S/PV.6396 Security Council

In accordance with the understanding reached in the Council’s prior consultations, I shall take it that the Security Council agrees to extend an invitation under rule 39 of its provisional rules of procedure to His Excellency Mr. Peter Wittig, Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission and Permanent Representative of Germany. It is so decided. I invite Mr. Wittig to take a seat at the Council table. In accordance with the understanding reached in the Council’s prior consultations, I shall take it that the Security Council agrees to extend an invitation under rule 39 of its provisional rules of procedure to His Excellency Mr. Pedro Serrano, head of the delegation of the European Union to the United Nations. It is so decided. I invite Mr. Serrano to take the seat reserved for him at the side of the Council Chamber. The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. The Security Council is meeting in accordance with the understanding reached in its prior consultations. I should like to draw the attention of Council members to document S/2010/386, which contains the progress report of the Secretary-General on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict, and document S/2010/466, which contains the report of the Secretary-General on women’s participation in peacebuilding. I welcome the presence of the Secretary-General, His Excellency Mr. Ban Ki-moon. Before I invite him to take the floor, I would like to inform the Council that we will hold informal consultations after the statement by the Secretary-General, and that thereafter we will resume this meeting. I now invite the Secretary-General to take the floor.

One of the most difficult and important tasks facing the United Nations is to ensure that nations emerging from devastating conflicts are not allowed to slide back into violence. Building peace may sound straightforward, but we know from painful experience that it is not. Success requires patience, long-term commitment and the involvement of a wide range of actors working together. We face real difficulties every day as our field missions, funds, programmes and agencies, each in their own way, work to provide the kind of help that nations need to rebuild after war. We feel keenly and constantly the need to do better. It was in that spirit that my report last year on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2009/304) set out an agenda for action to help the United Nations deliver more rapid and effective support to national peacebuilding efforts and to ensure that the impacts of those activities would endure. We are making progress in Burundi, Haiti, Nepal, Sierra Leone and elsewhere. Let us remember that for people who have suffered through conflict, progress cannot come fast enough. The ultimate test is how well we deliver on the ground and how well we give people signs of hope, beyond mere words and promises. One year since I issued that report, I am pleased to report that we have made real gains in carrying forward the specific recommendations I put forward aimed at better organizing our peacebuilding efforts. But we still have further to go. I see four areas that require our particular attention. First, we need to get the right people in the right place at the right time. We now deploy special representatives and other United Nations leaders more rapidly to crisis situations. All senior staff now have managerial compacts to define their goals and priorities and to improve their accountability. The demands on leaders in crisis situations are growing. They are now expected to implement broader Security Council mandates, provide a strategic vision, ensure proper coordination and undertake joint planning. We need to give them the properly trained and equipped support teams that will enable them to perform the full range of their responsibilities right from the very beginning. Such demands underpin the review of international civilian capacities that is currently under way. The review is anchored in the need to ensure that international assistance in the aftermath of conflict is driven by national needs and priorities, that we make better use of the capacities of women and the global South, and that our responses become faster and more flexible. I look forward to the recommendations of the Senior Advisory Group for the Review of International Civilian Capacities, led by Jean-Marie Guéhenno, early next year. Meanwhile, I encourage all Member States to be engaged in and contribute to the outcome of the review. Secondly, we need predictable financing. Whatever type of United Nations presence there is, we and our national partners need sufficient and timely funding, especially in the middle of a crisis response. In fragile transition situations, the Peacebuilding Fund can quickly finance early action, which can in turn prompt other sources to provide longer-term funding. The Fund has streamlined its procedures, enabling it to respond more swiftly to urgent needs. I encourage Member States to contribute to its replenishment. But the Fund is only one among many. Many other efforts are under way, aimed at making all peacebuilding financing more flexible and tolerant of risk. I urge Member States to support these as well. Thirdly, we need more effective partnerships. Greater cooperation and joint approaches within the United Nations are important, but they are not enough. We must build deeper strategic partnerships. With that in mind, we have begun strengthening cooperation and developing closer institutional links with the World Bank. Partnerships work best when roles are clear. Greater clarity and deeper capacities are being established in core areas such as mine action, mediation and electoral assistance, but we still need to review the institutional arrangement in areas such as security sector reform and the rule of law. To this end, I am encouraging a frank examination of the comparative advantages of various United Nations actors and other partners, based on available capacities and presence. This will be an important priority in the coming months, and I rely on the support of the Council. One of the most important partnerships is the one between the Security Council and the Peacebuilding Commission. A closer collaboration can help the Council to support peacebuilding more effectively from the very start, including by enabling peacekeeping operations to have an impact as early peacebuilders and by ensuring that integrated peacebuilding offices institutionalize these early achievements. With respect to the recent review of our peacebuilding architecture, I look forward to the outcome of discussions by the Council and the General Assembly. Fourthly, we need to put women at the heart of peacebuilding. That is where women should be, not only because of their peacebuilding needs, but above all because of their capacities. Yet we have not truly achieved this, nor have we fully implemented resolution 1325 (2000). While their voices are critical for ensuring that the foundations of peace are just and equitable, women are still not systematically included at all stages of the peace process. My new report on women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466) provides a comprehensive strategy to address these challenges. It identifies the hurdles women confront in seven key areas: mediation, post-conflict planning, financing, civilian capacity, post-conflict governance, the rule of law and economic recovery. It makes specific commitments for each, thereby providing a framework for the full implementation of resolution 1325 (2000). But that did not happen without dedicated funding for women’s needs. Conflicts leave States severely weakened and social structures decimated. In such situations, women are vital to ensuring that the basic survival needs of families and communities are met. I have therefore stipulated that all peacebuilding funds managed by the United Nations will henceforth allocate 15 per cent of their funds to projects that address women’s specific needs, advance gender equality or empower women. Advancing the cause of women and peace and security enhances the legitimacy of peace processes and governance structures. It must be an integral part of our peacebuilding efforts, not an afterthought. The work of rebuilding societies broken by conflict requires long-term commitment, a truly integrated approach and significant amounts of human, financial and institutional resources. There is no set sequence of peacemaking, followed by peacekeeping, followed by peacebuilding, but rather a need for us to be flexible and bring our tools into play at the appropriate moments. It is essential for us to develop the peacebuilding architecture and promote greater coherence within the United Nations system. Meeting these challenges will bring us closer to our overarching goal of building sustainable peace. I will continue to rely on the Council’s support and cooperation in that endeavour.

I thank the Secretary-General for his statement. As announced earlier, I now invite Council members to informal consultations. The 6396th meeting will resume shortly.

At this meeting the Council will hear a briefing by His Excellency Mr. Peter Wittig. I now give the floor to Mr. Wittig. Mr. Wittig: Last year the Security Council recognized that the Secretary-General’s 2009 report on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2009/304) was an important contribution to a more effective and coherent international response to post- conflict peacebuilding. The Council also saw the continued engagement of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) as the Secretary-General embarked on the implementation of his ambitious agenda for action. While a number of recommendations made by the Secretary-General in last year’s report addressed internal United Nations system mechanisms, there has been a general sense that the PBC is the most suitable platform to generate support for Member States for a shared and coherent United Nations peacebuilding agenda. The PBC therefore has regularly engaged with and been able to contribute ideas and perspectives to the two reports of the Secretary-General before the Council today: S/2010/386, a progress report on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict, and S/2010/466, on women’s participation in peacebuilding. Last week the Organizational Committee of the PBC convened a meeting to consider those two reports. We had received a comprehensive briefing by Assistant Secretary-General Judy Cheng-Hopkins. The meeting was also briefed by Jean-Marie Guéhenno, Chair of the Secretary-General’s Senior Advisory Group for the Review of International Civilian Capacities, another important process emerging from the 2009 report on peacebuilding. Allow me to share with the Council today a few points that have emerged from the PBC discussions last week. First, on the matter of capacity development, we stressed the importance of strengthening national ownership and national capacities, in order to lay solid foundations for sustainable peacebuilding. We emphasized the linkage between national ownership and national capacity development as an overarching principle for an effective peacebuilding strategy. Secondly, with regard to roles and responsibilities, we noted the progress made in clarifying roles and responsibilities in the areas of mine action and meditation. We also underlined the need to make more considerable progress in bringing clarity to the roles played by different actors in the United Nations system, in such key areas as disarmament, demobilization and reintegration, security sector reform and rule of law. We shall anticipate the outcome of the ongoing reviews of roles and responsibilities in these areas. As we all know, a more coherent and effective peacebuilding response will benefit from clarity and consequently from establishing solid accountability frameworks for actions in these priority peacebuilding areas. Thirdly, where the relationship between the United Nations and the World Bank is concerned, the PBC devoted a significant portion of its activities in 2010 to exploring means to strengthen the partnership with the World Bank. We therefore welcome the ongoing initiatives to strengthen the relationship with between the United Nations and the World Bank at the headquarters level and underline the need for more concrete progress in the field. There are encouraging signs of more dynamic country-specific linkages, such as in the case of the Central African Republic. Fourthly, on financing, we cannot overemphasize the need for coordinated and more predictable financial support for peacebuilding initiatives. We therefore reaffirm the need for flexible financing for peacebuilding instruments. We noted in this regard the progress made in the process for Peacebuilding Fund projects approval through the Immediate Response Facility and an increased envelope from this facility for up to $10 million. The PBC has contributed to the report on women’s participation in peacebuilding during the drafting phase. We noted the action plan, which aimed at a more gender-responsive peacebuilding agenda. As members are aware, the PBC mandate recognizes the role that women play in peacebuilding, both as victims of conflict and as critical agents for positive change and for rebuilding societies emerging from conflict. The PBC will continue to work with all relevant actors in the countries on its agenda, to ensure that its advice is gender-responsive and that women’s role and participation in peacebuilding are appropriately reflected. We also look forward to engaging with the newly established UN Women, and we take this opportunity to congratulate Mrs. Michelle Bachelet on her assumption of the leadership of that new agency. In conclusion, I wish to note that the progress in developing the Secretary-General’s reports related to peacebuilding has helped to highlight a number of opportunities and challenges facing the continuing evolution of the United Nations peacebuilding agenda. By generating the need for the actors to engage in and contribute to the recommendations, we are gradually placing emphasis on the need for better integration of efforts. The PBC is committed to continue to champion the cause for a more responsive, coherent and integrated United Nations peacebuilding agenda. A closer synergy between the Security Council and the Commission will certainly be a crucial step on the path towards that end.

I thank Mr. Wittig for his briefing.

We are very grateful for this opportunity to discuss the Secretary- General’s reports on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2010/386) and on women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466). I would like to thank the Secretary-General and the Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission for their briefings today. Over two and a half years have passed since the first peacebuilding report (S/2009/304) was commissioned. That report was commissioned as a result of concerns about the support provided by the international community — including, in particular, the United Nations — to countries emerging from conflict. Many of the issues that it identified were not new, but the process gave fresh impetus to the effort to resolve the familiar problems of fragmentation, weak leadership, lack of strategy and sluggish deployment of civilian experts and finance. The same is true for the women and peacebuilding report. Many of the issues in this good report are also not new. The problem has been one of delivery, not ignorance of the issues. We have made progress over the past two years, but not enough. What we now need over the next two years is a shift from reflection and debate in New York to roll-out and implementation on the ground. And to do that, we propose a five-point course of action. First, we need to wrap up outstanding programmes of reform. These include finalizing the civilian capacity review, clarifying roles and responsibilities, and putting in place new and creative ways to enhance the relationship between the United Nations and the World Bank. Secondly, we should learn lessons about what works from those reforms that have already been completed, notably on leadership, integrated planning and finance. We must ensure that those lessons are systematically fed into the planning and implementation of other missions. Here, I would like to highlight the example of Sierra Leone, where good leadership and integration of effort have led to a real step-change in United Nations support to the country. Thirdly, we need to focus on issues where there are persistent bottlenecks to sustainable peacebuilding. The United Nations system, working closely and more effectively with other international partners, should get better at helping a country unblock those bottlenecks. We have seen time and again that a lack of progress in a number of key areas — including, in particular, security sector reform and strengthening the rule of law, restoring other core government functions and revitalizing the economy — can hold back progress and risk a return to conflict. Fourthly, we need to see real progress on the ground in priority countries. For example, in Liberia we want to see the transition of the United Nations presence shortly after the elections. We see the Peacebuilding Commission, following its very helpful recent review, as having a critical role in preparing for this by helping to extend and boost police capacity so that the United Nations can hand over responsibility for safety and security to the national authorities. Another example is the Democratic Republic of the Congo. This Council sent a strong signal earlier this year in turning the United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo into the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The focus should increasingly be on stabilization, with peacebuilding going hand in hand with robust peacekeeping. We cannot successfully address the root causes of the violence and insecurity that prevail in the Democratic Republic of the Congo without reforming the police and the army and without real improvements in the capability of the country’s justice sector. Fifthly and finally, post-conflict peacebuilding cannot be truly successful without ensuring that women are an equal part of the process. They need to be routinely involved in conflict resolution, post- conflict peacebuilding and governance in order to achieve sustainable peace. In this, the tenth anniversary year of resolution 1325 (2000), we welcome the Secretary-General’s report on women’s participation in peacebuilding as an important step in that direction. The challenges to effective women’s participation in peacebuilding are significant, but this is all the more reasons for unity of effort. The Secretary-General’s report sets out a clear direction for the United Nations system, the international community and conflict- affected States to deliver a practical difference to women’s involvement on the ground. We consider that the newly established United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women will have an important role in driving this forward.

My delegation is grateful to Uganda for having organized this debate, as it gives us an opportunity to continue our discussions on the two latest reports on peacebuilding. We are also grateful to the Secretary-General for having presented them today. Austria warmly welcomes both reports and looks forward to the United Nations system’s continued coherent engagement in implementing the agenda for action, as well as the new action plan laid out in the report on the role of women in peacebuilding (S/2010/466). I should also like to welcome the Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), Ambassador Wittig, and to thank him for his presentation today and his leadership of the Commission. Austria associates itself with the statement to be delivered by the representative of the European Union later in this meeting. The Secretary-General’s follow-up report on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2010/386) rightly points out that, despite important progress made by the United Nations and its partners in the area of peacebuilding, the main challenges remain. We welcome the Secretary-General’s efforts to enhance effective leadership, both at Headquarters and in the field, as well as those aimed at improved planning and strategy development. Enhanced coordination, from our point of view, must also take place outside of the United Nations system in order to avoid duplication and to ensure the efficiency of peacebuilding efforts. We appreciate efforts to intensify cooperation with regional and subregional organizations, such as the European Union and the African Union, as well as with the international financial institutions. It is essential to make maximum use of partners with a comparative advantage on the ground. My country has repeatedly stressed the importance of national ownership of peacebuilding processes. In order to promote national leadership and ensure the sustainability of progress, all peacebuilding efforts need to draw upon existing national capacities to the greatest extent possible. We therefore welcome efforts to assess existing capacities as a basis for the deployment of international civilian expertise. The ongoing review of civilian capacity will contribute to ensuring that civilian expertise in peacebuilding is deployed in an efficient and timely manner, and that specialized skills to address women’s need are included. Decisive action aimed at establishing durable peace and long-term sustainable development must be undertaken from the earliest stage onwards and go hand in hand with the possible deployment of integrated peacekeeping missions. This is a point that the Council has repeatedly discussed over the past months and years. Restoring the rule of law, ensuring respect for human rights, and providing for the effective disarmament, demobilization and the reintegration of former combatants, security sector reform and the return and reintegration of refugees and internally displaced persons must be key priorities in the immediate aftermath of a conflict. They must be complemented by the reform and re-establishment of effective and independent justice institutions and reconciliation mechanisms. A coordinated and coherent approach is needed in order to ensure women’s full participation in all peacebuilding efforts. The relative absence of women from peace negotiations and post-conflict planning processes has recently been demonstrated by concrete figures in a study by the United Nations Development Fund for Women. Women rarely assume core Government functions; they are not able to ensure that their issues are addressed in peace accords and peace processes; and they are not in a position to ensure the prioritization of their needs in planning processes or adequate financial allocations to address them. This problem needs to be addressed by the Council and the United Nations system in a more consistent manner. Austria therefore fully supports the Secretary- General’s action plan for gender-responsive peacebuilding with its seven commitments, and calls upon the Secretariat and other relevant bodies and agencies to translate these commitments into concrete programmes, ensuring that the peacebuilding priorities identified by the Secretary-General in his 2009 report (S/2009/304) are met in a gender-responsive way to ensure the full participation of women. Austria highly welcomes the crucial role of the PBC in addressing a country’s post-conflict needs and in promoting and ensuring women’s participation in all peacebuilding efforts as outlined in the report of the Secretary-General. We would like to underline the need for the Council to involve the PBC and make use of its advice from the very outset. This is clearly an area where improvement — if I may say so — is possible. I would add that this also applies to the relationship between the Council and the country-specific configurations of the Peacebuilding Commission. We have also looked at possibilities for intensifying this cooperation, and I think the informal working group on working methods has made a number of very important suggestions in this field as well. By promoting a coherent and integrated approach that highlights the principles of national ownership and regional cooperation, the PBC provides valuable support for long-term democratic consolidation and sustained economic development. The fact that Liberia has recently been added to the agenda of the PBC proves that the PBC’s engagement continues to be perceived as providing substantial advantages and benefits to post-conflict countries. We welcome the report of the three co-facilitators on the review of the Commission (S/2010/393, annex), its thorough analysis of strengths and weaknesses and the broad range of recommendations made therein, and it will be good to hear all three facilitators today in the framework of our debate. Austria looks forward to the Council’s and the General Assembly’s consideration of the report and to the adoption of a resolution in due course in order for the Secretary-General and all other relevant actors to set the implementation of the recommendations in motion. Furthermore, we are looking forward to regular updates by the Secretary-General on efforts to ensure women’s full participation in peacebuilding. The indicators to measure progress in the implementation of resolution 1325 (2000) constitute a useful tool to track progress in this regard. Finally, Sir, I would like to thank you and your delegation for preparing the draft presidential statement that will be adopted today.

