S/PV.6643 Security Council

I thank Ms. Cheng-Hopkins for her briefing. I now give the floor to Ms. Lucas. Ms. Lucas: I have the honour of addressing the Council on behalf of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC). In its previous considerations of the Secretary- General’s reports on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2009/304) and women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466), the Security Council sought the continued engagement of the Peacebuilding Commission as the Secretary- General embarked on the implementation of the recommendations contained in both reports. At the same time, the reports anticipated the completion of the 2010 review of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture, which generated a number of important recommendations aimed at further strengthening the Commission’s role in and impact on the evolving United Nations peacebuilding agenda. The Council welcomed the review and encouraged the implementation of relevant recommendations. In response, the PBC adopted an action oriented road map for actions, focusing on reinforcing the Commission’s impact in the field. Therefore and with an expanded agenda of six countries and its ongoing efforts to adapt its tools of engagement with the countries on its agenda, the PBC is increasingly becoming a central political platform to promote a shared and coherent United Nations peacebuilding agenda. From the Commission’s particular experience of concrete peacebuilding work on the ground, I would like to highlight how the PBC’s activities are complementary to the Security Council’s work and how the Council can benefit from the Commission’s experience and advice to the countries under its consideration and beyond. Being a creation of the General Assembly and the Security Council, and with some of its members designated by the Economic and Social Council, the PBC has a unique convening power that allows it to bring together interested and committed Member States, as well as competent and relevant actors from inside and outside the United Nations system. In the years since its inception, the PBC has been able to help build a knowledge base in matters of post-conflict peacebuilding, including on issues of interest to the Security Council, whether regarding the link between peacebuilding and peacekeeping, the preparation of elections in the countries on its agenda, or concerning issues of regional relevance such as the fight against organized crime and drugs in West Africa. In this regard, the country-specific configurations for Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia and Sierra Leone organized a joint meeting this June, together with the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, to deepen their knowledge of the problem and seek common solutions to a problem affecting all four countries. The PBC, especially through its country configurations in collaboration with the Working Group on Lessons Learned, stands ready to present more regular reports documenting its findings to the Council and to deepen discussions with the Council on issues on the Council’s agenda, such as resolutions or statements regarding the PBC agenda countries that have a significant impact on the situation on the ground. Another way to deepen the relationship is to have the country-specific configuration Chairs participate in the Security Council Working Groups when they deal with the country concerned, such as the Working Group on Children and Armed Conflict. The PBC is developing a body of experience with United Nations engagement in a range of settings with a variety of field presences, from full-fledged peacekeeping missions, such as in Liberia, to integrated peacebuilding offices, such as in Sierra Leone or the Central African Republic, to Resident Coordinator-led United Nations presence, such as in Guinea. That engagement, and the lessons learned from it, could be used to enhance policy processes that are also of direct interest to the Council. In addition to the follow-up of the 2009 report by the Secretary-General on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict , a similar reporting structure could also be applied to the civilian capacity review, the Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) and the Peacebuilding Support Office (PBSO) early peacebuilding strategy or the follow-up to the World Bank’s 2011 World Development Report. The Chair of the Central African Republic configuration has written to Under-Secretary-General Malcorra, suggesting that she take the Central African Republic and other PBC agenda countries as pilot countries for the civilian capacity review. The PBC can help to provide an integrated and holistic perspective for taking into account the interdependence between security and development, as well as the social and economic situation on the ground in the countries on its agenda. It has the mandate and the composition to address development issues in a country in transition, in particular when a peacekeeping mission withdraws. Peacekeeping and peacebuilding, as has often been affirmed in this Chamber, and as is reaffirmed in the new DPKO and PBSO early peacebuilding strategy, should not be seen as sequential activities. Peacebuilding activities are essential to establishing the basis for sustainable peace and should start at the earliest stages of United Nations engagement, regardless of the form of the United Nations presence. Country-specific configurations are capable of providing continued political attention to situations not constantly on the Council’s agenda. In the case of Sierra Leone, the PBC played a supporting role with respect to monitoring the aftermath of the March 2009 violence and will be called upon again over the course of the coming year as the elections process moves forward. That is being done in a spirit of partnership, national ownership and mutual accountability for results, which permits the establishment of a relationship going beyond what the Council, with its very busy agenda, is able to sustain. By bridging the different points of the continuum between conflict, early recovery, transition and development, the PBC country-specific configurations can play an essential role for strategic coordination. With its mandate from the General Assembly and the Security Council, and given its composition and tools, the PBC can encourage and pursue coherence and coordination among the various actors of the United Nations system as well as bilateral actors, including on the ground, and improve relations between Headquarters and the field, all the while respecting the sovereignty and ownership of the process by the country concerned. In Guinea-Bissau and the Central African Republic, known as “aid orphans”, the work of the PBC country-specific configuration has helped to increase the number of partners engaged with the country, both in terms of bilateral and multilateral cooperation. The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the Community of Portuguese-Speaking Countries, for example, have developed a stronger cooperation with Guinea-Bissau, especially with regard to security sector reform and issues that require a regional approach, such as drug- trafficking. In the case of the Central African Republic, the World Bank, the African Union, the Economic Community of Central African States and the Central African Economic and Monetary Community have deepened their cooperation with the Central African Republic. African countries have also stepped up their bilateral cooperation with Guinea-Bissau and the Central African Republic. In Sierra Leone, the PBC has explicitly aligned its work on the second Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP), the “Agenda for Change”. In Burundi, the PBC facilitated the timely support to the national authorities in the second PRSP process by providing an expert in order to ensure that strategic planning was done in a more conflict-sensitive manner. In addition to more coherence and harmonization, the country-specific configurations are also playing an increasingly important role in terms of resource mobilization. The Central African Republic configuration managed to mobilize resources for disarmament, demobilization and reintegration and for the elections. It organized a high-level event in the margins of the 2010 Summit on the Millennium Development Goals with the World Bank and a round table in Brussels with the Central African Republic Government and support from the World Bank, the United Nations Development Programme and the African Development Bank to raise awareness for the priorities in the draft second PRSP. In the case of Guinea-Bissau, the country-specific