Prevention, Development Must Be at Centre of All Efforts Tackling Emerging Complex Threats to International Peace, Secretary-General Tells Security Council
Prevention and development must be at the centre of all efforts to address both the quantitative and qualitative changes that were emerging in threats around the world, the Secretary‑General of the United Nations told the Security Council today, as some 60 Member States participated in an all‑day debate tackling complex contemporary challenges to international peace and security.
António Guterres said the perils of nuclear weapons were once again front and centre, with tensions higher than those during the Cold War. Climate change was a threat multiplier and technology advances had made it easier for extremists to communicate. Conflicts were longer, with some lasting 20 years on average, and were more complex, with armed and extremist groups linked with each other and with the worldwide threat of terrorism. Transnational drug smugglers and human traffickers were perpetuating the chaos and preying on refugees and migrants.
The changing nature of conflict meant rethinking approaches that included integrated action, he said, stressing that prevention must be at the centre of all efforts. Development was one of the best instruments of prevention. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development would help build peaceful societies. Respect for human rights was also essential and there was a need to invest in social cohesion so that all felt they had a stake in society.
He also emphasized that women’s participation was crucial to success, from conflict prevention to peacemaking and sustaining peace. Where women were in power, societies flourished, he pointed out. Sexual violence against women, therefore, must be addressed and justice pursued for perpetrators.
Prevention also included preventive diplomacy, he said, noting that the newly established High-level Advisory Board on Mediation had met for the first time. The concept of human security was a useful frame of reference for that work, as it was people‑centred and holistic and emphasized the need to act early and prioritize the most vulnerable.
“Let us work together to enhance the Council’s focus on emerging situations, expand the toolbox, increase resources for prevention, and be more systematic in avoiding conflict and sustaining peace,” he said, emphasizing the need for Council unity. Without it, he said, the parties to conflict might take more inflexible and intransigent positions, and the drivers of conflict might push situations to the point of no return.
Japan’s representative, Council President for December, spoke in his national capacity, noting that in the 25 years since the end of the Cold War, there had been a rise in complex contemporary challenges to international peace and security. That included the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the expansion of terrorism, and non‑traditional challenges such as non‑State actors and inter‑State criminal organizations.
While the Council had been tackling those challenges, in most cases through a country or region‑specific context, he stressed that a human security approach was highly relevant when addressing complex contemporary challenges to international peace and security. Such an approach placed the individual at the centre, based on a cross‑sectoral understanding of insecurities. It also entailed a broadened understanding of threats and challenges.
In the ensuing debate, speakers emphasized the need to adjust to the changing challenges to international peace and security and welcomed the Secretary General’s reform of the Organization’s security pillar and other initiatives. Many stressed the need to address root causes of instability and conflict, including climate change, non‑State armed groups, extremism and terrorism, as well as poverty and underdevelopment.
Calling for creativity in the Council’s efforts, they underlined the importance of prevention, and stressed the responsibility of the 15‑member organ to address threats to international peace and security at an early stage. Delegations also called for strengthen cooperation and coordination with other United Nations bodies and with regional and subregional organizations. Ending impunity for serious international crimes was equally crucial, with some delegates stressing the importance of effective cooperation with the International Criminal Court.
Other speakers took issue with the way the Security Council was functioning, with Turkey’s representative pointing out that the Council had failed many times to show timely and adequate responses to emerging crises, often as the result of the use, or the threat, of veto, which disabled the Council’s effectiveness.
India’s delegate said a non‑representative Council, designed long ago to maintain a balance of power between rival States, was unable to handle challenges which had changed beyond recognition over the decades. “An instrument that is no longer considered legitimate and has lost its credibility cannot be our hope for salvation,” he said, adding that “speech acts”, such as the current open debate, would have little impact.
The Russian Federation’s representative said it would be useful for the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council and other organs of the United Nations to consider the links between peace and security and socioeconomic and environmental issues. Integrating all factors should not come under the work of the Council, which did not have the capacity in those other areas and for which the basic responsibilities in peace and security must remain the focus.
China’s representative stressed the importance of firmly upholding the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, saying that the Council must respect sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of States as well as their right to choose their own social structures. The major organs of the United Nations should stick to their mandates while coordinating their efforts.
Some Member States addressed specific challenges to peace and security. The representative of Tuvalu, speaking for the Pacific small island developing States, underscored that climate change was not going away and was the most pressing contemporary security challenge. The Secretary‑General should appoint a special representative on climate and security who could produce a report, in cooperation with scientific bodies, that identified and analysed potentially dangerous tipping points at the nexus of climate and security, he said.
Slovenia’s delegate drew attention to water scarcity as a threat to stability, recalling the work of the Global High‑level Panel on Water and Peace chaired by the former President of her country. Regional cooperation was vital in preventing water from becoming a cause of conflict or an amplifying risk, she stressed, citing successful practices in the Western Balkans region, as seen in the Sava River basin, which could serve as a model for water‑related cooperation.
Addressing cyber threats, Lithuania’s representative, also speaking for Latvia and Estonia, said hybrid threats and cybersecurity were priority issues for the Baltic States, noting that concerns regarding the Russian Federation’s interference in national election processes were not limited to European countries. Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania had faced a politically motivated series of cyberattacks. To cope with the strikes, the public and private sectors, as well as civil society, must cooperate.
The Deputy Foreign Minister for Ukraine also spoke, as did representatives of Sweden, Egypt, Bolivia, United Kingdom, France, Kazakhstan, Uruguay, Senegal, United States, Ethiopia, Italy, Colombia, Liechtenstein, Pakistan, Hungary, Switzerland, Norway (for the Nordic countries), South Africa, Germany, Belgium, Indonesia, Peru, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, Ecuador, Kyrgyzstan, Qatar, Azerbaijan, Kuwait, Viet Nam, Mexico, Slovakia, Ghana, Chile, Guatemala, Botswana, Netherlands, Greece, Armenia, Australia, Morocco, Lebanon, Nepal, Maldives, Portugal and Bangladesh, as well as the European Union delegation.
Representatives of the Russian Federation and Ukraine took the floor for a second and third time.
The meeting began at 10:02 a.m. and ended at 4:20 p.m.
Opening Remarks
ANTÓNIO GUTERRES, Secretary‑General of the United Nations, said there had not only been a quantitative but also a qualitative change in threats to international peace and security. The perils of nuclear weapons were once again front and centre, with tensions higher than those during the Cold War. Climate change was a threat multiplier. Inequality and exclusion fed frustration and marginalization. Threats to cybersecurity were escalating and technology advances had made it easier for extremists to communicate.