Let me also thank the Secretary-General and Ambassador Wittig for their leadership, as well as the Chairs of the Peacebuilding Commission’s country-specific configurations for all they do to advance the Commission’s work both in the field and in New York. The United States continues to strongly support the Peacebuilding Commission’s work, since promoting sustainable peace lies at the heart of the United Nations mission. Today let me underscore four key points. First, former Secretary-General Annan used to speak of the “missing middle” between peacekeeping and sustainable development. The Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) was created five years ago as an important first step towards filling that gap. Supporting sustainable peace requires linking many actors together. Progress has sometimes been slower than we would have hoped, but the Commission today is delivering on the commitment it has made to the countries on its agenda. Indeed, the addition of Liberia to the PBC’s agenda demonstrates growing faith in this important new institution. And the United States decision to take on a leading role in the PBC’s recent mission to Liberia is a signal of our commitment to Liberia’s recovery, as well as to the PBC’s ongoing development. Much of the PBC’s success will be judged by its work in country-specific situations. And we are therefore pleased that more countries are choosing to become part of its agenda. This is a testament to its potential for generating greater coherence among donors and spurring frank dialogue on the underlying causes of instability that so often mean tragic relapses into conflict. The Peacebuilding Commission is gaining strength as an institution. It continues to play an important role by bringing additional attention and resources to countries emerging from conflict and proposing strategies to build sustainable peace in the wake of bitter conflict. But to truly serve as the leading actor on peacebuilding, the Commission must do more to link ambitions in New York with programmes in the field. It must also coordinate better with international institutions running programmes and assessing needs in post-conflict countries. The PBC should also encourage a range of actors including United Nations funds and programmes, traditional and non-traditional donors, the Bretton Woods institutions and the peacebuilding community of civil society, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and academia to support coherence in the field through more inclusive dialogue, greater innovation, stronger best practices and better coordination, resource delivery and capacity-building. Secondly, the success of United Nations efforts is highly dependent on the experience and capabilities of its field personnel. Sometimes the sacrifice of a battalion of soldiers can be wasted, if it is not accompanied and succeeded by the timely advice and engagement of seasoned civilian peacebuilding experts. But often these key civilian personnel are hard to find, or take too long to recruit and deploy. We therefore appreciate the Secretary-General’s decision to launch a high-level review of international civilian peacebuilding capacities and look forward to its results early in 2011. Thirdly, if United Nations efforts to build peace are to be truly sustainable, they must incorporate women throughout the process. Where women’s roles are ignored, peacebuilding is more likely to fail. Gender is not just a box to be checked. It is a key ingredient in the planning phase, throughout implementation and in the evaluation of plans. The seven-part action plan laid out by the Secretary-General pushes this process forward and commits to the more systematic and substantive engagement of women in peacemaking and planning processes in the wake of armed conflict. We endorse that commitment strongly, and we recognize the need for adequate funding to support women’s roles in peacebuilding. But we must also remember that an action plan means little, unless and until it is implemented. The United Nations must therefore commit itself to monitor, evaluate and adapt the proposed action plan, lest we lose the very impact that we seek. Finally, each organ of the United Nations, including every major fund and programme, should embrace peacebuilding’s cross-cutting nature. Efforts to build sustainable peace can start with the arrival of United Nations peacekeepers, aid workers or diplomats, and they can continue through the longer- term development efforts. But peacebuilding success ultimately depends on leadership from the country emerging from conflict itself. And the United Nations must make it a top priority to build the capacities of local leaders and communities. With the right mandate, leadership and resources, the United Nations can and should play an indispensable role in helping post-conflict societies find their footing on the path to lasting peace and prosperity. So we must work together to develop the critical peacebuilding capacities needed to fulfil the Council’s mandate to advance international peace and security and to improve the prospects for lasting progress in countries emerging from conflict and chaos. The United States is pleased as well to support the draft presidential statement to be issued by the Council today.

I thank you, Mr. President, for convening this debate. France endorses the statement to be delivered by the representative of the European Union. I think that everyone around this table is in broad agreement regarding the need to improve the effectiveness of the means by which the international community takes action to prevent a country recently emerged from conflict from relapsing into a crisis. I believe there is also consensus on the fact that this is a long-term and difficult endeavour. It is difficult because it requires that institutions with very different practices and traditions, and that clearly cherish their autonomy, work together. It is also difficult because we must simultaneously conduct a set of very different tasks — from the disarmament of armed groups to the strengthening of State institutions — and because one cannot employ a sequential approach. As we have already heard in this Chamber, we have to simultaneously conduct peacekeeping and lay the groundwork for peacebuilding. Lastly, it is difficult because we must better assess the risks associated with new threats, such as drug and human trafficking, organized crime and even corruption, which have great potential to destabilize fragile countries. In this respect, I believe that there is no more telling example of what we are discussing here than the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. I am not the first to cite this example. We know that we cannot indefinitely remain in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, but that we can withdraw the United Nations forces only if we leave behind State institutions that are sufficiently sound to ensure the development and stability of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. We will do so, of course, alongside the Congolese authorities. These reconstruction tasks are tremendous. Moreover, we might well ask ourselves whether the area is really in a post-conflict situation. It is therefore essential that a responsible relationship be established between the authorities of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the actors of the international community as a whole. The United Nations have drafted a state reconstruction plan for Kivu — the stabilization and reconstruction plan for areas emerging from armed conflict — and we must ensure that all the international institutions, in particular the European Union, which is the leading donor to and backer of countries emerging from crisis, work together towards the same goal. There is a need for synergy. Given the gravity of the crisis from which the Democratic Republic of the Congo has only recently emerged, it is the primary challenge for our Organization. We have examples of relative success. Sierra Leone was raised as an example by my British colleague, but we also have the positive experiences of the United Nations Integrated Peacebuilding Office in the Central African Republic and the United Nations Integrated Office in Burundi. We must learn from these experiences insofar as they guarantee a political dialogue with the authorities of the host country and close coordination in the reconstruction efforts led by various United Nations agencies. The withdrawal strategy for these offices should be carefully prepared — because these situations are looming already and will continue to be an issue — in order to avoid opening new gaps or the re-emergence of tensions due to a lack of resources or attention from the international community. There is no one-size-fits- all solution. Each problem must be considered on a case-by-case basis by the international community. We are closely following the work of the Senior Advisory Group for the Review of International Civilian Capacities, led by Mr. Jean-Marie Guéhenno. This matter was raised by Mr. Peter Wittig and the Ambassador of Austria. We are awaiting bold recommendations to better meet the real needs of post- conflict countries and the competencies available at the international level from other Member States and our system as a whole. To work towards peacebuilding as soon as an armed conflict has ended is to pay due attention to the contribution of women as a key aspect of peacebuilding. How could we imagine setting aside half of a society that is trying to rebuild itself? Leaving women out would undoubtedly pave the way for future disasters. That is why we believe that women must have access to decision-making in the political, economic, social and cultural arenas in a more systematic manner and on an equal footing with men. In this regard, we fully support the work of the Secretary-General and we invite the United Nations system — and above all UN Women and its Executive Director, Ms. Bachelet — to implement it. We have been discussing this matter for a long time. It is a complex task, but we have unfortunate examples in Timor-Leste and Haiti demonstrating that, without integrating the peacebuilding stage into the very design and implementation of peacekeeping operations, we will fail. We must therefore continue to improve the resources at our disposal. That is why, Sir, I thank you once again for organizing this debate.

At the outset, we would like to thank you, Sir, for convening this important meeting to discuss the topic of peacebuilding and the significance of female participation in this process. We are confident that our deliberations today will constructively contribute to this important item on the Security Council’s agenda. We would also like to thank Secretary-General Ban Ki- moon and the Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission, Ambassador Peter Wittig, for their detailed briefings. Bosnia and Herzegovina believes that the process of peacebuilding must be supported by a variety of national and international actors at different levels, including political, technical, operational, national and regional. It is very important that, in the immediate aftermath of conflict, the roles and responsibilities of different actors within the United Nations system be clearly defined. Peacebuilding, as a primarily national challenge and responsibility, is largely shaped and sequenced by national factors. In that respect, an early focus on national capacity development is a central theme of the United Nations system’s engagement in peacebuilding. The development of national capacity and ownership are among the key priorities in this process. We are aware of the fact that peacebuilding priorities may vary in response and can include inclusive political processes, the provision of basic services, restoring core Government functions, or providing basic security or economic revitalization measures. Those activities are aimed at making peace self-sustaining. If we are to be able to provide security and deliver services to the population in the immediate aftermath of conflict, priority must be given to the restoration of State authority and the capacity-building of national institutions. Only a viable State with a strong structure will contribute to peace and stability and reduce the risk of relapse into conflict. Stronger partnerships with Member States, regional and subregional organizations, international financial institutions, civil society and other actors are preconditions for delivering greater impact and results on the ground. In order to implement certain peacebuilding tasks, it is crucial to strengthen connections and linkages within the United Nations family. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to provide early and predictable support in priority areas of peacebuilding. In that regard, the role of the Peacebuilding Commission, with its integrated and coherent approach, should be emphasized. As a unique intergovernmental advisory body, its function of addressing the needs of countries emerging from conflict towards sustainable peace is of vital importance. The need to link security and development, recognized in the mechanism of the Peacebuilding Commission, should be linked to utilizing its potential to play the preventive role defined in its mandate. Bosnia and Herzegovina is of the view that mainstreaming women’s participation in peacebuilding, addressing their post-conflict needs, increasing their engagement in post-conflict planning and governance, and enhancing their capacity to contribute to economic recovery and overall social stability are key issues in post-conflict societies. We therefore consider that increasing women’s confidence in the political process not only requires action in the immediate post-conflict period, but also influences the design of provisions on power-sharing or justice. It is of vital importance to enhance the funding that addresses the specific needs of women and girls, the economic empowerment of women and gender equality. The gender perspective needs to be filtered through country-specific situations. It should also be an integral part of every aspect of peacebuilding on the ground. To that end, the role of women in peacebuilding needs to move from a niche concern to the mainstream. Enhancing women’s capacity to engage in peacebuilding needs to include, inter alia, supporting peace processes through independent diplomatic initiatives, providing bilateral assistance to post-conflict countries and participating within United Nations intergovernmental bodies. We would like to underline the importance of enhancing the mobilization of resources for initiatives that address women’s specific peacebuilding needs, advance their equality and empower them. We urge Member States and other partners to render their support. We welcome the fact that there is overwhelming support in the international community for vigorous action to ensure women’s full participation in peacebuilding, and we urge Member States to make substantial long-term investments in women’s security and productive potential. We also welcome the establishment of the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women and encourage its close work and cooperation with relevant United Nations agencies and other stakeholders in that direction. Much has been achieved in the area of peacebuilding, but there is still much work ahead of us. Nevertheless, we cannot lose the momentum towards starting to revise procedures and design programmes, with careful deliberations on actions to be taken without delay. It is important to point out that long- term investment provides the potential for economic recovery, a more stable society and lasting peace. Finally, we would like to reiterate our readiness to share our knowledge, experience and lessons learned on post-conflict peacebuilding in every situation where our first-hand experience may be seen as relevant, reliable and useful.

I would like to start by thanking you, Mr. President, for your kind words about the Turkish presidency of the Council in September. I congratulate you on your presidency this month and wish you and the Ugandan mission all the best for the month of October. I would like to commend your presidency for organizing this meeting. I would also like to express our appreciation to the Secretary-General for his thorough and analytical reports on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2010/386) and on women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466). Let me also thank Ambassador Wittig for his valuable contribution and the active work of the Peacebuilding Commission. I would like to briefly highlight some of the important conclusions that we have drawn from those reports. First, we are glad to see that the interlinkages and interactions among peacemaking, peacekeeping and peacebuilding are now better appreciated. In that regard, the report of the Secretary-General makes an important contribution by laying down an integrated strategic framework for peace operations, in which these processes complement and mutually reinforce each other from the very outset. That is also precisely what the presidential statement (S/PRST/2010/18) adopted at the Security Council summit held on 23 September 2010 called for (see S/PV.6389), and we believe that the United Nations is on the right track. Secondly, the report of the Secretary-General points to the numerous short-term challenges in the immediate aftermath of conflicts and provides guidance on how those challenges, if addressed in a proper and timely way, could be turned into opportunities to sustain peace. An important corollary is that short-term peacebuilding efforts need to be integrated into longer-term strategies. In that regard, the Secretary-General’s report rightly makes a strong case for more effective United Nations leadership on the ground, backed up by effective strategic planning capabilities at United Nations Headquarters. Thus, we welcome the steps taken towards providing improved guidance and support to field missions and also support the Secretary-General’s initiative to deploy integrated and effective leadership teams in those field missions. Thirdly, we also concur with the Secretary- General that peacebuilding is primarily a national responsibility and that the principal role of the international community should be to support national peacebuilding efforts. The emphasis of the Secretary- General’s report on nationally owned planning processes and national capacity-building is therefore well placed. Thus, we believe that the international community should assist in building or rebuilding national capacities in a sustainable way, instead of simply substituting for those capacities. That will prevent a culture of dependency from taking root in those societies and provide credible transition and exit strategies. In that regard, while there is certain merit in trying to generalize about the steps to be taken, we should also not lose sight of the fact that every country is unique. Local conditions, needs, opportunities and limitations may differ considerably from one country to another, which means that there is no single blueprint for dealing with the challenges facing peacebuilding activities across the board. Rather, the strategic planning of peacebuilding activities should be sufficiently flexible to take into account country- specific capacities and other idiosyncrasies. Fourthly, the diversity of challenges and complexities associated with peacebuilding efforts today suggests that we will continue to need the support and contribution of a myriad of actors, including international financial institutions, regional and subregional organizations, civil society and the private sector. Indeed, various actors, such as the African Union, the European Union, NATO and the World Bank, have become established players in peacekeeping and peacebuilding efforts, and the United Nations should support and make use of the capacities of those organizations. Of course, coordination among those stakeholders is also critical, and the role of the United Nations in that regard is simply essential. Related to that, we also support the efforts aimed at strengthening the international civilian capacity to be deployed in countries emerging from conflict. We hope that the review process, which is presently under way under the auspices of the Secretary-General, will lead to a broadening and deepening of the pool of civilian experts available for deployment in a coordinated and coherent way. Last but not least, we wish to underline the importance of mainstreaming women’s participation in peacebuilding efforts and of increasing opportunities for women to engage in decision-making and economic recovery. In that context, we welcome the Secretary- General’s action plan for gender-responsive peacebuilding, which aims to address women’s post- conflict needs and remove the constraints on their full participation in peacebuilding processes. The draft presidential statement before us today contains important elements on all the issues I have just touched upon, and we fully support it. However, allow me to conclude by reiterating the Secretary- General’s call on all United Nations Member States to play their part in the collective efforts, not only through the commitment of resources, but also through coherent, consistent and sustained participation in peacebuilding activities. Longer-term commitment, an integrated approach and capacity-building are indeed the key words. For our part, Turkey will continue to be guided by those key principles and will actively engage in all peacebuilding efforts.

