S/PV.5187Resumption1 Security Council

The President: I wish to remind all speakers, as my Foreign Minister indicated this morning, to limit their statements to no more than five minutes in order to enable the Council to carry out its work expeditiously. Delegations with lengthy statements are kindly requested to circulate the text in writing and to deliver a condensed version when speaking in the Chamber. The next speaker is the representative of Morocco, to whom I give the floor.

Mr. Bennouna (Morocco) (spoke in French): On behalf of the Moroccan delegation, I wish at the outset to thank you, Madam President, for your initiative to convene this debate on a question of such importance to the international community: peacebuilding. My delegation is pleased to note that peacebuilding remains a central concern of the United Nations system. Moreover, we are very pleased that, under your presidency, Madam, the Security Council will be making a major contribution to the reform of the United Nations. This question was indeed given special attention this year, during the consideration of the report of the Secretary-General entitled "In larger freedom: towards development, security and human rights for all" (A/59/2005). As we all know, the report contains a proposal to establish an intergovernmental Peacebuilding Commission. Many among us believe that the proposal could well become the object of consensus. The nature of most post-cold-war conflicts - which more often than not are based on ethnic, cultural or religious confrontation - means, even if those conflicts are subsequently internationalized, that they can have a devastating effect on the societies concerned. Hence, once United Nations efforts have succeeded in stabilizing a situation and putting a complete end to hostilities, it is very often necessary to tackle the daunting job of peacebuilding, in which former combatants must learn how to behave as new partners. They have to learn to join political parties or bodies working for human development. To achieve that, the short-term and medium-term support of the international community is essential in order to ensure the success of that delicate transitional period from the cessation of hostilities to the building of social consensus with the participation of all, with everyone assuming his or her rightful role. Rebuilding takes time, and it must take account of a series of often complex and interdependent factors such as disarmament, demobilization, reintegration and rehabilitation; security-sector reform; establishment of the rule of law; and good management of natural resources. When a country emerges from conflict, the first challenge relates to the rule of law: formulating appropriate, coherent norms and providing the resources needed to implement them; establishing procedures for the settlement of disputes; and putting in place the appropriate judicial structures. If the conflict had been a theatre of serious crimes against human peace and security, it is essential that the perpetrators of such crimes not go unpunished. Here again, the international community must provide assistance to ensure due process, either through international, joint or national tribunals, and with the possibility of establishing what have come to be called truth and reconciliation bodies provided with the necessary guarantees. By "necessary guarantees" we mean that certain guarantees should be attached to any amnesty that may be offered, apart from the compensation provided to victims. In our view, the right mix of those elements to combat impunity would make it possible to deal with crimes committed on a massive scale. Another challenge in any peacebuilding process lies in the area of democratization and good governance. Although we now agree on the goal of democratization, without which there can be no true sustainable development, we must take account of historical and cultural factors when determining the pace of democratization in any given society. We all have our historical baggage to carry. Unfortunately, many conflicts also revolve around the control of or access to natural resources. Accordingly, the main effort during the reconstruction phase or the peacebuilding phase has to be focused on dismantling war economies and on managing natural resources in the best interests of all of the people. In the relationship between the State concerned and its neighbours - we have many examples of this and the Council has tackled the most important examples, such as in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - the certification of certain precious commodities can be established. Monitoring mechanisms can be established in the United Nations in order to put an end to major transnational trafficking in these commodities. In recent years, the United Nations has, it is true, acquired a wealth of experience in peacebuilding, through a number of difficult undertakings, particularly in Africa. The majority of peacekeeping operations, decided on by the Security Council, today increasingly include a peacebuilding component. The multitude and diversity of stakeholders, however, make it difficult to elaborate a real strategy here. Interventions by various United Nations institutions - the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, bilateral donors and other non-governmental organizations - each acting in its area of competence, very often lack coherence. Peacebuilding activities are not coordinated with development cooperation activities, and this is an area where we believe that the United Nations can do better in terms of being effective at a time when many are talking about the need to improve the management of the Organization. However, this is a complex task, because none of the bodies within the United Nations system has an exclusive peacebuilding mandate. Governments that emerge from peace agreements need some time, and they need support properly to play their role of interlocutor vis-a-vis the international community - quite simply, to become legitimate. Peacekeeping operations decided on by the Council are given the necessary funding from assessed contributions, but this is not the case when it comes to peacebuilding activities, where resources are neither stable nor predictable. Furthermore, the pace of fundraising for peacebuilding programmes is often slow and is not in keeping with the urgency felt on the ground. The delays that we have seen in disbursements by financial institutions have often been a major obstacle to rapid action, notwithstanding the often very generous pledges made at various fundraising conferences. There are many examples - Sierra Leone, Liberia or Haiti, in particular, which the Council was discussing just yesterday. These problems must be resolved by designing better strategies whereby all stakeholders can participate right at the beginning of the peacebuilding effort, in particular as soon as the date has been set for the holding of elections, as in the case of Cote d'Ivoire or in Haiti. Financial and technical assistance should also be planned for, so that the structures that emerge from the elections can function normally and live up to the expectations of the people. Otherwise, there will be democracy, but there may also be a failure of democracy. Frequent regular meetings between the major donors, troop-contributing countries, financial institutions and the Governments concerned must take place in order to assess the situation and to elaborate strategies. Very modestly, my country, pursuant to its commitment to South-South cooperation, is entirely prepared to make a contribution in terms of the necessary technical assistance to be provided, for example by sending experts to help countries in the South and enabling them to benefit from our experience in development. Of course, the mandates of peacekeeping operations need to be more ambitious. They should include more peacebuilding activities, particularly during protracted conflicts. We are aware that there is no clear line of separation between peacekeeping and peacebuilding. This is the doctrine of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations. Rather, we are witnessing a gradual process where, for some time, peacekeeping and peacebuilding will coexist. The Secretary-General's proposal to establish a Peacebuilding Commission is an initial response to this question inasmuch as it provides an institutional framework to enable the various stakeholders to act together, target their activities and make them complementary. The peacebuilding fund, the shape of which is still vague, will, if it is set up, provide an appropriate response to the question of the unpredictability of resources. We all know that there is broad consensus to establish this Peacebuilding Commission which, according to Morocco, should be attached to the Security Council and to the Economic and Social Council. And why not also to the General Assembly, if the international community so decides? In that body, donors, financial institutions and experts should cooperate to make a success of the transitional process in countries emerging from conflict. When I say cooperate, it is not just the rich that cooperate; it is the rich and poor working together, achieving unity to help the poorest among us in the international community. Morocco hopes that our Heads of State and Government will give their agreement to the principles that will govern the future Commission, which will be a symbol of a chain of solidarity among countries and between generations.

The President: The next speaker on my list is the representative of Iceland, to whom I give the floor.

Mr. Hannesson (Iceland): Let me begin by thanking the Foreign Minister of Denmark for taking part in and presiding over the open debate this morning on post-conflict peacebuilding. I would also like to thank the Danish presidency for the useful discussion paper on this important subject. A year ago, when James Wolfensohn, President of the World Bank, addressed the Security Council, he reminded us that the first question of conflict prevention is to have a growing economy in which people share. He also referred to the remarkable World Bank study, Voices of the Poor, which made it clear that people in poor and conflict-ridden countries want to live in peace. They want opportunity and empowerment, not charity. The complex links between conflict, peace, development and security call for a multidimensional and multisectoral approach to peacebuilding. By addressing the root causes of conflict through reconciliation, institution-building and both political and economic transformation, durable peace can be established and the recurrence of conflict prevented. Local ownership, coordination of international efforts and harmonization of procedures are all essential for results. Additionally, regional organizations can play an instrumental role in bringing about long-term peace. The discussion paper provides an excellent overview of the key elements of peacebuilding efforts. I would like to focus my comments on one issue: the importance of the rapid and targeted deployment of civilian experts for a successful transition from peacekeeping to peacebuilding and subsequently building the foundations for long-term development. For a number of years, the Government of Iceland has operated a programme for the rapid deployment of civilian personnel to peacekeeping and peacebuilding missions. The programme, called the Icelandic Crisis Response Unit, maintains a roster of civilian experts who can join international missions on short notice. Our experience shows that there are many well- qualified civilian experts who are willing to be deployed on short notice to areas in which conditions are extremely challenging and for which, in the past, the international community has deemed military missions to be the only feasible option. We therefore believe that there is significant potential for further developing that approach, and we are pleased to see the idea of developing such a mechanism for the United Nations raised in the discussion paper. We are also aware that the Department of Peacekeeping Operations has been exploring that approach, and we strongly encourage the United Nations to continue that work actively. Experience in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Afghanistan, Kosovo and Sri Lanka has taught the Icelandic authorities the importance of finding a niche where we have a comparative advantage. As a smaller Member State, we seek out projects where we can bring special expertise to bear. In addition, allow me to mention five basic principles that we have drawn from our experience in the field. First, a mission must be well defined, with a clear strategy and clear objectives. Secondly, the involvement of the local population in both the planning and the implementation phases is highly desirable and in most cases is a prerequisite for a successful outcome. Thirdly, the prospects of sustainability must be emphasized at all stages, and civilian experts must demonstrate a strong will, motivation and the ability to transfer their technical expertise and practical know-how to their counterparts. Fourthly, partners must coordinate and cooperate at all levels to avoid the inherent failures of approaches that are insufficiently coordinated. Finally, a long-term perspective is important, because efforts should always be made to outline an exit strategy from the very beginning of a peacebuilding operation. The termination of a conflict does not guarantee sustainable peace. A comprehensive and long-term peacebuilding operation is a necessary continuation of a successful peacekeeping process. I am certain that the discussion here today will cast valuable light on how the United Nations can continue to improve its approach to peacebuilding. I would like to conclude by reaffirming what we have already said in the General Assembly: Iceland fully supports the proposal of the Secretary-General to establish a Peacebuilding Commission.

The President: I now give the floor to the representative of South Africa.

