A/71/PV.78 General Assembly

I thank you, Sir, for convening a meeting on the reports of the Peacebuilding Commission (A/71/768) and on the Peacebuilding Fund (A/71/792). This debate provides an opportunity to reflect on peacebuilding activities this past year and for the future. Estonia aligns itself with the statement delivered by the observer of the European Union (see A/71/PV.77). Almost a year ago, the General Assembly and the Security Council adopted resolutions 70/262 and 2282 (2016), respectively, on the review of the peacebuilding architecture. That was a landmark achievement, as the concept of sustaining peace was introduced in recognition of the comprehensive and integrated approach to addressing peacebuilding, going beyond the post-conflict phase and including all stages of a conflict. As recent reviews of the United Nations peace-related activities had concluded, there was an urgent need to put prevention at the core of the United Nation’s work. In that regard, we fully support the Secretary-General’s vision on conflict prevention and sustaining peace, as outlined at the beginning of the year. If peacebuilding and sustaining peace are to be effective, it is essential to integrate peace and security, human rights and development approaches. None of the three United Nations mandates could be achieved without the others. It is therefore important to invest in democracy, good governance and the rule of law, as political exclusion is among the most common causes of violent conflict. Equally, the protection of human rights and respect for fundamental freedoms are core principles for sustaining peace and achieving equal, equitable and progressive societies. The resolutions on the review of the peacebuilding architecture restated important mandates for the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) concerning countries in the transition period. We welcome the comprehensive report of the Peacebuilding Commission’s tenth session as the first summary of the implementation of the recommendations contained in the resolutions. We would like to commend the Permanent Representative of Kenya for his leadership and work as the Chair of the Commission last year. Estonia became a member of the Peacebuilding Commission this year. We would like to express our full support to the current Chair of Commission, the Permanent Representative of the Republic of Korea, in his efforts to re-energize the Commission’s work. Estonia supports a broader focus for the Peacebuilding Commission, including through regional approaches and addressing cross-cutting issues, strengthening the bridging role between the General Assembly, the Security Council and the Economic and Social Council, and improving the PBC’s advisory role to those organs. We are convinced that for effective peacebuilding, the United Nations system needs to work in a more integrated, flexible and coordinated manner, both at the country level and at the Headquarters. We therefore support efforts to link the reform of the peace and security architecture of the United Nations with the reform of the United Nations development system, which would contribute to the one United Nations initiative. Furthermore, the gender aspect and the empowerment of women is critical for sustaining peace. We welcome last year’s adoption of the PBC’s gender strategy. The engagement of women from the early stages of prevention, resolving crises, peacebuilding and securing peace reduces the probability of relapsing into violent conflict and leads to more durable peace agreements. Additionally, predictable financing is an essential component of peacebuilding activities. Estonia contributes to the Peacebuilding Fund, and we are glad that the Fund has shown substantial results. Greater cooperation between the Peacebuilding Commission and Peacebuilding Fund is needed. Last but not least, close partnerships between the United Nations and international, regional and subregional organizations, as well as international financial institutions, are essential to addressing the challenge of sustaining peace. We especially encourage reinforcing its collaboration with the World Bank and the African Union. Estonia looks forward to continuing to work in the Peacebuilding Commission, and we would also like to thank the Peacebuilding Support Office for its outstanding work.

Australia is deeply committed to the implementation of the sustaining peace agenda. The sustaining peace resolutions (General Assembly resolution 70/262 and Security Council resolution 2282 (2016)), facilitated by Australia and Angola, set out ambitious objectives to deliver on the international community’s commitment to peacebuilding and conflict prevention. Those objectives go to the core of the Charter of the United Nations. We commend both the Peacebuilding Commission and the Peacebuilding Fund for the results achieved over the past year, in two areas in particular. First of all, we acknowledge the longer-term strategic advice provided by the Peacebuilding Commission to the Security Council on countries in transition, such as Liberia. The sustaining peace resolutions, coupled with the Secretary-General’s commitment to sustaining peace, provide an opportunity for the Commission to reinvigorate its important advisory role, which it must seize. The Commission’s contribution to Liberia’s peacebuilding plan has been recognized by the Secretary-General as a model for inclusive consultations and longer-term strategic planning. Those efforts are practical ways to advance the sustaining peace agenda. Secondly, we congratulate both the Peacebuilding Fund and the Peacebuilding Commission on their respective initiatives to promote gender equality. The Fund’s achievement of surpassing the 15 per cent target for gender-sensitive peacebuilding in 2016 is the culmination of years of dedicated work by the Peacebuilding Support Office. It will help ensure that women’s needs and priorities are addressed in conflict-affected countries. We urge the Peacebuilding Fund to surpass that target again in 2017 and to improve the monitoring of gender- sensitive investments in peacebuilding. Equally, we commend the Peacebuilding Commission for the adoption of a gender strategy — a major achievement for an intergovernmental United Nations body. We look forward to the Commission implementing that strategy. Australia’s $10 million commitment to the Peacebuilding Fund shows our confidence in the Fund’s work. We urge all members to make strong financial commitments to meeting the $150 million shortfall identified by the Fund in its latest report. We also encourage continued efforts to improve cooperation between the Peacebuilding Commission and the Peacebuilding Fund, in particular on financing options. In that respect, we welcome both the Commission’s and the Fund’s actions to strengthen cooperation with the World Bank. We recognize that much work lies ahead in order to prioritize conflict prevention in practice and strengthen predictable financing for peacebuilding. We urge United Nations Members and the United Nations system to embrace those challenges, so as to ensure that we continue to make progress in implementing and embedding the sustaining peace approach.