I would like to thank the Secretary-General and Mr. Wittig, Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission and the Permanent Representative of Germany, for their respective briefings on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict and on women’s participation in peacebuilding. Japan also appreciates the President’s initiative to convene this very important debate on post-conflict peacebuilding following the ministerial- level discussion in April and the Security Council summit held last month (see S/PV.6389). Japan welcomes the report of the Secretary- General (S/2010/386) on the implementation of the agenda outlined in his 2009 report (S/2009/304). His observations are all certainly relevant. We look forward to further progress on all priority items set forth. Among other things, Japan would like to highlight the following three points, with a view to filling in gaps in the process of transition from peacekeeping to peacebuilding. First, in the light of the utmost importance of national capacity development, more robust action is needed in mainstreaming it as a system-wide priority and in integrating short-term interventions into longer- term strategies for peacebuilding. As shown in dire cases such as Timor-Leste and Liberia, exit strategies rely on national security capabilities. Secondly, Japan stresses the need for the United Nations system as a whole to clarify the division of roles for engaging in post-conflict peacebuilding. In that regard, Japan calls upon the Secretariat to complete the reviews in the remaining sectors of the six key peacebuilding sectors, in particular the areas of disarmament, demobilization and reintegration and security sector reform, as early as possible. Based on the outcome of the reviews, we should embark upon establishing a better coordinated system to increase the effectiveness of United Nations support on the ground. Thirdly, since its establishment in 2005, the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) has made steady progress, but we believe the Commission should further develop its functions. First and foremost, it is essential that the PBC identify peacebuilding priorities in a timely manner through consultation with post-conflict countries and facilitate the necessary support from the international community, as appropriate. Japan is ready to take an active part in the discussion of the PBC review, taking into account the report submitted by the three co-facilitators, from Mexico, Ireland and South Africa (S/2010/393, annex). Finally, with regard to the transition process, I would like to stress the importance of strengthening the PBC’s advisory function vis-à-vis the Security Council. In a recent note by the Council President on working methods (S/2010/507), the Council expressed its intention to invite, as appropriate, the Chairs of the country-specific configurations of the PBC to participate in formal meetings of the Council at which the situation concerning the country in question is considered, or on a case-by-case basis, for an exchange of views in an informal dialogue. Japan hopes that deepened substantive discussions between the two organs will lead to a better United Nations impact on the ground. In that regard, Japan proposes to explore the possibility of holding such an informal dialogue before the end of this year in an appropriate manner. Japan welcomes the Secretary-General’s report on women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466). We expect that the Secretary-General will steadfastly implement the action plan for gender- responsive peacebuilding to which he committed in the report, as part of his comprehensive agenda to improve United Nations peacebuilding efforts. The Security Council will commemorate the tenth anniversary of its landmark resolution 1325 (2000) later this month. In that connection, the Council should conduct a substantive review of the implementation of the action plan and its peacebuilding agenda in order to further mainstream the issue of women and peace and security in the Council’s overall agenda over the next decade. Japan very much expects that the newly established United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UN Women) will play an important role through the implementation of both policies and programmes. The agenda regarding women and peace and security, including women’s participation in peacebuilding, should be addressed by coordinating the relevant United Nations activities effectively and efficiently. Japan will actively contribute to the activities of UN Women while continuing to support the enhancement of women’s participation in peacebuilding, including, inter alia, through the economic empowerment of women in post-conflict situations from the perspective of human security.

I would like to thank you, Mr. President, for holding this debate. We are also grateful to the Secretary-General and to Mr. Peter Wittig, Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission, for their briefings today. The progress report of the Secretary-General on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2010/386) is encouraging for two main reasons. First, it puts the right emphasis on the multifaceted nature of sustainable peace, and therefore that of peacebuilding. Gone are the days when peace could be seen as the mere absence of armed conflict. The report is also encouraging because it makes clear that the senior management of the Organization is engaged in a serious effort to adjust institutional practices and mechanisms to that concept of peace. We thank the Secretary-General for leading that process within the system. Among the initiatives now under way, I wish to single out two of particular importance, namely, integrated planning, which is critical to ensure that a truly holistic approach to peacebuilding prevails, and the establishment of unified teams of civilian experts to assist the heads of missions. Such units must themselves be comprehensive in scope. They must include experts not only in the rule of law, human rights and security sector reform, but also in public administration and socio-economic development. Without staff in those latter areas, our support for United Nations action in them will tend to be merely rhetorical. My delegation could not agree more with the Secretary-General when he emphasizes national capacity development as the cornerstone of peacebuilding efforts. Several of the protracted crises that the United Nations faces today are, to a large extent, fuelled, if not caused, precisely by weak governance and the lack of institutional capacity. We also concur with the view that support for capacity development must be a system-wide priority. The ultimate goal of several parts of the United Nations system should be to work themselves out of business. Member States are also a key piece of that puzzle. We must once and for all move away from supply-driven cooperation and focus on finding the right way to support partners without stifling ownership. In so doing, we will be serving our own long-term interests. In that regard, we reiterate our support for ongoing efforts aimed at establishing pools of civilian capacity to be expeditiously deployed in the field. Needless to say, such pools should not replace existing local capacity. They ought to resort to experts from developing countries as much as possible, especially from the region of the country concerned, and must help to develop national capacity in post-conflict countries, even in the immediate aftermath of conflict. The current review of civilian capacities should also be consistent with the holistic approach to peacebuilding and put forth recommendations on all the areas set out in the report of Secretary-General of last year (S/2009/304), including the provision of basic services and economic revitalization. Another key issue is the interaction of peacekeeping and peacebuilding. The emerging consensus that they are not sequential forms of engagement must now be made operational. In those cases where peacekeepers can be early peacebuilders, it is illogical not to use some of their existing capacities to start laying the groundwork for peacebuilding. That is especially true for civil affairs components of peacekeeping operations, in particular with respect to the consolidation of State authority. The area of job creation, which is key to stability, is also potentially relevant for the interaction between peacekeeping and peacebuilding. As indicated by the Secretary-General, greater synergies between peacekeeping operations and the activities financed by the PBF may contribute to broadening the reach of projects. As we near the anniversary of resolution 1325 (2000), the importance of involving and empowering women in all stages of the conflict is very much on our minds. In that area, as in others, our main concern is sustainability. Our ultimate goal must be to help permanently improve women’s place in society. It is with that in mind that we are studying the Secretary-General’s report on women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466), for which we are grateful. Today, I wish to make a few preliminary comments on one of the plan’s key commitments, namely, women’s participation in economic recovery. Although Brazil is not a post-conflict country, our experience suggests there are significant long-term social and economic benefits in steering social programmes towards women. A similar approach may be fruitful in peacebuilding. It is not merely a question of distributive justice, but of inducing meaningful change. Ensuring women’s economic inclusion has the potential to permanently transform their role in society, regardless of cultural and historical particularities. That should be our collective ultimate goal. Finally, I wish to say a few words on the report of the co-facilitators of the Peacebuilding Commission review process (S/2010/393, annex). We thank them for their work. The document is quite comprehensive, although more could have been said about the work of the country-specific configurations. The report also sets out recommendations that deserve careful consideration in the General Assembly, the Security Council and the Peacebuilding Commission. Among such recommendations, I would single out those concerning support to national capacity- building, the developmental aspects of peacebuilding, the emphasis on youth employment, coordination and coherence, and the strengthening of the relationship with the General Assembly, the Security Council and the Economic and Social Council. Our peacebuilding efforts are a key element of our strategy, both as an Organization and as individual Governments, to move from a simplistic and fragmented approach to peace to a more complex and integrated way of consolidating peace — one that fully understands that peace, security, development and human rights are closely linked and that peace will not be sustainable without simultaneous and coordinated action in all four aspects. The challenge is to translate that concept into practice and above all in a new mentality — in capitals, in New York and in the field.

I now give the floor to His Excellency Mr. William Habib, Acting Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Lebanon.

Mr. President, I wish to thank you for having organized this debate. I convey our gratitude to His Excellency the Secretary-General and to the Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission and Permanent Representative of Germany for their statements, which were invaluable. A great many regions throughout the world continue to be devastated by conflict, which is proof of the need, on the one hand, to strive to contain tensions and, on the other, to assist States emerging from conflict to move to the phase of lasting peace and to achieve development. Here we wish to express our gratitude to the Secretary-General for his report (S/2010/386), and we agree with him that the main challenge facing the international community is peacebuilding. We support the plan of action drawn up by the Secretary-General to bolster the United Nations response to post-crisis situations. We welcome the positive measures adopted and implemented thus far, and we consider that in future we should focus on a faster response, more in line with the needs of peacebuilding. We wish to make some comments in that context. First, we welcome the measures adopted to back the role of the leadership on the ground and to strengthen cooperation between United Nations Headquarters and country teams through systematic communications, offering expertise and strengthening accountability. Secondly, we should establish an integrated strategy for rapid peacebuilding, a strategy that would incorporate a great many priorities in various fields — political, security and development. That strategy should be based on an impartial analysis of the root causes of conflict and its dynamics. It should also build bridges between short-term results and preparation for structural, long-term objectives. The strategy should be implemented through dialogue and coordination with stakeholders at the local level. It should be based on an assessment of existing local capacities and potential in order to utilize them as successfully as possible. Thirdly, national ownership is critical to ensuring the success of peace efforts. Therefore national authorities should discharge their primary responsibility, which is to rebuild institutions for security, governance and economic revival, with the assistance of the United Nations and international partners. Fourthly, the United Nations should bolster relations with all partners to provide the necessary financing in a timely way, in accordance with national priorities for peacebuilding. In that regard, increased contributions to the Peacebuilding Fund since 2009, the Fund’s undertaking the process of accurately assessing the results of its actions, and the confirmation of its impact are positive contributions. Lebanon believes that a number of local infrastructure projects are insufficiently financed, despite their positive impact in changing the course of the conflict. All of that impedes the peacebuilding process. Fifthly, we believe that peacebuilding is an effort that is collective in nature, one in which a great many United Nations agencies and international partners participate. To ensure greater effectiveness, it is imperative that roles be clearly defined and the division of labour in the area of peacebuilding clearly mapped out, based on technical expertise and the direction that the peacebuilding process takes on the ground. Sixthly, women and children are the main victims of conflict. In the post-conflict period, women should be given the opportunity to participate in reconstruction and peacebuilding, as well as in peace negotiations. Those factors serve to promote the agreements that the parties are working to reach. Furthermore, including women in positions of power reduces the likelihood of a resumption of conflict. That is why we concur with the Secretary-General’s statement that greater efforts should be made to meet women’s needs in post-conflict situations and to increase their participation in the peacebuilding process. Lastly, we welcome the ongoing review of the Peacebuilding Commission, and we hope it will lead to increased coordination between the Commission and the Security Council. It is often said that the end of a conflict does not always mean that peace has been achieved. Quite often, building genuine, lasting peace after a conflict is a complex and arduous road. It is, however, one that should be taken, because it is the only one that will lead to the stability and development of societies.

We are grateful to the Ugandan delegation for organizing this Council meeting on the topic of post-conflict peacebuilding. The complex nature of the tasks that face States going through the “hot” phase of a crisis requires a balanced strategy for carrying them out, one based on the interconnectedness of security, social and economic development and human rights- related issues. A holistic approach is needed, based on united, objective and predictable logistical and financial sources, effectively pooled stabilizing action, close coordination, taking regional contexts into consideration and the maximum possible use of the potential of regional organizations. That is how we view the Secretary-General’s report on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2010/386). Many of its ideas and proposals are rational, in our view. It is clear that peacebuilding activity must be based on the principle of national responsibility for approaches to implementing it. The success of peacebuilding efforts in the Middle East, Afghanistan, Africa, Haiti and Timor-Leste results from taking into account the interests and priorities of the host countries. Any assistance from the international community, regardless of the form it takes, should be at the consent of national Governments, with respect for the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity. It is important to be mindful of the specifics that apply to each individual State. A key component of successful post-conflict peacebuilding is strengthening national and social potentials. Undoubtedly, the United Nations has a special role in coordinating international post-conflict rehabilitation efforts. We understand well that such action implies a great many difficulties and requires coordinated efforts on the part of the United Nations Secretariat, programmes and funds, from Member States, regional organizations and international financial institutions. Such difficulties include, as the report discusses, fragmented and insufficient coordination, irrational division of labour among peacebuilding stakeholders and shortcomings in financing mechanisms. That is why we support the Secretary-General’s efforts to bolster, in accordance with the existing mandate, the coordinating role of the United Nations in key peacebuilding areas. They include combating organized crime and drug trafficking, incorporating post-conflict needs-assessment practices, international civil capacity reviews and the creation and training of United Nations teams of experts, while observing the most equitable possible geographical representation. Many early peacebuilding tasks now fall to United Nations peacekeeping operations. While carrying out their main mission — the advancement of the peace process — United Nations peacekeepers play a critical role in establishing conditions conducive to the provision of larger-scale peacebuilding assistance. We should bear in mind, however, that peacebuilding is a lengthy and multifaceted process, far exceeding the time taken by peacekeeping operations. We attach great importance to the Peacebuilding Fund as an emergency financing mechanism that promotes the involvement of long-term reconstruction and development mechanisms. We support our position with an annual contribution to the Fund of $2 million. We continue to study the Secretary-General’s report on women and peacebuilding (S/2010/466). A number of its ideas and proposals are of clear interest and can be put into practice. Excessive haste, however, is not a good idea here. As the report indicates, the implementation of its proposals will require a review of a whole range of procedures as well as changes to programme planning. We stand ready to continue to work on the Secretary-General’s proposals. We endorse the adoption of the presidential statement prepared by the Ugandan delegation.

I thank you, Mr. President, for convening today’s meeting. I welcome the statements by Secretary- General Ban Ki-moon and Ambassador Wittig, Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC). Post-conflict peacebuilding is an important component of the work of the United Nations and is of great significance in helping countries that have just emerged from conflict to achieve lasting peace. Over the past decade or so, the United Nations has taken an active part in peacebuilding in various post-conflict countries and regions and has achieved remarkable results. At the same time, the promotion of post- conflict peacebuilding is still faced with many challenges. I would like to make the five points in that regard. First, the political will of the international community is a strong guarantee for helping post- conflict countries succeed in peacebuilding. The international community should not only be well aware of the importance of post-conflict peacebuilding, but should also display firm resolve and take decisive and quick action. Peacebuilding efforts should be undertaken in the immediate aftermath of conflict. Peacebuilding and peacekeeping complement and reinforce each other and can function in harmony. Peacebuilding operations should also have an exit strategy to facilitate a smooth transition to sustainable development. Secondly, ownership by the countries concerned is a prerequisite for a successful peacebuilding process. Peacebuilding countries and administrations shoulder primary responsibility. The international community’s efforts in the area of peacebuilding should fully respect the will of the countries concerned and give free rein to country ownership. For countries in the immediate aftermath of conflict, the international community should give priority to helping them with capacity- building and improving governance. Donors should treat post-conflict countries not as mere recipients but as equal partners in cooperation. The United Nations and the relevant national agencies, while helping post-conflict countries to prepare their international development strategies for peacebuilding, should fully respect the priorities independently identified by the countries concerned, as well as the diversity of circumstances in individual countries, and adopt an integrated approach in order to spare the countries concerned additional and unnecessary administrative burdens. Thirdly, identifying priorities is important to ensuring the successful implementation of post-conflict peacebuilding. We concur with the view of the Secretary-General that post-conflict peacebuilding should focus on the five areas of ensuring basic security, building the political process, providing basic services, supporting core Government functions and revitalizing economic development. A strong political process and national reconciliation are prerequisite foundations for peacebuilding. Only by achieving speedy and early recovery and promoting socio-economic development can we win the confidence of the peoples of post- conflict countries in the peace process. It is critical to address the issue of youth employment and the reintegration of ex-combatants in order to eliminate hidden threats to social stability and to prevent relapse into conflict, and these matters should receive heightened attention. Fourthly, the PBC and regional commissions must be enabled to play a more important role in post- conflict peacebuilding. China welcomes the PBC’s five-year review of its work and hopes that Member States can reach an early consensus on the proposals for improving the Commission’s work. With a view to complying with the relevant General Assembly and Security Council resolutions, we should give full play to the unique strengths of the African Union and other regional and subregional organizations in the area of peacebuilding. China supports the efforts of the United Nations and the PBC to deepen peacebuilding cooperation with such international organizations as the World Bank. Fifthly, China pays close attention to the financing of the development of pools of experts and calls on the international community to continue to provide resources to post-conflict peacebuilding efforts and to unite in tapping new and additional sources of financing. The multi-donor trust fund should undertake appropriate reforms of its operations in order to enhance its accountability and efficiency. China has always supported the countries concerned in their peacebuilding efforts and stands ready, together with the international community, to make its own contribution to achieving peace and stability and promoting sustainable socio-economic development in the countries concerned.