While the number of armed conflicts had declined over the long‑term, they had surged in the Middle East and Africa, he continued, with many lasting on average more than 20 years. Conflicts were also more complex as armed groups competed for control over State institutions, natural resources and territory. Extremist groups left little room for diplomacy. There was also an increased regionalization and internationalization of conflicts. Clashes were more linked with each other and with the worldwide threat of terrorism. Transnational drug smugglers and human traffickers perpetuated the chaos and preyed on refugees and migrants.
The changing nature of conflict meant rethinking approaches which must include integrated action, he underlined. Such efforts must be coherent, coordinated and context‑specific, working across pillars. Towards that aim, he had initiated three inter‑linked reform efforts focused at repositioning the United Nations development system, streamlining internal management and strengthening the Secretariat’s peace and security architecture. He had also sought to forge closer links with regional partners.
He stressed that prevention must be at the centre of everything, as it would avoid human suffering and even save money. Prevention was a sound investment that brought ample and visible dividends, and development was one of the best instruments of prevention. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development would help build peaceful societies. Respect for human rights was also essential in prevention. There was a need to invest in social cohesion so that all felt they had a stake in society.
As well, gender equality was closely linked with resilience, he said, stressing that women’s participation was crucial to success, from conflict prevention to peacemaking and sustaining peace. Where women were in power, societies flourished, he pointed out. Therefore, it was critical that sexual violence against women be addressed and justice pursued for perpetrators.
Prevention also included preventive diplomacy, he said, noting that the newly established High‑level Advisory Board on Mediation had met for the first time. The concept of human security was a useful frame of reference for that work. Human security was people‑centred and holistic; it stressed the need to act early and prioritize the most vulnerable.
“Let us work together to enhance the Council’s focus on emerging situations, expand the toolbox, increase resources for prevention, and be more systematic in avoiding conflict and sustaining peace,” he said, emphasizing the need for unity in the 15‑member organ. Without that unity, the parties to conflict might take more inflexible and intransigent positions, and the drivers of conflict might push situations to the point of no return. “But with unity, we can advance security and well‑being for all,” he underscored.
Statements
KORO BESSHO (Japan), Council President for December, spoke in his national capacity, noting that in the 25 years since the end of the Cold War, some parts of the world had been enjoying the benefits of improvements in science and technology, from groundbreaking medicines to new frontiers in outer space. However, during the same period, there had been a rise in complex contemporary challenges to international peace and security, including the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the expansion of terrorism. Peace operations were also facing non‑traditional challenges such as non‑State actors and inter‑State criminal organizations.
The Security Council had been tackling those challenges, in most cases through a country or region‑specific context, he said. It was important for the Council to discuss those complex contemporary challenges to international peace and security in a holistic and methodological manner. However, it needed to increase its focus on effectiveness throughout the whole conflict cycle. At the same time, close attention must be paid to the fact that peace and security, development and human rights were closely interlinked. It was vital for the Council to enhance cooperation with other organs, both within the United Nations system and beyond.
A human security approach was highly relevant when addressing complex contemporary challenges to international peace and security, he continued, adding that such an approach placed the individual at the centre, based on a cross‑sectoral understanding of insecurities. It also entailed a broadened understanding of threats and challenges. Japan had consistently provided human‑centred and comprehensive assistance through cross‑sectoral efforts with a range of partners. As for the Secretary‑General’s ongoing initiative for the reform of the United Nations, he said that the resolution on the restructuring of the Organization’s peace and security pillar was being tabled for adoption at the General Assembly. Although the scope of that resolution did not include Security Council reform, no reform would be complete without the reform of that 15‑member organ.
SERGIY KYSLYTSYA, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs for Ukraine, associating himself with the statement to be made by the European Union, said that while criticism of the Council’s work was mostly justified, there was currently no alternative entity to safeguard international peace and security. The Council had achieved some positive results in recent years, including its role in implementing an agreement between the Government of Colombia and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC‑EP). With the adoption of resolution 2349 (2017), the Council demonstrated an openness to addressing some of the underlying causes in the complex crisis in the Lake Chad Basin region. It had also been active in addressing the threat of terrorism, engaging in a number of discussions and taking landmark decisions. Because threats to international peace and security could not effectively be addressed in isolation, he welcomed the expansion of the Council’s agenda to include challenges such as human rights, development and climate change, to name a few. Nonetheless, among the Council’s shortcomings or even outright failures were unresolved challenges in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and tragic events in the Middle East, as well as blatant violations of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction that continued with impunity. Further, he expressed regret at the erosion of the rule of law, which was most obviously manifested in the aggressive policy of the Russian Federation towards its neighbours.
OLOF SKOOG (Sweden), aligning himself with the statements to be made by the European Union and the Nordic countries, said that international peace and security was increasingly hampered by the negative impacts of multidimensional poverty, climate change, transnational organized crime, food insecurity, weak governance, human rights violations and growing inequality. The Council’s preventive role was now more important than ever before. However, prevention was not possible without a comprehensive and holistic strategy to address the root causes and the conflict amplifiers. While ongoing reform efforts would better position the United Nations system to enhance its joint analysis and integrated strategic planning capacities, it was also crucial to consistently integrate a gender perspective into long‑terms strategies.
AMR ABDELLATIF ABOULATTA (Egypt) said that an innovative approach, coordinated through the United Nations and focused on root causes, was needed to meet current interrelated, complex challenges to international peace and security. In its analysis of conflicts and potential conflicts, the Secretariat must take into account the nature of each situation on a case‑by‑case basis. The effectiveness of the Peacebuilding Commission must also be strengthened so that it could work with the Council to lay the foundation for stability in countries at risk. Transnational challenges must be met through close coordination with regional organizations. National ownership must be ensured in all efforts with the support of the international community, so that institutions capable of confronting all current challenges could be built. He stressed that each organ of the United Nations must respect the mandate of the others, so that they could each adequately take on their respective responsibilities and not duplicate efforts.
PEDRO LUIS INCHAUSTE JORDÁN (Bolivia) said that the Council efforts were constantly endangered both by insufficient implementation of established mechanisms and the lack of coordination to prevent duplication of efforts. Mediation, prevention and use of good offices, as well as use of Chapters VI and VIII of the Charter of the United Nations should be better used for peaceful settlement of disputes, with Chapter VII tools only used after other strategies had been well applied. Unilateral actions were also imperilling the Council’s efforts to maintain peace and security. Such action often resulted in negative consequences for entire regions by creating vacuums of authority, in which terrorist fighters could fill the void. Robust actions must be taken to meet the terrorist threat. Prohibition of nuclear weapons, in addition, was an important goal to meet to reduce the threat of devastating conflict. As a pacifist country, his country would continue to advocate for the peaceful settlement of conflict to avoid the scourge of war and all its consequences, he said.