Mr. Kumalo (South Africa): Allow me to congratulate you, Madam, on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for the month of May. This debate is certainly timely in the context of our ongoing collective effort to strengthen the capacities of the United Nations to assist countries emerging from conflict to attain lasting and durable peace. There is general agreement that addressing the long-term needs of countries emerging from conflict requires a high degree of coordination and coherence among the various international actors supporting peacebuilding. Peacebuilding goes beyond disarmament, demobilization and reintegration and beyond giving the necessary assistance to refugees. It also involves longer-term needs such as reviving the economy, rebuilding infrastructure, strengthening the rule of law and establishing democratic institutions. Addressing those long-term needs is vital if we are to prevent a recurrence or a slide back into conflict. In other words, if the United Nations is to be successful, there needs to be a focal point that deals with peacebuilding in a comprehensive manner. In his report entitled "In larger freedom" (A/59/2005), the Secretary-General too acknowledges that significant deficits remain in the planning, financing and implementation capacities of the United Nations system. As a result, he has proposed the establishment of a Peacebuilding Commission. When a conflict is at its peak, there is usually a myriad of interventions, starting with the involvement of the Security Council in carrying out its mandate for maintaining international peace and security. Once the conflict subsides, all the interventions gradually disappear. Yet, experience has taught us that this is the most critical stage of conflict resolution since it is a stage when peace agreements are most fragile and need to be consolidated. The challenge we face in our own African-led peace initiatives is gaining the necessary political, moral and material support from the international community to ensure an effective transition from immediate security and humanitarian needs to long- term development, which is a prerequisite for sustainable peace. Over the past several years, both the Security Council and the Economic and Social Council have come to recognize the importance of comprehensive and long-term strategies for peacebuilding. The establishment of the Economic and Social Council's ad hoc advisory groups on countries emerging from conflict, designed initially for Burundi and Guinea- Bissau and, more recently, Haiti, bear testimony to that awareness. We also note with appreciation that the Secretariat has tried to exert efforts to ensure a common approach to the work of United Nations agencies, particularly those operating in conflict countries. However, as we have learned in both Burundi and Guinea-Bissau, for conflict resolution to be effective, there is a need to engage other role players, such as international donors and the Bretton Woods institutions, which already have their own programmes in support of peacebuilding. The challenge is to harness the efforts of all role players early enough to ensure coordination from the start. Because it often takes donors a long time to give critical support to countries that have just emerged from conflict, particularly in the context of disarmament, demobilization and reintegration, it would be important for the United Nations to take responsibility by financing that important step from assessed contributions until such time as other resources are secured. We believe that the establishment of a Peacebuilding Commission would go a long way towards bridging those gaps, and we have therefore supported the Secretary-General's proposal for the creation of such a mechanism. Countries in post- conflict situations face significant challenges to the establishment of lasting peace. Failure to properly address those challenges could precipitate further conflict or result in a sharp decline in social and economic progress. If strategies to deal with those challenges are to be effective and successful, they have to be comprehensive in nature and address the root causes and negative consequences of the conflict. We wish to reaffirm that the United Nations has a vital and fundamental role to play in post-conflict situations. It is the only organization that has the unique experience of helping people rebuild their countries after the ruin of armed conflict. We believe that the proposed Peacebuilding Commission can provide the much-needed coordination. We welcome you, Mr. Minister, to New York. Your presence indicates how important this issue is.

The President: I thank the representative of South Africa for his kind words. I now give the floor to the representative of Egypt.

Mr. Abdelaziz (Egypt) (spoke in Arabic): At the outset, I would like to welcome you, Mr. Minister, in our midst here in New York as you preside over this meeting. The delegation of Egypt appreciates your timely initiative to convene this meeting, which will help strengthen constructive dialogue on the proposals for enhancing the United Nations role in peacebuilding and in addressing institutional gaps in the multilateral mechanisms that are needed following a peace agreement and during the transition from peacekeeping to peacebuilding. It is our view that the Secretary-General's proposal in the context of United Nations reform to establish an intergovernmental Peacebuilding Commission reflects the realities and results of and changes in armed conflict, especially in Africa. In that respect, I should like to offer certain thoughts as our contribution to this discussion on the dimensions and framework of the peacebuilding issue, particularly in its institutional manifestations. First, the United Nations has had notable successes in conflict situations, such as in Angola, Mozambique and Guatemala, not to mention its ever greater success in addressing such delicate and complex situations as those in Sierra Leone, Kosovo and Timor-Leste. That reflects the need for common political will among all parties to a conflict, the international community and regional Powers to overcome crises and meet the challenges of establishing peace and stability. Secondly, a peacebuilding contract is based on the fact that security and political cooperation in the post-conflict phase cannot be successful without a comprehensive framework for addressing the social and economic dimensions of the conflict. The establishment of such a comprehensive framework must begin at an early stage of a peacekeeping mission so as to allow the implementation of all its components and elements in a timely manner, as soon as relative security has been ensured, and with continuity and sustainability when the mission has fulfilled its mandate. It is therefore necessary to identify the coordinating role of the United Nations agencies and regional Powers concerned and to agree on a schedule for drawing down a peacekeeping mission and moving on to the phase of social and economic development. Thirdly, experience has exposed the limitations of the Security Council's vital role in the maintenance of international peace and security. Those limitations have become apparent in situations in which conflict has resumed, most notably in Liberia and Haiti. Although the Council invested much time and effort in those conflicts, it was unable to provide sustained international attention and support for the work of rebuilding the State and addressing the social and economic root causes of the crises. Indeed, we cannot imagine how the Security Council could find the time, energy or even the capacity to coordinate the roles of all the relevant United Nations political and development bodies, mechanisms and agencies, nor can we conceive its assuming the functions of the Economic and Social Council, the General Assembly and other bodies endowed with special mandates under the Charter. Most of the United Nations inability to deal with post-conflict situations is due to the blurring of the lines between peacebuilding and peacekeeping and between the mandates of the Security Council, the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council, not to mention the roles of the international financial institutions and donor countries. The proposal to establish the intergovernmental Peacebuilding Commission is important in that respect, as it would be a focal point for coordinating the roles of the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council and the Security Council pursuant to their respective mandates and the Charter, as well as the roles of the specialized agencies and the international donor community. In that context, I would stress the importance of the proposal to developing countries in particular, given that Africa, inter alia, is looking to the United Nations to play a central role in peacebuilding. In that context, I would emphasize the following criteria. First, the Commission should act at the official request of the concerned State or interim authorities for its assistance. Second, the nature, timing and scope of assistance should be determined in accordance with the specific needs of any given State. Third, the Commission's mandate should be limited to post- conflict situations, and especially to meeting direct and urgent needs in the areas of rehabilitation, reintegration, reconstruction, national reconciliation, and in particular the strengthening of institutional and human capacities. Fourth, the Commission should make every effort to avoid duplication and to distribute its resources equitably. Fifth, criteria and conditions should be identified for determining the end of a Commission mission in any given State. Sixth, the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council and the Security Council should be entrusted with monitoring the Commission's work, pursuant to their respective mandates. Seventh, representatives of the Secretariat, the United Nations agencies and programmes, international and regional financial institutions, national and interim State authorities, and regional and subregional organizations should be invited to attend the Commission's meetings in order to coordinate their roles and avoid duplication. The delegation of Egypt has distributed integrated proposals to all Members of the Organization in relation to the implementation of the idea of establishing the Commission, based on the United Nations peacebuilding activities. The Egyptian delegation is motivated by its dedication to the idea of genuine reform of the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council, the Security Council and the Secretariat. The High-level Meeting in September will adopt many institutional reforms, and that endeavour should be accompanied by the extensive reform of all agencies and organizations whose work is linked to that of the United Nations in addressing multilateral challenges in all fields and in meeting collective security requirements in their broadest possible definition and in all their political, security, economic and social dimensions, taking into consideration existing mandates and the need for complementarity in their implementation.

The President: I now call on the representative of Ukraine.

Mr. Kuchinsky (Ukraine): Ukraine fully aligns itself with the statement made by the Permanent Representative of Luxembourg on behalf of the European Union. We welcome today's debate as a logical continuation of a number of discussions held by the Security Council over the past several years on subjects related to peacebuilding. We also recognize the additional relevance and value of this discussion in the light of the ongoing deliberations in the General Assembly and elsewhere on the creation of the Peacebuilding Commission. My delegation would like to thank the Danish presidency for convening this timely and very important meeting and for the submission of the focused discussion paper for today's debate. We are also grateful to the Deputy Secretary-General and the President of the World Bank for their important and thought-provoking statements today, and to the high dignitaries taking part in today's discussion. Ukraine welcomes the fact that the issue of peacebuilding is becoming increasingly topical for the United Nations. Indeed, the United Nations peacebuilding efforts are in great demand all over the world. It is a well- known fact that almost half of all countries that emerge from war lapse back into violence within a few years. Rebuilding the State and its institutions, establishing effective and democratic governance and the rule of law, as well as ensuring an environment of security to help countries in transition from war to lasting peace requires a comprehensive approach to peacebuilding. In our view, such an approach should take into account the existing links among conflict prevention, peacekeeping, peacemaking and peacebuilding and should thus be aimed at preserving the results achieved and preventing the recurrence of armed conflict. It should also be based on an understanding of the interdependence among sustainable peace, security and development. Obviously, the implementation of such a comprehensive strategy requires effective interaction, cooperation and division of labour among all international partners including the relevant United Nations bodies, Member States, international financial institutions, non-governmental organizations, local stakeholders and other players. The Security Council undoubtedly has an outstanding role to play in peacebuilding efforts, especially in the immediate aftermath of a conflict. The Council has already undertaken to include peacebuilding elements in the mandates of peacekeeping operations in order to ensure a smooth transition to a successful post- conflict phase. At the same time, we believe that when a country approaches the phase of moving from transitional recovery towards long-term development, it is the Economic and Social Council that should take over the leading role in coordinating the relevant activities of the international community. I would also like to acknowledge the important role of the General Assembly in mapping out general peacebuilding strategies, as well as that of the Secretary-General. Considering the complexity of peacebuilding activities, there can be no one-size-fits- all recipe. Each given situation requires dialogue and cooperation among a number of actors, including local stakeholders. Fostering local ownership is an important element of ensuring the sustainability of peacebuilding efforts. Early involvement, where necessary, of regional and subregional organizations would also contribute to the goals of peacekeeping. In conclusion, I wish to reiterate Ukraine's support for the creation of a Peacebuilding Commission. In our view, the Commission could fill the institutional gap in the United Nations and help to overcome many existing challenges in the United Nations peacebuilding machinery. Ukraine supports, in principle, the Secretary- General's proposals and ideas as to the functions and modalities of that body and hopes that the decision to establish the Commission will be among the major outcomes of the United Nations summit in September 2005.

The President: I now give the floor to the representative of Malaysia.