Nigeria welcomes the thorough briefing provided by the Secretary-General and the presentation by Ambassador Wittig on behalf of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC). The need for increased cooperation with the Peacebuilding Commission has consistently been stressed by the Council. This debate is an opportunity to deepen our cooperation with the PBC in order to capitalize on its capacity to marshal the actors and resources necessary to realizing the objectives of peace articulated here in the Security Council. The reports before us today mark a critical turning point in the United Nations strategy for peace and security. The in-depth analysis contained in the report on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2010/386) dovetails with the proposals in the report on women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466). Nigeria welcomes the renewed emphasis on the nexus between peacekeeping, peacebuilding, security and development, and we understand the challenges faced by women in relation to conflict, as well as the invaluable contribution they can make to the establishment of peace. The Secretary-General’s report sets out a detailed model for cementing peace in fragile States in a manner that reaffirms the key role that women can play in re-establishing the fabric of recovering societies. His proposals for a more gender-responsive approach to peacebuilding, encompassing access to justice and participation in post-conflict planning and governance, duly prioritize the needs and capabilities of women in the peacebuilding context. It is encouraging to note that, as set out in document S/2010/386, the Secretary-General’s perspective on peacebuilding encompasses the breadth and depth of its component parts. Nigeria agrees that peacebuilding efforts must address peace and security, human rights, development and the humanitarian pillars of the United Nations. It will add a broader dimension to that list of priorities, within which respect for the rule of law; combating the illicit arms trade, drug trafficking and transnational organized crime; and the restoration of core Government functions must also be supported. The steady embedding of system-wide coherence and positive steps towards reliable funding are sure to benefit the peacebuilding work of the United Nations and its partners. The work that has gone into harnessing the right calibre of human capital within the United Nations system is commendable, and we are encouraged by the new measures to strengthen leadership and accountability. Yet there are so many interconnected parts to this process that we must remember that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Therefore, it is important to enhance our capabilities at every point of need in the system. Resource allocation is a difficult issue at the best of times, requiring careful and thoughtful priority- setting. Document S/2010/386 observes that, in the case of a number of United Nations missions and peacebuilding offices, the lack of pre-mandate funding slows progress and is detrimental to the implementation of critical transitional mandates. In a number of countries, including Somalia, we have witnessed the social and political costs of not matching the expressed will of the international community with adequate resources. While recognizing that this issue is not within the specific purview of the Security Council, we look forward to the proposals to be submitted by the Secretary-General to the General Assembly on this issue. The question of funding and resourcing in general is also critical from the perspective of women in peacebuilding. In order to have a real impact on the lives of women and the post-conflict societies they live in, United Nations agencies should be adequately resourced. In that way, we might provide women and girls with effective resources and protections as victims of violent conflict. Our work can also empower and engage women as protagonists of peace within the United Nations system and as political and civil society participants. There is clearly a need to enhance the mobilization of resources for initiatives to mainstream women in peacebuilding activities in order to address their peacebuilding needs, advance gender equality and empower them in peacebuilding contexts. Nigeria pledges its support for the newly created United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women. In this regard, we look forward to its full engagement in promoting the role of women in peacebuilding and in advocating for the active participation of women at all levels of decision- making and post-conflict planning. Nigeria takes comfort in the recognition that national ownership of peacebuilding processes is vital, and welcomes the reports’ recognition of the United Nations as facilitator in an explicitly supporting role. In situations of crisis, most States in conflict lack national capacities. Efforts should therefore be made to ensure that, as we strengthen national ownership, the same is done for national capacity development. Against this background of support, national Governments should be given predictable assistance by the international community. Given the complexity of the threats to peace we now face, there is an even greater imperative for the coordination of responses. A clear division of labour and accountability must be agreed on, buttressed by a common strategic framework and aligned with the objectives of each peacebuilding exercise. The Secretary-General’s proposal for focal points for each thematic area of peacebuilding is a solid starting point in this regard. In addition, I wish to emphasize the critical need for collaboration and cooperation with regional and subregional organizations within the geographical zones of the countries on the PBC agenda. The contributions of the Economic Community of West African States and the African Union in peacebuilding in their various regions are legion. We welcome the seven action points identified the report of the Secretary-General on the participation of women in peacebuilding (S/2010.466). They capture the core gaps in our efforts to promote the full and equal participation of women in post-conflict peacebuilding, as envisaged in resolutions 1325 (2000) and 1889 (2009). Nigeria commends the Secretary- General for homing in on the required actions in such considered detail. We feel strongly that, if correctly implemented, this action plan will go a long way towards actualizing the aims of resolution 1889 (2009). The two reports before us today give the Security Council an opportunity to lead the way in inclusive peacebuilding measures that address the needs of all segments of society, thereby laying the foundation for enduring peace. We welcome the adoption of the presidential statement and express the hope that, together, we can enhance the United Nations capacity to make peace a prominent feature in the lives of all those we serve.

We thank you, Mr. President, and your delegation for having organized this meeting. We welcome the statements by the Secretary-General and Ambassador Wittig, Permanent Representative of Germany, in his capacity as Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission. My delegation acknowledges the value of the reports we have before us (S/2010/386 and S/2010/466) and shares the view that we must place peacebuilding at the very centre of the work of the United Nations in various areas, including the participation of women and the strengthening of the Organization’s peacebuilding capacity. Meeting the challenge of peacebuilding requires a collective endeavour that rests upon the pillars of the United Nations: peace and security, human rights, development and humanitarian affairs, while guaranteeing respect for international law and always focusing our efforts on generating and strengthening national capacity. We welcome the recommendations contained in the report (S/2010/386) on the action plan to strengthen capacities and mechanisms to ensure an effective, systematic, planned and consistent response by the Organization in matters relating to peacebuilding in the aftermath of conflict. We consider it relevant to establish new guidelines for the integrated planning process for peacekeeping missions in order to bolster the collective and coordinated work of United Nations agents in the field and to achieve a greater complementary effect in the sectors of peace, security, humanitarian assistance and development. We reiterate the importance of deploying an increased international civilian capacity in a prompt and coordinated manner in countries emerging from conflict, in particular taking advantage of the capacities of the southern hemisphere and of women, taking into account their important contribution in generating national capacity, in particular in spheres such as the strengthening of the rule of law, disarmament, demobilization and reintegration, security sector reforms, mediation and electoral assistance. We await the study by the Peacebuilding Support Office of ways to extend and improve the list of available civilian experts, including the role of the United Nations Volunteers programme. Likewise, we acknowledge the importance of developing strategic relations between the United Nations and the World Bank with a view to articulating effective responses and improving coordination and the collective impact on the ground on the basis of accountability and the delimitation of functions and responsibilities. With regard to the report on the participation of women in peacebuilding (S/2010/466), we welcome the plan of action aimed at implementing resolution 1325 (2000) through concrete peacebuilding measures. Over the past 10 years, the Security Council has made progress and has put in place a solid framework for its gender agenda. But the time has now come for it to adopt concrete measures that enjoy the full support and political backing of the Security Council, as well as the political will of States, the United Nations system and strategic partners. We support the plan of action for the participation of women and its seven commitments. We are aware that it is an ambitious plan, but it can be achieved by joining the efforts of all of us who make up the United Nations. Likewise, it will be crucially important to ensure that all the relevant agencies, including the recently established United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women, participate actively to ensure women’s contributions in conflict resolution and decision-making processes and that their particular needs are taken into account in the very design of security and justice strategies. In discussing positive actions that should be undertaken by States at this stage of the peace process, countries have an unparalleled opportunity to ensure respect for the human rights of women and to contribute to their involvement in the civilian, political, social, cultural and economic spheres. Last December, the Presidents of the General Assembly and the Security Council named Mexico, together with Ireland and South Africa, as co-facilitators of the Peacebuilding Commission review process. During the first semester of this year, we held informal, open consultations with Member States, wide-ranging debates with key agents in the United Nations system, and meetings to consult with a broad range of interested parties and associates. On 21 July 2010, we submitted a report (S/2010/393, annex) that reflects the opinions that Member States transmitted to us in the context of a broad-ranging, open, transparent and inclusive process. Subject to the views of our colleagues from Ireland and South Africa, we believe it important to draw attention to the specificity of this dual process. That is, both the General Assembly and the Security Council should continue to work on the basis of the recommendations contained in the report, in the interest of strengthening and raising the profile of the Peacebuilding Commission. I conclude by expressing the support of my delegation for the presidential statement that we will be adopting at the end of this meeting.

I wish to start by extending to you, Mr. President, the most heartfelt congratulations of my delegation upon Uganda’s assumption of the presidency of the Security Council. We all know Uganda’s consistent interest in the issues of international peace and security. The choice of subject for today’s debate on peacebuilding, Sir, clearly shows your country’s commitment. I should also like to welcome the presence of the Secretary-General at this debate and to convey to him my gratitude for his two reports — on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2010/386) and women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466). I would also like to convey my gratitude to Ambassador Peter Wittig, Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission, for all the information he provided to us. I pay tribute to the outstanding work which he has carried out at the head of the Commission. Our debate takes place at a time when we are assessing peacebuilding experiences in Burundi, Guinea-Bissau, the Central African Republic and Sierra Leone, within the framework of the Peacebuilding Commission. This exercise affords us an opportunity to re-examine the missions entrusted to this body and to rethink our overall peacebuilding strategy on the basis of a cohesive, coordinated and integrated approach which gives pride of place to mechanisms of national and regional ownership in the reconstruction process. That is the thrust of the new United Nations peacebuilding agenda for action proposed to us by the Secretary-General in the report submitted for our consideration, and my country fully backs it. This new agenda, in our view, meets the need, on the one hand, to tailor peacekeeping operations to needs on the ground and, on the other, to take into account all aspects of post-conflict peacebuilding. Here, my country welcomes the efforts undertaken to those ends in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Chad, Timor-Leste and Afghanistan, to limit myself to these few examples. The same applies to post-disaster Haiti, following the horrible disaster that struck that country at the beginning of this year. The comprehensive and integrated approach with a view to lasting peace does not end at guaranteeing political and security stability. It must also be supported by measures aimed at laying the foundations for sustainable development and lasting democracy, while strengthening, in particular, the political, judicial and institutional architecture as well as the economic and social fabric in a post-conflict country. A number of examples illustrate the effectiveness of this approach. It is true of the elections held in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Liberia and, recently, Burundi. It is also true of the strengthening of judicial and police institutions in Liberia and Sierra Leone, as well as the creation of development poles in the Central African Republic. The statements we have just heard illustrate the extent to which peacebuilding is a complex and multifaceted endeavour. It demands the constant effort of the international community in collaboration with national authorities and, of course, an intensive mobilization of significant human and financial resources. To this end, the Peacebuilding Commission will have to continue to bolster its action on the ground and strengthen its partnerships with international financial institutions and regional organizations. The contribution of bilateral and multilateral donors is vital in this regard. Accordingly, we can only encourage the stepped- up action by the European Union and the World Bank in favour of peacebuilding undertaken by our Organization. We call for greater cooperation with the African Union and the various regional economic communities in Africa. The Council will agree that there can be no lasting peace in post-conflict countries unless women are effectively involved in the stabilization and development processes of these countries. This is addressed in resolution 1325 (2000), whose tenth anniversary we mark this month. To date, the success of this resolution is reflected in the increased participation of women in peace processes. Today, one notes the increased number of women heading peace missions and civilian components of peacekeeping operations. We are gratified by the fact that the Secretary-General’s action plan for gender-responsible peacebuilding is part and parcel of the Council’s approach aimed at bolstering the involvement of women in post-conflict peace and reconstruction efforts. This plan provides Member States with a solid and credible foundation for meeting their commitments on implementing relevant Security Council resolutions. This is the right time and place to pay tribute to the role played by civil society organizations in making States more aware of the importance of involving women in peacebuilding activities. I cherish the hope that the setting up this year of the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women, better known as “UN Women”, headed by Ms. Michelle Bachelet, will, amongst its other missions, back this very important development. I wish to reaffirm Gabon’s readiness to work side by side with UN Women in developing this approach. I should like to conclude by voicing my delegation’s backing for the presidential statement which we will adopt following this debate.

I shall now make a statement in my capacity as the representative of Uganda. I thank the Secretary-General for his statement and the Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission for his briefing. We welcome the increasing emphasis on ensuring that peacebuilding activities, especially in post-conflict situations, are nationally owned and carried out in a more coordinated, more coherent and more effective way. Peacebuilding is premised on the need to address the root causes of conflict as well as developing national institutions and conditions that are conducive to sustainable peace and development. The report of the Secretary-General on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2010/386) has highlighted a number of areas in which progress is being made towards improving United Nations peacebuilding efforts. We particularly welcome the increasing engagement with national authorities on peacebuilding priorities, support for national capacity and development, and improving the mobilization of resources for peacebuilding. As the Secretary-General notes in his report, there is still a lot of work to be done. It is therefore essential that the United Nations and the wider international community intensify efforts towards a more effective and coherent approach to peacebuilding, with an emphasis on delivering an impact on the ground. There is a need for focusing more on delivering tangible dividends, including provision of basic services and improvement of the standard of living of the population. It is also important to strengthen partnerships amongst Member States, regional and subregional organizations, international financial institutions and other actors, since peacebuilding is a collective effort. My delegation welcomes the report of the Secretary-General on women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466). The report is comprehensive, and its action plan contains very useful recommendations whose implementation, as appropriate, will reinforce the overall agenda for action to improve United Nations peacebuilding efforts. Uganda reiterates the importance of women’s equal participation and full involvement in peacebuilding, including in the development and implementation of post-conflict strategies. The engagement of all relevant United Nations agencies, including the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UN Women), as well as other actors, in the consideration and implementation of the action plan will be critical. I now resume my functions as President of the Council. I now give the floor to His Excellency Mr. João Gomes Cravinho, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs and Cooperation of Portugal. On behalf of the Council, I wish to extend a warm welcome to Mr. Cravinho.