I thank you, Sir, for convening this meeting, and for providing an opportunity to comment on the Peacebuilding Commission’s report on its tenth session (A/71/768), and the Secretary- General’s report on the Peacebuilding Fund (A/71/792). First, allow me to say that Norway is very pleased to be back in the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC). Long-term and comprehensive peacebuilding has always been a central part of Norwegian foreign policy. We welcome the focus of the PBC report — a more flexible Commission. In the light of the sustaining peace resolutions (General Assembly resolution 70/262 and Security Council resolution 2282 (2016)) and the Secretary-General’s clear leadership and prioritization of conflict prevention, the Peacebuilding Commission has an obvious role to play. The Commission should take advantage of that momentum and build on its experience as a convening power. The experience of country configurations is important, and we see clear signs of the comparative advantage of the PBC in Liberia, for example. However, it is important for the Commission to increase its flexibility with regard to country situations. We would like to commend the chairmanship of the PBC for its ability to cooperate closely with the Security Council and the Secretariat, while simultaneously showing the relevance of the Commission for conflicts that are not formally on the its agenda. The PBC report proposes to establish focal points for certain central issues in the sustaining peace agenda. Norway is honoured to have been entrusted with the role of focal point of financing for peacebuilding — alongside our good partner, Indonesia. We intend to work closely with the chairmanship and other Member States. We will draw on the important discussions and experiences on financing shared in the Secretariat with the participation of civil society and other actors, in order to prepare for the Secretary- General’s forthcoming report on sustaining peace. As stated in the report of the Advisory Group of Experts on the Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture (A/69/968), peacebuilding for too long has been left as an afterthought: underprioritized and underresourced. Addressing the root causes of conflict requires long- term commitment and access to regular, predictable and adequate funding. That responsibility rests heavily on us, the States Members of the United Nations. The Secretary-General’s report on the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) shows us once again that the Fund is a crucial player for United Nations peacebuilding. The Fund has a strong record of delivering on its relatively narrow objectives and should be recognized as addressing the market failure in financing for peacebuilding with a flexible, risk-taking approach. The PBF also contributes directly to Sustainable Development Goal 16 on just, peaceful and inclusive societies — as confirmed by a number of independent evaluations. Norway will continue to be a strong supporter of the PBF. We encourage all Member States to look into possibilities for supporting the Fund, given its harsh financial reality. Last, but not least, Norway particularly commends the Fund for its immense efforts in promoting and funding the role of women in peacebuilding. The Peacebuilding Commission’s recently adopted gender strategy contributes to important synergies with the Fund in that regard. Women constitute half of the population. If we do not involve women, we risk missing half the conflict analysis; we might overlook half of the problems and miss half of the potential solutions. The fact that the Fund is the first of the United Nations agencies to have reached the aim of 15 per cent support to women’s empowerment — and has now even surpassed 20 per cent, is highly impressive and should be an encouragement for the rest of the United Nations family.

Bangladesh joins other delegations in thanking you, Sir, for having convened this joint debate on the annual reports of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) (A/71/768) and the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) (A/71/792). We commend the stellar role played by the PBC Chairs in 2016 and 2017 in advancing the Commission’s work — pursuant to last year’s substantively identical resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council on the United Nations peacebuilding architecture review (resolutions 70/262 and 2282 (2016), respectively). Bangladesh feels encouraged by the Secretary- General’s commitment to sustaining peace, which has been the PBC’s unique contribution to the entire United Nations system. Through their consideration of the goal and process of sustaining peace, the aforementioned resolutions appropriately broaden the traditional notion of peacebuilding and underscore the importance of sustained political accompaniment through the entire spectrum of conflicts, with a focus on conflict prevention. We urge all principal organs of the United Nations and all other relevant stakeholders to duly acknowledge this new approach and to give peacebuilding a real chance to deliver on its potential in national, regional and multilateral contexts. While echoing the points made by the Chair and Vice-Chair of the PBC in their introductory statements, we wish to reiterate the importance we attach to five critical issues. First of all, the centrality of national ownership and leadership in peacebuilding and sustaining peace must be valued and preserved in real terms. It is of paramount importance to foster an environment of inclusive peacebuilding where a diverse set of national actors with legitimate voices and interests have the opportunity to participate and contribute. We appreciate the inclusive and consultative process of developing the statements of mutual commitment to peacebuilding by certain country-specific configurations. We also laud the recent proactive initiatives by the delegations of Kyrgyzstan and the Gambia to have their national peacebuilding priorities and initiatives deliberated in the PBC through multi-stakeholder engagements. Secondly, it is encouraging to see positive ongoing efforts, including at the field level, to break down silos within the United Nations with a view to advancing the comprehensive goal and process of sustaining peace. It must remain a constant preoccupation for the PBC, through its convening and advisory roles, to further consolidate these efforts, particularly towards bringing the security, development and humanitarian actors closer to each other without undercutting their respective mandates and competence. We reiterate our thanks to President Thomson and the PBC Chairs for having convened the High- level Dialogue earlier this year to discuss the potential synergies between the notion of sustaining peace and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. We recognize that much work remains to be done in that context and are committed to doing our part in our capacity as coordinator of the group of least developed countries at the United Nations. Thirdly, we welcome the upswing in the PBC’s interface with the relevant regional and subregional organizations, especially in Africa, and its growing focus on regional, cross-cutting issues. The PBC’s value-added work could make a difference by addressing various relevant and emerging issues of concern, including the critical task of institution building. In that context, we underline the importance of building on the recent constructive and forward-looking deliberations of the PBC regarding the Sahel and Lake Chad regions. The Commission’s partnerships with the concerned regional and subregional organizations have emerged as a unique resource that must be fully leveraged. Fourthly, we consider the adoption of the PBC gender strategy last year to be a valuable contribution to the promotion of the inclusivity agenda for peacebuilding and sustaining peace. We thank the PBC membership for entrusting Bangladesh and Canada with the responsibility to serve as focal points for the first year of the strategy’s implementation. We look forward to the cooperation of all concerned in allowing the gender dimension be mainstreamed through the work of all relevant PBC activities, and in highlighting the strategy in relevant entities and forums across the United Nations system. We are confident that the PBC gender strategy has the potential to advance the women and peace and security agenda in practical terms, including by complementing national action plans pursuant to Security Council resolution 1325 (2000), where relevant. Bangladesh also welcomes the PBC’s focus on promoting the role of youth in peacebuilding and sustaining peace. Fifthly, and perhaps most importantly, the lack of financing for peacebuilding remains an obstacle to realizing the comprehensive goal and process of sustaining peace. Last year’s twin resolutions (General Assembly resolution 70/262 and Security Council resolution 2282 (2016)) underscored the need for increased, predictable and sustainable financing. We hope that they will help garner the necessary political support for mobilizing critical resources for peacebuilding, including for the PBF. The rapid and flexible funding mechanism offered by the PBF is widely recognized, yet it is underfunded. That gap needs to be addressed. In that connection, we look forward to both pragmatic and creative ideas from the Secretary-General on mobilizing additional finances for peacebuilding and sustaining peace through both assessed and voluntary contributions. We hope this year’s annual PBC session will help generate some constructive suggestions to that end and will enhance the synergy between the work of PBC and PBF. Bangladesh underscores the importance of making the best use of the PBC’s convening and advisory role to broaden its dialogue and engagement with international financial institutions and other development partners in order to increase coordination and coherence in peacebuilding activities. We urge PBC to impress upon the relevant international financial institutions the importance of staying engaged with the concerned countries, on favourable terms, in order for them to pursue their socioeconomic development efforts as critical enablers of national recovery and reconciliation. Bangladesh remains attached to the “one PBC” idea and supports the review of the PBC’s working methods to further that objective. On our part, we shall continue to discharge our role — as a PBC member and as the coordinator of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries Caucus in the PBC — in support of implementing last year’s twin resolutions and making peacebuilding and sustaining peace a flagship agenda of the United Nations. In line with our abiding commitment to peacebuilding, our Government is poised to open the doors of a peacebuilding centre in our capital, which we believe would add to regional and international efforts in peacebuilding and sustaining peace through substantive research and training activities. We invite all interested partners, including the Peacebuilding Support Office, to come forward in forging meaningful and value-added partnerships to make the best use of that centre.