Mr. Rastam (Malaysia): I wish to congratulate you, Sir, on presiding over today's meeting and to congratulate your delegation on its assumption of the presidency of the Security Council this month. I should like to thank your delegation for taking this timely initiative to consider issues of post-conflict peacebuilding in an open debate of the Council with the participation of the larger membership of the United Nations. My delegation has taken note with keen interest of the statements of the Deputy Secretary-General and the President of the World Bank. My delegation extends its sincere appreciation to Denmark for the non-paper on post-conflict peacebuilding (S/2OOS/3l6, annex), which provides a sound basis for today's discussion. We are particularly impressed by the comprehensive and thought-provoking approach in the non-paper highlighting very important and relevant questions related to current policy, institutional and financial challenges in post-conflict peacebuilding. My delegation fully subscribes to the view that the United Nations should play a key role in post- conflict peacebuilding in order to prevent the resurgence of conflict, help countries put back in place the foundations of normal life, and move societies towards sustainable peace. That normally involves a multifaceted process and a multidimensional mandate covering a full range of issues and activities. Clearly, there are major policy, institutional and financial challenges that need to be addressed. That would require policy coherence and better coordination involving the United Nations, the parties emerging from conflict, local stakeholders, international institutions, donors and other actors. It is important to ensure that there exists an adequate and conducive enabling and supporting environment. In that regard, we welcome the consideration of possible regional approaches to meeting the challenges of post-conflict peacebuilding. Malaysia concurs with the View that each post- conflict situation generates its own unique set of circumstances. There is no single peacebuilding model that can fit all situations. The United Nations has to tailor its activities to specific situations on a case-by-case basis. We agree with the View that ways must be found to ensure greater ownership and capacity among local actors to ensure a more acceptable, implementable and sustainable post-conflict peacebuilding programme. In that regard, due attention must be given to local norms and values, cultural and religious traditions and capacity to respond. By now, the United Nations and the international community have had sufficient experience to put together best practices from past situations to deal with future challenges. We would support consideration of establishing a civilian rapid deployment mechanism consisting of judges, administrators, police and election observers on a stand-by basis for United Nations missions. Malaysia is fully cognizant of the need for a comprehensive strategy in promoting peacebuilding efforts. Currently, however, there is no clear institutional mechanism for the formulation of such a comprehensive strategy. We think that the ongoing deliberations in the General Assembly on the possible modalities of a Peacebuilding Commission and other reform proposals can help clarify and redress the institutional deficit. Malaysia welcomes and supports the establishment of a Peacebuilding Commission. However, I wish to reiterate our view that, without any prejudice to the competence and roles of the other principal organs of the United Nations in post-conflict peacebuilding activities, the General Assembly must also have the key role in the formulation of post-conflict peacebuilding activities. The implementation of post-conflict peacebuilding activities requires full consultation with and the consent of the parties concerned and should be based on the principles of international law and the United Nations Charter.

The President: I now give the floor to the representative of Norway.

Mr. Lflvald (Norway): My delegation welcomes Denmark's initiative to hold this very important open debate. In our view, there are four broad gaps in current peacebuilding doctrine and practice. These are: the lack of coherent planning of broad peacebuilding operations; the lack of sufficient clarity of the activities and cooperation among all actors in the field; the lack of coherence among actors involved in peacekeeping, humanitarian and long-term development efforts; and finally, the lack of adequate coordination within the United Nations system. The proposed Peacebuilding Commission and the corresponding Peacebuilding Support Office will go a long way in addressing the aforementioned shortcomings. We also believe that the Peacebuilding Commission could serve as a most useful tool for enhanced donor coordination and interaction. In order to forge stronger cooperation among the United Nations actors involved, key leadership and management issues need to be addressed. As far as the Special Representatives of the Secretary-General are concerned, their mandates need to be clarified. Also, roles, functions and modalities for cooperation among the various United Nations actors in the field must be more clearly specified. Finally, the need for a more integrated United Nations at the country level must be combined with the need to reflect the conceptual and operational divisions among military, political, humanitarian and development- oriented action. The United Nations has both a comparative advantage and a clear role to play in peacebuilding. Its experience in conflict areas and its technical expertise are unique. Furthermore, the United Nations is present before, during and after a conflict and is thus well placed to provide assessments of, and strategic planning for, peacebuilding efforts. For the United Nations to play that role, close and continuous cooperation between all relevant parts of the system is necessary. A sound division of labour, based on comparative advantage, among Secretariat units, funds and programmes, and agencies is the only viable approach. However, the various aspects of peacebuilding are interrelated, and competencies and relative advantages may vary from country to country. Thus, a clearer division of labour cannot replace the need for close and flexible cooperation among the various United Nations actors. It is our view that we also have to look beyond the United Nations itself. It is neither realistic nor desirable for the United Nations to be the only provider of technical expertise to broad peacebuilding operations. Regional organizations should be given important roles. The division of labour between the United Nations and regional organizations should be based on the principle of subsidiarity. In that context, donors should also revisit their funding formats to facilitate long-term cooperation at the regional level. Assistance is often negligible during the most critical period after a peace settlement. That persistent funding gap needs to be addressed as an integral part of the overall response to post-conflict peacebuilding. It is our view that all activities included in the mandates should be financed by assessed contributions. In addition to the limitation of funds, the funding rules and regulations of agencies do not support the flexibility that complex peacebuilding efforts demand. A standing fund for peacebuilding, as proposed by the Secretary-General, could, if properly designed and adequately funded, help substantially in addressing that problem. There is little chance of institutionalizing democracy if peacebuilding itself is not democratically organized and accountable to local partners. The involvement of local actors in peacebuilding policy- making is also crucial to assist in ensuring a better match between assistance and local absorptive capacity. Swift assistance in establishing key State functions and institutions is crucial in that regard. This has to be supplemented by support for civil society at an early stage of the post-conflict phase. Externally funded community projects supporting socio-economic development are necessary in order to provide a sense of purpose to communities divided by conflict. Finally, we need to be more creative in identifying ways and means to implement Security Council resolution 1325 (2000). True local ownership implies the involvement of entire populations. Efforts to build peace are less likely to succeed if women do not play their rightful role. Nearly five years after the adoption of that resolution, women are still scarce around negotiating tables, in constitution-making bodies and in political councils. As we continue this debate, we need to recognize that, despite the comparative advantages of the United Nations in peacebuilding, there are limitations as to what the Organization can achieve. Success and progress must be judged against a realistic standard.

The President: The next speaker on my list is the representative of Ghana, to whom I give the floor.

Mr. Tachie-Menson (Ghana): Mr. President, I would like to commend you at the outset for having convened this meeting, which offers the Council an invaluable opportunity to undertake an assessment of the agenda item under consideration, and for your effective steering of the affairs of the Council this month. The Security Council, in conformity with its Charter mandate, has considered and authorized United Nations peacekeeping operations. That responsibility has been discharged commendably, given the United Nations success story in such operations. Despite the accomplishments registered, there is no doubt that the peacekeeping story has not been wholly glorious - a manifestation of the fact that this organ has on certain occasions failed to carry out its responsibilities effectively. It is in this regard that my delegation welcomed the reports of the High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change and the report of the Secretary- General and their identification of the fact that there is a fundamental institutional gap within the United Nations system with respect to forestalling a State in crisis from plunging into war or to assisting it in ensuring that the transition is made from war to peace. My delegation also concurs, in principle, with the Panel and with the Secretary-General's recommendation that a Peacebuilding Commission be established to effectively address that gap. It is heart-warming to recognize that the proposal enjoys widespread support among Member States. That positive reaction is a clear testimony of Member States' recognition of the need to address the shortfalls in United Nations peacekeeping operations, particularly during the post-conflict period. Peacebuilding has in recent years emerged as an increasingly indispensable aspect of the various elements that constitute international peace operations. It is now widely acknowledged that, to achieve genuine closure of violent conflict situations, concerted efforts need to be made to put in place structures that would effectively dissipate lingering tensions. In this connection, it has been rightly observed that there is a need to ensure, right from the outset of peace initiatives, effective coordination, coherence and continuity among the various elements of the overall strategy of such operations - in particular between peacekeeping operations on the one hand and possible transitions into peacebuilding operations on the other. Since attempts to secure a lasting peace in the aftermath of most violent conflicts around the globe necessarily requires sustained support from the United Nations and its development and humanitarian partners, efforts should be enhanced to encourage closer cooperation among all relevant United Nations agencies, funds and programmes, regional and subregional organizations and the private sector to achieve the desired objectives. In our opinion, the idea of the creation of an authoritative intergovernmental mechanism capable of establishing a substantive link between security and development and of ensuring the development of an integrated mission plan, with adequate coordination among the various intergovernmental and national donor agencies, warrants universal support, as it would buttress efforts towards optimizing synergies for recovery and reconstruction. The intricate link between development and security has been generally acknowledged. In that connection, given the development and security components of all post-conflict peacebuilding efforts, we cannot but concur with the proposal to place the Peacebuilding Commission under the joint authority of the Security Council and the Economic and Social Council but to establish it by the authority of the General Assembly. For us, whatever decision is taken on the location of such a body should take into account all of the development and security elements, as well as the need for inclusiveness, maximum participation, genuine partnership and a balanced assessment of the security and humanitarian dimensions of post-conflict situations. In that connection, we support the Secretary-General's view that the mandate of the proposed Commission should be mainly focused on post-conflict peacebuilding. Also, for the Commission to achieve general acceptance, it should be of an advisory nature and not have decision-making powers. Furthermore, my delegation endorses the Secretary-General's proposal that, in the event of the establishment of the Peacebuilding Commission, the Commission should report to the Security Council and the Economic and Social Council sequentially, and not jointly, to avoid duplication and confusion. In terms of the Commission's composition, my delegation would prefer equal regional representation from the Security Council and the Economic and Social Council. In addition, officials from the relevant United Nations departments, agencies, funds and programmes, as well as representatives of national authorities and regional or subregional organizations could be invited to participate in its meetings and activities. Given the developmental role of the Commission, the involvement of regional and international financial institutions is also an imperative. In fairness, we would like to note that the acknowledged gap between relief and development has been to a degree narrowed down, albeit modestly, by the recent inclusion of funds for disarmament and demobilization as part of the assessed budget. That notwithstanding, serious gaps continue to impede efforts aimed at the reintegration of ex-combatants and displaced persons, the training and deployment of indigenous police forces, judicial reform, and other essential elements of peacebuilding. Thus, in view of the fact that it usually takes some time before resources can be mobilized for demobilization, disarmament and reintegration (DDR) programmes at the end of a conflict, the proposed institution of a peacebuilding fund could play a crucial role in post-conflict peacebuilding and assist in the implementation of DDR programmes. My delegation would further like to recognize the gender perspective in peacebuilding. The vital contribution of women in promoting peace, and their role in peacebuilding processes in particular, should not be overlooked. We wish to encourage all relevant initiatives geared towards the full participation of women in all stages of peace operations as part of the requisite gender mainstreaming. This would ensure that all policies and programmes adopted in peacebuilding would promote the full interests and participation of women, gender equality and respect for women's human rights. I would like to recall that our experiences in West Africa reveal that certain sister States such as Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea-Bissau could have benefited from the existence of an effective institutionalized peacebuilding mechanism. We share the Council's belief, stated in its presidential statement (S/PRST/2005/9) of 25 February 2005 in connection with its consideration of the agenda item entitled "Cross-border issues in West Africa", that action on cross-border and subregional issues should take place as part of a wider strategy of conflict prevention, crisis management and peacebuilding in the subregion. We add our voice to that of the Council in calling for the further promotion of an integrated approach in that regard with the Economic Community of West African States and the African Union, as well as other key international partners and civil society organizations. The establishment of a Peacebuilding Commission is, therefore, of paramount importance to Africa. Ghana's strong support of the proposed Commission was reflected in its decision to jointly host, with the Danish Government, a recent meeting in Accra to deliberate on the concept. We cannot overemphasize the need for concerted international action to strengthen the enfeebled capacity of Governments and ensuring security sector reforms aimed at improving civil-military relations in countries emerging from conflict situations, with a view to creating a culture of peace and stability and promoting the rule of law. In this regard, another issue which merits serious consideration by the proposed Peacebuilding Commission is the need for the expeditious granting of assistance for reconstruction processes to meet the immediate requirements of deprived populations. A major inhibiting factor over the years has been the lack of early access to substantial development aid, with its attendant adverse effect on long-term reconstruction and development. Such situations invariably undermine the objective of promoting sustainable security. Against that backdrop of an imperative need for concrete peacebuilding measures in contemporary peace operations so as to mitigate costly relapses into cycles of conflict, my delegation associates itself with the emerging consensus within this Organization to effectively and coherently put in place an institutional remedy to assist in ensuring a seamless transition from war to lasting peace. The ultimate goal should be to move beyond the simple extension of temporary relief to traumatized populations to meeting their expectation of an enabling environment for the attainment of sustainable peace.