Post-conflict peacebuilding is at the core of our efforts to improve United Nations efficiency and capacity. We now have to take stock of the work that has been done since the establishment of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), five years ago, and to identify — as clearly as possible — what we want to achieve in the near future. At the outset, I would like to welcome the progress report of the Secretary-General on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2010/386), as well as the report of the Secretary- General on women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466). The substantive contribution of the co-facilitators of the 2010 review of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture (S/2010/393, annex) deserves to be commended. In line with what the European Union delegation will state, Portugal fully endorses the co-facilitators’ report. We are now at a crossroads, and I want to assure the Council of Portugal’s commitment to contribute towards a more effective and coherent international response to post-conflict peacebuilding. We share the perception that there is a risk of fragmentation of the PBC process, on account of its complexity and on account of the multiplicity of actors and institutions involved. We must avoid artificial divisions and ensure integration between different levels of engagement. To that end, allow me to stress some elements that in our opinion deserve careful and urgent attention. First, the relationship between the Security Council and the PBC needs to be improved. To date, even if some progress has been achieved, the interaction is still limited, and we should take advantage of the potential that now exists to create a new dynamic that will allow for better performance — in particular in the early stages, when the setting up of peacekeeping mandates takes place. Secondly, we also believe that transparency and inclusiveness should be increased, in order to build up a firm involvement from the Member States, the United Nations as a whole and other stakeholders and partners. In particular, allow me to underline the importance of regional and subregional bodies in that regard. Thirdly, it is now broadly understood that peacebuilding must not follow peacekeeping operations, but rather that it should be simultaneously present from the start and as soon as the situation on the ground permits — that is, when the phase of open conflict is over. We agree with the notion that the PBC should also have a preventive role and should stand ready to respond to any possible deterioration of the situation on the ground. Fourthly, concerning the chairmanship of the country-specific configurations, we share the view that there is still room for improvement, namely by the nomination of vice-chairs as well as the establishment of liaison committees in the field. Portugal welcomes the recent creation of the Liberia country-specific configuration, of which we are a member. This is a great opportunity to ensure that peacebuilding and peacekeeping efforts are complementary and mutually supportive, as it is the first time that a country-specific configuration has been created during the effective lifetime of a peacekeeping mission. Coming after the co-facilitators’ report on the 2010 review of the PBC, it will provide an excellent opportunity to start to implement some of the recommendations in that report. I also wish to make a reference to the importance of women’s contribution to this process, which was clearly underlined in the Secretary-General’s report on women’s participation in peacebuilding. The instrumental role that women play in economic recovery, social cohesion and political legitimacy — thus expanding the scope of national ownership and national capacity — makes it imperative to fully integrate the gender perspective into our goals. To relegate consideration of gender issues to later phases of peacebuilding would be to ignore the centrality of those issues in everything from institutional design to funding allocations to programme execution. Portugal is fully committed to a gender-responsive approach to each of the five peacebuilding priorities that have been outlined in the 2009 report of the Secretary-General on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2009/304). Finally, it is always important to underline the inherent connection between peace and development, and, in this context, we consider that it is of paramount importance to make more coherent and integrated peacebuilding efforts, including by fostering stronger partnerships with the World Bank and other international financial institutions. Portugal is strongly committed to an active contribution to United Nations endeavours and to helping pave the way for a revitalized peacebuilding process that will promote peace and security in all parts of the world. We are honoured to have been elected to serve on the Security Council for the period 2011-2012, and we wish to assure the Council that we shall accord the highest importance to this issue.

I now give the floor to the representative of the Peru.

I wish to thank you, Sir, for convening this debate and for the opportunity it provides to continue to contribute to the objective of achieving an Organization that is better prepared to meet its primary responsibility of maintaining international peace. My delegation endorses what was said by Mr. Peter Wittig, Permanent Representative of Germany and Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), of which Peru is honoured to be a member. Likewise, my delegation endorses the statement to be made by Mr. Abulkalam Abdul Momen, Permanent Representative of Bangladesh, on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. Allow me to focus now on a few points. The Secretary-General’s plan of action and his subsequent reports give us a clear guide as to where we should direct our efforts in order to achieve sustainable peace in a more prompt and efficient manner. We are aware that we must enhance our efforts and use our available resources more efficiently, which calls for better planning and response capacity. Therefore, in each case we must ascertain priorities and needs for peacebuilding in the five priority areas set out by the Secretary-General, and act upon them in parallel. Those areas are basic safety and security, including justice and respect for the rule of law; confidence in the political process so as to restore essential governmental functions and institutions; support for the provision of basic services; support for the functioning of public administration; and support for economic revitalization. That analysis must be undertaken with the direct and early involvement of national actors along with the Peacebuilding Commission. As the Secretary-General has stated in his reports, peacebuilding is first and foremost a national responsibility and a process of national empowerment, and the response of the international community must be channelled through a strategic, coordinated and integrated approach, on the basis of national priorities. That highlights two factors: the development or strengthening of national capacity and the preventive dimension. It is essential that from the initial deployment of a United Nations mission in a post- conflict situation, national capacity be developed or strengthened. In this regard, it is important to remember that strengthening or developing national capacity — as is true of international civilian capacity — should follow the need-driven approach, as was pointed out by Mr. Jean-Marie Guéhenno, Chair of the Secretary-General’s Senior Advisory Group for the Review of International Civilian Capacities, when it met last week with the PBC. As the co-facilitators noted in their report on the review of the PBC (S/2010/393, annex), the national empowerment process is closely linked to the horizontal and multidisciplinary reinforcement of the national capacity for full involvement in peacebuilding efforts. The empowerment of women and the gender perspective are a key element in generating capacity and in the peacebuilding process, as the report of the Secretary-General notes. It is no coincidence that, as the Secretary-General points out, women’s post- conflict needs resemble the five recurring priorities that we have just mentioned. An analysis of women’s needs and the strengthening of their overall participation in peacebuilding processes will also facilitate clearer awareness of the causes of the conflict, which is significant in planning the response strategy, mobilizing resources and identifying measures to enhance the confidence of the local people to the peace process and their commitment to it. Hence, national capacity is important not only in order to ensure the transition towards peace, but also as a measure to prevent the recurrence of conflict. In that context, particular attention should also be paid to creating jobs and training the unemployed or under- employed young people, who constitute a high risk factor for disrupting the peace process. We must also mention the links that exist between the Millennium Development Goals and peacebuilding processes, particularly with regard to the role of women in peace processes and in priority areas. That is because, as previously stated in this Chamber, progress in implementing the Development Goals clearly contributes to, and lays the basis for, lasting and comprehensive peace, as well as avoiding resumption of conflict. In any peacebuilding process, I would like to reiterate the fundamental role of the PBC in drafting comprehensive regional strategies, including prevention strategies. The PBC must retain its role as an advisory and catalyzing body within the system, a body that ensures the coherence, flexibility and effectiveness of the work of the United Nations in peacebuilding processes and in the implementation of the Secretary-General’s plan of action. Finally, I would like to state that my country very strongly supports the draft presidential statement that you, Sir, intend to issue on this subject as a statement of the Security Council.

I now give the floor to the representative of Canada.

The reports before us demonstrate that the United Nations is prepared to move forward with the concrete implementation of an effective peacebuilding agenda. The ultimate test will be whether the United Nations system deploys resources and technical expertise in a timely and targeted manner. In that light, I would like to make a few brief comments about each report in turn. First, Canada supports the seven-point action plan contained in the Secretary-General’s report on women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466). At a time when the United Nations is reviewing its efforts to implement resolution 1325 (2000), on women and peace and security, the action plan’s pragmatic, coordinated and sustained approach to addressing women’s and girls’ post-conflict needs and the constraints on women’s participation in peacebuilding is most welcome. It encourages troop- and police- contributing countries to address the participation of women in peace operations and in training for those operations. It also provides concrete targets for enhancing women’s participation in all aspects of the peacebuilding continuum and the availability of relevant expertise. Canada also agrees that monitoring of the action plan can be facilitated by the global indicators on resolution 1325 (2000), which we call on the Security Council to endorse on 26 October. In that spirit, Canada was pleased to announce earlier this month the launch of its new Action Plan for the Implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolutions on Women, Peace and Security. Canada’s Plan is intended to guide the Government in its implementation of those resolutions and to improve Canada’s capacity to safeguard and support affected populations in fragile States and conflict-affected situations. Canada is also pleased to note the progress made since the publication of the Secretary-General’s report on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2010/386). Advances in supporting senior leaders in the field and in existing planning and assessment processes are particularly welcome. Canada also concurs that capacity remains a critical issue and looks forward to the important recommendations emerging from the review of international civilian capacities, which we have been pleased to support financially. Yet enduring challenges also remain. Despite much discussion, roles and responsibilities in critical sectors such as the rule of law, security sector reform and disarmament, demobilization and reintegration still require clarification. The relationship between the United Nations and the World Bank should also be deepened if broader progress is to be made. (spoke in French) Member States still need to consider modalities for delivering rapid, responsive and risk-permissive post-conflict financing. In order to meet that objective, the United Nations and Member States must invest in monitoring and measuring the outcomes of our peacebuilding initiatives. In that way we can better determine the areas where our efforts most effectively advance the interests of sustainable peace. Finally, I would also like to raise an issue related to this debate. Canada welcomes the co-facilitators’ report on the 2010 review of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture (S/2010/393, annex). The review proved very useful, for it reaffirmed the importance of the Peacebuilding Commission. It also brought out the need to see that its action produces more tangible results the countries on its agenda. While full implementation of the recommendations is a longer-term task, Canada agrees with the report’s assessment that the Commission needs to maintain a flexible approach and align closely with national priorities. Likewise, there is also a need to reduce administrative burdens. The outcome of that thinking will largely be put into practice in country- specific configurations. In that regard, Canada is of the view that a closer relationship between the Security Council and the Peacebuilding Commission is advisable. Such a relationship would better define what the Council expects on specific peacebuilding issues and clarify what the Commission can contribute. Capacity-building as a key concept is only in its infancy. Peacebuilding is a work in progress, and that evolution has significant implications for peacekeeping, peacemaking and early recovery. It also affects how the United Nations system organizes itself to deliver results in the field that benefit all those affected by a conflict and to ensure the sustainability of efforts to prevent relapse into violence. Finally, the reports considered today give us a look at the state of affairs and at the work remains to be done. As always, Canada stands ready to play its part.

I now give the floor to the representative of Bangladesh.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). Let me begin by thanking the presidency of Uganda for organizing this debate. I also thank the Secretary-General for his progress report on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2010/386) and his report on women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466). We are now passing through a very challenging period. We are about to celebrate the tenth anniversary of the landmark resolution 1325 (2000) on women, peace and security at a time when such initiatives as review of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), women’s participation in peacebuilding, review of civilian capacity and others are being debated and developed. The Movement deems it a privilege to take note of the endeavours of different actors in these processes who have been contributing positively to restoring sustainable peace by preventing relapse into conflict and addressing the genuine needs of the people emerging from conflict. Furthermore, the Movement feels it necessary that such processes be considered by the principal bodies of the United Nations, in particular the General Assembly. The 2009 report of the Secretary-General on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2009/304) outlined how the United Nations and the international community could support national efforts to secure sustainable peace more rapidly and effectively. Since then, the Movement has continued to follow up on those actions on different occasions by sharing inputs and feedback to reflect the views of the Movement on the process. The Movement reiterates its principled position that all peacebuilding initiatives and planning should be based on the principles of national ownership and predictable financing and should include as priorities the goals of gender equality and empowerment of women. The Movement subscribes to the general consensus views of the Peacebuilding Commission that economic reconstruction and rehabilitation should be at the forefront of all efforts aimed at sustaining peace, initiating development and promoting post-conflict recovery. This process, however, entails the concerted efforts of all relevant actors both at Headquarters and in the field with adequate mechanisms for ensuring accountability. The Movement believes that the PBC provides an appropriate platform for a coordinated, coherent and integrated institutional mechanism to address the special needs of countries emerging from conflict and to promote their recovery, reintegration and reconstruction. The PBC should therefore play the central role in providing the United Nations system with policy guidance and strategies in the area of post- conflict peacebuilding activities. The broader membership of the Organization should play principal roles within the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council in relevant areas of peacebuilding activities, without prejudice to the functions and powers of the other principal organs as stipulated in the United Nations Charter. It is the view of the Movement that peacebuilding activities should not be considered substitutes for peacekeeping; rather, complementarities between peacekeeping and peacebuilding must be used innovatively in order to prevent a relapse into conflict. Therefore, peacebuilding and peacekeeping planning and assessment processes should unfold in a more coordinated and concerted manner among all stakeholders to ensure the best use of our capacities to maintain sustainable peace and security and launch a sustainable development process in post-conflict countries. The Movement maintains its position that there can be no lasting peace without development and job creation and no sustainable development without stability. Therefore, the importance of partnership and early investment in economic recovery cannot be overemphasized. The international community must establish and ensure coherent and predictable resource deployment for capacity-building and development activities in countries emerging from conflict, based on the principle of national ownership. We have noted the efforts of the Secretary- General to address rapid resource deployment in certain emergency situations, such as in Haiti, by forming multidisciplinary teams with expertise in planning and mission support. The Movement urges the Secretary-General to explore, through an open, transparent and all-inclusive process, opportunities for the wider membership to contribute to the formation of such multidisciplinary teams, due account being taken of existing relevant expertise within the police and troop-contributing countries. We note with appreciation the efforts made so far to build national capacities in countries emerging from conflict. Much more needs to be done to create sustainable peace. The Movement believes strongly that these initiatives must be complementary. A roster for such complementary capacity-building efforts must represent the broader membership with specific emphasis on representation of the global South, South- South cooperation and trilateral cooperation. Civil society members and women actors with experience in similar State-building activities should be incorporated, as they will understand the ground reality from the perspective of their life experience and lessons learned. In this regard, the Movement has noted with appreciation and duly recognized the fact that peacekeeping missions and United Nations country teams have worked together in Cote d’Ivoire, Haiti, Liberia and elsewhere to support early employment generation. This has provided job opportunities and thus helped to build confidence in the peace process. The Movement urges that similar lessons be replicated appropriately in other peacebuilding activities and emphasizes the central role of the PBC during the early stages of peacebuilding. Now, turning to the report of the Secretary General on women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466), the Movement reiterates its view that it is women and girls who suffer the most as victims of conflict and benefit the least from the dividends of the peace process. Therefore, the onus is on us to alleviate the challenges faced by women and girls in post- conflict situations and to strengthen their effective participation in the peacebuilding process. The Movement appreciates the Secretary- General’s efforts to create specific action plans for ensuring women’s participation in the peacebuilding process and emphasizes that women are crucial partners in shoring up the three pillars of lasting peace: economic recovery, social cohesion and political legitimacy. Thus, the Movement stresses the necessity of reviewing and evaluating the recommendations and proposed action plan in this regard in an open, transparent and all-inclusive manner in the General Assembly and in the Economic and Social Council in accordance with their relevant mandates as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, as well as in relevant United Nations structures including the PBC and UN Women. The Movement is well aware that all these initiatives are taking place concurrently with the ongoing 2010 review of the Peacebuilding Commission. The Movement has taken note of the co-facilitators report (S/2010/393). The recommendation that issues be discussed in an open, transparent and inclusive manner in all relevant bodies including the Security Council, the General Assembly and the Organizational Committee of the Peacebuilding Commission is a reflection of the views of the Movement. The Movement reiterates its commitment to full cooperation and constructive engagement in future discussion of this report.