configuration has been providing enhanced support to the country in its efforts to address major economic imbalances, as well as advocacy for the recognition that Guinea-Bissau had reached the completion point of the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative. The World Bank, the African Development Bank and the International Monetary Fund have all taken steps to increase resources in key sectors. As the Chair of the Guinea configuration, I am working with partners on solutions to fund the retirement of some 4,000 military personnel from the Guinean army to kick-start the security sector reform that is a crucial element of Guinea’s peacebuilding agenda. However, we have to recognize that we need to do more in terms of mobilization of partners and resources to increase the relevance of the PBC for the countries on its agenda. Efforts are being undertaken through the working group on lessons learned to pursue more effective resource mobilization and to improve coordination among various actors in order to achieve a more efficient engagement of the PBC. As mentioned earlier, the PBC has started to build partnerships with regional and subregional bodies, most notably the African regional economic communities, ECOWAS in the context of Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia and Sierra Leone, the East African Community in the context of Burundi, and the Economic Community of Central African States and the Central African Economic and Monetary Community in the context of the Central African Republic. The same applies to the international financial institutions, like the African Development Bank, which we as the PBC Chairs Group will visit in Tunis at the beginning of November. We are happy to share the results of our consultations with those bodies with the Security Council and to contribute to deepening and strengthening the partnerships between the Council and those increasingly important regional actors. Finally, the PBC has a clear role in bringing about the conditions that allow for the withdrawal of peacekeeping missions, as well as the graduation of countries off the PBC agenda. In new contexts, like Guinea, the PBC’s work to accompany the process of consolidating peace and democracy is also a way to help the country to stay out of conflict and thus off the Security Council’s agenda and to contribute more broadly to the stabilization of the subregion. In the context of Siena Leone, the PBC will have an important role to play in ensuring that the United Nations long and costly investment in the country is not subject to unnecessary political and financial shocks when the United Nations Integrated Peacebuilding Office in Sierra Leone withdraws and the United Nations moves to a Resident Coordinator- led presence focusing on development. As foreseen by the founding resolution 1645 (2005), the Security Council “recommends that the Commission terminate its consideration of a country-specific situation when foundations for sustainable peace and development are established or upon the request by national authorities of the country under consideration”. (resolution 1645 (2005), para. 22) In the context of Burundi, first discussions have begun on a further change in approach of the PBC engagement and on a path towards leaving the PBC agenda, although several members of the configuration think that would be premature. The upcoming visit of the Chair of the country configuration to Burundi will provide an opportunity to further pursue those discussions.

I thank Ms. Lucas for her briefing.

I would like to thank Ms. Judy Cheng-Hopkins, Assistant Secretary-General for Peacebuilding Support, for her comprehensive briefing on the overall peacebuilding agenda. I also thank Ms. Sylvie Lucas, Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission configuration for Guinea, for her remarks. We have emphasized many times that clear mandates, strategic planning, coherent implementation and timely and predictable funding are critical elements of peacebuilding. The thematic debate organized during our presidency of the Security Council in January (see S/PV.6472) highlighted the importance of national ownership and institution- building for peacebuilding efforts and ensuring sustainable peace. Building domestic capacities and strengthening domestic institutions are both included in the recommendations of the civilian capacities review. Moreover, comprehensive domestic peacebuilding strategies are developed in close cooperation between, on the one hand, the international community, which often provides its technical and financial expertise in the process, and post-conflict Governments, to ensure domestic ownership and leadership, on the other hand. The contribution of United Nations peacekeeping to early peacebuilding is undeniable. For that reason, it is important to clearly define what kind of peacebuilding activities can be developed at the early stages of a peacekeeping mission and which should be part of short-term or long-term priorities. Therefore, the integrated mission planning process needs to be improved in order to assist United Nations field missions and country teams to prioritize, while domestic capacity assessment should be taken more into account. The United Nations must improve its expertise in working with civilians on peacebuilding. Implementing measures that support domestic capacity development and developing policy dialogue with donors on innovative approaches to the programming and funding peacebuilding is of vital importance. The United Nations system must clearly organize the roles and responsibilities it carries for dealing with core peacebuilding functions. The Peacebuilding Commission and the Peacebuilding Fund play an important role, in particular for country-specific configurations, since their peacebuilding strategies support activities related to creating environments conducive to sustainable peace and development. We are convinced that the high-level stakeholders meeting of the Peacebuilding Fund to be held in November will bring about concrete recommendations on how better to utilize existing domestic resources for economic recovery in post- conflict situations. The role of the Peacebuilding Fund is significant with regard to providing a quick response to immediate peacebuilding needs and post-conflict peacebuilding opportunities. The recent debate on security sector reform (see S/PV.6630) emphasized the important role of the Peacebuilding Fund and funds allocated for this purpose, not only in United Nations field missions but also in non-mission settings. We acknowledge the importance of the World Bank-United Nations Fragility and Conflict Partnership Trust Fund. Although it has been operational for just over a year, the Fund continues to support peacebuilding initiatives in the field as well as exchanges of personnel between the two sponsoring institutions. We emphasize that timely, predictable and sustainable funding for peacebuilding is the key to success. Innovative approaches to peacebuilding funding need to be explored and supported. Last year’s review of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture brought to light new possibilities for the work of the Peacebuilding Commission. Improved methods of work contributed to better interaction aimed at strengthening impact in the field. To that end, cooperation between conflict- affected States and donors in terms of support for peacebuilding needs to be more structured, and efficiency needs to be supported. Lessons learned and previous experiences should be taken into consideration. One-size-fits-all solutions should be avoided, while the specificity of each country must be taken into account. This year’s annual debate on women and peace and security (see S/PV.6642) stressed important issues related to peacebuilding, namely, ensuring and increasing the role of women in peace processes, conflict mediation and resolution, providing women with a role in post-conflict needs assessment and planning, granting women access to justice and including women in economic recovery processes. We are therefore of the view that UN-Women and the Peacebuilding Support Office should cooperate closely on implementing activities on the ground. The comprehensive economic engagement of women in economic recovery is not enough. The political participation of women needs to be a high priority, while more peacebuilding funds for women’s empowerment and gender equality should be allocated. In conclusion, we firmly believe that only the sustained and concerted efforts of all relevant actors can provide meaningful and tangible results in the peacebuilding arena. We should spare no effort in that endeavour.