One year after Member States agreed to the twin sustaining peace resolutions (General Assembly resolution 70/262 and Security Council resolution 2282 (2016)), we have seen progress in how both the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) and the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) can assist in their implementation, and signs as to the direction they should move in. Much of the Commission’s added value within the United Nations is in helping sustain peace in countries transitioning out of conflict and, as is often the case, off the Security Council’s agenda. There are three ways it can do that, in practice. First, the Commission should, on a frequent basis, be asking how all United Nations actors are helping address conflict drivers in a coherent way, especially in the countries on its agenda. There is no other part of the United Nations where those questions can be asked by Member States. Only yesterday, at the request of the Gambia, several United Nations actors briefed the Commission on their support of that country. We hope to see such dialogue continue. Secondly, the Commission should work harder to provide space for United Nations and non-United Nations actors, including regional organizations, international financial institutions and civil society to engage with one another on how they can each play to their comparative advantage. We should not pretend that the United Nations can do everything, but it can help ensure that the wider international community gets everything done. We recently saw the Commission play that role in discussions on the Sahel and have been impressed at how it has helped bring stakeholders around a peacebuilding plan in Liberia. Thirdly, while significant progress has been made in recent years, the Commission still needs to become more flexible and able to tailor its response according to need. Every conflict is different. The United Kingdom is a strong supporter of the Peacebuilding Fund, which is why we will dedicate over $10 million a year to the Fund, until 2020. The PBF provides funding that is fast, flexible and risk- tolerant — all critical attributes for assisting conflict- affected States. It has also exceeded its commitment of allocating 15 per cent of its resources to women’s empowerment, essential to any effort to sustain peace, and its work in Yemen demonstrates the role it can play in crises. The United Kingdom welcomes the cases of Somalia, Colombia, Sri Lanka and Myanmar, for example, where the PBF has successfully allocated a relatively small amount of money in order to leverage much greater funding from bigger donors. That is a good example of how the United Nations can play to its comparative advantage in sustaining peace, as an enabler rather than a financer. Indeed, we must reject the idea that if the United Nations simply spent more money on peace, then more countries would be peaceful. Other factors, often related to power and exclusion within States and societies, matter much more. However, when and where the conditions are right, external financing can make a real difference. It is clear that the Peacebuilding Fund has played such a role, and we would urge it to do more to highlight the successes, its comparative advantage and its strategic position in sustaining peace. The United Kingdom looks forward to seeing continued progress in both the Peacebuilding Commission and the Peacebuilding Fund in the year ahead.

Germany aligns itself with the statement delivered earlier by the observer of the European Union. Allow me to add just three brief points from the German perspective. First, we believe the sustaining peace resolutions (General Assembly resolution 70/262 and Security Council resolution 2282 (2016)) were milestones in putting prevention first. We also laud the Secretary- General for making prevention his top priority. We wish to support him in his efforts, primarily by helping restructure the Secretariat to make it fit for purpose in terms of conflict prevention. The reports in front of us show us how a little money up front can prevent costly conflicts later on. Secondly, the Peacebuilding Commission and the Peacebuilding Fund play a vital role in all phases of a conflict, but especially during the crucial transition phases when a peace operation comes to an end and country teams need all the support they can get. We need to emphasize and institutionalize this work. Thirdly, to complement our support of the Peacebuilding Commission, Germany is promoting stabilization efforts in fragile States. We believe the best way to support political processes is by taking a comprehensive approach. As an example, Germany has enhanced its civil stabilization measures in Mali alongside its military and police engagement. And in addition to the €5 million we have contributed to the disarmament, demobilization and reintegration process, we have also increased our support to the Ministry of Reconciliation and its High Representative to more than €9 million. Beyond our bilateral engagement, Germany has made significant contributions to the Peacebuilding Fund, having given $22 million in 2016. Germany stands ready to support the Fund and its valuable work in the future.