I give the floor to the representative of Ireland.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak today. I asked to do so because of my co-facilitation, together with my colleagues from Mexico and South Africa, of the 2010 review of the United Nations peacebuilding machinery (S/2010/393). I understand that the Security Council would hope to adopt a resolution on the review later this month to coincide with adoption of an identical resolution in the General Assembly. Since a further debate on peacebuilding is not envisaged by the Council in the course of the month, this seems likely to be the only opportunity for the co-facilitators to address the Council on the subject of the review. Before turning to the review, I will avail myself of the occasion to underline my country’s strong endorsement of the Secretary-General’s report (S/2009/466) on women’s participation in peacebuilding, and particularly the seven-point action plan which is at the core of the report. Each of the seven commitments is individually important; their collective impact promises to be truly significant. The analysis in which the commitments are grounded is of impressive quality and the report as a whole is clear and compelling. As I said, my specific reason to take the floor relates to the report on the review of peacebuilding, which was presented by the co-facilitators some 12 weeks ago, on 19 July. The report runs to around 40 pages. In an Organization struggling with paper overload, not everyone around this table may have had the time to read the whole report. Today’s discussion, therefore, is an opportunity to highlight aspects of particular relevance to the Security Council. In establishing a context for my remarks on these specific aspects, it is important to underline the approach followed in preparing our report. As emphasized by my colleague from Mexico, the process was a very open and consultative one, with a real sense of common purpose among all who contributed. That common purpose is simply stated: to help the United Nations peacebuilding machinery to fulfil its potential so as to better carry out the role envisaged by world leaders when they came together at the 2005 World Summit. As co-facilitators, we tried throughout to keep faith with the spirit of the process: to analyse the issues with honesty and propose implementable recommendations. Where perspectives differed among those providing inputs, we sought to define approaches that could keep the membership together while meeting the basic test of strengthening the peacebuilding architecture. And indeed, these two objectives should not be seen in juxtaposition to each other: the peacebuilding machinery will work most effectively when it has the goodwill and active support of the breadth of the membership behind it. This is obviously not the occasion to cover the detail across the various chapters of the report. Although the co-facilitators believe the recommendations need to operate alongside one another and that they form a coherent whole, it is the chapter on key relationships that I think it most useful to comment on in today’s setting. We all know that institutional relationships within the United Nations can be very sensitive. Since its birth five years ago, the PBC has been trying to make its way in this sensitive landscape. The two co-parents, the General Assembly and the Security Council, have a relationship with each other that is not always an easy one. Nevertheless, as we point out in our report, both bodies have the nurturing responsibilities inherent in the parenting role. No honest analysis of the peacebuilding machinery could have shied away from a discussion as to how these responsibilities have been met. In Chapter IV of our report, which addresses key relationships, there are specific paragraphs which focus on the PBC’s relationship with the Security Council. The co-facilitators underline the dual requirement of making space and earning space. We set out recent positive steps but nevertheless express concern about limited interaction and missed opportunities. We go on, however, to state our belief that “the benefits of an enhanced and more organic relationship between the Security Council and the Commission are increasingly being recognized, and the potential now exists to create a new dynamic between a more forthcoming Security Council and a better performing Peacebuilding Commission”. (S/2010/393, annex, para. 107) I suggest that the passages on peacekeeping and peacebuilding, in the same chapter, also bear careful reading. The co-facilitators explicitly acknowledge the prerogatives which the Charter confers on the Security Council in relation to peacekeeping mandates. Consistent with these prerogatives, we point to the added value which a better performing PBC would bring to Council deliberations in the successive phases of mandate framing and renewal, and in approaching the drawdown of operations. In that section too, our emphasis is on cutting though any kind of disabling circularity. We seek a situation whereby the PBC provides more focused advice and the Security Council understands that its deliberations will be enhanced by tapping into that advice in a structured way. As in other parts of the report, our brief recommendations at the conclusion of chapter IV reflect the earlier analysis. The task for us as co-facilitators was to produce an honest, balanced and implementable report on the basis of our consultations. It is of course for the membership to decide on implementation of our recommendations, and for the General Assembly and the Security Council, acting simultaneously, to adopt a resolution in terms they deem most appropriate. The co-facilitators are not demandeurs; our role at this point is to elucidate and encourage. I have focused my remarks as I have because, amidst generally very positive reactions to the report, there is discernible sensitivity in some quarters about what the report states concerning the relationship between the Security Council and the PBC. It would be deeply regrettable if there were to be a narrowing of vision and if the sense of common purpose which has so characterized the process were to falter now. What unites us all is the objective of strengthening peacebuilding. It is a huge and complex task, and collectively we have not been doing well enough. There is now the opportunity to take real and concrete steps. It is my hope that constructive instincts will prevail, and that the follow-up to the Peacebuilding Review will be committed, purposeful, and large- minded.

I now give the floor to the representative of Morocco.

My delegation wants to congratulate you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for this month. We thank the Secretary-General for his statement and thank the Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission for his briefing. My delegation, of course, aligns itself with the statement made by the representative of Bangladesh on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, but I would nonetheless like to add a number of specific comments. Transforming conflict situations requires the United Nations to continuously review its working methods with respect to the maintenance of international peace and security in the light of the complexity and multifaceted nature of peacekeeping operations. The Kingdom of Morocco stresses the importance of enhancing the role of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), which is an important body, to enable it to ensure its structural, organizational and operational effectiveness, including with respect to the financing of the Peacebuilding Fund. My country takes note with interest of the co-facilitators’ review of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture (S/2010/393, annex). Its recommendations merit sustained attention, including those on coordination among local and international actors, strengthening the quality and staffing of the Secretariat’s Peacebuilding Support Office, and on generating fresh momentum in the cooperation between the Security Council and the Peacebuilding Commission. Peacebuilding will not yield the success we desire without the active involvement of the host State from the very moment that a peacekeeping operation is deployed. Moreover, the experience gained by the Peacebuilding Commission shows that no peacebuilding activity can be successful without including social and economic activities, such as economic revitalization, youth employment, the development of infrastructure and the provision of essential services. Along with previous speakers, I want to underscore the need for a partnership approach to peacebuilding involving host countries, the United Nations, troop-contributing countries and donors. Here, we welcome the Secretariat’s steps to forge an active peacebuilding partnership with the World Bank. However, we believe that regular consultations among the World Bank, the Peacebuilding Commission, the United Nations Development Programme, the Peacebuilding Support Office and the Department of Peacekeeping Operations would enable the United Nations to fine-tune the strategies for post- conflict States. Peacebuilding is by its very nature more a civilian than a military exercise. Therefore, it is essential, as underscored by the Secretary-General in his report on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2010/386), to create necessary civilian capacity in specialized and specific areas such as mediation and justice and security sector reform. In addition, peacebuilding will be effective only if women are actively and effectively involved in their societies. In this regard, we support the seven commitments of the action plan proposed in the Secretary-General’s report (S/2010/466). We believe, furthermore, that greater involvement by women in political life, the mediation process and the planning of sensitive activities would promote lasting peace. We are convinced that the new gender entity, led by Ms. Michelle Bachelet, will also make a substantial and valuable contribution to this goal. We can never say it too often: The challenges related to peacebuilding are insignificant when compared to the costs of conflict and cannot be met without the political, moral and financial support of States, in particular that of neighbouring States, which must, first and foremost, abide by the requirements of good-neighbourliness and the peaceful settlement of disputes, a prerequisite for the promotion of friendly relations, peacemaking, peacebuilding and the establishment of regional security.

I now give the floor to His Excellency Mr. Pedro Serrano, head of the delegation of the European Union to the United Nations. Mr. Serrano: I thank you, Mr. President, for giving me the floor to speak on behalf of the European Union. The candidate countries Turkey, Croatia and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the countries of the Stabilization and Association Process and potential candidates Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro and Serbia, as well as Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova, Armenia and Georgia, align themselves with this declaration. The Secretary-General’s progress report on peacebuilding (S/2010/386) and his report on women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466) show the important steps which have been taken to improve the international community’s response in post-conflict situations in order to achieve enduring peace. We are here today to consider how to pursue further progress. Predictable and timely funding aligned with national peacebuilding priorities, swift deployment of high-quality civilian experts to help build national capacity and strong partnerships with international financial institutions and regional players represent some of the areas where much more remains to be done. The United Nations cannot achieve these goals in isolation. The European Union is more than ready to lend its assistance and work hand in hand with the United Nations system. The deployment of international civilian expertise is one of the areas where the European Union is already strongly involved. Over the past 10 years, civilian aspects of European security and defence policy and crisis management have seen exponential growth. The European Union now has nine civilian missions with around 2,000 seconded personnel currently deployed in eight different theatres of operations. We look forward to the outcome of the review of international civilian capacities early next year and, in particular, to seeing how we can broaden and deepen the pool of experts involving the global South. In a similar way, common assessments, planning and strategies are also of paramount importance. Since early 2007, the European Commission, the United Nations and the World Bank have worked together in setting up a platform for cooperation on post-crisis needs assessments for natural disasters and conflict scenarios. This tripartite partnership has played a key role in recent difficult scenarios, such as those in Haiti and Pakistan. The European Union warmly welcomes the report of the Secretary-General on women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466). As we mark this month the tenth anniversary of Security Council resolution 1325 (2000), we need to redouble efforts to increase women’s participation at all stages and all levels of peace processes and peacebuilding efforts. The three pillars of lasting peace — economic recovery, social cohesion and political legitimacy — cannot be achieved without the active engagement of women. According to United Nations figures, nevertheless, women accounted for less than 6 per cent of formal peace negotiators. The action plan presented in the Secretary-General’s report offers useful and practical suggestions on how to address the present challenges, and we look forward to these being taken forward in an appropriate manner. The European Union has developed a comprehensive strategy to implement Security Council resolution 1325 (2000), and the European Union Council adopted in July this year indicators to measure progress in achieving our commitments. The comprehensive strategy is complemented by the action plan to promote gender equality in development cooperation, which, inter alia, commits the European Union to promoting capacity-building in fragile States for the implementation of Security Council resolutions 1325 (2000) and 1820 (2008). Let me turn now to the final step of the 2010 review of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC). From the outset, the European Union has been a strong supporter of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture and has worked tirelessly within the country-specific configurations. During the past months, the European Union has also been strongly committed to making the 2010 PBC review a success. The European Union would like to commend the extraordinary work done by the three co-facilitators, and we look forward to the adoption of an appropriate resolution at a later date. The most recent inclusion of Liberia on the PBC’s agenda, with a sizeable peacekeeping mission in the country, is a good opportunity to implement several of the recommendations contained in the report (S/2010/393, annex). It is also a good case to prove the PBC’s added value by fostering earlier linkages and coherence between peacekeeping and peacebuilding activities. In this regard, we welcome the Council’s resolve to enhance interaction with the PBC and to make greater use of its advisory role, as reaffirmed in the draft presidential statement to be adopted today. The European Union also firmly believes that the Peacebuilding Commission has an important role in helping to champion the two reports brought to our attention today and, in doing so, to enhance the effectiveness of United Nation’s peacebuilding efforts. In conclusion, the latest reports of the Secretary- General, on peacebuilding and on the participation of women in peacebuilding, as well as the review of the Peacebuilding Commission, have all generated renewed political momentum to collectively engage in improving assistance to countries emerging from conflict. Our duty now is to make a difference on the ground. The European Union is ready to assume its responsibilities and to assist the United Nations in these tasks.

I now give the floor to the representative of the Czech Republic.

My delegation fully associates itself with the statement just delivered on behalf of the European Union. At the outset, I would like to congratulate you, Mr. President, on having organized this important debate. We highly appreciate the efforts of your country to promote the post-conflict peacebuilding. The July 2009 ministerial debate held on your initiative (see S/PV.6165) and today’s follow-up constitute the best proof of Uganda’s commitment to peacebuilding. Let me take this opportunity to stress that the Czech Republic fully shares your appreciation of the importance of the early post-conflict peacebuilding. Experience over the past decade clearly shows that United Nations peacekeeping operations alone are not sufficient for breaking the vicious circle of countries relapsing into new conflicts. Peacekeeping must be accompanied by peacebuilding efforts from the early stages of the deployment of United Nations peacekeepers. The character of recent conflicts has changed, and the United Nations has to adapt accordingly. The report of the Secretary-General on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2009/304) and his July progress report (S/2010/386) clearly demonstrate the general acknowledgment of this fact. The Czech Republic devotes great attention to the work of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), a body within the United Nations system which helps countries with their peacebuilding efforts. This year’s PBC review process gave us an opportunity to take stock of achieved results and to formulate recommendations for the improvement of the Commission’s future work. We welcome the fact that during the four years of its existence the Peacebuilding Commission has established very fruitful working relations with the Security Council and the Economic and Social Council. But there is still room for improvement. Looking at the PBC working methods laid down in the founding resolutions, we can see that the Commission has not yet started to formulate the exit criteria for disengagements. Also, cooperation with the Security Council could be further developed. According to its mandate, the PBC should advise the Security Council not only on the countries on its agenda, but also on those in the process of becoming a subject of a future peacekeeping operation, as well as those finding themselves in the phase of an operation withdrawal. In that vein, we welcome the decision to include Liberia in the PBC’s agenda. For the first time, a country where a robust peacekeeping operation is still deployed has been placed on the agenda. That will create new challenges for the PBC and new experience will be gained. Everything is seen as a priority in a country that is emerging from a conflict. Helping such a country in its vast peacebuilding efforts requires the availability of a broad range of experts from different fields, covering areas from security sector reform, disarmament, demobilization and reintegration, the restoration of core Government functions and the building of national administration, education and health to the revitalization of the economy. In those circumstances, it is impossible to provide the required expertise without civilian capacity. We must therefore improve the process of identifying, deploying and employing civilian experts. Close cooperation with non-governmental organizations is indispensable. In welcoming the second report of the Secretary- General before us today, that is, women’s participation in peacebuilding, my delegation would like to underline the attention given to the role of women in peacebuilding. Women represent more than half of the active population and bear an important part of the peacebuilding activities. Without the active participation of women, it would not be possible to succeed in peacebuilding efforts, as many delegations have outlined. We therefore support the seven-point action plan contained in the Secretary-General’s report. In closing, I would like to stress the importance of ensuring that all actors involved in peacekeeping, including all parts of the United Nations system, financial institutions, regional and subregional organizations and donors, forge close cooperation. We are convinced that the United Nations should play a leading role in that process.

I now give the floor to the representative of South Africa.

Allow me to join others in congratulating you, Sir, on assuming the presidency of the Security Council this month. We thank you for organizing this important debate and the Secretary-General for his reports on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2010/386) and women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466). We also thank the Secretary-General, Mr. Ban Ki- moon, and the Chairperson of the Organizational Committee of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), Ambassador Wittig, for their briefings. This debate comes at a critical time for peacebuilding, as evidenced by the centre stage that peacebuilding has taken in international discourse, including the review of the Peacebuilding Commission (S/2010/393, annex). Despite the multiplicity of peacebuilding efforts by the United Nations and other role players, it would seem that, as shown by the Secretary-General in his report, we are making good progress. But there is still much work that needs to be done. Countries emerging from conflict face a multitude of challenges and need international assistance. However, such countries should be given space to identify priorities that could anchor peace and show dividends. In short, national ownership should remain the foundation upon which all peacebuilding endeavours are predicated. The Secretary-General’s report reveals that some ground has been covered in the areas of leadership and accountability as they relate to post-conflict peacebuilding. We are pleased to note progress in the efforts to bridge leadership gaps in field missions, especially in Haiti, Somalia, Chad, Côte d’Ivoire and Afghanistan. Development cannot take place without peace and vice versa. They are mutually reinforcing and should be pursued simultaneously. In that regard, we believe that integrated strategic frameworks should be holistic, coherent and, most important, organic to the context in which they are to be applied. South Africa strongly supports the call for greater collaboration, coordination and interaction among the various role players, such as international financial institutions, the private sector, local communities, regional organizations, the United Nations, donors and national authorities, in addressing national priorities in post-conflict situations. In that regard, the development of civilian capacities should play a major role in supporting and developing critical areas for post- conflict peace consolidation, such as strengthening the rule of law and security sector reform. We call on the donor community to align their funding and programmes with the economic and social recovery programmes of the national Governments so as to ensure sustainability and greater coordination and effectiveness. We continue to underscore the importance of building local capacities and providing training in order to enhance the capacities already existing at the national level, as in most instances, they are ready, available and willing to participate actively in the reconstruction of their countries. In that respect, timely and predictable financing remains crucial in realizing the objectives of peacebuilding. That will indeed require resources beyond the funding capacity of the Peacebuilding Fund. The United Nations must therefore look at innovative ways of funding peacebuilding programmes and activities. We should continue to explore assessed contributions as a means of kick-starting peacebuilding activities as missions transition from peacekeeping to peacebuilding. Additionally, in the light of the ongoing debate on the nexus between peacekeeping and peacebuilding, South Africa reiterates the view that peacebuilding elements should be integrated into peacekeeping mandates. We welcome the Council’s expressed willingness “to make greater use of the Peacebuilding Commission’s advisory role”, as stated in the draft presidential statement before us. The PBC review has generated considerable political momentum, which must be maintained and sustained. We welcome the progress made by the PBC in strengthening its partnership with international financial institutions and regional organizations, in particular its efforts to institutionalize its relationship with the African Union. The United Nations will stand to benefit from closer interaction with regional organizations, such as the African Union, with regard to preventive, peacemaking and peacebuilding activities. In fact, it is an established view that countries that are closer to the countries emerging from conflict have better knowledge of the situation in those countries. My delegation has noted the report of the Secretary-General on women’s participation in peacebuilding. Women can play an important role as agents of change, and South Africa has always viewed the participation of women in post-conflict situations as critical to the attainment of peace. To that end, the adoption of resolution 1325 (2000), which we are about to commemorate later this month, was a response to the need to fully involve women in promoting peace and in playing a pivotal role in the post-conflict reconstruction and development of their countries. We remain convinced that women should be provided with the necessary support to be able to play an effective and visible role in providing leadership for peacebuilding and full participation in the development processes of their countries. In conclusion, we welcome the adoption of the draft presidential statement on post-conflict peacebuilding and further emphasize that South Africa remains committed to the United Nations efforts towards sustainable peace. South Africa will continue to work in unison with the international community in its quest to prevent conflict where it has not yet occurred, find lasting solutions where conflict still persists, and consolidate peace where open conflict has ceased.