The President: The next speaker is the representative of Chile, to whom I give the floor.

Mr. Mufioz (Chile) (spoke in Spanish): I would like to thank the Danish presidency for having chosen the subject of post-conflict peacebuilding for the Council's thematic debate this month. The international community has taken note of the enormous growth in United Nations peace operations over the past two decades. In the case of every such operation, once hostilities ceased, the United Nations set in motion an operation that was as just difficult, if not more so: post-conflict peacebuilding. This is an enormously complex challenge that is necessary because of the trauma inflicted on societies as a result of the often protracted armed conflicts that have torn them apart. Peacebuilding demands, first of all, that we take a multidimensional approach to the search for a solution to the causes of conflict, generating minimum security conditions while making it possible to restore law and order and to lay the foundations for political, social and economic rehabilitation. That is why we believe it essential that peace missions should have a comprehensive, multidimensional, long-term mandate that provides them with the tools and resources they need to assist transitional Governments in the task of institutional and economic reconstruction of States emerging from conflict. In the context of that holistic view of a peacebuilding mission, it is of fundamental importance that we seek inclusive political processes, involving all sectors of society that are prepared to renounce violence, so as to achieve a social contract that makes it possible to generate a sustainable climate of peace and security. To that end, it is essential to ensure the creation of a wide-ranging national dialogue that brings together all the relevant political forces. Often, the root causes of conflict are poverty, hunger and underdevelopment. Thus, security and development are essential components that are mutually reinforcing. Once a conflict is over, it is vital that the international community, while helping to create political stability and a safe environment, provide a level of resources that makes it possible to tackle the most urgent needs of the population and help transitional Governments to prepare quick-impact strategies and develop medium- and long-term development programmes and projects. We believe that the Economic and Social Council, through its ad hoc advisory groups, can make a substantial long-term contribution to that effort. The United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH) provides a clear example of such a situation. The United Nations operation in Haiti is clearly a fourth-generation peace mission, whose goal is not merely the suppression of violence. Its task is a complex one, ranging from creating or strengthening democratic institutions and ensuring full respect for human rights to the modernization of legislation, the consolidation of political parties, the reform of the judicial and penal systems and, last but not least, the restructuring and professionalization of the national police. Such situations can be found elsewhere, too. Although I do not intend to speak at length on the Secretary-General's recommendations in the context of the United Nations reform process, we must point to the desirability of creating a Peacebuilding Commission designed to help countries go beyond the transitional phase between armed conflict and the restoration of national institutions and to help them overcome the trauma of conflict. In addition, the initiative to create within the Secretariat a Rule of Law Assistance Unit to cooperate with national initiatives to restore the rule of law in societies that have been or are still in conflict is a very positive one that will make it possible to enhance our approach to issues of the rule of law and reconciliation in the post-conflict phase. We also believe that involving local people in the elaboration and implementation of post-conflict strategies at an early stage is decisive in making such strategies more acceptable, viable and sustainable. That not only achieves the vital goal of involving the beneficiaries themselves in the process, but also optimizes its implementation, since this depends on local experience and knowledge. We also believe that we must keep in mind the regional context of a conflict. Thus, from its inception, a mission must factor regional synergies into the peacebuilding process. In this context, we should bear in mind the increasingly important complementary contribution that various regional organizations can make in ensuring stable solutions. Along with those elements, it is essential to be able to rely on sufficient financial and human resources to carry out the peace missions mandated by the Security Council. Those resources are all the more necessary in the first phases of a mission, when there is especially urgent need among the population. That initial encounter will determine the level of trust between the members of the peace mission and the population as regards the task ahead. Once the emergency phase is over, it is sometimes difficult to rely on the resources pledged by the international community to implement ongoing projects; such a situation can ultimately undermine the timely and successful outcome of those projects. It is precisely because we are convinced about the tremendous importance of post-conflict peacebuilding missions that we believe that we must continue to do all we can to improve them, starting with the planning, deployment and execution phases. Each success helps lay the foundations for the political, economic and social development of peoples, for the establishment of the rule of law and for respect for human rights; this paves the road for long-desired peace and stability in countries and regions previously torn by violence.

The President: I now give the floor to the representative of Slovakia.

Mr. Burian (Slovakia): Slovakia fully associates itself with the statement delivered by the Permanent Representative of Luxembourg on behalf of the European Union. My delegation wishes to add several observations and comments in its national capacity. My country has been playing an active role in peacekeeping and peacebuilding efforts in various parts of the world for many years, and has thus assumed its share of responsibility for the strengthening and protection of values and principles that the United Nations stands for. Ample experience in peacekeeping has provided us with a whole new dimension of understanding of the depth and complexity of the challenges and threats to global peace and security. Slovakia stands ready to share all the expertise and experience it has gained with its partners, States Members of the United Nations. Not a great deal of time has passed since Europe, especially its eastern part, underwent major political changes connected, at least in some cases, with difficult security challenges. Although not all the problematic issues have yet been entirely overcome, the final outcomes, luckily, have been mostly positive. That has been so. Thanks in large part to the positive role played by regional formations and regional organizations. In addition to the European Union and NATO, I have in mind the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and its active role in a wide range of areas, such as free elections, the building of democratic institutions, the reform of public administration, et cetera. We argue for the further widening and strengthening of United Nations cooperation with regional organizations such as the European Union, NATO, the OSCE and the Council of Europe in the area of building stability and peace. Their ample expertise, experience and proven and established best practices could be of great benefit wherever necessary. Also, I would like to particularly emphasize the role of civil society and non-governmental organizations in post-conflict peacebuilding. As our own experience has well proven, they are the ones who can ensure greater ownership and capacity-building at the local level, and who can make a great contribution to the implementation of strategies and to the proper delivery of tasks. In that regard, Slovakia has in recent years been particularly active in the western Balkans. We have had wide experience in providing good offices to the countries of the western Balkans. Just this past weekend, Bratislava hosted another international conference on development in the western Balkans. In his speech at the conference, His Excellency Mr. Eduard Kukan, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Slovak Republic and former Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for the Balkans, said, "The future of the western Balkans region lies, above all else, in deepening collaboration and building trust". In that respect, we think it appropriate to point out another positive role played by a regional formation - the Visegrad Four, comprising the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia. Throughout the 19905 and in the first years of this century, especially during the processes of the accession of its four members into the European and transatlantic structures, and to the present day, the Visegrad Four has been tremendously helpful in enhancing political dialogue and the atmosphere of mutual trust, cooperation and good-neighbourly relations. That has been the case in spite of the Visegrad Four being only an informal formation, with no institutional framework necessary. As our experience shows, the development of this kind of regional cooperation can be an important factor in peacebuilding and in strengthening regional stability. We have learned this lesson ourselves; that is why we have been advising our friends, especially those from the western Balkans, that areas such as the intensification of political dialogue in the broadest sense of the word, the development of economic cooperation, exchanges of students and teachers and cultural cooperation are the motive forces for further democratic change in individual countries. Still speaking of the western Balkans, we see the greatest dangers to the building of a democratic society in the region, including that of slipping back into conflict, above all in the underdeveloped state of civil society, the lack of development of the rule of law and the difficult economic situation. The latter provides fertile ground for corruption, extremism and organized crime. Stability is an important prerequisite for the building of a democratic society. Tomorrow the Security Council will hold an open debate on the situation in Kosovo. We believe that many of those factors need to be taken into account in the peaceful resolution of Kosovo's future status, too. Slovakia stands ready to continue playing an active and instructive role in this important process in whatever way necessary. As an added value, my country could now, among other things, offer its experts and their recent professional experience gained from the successful reform of our armed and security forces and the rapid re-establishment of the fundamental principles of the rule of law. Also, we have recently invested a great deal of financial resources and energy in enabling our armed and security forces to better address areas such as organized crime, the vulnerability of the information and communication systems and the role of non-State actors in possible acts of terrorism and in the threat of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. We regard the concept of the armed forces being an integral part of democratic institutions and processes and falling under proper civilian and parliamentary control as a significant element of sustainable peacebuilding efforts. We are also making every effort to be able to contribute further civilian and police capacities. We are hopeful that such personnel will be able to live up to the very positive reputation, earned in recent years, especially by our military engineers, deminers and paramedics. We are currently closely looking at ways and means to widen or enhance our offer of expert and training capacities - governmental as well as non- governmental - in fields such as accountable and transparent disarmament, demobilization and reintegration (DDR) programmes, reform of public administration, free elections, good governance, building of democratic institutions, economic and social reform, and so forth. We would welcome the creation of a United Nations standing list of such institutional and personnel capacities to be used whenever and wherever there is a need. Slovakia is ready to contribute appropriately to such a list. Substantial and lasting progress in the overall peace and security situation of any conflict can hardly be achieved without tangible improvement of the economic and social situation of ordinary people and without their feeling the benefits of the rule of law. By adopting effective measures in those areas, Slovakia has gradually moved from being a recipient of development assistance in the early 1990s into the present situation of being an emerging donor country now providing official development assistance to 14 partner countries in Europe, Asia and Africa. We have been supporting those countries' institutional capacities, infrastructure and living conditions and sharing our own experience from the ongoing transformation of our economic and social system. That is undoubtedly an indispensable part of the entire concept of peacebuilding. As we have done on previous occasions, we wish to express our strong support for the creation of a Peacebuilding Commission and for its four main purposes as proposed by the Secretary-General. We see that step as a prerequisite for abolishing the existing institutional gap. The urgent need to maintain peace and security in post- conflict situations and achieve long-term sustainable social and economic development must be addressed appropriately. In conclusion, let me thank you, Mr. President, for organizing this open debate and for presenting us with an excellent discussion paper (S/2005/316, annex). We would welcome it if this kind of valuable discussion were to continue and if it were to be followed up by further concrete, practical steps. In that connection, we think it would be worthwhile to consider, for instance, the organization of a United Nations conference on peacebuilding, transformation and stabilization to discuss best practices in the area of building peace and stability. I wish to assure the Council of my Government's keen support for all the peacebuilding efforts and endeavours of the United Nations. We are strongly committed to achieving the best possible results in all their aspects.