Indonesia thanks the Chair and Vice-Chairs of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) for their hard work and efforts in stewarding the Commission. We also welcome many of the points that the Secretary-General alludes to in his report (A/71/792). The year 2017 marks a renewed approach to peace and security with the introduction of the concept of sustaining peace. In this regard, United Nations peacebuilding as one of the important elements in sustaining peace will remain vital, while the PBC as the entrusted forum, must ensure that peacebuilding in all its aspects corresponds to today’s needs and reality. In this context, my delegation would like to share some of its additional thoughts. The first important element is partnership. No one organ or entity by itself can promote peacebuilding, sustaining peace or the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Strong partners, companions and allies of peace and development, both inside and outside the United Nations, are needed. We need concerted efforts that involve the whole of the United Nations system and include collaboration with national Governments and other key partners, such as international, regional and subregional organizations, international financial institutions, civil-society organizations, women’s groups, youth organizations and the private sector. New information technology and social media should also be utilized as an intangible partner to cultivate support for and more active participation in sustaining peace. The second is institutionalization. Indonesia supports the recommendation of the High-level Independent Panel on United Nations Peace Operations that the Secretary-General be required to develop options for restructuring the Secretariat’s peace and security architecture to strengthen leadership and management and to remove the silo mindset. Synergy among all United Nations organs and agencies working in peace and security, development and human rights should be a prerequisite. As Indonesia has urged in other United Nations forums, there needs to be greater collaboration and cooperation between the Security Council, the General Assembly and its main committees, the Peacebuilding Commission, the Economic and Social Council and the Secretariat agencies and departments. Indonesia welcomes the idea of one PBC to ensure better flexibility and mobilization of the Commission in fulfilling its mandates and functions. The third is reliable resources. Peacebuilding and sustaining peace should be reinforced through more reliable and predictable resourcing. Indonesia commends the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) for its work. The Fund’s impact has been important in attracting support from other actors as well. Indonesia, for its part, has contributed to and will further play its role to support the PBF. At the same time, we underline the need for a new approach that, in addition to aid and grants, also facilitates domestic and international investments and trade, as well as other innovative sources of financing. Apart from assisting the countries with their national skills and capacity development, our overarching aim should be to make their tools of financing for peacebuilding self-sustainable. We are happy to note that the annual session of the PBC, to be held on 22 June, will focus on financing for peace. This will be a timely opportunity to discuss innovative ways to provide more predictable support to peacebuilding and sustaining peace. Indonesia and Norway are co-focal points of financing for peacebuilding in the PBC and are committed to supporting the PBC in ensuring that the PBC further incorporates financing as one of its key focus areas. The fourth is a nationally driven process. We reiterate that a nationally owned and sustained process is essential to laying down strong foundations for sustaining peace. This process should encourage women and youth to also play an active role in fostering reconciliation and building stakes for a collective national vision of peace and development. It is vital that the United Nations entities and other partners support in particular the Member States lacking capacities in also integrating conflict prevention and peacebuilding into their national governance and development functions. We also underline the importance of good leadership and politics. A credible and sustained political process that can tackle conflict’s root causes is necessary to mitigate mutual suspicions and build confidence. In their absence, international efforts will have a limited impact. In conclusion, in the light of today’s discussion, my delegation is of the view that the PBC annual session should be reinvigorated as an international forum that enables cross-sectorial stakeholders to synergize and develop concrete initiatives on peacebuilding and sustaining peace. Such a forum will help move everyone from rhetoric to practice. It will also help the countries to prioritize political and financial resources for peacebuilding and sustaining peace in a proactive manner.

The delegation of Senegal welcomes this first annual debate on the report of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) (A/71/768), which commemorates the first anniversary of the adoption by the General Assembly and the Security Council of the identical resolutions 70/262 and resolution 2282 (2016), on the review of the peacebuilding system. Allow me to thank and congratulate the Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission, Ambassador Cho Tae-yul, and his predecessors, Ambassador Macharia Kamau and Ambassador Olof Skoog, for their outstanding work in recent years, which made it possible to strengthen the Peacebuilding Commission, as a central body in the United Nations peace and security framework. I would also like to take this opportunity to welcome the significant progress made in such a short time in implementing the recommendations of the report of the Advisory Group of Experts on the Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture (see A/69/968) and subsequent resolutions. By building on those substantial achievements, we must now work with resolve to push for new momentum and even think outside the box with regard to carrying out our work as called for by the identical Security Council and General Assembly resolutions on the review of the peacebuilding architecture, which act as a guide leading towards more coordinated, comprehensive and coherent strategies so as to lay the foundations for a lasting peace. In the light of the information contained in the report under consideration, we are pleased to note that the Commission has embraced this new vision. Moreover, that shines through not only in its work concerning the countries on its agenda, but also in its initiatives involving regional and cross-cutting issues. We welcome initiatives to encourage strengthening partnerships with regional and subregional organizations, in particular the African Union. In that regard, greater interaction between the Peacebuilding Commission and the relevant bodies of the African Union would facilitate better coordination in their work and consequently lead to streamlining on the ground. A joint assessment of the nature and challenges of peacebuilding in Africa, as well as an ongoing dialogue on how best to coordinate support for countries on the peacebuilding agenda could therefore make that cooperation more constructive. In that vein, the visit by the Chair of the Commission and chairs of the relevant country configurations to the African Union headquarters in Addis Ababa from 17 to 19 October 2016 to consider ways to improve cooperation between the PBC and the African Union Peace and Security Council in the areas of conflict prevention and sustaining peace in Africa is an initiative that is to be commended and continued. The same applies to discussions dedicated to the regional, transboundary and transnational problems posed by peacekeeping in West Africa, as well as to strengthening partnerships with subregional organizations, in particular the African Union, the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the Mano River Union so as to sustain peace in Africa. Through their active involvement in mediation and conflict prevention, the African Union and other subregional organizations in Africa have contributed to defusing several crises in the continent at an early stage. Better yet, with the establishment of its peace and security architecture, the African Union has clearly shown its ambition to play a more active role in conflict prevention that — need we recall — is a determinant factor for sustaining peace. In that regard, it should be noted that lessons learned from peacebuilding in Africa reveal the crucial role of regional and subregional partners in supporting political processes. The example of ECOWAS involvement, in particular in Guinea- Bissau and several other countries in the subregion of West Africa, in cooperation with the Office of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for West Africa and other regional and international partners, adequately illustrates the importance of such joint action. Another important issue that should be considered in the framework of strengthening cooperation with the African Union and subregional organizations is the coordination of the involvement of the various concerned stakeholders in the process of building and sustaining peace in Africa. In that regard, in the framework of their respective chairmanships of the Security Council’s Working Group on Peacekeeping Operations and Ad Hoc Working Group on Conflict Prevention and Resolution in Africa, Senegal and Ethiopia took the initiative to organize a joint meeting on the theme of developing synergies for building and sustaining peace in Africa and of how the United Nations, the African Union and its regional mechanisms can strengthen their strategic partnership, to take place on Wednesday 26 April. Countries that are in the process of peacebuilding are generally politically fragile. Their institutions are often weak, their economies vulnerable and their young people faced with unemployment, while their infrastructure is frequently in need of rebuilding. The challenges that they face in the peacebuilding process are colossal. In terms of assistance, their needs are equally important, including the electoral process; reform of the justice and security sectors; disarmament, demobilization and reintegration; strengthening the health and education systems; reviving economic activity; agricultural support; and generating jobs. In other words, those countries require substantial, long-term funding. Unfortunately, at the same time, the financial resources for sustaining peace remain limited, inconsistent and even unpredictable. As we all know, if peace is to be sustainable, restoring security must be accompanied by economic and social development. That is why we should insist on the importance of maintaining and strengthening support for countries in transition towards peace so that they can continue to benefit from the international community’s attention, particularly in terms of sustainable and predictable funding. Taking into account the central role of predictable and sufficient funding in achieving peacebuilding goals, we hope that that issue will continue to receive all the attention that it deserves in our initiatives.