We express our sincere appreciation to the Assistant Secretary-General for Peacebuilding Support, Ms. Judy Cheng-Hopkins, and to the Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission configuration for Guinea, Ms. Sylvie Lucas, for their briefings. Today’s briefing provides an opportunity to reflect on what we have done as an Organization to enhance our peacebuilding efforts and continue to explore further measures to accomplish this important task. At the centre of peacebuilding efforts lies the crucial understanding that peacebuilding is the responsibility of Member States. While we believe that national ownership is at the core of the success of any peacebuilding initiative, that does not negate the fact that the international community has the responsibility to assist and advise countries, based on their priorities and policies, on how to consolidate and sustain newly fragile peace. Consequently, the United Nations should acknowledge already existing national programmes and build on them, instead of introducing new programmes, which are usually complicated and cumbersome. While we are pleased that progress has been made in the area of leadership for peacebuilding, we believe that more can and will be done. The progress report of the Secretary-General on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2010/386) identified challenges such as poor coordination or the lack of it, accountability and effectiveness. The complexity of peacebuilding tasks requires better coordination, especially in the field. In the selection and deployment of leadership, greater flexibility that takes into account the uniqueness of circumstances should be maintained. Furthermore, we commend the action taken to strengthen cooperation between United Nations Headquarters and country teams on the ground. However, we believe that more needs to be done to provide support to country-level leadership in order to enhance coordination, effectiveness and accountability. South Africa recognizes the importance of the close cooperation between the United Nations and other international organizations, especially the Bretton Woods institutions. The World Bank’s World Development Report 2011: Conflict, Security and Development shows that more collaboration between the United Nations and those institutions could optimize our peacebuilding efforts. In that connection, we have noted with appreciation the World Bank’s fragile States hub established in Nairobi. With regard to Africa, we would like to encourage greater cooperation with the African Union, its regional economic communities and the African Development Bank. In forging such a partnership, coordination is crucial in order to facilitate strategic synergy and avoid unnecessary duplication. We believe that timely, sustainable and predictable financing remains a crucial element in realizing the objectives of post-conflict peacebuilding. While we acknowledge the funding of the Peacebuilding Fund secured through donations, we emphasize that the United Nations should consider using more sustainable mechanisms to kick-start peacebuilding activities in countries emerging from conflict. We welcome plans to implement the recommendations of the Senior Advisory Group in its independent review of civilian capacities last year. We look forward to a comprehensive progress report on this process. We believe that we have not sufficiently tapped into the existing international civilian capacities, especially those from the global South. As we seek to broaden the pool of civilian experts, we cannot overemphasize the importance of partnerships at local, regional and subregional levels in order to exploit the unique advantages inherent in human capacities at these levels. The relationship between the Security Council and the Peacebuilding Commission is crucial. The growing number of peacekeeping operations and integrated peacebuilding and political missions with considerable peacebuilding tasks provides the Security Council with an opportunity to make optimal use of Peacebuilding Commission advice. The Council could seek the Commission’s advice when considering peacebuilding tasks in specific missions. Peacekeeping and peacebuilding should be mutually reinforcing in the pursuit of lasting peace in post-conflict countries. In that regard, we welcome the recent Council decision to include peacebuilding mandates in the United Nations Mission in the Republic of South Sudan and the United Nations Support Mission in Libya. In the long term, it is our belief that all United Nations peacekeeping missions should have some peacebuilding elements. Based on our past experience, South Africa is conscious of the centrality of women as peacemakers and facilitators in political processes and peacebuilding initiatives, particularly at the grass-roots level. Women at all levels of society have a role to play in conflict prevention and peacebuilding. An important dimension in advancing peace and preventing conflict is to ensure greater and more equitable economic justice and development. Despite the advances that have been made in positioning women to assume leadership roles in conflict prevention and mediation, these will be meaningless if the root causes of conflict, which by and large are economic in nature, are not adequately addressed. We look forward to the next comprehensive report of the Secretary-General in 2012, and hope that by that time we will have made significant progress in our peacebuilding efforts.