The President: The next speaker is the representative of Sierra Leone, to whom I give the floor.

Mr. Pemagbi (Sierra Leone): The delegation of Sierra Leone wishes to congratulate you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for the month of May 2005. We extend to you and to the other members of the Council our deep appreciation for selecting for public debate a subject that is closer to our heart than we can express. The choice of post-conflict peacebuilding as the subject of this debate is an indication of the significance that your delegation and the Council attach to that critical aspect of the peace process. We view this debate as a prelude to an opportunity for more exhaustive discussion of the Secretary-General's proposed Peacebuilding Commission. As all are aware, Sierra Leone is a post-conflict country. Naturally, we are delighted to participate in this debate, and we are doing so from the perspective of our practical experience and our expectations. The post-conflict phase of a peace process is supposed to address the issues that generated the conflict and to lay the foundation for lasting peace and development. It is a period for reconciliation, confidence- building and the rebuilding of institutions, especially those for the administration of justice, democracy, human rights and accountable governance. It is a period for a country in war-to-peace transition to reflect on the past and to cultivate attitudes that will facilitate the avoidance of the mistakes that culminated in the conflict. But it is also a phase that is characterized by expectations for a better standard of living, justice, human rights, freedom, rapid development, social services and, of course, participatory governance. After all, it is the lack of access to these that generates most conflicts in the world today. The fear and anxiety of post-conflict countries stem from a failure to deliver on those expectations, and, often, many post-conflict countries have neither the resources nor the capacity to deliver on them. Unfortunately, moreover, post-conflict peace management or consolidation has never been a priority of the international community. Making sure that the guns are silent, but not making sure that they are silent forever, has been erroneously interpreted as peace. Hence the bitter experience of frequent reverses in peace efforts. The problem of abandoning post-conflict countries to struggle with their own fate has been aptly described by the Secretary-General as "a gaping hole in the United Nations institutional machinery" (A/59/2005, para. 114). That is why Sierra Leone welcomes - and with great expectations - the Secretary-General's recommendation to create a Peacebuilding Commission charged with the responsibility of promoting assistance for post-conflict countries to transit from war to lasting peace. Naturally, we look forward to the establishment and operationalization of the Commission, particularly in the light of the withdrawal from my country of the United Nations Mission in Sierra Leone (UNAMSIL). It is common knowledge that the United Nations has scored major successes in Sierra Leone and that UNAMSIL is on the verge of completing its withdrawal. We appreciate the role of the United Nations organs and agencies in our post-conflict recovery, but we wish that no "gaping hole" existed and that the United Nations were more involved in this phase. In spite of that, and in spite of many difficulties, Sierra Leone is proud of its rapid progress in many areas, including rebuilding the justice system and strengthening the rule of law; raising new, better, trained, disciplined and efficient security forces; restoring social services; rehabilitating the road infrastructure; capacity-building; governance reforms; reviving the economy; reintegrating ex-combatants; and resettling the displaced population. We owe those developments to the generosity of the international community and our bilateral friends. We thank them all. But we need more - much more - to sustain the momentum for achieving lasting peace and stability. That is the most reliable guarantee against sliding back into conflict. In conclusion, it is fair to say that the United Nations is at a crossroads, poised for fundamental reform in response to identified weaknesses and strengths and to challenges imposed by its ever expanding functions. One of those challenges is armed conflict in all its aspects and manifestations. Now we have the unprecedented opportunity to take decisions on reforms and on the creation of new institutions for the elimination of armed conflict and, more urgently, for helping countries emerging from conflict to achieve lasting peace and stability. It is much better and much cheaper to invest in post-conflict peacebuilding, which is also preventive in nature, than to expend scarce resources on relapses that can be prevented.

The President: The next speaker is the representative of Cote d'Ivoire, to whom I give the floor.

Mr. Djangone-Bi (Cote d'Ivoire) (spoke in French): I wish at the outset, on behalf of my delegation, to congratulate you sincerely, Sir, on Denmark's assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for the month of May. You are presiding over the work of the Council at a time when the United Nations is discussing the great challenges facing the world: collective security, development and respect for human rights. I can assure you that my delegation supports all your initiatives. I wish also to thank you for having organized this debate on a topical theme, to which my country, Cote d'Ivoire - which has been at war since 19 September 2002 - attaches great importance. Further, I salute the Secretary-General's determination constantly to reassert the role of the Organization in peacebuilding and the maintenance of peace in the post-conflict phase. All the steps the Council has already taken in the sphere of post-conflict peacebuilding in countries emerging from conflict have proven to be extremely effective. These relate to restoring the rule of law and confidence in the impartiality of the judicial, security and penal systems; to arms embargoes; to the process of certifying the origin of natural resources in countries being assisted; to subregional efforts to monitor the movements of ex-combatants and the trafficking in women and children. Such measures have been useful for the long-term maintenance of peace wherever they have been implemented. The same applies to the commitment to quick- impact projects during peacekeeping and the linking of crisis resolution and peacebuilding measures. The emphasis must now be on enhancing overall coherence and constantly making sure that the stakeholders' work is consistent and that there is complementarity, as well as close cooperation among all national and international actors. Any peacekeeping programme needs to include a priority component of arms control. The proliferation of small arms and their uncontrolled circulation is without any doubt an important fact or that complicates and prolongs conflicts, particularly in Africa. The resurgence of rebel movements and the rise in organized crime in our countries have been made possible because of the proliferation of and illicit trafficking in small arms and light weapons, and the eradication of these weapons requires the support of the international community. Given the multitude of conflicts and their complexity, it is more necessary than ever before that States combine their efforts to deal with this phenomenon. Success will not be assured or lasting unless the embargo on importing weapons is strengthened by identifying, on the one hand, the licit and illicit supply lines of weapons and resources that fuel conflicts, and, on the other, all national and external interests in the conflict. We all recall the recommendations on the threat of conflict between States and the threat of conflict within States, as contained in the report of the High- level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change; in recent months those recommendations were the subject of broad-based consultation and discussion. There is no doubt that the strategy to be formulated at the September summit which we all eagerly await will make it possible to strengthen the consensus that should guide our action. Pending those conclusions, we must continue to think about various ways to give new momentum to the work of the United Nations in the areas of peacekeeping and peacebuilding. Cote d'Ivoire, exhausted and shaken by war, has clearly embarked resolutely on restoring domestic peace. This fortunate process, which we owe to the mediation of the African Union, led by President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa, would benefit if it were assisted and strengthened by measures that are being discussed in the Security Council right now. Cote d'Ivoire is counting on the international community to support us in our difficult post-conflict reconstruction. Unless there is major investment in post-disarmament, demobilization and reintegration - unless there is bold action to help out development - it is obvious that there is a risk of relapsing into crisis. It is by making these investments that peace may be built on a lasting basis. Clearly, peacekeeping operations, although very useful, are not enough in themselves to guarantee a return to peace and future peacebuilding. These operations have to go hand in hand with development activities, which should be tailored by the specialized agencies and the United Nations programmes to support the efforts of the authorities of the country concerned. It is with this in mind that my delegation supports the welcome proposal of the Secretary-General to establish a Peacebuilding Commission. I cannot conclude my statement without reaffirming the fervent desire of Cote d'Ivoire to continue to receive assistance from the United Nations in organizing and holding the upcoming general elections, particularly the presidential election to be held in October of this year. I should also like to convey once again to the United Nations and, in particular, to the Security Council the gratitude of my country for steps already taken and those being envisaged with perfect complementarity of action by the various stakeholders in resolving the crisis in Cote d'Ivoire to guarantee that these elections will be free and transparent. Furthermore, I would be grateful to you, Mr. President, if you could relay the message of Cote d'Ivoire to countries that contribute troops and other resources to bring about a return of peace to my country.

The President: I now give the floor to the representative of Nigeria.