Matthew John Rycroft (United Kingdom) said that not only emerging threats but also conventional threats had been fuelled by developing transnational challenges, from internet incitement to enslavement of migrants. All such factors must be confronted at home, in partnership, and multilaterally. For example, at home, his country was tackling illicit financial flows that funded armed groups, terrorists and corruption, through new legislative acts. The United Kingdom was also assisting 13 countries in meeting climate threats to reduce their vulnerability. Multilaterally, it was supporting action of the Security Council, the General Assembly and the Human Rights Council to address the complex and diverse challenges. For those organs to play their full role, the reforms proposed by the Secretary‑General must be supported. That would enable the Organization to more effectively sustain peace, meet the Sustainable Development Goals and build respect for human rights. He pointed out that, during the current open debate, millions of people were experiencing displacement, hunger and conflict as a single reality. Those ills should all be addressed at the same time to achieve a safer world for all.
FRANÇOIS DELATTRE (France) affirmed that Council debates in 2017 had illustrated that the complex challenges facing international peace and security must, in the context of globalization, be met by a global response. The United Nations must use all its tools to assist States in an integrated manner that addresses deep‑rooted causes. Terrorism must be faced by addressing all factors — economic, political, cultural and social — along with multilateral security responses and regional arrangements supported by the international community such as the Group of Five for the Sahel (G5 Sahel) joint force. Those responses must be accompanied by long‑term support for development. Climate change, often exacerbating crises, must be met by technological and financial means, starting with the immediate implementation of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. The Council should also be in close communication with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and other mechanisms so that it could react quickly to grave violations. All challenges, along with ever‑present threats such as nuclear proliferation and inter‑State tensions, must be addressed by every State collectively, along with the mechanisms of the United Nations. Therefore, he voiced his country’s full support for the Secretary‑General’s efforts to increase the effectiveness of the Organization.
KAIRAT UMAROV (Kazakhstan), expressing full support for the Secretary‑General’s reform proposals to make the United Nations more effective, called for a comprehensive, integrated strategy in which the priority of sustaining peace ran through all efforts. His country had seen the importance of that approach since its independence and for that reason had been at the forefront of conflict prevention, including the establishment of the United Nations Regional Centre for Preventive Diplomacy for Central Asia, among other efforts. Reducing the threat of military confrontation was a priority for Kazakhstan, as shown by its hosting of conferences on Syria that had helped de‑escalate areas and promote political progress. Peacekeeping operations had to become more viable and accountable, with adequate staff and equipment. The Organization must comprehensively adopt a threefold strategy that addressed the peace and development nexus through a regional approach that involved the entire United Nations system working as one. His country would continue to be fully engaged in strengthening international peace and security throughout its Council membership and beyond, he pledged.
LUIS HOMERO BERMÚDEZ ÁLVAREZ (Uruguay) said that the Council should consider all aspects that could worsen conflicts, such as proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, legal and illegal trade in other weapons, terrorism, cyberattacks, and climate change. The international community must show greater solidarity and global governance must be strengthened. There was not only a need for prevention but also for creativity in which greater coordination between the organs of the United Nations was indispensable. The nexus between security, development, human rights and the humanitarian spheres was clear, but factors such as climate change, pandemics and transnational organized crime could exacerbate crises in conflict or post‑conflict situations. In such situations there was a need to strengthen the rule of law and promote sustainable economic growth, national reconciliation, access to justice, accountability, democracy, gender equality and protection of human rights. The use or threat of use of nuclear weapons was a violation of international law.
GORGUI CISS (Senegal) said over the last years, the international community had increased initiatives to address threats to peace, including through the reform of the Organization’s peace architecture and the adoption of the 2030 Agenda, among others. Such factors as the circulation of small arms, sexual violence, recruitment of children, and illegal exploitation of natural resources required a holistic response. Terrorism had suffered defeats but remained a threat as illustrated in numerous attacks. Mandates of peacekeeping missions should be better adapted to the situation on the ground, he said, noting that African countries had used their troops to combat non‑State actors. He welcomed the initiative to reinforce the security pillar. Senegal’s water, peace and security initiative was aiming to facilitate access to transborder sources of water.
SHEN BO (China) said that, in the desire for peace and development, it was necessary to firmly uphold the principles of the United Nations Charter. Although new challenges kept emerging, the Charter’s principles remained valid. Maintaining peace and security was the primary responsibility of the Council and its authority should be defended by all Member States. The United Nations and the Council should be subjective and impartial. The 15‑member organ must also respect sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of States and their right to choose their own social structures. Noting that root causes of conflict such as poverty and under‑development had not been solved and that threats such as climate change were constantly expanding, he urged for the full implementation of the 2030 Agenda and the Paris Agreement. The major organs of the United Nations should follow the provisions of the Charter and stick to their mandates while coordinating their efforts.
MICHELE J. SISON (United States) said the Council had a responsibility to respond to crises too large for one nation to deal with. One of the Council’s most effective tools — peacekeeping operations — was a powerful mechanism, she said, noting that the United Nations deployed over 100,000 troops and police all over the world. The missions, however, must adapt to the reality of the situation on the ground. The quality of troops deployed should also be analysed. Giving examples of successful peacebuilding, including in Liberia, where the United Nations had devised a peacebuilding plan in coordination with the Government and participation of civil society, she said the Council had mostly used missions after conflict had broken out. There was a need to look at underlying challenges, such as failure to develop or lack of protection of human rights, as those factors could directly lead to instability. In Yemen, 22 million out of 29 million were in need of humanitarian assistance and there was a risk of famine. Famine conditions had been caused by conflict and parties more interested in personal gain. The United Nations had the power to develop solutions to transnational problems, she said, encouraging the Secretary‑General to raise issues early on to the Council.
TEKEDA ALEMU (Ethiopia) said that a new way of thinking, along with innovative tools, were needed to meet emerging, complex challenges in international peace and security through a comprehensive and holistic approach. Strengthened partnerships were needed between United Nations bodies and regional organizations for that purpose. The Secretary‑General’s vision could allow the creation of integrated capabilities with improved planning and budgeting to support operations on the ground and longer‑term efforts. While a cross‑pillar approach was critical to address driving factors of conflicts that did not mean that the mandates of existing operations should be changed. The Security Council should not impinge on the responsibilities of other bodies. The Council had many responsibilities of its own to deal with, for example, principles of international law governing inter‑State relations, which were not at this point being adequately addressed.