I too would like to thank Assistant Secretary-General Judy Cheng-Hopkins for her briefing and Ambassador Lucas for her observations. My delegation welcomes the progress achieved in 2011 on the recommendations resulting from the 2010 review of United Nations peacebuilding efforts. The Peacebuilding Support Office played a large role in this, in accordance with the commitment made to the General Assembly in January 2010 to making 2011 the year that those recommendations would be implemented. We also welcome the Peacebuilding Commission’s ongoing efforts in this area as it seeks, on the basis of the 2011 action plan, to achieve concrete goals and tangible results in improving its effect on national capacity-building, mobilizing resources and bringing key actors together around common peacebuilding objectives. We also welcome the progress in strategic and operational cohesion that Ms. Cheng-Hopkins mentioned in her briefing. If we are to achieve this vision fully, we clearly need to strengthen the role of the Peacebuilding Support Office and to improve coordination between the Office and the Commission, which continues to benefit directly from the Office’s resources. My delegation also welcomes the information sessions that the Office conducts for the Commission on the activities and operations of the Peacebuilding Fund, which have contributed to a better understanding of the synergy between the Commission and the Fund in the countries on the Commission’s agenda. This was the case at the most recent visit to Bangui a few weeks ago of the Central African Republic configuration, in which my country took part. My delegation takes this opportunity to welcome the Council’s efforts to encourage participation by the Chairs of the country-specific configurations to conduct more interactive and informal exchanges on the opportunities that peacebuilding offers or the difficulties it faces in some countries on the Commission’s agenda. We realize that peacekeeping and peacebuilding are increasingly linked and thus demand greater effectiveness from the Commission in its consulting role as it pursues its mission. Beyond the tasks of security and stabilization, we believe it essential for peacebuilding strategies to put increasing emphasis on socio-economic policies designed to improve the living standards of the most vulnerable populations and of former combatants within the framework of disarmament, demobilization and reintegration (DDR) — particularly the crucial “R” stage of DDR, the reintegration of former combatants. Priorities in this area are training young people and promoting the advancement of women, which contribute to fighting poverty. Tangible progress in the socio-economic area cannot fail to have a positive impact on the security situation. My delegation welcomes the Commission’s efforts with donors to enhance international commitment and mobilize more funding for the Peacebuilding Fund, without prejudging what the most effective strategies might be. Finally, we believe that partnerships are also crucial to the success of any peacebuilding initiative. Exchanges and consultations with the international financial institutions, and with regional and subregional organizations such as the African Union, the Economic Community of Central African States, the Central African Economic and Monetary Community (CAEMC) and the Economic Community of West African States, will be very helpful in backing up the Peacebuilding Support Office and the Commission. In the Central African Republic, for example, the authorities have emphasized that the successful launch of DDR operations there last June was due to the funds provided by CAEMC to support the electoral process. My delegation continues to believe that the United Nations should continue to play the principal role in the common vision of peacebuilding and in promoting increased cooperation between its various stakeholders, and that it should act as the link between national authorities and the various development and peacebuilding stakeholders.

I would first like to express my appreciation for the briefings by Ms. Judy Cheng-Hopkins, Assistant Secretary-General for Peacebuilding Support, and Ambassador Sylvie Lucas, Chair of the peacebuilding configuration of the Peacebuilding Commission for Guinea and Permanent Representative of Luxembourg. The Council’s analysis today of strategies for effectively and efficiently addressing problems of peacebuilding and peacekeeping is very timely. Going on previous discussions, and given the high risk of regression in the first few years of peace, we acknowledge that the identification, development and use of national capacities should be a post-conflict priority. We also agree that national post-conflict activities to establish and build peace should be supported by effective and timely civilian efforts, and that the international community, especially the United Nations, should provide speedy and effective specialized civilian capacity and the experience needed for supporting national stakeholders working to restore the rule of law, revitalize the economy, relaunch the provision of basic services to the population and develop the capacity to make such efforts sustainable. As the Secretary-General indicated in his report (S/2009/304), what must be done in the post-conflict period is to create basic security conditions and confidence in the political process and to strengthen national capacity to take the initiative in peacebuilding activities and create stable living conditions. We welcome Ambassador Lucas’s report on the progress of countries receiving support from the Peacebuilding Commission. Support for national authorities has promoted progress in such areas as security sector reform, the rule of law, respect for human rights, the restoration of Government institutions and economic revitalization. In this regard, Colombia emphasizes the importance of ensuring that post-conflict support is based on the principles proposed by the Senior Advisory Group: national ownership, more solid partnerships, experience in supporting national entities and flexible responses. National ownership is the guiding principle on which all measures to promote civilian capacity should be based. In order to strengthen national ownership, we cannot fail to clarify and strengthen a Government’s basic post-conflict functions. It is essential not only to build technical capacity but also to strengthen institutions and rebuild the confidence of society as a whole, enabling people to accept the legitimacy of their own Government. Another peacebuilding priority is the need to build more solid partnerships with external actors that can bring innovative approaches to civilian capacity- building. Our Organization must work to facilitate improvements on the ground by creating effective, broader partnerships that take supply and demand from outside partners into account. Clearly, more adaptable, timely and cost-effective systems are needed to enhance the flexibility of the responses required by the changing environment on the ground. Due consideration must be given to budget implications and contributions from States, as well as to the need to fully comply with the mandates set by the competent organs of the United Nations. It is essential to strengthen, by providing adequate technical assistance, monitoring and accountability mechanisms for United Nations staff as part of efforts to guarantee impartiality and transparency and to restore trust. Moreover, the actors involved in the process must be able to clearly assess the progress made in the early stages of national reconstruction. We commend the Secretary-General on his efforts to improve the accountability mechanisms for United Nations senior leadership and assessment methods, and on his initiatives to increase the number of vacant posts and enhance training for senior-level personnel. As I have said, the United Nations and its Member States must broadly promote all of the pillars mentioned, including women’s participation in conflict resolution, not only as experts within the Organization and in Member States but also as true actors of change. Colombia once again underscores the need to formulate sustainable long-term strategies based on a balance between direct international support and national efforts. This will help to prevent countries’ prolonged dependence on international resources, which eventually limits their development. The success of those processes is a responsibility shared by affected societies and the international community. We encourage the Steering Group to pursue the open and comprehensive consultation process, in which due attention should be given to the concerns of all States. In conclusion, what countries want is a competent Organization that provides cooperation while respecting national ownership and priorities, and that supports the democratic processes chosen by a country’s people in peacebuilding.