Mr. Adekanye (Nigeria): I wish to thank the presidency for organizing this open debate on the subject of post-conflict peacebuilding and the opportunity for the Nigerian delegation to participate therein. This is most timely, considering the attention that the subject has received in recent discussions among member States on how best our Organization can address the challenges that flow from conflict situations once the United Nations peacekeeping missions have fulfilled their mandates in the specific countries concerned. It is not my intention to re-state the Secretary- General's well-grounded concerns on this subject, which have led to his recommendation for the establishment of the Peacebuilding Commission for the Organization. Suffice it to say that, through its long involvement in United Nations peacekeeping operations, Nigeria, as an important troop-contributing country, has come to the conclusion that post-conflict peacebuilding constitutes an integral, though not fully addressed, phase of peace management efforts of the international community. Statistics of relapse abound in countries emerging from conflict. The potential of such relapses has grown in the proportion that conflicts have multiplied. It has brought to the fore commitment to peace agreements by parties to the conflicts, a number of whom have found it convenient to take up their arms again to fight for causes that they believe could only be won on the battlefield. Such situations, if allowed to go unchecked, would set at naught the heroic efforts of our valiant United Nations peacekeepers. Besides the loss of vital and scarce resources, both for our Organization and the countries concerned, neighbouring countries have almost invariably been sucked into such renewed hostilities with far-reaching consequences for peace, security and stability in the subregion. In Africa, which has a disproportionately large share of conflict situations in the world, the challenges of post-conflict peacebuilding are particularly daunting. The porous nature of our borders, the advances and ease in communication, and the mobility of populations have challenged traditional notions of conflict, in which attempts at resolution have focused on peace agreements between belligerents in the national territories. Considerable resources have also been devoted to immediate problems of disarmament and demobilization of erstwhile combatants. However, it is evident that the reintegration or rehabilitation components of conflict resolution have to be given more attention than has hitherto been the case. It is our assessment that the efforts of the international community in this area perhaps hold the key to lasting peace. For populations, especially women and vulnerable groups brutalized by conflicts, an effective and well- funded reintegration and rehabilitation programme would constitute an assurance that conflicts are indeed over and that people can resume their normal lives. Current steps that have been taken to reintegrate ex-combatants in the disarmament, demobilization and reintegration (DDR) process, for example, through the creation of job opportunities for the large population of restive youths, as part of strategies to wean them from conflicts, should be consolidated. Nigeria believes that, for post-conflict peacebuilding to be effective, it must focus on some key groups and areas in conflict environments. The key groups would include professional soldiers who have fought on the side of non-State actors; rebel or mercenary soldiers; and child soldiers. Account must also be taken of vulnerable groups - namely, women and children. The key areas deserving the international community's attention in all peacebuilding efforts include the provision of employment opportunities, training of ex-combatants, in particular to give them skills enabling them to live normal lives, resuscitation and strengthening of the judicial system, protection and promotion of human rights, including measures to punish human rights offenders, and reconciliation and the healing process. In all that, it is essential that we resist the temptation to apply one solution designed to fit all situations. Rather, our efforts should take full account of the specific local situation by ensuring national ownership. Close collaboration with local and national entities, including civil society groups, would also be invaluable. That would ensure that long after the peacekeepers depart, the process of rebuilding shattered societies and lives continues. Thus, the fruits of the investments in peace are reaped. Nigeria believes that subregional and regional organizations should have a complementary role to play in post-conflict peacebuilding. Some of those organizations, including in particular the Economic Community of West African States and the African Union, have proved that they can be relied on as effective partners in both conflict resolution and the peacebuilding process. Thus, enhancing the capacity of those organizations would enable them to perform even better. In that regard, it is desirable for the Council to address the special needs of Africa. Finally, one cannot overemphasize the need to mobilize the support of the international financial institutions to make a worthwhile investment in peace. That calls for a genuine partnership and understanding between the United Nations and those institutions. In conclusion, I wish to state that it is the expectation of the Nigerian delegation that our debate today will enable the Council to devote greater attention to post-conflict peacebuilding and thereby reinforce the confidence of affected populations - and, indeed, the international community - in the Council's primary role of maintaining international peace and security.

The President: I now give the floor to the representative of the Republic of Korea.

Mr. Shin Kak-soo (Republic of Korea): At the outset, let me join previous speakers in thanking you, Mr. President, for convening this open debate on peacebuilding. Given the emerging consensus on the proposed establishment of a Peacebuilding Commission, the subject of today's debate is especially timely. The cessation of armed conflict does not always instantly bring peace on the ground. Rather, it is only the first step in the long, hard peacebuilding process. Peacebuilding comprises all efforts to assist countries and regions in their transition from war to peace, encompassing a wide range of political, development, humanitarian and human rights programmes and mechanisms. In particular, peacebuilding is all the more important in the light of the fragile and vulnerable situation that exists following the restoration of peace, as almost 50 per cent of armed conflicts recur within five years of their cessation. It is our firm conviction that conflict prevention, peacekeeping and peacebuilding are so closely interlinked that it would be more effective to pursue them simultaneously rather than sequentially. Concerted efforts to build durable peace in countries and regions in a post-conflict situation are critical to establishing the conditions for sustainable long-term development and thus preventing the resurgence of conflict. My Government is pleased to note that the Secretary-General's recommendation to create a Peacebuilding Commission has the broad support of the general membership of the United Nations. This innovative proposal would fill an institutional gap within the United Nations system, allowing the Organization to provide coordinated assistance to post- conflict societies, which must traverse the difficult and often treacherous path from violent conflict to sustainable peace and economic development. Member States have discussed the major issues with respect to a Peacebuilding Commission at great length, including its mandate, reporting structure, composition and funding. Reaffirming our strong commitment to the creation of a Peacebuilding Commission, I would like to take this opportunity to focus on two outstanding issues: its reporting structure and composition. Post-conflict peacebuilding will require close coordination and collaboration between the Security Council and the Economic and Social Council. Indeed, owing to the mixed nature of peacebuilding functions, it is difficult to make a clear delineation between the mandates of the two organs. Furthermore, peacebuilding efforts do not always unfold in a linear, step-by-step fashion; the simultaneous involvement of both the Security Council and the Economic and Social Council is thus required. Hence, it is imperative to ensure close coordination between those two principal organs throughout the whole process of peacebuilding. Another important consideration is that the expertise of the Economic and Social Council in the social and economic arenas should be deployed at an early stage of the peacebuilding process in order to optimize the outcome of peacebuilding efforts in the long-term perspective. In its reporting, a Peacebuilding Commission should make recommendations, taking into account the medium- and long-term development needs of the countries in transition. Regarding the composition of a Peacebuilding Commission, we have proposed one possible model, which includes two permanent and three non-permanent members of the Security Council and six members of the Economic and Social Council, ensuring an adequate balance between the two bodies. It is also crucial that a Peacebuilding Commission establish close links with two important stakeholders, the funds and programmes of the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions and regional development banks, by allowing for their representatives' participation as observers in its deliberations. The Republic of Korea attaches great importance to peacebuilding as a vital instrument of the United Nations in the maintenance of international peace and security. We note with satisfaction that peacebuilding has now become an ongoing mainstream activity integrated into the Secretariat's daily operations, with 10 peacebuilding missions currently in the field. Let me conclude with the hope that with the establishment of a Peacebuilding Commission at an early date, the United Nations will become more efficient and effective in its comprehensive efforts to promote peacebuilding.

The President: I now give the floor to the representative of Pakistan.

Mr. Chaudhry (Pakistan): Let me join others in felicitating the Danish presidency on its excellent handling of the Council's work during this month. We also congratulate Ambassador Wang Guangya for the successful Chinese presidency in April. We welcome this important debate on post- conflict peacebuilding and appreciate the personal participation of Foreign Minister Mr. Moller. The Presidency's discussion paper has been useful in guiding the debate. We also appreciate the contributions made by the Deputy Secretary-General, Ms. Frechette, the President of the World Bank, Mr. Wolfensohn, and other speakers. The subject of peacebuilding has received increasing attention since the High-level Panel's report (A/59/565) last December. The Secretary-General later offered his reflections in his report entitled "In larger freedom" (A/59/2005) and in a subsequent non-paper. The proposal for a Peacebuilding Commission is now under active consideration in the General Assembly. The proposal has particular relevance and appeal for countries emerging from conflict, especially in Africa. I would like to make a few points. First, the increased focus on peacebuilding during the last couple of years has its roots in the now well-recognized interlinkage between peace and development. Indeed, sustainable peace can be built only on a foundation of sustainable development. Secondly, peacebuilding is complex. It embraces many facets, including the security, political, economic, social and humanitarian facets. It often involves assistance for institutional capacity-building, economic recovery, good governance, reconciliation, rule of law, human rights and the organization of elections, among other things. It is clear that no single United Nations organ has an exclusive mandate over those issues. Successful peacebuilding strategies have to be based on a comprehensive and integrated approach, greater systemwide coherence, increased inter-organ coordination and the engagement of all relevant actors. Thirdly, though peacebuilding is associated mainly with post-conflict situations, in which one of the main concerns is to help prevent a relapse into conflict, it is equally important to prevent conflicts in the first place. Apart from preventive diplomacy and the pacific settlement of disputes, development should be promoted as the best means to prevent conflict. Assistance in economic, humanitarian or other fields may be provided at the request of a country to avoid slipping towards conflict. Fourthly, at the policy level, a primary challenge is to recognize and respect the respective competencies of the General Assembly, the Security Council and the Economic and Social Council with regard to peacebuilding. Besides, the integration of peacebuilding activities in the field and at the country level logically necessitates coordination between the relevant organs and other actors at Headquarters. We believe that complementarity in the work of the three principal organs should be used to promote synergy in peacebuilding efforts. Interaction between the Security Council and the ad hoc advisory groups of the Economic and Social Council on countries emerging from conflict is a good basis upon which to build. Another challenge is to preserve and promote national ownership of the peacebuilding programmes and activities and to ensure that the priorities of the country concerned have precedence. Fifthly, it is widely acknowledged that we need an institutional mechanism dedicated to peacebuilding. It may not be merely a gap-filling mechanism, but should promote and coordinate a comprehensive approach. It should be an intergovernmental body with the flexibility to bring together all relevant actors in specific situations, including United Nations agencies and the international financial institutions, as appropriate. Sixthly, experience from various specific situations, Guinea-Bissau for example, shows that the major challenge remains the provision of adequate, timely and sustained assistance for peacebuilding activities. The special circumstances of countries emerging from conflict should be kept in mind while recommending policy changes and negotiating aid packages. The international financial institutions should show some operational flexibility. Debt write-offs should be considered in the first instance. While the recipient countries are expected to meet some minimum requirements, there should be no shifting of the goalposts by the donors. The proposal for a standing fund for peacebuilding has merit. All of us are trying to find answers to many of those and other questions in the Secretary-General's proposal for the establishment of a Peacebuilding Commission. We hope that the various ideas advanced today by Member States will feed into the rich array of proposals already made on peacebuilding in general, and the Peacebuilding Commission in particular. I should like to recall that, in 2003, Pakistan first proposed the idea of ad hoc composite committees, comprised of members drawn from the three principal organs of the United Nations, to effectively address complex crises in all their phases, including post- conflict peacebuilding. In May 2004, during Pakistan's presidency of the Security Council, we circulated a non-paper on ad hoc composite committees during a public meeting on complex crises and the United Nations response. During the discussions in the General Assembly, Pakistan has circulated its specific proposal on the proposed Peacebuilding Commission. Pakistan has a special interest and a sense of ownership in the proposed Commission, which basically follows the same concept of a composite approach we proposed long ago. We are working with other Member States to further crystallize the proposal and we are hopeful that the General Assembly will be in a position to establish the Commission at its forthcoming session.

The President: I call on the representative of Indonesia.