PETR V. ILIICHEV (Russian Federation) stressed that a context‑specific approach must be highlighted, with all the particularities taken into account, and an over‑broad use of Chapter VII, as well as outside intervention, be avoided. In that context, he rejected the blasphemous statement by the representative of Ukraine in relationship to international law, given that that representative’s Government had come into power illegitimately. He called for full implementation of the Minsk agreements. Factors, such as foreign intervention and economic compulsion, must be added to the list of drivers of current conflict that were being discussed. In terms of an integrated strategy to international peace and security, it would be useful for the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council and other organs to consider the links between peace and security and socioeconomic and environmental issues. However, each must focus on its own responsibilities. Integrating all factors should not come under the work of the Council, which did not have the capacity in those other areas and for which the basic responsibilities in peace and security must remain the focus.
SEBASTIANO CARDI (Italy), aligning with the statement to be delivered by the European Union, said that during its presidency, his country had begun to address challenges in an integrated way, including a focus on migration and the nexus that phenomenon was connected to. Protection and empowerment of people was key to building resilient societies. The Secretary‑General should provide early‑warning information to the Council. In order to address all problems in a comprehensive manner, United Nations effectiveness must be improved through building synergy between all actors. In peace and security, capacity should be built to fully realize the concept of a peace continuum, as well as the building of inclusive political processes and resilient institutions. His country would continue to fully support reform to strengthen the Organization across the three pillars. In the Council, the interventions today showed that members had sufficient common interest to be able to reach consensus.
The representative of Ukraine, taking the floor a second time, said that it had been reconfirmed just recently that the Russian Federation was an occupying Power and a party to the conflict in the east of Ukraine. For that reason, the country could not discuss the conflict as an impartial actor. It must, instead, withdraw from Crimea and Donbass and make reparations for the damage it had caused in his country.
The representative of the Russian Federation, responding to his counterpart, encouraged the representative of the Ukraine to respect the Council and common sense. The conflict in the Ukraine was a consequence of the seizure of power that was not accepted by people in the east of Ukraine, and while there was no proof of intervention on the part of his country, there was proof of malfeasance by Ukraine, including bombardment of schools and hospitals that threatened a large-scale humanitarian disaster. He called for the implementation of the road map that was written into the Minsk agreements to resolve the situation.
The representative of Ukraine cited the Secretary‑General who voiced his concern over Russian arms flowing into eastern Ukraine, as well as actions in Crimea. That was adequate proof of Russian aggression against his country.
The representative of the Russian Federation said that the Monitoring Mission of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), which regularly visited areas not controlled by the Government, had not noted massive troop movement in the areas under discussion. In addition, he pointed out that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) had been notified that all facilities in Crimea were working in compliance with the Agency’s regulations.
CARLOS ARTURO MORALES LÓPEZ (Colombia) said the maintenance of international peace and security was the fundamental mandate of the Council, which had the responsibility to ensure that decisions were coherent in light of changing needs. An integrated approach required focus on the main causes and multipliers of conflict. Nuclear proliferation, climate change, water scarcity and cyberspace attacks required flexible diplomacy. Prevention and peacebuilding should be the Council’s priority in the maintenance of peace. Expeditious and bold solutions were required to ensure that the Organization could prevent conflicts. Reform of the peace and security pillar would make it possible to adapt the United Nations to present day crises. The Organization’s activities in Colombia were a clear example of building peace, and the success of the peace process in his country was based on a comprehensive approach, including gender equality.
GEORG HELMUT ERNST SPARBER (Liechtenstein) said that a comprehensive approach to peace and security included rule of law, fundamental rights and freedoms as well as sustainable development. Implementation gaps in development commitments and disregard of human rights obligations were important early warning signals, he said, adding that contemporary security challenges tended to be complex, requiring tailor‑made, context‑specific solutions. Stressing the importance of accountability in ensuring lasting peace, he added that transitional justice contributed to deterrence and allowed traumatized communities to come back together and move forward. Noting the Council’s “half‑hearted engagement” with the International Criminal Court, he welcomed the Court’s announcement of investigations into various crimes in Libya.
MALEEHA LODHI (Pakistan) said that conflicts continued to rage around the world and the longstanding internationally recognized disputes regarding Palestine, as well as Jammu and Kashmir, continued to fester. The Palestinian and Kashmiri people continued to suffer horrific human rights violations at the hands of occupying forces, while the world continued to watch without responding to those egregious situations. The drivers of such challenges, including political and economic injustice and terrorism and violent extremism, must be addressed. What was needed was a shift from a culture of reaction to a culture of prevention. There was obviously no one‑size‑fits‑all solution to conflict prevention and mitigation. Moving a country towards durable peace began with a clear understanding of the sources and nature of conflicts, she said.
KATALIN ANNAMÁRIA BOGYAY (Hungary) said that “comprehensive”, “integrated” and “holistic” were not just buzzwords, but real calls for action and anchors for the work of the United Nations. The only way to achieve and preserve peace was through dialogue, she said, expressing appreciation for the Secretary‑General’s dedication to start a surge in diplomacy. Preventive processes should include intercultural and interreligious dialogue and reconciliation, hand in hand with moderate religious and community leaders and faith‑based organizations. Further, there was no sustainable peace without respecting human rights and international humanitarian law.
JÜRG LAUBER (Switzerland) said the United Nations framework for conflict prevention was in the DNA of the 2030 Agenda and in resolutions on sustaining peace adopted by the Council and the General Assembly. It was also anchored in the Secretary‑General’s reform agenda. Further, the implementation of the Paris Agreement was a significant preventative step as it acknowledged the strong links between climate change and peace and security. As respect for human rights was also key to conflict prevention, his country had launched the “Appeal of June 13” to enhance systematic cooperation within the United Nations system on human rights issues. The appeal specifically called for intensified cooperation between the Council and human rights organs of the United Nations with a view to strengthen conflict prevention. He also highlighted that many grievances started around issues of perceived or real exclusion and injustice; they deserved greater attention.