I now give the floor to the representative of Pakistan.

I am privileged to make this statement on behalf of my Permanent Representative. Pakistan’s delegation would like to thank you, Mr. President, for arranging today’s debate and to congratulate you on your assumption of the presidency of the Council. We also thank the Secretary- General and Ambassador Peter Wittig of Germany for their important briefings. We express our appreciation of the Secretary-General’s reports under discussion today (S/2010/386 and S/2010/466). The reports enrich the evolving discourse on peacebuilding and ameliorate our collective response to addressing the challenge of peacebuilding. The Secretary-General’s progress report on peacebuilding in the aftermath of conflict is a substantive addition to its prequel of July 2009 (S/2009/304). In the earlier report, the Secretary- General outlined an agenda for coherent, efficient and predictable responses to the peacebuilding needs of countries emerging from conflict. The present report notes the progress achieved in implementing that agenda. In that context, we note the positive role played by the Integration Steering Group, which includes peace and security, humanitarian and development actors across the United Nations. The Group can enhance the Secretariat’s responsiveness to peacebuilding needs. Parallel improvement in cooperation between Headquarters and the country team, along with strengthening the office of the resident coordinator, are also vital. At the same time, it would also be important to clarify the linkages between peacebuilding and the socio-economic development strategies put forth by the United Nations Development Programme and other multilateral donors. We agree with the Secretary-General that the core priority areas of peacebuilding are basic safety and security, support to political processes, the provision of basic services, restoring core Government functions and economic revitalization. We believe that national capacity development will remain a cornerstone of all peacebuilding efforts. Security sector reforms, together with strengthening national capacity to manage inter- community conflicts, fill the gap in a country’s ability to build sustainable peace. However, in order to succeed, all peacebuilding initiatives must be people- centric in terms of the specific needs or circumstances endemic in a post-conflict situation. In the context of the human dimension of peacebuilding, the Secretary-General’s report on women and peacebuilding is both candid and objective. The report puts forth a seven-point action plan that factors the gender perspective into peacebuilding endeavours. We believe that lasting peace after a conflict will remain elusive without improving the conditions of women and other vulnerable segments of society. For long-term economic recovery and social cohesion, women’s access to health, education and entrepreneurship is essential. Women’s participation in mediation and the formulation of policy in various peacebuilding efforts can be a force multiplier. However, adherence to merit, cross-board institutional contexts and strict professionalism should not be compromised. The challenge of peacebuilding is complicated by the proven risk of the relapse into conflict. Such challenges can be tackled by more coordinated assessment and planning for peacebuilding and peacekeeping activities, where both processes must be explicitly defined in a complementary relationship. That is especially important in view of the fact that long-term peacebuilding objectives are now enshrined in at least 10 out of 16 peacekeeping missions. This overlap should not obviate the specificity of peacekeeping and peacebuilding disciplines. Peacebuilding and peacekeeping can work together only through the dynamic interplay of the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council, international financial institutions, troop-contributing countries (TCCs) and the relevant departments of the Secretariat. The Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), with its unique composition and specific mandate, holds a pivotal role in the peacebuilding architecture. The achievements of the PBC in the first five years of its existence should not be downplayed. The operation of the PBC will improve as the global narrative on peacebuilding further evolves and as our collective response becomes more resource-rich. It is therefore important not to tamper with the composition and structure of the PBC. Any alteration in the composition of the PBC, particularly with reference to the representation of TCCs, should not be accepted, as it would only weaken the institutional and other important linkages between peacekeeping and peacebuilding. I would like to conclude by reiterating that there is no silver bullet that can precipitate conditions conducive to peacebuilding. Such conditions — namely, security and political stability — can be sustained only if the aim of our collective peacebuilding endeavour is to win peace, and not to earn or impose it.

I now give the floor to the representative of Egypt.

At the outset, I would like to express our appreciation to the sisterly country of Uganda for organizing this important debate on peacebuilding in post-conflict situations. I would also like to welcome the report (S/2010/386) of the Secretary-General on United Nations efforts in peacebuilding, including its important recommendations and proposals. The United Nations has in recent years developed and improved its peacebuilding efforts in post-conflict situations through an integrated system established by the General Assembly for that purpose. In the meantime, the international community has come to realize the significance of the decision made at the 2005 World Summit to establish the Peacebuilding Commission, which, through its achievements over the five years of its operations, has contributed significantly to peacebuilding, along with the efforts of the Secretary-General to solicit international support. In that connection, Egypt has supported United Nations peacebuilding efforts through the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council and the Peacebuilding Commission. The activities of the Commission are becoming increasingly important as a result of the expertise it has acquired and the lessons it has learned over the years. It also has a vital role to play in coordinating international efforts to prevent post-conflict countries from relapsing into conflict. Peacebuilding has become a multidimensional process, with varied priorities that complement each other in order to reinforce stability, peace, security and overall sustainable development. That requires achieving balanced, simultaneous progress on all tracks and priorities on a case-by-case basis. The maintenance of international peace and security requires dual emphasis on the military and social dimensions of security sector reform and on ensuring the success of disarmament and demobilization programmes for former combatants through the establishment of a development framework to deliver the basic security, social and economic requirements essential to the successful reintegration of ex-combatants into their communities. It also requires the presence of many factors for ensuring the sustainability of peace, including a comprehensive national dialogue, social justice, the impartiality and independence of the judiciary and the rule of law, along with the launching of a comprehensive process for economic and social development. Recently, certain voices have increasingly advocated the need to start the processes of peacekeeping and peacebuilding simultaneously. Egypt believes that such views merit detailed and very careful consideration. We recognize the importance of strengthening, within a nationally owned framework, the national capacities of Governments in post-conflict countries, thereby laying the foundations for the launch of a peacebuilding process that empowers a national Government with the necessary prerequisites to assume its responsibilities in the security and defence sectors and launch an overall development process. Similarly, due consideration must be given to the overlap between the peacebuilding process and the launch of a sustainable development framework in post-conflict countries. Merely talking about efforts to establish the foundations of good governance, the rule of law and the application of the principles of democracy and justice will not enable them to be realized in communities plagued with poverty, disease, hunger and an absence of decent standards of living, as targeted in internationally agreed development goals. It is thus of the utmost importance to launch a peacebuilding process at the right time, to ensure the successful establishment, during the early stages of conflict resolution — which may coincide with peacekeeping operations — of the central political, economic and social pillars needed for comprehensive development strategies supported by timely, predictable and sustainable financial resources. It is also essential to fully cooperate with national stakeholders in creating an appropriate environment and incentives that will help start a comprehensive peacebuilding process within the country in question, and in this way creating the conditions necessary for a peacekeeping operation to draw down. In this context, we look forward to the completion of the international civilian capacity review, which should take into account the need to provide the necessary funding for the recruitment of international civilian officials without jeopardizing existing financial resources earmarked for peacebuilding operations. It should also take account of the specific needs and characteristics of the States and communities where such personnel will be deployed to back up efforts to build institutional and human resources capacity. The review should also take into account the need to further develop cooperation frameworks between United Nations entities, regional and subregional organizations and institutions in countries of the South that have accumulated needed peacebuilding expertise, either within the country concerned or within a specific region, in order to promote South-South and triangular cooperation in this area. Furthermore, the success of any peacebuilding process also rests on its ability to ensure gender equality and the empowerment of women in the socio- economic and political spheres. It is important for the General Assembly and the Security Council to study and evaluate the Secretary-General’s report (S/2010/466) on women’s participation in peacebuilding, and the seven commitments underlying the proposed action plan. We should work to provide expertise to the countries of the South, with a view to maximizing the use of relevant human and institutional capacities to ensure that the action plan is implemented and fully promoted by the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UN Women), recently established by the General Assembly. In this respect, the capacity of the Peacebuilding Commission must be strengthened so that it can carry out its mission ably and effectively. We are confident that this can be achieved through consideration by the General Assembly, the Security Council and the Economic and Social Council of the means for implementing the recommendations and proposals contained in the report of the co-facilitators of the Commission review process, in coordination with top contributors of troops and financial resources. Successful peacebuilding requires the speedy establishment of a monitoring and follow-up mechanism to ensure that national and international players meet their financial commitments, which is needed to realize peacebuilding priorities and to ensure consistent priorities among international funding mechanisms — first and foremost, ensuring that the work of the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) is aligned with the national peacebuilding priorities of the countries involved. We also need innovative financial methods to strengthen the resources of these mechanisms, in particular the Peacebuilding Fund. In this regard, Egypt suggested during the sixty-fourth session of the General Assembly the holding of an annual donors conference for the Peacebuilding Fund, similar to the annual donors conference for the Central Emergency Response Fund. This is aimed at ensuring increased funding for future peacebuilding activities. We hope that this proposal will enjoy the full support of the general membership.

I now give the floor to the representative of Australia.

There has been much discussion about the importance of peacebuilding in different forums throughout the course of this year. Member States have been engaged in the review of the Peacebuilding Commission, and we commend Ireland, Mexico and South Africa on their leadership of our efforts in that regard. The Peacebuilding Commission has been actively engaged not only in consideration of the peacebuilding challenges in the countries on its agenda but also of broader, cross-cutting questions, including its relationship with the international financial institutions and regional organizations. The g7+ group of fragile States and the International Dialogue on Peacebuilding and State- building have been active, including in the margins of last month’s General Assembly summit on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), in highlighting the negative impact that conflict, fragility and armed violence have on the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals — a point we expect to be reiterated with the release of the World Bank’s World Development Report in 2011. Importantly, the Security Council has also been actively considering these issues, with its consideration of transition and exit strategies from peacekeeping operations in February (see S/PV.6270); the debate convened by Japan on post-conflict peacebuilding in April (see S/PV.6299); and most recently, in a more holistic fashion, through the summit convened by the Turkish presidency last month (see S/PV.6389). Today’s debate is a timely continuation of those discussions. It brings together important strands of work, which, collectively, should put the United Nations in a better place to address the needs of conflict-affected communities. The first of these strands is the report of the Secretary-General on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2010/386). We welcome the progress that has been made in implementing the ambitious agenda for action set out in the Secretary- General’s 2009 report (S/2009/304), and we appreciate the honesty in this year’s report in acknowledging that there remain areas in which further work needs to be done. We urge the continuation of this work as a matter of priority, especially in relation to clarifying the roles and responsibilities of relevant actors in relation to security sector reform and the rule of law, and in strengthening the relationship with the World Bank. The report’s central message, as we read it, is that peacebuilding is a collective effort that requires a coherent, consistent and integrated approach not only from the United Nations, but from the broader international community. This is a message we endorse. The second strand of work under consideration today is the recently released report of the Secretary- General on women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466). Not only must women’s rights be protected in conflict-related situations; women must also be able to fully and effectively participate in all aspects of conflict prevention, resolution and peacebuilding activities if we are to build a durable peace. We welcome the detailed action plan set out in the Secretary-General’s report, which, if implemented, will make a substantial contribution towards that end. I would also like to take this opportunity to discuss a related strand of work which is under consideration by this Council, namely, the report of the co-facilitators on the review of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture (S/2010/393, annex). To paraphrase the co-facilitators, the report proposes a series of recommendations addressed to a range of actors that, if implemented, would lead to a more relevant, flexible, empowered and better understood Peacebuilding Commission. Such an outcome is in the interests of all Member States. Of particular interest to the work of the Council, the report notes, unsurprisingly, that peacebuilding needs to be considered at the inception of a peacekeeping mission. This point has been repeatedly made by the Council, most recently at the end of its summit-level meeting in September (see SPV/6389). This demands a multitude of voices — political, humanitarian, development and security — in the mission mandating and review processes. A closer and more organic relationship between the Security Council and the Peacebuilding Commission throughout the Council’s consideration of a situation could provide a forum within which these voices could be heard. It could also help to affect the mind-shift that is called for in the report, away from the current, predominately peacekeeping one. Peacekeeping should be seen as a part of a broader peacebuilding and stabilization effort rather than as an end in itself. These three reports demand our attention. Together with the eagerly anticipated report on the review of civilian capacities, they have the potential to transform the way in which the United Nations conducts peace operations. The Council is to be commended for placing a spotlight on this issue and for driving many of these processes forward. It is equally beholden now on the Council to sustain its focus on these issues in order to ensure that the good ideas reflected in these reports are translated into action.

I now call on the representative of Finland.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the Nordic countries: Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden. I would like to begin by thanking the Ugandan presidency and the Council for taking these issues into consideration together and for the briefings we have heard this morning. This gives the Council an excellent opportunity to discuss peacebuilding comprehensively. In his report on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2010/386), the Secretary- General outlines ambitious but vital goals for the United Nations in becoming more effective in its support for post-conflict countries. We welcome his progress report, and the steps taken so far in its implementation. We also congratulate the Secretary- General on having delivered a strategic action plan on the participation of women in peacebuilding. The Nordic countries fully support its clear recommendations and comprehensive approach, and stand ready to do their part in fulfilling these measures. The Nordic countries believe that the following recommendations deserve particular attention: first, inclusive participation as a key to legitimate and sustainable peace; secondly, adequate and timely financing of the post-conflict needs of men and women alike; and thirdly, improving the response of the system as a whole in the immediate aftermath of a conflict. As the Secretary-General notes in his report, rebuilding after a conflict offers an opportunity to create a virtuous cycle, starting from more inclusive peace processes. The report also draws an important link between women’s participation and the wider question of gender equality. Women need to be included in all phases of peace processes and in post- conflict governance institutions. Outside actors cannot dictate the composition of the negotiating delegations, but there is a lot that can be done. Peace mediators and their supporting teams can ensure that sufficient gender expertise is provided to the parties; they can also organize parallel consultations with women’s groups if they do not have a seat at the table. Special measures might also be needed to support women’s representation in the governance institutions that emerge after a conflict. The United Nations often acts as the adviser in crucial decisions, such as the composition of constituent assemblies or the choice of electoral system, including possibilities for quotas or preferential treatment. We believe that such measures can be effective and justified in ensuring more legitimate State institutions, thus leading to a more durable peace. Timely, flexible and predictable funding is necessary to successful post-conflict State-building. Steps have been taken during the past 12 months to shape the Peacebuilding Fund based on the new terms of reference. Considerable work has also been undertaken in the context of the International Network on Conflict and Fragility of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. The success of this challenging work, however, will largely depend on the cooperation of donors, partner countries, the United Nations and other international organizations and funds. We congratulate the Secretary-General on committing the United Nations system to ensuring that at least 15 per cent of United Nations-managed funds in support of peacebuilding are dedicated to projects whose principal objective is to address women’s specific needs, advance gender equality or empower women. As donors, we are happy that the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) is already employing a gender marker and that Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery of the United Nations Development Programme is already exceeding the target of 15 per cent. However, in all United Nations post-conflict multi-donor trust funds, the proportion is far behind the target. We encourage the United Nations to work towards the target of 15 per cent. A coherent early response requires clearly defined roles and strong partnerships from the United Nations and other international actors. A lot has been achieved in the field of leadership and accountability and in developing tools for integrated strategic frameworks. Nevertheless, further efforts are needed, especially regarding partnerships with international financial institutions. The ongoing review of civilian capacities is a key component of reforming United Nations support to countries emerging from conflict. We are encouraged by the breadth and depth of the review, and look forward to the upcoming report. Its recommendations are needed to make sure that the international community can deploy the right type of support and expertise at the right time. The Nordic countries remain committed to making the review a success. The Secretary-General’s action plan on ensuring the participation of women in peacebuilding offers a good example of a system-wide strategy. We welcome the establishment of UN Women and congratulate Michelle Bachelet on her appointment as Under- Secretary-General and Executive Director. We pledge our full support to Ms. Bachelet and hope that UN Women will have a leading role in the area of women, peace and security. The full collaboration of all relevant United Nations actors — such as the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, the Department of Political Affairs and the Development Operations Coordination Office — will be fundamental to ensuring the implementation of a system-wide approach. Finally, I would like to conclude by commending the excellent work of the three facilitators of this year’s review of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture. The consultations showed that we may not have come as far as we had hoped. Nevertheless, the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), the PBF and the Peacebuilding Support Office have to some extent helped to fill what the Secretary-General in 2005 called a “gaping hole” in the United Nations machinery. We welcome the facilitators’ report (S/2010/393, annex) and look forward to seeing continued strong leadership from the Secretary-General in taking the peacebuilding reform processes forward. Speaking here in the Security Council, the Nordic countries would like to highlight the report’s observations that there is potential to create a new dynamic between a more forthcoming Security Council and a better performing PBC. In particular, we support the recommendations that the Council benefit from PBC advice at an early stage in the framing of peacekeeping mandates, when mandates are renewed, and as drawdown approaches. We look forward to discussing the report in more detail at a future date and guarantee that the Nordic countries will remain committed partners in making the PBC and the United Nations peacebuilding architecture a success.