Ms. Asmady (Indonesia): Allow me at the outset to thank the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Denmark, Mr. Per Stig Moller, for his initiative of convening this debate on the subject of post-conflict peacebuilding. I commend the very helpful non-paper distributed by the Danish Permanent Mission on that important issue. I would also like to acknowledge the presence among us of Deputy Secretary-General Louise Frechette and of Mr. James Wolfensohn, President of the World Bank. One cannot justifiably participate in a debate of this nature without taking at least a quick look at what the Security Council, as the body responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security, has done so far. In the wake of the demand for peacekeeping in the recent past, as well as the tendency of some cultures to slip back into conflict soon after a peacekeeping mission or the cessation of hostilities, peacebuilding has become an increasingly important burden for the Council and for the United Nations in general. As we all now know, one of the most talked- about proposals in the Organization in recent times, originating from the Secretary-General's report "In larger freedom: towards development, security and human rights for all", is that of establishing a Peacebuilding Commission. Not surprisingly, the proposal has received wide support throughout the United Nations. It is the belief of the delegation of Indonesia that discussions such as this not only underline the importance of peacebuilding, but will strengthen the international effort to mobilize the ideas and structures that will be needed to implement it. It is obvious that, as difficult as peacekeeping is, it does not hold the subtleties and challenges that peacebuilding entails. We cannot mandate peacebuilding in the same sense as the Council might mandate a peacekeeping mission, or impose regulations of peace in the same sense as we might rules of engagement. Peacebuilding is a political exigency that must be fine- tuned and implemented as an art. Just as the practice of peacekeeping emerged with complex multidimensional mandates, peacebuilding can succeed only if it proceeds from a multidimensional and comprehensive perspective. In our view, therefore, the first and most important factor for such success is serious institutional planning. While there will always be variations in local cultures and environments that must be taken into consideration in particular mandates, peacebuilding has one luxury that peacekeeping does not. That factor is time. Since peacebuilding would usually follow a period of peacekeeping, it should benefit from the time lag that the cessation of hostilities or a peacekeeping mission provides. This means that, for that particular country or environment, peacebuilding preparation, at its most multidimensional and comprehensive best, ought to commence once peacekeeping is under way. It is not debatable that, if peacebuilding is to succeed, there must be a deep sense of ownership and capacity among local actors. Indeed, no matter what else is attempted or provided, it is only the investment of local participation, ideas and energy that can imbue a peacebuilding effort not only with legitimacy, but with "building" tools as well. Programme planners must determine from the beginning what means might best be used to ensure such local ownership, and advantage must be taken of available time to advance a clear, realistic and inclusive peacebuilding strategy. With reference to the issue of content, therefore, my delegation is of the view that peacebuilding should be structured as part of a broader development agenda. In the best-case scheme, that agenda would include the provision of such elements as physical infrastructure and education that would continue from where such peacekeeping programmes as disarmament, demobilization and reintegration may have left off. A well-grounded approach of that nature, tied into the expectations of peace and stability, would convey the important message that the international community is determined to see that the peacebuilding process is an investment in the future. In the view of my delegation, a significant component of that broader agenda is the rule of law. It is of the utmost importance that provision be made for the structures of a viable legal and judicial order and the protection of human rights. Those structures are crucial towards ensuring that all social, political and economic processes are governed by the rule of law. It is obvious that a scenario such as that involves timely, sustained and well-targeted resources. We share the view that, while high levels of aid do not guarantee success, the absence or inadequacy of aid would make post-conflict peacebuilding efforts a time-wasting Charade. Similarly, it is increasingly recognized that focusing narrowly on country-level peacebuilding efforts is unlikely to yield significant changes in peacebuilding outcomes, especially in the regions where conflict has interlocking political, security and economic dynamics. Planning for peacebuilding must be cognizant of such situations - as we have seen in West Africa and the Democratic Republic of the Congo - and broader strategies must be prepared in order to respond to them. In that connection, let me point out that there is growing evidence that the failure to address international trade in conflict goods helps to sustain criminal economic networks in post-conflict environments, thereby significantly reducing the impact of in-country peacebuilding strategies. The steady global trade in small arms and light weapons, for instance, compounds the difficulties of country- based disarmament, demobilization and reintegration (DDR) strategies. A peacebuilding strategy that does not take those interlocking factors into account would obviously be a tremendous waste of resources. As I have indicated, my delegation is very much in favour of adequate and advanced planning for peacebuilding, but this must apply not only to funding and material, but also to the deployment of the required civilian personnel. To this end, my delegation would like to see a pool of such trained personnel made available and a comprehensive database of peacebuilding experts maintained by the Secretariat. Finally, let me reiterate my hope that this welcome debate will enrich peacebuilding thinking at the United Nations in general, and in the Peacebuilding Commission in particular.

The President: I give the floor to the representative of Peru.

Mr. De Rivero (Peru) (spoke in Spanish): It is very significant that the Security Council should dedicate this open meeting to the topic of peacebuilding. We appreciate the initiative of the Danish delegation in that respect. It is very important for my delegation that the efforts and resources of the international community also be mobilized on a preventive basis to help States that are undergoing stress - in other words, countries that run the risk of imploding into civil war and turning into chaotic, ungovernable entities that are showcases for massive violations of human rights, ethnic cleansing and even genocide. By failing, at the international level, to provide intensive preventive care to many States undergoing stress, in the post-cold-war era we ended up producing more than 30 civil conflicts that resulted in more than 5 million deaths and I7 million refugees. Recent experience has shown that death, destruction, chaos and the plague of hatred left by those conflicts make the task of reconciliation and reconstruction of those States more complex. Many of those so affected have been abandoned to their fate and remain in a collapsed and ungovernable state. Many of the tools used today for peacebuilding in collapsed States are the same tools that could have been used to prevent conflict. But what is different is the cost in human lives and the destruction of property. For that reason, peacebuilding strategies must also include conflict prevention. That is the inescapable responsibility of the United Nations. Having spoken about prevention, now I will address today's topic of post-conflict peacebuilding. One of the main goals of the peacebuilding process in post-conflict situations is to develop a viable economy. What does a viable economy signify? It means that reconstruction should not replicate the dysfunctional economy that had caused the State to fail. In other words, we should not rebuild a primary economy that is based on a single crop or that exports low-tech products that do not generate sufficient resources for collapsed States with growing urban populations. The building of a new economy that is viable in the global economy implies, first, the provision of financial and economic intensive care for the collapsed State. That means emergency measures designed to write off a sizeable proportion of the debt, provide new credits, massively increase assistance to meet the most urgent social needs and, in particular, to increase access to food, water and energy. Once intensive initial care has been provided, structural measures will be required to modernize and diversify the technological component of exports, in order to release those countries from the trap of primary production that cannot compete in today's global economy. That could be achieved with the help of entrepreneurs and executives from the private sector, members of the Global Compact created by the Secretary-General. Those executives have global experience in trade in transnational goods and services. They could thus play a more creative and more realistic part in modernizing non-viable economies than could many technocrats in the international financial institutions. To create businesses that can produce competitive goods and services in collapsed States, instead of economists from the financial bureaucracies, we need entrepreneurs with transnational experience, members of the Global Compact. What we must not do is rebuild a non-viable primary economy that is incapable of producing enough resources in the context of a global economy that increasingly demands goods and services with a high degree of technological advancement. Entrepreneurs and transnational businesses participating in reconstruction policies should continue to honour the Ten Principles they accepted in the Global Compact, including respect for human rights, decent working conditions, protection of the environment and anti-corruption efforts. The need to not recreate the backward, non-viable primary economy and to create a new competitive economy should also guide the institutions of the international financial system, which up to the present have focused more on economic adjustment than on modernizing economies that are dysfunctional within today's competitive global economy. We have to understand that today's conflicts are the product of non-competitive, dysfunctional economies marginalized by globalization, leading to tremendous social exclusion and environmental degradation, to the extent that the entire national market system becomes non-functional and leads to the collapse of the State. Many ethnic, religious and cultural conflicts have been aggravated by the social marginalization produced by non-viable economies, sometimes reaching levels of violence that lead to genocide, ethnic cleansing and other crimes against humanity. It is not by chance that most of the civil conflicts being addressed nowadays by the Security Council are occurring in countries where primary production has not increased sufficiently, where there has been explosive growth in the urban population, and where personal income has grown no more than 2 per cent in the last 28 years. Such countries, victims of the perverse interplay between population growth and primary production, have been marginalized in terms of investment flows, trade and technological research. They have had to go further and further into debt to purchase the technology that they cannot produce on their own, to the extent that they can no longer honour their debts. In order to continue to obtain credit, they have to undergo structural adjustment, which, instead of modernizing them, only makes them more unstable politically. While modernizing the non-viable economies of collapsed States, we must also set in motion a process of political reconstruction. In other words, while building a viable economy, we also have to create an effective institutional democracy. In building such democratic institutions, the commitment of the international community is required. That is why Peru has consistently advocated that all Security Council peacekeeping missions incorporate institutional reconstruction programmes that will lay the foundation for a solid democracy. The first thing to be done is to promote national agreement - in other words, arrive at an effective social contract within the collapsed country. That social contract has to be secured by United Nations peacekeeping forces, which must ensure that power is gradually transferred to the people through national democratic institutions. Reconstruction should also lead to a revitalized national civil administration capable of providing basic public services such as water, energy, health care, education and infrastructure. It is also crucial that such a civil administration be created on the basis of democratic principles that will strengthen the rule of law. What is most important, however, is for such a democratic civil reconstruction to start at the local level. First priority has to be accorded to setting up local democratic governments. Democracy must spread from the local level to the regional level, and from the regional level to the State. Thus democracy spreads from the citizenry to the State. These thoughts on the democratic reconstruction of collapsed States are based on important socio- political studies that have been carried out with respect to specific cases, in particular Kosovo, Timor-Leste, Liberia and Sierra Leone. I am thinking in particular of the research done by the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, which now has observer status with the General Assembly. Up to now, the greatest constraints on peacebuilding have been a lack of strategies aimed at preventing conflict, and then, in the post-conflict stage, a lack of strategies aimed at creating a modern, viable economy and at building democracy, starting from small local communities and working up to the national level. Post-conflict peacebuilding must evolve into an economic and political process that simultaneously creates viable economies and democratic institutions. Such a process must be innovative and be led by the United Nations, with the participation of, and fresh input by, Global Compact transnational companies as well as institutions and civil society.

The President: I should like to inform the Council that I have received a letter from the representative of Papua New Guinea in which he requests to be invited to participate in the discussion of the item on the Council's agenda. In conformity with the usual practice, I propose, with the consent of the Council, to invite that representative to participate in the discussion without the right to vote, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the Council's provisional rules of procedure. There being no objection, it is so decided. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Aisi (Papua New Guinea) took a seat at the Council table. The President: The next speaker is the representative of Papua New Guinea, to whom I give the floor.