I thank the President for convening today’s meeting. I also thank Ambassador Kamau of Kenya for his work as Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) throughout the reporting period. On behalf of Ireland, I offer Ambassador Cho Tae-yul our full support and every good wish as he takes up that important position for 2017. Ireland aligns itself with the statement made on behalf of the European Union, and I offer the following remarks in my national capacity. We have reviewed the report of the PBC on its tenth session (A/71/768) and the report of the Secretary- General on the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) (A/71/792) with great interest. The reports reflect the ongoing evolution of both mechanisms, particularly in response to the adoption of the sustaining peace resolutions (General Assembly resolution 70/262 and Security Council resolution 2282 (2016)) this time last year. In particular, we welcome the efforts of the PBC and the PBF in strengthening existing partnerships while also establishing new ones. Last year, we saw great strides taken by the Commission in developing the relationship between the United Nations and the African Union in the area of sustaining peace. Moreover, in contexts such as those of the Central African Republic and Yemen, cooperation between the PBF and the World Bank showed the Fund’s potential to work hand in hand with external partners in strengthening peacebuilding support for nations. While partnerships with external entities are crucial, it must be recalled that the sustaining peace resolutions place emphasis on the convening power of both the PBC and PBF among internal United Nations bodies and mechanisms. I am pleased to see that reflected in the work of both the Commission and the Fund in 2016 and hope that it will remain a priority throughout the current year. As mentioned by other delegations today, 2016 was a good year for gender in United Nations peacebuilding activities. One year after becoming the first fund to meet the 15 per cent target of the Secretary-General for gender-responsive peacebuilding, the PBF has now gone further and has exceeded that the target. Moreover, the PBC adopted an advisory gender strategy that will help guide its work. We encourage the sharing of lessons learned among Member States, other United Nations funds and bodies, and external stakeholders as efforts in this area continue. That could include an analysis of the gender dimensions of the 23 PBF final evaluations undertaken last year. We also look forward to continued emphasis on inclusion from both bodies throughout 2017, particularly in the area of civil society and youth. Development is mentioned no fewer than 19 times in the sustaining peace resolutions, as evidence of its centrality to what we are striving to achieve. Ireland was glad to participate in last summer’s joint event between the Economic and Social Council and the PBC, which focused on the nexus between sustaining peace and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. We also welcomed the initiative of the President of the General Assembly to convene a high-level event on this issue last January. As we now move into the second year of the implementation of the sustaining peace resolutions, and as we are approaching the third anniversary of the adoption of the 2030 Agenda, questions remain as to how we can achieve the right level of alignment and complementarity. We believe that the PBC should use its unique position to foster discussion among a wide range of partners to further explore these questions and optimize the potential for complementarity between sustainable development and sustaining peace. Finally, we want to welcome the continued emphasis on national ownership seen throughout the work of both the PBC and PBF. From our role on the Commission’s Liberia configuration, we have seen how the PBC has supported the Liberian Government to act as the main driving force behind its own national peacebuilding planning process. Similarly, the PBF moved quickly to channel support to the implementation of the Colombian peace agreement upon the joint launch by that Government and the United Nations of the new trust fund. Before last April, peacebuilding was often seen as an area confined to post-conflict contexts. Sustaining peace, however, acts as a thread that connects our traditional concept of peacebuilding to all other areas of support and activity along the peace continuum, in particular conflict prevention. The reports being discussed today show how much has already been done by the PBF and PBC to translate sustaining peace from a concept in a resolution to a practice on the ground. We look forward to supporting these efforts as they are continued and scaled up throughout the current year and beyond.