I now give the floor to the representative of Nepal.

Let me congratulate you, Mr. President, on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for the month of October. I would also like to take this opportunity to express my sincere appreciation to you for organizing this timely meeting. I also thank the Secretary-General for presenting his comprehensive report on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2010/386) and on women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466). Building peace is far more than just making and keeping the peace. It is a multifaceted and long-term task that requires national commitment, ownership and coordinated, coherent and integrated international support. Building national capacity to take charge of governance and development activities is fundamental to the peacebuilding task. Peacebuilding interposes itself between security and development, and it takes the two aspects together to ensure the sustainability of peace in countries emerging from conflict. It is therefore important that we look at both aspects clearly and coherently. A one-size-fits-all approach does not work in peacebuilding. The international community has to look into the socio-cultural, economic and political aspects with deep insight in order to ensure the success of the mission. Continued political dialogues among stakeholders, disarmament, demobilization and reintegration, security sector reforms, legislative reform and institution-building for governance are part of the transformation process. The working group on lessons learned of the Peacebuilding Commission has come out with a recommendation that the implementation of quick- impact projects is critically important. This is necessary to deliver something concrete for conflict- stricken people in the form of peace dividends. Unemployed youth in the immediate aftermath of conflict are a great source of trouble and violence. Youth employment, income-generating rural work and essential services must receive the highest priority. This will greatly contribute to creating an environment for sustained peace and economic growth. The efforts of the national and international community in the early post-conflict period should ensure predictable support in the core areas of peacebuilding, namely, basic safety and security, support to the political process, the provision of basic services, restoring core government functions and economic revitalization. A fair balance between them is necessary to quickly stabilize the situation. The United Nations is not a lone player in the field of peacebuilding. International financial institutions, particularly the World Bank, regional organizations and civil society organizations have important roles to play on their respective fields. To strengthen the coordination between the United Nations and the World Bank, my delegation supports the call for creating a mechanism for regular, headquarters-level consultations on crisis and post- crisis countries of common concern on the basis of the 2008 Partnership Framework Agreement. Women should not be on the receiving end of the pains of conflict, with all the psycho-social trauma and stigmatization that entails. They are peacemakers and they are the very foundation of social cohesion and the long-term sustainability of peace. They are an inherent part of the reconstruction and rebuilding of any country. The adoption of resolutions 1325 (2000) and 1820 (2008) have not only drawn the attention of all Member States to act concertedly for protecting women and children from violence during conflicts, but also emphasized the role of women as peacemakers and peacebuilders. The report of the Secretary-General rightly identified women’s role as partners in shoring up the three pillars of lasting peace: economic recovery, social cohesion and political legitimacy. We support a greater role for women in peacebuilding, including the promotion of gender equality within the work of the United Nations. The legal provision for ensuring women’s representation in political bodies, gender mainstreaming, empowerment, affirmative action and targeted programmes are some of the essential measures to bring women to the forefront of every walk of life. The 2010 review process of the Peacebuilding Commission has provided an excellent opportunity to engage all Member States and other interested stakeholders in seriously taking stock of the achievements and constraints of the United Nations involvement in peacebuilding. The time has come to redouble our efforts to make the United Nations peacebuilding architecture more effective and efficient in order to meet the aspirations of conflict-stricken people for peace, stability and sustained economic growth. They need constant attention here and an enhanced level of support to stabilize the situation and make peace sustainable. We believe that the Peacebuilding Commission needs to be fully consulted by the Security Council whenever the country in question is discussed here. As the Peacebuilding Commission’s co-parents, we have also asked for stronger coordination with the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council. Similarly, we call for the integration of peacebuilding work in peacekeeping operations early on, so that early efforts at peacebuilding-related work will help stabilize the situation sooner rather than later.

I now give the floor to the representative of Chile.

My delegation welcomes the holding of this debate on the Secretary-General’s progress report on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2010/386) and his report on women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466). We also thank the Secretary-General for his statement this morning and the valuable statement deliver by the Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), Ambassador Wittig. This debate is especially timely, in part because of the review of the Peacebuilding Commission, which is expected to conclude shortly after the excellent work by the facilitators appointed by this Council and by the President of the General Assembly. In addition, this is the tenth anniversary of the adoption of resolution 1325 (2000), which lays the basis for the Secretary- General’s report on women’s participation in peacebuilding. I would like to highlight the Secretary-General’s report on women’s participation in peacebuilding and his seven-point plan, which places women on truly equal footing with men and emphasizes their full participation in the peacebuilding process from the outset. As stated in the report, women’s participation is crucial in shoring up the three pillars of lasting peace: economic recovery, social cohesion and political legitimacy. Coordinated work between the PBC and UN Women seems to us to be essential. As the Secretary-General has said, the peacebuilding process is an opportunity to better rebuild a country in all its aspects, with one of the most important aspects being the status of women, their legal position, and access to jobs and to justice, among others. This last aspect — access to justice — is of crucial importance, since women are among the main victims of conflicts. Their access to justice is crucial, since it will enhance their confidence in the State and in the country’s political processes. Chile supports the fact that the proposed seven- point peacebuilding plan embodies a gender approach. In order for it to succeed, there must be proper coordination among the various United Nations agencies and coordination between them and other external partners, in particular international financial institutions, that participate in the peacebuilding process. Particular attention should be paid to ensuring the presence of women in leadership positions either by direct appointment or by popular election. Lastly, we welcome the Secretary-General’s proposal of specific measures to ensure that the recommendations contained in the report are implemented on the ground through the inclusion of women in development, infrastructure, employment, and disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programmes. With respect to the progress report on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict, Chile welcomes the progress made since the submission of the 2009 report (S/2009/304). Chile agrees with the Secretary-General that, although the peacebuilding process is a national challenge and responsibility, the international community and the United Nations have a major role to play in supporting the national agenda. This is proof not only of solidarity but also of the need for mutual support created by the global village. The progress noted by the Secretary-General in his report in the areas of effective leadership, coordination and accountability is important, as is the United Nations experience in Haiti through its Stabilization Mission, in which Chile participates. Chile welcomes the establishment of the comprehensive Integration Steering Group to support field missions with a holistic approach. It also underscores the importance of coordination with regional organizations, which we view as fundamental and which allows for greater efficiency in the use of international resources. I also underscore the emphasis placed on national capacity-building in post-conflict States. This is crucial to establishing national leadership and strengthening democratic institutions and socio-economic development. With regard to the international review of civilian capacity currently under way, based on the potential deployment of teams of international experts, Chile looks forward to the publication of the report and emphasizes that it has been an important aspect of its participation as a member of the Peacebuilding Commission. We trust that there Member States will participate broadly in these teams. Here, I should like to emphasize the importance of regional and South-South cooperation. However, we often encounter difficulties in financing such cooperation in its entirety. To that end, the participation of developed countries is essential, and Chile is therefore in favour of triangular cooperation. Lastly, Chile shares the concerns of the Secretary-General with regard to adequate financing for the Peacebuilding Fund, especially in times that are difficult for us all. In this connection, Chile reaffirms its commitment to peacebuilding.

I now give the floor to the representative of Thailand.

Let me begin by thanking you, Sir, for having organized this timely debate. Thailand would like to commend the Secretary- General for his excellent reports on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2010/386) and women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466). The Thai delegation would also like to align itself with the statement delivered by the representative of Bangladesh on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. On this occasion, Thailand would like to emphasize a few aspects of peacebuilding that we believe to be crucial to its success and conducive to women’s participation in the process. While post-conflict societies, at least initially, may require and rely on assistance from the international community, fostering national ownership is of paramount importance to the success of peacebuilding. Institutions of governance and operational mechanisms must be developed not only to conform to international standards, but also to reflect local needs and conditions. Moreover, national capacity must be developed in the early stages to ensure prosperity and the sustainability of peace and security. If peace and security are to be sustainable, it is necessary to address the root causes of conflict. Often, this means creating a new sense of shared purpose and common values for post-conflict societies. This is a task best left to the national leadership, but should be encouraged where possible by the international community. Predictable, timely and sufficient national and international support is also essential to the success of the peacebuilding process. In this connection, Thailand welcomes the ongoing international review of civilian capacity. The review should contribute considerably to narrowing the serious gap in national and international capacities, and thus to ensuring a smooth transition from conflict to peacemaking, peacekeeping, peacebuilding and development. Thailand also appreciates the Secretary-General’s efforts to strengthen civilian capacities in the global South and among women. Thailand firmly believes that women’s participation in all aspects of peacemaking, peacekeeping, peacebuilding and development will contribute significantly to long-term and sustainable peace and security in post-conflict societies. Since it is mostly men who participate in conflict, it is important to encourage the role of women in order to help stabilize post-conflict environments and restore the fabric of society. In this regard, Thailand takes note with appreciation of the Secretary-General’s action plan for gender-responsive peacebuilding as a concrete step to women’s empowerment in post-conflict societies. Peacebuilding is a complex and multifaceted task. As we approach the end of our period of membership of the Peacebuilding Commission Organizational Committee, Thailand hopes that we have contributed in some small way to the work of the Commission, and that it will lead towards a more efficient, flexible and comprehensive approach to peacebuilding challenges in post-conflict situations around the world.

I now give the floor to the representative of Croatia.

My delegation aligns itself with the statement of the European Union, which we strongly support. However, in the light of the particular importance of this timely and exceptionally relevant debate, allow me to add a few remarks in my national capacity. The contemporary world is increasingly faced with a rapidly changing international environment that constantly adds new challenges to the international peace and security agenda. In that context, peacebuilding, as an effort to strengthen and consolidate peace in countries immediately after they emerge from conflict, represents an important tool at the disposal of the United Nations to confront those challenges and, at the same time, one of its core functions. It is obvious, and not only from this debate, that broad cross-regional support for stronger peacebuilding is growing, encompassing not only Governments, but also many international organizations, as well as civil society. We are grateful for the Secretary-General’s detailed overview of the progress achieved in the implementation of his agenda for action set out in the report on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of the conflict he issued a year ago (S/2009/304). In particular, we find valuable the many diverse examples from the field used to further clarify and support the report. Equally, we appreciate the Secretary-General’s report on women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466) and the strategic, seven-point action plan introducing necessary practical suggestions for women’s more active engagement in peacebuilding processes, which we wholeheartedly support. At the same time, Croatia welcomes the excellent report on the review of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture (S/2010/393, annex), presented by the three co-facilitators. The report adds substantially to our comprehension of the complex issue of peacebuilding and further confirms our perception that urgent action in this field is necessary. On that basis, Croatia strongly supports further strengthening peacebuilding operations through further implementation of the Secretary-General’s ambitious agenda for action and careful consideration of the requests, proposals and recommendations contained in his recent reports. Simultaneously, we call for appropriate consideration and adequate implementation of the many valuable recommendations contained in the report of the three co-facilitators (S/2010/393, annex). We believe that the time for a new balance within the United Nations peace architecture has definitely arrived. If I were to identify just two of the most important features that we perceive as imperative preconditions for any successful peacebuilding exercise, they would certainly be, first, national ownership and, secondly, predictable and sustainable multidimensional action by the international community, encompassing imperative regional considerations. We strongly believe that peacebuilding should be built on clearly established national priorities, but, equally, that it should lead to full reconstruction and further improvement of national institutions, capacities and capabilities. In that context, we particularly welcome ongoing efforts within the United Nations to further strengthen and mainstream national capacities, including conflict management capacities. Peacebuilding is a complex long-term effort that unites development, peace and security and human rights, reflecting their interlinked and mutually reinforcing nature. As has been said many times before, there can be no development without genuine security and vice versa, or, as we are reminded in the co-facilitators’ report, “conflict remains the single most important impediment to development” (S/2010/393, annex, para. 3). Likewise, in harsh, insecure and brutal conditions in the underdeveloped world there can be no real respect for or protection of human rights and human dignity. Bearing all this in mind, it is obvious that only coordinated, coherent, sustainable, mutually accountable national and international efforts, adequately encompassing security, human rights and development, will bear fruit. In that regard, Croatia particularly welcomes the new United Nations system- wide guidelines for the integrated missions planning process, which set standards for field-based integrated strategies and planning. We also welcome the post- conflict needs assessment adopted by United Nations Development Group, the World Bank and the European Union. Starting from the premise that building local capacity is the ultimate priority of peacebuilding, we strongly support the establishment of the Senior Advisory Group tasked to undertake a review of international civilian capacity in order to strengthen the availability, deployability, coherence and appropriateness of civilian capacities based on an assessment of existing capacities. The interdependence of today’s world — in which, on the one hand, national crises easily evolve into global problems and in which, on the other, global problems inevitably prowl within national borders — requires enhanced sensitivity to regional considerations and their successful integration into overall peacebuilding efforts. In that context, Croatia considers the further improvement and deepening of cooperation between the Peacebuilding Commission and regional and subregional organizations, as well as the appropriate engagement of various United Nations entities active in particular regions, to be crucially important. Croatia’s transition from recipient to donor country has been fairly short and effective. Today we are sharing our knowledge and experiences with countries in the region, as well as with other countries in crisis, where our post-conflict experience in nation- building is particularly relevant. Accordingly, Croatia assists in the development of civil society, reconciliation and post-conflict reconstruction, as well as in building functioning administrative capacities in the social realm. Finally, let me mention that as a co-founder of the Peacebuilding Fund, Croatia fully recognizes the critical role that timely and sustainable peacebuilding funding plays as an early investment towards peace and development, and in that regard strongly supports the Fund’s new simpler structures and its efforts to introduce predictable, flexible and sufficient funding schemes through revisited terms of reference and guidelines. In that context, we welcome the strengthening of a strategic partnership between the United Nations and the World Bank and expect with special interest the World Bank Conflict, Security and Development Report 2011. Let me conclude by saying that Croatia — working together with other Member States and the United Nations as a whole, and acting with the same enthusiasm and spirit that clearly accompanied our ambitions some five years ago — stands ready to play its due part in the revival of the peacebuilding architecture and the thorough implementation of its core functions.

The Council has before it the text of a statement by the President on behalf of the Council on the subject of today’s meeting. I thank Council members for their valuable contributions to this statement. In accordance with the understanding reached among the members of the Council, I shall take it that the members of the Security Council agree to the statement, which will be issued as a document of the Security Council under the symbol S/PRST/2010/20. It is so decided. There are no further speakers inscribed on my list. The Security Council has thus concluded the present stage of its consideration of the item on its agenda.