiring characteristics akin to multidimensional peacekeeping operations. A thorough discussion on the nature of special political missions and their relations to peacekeeping and peacebuilding efforts was crucial. Attention was needed to correct a flagrant inconsistency in the United Nations institutional design on special political missions. While the majority of such missions were established mandated by the Security Council, all were funded by the regular budget of the Organization, which constituted the single most important distortion in the budgetary process. Providing special political missions with their own budgetary resources would enhance their ability to fulfil their mandates. Welcoming the Secretary-General’s review panel, he urged Member States to make the best of the opportunity and engage in an open constructive and transparent manner.
DESRA PERCAYA (Indonesia), associating himself with the Non-Aligned Movement and ASEAN, said worsening security threats to people and to Blue Helmets made it imperative to ensure that the framework of special political mission was geared to meet the demands of today. He wished the Secretary-General’s report provided greater details on transparency and accountability. Stressing that such missions should work with regional and international political support, he called for regular interactive dialogue. It was vital to have clear and achievable mandates as well as to enhance transparency. It was also essential to deepen national ownership and better prepare the national authorities. The role of special political missions was ultimately aimed at assisting national counterparts. Regarding the increase in financial requirements, it was important to receive relevant reports on the funding and administrative arrangements. As mandates became broader and multidimensional, Indonesia was ready to bolster the missions.
TAHER M. ALI GHIRANI (Libya), associating himself with the Non-Aligned Movement, said the importance of special political missions was underscored by their number. Those missions were multidimensional and promoted national ownership in cooperation with other international agencies. The mandates should be clear so that they could work with peacekeeping and peacebuilding missions. The United Nations Mission in Libya was an important endeavour in helping the country emerge from conflict to peace and development, he said, and urged all stakeholders to advance the political process.
ADRIAN SOLLBERGER (Switzerland) stressed the need to strengthen cooperation among all relevant stakeholders involved in special political missions. Underscoring the importance and intensification of interactive dialogue, he said it was vital to understand the challenges faced by missions and to adopt appropriate measures to help them implement their mandate. Calling for better financing and administrative support, he said the current approach limited the potential, performance and effectiveness of those missions. Switzerland welcomed the review announced by the Secretary-General and considered it an opportunity to reflect on the development of special political missions. He hoped the review would facilitate understanding of how the United Nations should engage in a post-conflict context and further develop tools to face the challenges of tomorrow.
HIROSHI ISHIKAWA (Japan) said special political missions had experienced rapid and significant growth in number, size and complexity of their mandates, which meant that they had become ever more crucial. Field-based special political missions had become multidimensional, combining political tasks with boarder mandates, and there was a need to clarify relations with peacekeeping operations. Many decisions on such missions had been made by an internal process of the Security Council, and clarity in the decision-making process was essential to attaining broad support from all Member States. The Council should especially further account for each mission’s clear mandate and sound operation, as well as the defined timeline of each mission’s activities. His country, which chaired the Peacebuilding Commission’s Working Group on Lessons Learned, had been leading discussions in order for the Commission to best support countries transition from United Nations-mandated missions.
Mr. SINGH (India) urged respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of States in which special political missions operated, adding that the principles of impartiality, consent of parties, national ownership and national responsibility should be kept in mind. Clear mandates and more consultation was needed vis-à-vis policy formulation in order to minimize “disconnect” with political reality. Specifically, he supported communication among the Security Council, General Assembly and the Secretariat, pressing the Committee to examine that issue so that States could be involved in a more substantial manner. He also cautioned against expanding special political missions into areas that fell within the domain of treaty bodies or other United Nations institutions. The High-level Panel on the Comprehensive Review for Peacekeeping Operations should involve “serious and substantial” consultations with troop contributors.
ANASTASIA CARAYANIDES (Australia) strongly supported special political missions because, she said, they helped actors “step back” from the brink of conflict. The last year alone had shown the complexity of their mandates and positive impacts of their work, she said, citing the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons-United Nations Joint Mission to Syria, and the two Panels of Experts that monitored sanctions in the Central African Republic and Yemen, respectively. Their mandates included support in the areas of elections, constitution-making and sanctions-monitoring. She urged States to embrace the Secretary-General’s strategic reviews of peace operations and the peacebuilding architecture, and she encouraged States to cooperate with the Special Representatives and Special Envoys.