We thank you, Madam President, for having convened this briefing on a topic to which my country attaches great importance. I would also like to thank the briefers, Ms. Judy Cheng- Hopkins and Ambassador Sylvie Lucas, for the very useful views they have shared with the Council on this matter. It is now commonly assumed that peacekeeping and peacebuilding should be seen as an integrated effort, no longer as a sequence of activities, and that peacebuilding activities should begin as soon the situation on the ground so permits, well within the span of the foreseeable duration of a peacekeeping operation and throughout its cycle. We believe that we have come a long way in identifying gaps and mechanisms for more efficient post-conflict peacebuilding, mainly in terms of civilian capacity. The creation of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) brought much-needed consistency to the way the United Nations links immediate post-conflict stabilization to the creation and consolidation of State institutions that can ensure long-term security. The Security Council must be able to take full advantage of the work and insights of the PBC and its configurations when it discusses the establishment, renewal and conclusion of mission mandates. In this area of our interaction with the PBC, there is certainly much room for improvement. Allow me to underline a number of aspects that we believe to be particularly important in the context of post-conflict peacebuilding. The first is the importance of fostering national ownership in State- building initiatives. Strengthening national capacities for fulfilling the core functions of the State should be the first priority in post-conflict assistance. Choices always have to be made. International efforts should therefore be directed to ensure that decisions on policy objectives and priorities are taken by national actors, and that international efforts are intended mainly to assist, and not to replace, State authorities. Secondly, economic and social development in countries emerging from conflict is also important. International economic aid should be concentrated on projects that take into account the economic, social and even cultural realities of a country, as well as its specific capacities and their foreign investment potential. The issue of unemployment, especially youth unemployment, must be addressed with concrete and focused initiatives. Thirdly, we should pay attention to peacebuilding tasks from the early stages of the post-conflict period and reconstruction. Mandates should clearly identify the role and functions of peacekeepers as early peacebuilders in such multidimensional areas as the rule of law and security sector reform. The United Nations must better articulate the link between civilian and political tasks and those traditionally performed by peacekeepers. In many situations, that linkage is crucial to prevent a relapse into conflict. As complex as peacebuilding may be, the United Nations already has its fair share of success stories in ensuring a successful transition to sustainable peace and security. For example, Timor-Leste managed to develop into a solid democracy with stable institutions in less than a decade. That success was due, first and foremost, to the Timorese people and their leaders, but also to the decisive involvement of the United Nations and its peacebuilding efforts, in which it worked side by side with the national Government and other international partners. I am certain that we can learn from this and other similar cases as we strive to improve our capacity to carry out peacebuilding tasks.

I also wish to thank Assistant-Secretary-General Cheng- Hopkins and Ambassador Lucas for their thoughtful briefings today. Peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict is among our highest priorities, representing the greatest opportunity to transform the dynamics that led to bloodshed in the first place. If those who seek to build peace are not successful in the months after a conflict’s end, then it becomes increasingly difficult to consolidate peace as time passes. I would like to return to some key points made by Ambassador Rice during our most recent debate (see S/PV. 6396) on this subject. First, the strength of United Nations peacebuilding is dependent on the expertise and capabilities of its field personnel and on the United Nations agility in deploying, leading and managing them effectively. The United States welcomes the Secretary-General’s continuing focus on mission leadership. Skilled and effective leadership is essential to success. We also welcome the unfolding civilian capacity review implementation process, the efforts of which must improve the flexibility, resourcefulness and decisiveness of the United Nations in deploying qualified and capable civilian specialists to the field. The constellation of United Nations departments, agencies and programmes represents a deep reservoir of human talent and organizational resources that can be effective contributors to peacebuilding. We believe that more can be done to target the skills and expertise available within the United Nations family and the wider international community, including the Bretton Woods institutions. We also continue to look forward, as we have noted previously, to further progress in clarifying key peacebuilding roles and responsibilities. Secondly, if United Nations efforts to build peace are to be truly sustainable, they must incorporate women throughout the process. We echo the comments of the Secretary-General in his 2010 report on women’s participation in peacebuilding, in which he stated that “women are crucial partners in shoring up three pillars of lasting peace: economic recovery, social cohesion and political legitimacy” (A/65/354, para. 7). The United States is currently developing a national action plan on women and peace and security so as to focus efforts on women’s participation in relief and recovery efforts. Women must be empowered not just as beneficiaries of development, but as agents of economic, social and political transformation. The awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize this year to three women peacebuilders is a strong testament to their indispensability to successful peace processes. Our post-conflict development efforts recognize that women are essential drivers of the peacebuilding process. For example, members of the United States Civilian Response Corps in South Sudan are working with local women leaders in areas historically underrepresented in the political circles in Juba to facilitate their increased participation in political processes. We also commend the work of the United Nations Integrated Peacebuilding Office in Sierra Leone, which has developed an approach on gender matters that combats gender-based violence and promotes access to health care, political participation and justice for women. This briefing reminds us how vital the work of peacebuilding and institution-building is. Helping a society recover from conflict is never an easy task. But we must persevere in collaborating to formulate the effective solutions that each post-conflict society needs. Unless we work together to consolidate peace in war-torn lands, we will never be able to truly achieve our goal of international peace and security.

