Nimble Action, Clearly Defined Political Aims Essential to Defeat Threats against Peacekeepers, Deputy Secretary-General Tells Security Council

Following are UN Deputy Secretary-General Jan Eliasson’s remarks, as prepared for delivery, at the Security Council open debate on peace operations facing asymmetric threats, in New York today:

I thank the Government of Senegal for organizing this timely and important meeting.

Today, our peace operations increasingly face asymmetric threats from violent extremist and terrorist groups.  The casualty figures in Mali are a stark and tragic reflection of this.  It is a sad fact that our peacekeepers are now being specifically targeted by violent extremists and terrorists.

Yesterday again, our peacekeepers in Mali came under attack.  One of them died, seven others were wounded, and two Malian civilians were also killed by the unknown assailants.  The Secretary-General condemns this vicious act, underlining that such attacks targeting United Nations peacekeepers may constitute war crimes under international law.

For United Nations peace operations to be able to work safely and carry out their mandates in today’s complex conflicts, they must develop strategies to face these new conditions.  The question is:  “How?”

We should recall that the High-Level Panel on Peace Operations emphasizes that “United Nations troops should not undertake military counter-terrorism operations”.  A conclusion would be that peacekeeping operations should not be mandated to militarily defeat violent extremist and terrorist groups.

However, terrorism and violent extremism are a reality in many contemporary conflicts, a reality which has to be dealt with.

These destructive and dangerous forces make conflicts even more intractable.  They thrive on impunity and governance failures.  They exploit deep-rooted grievances.  These factors, in turn, are fertile ground for violent extremism and terrorism to grow further.  This is the context in which the United Nations often must operate.

In response, our action and footprint have to be more nimble and comprehensive.  And we need more flexible support arrangements.  We will need more sophisticated and predictable uniformed capabilities to strengthen mobility, responsiveness, and a deeper understanding of the operating environment.  Developing our intelligence and analysis capacities will be critical in this pursuit.  We will also need to adjust how we conduct our core tasks, including our good offices, our capacity-building, our community engagement and stabilization measures.

Further, the political objectives of our peacekeeping operations need to be clearly defined and communicated.  We must find new and creative ways of achieving political goals in situations where some parties are not speaking partners or willing participants.  And we must devise strategies to build coalitions of support around political objectives at local, national and regional levels.

I see three priorities for preparing our operations to face asymmetric threats.  First, and primarily, we must do all we can to ensure the safety and security of our personnel.  This means greater situational awareness, analysis and force protection measures.  We are already doing this in Mali.  But we need to do more.  We must, for instance, utilize new technologies and deploy uniformed units with built-in robust self-protection tools.

Second, we must adapt how we deliver our mandates.  The fact that the United Nations is a potential target should encourage us to think more deeply about how we are to operate in this new, more dangerous and unpredictable environment.

Supporting peaceful resolution to conflict should be grounded in a clear and nuanced understanding of who the different parties are, how they are resourced, and who their allies are.  This varies from case to case.  An over-generalized approach can be counter-productive, possibly exposing the United Nations to more risk.

In such environments, we should also think beyond a security-focused approach.  The entirety of the tools at the United Nations disposal should be considered, including sanctions regimes, normative instruments, capacity-building, stabilization and development aid.

And we must build State capacity that is accountable, legitimate, and respects human rights and the rule of law, to avoid perpetuating drivers of conflict and extremism in the first place.

Third, we must fully take into account how and when the United Nations can support national and regional efforts to prevent violent extremism and terrorism.  In his Plan of Action to Prevent Violent Extremism, the Secretary-General indicated the need to integrate prevention of violent extremism in peace operations, both in terms of mandates, and of relevant activities of United Nations country teams.

The General Assembly has called on Member States to implement the recommendations of the Preventing Violent Extremism Plan of Action as they apply to the national context.  When requested, the United Nations is ready to support their efforts.  We are providing technical assistance in areas such as criminal justice, border controls, kidnapping for ransom, dealing with foreign terrorist fighters, and the financing of terrorism.

We are also supporting youth engagement and skills development.  And we are encouraging Member States to exchange information, expertise and resources to strengthen international cooperation on countering terrorism.

One important tool to provide an “All-of-UN” strategic assistance is the Integrated Assistance for Countering Terrorism Initiative, mandated by this Council in 2014.

I would like to conclude with a final reflection.  The United Nations is an organization of States, but it is also an organization of normative values.  We work for the peoples of the world.  Our mandate is built around inclusion, not exclusion.

Over the past few years, Member States came together in an impressive display of unity to develop a blueprint for peace, sustainable development and dignity for all on a healthy planet.  The 2030 Agenda [for Sustainable Development] recognizes that all our challenges and all our opportunities are interdependent and mutually reinforcing.

Another important tool in our hands is the identical resolutions in the General Assembly and the Security Council on peacebuilding and sustaining peace.  This innovative concept opens several avenues towards a comprehensive response to many of the threats we face in today’s world.

If we implement the 2030 Agenda and use the full potential of the sustaining peace resolutions, discussions like the one we have today will hopefully be much less urgent and necessary than they are today.