SHIRUZIMATH SAMEER (Maldives) stressed the importance of making clear the objectives, mandates and expected outcomes of special political missions before approval of the missions. The Department of Political Affairs should not be allowed to use such missions “as an instrument to interfere in, and attempt to shape order in” Member States’ domestic politics. Consultation with, and approval by, the host State on the terms of reference for any such mission was necessary. Missions should not be allowed to impose policy prescriptions and must work to develop a common agenda that was flexible and context-specific. Public discussion of the work of missions should be conducted responsibly without undermining the objectives of their mandates. The main emphasis of political missions should be confidence-building among stakeholders, avoiding any activity that could undermine such trust.
Ms. WILSON (Fiji) said close partnerships with regional and subregional organizations were a key element of success for special political missions; Member States’ sustained support for them was also crucial. At the same time, she stressed the importance of fully respecting the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of States. She welcomed the Secretary-General’s report, including its emphasis on transparency, accountability, balance in geographical representation and effectiveness. In that regard, the continued staging of regular, inclusive and interactive dialogues with Member States and partners on overall policy matters was a central part of maintaining international peace and security. She also noted that the administrative requirements and complexity of the special political missions had increased over the past decade. She acknowledged their unique situation in terms of establishment and financing due to the fact that they did not follow the regular budget cycle even though they were funded by the regular budget.
BETH JONES (United States), expressing firm support for special political missions, said they played an invaluable role in preventing and resolving conflicts. With several presidential elections scheduled in Africa over the next two years, she affirmed that the United Nations Office for West Africa (UNOWA) played a particularly important role. Emphasizing also the role of the mission in Afghanistan in the aftermath of the presidential elections there, she said missions must adapt to the realities on the ground. In that context, she pointed to the rise of ISIL in Iraq as well. The Secretary-General’s comprehensive review of peacekeeping, she said, would provide an opportunity to address issues in their wider context, including peacebuilding and special political missions. Improved information exchange between the Secretariat and Member States was crucial to the success of special political missions. She expressed hope that the draft resolution being discussed would respect the different responsibilities of UN organs, including the Security Council’s primary role in peace and security, and avoid duplication and overlap.
PETR V. ILIICHEV (Russian Federation) said that special political missions were an effective instrument for maintaining peace and security. They played an important role in providing support to countries emerging from conflict and helped avoid new conflict. One of their key advantages was there flexibility, he added. Long-term benefits of the missions could only be achieved, however, in close cooperation with host countries and regional organizations. He noted that the report presented today reaffirmed the increased complexity of tasks of the special political missions that included maintaining law and order, holding elections and protecting human rights. In conclusion, he noted that interactive dialogues were in their initial phase and it was key that they did not duplicate issues discussed in other forums.
GIRMA ASMEROM TESFAY (Eritrea) associated himself with the statement made on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement and stressed the critical role played by the General Assembly in the development of policies pertaining to special political missions. The support and understanding of the general membership of the United Nations was critical for the success of such missions. Regarding the interactive dialogue in March, he said prior consultation between Member States and the Secretariat on topics as well as a timetable for interactive dialogues would contribute to a predictable and productive exchange. It was also important to maintain a proper balance between the different clusters of special political missions in interactive dialogues and in reports.
MOHAMMED SAMIR EZZAT SAMI ALNAQSHABANDI (Iraq), aligning himself with the statement made on behalf of the Non-aligned Movement, said that his country faced terrorist aggression from ISIS, which was committing terrible crimes against the Iraqi people. He stressed that ISIS was also a danger to international security. Recalling that the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) had estimated the number of people displaced in his country since January 2014 at 1.8 million, he expressed hope for special support from the United Nations. UNAMI’s role in providing consultation on dialogue between different Iraqi was particularly appreciated, he added.
FETHI METREF (Algeria), associating himself with the statement made on behalf of the Non-aligned Movement, said the establishment of special political missions as a separate agenda item in the Committee last year underscored their growing importance. In order to achieve their objectives, missions should have clear and credible mandates and mechanisms for evaluation. Noting that the budget of the missions had grown substantially over the past decade, he supported the establishment of a distinct account akin to the peacekeeping budget. He also stressed the imperative of greater coordination of the missions with regional and subregional organizations, national authorities and longer term development partners.
TEDEKA ALEMU (Ethiopia), associating himself with the statement made on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, said that global tensions were at an all-time high. In that context, special political missions were more than ever critical for the prevention of conflicts. Agreeing with the Under-Secretary-General regarding the danger faced by personnel in those missions, he said that not enough had been done to address the situation and to ensure that the missions were utilized properly and received adequate support. The general membership of the United Nations should have a say in the establishment and deployment of the political missions, he added. He welcomed the increased consultation between the African Union and United Nations political missions. However, such cooperation needed to be enhanced through greater emphasis on providing objective analysis. Stating that nothing was more important than conflict prevention, peace-making and peace building, he stressed that special political missions were particularly important in that regard.