I should like to thank Nigeria for its initiative to hold this briefing on post-conflict peacebuilding. We also welcome the statements made by Assistant Secretary- General Cheng-Hopkins and Ambassador Lucas. Post-conflict peacebuilding is a major task of the United Nations that has significant bearing not only on ensuring lasting peace and sustainable development in the countries concerned but also on strengthening the existing collective security system and promoting common development. In the past decade or so, while the United Nations has achieved remarkable results in post-conflict peacebuilding and has accumulated a wealth of experience, it has also encountered numerous challenges. I should like to focus on four specific points. First, post-conflict peacebuilding should be carried out on the basis of full respect for the sovereignty of the countries concerned. Countries in post-conflict situations bear primary responsibility for peacebuilding on their own territory. In helping countries to build peace, the international community should respect their aspirations and try to help them strengthen national capacity-building so as to enhance the level of governance. In doing so, integrated, coordinated and targeted working methods should be adopted that take into consideration the different domestic situations of various countries. In addition, partnerships with the countries concerned should be strengthened. Secondly, peacebuilding efforts should have clear priorities. In helping the countries concerned to formulate their integrated peacebuilding development strategies, the United Nations and its relevant agencies should respect the priorities identified by the countries themselves, focusing on stabilizing the security situation, promoting political reconciliation and strengthening democracy. Particular attention should be paid to tackling the root causes of threats to peace and security, particularly in the area of economic and social development. Peacebuilding efforts should also include exit strategies so as to enable a smooth transition towards lasting peace and sustainable development. Thirdly, resources should be used as effectively as possible in this field. The United Nations should continue to pay attention to issues such as peacebuilding, financing and expertise-building. We urge the international community to continue to provide sufficient resources to peacebuilding efforts. We consider that efforts should be made to expand fund-raising channels and that the Peacebuilding Fund should further improve its working methods and enhance performance management and its resource utilization rate. Fourthly, the important role of the Peacebuilding Commission and regional organizations should be brought into full play. China hopes that the Peacebuilding Commission will further improve its institution-building efforts and strengthen its synergies with other organizations in its efforts to explore effective means of peacebuilding. Regional organizations such as the African Union should also be fully utilized. China has always supported the efforts of countries in conflict situations to build peace, and we will further join the international community in making concerted efforts and contributions aimed at the promotion of lasting peace.

I wish at the outset to thank Ms. Judy Cheng-Hopkins for her presentation on recent developments to further the United Nations peacebuilding agenda. Brazil associates itself with the statement made by Ambassador Sylvie Lucas on behalf of the Chairs of the country-specific configurations. We welcome the discussion of the critical role of the United Nations in ensuring stability and sustainable peace in countries emerging from conflict. The Council has already recognized the interdependence between security and development, but we have yet to perfect a truly comprehensive approach that takes into account the underlying causes of conflict that helps countries rebuild institutions and supports their efforts to address the basic needs of their populations. A stronger relationship between the Security Council and the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) is crucial for the greater effectiveness of peacebuilding activities. We should find ways to enable the Security Council to draw further on the PBC in order to enhance the system’s capacity to implement peacebuilding strategies at the early stages of United Nations involvement in a conflict country. Early peacebuilding activities are relevant to the success of peacekeeping operations, through integrated missions that associate civilian capacities with the military and police component. Such integrated missions should ensure that the stability space created by a peacekeeping force can be sustained through a simultaneous effort to help the country strengthen its institutional capacity and restore basic services. We welcome the efforts being undertaken to strengthen a regional approach to some of the problems common to countries on the PBC agenda. Such is the case of the West Africa Coast Initiative, which brings together the countries of West Africa in the fight against drug trafficking. We must pursue more effective resource mobilization for the implementation of this important initiative. We are glad to see that women’s participation in peacebuilding has gained more attention. Women should play a central role in post-conflict situations. There is a greater awareness of their potential contribution to furthering reconciliation, preventing conflicts and bolstering economic revitalization. This potential should be fully tapped into. This is particularly true for the countries that are on the PBC agenda. In Guinea-Bissau, for instance, women make a fundamental contribution to all sectors of the country’s life, from agriculture, especially as smallholder farmers, to law enforcement and policymaking. We commend the actions taken by the Secretariat and the relevant United Nations entities, including UN-Women, to foster the role of women in peacebuilding, and strongly support the continuation of such efforts. We encourage the Secretariat to continue to look into creative ways of enhancing the United Nations response to the peacebuilding needs of post-conflict countries. Brazil will continue to be a strong supporter of peacebuilding at the United Nations. As a member of the Peacebuilding Commission and Chair of the country-specific configuration for Guinea-Bissau, we reaffirm our commitment to working together with other interested members in helping bring sustainable peace and development to the countries on the Commission’s agenda.