FERIDUN HADI SINIRLIOĞLU (Turkey) said all pillars of the United Nations were facing tremendous challenges. No single State possessed the capacity to take on the challenges alone. The United Nations was in acute need of substantial reform to confront the challenges faced. A primary objective was to increase the effectiveness of peacekeeping operations while prioritizing political solutions. Crisis prevention was essential, as well as preventing the relapse of crises in post‑conflict situations. The Secretary‑General’s “surge in peace diplomacy” initiative and his reform of the prevention pillar had underscored their importance, he said, noting that his country was a co‑chair of the Group of Friends of Mediation. The Council had failed many times to show timely and adequate responses to emerging crises. Often, inaction was the result of the use, or the threat, of veto. That disabled the Council’s effectiveness. He underlined the importance of more Council interaction with non‑Council members and other United Nations bodies. More attention must be payed to tackling the root causes of the multiplier factors of conflicts, including terrorism, climate change, water, and human and drug trafficking.
NIDA JAKUBONĖ (Lithuania), also speaking for Latvia and Estonia and associating herself with the statement to be made by the European Union, said that the rise in military conflicts was outstripping the international community’s ability to cope. Hybrid threats and cybersecurity were priority issues for the Baltic States, she emphasized, noting that concerns regarding the Russian Federation’s interference in national election processes were not limited to European countries alone. Increased societal awareness, resilience building and media and information literacy could help tackle hybrid threats. In 2007, Estonia had faced a series of cyberattacks, and Latvia and Lithuania had also experienced such politically motivated assaults. To cope with the strikes, the public and private sectors, as well as civil society, must cooperate; regional and subregional cooperation was key to strengthening cybersecurity in critical infrastructure. As hybrid and cyberthreats were here to stay, conventional security was not enough, she said, urging Member States to share best practices and lessons learned in tackling them.
TORE HATTREM (Norway), speaking on behalf of the Nordic countries, said conflicts were increasingly being caused by environmental degradation due to climate change, adding that the international community must cooperate to implement major environmental agreements. Backing the strengthened United Nations‑World Bank partnership, he added that the Nordic countries were supporters of the Green Climate Fund and initiatives focusing on African and small island developing States. The Nordic countries promoted the women, peace and security agenda, he said, and inclusivity started with women. The international community must make better use of the positive contributions of young people, however. For every dollar invested in prevention, 17 dollars were saved in post‑conflict assistance, he said, urging States to place prevention at the core of the United Nations agenda. Security Council reform should include seats for Africa; it was also crucial to ensure small States had the opportunity to serve as elected members.
STEPHEN MAHLABADISHAGO NTSOANE (South Africa) highlighted that the nature of conflict was not the one envisaged by the creators of the United Nations. Indeed, present‑day conflicts largely centred on the internal strife of Member States and transnational threats. Unfortunately, while the world had changed, the Council had largely remained the same. Contemporary challenges had brought divisions within the Council to the forefront, especially among its permanent members. At times, such paralysis had cost human lives, he said, citing the lack of meaningful action on the situation between Israel and Palestine, as well as divisions on Syria. While incremental improvements had been made to the Council’s working methods, such advancements did not obviate the need for comprehensive reform. A more representative Council would allow it to be more effective in dealing with complex, contemporary challenges. He called for a Council with a stronger voice for those closest to crises, one marked by non‑discriminatory decision‑making and collective, rather than narrow, national security interests.
CHRISTOPH HEUSGEN (Germany) said that, in anticipating threats to international peace and security, the Council must have the security implications of climate change on its radar and firmly on its agenda. In addition, it should also include a host of factors, such as the growing interconnectedness in the cyberworld. Lasting peace in such a complex world could not be achieved through military means alone, but in combination with development policy and a strong focus on prevention. For that purpose, resilience of societies must be strengthened; that often started with respect and promotion of human rights. Given abhorrent violations, such as sexual violence used as a tactic of war, the Security Council must do more to integrate human rights into its deliberations. Supporting the Secretary‑General’s reform to make the United Nations work better across institutional boundaries, he called for full use of existing arrangements, such as the advisory role of the Peacebuilding Commission. Describing multisectoral assistance for integrated Sahel initiatives provided by his country, he stressed that in all areas, comprehensive action was needed to respond to current security challenges. His country stood ready to assume its responsibilities in that regard, he pledged.
JEROEN STEFAN G. COOREMAN (Belgium) said that the challenges for international peace and security had to be looked at through an integrated approach. A focus on environmental security should be an integral part of a global approach to security. Environmental challenges had led to migratory pressures and had provoked conflicts. For that reason, climate change and ecosystem change should be analysed within the context of security. He voiced his support for the appointing of a special representative for environmental security. Such a person could become part of the broader reform of the peace and security pillar. Belgium would continue to actively participate in the discussion and would anchor the global approach in its national policies. It had accorded priority to funding the general budget of the United Nations agencies so that they could pursue a global approach. His country had also funded a number of humanitarian funds to help in cases of natural disasters, such as the hurricanes that recently hit the Caribbean region.
DIAN TRIANSYAH DJANI (Indonesia) pointed out that conflicts had increased threefold in recent years with an unprecedented number of people forcibly displaced. In that regard, he strongly supported the Secretary‑General’s call for a surge in political diplomacy and conflict prevention. Because an inability to tackle the root causes of disputes could cause and sustain conflict, it was encouraging that the United Nations was increasingly examining conflicts in a comprehensive manner. It was vital that the Secretary‑General’s proposals to restructure the Organization’s peace and security pillar succeed so that its engagement with the peace continuum was more effective and nimble. Furthermore, the Council must fully uphold the principles of international law, human rights law and humanitarian law. It must be judicious and not dictated by any particular national perspectives. That commitment was tested by the question of Palestine. The Council’s inaction had had devastating consequences on the ground, making solutions more complex. Moreover, the Council could not solve international peace and security challenges singlehandedly. Better cooperation was needed with troop‑ and police‑contributing countries in that regard.
SYED AKBARUDDIN (India) said that a basic reordering of perspectives was needed, emphasizing the need to address sustainable development for all and reduce gross disparities. The Council must put a greater focus on the globalization of terror networks. Even on an issue as serious as designating terrorist individuals and entities, Council‑mandated sanctions committees had failed to make concrete progress. A non‑representative Council, designed long ago to maintain a balance of power between rival States, was unable to handle challenges which had changed beyond recognition over the decades. “An instrument that is no longer considered legitimate and has lost its credibility cannot be our hope for salvation,” he said, adding that “speech acts”, such as the current open debate, would have little impact on billions of people striving to live in peace, safety and security.