In exactly one week, we will celebrate the first anniversary of the adoption of the landmark sustaining peace resolutions (General Assembly resolution 70/262 and Security Council resolution 2282 (2016)). At the time of their adoption, Sweden hailed them for being the most comprehensive resolutions to date on peacebuilding and conflict prevention in the United Nations. They not only advance the normative agenda, but also constitute a road map for the United Nations system. In January, during our presidency of the Security Council, we sought to provide support and momentum to this agenda by holding a ministerial-level open debate (see S/PV.7857) on conflict prevention and sustaining peace. That meeting offered an opportunity for the Secretary-General to lay out his vision for prevention. The level of engagement by Member States underlined the remarkable support for a more proactive United Nations fit to respond to the prevention challenges facing the Organization today. We are encouraged to see that the Secretary-General has put the sustaining peace agenda at the heart of his prevention efforts. We welcome the tangible changes he has already made in his Office, which aim to bring the system together in support of joint analysis as the basis for coherent action by all organs of the United Nations. A year after the adoption of the sustaining peace resolutions, we must now start to see the agenda in action at all levels. There are several key reforms currently under way, including the internal review of the Secretariat’s peace and security architecture. We have high hopes that those reviews will serve as mechanisms to translate this agenda into concrete and tangible change in operations. There is need for a United Nations system that acts decisively across silos; that recognizes the primacy of politics; that works with national Governments to support the institutions, norms and attitudes that sustain peace; and that leaves no one behind. We will continue to do our part, as we know that a more integrated system often starts with us, the Member States, including with how we finance the system. I now turn to the two specific reports at hand — that of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) at its tenth session (A/71/768) and that of the Peacebuilding Fund (A/71/792). This annual debate in the General Assembly offers us an opportunity to reflect on what has been achieved, as well as to determine where we need to go. With regard to the Peacebuilding Commission, I must first of all thank the Kenyan chairmanship and Ambassador Kamau in particular for his great stewardship of the PBC during 2016, which was a critical year for the Commission. Sweden thoroughly enjoyed working with Kenya as Vice-Chair. In particular, I would like to draw attention to the important steps taken last year to solidify the partnership between the United Nations peacebuilding architecture and the African Union. Let me also once again welcome the Republic of Korea and Ambassador Cho Tae-yul, as Chair of the PBC, whose proactive and strategic leadership in the first few months is already showing results, which is encouraging for the eleventh session. Yesterday’s meeting on the situation in the Gambia is a case in point — that is exactly the kind of role the PBC should be playing. We encourage the PBC to take further steps to diversify its agenda in this vein. From our experience, including having previously chaired the Commission in 2015, we believe there is even further scope to leverage the inherent flexibility of the Commission to convene regional and country-specific discussions concerning situations beyond the PBC’s established agenda. The annual report on the Peacebuilding Fund reveals another year of innovative action. The Fund has proved to be able to facilitate inter-agency work like few other instruments, to spur action in politically sensitive environments and to take risks. That is why Sweden continues to be a significant supporter of the Fund. I am happy to announce that we will increase our contribution this year from SKr56 to Skr70 million SKr, which is the equivalent of $7.8 million. We remain worried, however, about the lack of funding for the PBF going forward. We look forward to the Secretary- General’s reports on sustaining peace, in particular with regard to concrete options for predictable financing for sustaining peace. We encourage him to be as bold as the authors of the original report (see A/69/968) of the Advisory Group of Experts on the Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture. The forthcoming joint study by the World Bank and the United Nations will present other important recommendations with regard to the cost of prevention and peacebuilding and the role of international development assistance. Before wrapping up, let me say a word about Liberia. Sweden is happy to continue chairing the PBC country-specific configuration on Liberia and is determined to make sure the PBC accompanies Liberia through a period of multiple transitions in the country’s history, including the departure of the United Nations Mission in Liberia and the preparations for the holding of elections in 2018. That will be a moment of truth for peace. The United Nations and the international community must continue to stand by the people of Liberia during this period.

Uruguay welcomes the holding of this annual meeting to assess the work of the Peacebuilding Commission and the Peacebuilding Fund. First and foremost, we would like to acknowledge, and express our gratitude for, the work of the Permanent Representative of Kenya, Ambassador Kamau, as Chair of the Commission during its tenth session. Although Uruguay did not participate as a member of the Commission last year, it closely monitored its work. This year, Uruguay is participating in and is a member both of the Peacebuilding Commission and the Security Council, and is able to appreciate at first hand the complementary work of both bodies. The adoption of the two substantially identical resolutions on the review of the peacebuilding architecture (General Assembly resolution 70/262 and Security Council resolution 2282 (2016)) established a “before” and an “after” of the Commission’s work. Those documents are a valuable basis not only to establish the way in which the Commission should be run, but they also offer a new way of viewing sustaining peace at the systemic level. In addition, all the wide-ranging United Nations reviews carried out in 2015 were clear as to the need to prioritize conflict prevention. While much progress has been achieved in developing awareness of the importance of this subject, we think that much remains to be done and that we must be aware of the urgency of taking action now in order to create change. Uruguay would like once again to underscore its commitment to peacebuilding. As a long-standing troop-contributing country, we are familiar with the challenges that arise on the ground during and after conflicts. In that regard, we agree with the vision expressed in the review of the peacebuilding architecture that peacekeeping tasks are not limited to post-conflict situations, but require continuity that includes the “before”, “during” and “after” of conflicts. We also wish to stress the importance of the Peacebuilding Fund as a flexible and catalytic tool for the distribution of resources for peace-sustaining activities in a number of countries. We welcome the implementation of projects, which has been possible thanks to the Fund’s financing and which always seek to provide structural and institutional assistance in the most vulnerable regions. However, we regret that the work of the Peacebuilding Fund continues to depend on voluntary contributions and lacks a predictable budget, which could clearly improve its effectiveness and efficiency. I would like to conclude my statement by extending my best wishes to the Permanent Representative of the Republic of Korea, Ambassador Cho Tae-yul, in carrying out his work as Chair of the eleventh session of the Peacebuilding Commission. We hope he will continue on the same path to strengthen the achievements made last year and to establish new goals. In that effort, he can count on our support.