At the outset, I would like to thank you, Madam President, for having organized this timely debate. Your initiative will be significant in determining the relevance and effectiveness of not only the Council but also of the larger United Nations system in the decades to come. I would like to thank Assistant Secretary-General Judy Cheng-Hopkins and the Chair of the peacebuilding configuration for Guinea, Ambassador Sylvie Lucas, for their useful briefings. Our sincere appreciation also goes to Ambassador Gasana for his able stewardship of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC). The idea of peacebuilding essentially emanates from experience in peacekeeping distilled over decades. The United Nations has made enormous investments in manpower and resources in multidimensional peacekeeping operations. In such a scenario, the Council would do well to effectively consult major troop- and police-contributing countries, both individually and through the instrumentality of the PBC, when formulating and revising mandates of United Nations missions. India’s excellence in peacekeeping is a result of our long partnership with United Nations missions. Our consolidated contributions are bigger than the magnitude of current peacekeeping operations. Our peacekeepers have invariably also been early peacebuilders. India has also shared its experience and expertise with a range of countries that have embarked on the path of transition from conflict to peace. India will happily continue to make our capacities available to societies emerging from conflict situations and will partner with the United Nations in its peacebuilding endeavours. As a member of the Organizational Committee of the Peacebuilding Commission, India has actively partnered with the PBC since its inception in December 2005 and has contributed to the Peacebuilding Fund. Peacebuilding is a cooperative and coordinated venture. Peacebuilding strategies must first be harmonized within the United Nations system. The existing structures and networks need to be consolidated as we explore alternatives elsewhere. Harnessing the capacities of the global South will energize our peacebuilding enterprise. It is also important to keep in mind that national ownership is the critical determinant of success in peacebuilding. It is the duty of the international community to ensure assistance for capacity-building to national authorities. Security is, of course, the key pillar for peacebuilding. However, it is equally important that we focus on economic opportunity, particularly for the youth, in tandem with political and social stability. That demands a holistic approach. It is also important that there be an effective two-way dialogue between countries on the PBC agenda and the Commission itself throughout all phases. Let us also acknowledge the fact that the lack of funding constitutes a major impediment to the success of peacebuilding initiatives. It goes without saying that other elements such as human resources, technical assistance, managerial assistance, assistance in kind and other programmes of assistance through provision of appropriate technologies are also important. Predictable and appropriate resource levels over an extended period will guarantee the sustainability of peacebuilding initiatives. Enhancing civilian capacity will have a major impact on staffing and resourcing and the peacekeeping missions themselves. Those are essential, but they should neither dilute nor detract from the requirements of peacekeeping. It is also important that civilian capacities are sourced with the requisite measure of ground experience. In that context, priority should be given to obtaining secondment capacities from the Governments of developing countries. My delegation is hoping for constructive and meaningful discussions on the substance of the Secretary-General’s report on civilian capacity in the aftermath of conflict (S/2011/527). It is essential that such discussions take place in intergovernmental settings and involve the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations and the Fifth Committee.

I thank you, Madam President, for organizing this meeting. Allow me also to thank Ms. Cheng-Hopkins for her informative briefing and Ambassador Lucas for her presentation. We welcome the positive measures adopted in certain peacebuilding areas, such as the start of the implementation process of the international civilian capacities review, ensuring appropriate United Nations senior leadership capacities, and strengthening partnerships with the World Bank and other stakeholders. However, considerable work remains to be done to support national efforts in building suitable conditions for durable peace. I would like to make the following remarks in that regard. First, concerning United Nations senior leadership, my delegation concurs with Ms. Cheng- Hopkins that in certain settings evolving circumstances on the ground may require a shift in the field leadership profile and timely deployment of senior leaders with adequate expertise to support peacebuilding efforts, with special attention being duly given to the strategic period immediately following the end of the conflict. Secondly, my delegation believes that peacebuilding is collective in nature, and its success depends largely on the clarity of the roles and responsibilities of a wide array of local, national and international actors. Since none of those actors can individually conduct an overall successful peacekeeping operation, coherence and coordination are essential to manage the interdependence of their roles. In that regard, we welcome the various reviews carried out by the Secretary-General’s Policy Committee for the purpose of coherence and the efforts to strengthen partnership and coordination between the United Nations and the World Bank. Furthermore, we strongly believe an integrated peacebuilding strategy must be developed to create a reference point for coherence. Such a strategy should be based on impartial analysis of the root causes of the conflict and should be subject to timely review, according to the dynamic and evolving environment on the ground. Thirdly, my delegation is encouraged by the decision to make national capacity assessment part of the integrated missions planning process. Strong partnership among international and national actors is necessary to operationalize national ownership of peacebuilding, without which peacebuilding is unlikely to be sustainable or successful. Despite progress in this regard, more needs to be done to enable the United Nations to effectively support national peacebuilding efforts. That is particularly true for certain peacebuilding core areas such as rule of law and security sector reform. As is well known, those areas are fundamental for ensuring security, preventing new eruptions of violence and effectively combating drug trafficking and organized crime. Fourthly, the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to women from Yemen and Liberia was a laudable recognition of the difference that women can make when they so courageously engage in rebuilding their societies. Indeed, existing studies suggest that gender balance not only reduces corruption but also ensures greater transparency and responsiveness to community needs. That is why meaningful participation of women in decision-making institutions and mechanisms related to peacebuilding should begin at the earliest stage of recovery. Efforts have been made to ensure gender expertise in mediation and to promote the access of women and girls to security and justice. However, we believe that the United Nations and the Peacebuilding Commission should provide more systematic assistance to Governments and help them ensure more consistent participation of women in peace accords and donor conferences. Gender analysis is also important and offers a valuable tool for understanding the gender dimensions of violence and recovery and for tailoring effective approaches to gender issues in specific post-conflict settings. In conclusion, peacebuilding is often a long, convoluted and complex undertaking. However, its success is imperative for durable peace and for the sustainable development of societies.