FRANCISCO TENYA (Peru), stressing the importance of the reform drive at the United Nations, said that the traditional threats to international peace and security had been compounded by new complex global challenges. Foremost among the latter was the impact of climate change. Migration, food and security could be affected by that, in turn breeding more transnational crimes and illicit trade. Strengthening the international community’s commitment to multilateralism was key and broad consensus was necessary on sustaining peace through rule of law. Instead of “burying our head in sand”, the international community must tackle the problems through a multidimensional and inclusive approach. Expressing support for the reforms of the Secretary‑General, he said that those reforms would shape the United Nations into a coordinated and flexible body.
JOANNE ADAMSON, European Union delegation, expressed support for the Secretary‑General’s reform efforts and underscored the need to engage other stakeholders, including the private sector, in peacebuilding and sustainable development. To break the conflict cycle, increasingly complex challenges required changing approaches. That was not only a moral obligation, but a pragmatic imperative with huge economic advantages. Last year, the European Union adopted a global strategy reiterating its commitment to a global order based on international law, which translated into an aspiration to address the root causes of conflict. While addressing conflict early was necessary, staying the course was an even bigger challenge, she said, as relapsing back into conflict was common.
Meanwhile, the Council should not shy away from examining new and emerging challenges to peace and security, including climate change, she said. The Council must also use its unique role within the United Nations system to prevent climate change‑induced unrest. Overall, she said its working methods must evolve. By addressing situations earlier and in a more integrated manner, Member States could transform their approach to conflict and further empower the Council in fulfilling its core mandate.
ALEX GIACOMELLI DA SILVA (Brazil) said that the interlinkage between security and development was complex and nuanced. Poverty and inequality might exacerbate tensions in some scenarios, but did not necessarily endanger international peace and security. Geopolitical rivalries, militaristic approaches and the unilateral use of force were more serious sources of regional and global insecurity. While discussing the complex dynamics that affect contemporary conflicts, care should be taken to avoid misinterpretations and generalizations. Successful peacekeeping operations demonstrated the potential for a constructive relationship between security and development. The recent experience of the United Nations in Haiti was a positive example, where, for thirteen years, the United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH) contributed to a more secure and stable environment and assisted in the implementation of hundreds of initiatives that fostered peace and development at the local level.
MANAL HASSAN RADWAN (Saudi Arabia) said that contemporary challenges were complicated and interlinked. Israel’s continued occupation of Palestinian land and the violence perpetrated by the terrorist settlers were clear violations of international law and one of the main reasons for the armed conflicts in that region. The international community must work tirelessly to help the Palestinian people regain their rights. As well, approximately twenty‑four hours ago, the capital of her country, Riyadh, had become a victim of an attempted attack by a ballistic missile randomly fired from Yemeni territory. What the rebel militias were doing with the backing of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps was a blatant violation of the United Nations Charter. Rivers of blood were flowing in Yemen, she said, and the Council must take deterrent measures to resolve the threat posed to peace and security by the militia and Iran.
HELENA DEL CARMEN YÁNEZ LOZA (Ecuador), recalling that the United Nations was established to prevent the scourge of war, said that its founding document emphasized the glaringly obvious relationship between disarmament and development. The 2030 Agenda had served to further highlight that link. Calling on all relevant stakeholders to work together in a coordinated way, she said that there were a myriad of factors affecting peace and security, including climate change. Also stressing the imperative need for the Council to refrain from mandate creep, she recalled that Article 99 of the Charter conferred on the Secretary‑General the role of alerting the Council to any threats to international peace and security. The Secretary‑General must make use of the powers under that Article, she said, adding that gender‑mainstreaming had multiple benefits in peacebuilding.
MIRGUL MOLDOISAEVA (Kyrgyzstan), highlighting the Council’s important role in peacekeeping and humanitarian action, said increasing its effectiveness was only possible if members were unanimous in responding to emerging threats. Also expressing support for the Secretary‑General’s reform initiatives, she added that those reforms would strengthen the international community’s ability to prevent and resolve conflicts. It was necessary to improve the effectiveness of the United Nations and its bodies in order to confront the challenges to development, peace and security.
ALYA AHMED SAIF AL-THANI (Qatar) said that her country had adopted a global approach to international peace and security. Challenges to peace and security required a positive approach, with dialogue not confrontation. There was a need to strengthen a collective prevention of conflicts to achieve international peace and security. Qatar had always participated in resolving conflicts peacefully, she said, welcoming the Secretary‑General’s aim to make conflict prevention into a priority. She also welcomed regional consultations in sustaining peace in the Middle East. The major complex challenges in that region represented a threat to international peace and security, and cooperation between countries in the Middle East and the international community was needed to eradicate those challenges.
TOFIG MUSAYEV (Azerbaijan) said that the objective of ensuring a peaceful and prosperous world was hardly achievable if universally recognized fundamental values, norms, and principles were overtly disregarded or misinterpreted. At a time of brutal armed conflicts and high levels of forced displacement, more concerted action was required at all levels to end conflicts and direct greater attention to preventing future conflicts. Welcoming the General Assembly’s adoption of a resolution on restructuring the United Nations peace and security architecture, he said that States must comply with their international obligations, particularly those relating to respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of States and the inviolability of their borders.
MANSOUR AYYAD SH. A. ALOTAIBI (Kuwait) renewed his country’s deep conviction that development and human rights were linked to peace and security, and noted the vision of the Secretary‑General to work towards enhancing the main pillars of security, human rights and development. Peace required complete harmony and a coordinated effort, and there was a need to enhance the relationships between the United Nations and regional organizations. The problems faced were extremely complex, and the cooperation of others was needed to help solve them. Underscoring the importance to hold regional dialogues in order to exchange expertise, he said that would lead to the continued involvement of regional organizations in the peaceful settlements of conflicts.
NGUYEN PHOUNG NGA (Viet Nam) said a human‑centred and whole‑pillar approach was urgently needed to implement a comprehensive and long‑term strategy on conflict prevention and sustaining peace. Full use must be made of existing preventative diplomacy and mediation tools, and the United Nations should coordinate enhanced partnership with regional and subregional organizations. Peacekeeping must be coupled with peacebuilding, she continued, emphasizing the need for Security Council unity in taking decisions and collective action. As for the situation in the East Sea, or South China Sea, she called on all parties concerned to exercise self‑restraint and settle disputes peacefully in line with international law.