I wish to start by thanking the outgoing Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), His Excellency Mr. Macharia Kamau, for his briefing on the work of the Commission in the year 2016. We are grateful for the stewardship he demonstrated in leading the work of the Commission during its tenth session and congratulate him for his valuable accomplishments. I also congratulate His Excellency Mr. Cho Tae-yul, current Chair of the PBC, who has already made a notable start in his work. We look forward to working with him very closely throughout the year. The year 2016 was an important one for the work of the PBC, one during which the General Assembly and the Security Council adopted identical resolutions on the review of United Nations peacebuilding architecture (General Assembly resolution 70/262) and Security Council 2282 (2016)). We felt then, as we strongly do now, that the PBC has a key role in following up the implementation of the sustaining peace resolutions. While meeting our expectations, during its tenth session, under the able leadership of Ambassador Kamau, the PBC undertook wide-ranging and significant tasks with a view to implementing key recommendations emanating from the resolutions. It is therefore imperative that the Commission keep up the momentum by further strengthening its work for this year by building upon the achievements of the previous session. In that respect, we are pleased to note that the Chair has made financing and partnership his main priorities in 2017. We are also pleased to note that the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) became the only office within the Secretariat to have exceeded the United Nations-wide commitment to allocating at least 15 per cent of resources to women’s empowerment. The launching of the PBF’s first-ever Youth Promotion Initiative, which responds to the call made by Security Council resolution (2250) (2015), on youth, peace and security, was also a significant achievement. We believe that these two initiatives on women and youth have a far-reaching positive impact on building inclusive and peaceful societies, and we would like therefore to encourage the PBF to further beef up its activities in these areas. Nevertheless, as the Advisory Group of Experts on the Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture made clear, financing for peacebuilding remains scarce, inconsistent and unpredictable. No doubt the pledging conference organized in September 2016 was a step in a right direction to addressing the funding challenge, in spite of the shortfall. Yet, as the report (A/71/792) of the Secretary-General on the Peacebuilding Fund states, the demand for PBF assistance has reached historic highs, while the Fund’s sustainability still remains in question. Hence, it is important to look for additional and innovative approaches for securing adequate and sustainable financing for peacebuilding activities. In that regard, the contribution of the Peacebuilding Fund as a catalytic, rapid-response and flexible prepositioned pooled Fund providing financing to activities to sustain peace in conflict-affected countries remains very significant. We expect that the upcoming report of the Secretary-General on sustaining peace will offer us concrete funding options in that respect. Partnership in peacebuilding is another key element in the work of the PBC. Collaboration with relevant stakeholders, including with international financial institutions such as the World Bank and with regional organizations such as the African Union remains central in the activities of the Commission. Notwithstanding the PBC’s focus on country-specific configurations, promoting a regional approach through engagement with regional and subregional organizations is indeed duly emphasized in the sustaining peace resolutions. Last year, the PBC visited the headquarters of the African Union, in Addis Ababa, and held consultations with the African Union Peace and Security Council to explore ways to further enhance cooperation in the areas of conflict prevention and sustaining peace across the continent. We feel that such consultations need to be regularized in line with the recommendations suggested by the African Union communiqué issued following the Commission’s visit. We also recognize that the PBF provided its first direct funding to the African Union. It is our conviction that the two bodies could further collaborate on their peacebuilding efforts in Africa in line with the implementation of the African Union Post-Conflict Reconstruction and Development policy framework, as well as the African Solidarity Initiative. The need for strengthening the bridging role of the PBC with relevant United Nations principal organs, including the provision of an advisory function for the Commission to the Security Council, has been underlined many times. Of course, that remains one of the areas that need continuous focus and engagement in the work of the Commission. For our part, as was indicated earlier by the Deputy Permanent Representative of Senegal, Ethiopia, as Chair of the Security Council Ad Hoc Working Group on Conflict Prevention and Resolution in Africa, together with Senegal, as Chair of the Security Council Working Group on Peacekeeping Operations, will convene a joint meeting on building synergies for peacebuilding and sustaining peace in Africa on 26 April. We believe that the meeting will provide an opportunity to share the Commission’s experiences on best practices and lessons learned from its engagements in Africa. We look forward to the Chair’s briefing during the joint meeting.

I thank you, Mr. President, for having convened this important joint debate. This is a good opportunity for States Members of the United Nations to express their views and reflect on the work of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) and the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) following the adoption of identical resolutions last year by the General Assembly and the Security Council on the review of the peacebuilding architecture (respectively, resolution 70/262 and resolution 2282 (2016)). I take this opportunity to congratulate and express my best wishes to Ambassador Cho Tae-yul of the Republic of Korea, Chair of the PBC, and also to thank Ambassador Macharia Kamau of Kenya and Ambassador Antonio de Aguiar Patriota for their important work. My delegation also compliments and encourages Mr. Oscar Fernandez-Taranco in his important work as Head of the Peacebuilding Support Office. Nepal has been actively supporting the United Nations peacebuilding architecture in different capacities. As one of the top troop-contributing countries, with our own experience of post-conflict management, we have been continuously engaged in the work of the Commission. Nepal has actively served in that body, including as Chair of the Working Group on Lessons Learned. My delegation welcomes the comprehensive and action-oriented reports of the PBC (A/71/768) and of the Secretary-General (A/71/792). They analyse our challenges, gaps and the way forward in the peacebuilding architecture for the maximum utilization of operational activities — justifying its purpose and usefulness. The reports also clearly demonstrate the importance of partnership in peace processes. My delegation is of the view that partnerships with international financial institutions and other stakeholders, including the private sector, are crucial to garnering their support for effective peacebuilding activities. Nepal also has a long experience of peacekeeping missions abroad and of its own peacebuilding process at home. That experience has shown that sustaining peace is as important as raising consciousness for peace. The only way to secure peace is to engage all stakeholders — including the most marginalized and vulnerable sections of the community — in a just, equal and fair manner. As the final product of the peace process, the country now has an inclusive and rights- based Constitution, promulgated by democratically elected representatives of the people, and the first election to local bodies in nearly 20 years will be held on 14 May 2017. The partnership of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture throughout Nepal’s peace process has come a long way. The lessons learned by countries emerging from conflict are important to creating similar success stories in other contexts. Those lessons include the initiatives of creating and sustaining a peaceful focus, developing inclusiveness and promoting local leadership and ownership, and increasing resilience by carrying out regular context- specific assessments. Such initiatives would also harmonize with the Sustainable Development Goals, as inclusive and sustainable development has contributed immensely to preventing conflicts. In view of achievements, lessons learned and the Secretary-General’s concept of a surge in diplomacy for peace, it is essential to recalibrate the PBC’s mandate accordingly. There is no doubt that peace and development reinforce each other and there has to be a delicate balance between the two so as to smoothly steer countries in conflict towards the post-conflict phase. In that context, Nepal believes that vulnerable groups, including women, children and the elderly, should be on board and at the core of the peacebuilding process. Nepal has been implementing Security Council resolution 1325 (2000) and 1820 (2008) through tailor- made national action plans for mainstreaming women as integral to the peacebuilding process. Investing in creating employment, promoting dialogue among communities and enhancing collaborative decisions would increase the opportunity cost of preventing societies from relapsing into conflict. Similarly, coordination, coherence and flexibility are vital to peacebuilding activities. We stress that the PBC and the PBF must make use of synergies and complementarities for effective and efficient partnerships to have a maximum impact on the ground. The timely allocation of sufficient resources will be decisive to ensuring stability as we use available resources strategically and improving the weak financial health of the PBF. In that regard, Nepal will continue to contribute to United Nations peacebuilding efforts, as always, by constructively engaging with Member States and the United Nations.