Mr. Aisi (Papua New Guinea): I wish to thank you, Madam President, for allowing me to speak at the last minute. But as all the discussions have been about peacebuilding, I would like to tell the Council a little bit about what is happening in my country in terms of the process that is taking place. First, however, allow me, Madam President, to take this opportunity to extend the appreciation of my delegation for the convening of this meeting in connection with the subject of post-conflict peacebuilding. Papua New Guinea is one of the countries that has experienced post-conflict peacebuilding on the island of Bougainville, in Papua New Guinea, for more than a decade now. My delegation is pleased to report on the progress in the peace process in Bougainville. The island had been wrecked by a bloody civil conflict. It is believed that about 20,000 people died in the turmoil, while thousands more were injured. However, major steps were taken towards a peaceful solution following the signing of the Bougainville Peace Agreement in August 2001 - one of the 26 agreements signed in the pursuit of peace, normalcy and a political settlement on Bougainville since 1989. A ceasefire agreement between the warring parties - the Bougainville Revolutionary Army and Papua New Guinea - was signed in 1998, followed three years later by a peace agreement. During those years, a regional group composed of representatives from all over the Pacific region was sent to monitor the peace in Bougainville - first a Truce Monitoring Group, followed by a Peace Monitoring Group. The Group was unarmed, unlike in other post-conflict peacebuilding processes around the world. Within the span of those years, the Peace Process Consultative Committee was formed, which also included the Bougainville Constitutional Commission and the Interim Joint Supervisory Body, all in the name of peace and normalcy. Papua New Guinea remained committed to a peaceful solution through every available means. My Government therefore continued to give the people of Bougainville every opportunity to participate fully in the reconciliation process, which led to the Peace Agreement signed in August 2001 and finally to the election of the autonomous Bougainville Government, which is continuing today. The Agreement was then given the force of the highest law in the land as a result of the Papua New Guinea Parliament's decision to amend our national Constitution by adding the new part XIV and passing the Organic Law on Peacebuilding in Bougainville. The deal guaranteed a referendum on independence in 10 to 15 years, promised more autonomy in the interim, and set out a plan for weapons disposal. In December 2004, the Papua New Guinea Government approved the Bougainville Constitution, laying the ground for elections. That decision, in many respects, was the culmination of longstanding dreams and of a commitment made real through years of protracted struggle and negotiations leading up to the Bougainville Peace Agreement. The way in which that decision was made - on a bipartisan basis, with overwhelming support and without any votes against it - showed how important issues and principles can bring together leaders and people from all parts of a country - in our case, Papua New Guinea - with otherwise diverse interests and opinions. The spirit and detailed provisions of the national constitutional laws have been further developed through the making and implementation of the Constitution for the Autonomous Region of Bougainville. Like our national Constitution, the Bougainville Constitution is also "homegrown" - made and adopted by leaders following close consultations with people in all parts of Bougainville, as well as Bougainvilleans in other parts of Papua New Guinea, within the framework of our national Constitution, as amended to give legal effect to the Bougainville Peace Agreement. The first general election for the Autonomous Bougainville Government, to be established under the Bougainville Constitution, is currently under way and is the next critical stage in giving substance to the Agreement. The election marks a new beginning for the people of Bougainville as candidates compete for public support, as the public takes part in voting and as officials gear up for the inauguration of the first Autonomous Bougainville Government next month. Leaders now in the race for the province's top post played many significant roles and risked their lives in the search for peace and normalcy for the people of Bougainville. Now that the conflict is over, the Bougainville Peace Agreement has been completed and given the force of law and arrangements for the first elections are under way, Bougainvilleans are keenly participating in choosing the leaders who will be responsible for ensuring that normalcy returns and for setting priorities for future development in Bougainville. The general elections are under way right at this moment. We believe that the election is a good example of a United Nations-brokered peace deal. I think that is well reflected in the subject of today's meeting. The people of Bougainville have been waiting patiently for this opportunity and are now going out in their numbers to polling stations to cast their votes for candidates of their choice. The voting system is first- past-the-post. There is very high public enthusiasm to see the Autonomous Bougainville Government take office in the middle of June - next month. The atmosphere on the ground is generally calm and strongly in favour of the election. As might be expected, there have been two incidents, but the situation is otherwise peaceful and orderly. The electoral process is moving ahead according to plan. The calm and purposeful way in which the election is being held shows how thoroughly preparations have been made. More importantly, it underlines how eager people around Bougainville are to play their part in choosing Bougainville's future political leaders and to get on with their lives. The Bougainville election should be seen as the model for others who have been experiencing similar conflicts. It took real commitment by the leaders and people of Bougainville to achieve peace and to choose the type of government that they believe will bring about development and prosperity. The election would not be running smoothly without necessary and generous funding from friendly nations. There have been a lot of friendly nations in this Council Chamber over the last couple of years who have helped us. The funds made possible the purchase of communications equipment to link the three main centres where votes will be counted when voting concludes on June 2. The results will be officially declared on 9 June. Our Prime Minister has been invited to officially open the Bougainville House of Representatives, which is scheduled to meet on 25 June. The assistance provided demonstrates practical support for the parties' commitment and the progress being made in implementing the Bougainville Peace Agreement and the laws that give it legal effect. The assistance also signifies the interest the international community is taking in the first general election for the Autonomous Bougainville Government. In conclusion, I wish to record here - and I will record it again next month, when the mandate ends - on behalf of my Government and the people of Papua New Guinea our deep appreciation for the contribution of the United Nations in ensuring that the peace process was maintained and the weapons disposal process completed before the election commenced on 20 May 2005. I thank all members for allowing me to speak today.

The President: Following consultations among members of the Security Council, I have been authorized to make the following statement on behalf of the Council. "The Security Council reaffirms its commitment to the purposes and principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and recalls its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. The Security Council considers post-conflict peacebuilding closely linked to its primary responsibilities. "The Security Council recognizes that intra- State conflicts and States emerging from conflict are among the most complex challenges facing the international community and that responding to these challenges in most instances requires a coherent and integrated mix of peacebuilding and peacekeeping activities, including political, military, civilian, humanitarian and development activities. "The Security Council acknowledges that serious attention to the longer-term process of peacebuilding in all its multiple dimensions is critically important and that adequate support for peacebuilding activities can help to prevent countries from relapsing into conflict. "The Security Council underlines that priorities in the post-conflict environment should include, where appropriate: protection of civilians; disarmament, demobilization, repatriation, reintegration and rehabilitation of former combatants; security sector and economic and social reform; the end of impunity; establishment and re-establishment of the institutions of government, the rule of law and transitional justice, respect for human rights; and economic revitalization. "The Security Council recognizes the key role played by the United Nations, including the United Nations funds, programmes and specialized agencies, in peacebuilding alongside the international financial institutions, in particular the World Bank, bilateral donors and troop contributors. It also acknowledges the role the private sector can play in countries emerging from conflict. The Security Council underlines that a successful outcome of post-conflict peacebuilding activities depends on the sustained commitment of all relevant actors to the process, through the involvement of these actors and the coordination of their activities in all phases from planning through implementation. In this regard, the Council also stresses the importance of pursuing coherent policies and resource allocation between these United Nations entities, taking into account their respective mandates. The Council recalls the report of 21 August 2000 by the Panel on United Nations Peace Operations (A/55/305) and the recommendations therein, and welcomes the progress made since the publication of the report, not least as regards planning of peacekeeping operations. "The Security Council underlines that for countries emerging from conflict significant international assistance for economic and social rehabilitation and reconstruction is indispensable. In this regard the Security Council acknowledges the role that the Economic and Social Council plays, including in sustainable development, and reiterates its willingness to improve cooperation with United Nations bodies and organs directly concerned with peacebuilding. "The Security Council underlines the importance of national ownership of the transition process from the end of a conflict to the attainment of lasting peace and sustainable development and the need for the international community to support nationally owned peacebuilding priorities. The Security Council recognizes the positive role played by local stakeholders and encourages dialogue between the United Nations and relevant national actors. The Council encourages capacity-building in order to respond to the country-specific circumstances of each conflict situation. One goal of this capacity-building - and of peacebuilding generally - should be to promote the establishment of self-supporting national authorities and thus the evolution of international assistance from peace support to longer-term development. "The Security Council recognizes the crucial role of regional and subregional organizations in post-conflict peacebuilding and their involvement at the earliest possible stage. The Security Council realizes that a clear regional perspective is necessary, as most conflicts have interlocking political, security, humanitarian and economic dynamics across borders. The Council underscores in this respect the need for enhanced cooperation and, where appropriate, coordination between United Nations and regional and subregional organizations in peacebuilding, based on a more integrated approach and with the aim of maximizing use of available resources and capabilities. "The Security Council stresses the importance of a comprehensive international and regional approach to disarmament, demobilization and reintegration of former combatants that is not limited to the political and security aspects, but also addresses its social and economic aspects, including special needs of child soldiers and women. "The Security Council stresses the special needs of Africa in post-conflict situations and encourages the international community to pay particular attention to those needs. It welcomes the ever-closer partnership between the African Union, the African subregional organizations and the United Nations in the area of peacemaking and peacekeeping and stresses the importance of extending this partnership to peacebuilding efforts. "The Security Council underscores the importance of cooperation between United Nations peacekeeping operations and the United Nations funds, programmes and specialized agencies. The Security Council stresses the importance of ensuring that planning and implementation of United Nations humanitarian, peacekeeping, political and developmental activities at country level are well coordinated system-wide, including through the development of shared strategic objectives. The Security Council stresses that the United Nations should function as one integrated entity at country level under effective overall leadership in post-conflict peacebuilding. "The Security Council stresses the need to ensure adequate and timely financing for peacebuilding priorities at all stages of the peace process, and stresses the need for sustained financial investment in peacebuilding over the medium to longer-term period of recovery. It recognizes the importance of rapid initiation of peacebuilding activities to meet immediate needs and encourages the building of capabilities that can be incorporated rapidly. "The Security Council welcomes the submission of the report of 21 March 2005 by the Secretary-General 'In larger freedom: towards development, security and human rights for all' (A/59/2005) and of the report by the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change 'A more secure world: our shared responsibility'. The Security Council acknowledges institutional gaps, identified in the reports, in the United Nations institutional machinery with respect to effectively, coherently, and comprehensively helping countries with transition from conflict to lasting peace and sustainable development. "The Security Council takes note with interest of the important proposal by the Secretary-General to establish a Peacebuilding Commission and shares the objective of improving United Nations capacity to coordinate with donors and troop contributors and to perform peacebuilding activities, in particular from the start of peacekeeping operations through stabilization, reconstruction and development. The Security Council recognizes the important role that this body could play to bridge the gap between maintenance of international peace and security and the work of humanitarian and economic development assistance." This statement will be issued as a document of the Security Council under the symbol S/PRST/2005/20. There are no further speakers on my list. The Security Council has thus concluded the present stage of its consideration of the item on its agenda. The meeting rose at 5.45 p.m.