JUAN SANDOVAL MENDIOLEA (Mexico) said the world was at a critical crossroad in the maintenance of peace and security. Praising the priority the United Nations was giving to conflict prevention, he said it was necessary to find political solutions to disputes. To do so, it was necessary to fix the fragmentation in the United Nations and enable it to wield its tools more effectively. Supporting the Secretary‑General’s initiatives in that regard, he said the Organization must invest in peace and security “for every person in every country”. Peacekeeping should be pursued in harmony with the other agendas of the United Nations, including the ones enshrined in “the holy triumvirate of peace and security, development and human rights”. The threat or use of force was even more serious when it accompanied the dangers of weapons of mass destruction, such as nuclear weapons, he said, calling for a robust system of global governance.
MICHAL MLYNÁR (Slovakia), associating himself with the European Union, said the Security Council should, in a more systematic and targeted manner, deal with challenges in the areas of non‑traditional and cross‑border threats, including those concerning public health, exploitation of natural resources, climate change, poverty and forced displacement. Both the Council and the General Assembly should take greater advantage of the work of the Peacebuilding Commission. Preventing conflict was one of the Council’s most significant responsibilities; it should enhance its preventive and mitigating role. Security sector reform, a priority area for Slovakia, should focus on genuine national ownership and effective partnerships, among other targets.
MARTHA AMA AKYAA POBEE (Ghana), emphasizing the need to work across the United Nations system and noting efforts to reform the Organization’s peace and security architecture, said the Council’s capacity to play a preventative and mitigating role would be enhanced by a structured dialogue on the security implications of development‑related issues. Much could also be gained through increased collaboration between the Council and regional and subregional organizations, such as the African Union and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). Noting that peacebuilding and sustaining peace went hand in hand with Sustainable Development Goal 16 [promoting just, peaceful and inclusive societies], she said effective strategies across the United Nations system to support that objective would ultimately lead to the effective maintenance of global peace and security.
BELEN SAPAG MUÑOZ DE LA PEÑA (Chile) said a multidimensional approach was necessary to respond to threats, including non‑State and non‑military ones. Recalling that in January 2015, her country had convened an open debate in the Council on inclusive development, she said there was widespread agreement that security and development were mutually reinforcing. Underscoring the importance of inclusion, she noted that the design of the transition from MINUSTAH had contained a strong element of national ownership. Further, it was important to raise awareness regarding the Arria Formula meetings and integrate subsidiary bodies and groups of experts in the work of the Council when designing missions and transitions. The Council must also improve interaction with regional and subregional bodies.
OMAR CASTAÑEDA SOLARES (Guatemala) said that the United Nations had striven to resolve conflict since its founding through a series of measures, including the maintenance of peace and peacebuilding, as well as promoting recovery and rebuilding. In all of the aforementioned activities, the Council had played a critical role whenever called upon to respond to various conflicts. His country had experienced that directly through the United Nations Verification Mission in Guatemala. The exit of peacekeeping or special political missions did not mean an end to the peace process. In response to various collective appeals for an urgent change in the way in which peace instruments available to the United Nations were used, Guatemala was optimistic about the Secretary‑General’s plan to conduct an overhaul and review of those tools. He remained convinced that prevention and mediation should be at the forefront of the Organization’s efforts on peace and security.
CHARLES T. NTWAAGAE (Botswana) said the Council must deploy all the tools at its disposal to effectively deal with emerging threats, and the Organization must act as a whole, coordinated entity. However, the burden for maintaining international peace and security could not be solely placed on the United Nations; regional bodies should play a critical role. Because of their presence on the ground, such bodies were better placed to appreciate and address security challenges. He welcomed the development of partnerships, including African Union‑European Union and African Union‑United Nations joint efforts. He also highlighted the role of subregional entities, citing Botswana’s experience with the Southern African Development Community (SADC), which included structures tasked with addressing peace and security challenges and played a key role in preventive diplomacy and conflict resolution and management, among others. He also noted States’ collective accountability for effective border management, which could help to reduce crime and insecurity.
LISE HUBERTA JOHANNA GREGOIRE VAN HAAREN (Netherlands), stressing the importance of an integrated approach and early action, said that the challenges of the twenty‑first century transcended borders. Her country had learned, sometimes the hard way, of the connection between root causes and ensuing conflict. However, it was not enough to formulate an integrated response to conflict; the Council should also devote attention to preventing conflicts. While the Council’s involvement with the situation in Gambia earlier in 2017 had proved timely and successful, a clear focal point was still lacking on the issue of climate and security. Given the growing risk of climate change increasing tensions within and between nations, he underscored that it was important that there be an institutional home for the issue.
ONDINA BLOKAR DROBIČ (Slovenia) said the Council must better integrate peacekeeping with development and humanitarian efforts. The United Nations and its Member States, regional organizations, non‑governmental organizations (NGOs), and civil society must all support fragile countries, especially by enhancing their societal resilience and security architecture. Ending impunity for serious international crimes was equally crucial, she said, stressing the importance of effective cooperation with the International Criminal Court and calling upon States that had not yet done so to ratify the Rome Statute. Turning to water scarcity, she recalled the work of the Global High‑level Panel on Water and Peace chaired by the former President of Slovenia. Regional cooperation was also vital to avoid water becoming a cause of conflict or amplifying risk, she pointed out, citing successful practices in the Western Balkans region, for example, in the Sava River basin, which could serve as a model for water‑related cooperation.
MARIA THEOFILI (Greece) said that a priority in tackling growing global insecurity should be taking a holistic approach to address the drivers of conflict and to focus on both prevention and long‑term stability. Greece, considering itself a pillar of stability in a region that bordered on the Middle East and North Africa, had hosted international conferences that had aimed at promoting tolerance, pluralism and dialogue among civilizations. It also engaged in bilateral programmes that utilized country synergies and joint activities in culture and other constructive areas, such as trade and research. Greece had also established mechanisms of cooperation with countries in the Balkans. As it was on the front line of migration issues, it advocated for the streamlining of migration governance that made use of existing forums and promoting global partnership. Affirming the importance of addressing climate change as well, she pledged her country’s support to the Organization’s efforts to address all factors involved with international peace and security to shape a more peaceful world for the future.
ZOHRAB MNATSAKANYAN (Armenia) said that terrorism should not be associated with any religion, nationality or civilization, but at the same time, called for the acknowledgement of evidence of extremists and terrorists targeting specific communities based on religion or ethnicity. He called for addressing the suffering of Yazidis, Christians and other minorities, and the indiscriminate attacks and forced displacement of ethnic Armenians from certain Syrian cities. Armenia had been providing humanitarian aid to the Syrian population, sheltering approximately 22,000 refugees and implementing policies to facilitate housing, education, health care and other integration measures. Turning to regional issues, he said the OSCE Minsk group co‑chair countries had in October reiterated a commitment to mediating a peaceful settlement of the Nagorno‑Karabakh conflict. They had also welcomed the resumption of high‑level dialogue between the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan in Geneva on 16 October and a meeting of their foreign ministers on 6 December. Armenia remained fully committed to negotiations in that regard.