I want to thank the presidency of the General Assembly for having convened this meeting, which enables us to debate an issue that is critical for our Organization. We are also grateful for the reports of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) (A/71/768) and on the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) (A/71/792). I would like to highlight the exemplary work of Kenyan Ambassador Kamau as 2016 Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC). He brought important changes to the Commission’s work — which is now progressing along the same lines under the leadership of the current Chair, Korean Ambassador Cho Tae-yul. Today’s meeting is an opportunity to review peacebuilding, considering our trajectory thus far and our path forward. The United Nations participated actively in our peacebuilding process, first advocating a peaceful resolution to the conflict in the 1980s and then playing an important role in the peace negotiations, the signing of agreements and the initial peacebuilding phase. We would highlight the efforts of the PBC to comply with the relevant recommendations of the resolutions on the review of the peacebuilding architecture (General Assembly resolution 70/262 and Security Council resolution 2282 (2016)). The adoption of an advisory gender strategy that underscores the importance of women’s leadership and participation in conflict prevention and resolution has been key. With regard to the Fund, we believe that, despite the lack of financing, it is opening up innovative ways to financially support peace processes. While we certainly believe in the importance of peacebuilding for the attainment of the Sustainable Development Goals, it is senseless to limit its funding to voluntary contributions. A portion of the regular budget should also be set aside for that purpose. We would like to share some reflections from our peacebuilding experience and efforts. First, the root of these types of conflicts lie not only in economic differences, but also in cultural, racial, religious and political differences. In many cases, it is political differences that pervade the discourse and the violence. What that means is that peacebuilding is inextricably linked to building a culture of dialogue and resolving differences, without which signed peace agreements tend to be short-lived. Secondly, peacebuilding is not a transitional stage for States, but rather a permanent duty, as it not only implies an end to armed conflict but also the building of public institutions and the development of civic awareness to anchor such efforts. Thirdly, it is evident that peacebuilding must prioritize putting an end to widespread violence. That is why the first goal is the cessation of violence and a peace agreement among the belligerent parties. But in order to ensure the sustainability of that goal, there must be a reduction in the inequality and exclusivity that caused the conflict, accompanied by the pursuit of a culture of peace that will transform social attitudes. Those are tasks for the entire society. We believe that the PBC should not work almost exclusively on a limited number of cases in a specific subregion, as its vocation is universal and permanent — in line with the relevant resolutions, which call for those very changes. Fourthly, in contrast with other topics such as sustainable development, human rights and others for which the United Nations has developed the vision and tools to enable it to better carry out its universal tasks, in the case of peace both the vision and tools are still being developed and the practices derived from those weaknesses tend to focus solely on certain aspects of the phenomenon and are no longer comprehensive. On other occasions, there is an attempt to implement solutions that succeeded elsewhere without considering their feasibility or adaptability to the new contexts of peace to which they are being applied. Fifthly, we therefore believe it is necessary to expand the focus of the Commission in order to give it the ability to broaden its scope, while always prioritizing the most urgent cases. In addition, with appropriate care and with budgetary and political limitations in mind, we must provide the dynamics and tools that will enable it to carry out the new strategy. Finally, El Salvador calls on all countries that have had success in peacebuilding to share their experiences and good practices with the rest of us. El Salvador has gone through several stages during its process of national reconciliation, but it still faces significant challenges to the creation of a peaceful society with security for its citizens. We are ready to share our experience and to receive the wisdom of other societies, which undoubtedly will be of great help.

I thank the President of the General Assembly for having organized this joint debate. I also thank the Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission for the report (A/71/768) on the its tenth session, and the Secretary-General for his report (A/71/792) on the Peacebuilding Fund. The adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, in 2015, and the twin resolutions (General Assembly resolution 70/262 and Security Council resolution 2282 (2016)) the following year on the United Nations peacebuilding architecture set the stage for addressing the challenges to peace and development through a more coherent, comprehensive and coordinated United Nations system. The resolutions broadened the scope of peacebuilding so as to encompass the entire peace continuum, with particular interest in preventing conflict and relapse into crisis, and also laid the foundations of a system-wide United Nations approach to create synergies and complementarities among United Nations organs towards sustaining peace. Turkey fully agrees with that comprehensive approach, which embraces development, peace and security, and human rights as interlinked and mutually reinforcing pillars of the overall United Nations activities. The first World Humanitarian Summit, held in Istanbul in May 2016, also sought to further strengthen that framework, with a particular focus on addressing humanitarian crises, in order to prevent conflict and sustain peace. We are pleased to see that our emphasis on humanitarian efforts was also echoed by the Secretary- General in his inaugural speech (see A/71/PV.60). Turkey also supports his initiative towards a surge in diplomacy for peace, as well as his agenda to develop a broader framework for prevention that aims to give momentum to the efforts towards sustaing peace. It is against that backdrop that Turkey is organizing the fourth Istanbul Conference on Mediation on 30 June to explore the untapped potential of mediation in conflict prevention and sustainable peace. Firmly convinced of the need to address the root causes of crises in order to achieve sustaining peace, Turkey believes that the Conference will also provide an opportunity to engage in a broader spectrum of contemporary tensions, including all sorts of discriminatory trends in all parts of the world. The Peacebuilding Commission, with its convening power, is best placed to provide strategic advice to the relevant United Nations bodies in support of the long-term objective of sustaining peace, as well as country-specific assistance to nations in transition through capacity-building and increasing resilience. The ongoing arrangements to expand the scope of the Peacebuilding Commission through the inclusion of additional countries or regions to its agenda can enhance United Nations efforts of conflict prevention and sustaining peace. However, that will require more predictable and adequate financial resources, which might be further developed by enlarging the spectrum of stakeholders, including through partnerships with international financial institutions to sustain the Peacebuilding Fund. At the World Humanitarian Summit, we pledged a new multi-year financial package of $1 million to support the Fund. Turkey also continues to contribute to the pursuit of sustainable development goals at the global level through its development assistance and humanitarian aid programmes. It puts forth a genuine political effort, including through mediation, to support the peaceful settlement of disputes and to prevent and solve conflicts at the regional and international levels. We are working closely with the relevant United Nations and its specialized agencies to develop and implement comprehensive strategies to address the security, development and humanitarian challenges in the field. Our financial support to various United Nations agencies, departments, programmes and funds has increased over the years, and Turkey has become an important voluntary contributor to the United Nations, beyond its assessed contributions.

We have heard the last speaker in this joint debate. The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda items 29, 61 and 110.