DAVID GREGORY YARDLEY (Australia) said addressing increasingly complex contemporary challenges to international peace and security required a change of approach. Of particular importance was conflict prevention, sustainable peace, women’s participation in peacebuilding and United Nations reform. All staff within the Organization must show leadership in embedding prevention approaches across all operations and programmes. Furthermore, efforts to support peaceful societies must be inclusive, he said, citing evidence that meaningful participation of women in peace processes led to more durable outcomes. In that regard, he acknowledged the practical steps taken in 2017 by the Department of Political Affairs, Department of Peacekeeping Operations and the Peacebuilding Support Office. Expressing strong support for the Secretary‑General’s ambitious reform efforts, he called for the Organization to prioritize prevention and inclusive peacebuilding.
OMAR HILALE (Morocco) said the growing number of conflicts and the resulting fallout required a review of the Organization’s response. Indeed, the international community had not made great use of mediation and conflict tools, which were needed to achieve lasting peace. He welcomed the Secretary‑General’s reform agenda, which he hoped would result in a more transparent and cooperative approach. For its part, Morocco was active in addressing the impact of climate change on peace, and the world was already witnessing its effects, including migration and the erosion of coasts. Concerning the threat of terrorism to international peace and security, he said peacekeepers could not react robustly to threats if they remained “shackled” in their current mandates. In that vein, he expressed support for the G5 Sahel joint force and called for its full logistical and financial support, noting that multidimensional missions often lacked needed resources to support their mandate. At the same time, resolving conflict required partnership, he said, calling for the United Nations to take the lead in coordinating efforts.
HASSAN ABBAS (Lebanon) said the notion that conflicts had become more complex should not distract from addressing root causes, including foreign occupation and aggression. Lebanon faced many challenges, including almost daily Israeli violations of its sovereignty and the presence of more than 1.2 million refugees from Syria. Such challenges had contributed to a significant decrease in gross domestic product (GDP) growth, higher unemployment and poverty levels and an overstretched infrastructure. The pioneering United Nations strategic framework, signed by the United Nations system and the Government in October 2016, recognized Lebanon’s multidimensional challenges, he said, emphasizing that the United Nations must follow a “whole of Lebanon” approach which leveraged and integrated the Organization’s diverse expertise, capacities and resources while supporting Lebanon along the path to sustainable development, as per the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
NIRMAL RAJ KAFLE (Nepal) said that studies had established the hazardous consequences of climate change on people as well as on the existence of small islands. The security and economic implications of climate change could not be ignored. That and other natural disasters would increase the number of environmental migrants in the coming decades. It was the common responsibility of the United Nations membership to ensure secure futures for island‑dwellers and environmental migrants. In Nepal, snowcaps were increasingly receding in the Himalayas. As well, his country was experiencing pressure on food security and witnessing the extinction of some rare flora and fauna. The Council could play an important role in addressing climate change simply by sending a message of its collective commitment. The Council members that were also major contributors to greenhouse gas emissions must lead others by example, he said.
ALI NASEER MOHAMED (Maldives) recalled that, with resolution 2349 (2017), the Council had recognized that climate change had an adverse impact on security. Now, the Council and the General Assembly must clearly articulate practical measures the Organization could take in response to climate change and other non‑traditional security threats. Measures could include the Secretary‑General preparing regular periodic assessment reports to serve as an early warning mechanism. Moreover, the Council and Assembly could also consider examining the feasibility of establishing a regular coordination mechanism through which all of the Organization’s principal bodies and relevant agencies could contribute to designing conflict prevention, peacemaking and peacekeeping operations. Small States were the most vulnerable to non‑traditional and emerging security threats and it was necessary that small island developing States in particular had a seat at the Council. However, over 72 years, only eight such States had served in that body, he recalled, expressing hope that his country would be elected for the 2019‑2020 term in order to represent those States and contribute to shaping decisions affecting the smallest members of the international system.
SAMUELU LALONIU (Tuvalu), on behalf of the Pacific small island developing States, said that climate change was the most important security challenge facing the world today, as affirmed in a seminal report by the previous Secretary‑General. The growing attention paid to the issue in this chamber gave hope, but dangerous impacts were already occurring, with the most vulnerable bearing the largest burdens. On the small islands, there were record‑breaking droughts and storms and extreme heat and floods had displaced more people than many conflicts.
Climate change was not going away and the situation would continue to deteriorate even if the goals of the Paris Agreement were met, he said. The changes could be abrupt and could severely affect many systems that were currently relied on for modern life. For those reasons, the Secretary‑General should appoint a special representative on climate and security, who could produce a report, in cooperation with scientific bodies, that identified and analysed potentially dangerous tipping points at the nexus of climate and security and address concerns that the securitization of climate change would lead to more militarization.
JOSÉ ATAÍDE AMARAL (Portugal) said addressing both the new and old threats to global peace and security required, more than ever before, a multilateral approach that also involved tackling the root causes of conflict. Complex contemporary challenges required continuous adaptation of mechanisms, better coordination and early action to address threats at all levels. Affirming the importance of conflict prevention, he supported the Secretary‑General’s reform proposals in that context. The integration of a gender‑balance perspective was also a priority, as was an ever‑strengthening relationship between the General Assembly, Security Council and the rest of the United Nations system, including through the Peacebuilding Commission. Early Council consultations on situations of imminent risk and collective action were important to break the conflict cycle. Portugal stood ready to fully contribute to those efforts.
MASUD BIN MOMEN (Bangladesh) said emerging challenges had the potential to further exacerbate protracted conflicts and create multiplier effects across borders. Conflict prevention was, first and foremost, a national responsibility and the active participation of all segments of society was fundamental to mitigating the potential drivers of conflict. Meanwhile, the United Nations had a critical role in facilitating and monitoring the implementation of internationally agreed commitments to support Member States. However, the range of tools at its disposal needed to be deployed with sensitivity to the realities on the ground and in consultation with relevant national, civil society and humanitarian actors. The failure to do so was evident in the “textbook case of ethnic cleansing” witnessed in Myanmar’s Rakhine state in August, he said. Furthermore, while the Council did not need to remain confined to a strict definition of its mandate, it should find ways to enhance its interface with other principal organs.