Thank you, Madam President, for holding this meeting on peacebuilding. I would also like to thank Assistant Secretary-General Cheng-Hopkins and Ambassador Lucas for their presentations. It is crucial for the Security Council, which is responsible for issues of international peacekeeping and security, to regularly address the matter of peacebuilding. United Nations action is not limited to merely supporting or restoring peace. Building peace once it has been established is essential to make sure that a country just emerging from conflict does not relapse into crisis. We must remember that peacebuilding consists above all of managing the progressive restoration of all the capabilities of a given sovereign State with the goal of giving their people full mastery of their destiny. Several elements are key to the successful management that transition. First of all, national ownership, which is the basis of lasting peace, demands sizable reforms. Those reforms, which involve such essential aspects such as governance, justice and security, or which can also require the renewal of a development process, cannot be brought to fruition without national ownership. The key to success in peacebuilding is the implementation of a substantial dialogue with the State in question. To facilitate that dialogue, we have established in some post-conflict countries, integrated peacebuilding offices, such as the United Nations Integrated Office in the Central African Republic and the United Nations Integrated Office in Burundi. The second key element for a successful transition is good coordination among the stakeholders. Post-conflict peacebuilding is complex, because it implies the simultaneous management of very different tasks. There is often a fine line between those tasks and peacekeeping operations. Peacekeeping operations should support that process as much as possible. However, even during the early stages, peacekeeping operations cannot necessarily take on all the aspects of peacebuilding. The earliest possible return of the usual actors, in the realm of development for example, is preferable. Careful consultation and coordination among all stakeholders is therefore necessary for the most effective international partners to be involved in peacebuilding programmes, and for each stakeholder to play the most appropriate role. In addition to the civilian structure that any peacekeeping operation implies, this could involve the United Nations agencies with solid technical experience, such United Nations Development Program, or bilateral partners. It is precisely that level of engagement that the Peacebuilding Commission, with the impetus provided by the Luxembourg Mission and the help of the Secretariat and the Office in Dakar, is attempting to advance in Guinea, where there is neither a peacekeeping operation nor an integrated peacebuilding office. We are pleased to see that the support actions have been identified and assigned, particularly with respect to security sector reform, in order to help the Guineans to build peace and consolidate their young democracy. The third key element is advance planning. Because the conditions needed for peacebuilding must to be present from the first stages of crisis management, it is important to undertake a process of reflection on the priorities that need to be implemented in the immediate post-conflict period. In that regard, I wish to single out the study conducted by the Department of Peacekeeping Operations and the Mission Support Division on the contribution of peacekeeping operations to the question of consolidating peace, which was explored during the last meeting of the Peacebuilding Commission. What tools do we have for implementing those transition principles? First of all, we must work on the quality of the mandates, which should allow us to lay the groundwork for the peacebuilding phase. That is what we did in Côte d’Ivoire, with resolution 2000 (2011), which gives the United Nations Operation in Côte d’Ivoire a clear mandate to support the authorities in stepping up their security sector. We did the same thing with the United Nations Mission in South Sudan, with resolution 1996 (2011), which sets forth support for the South Sudanese authorities with respect to the reform of their justice and security sectors, and the strengthening of the rule of law. Secondly, based on those mandates, the Secretariat should implement a planning process that includes, on the one hand, a mechanism for measuring the progress of a mission, and on the other, provisions that allow its end-point to be taken into account from the beginning. Finally, it is critical to have resources on the ground in order to implement the transition. For that reason in particular, the civilian capacity-building is a key aspect in peacebuilding in post-conflict situations. In order to more effectively help countries affected by conflict, the efforts of the international community should be guided by a spirit of partnership that strengthens the links between United Nations civilian capacity, Member States, regional organizations and civil society. In that context, I welcome the Secretary- General’s report from last August (see S/2011/552), which is the first United Nations response to the Independent Report by Mr. Jean-Marie Guéhenno on civilian capacities. To conclude, I should like to underscore that the growing mobilization of different stakeholders with respect to peacebuilding, whether the United Nations or other international actors, has provided us with many tools, which we must use in the best way possible by developing synergies. We will thus ensure both consistent international action and clear United Nations work in the area of peacebuilding.

I thank Assistant Secretary-General Judy Cheng-Hopkins and Ambassador Lucas for their detailed briefings. This is a welcome opportunity to take stock of the peacebuilding agenda and to follow up on its implementation. We share the analysis that progress has been achieved in various fields since last year’s progress report of the Secretary-General. However, our undivided attention and continued support are required for us to deliver on commitments and to further enhance our impact on the ground. That includes the need for continuous adaptation of peacebuilding to changing and evolving circumstances in countries emerging from conflict. It is against that backdrop that I would like to focus my remarks on three priority areas: first, the need to further develop and clarify the scope and mode of action of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC); secondly, the implementation of the civilian capacities review; and thirdly, the strengthening of women’s participation in peacebuilding. First, with regard to the Peacebuilding Commission, while the addition of countries to the PBC’s agenda over the past year proves the membership’s acknowledgement of and faith in the PBC, focus needs to be given to developing strategies that allow countries to graduate from the PBC’s agenda and, if needed, to a lighter form of engagement. Ms. Cheng-Hopkins elaborated on that point as well. As we witness the increasing inclusion of peacebuilding into national poverty-reduction strategies in countries like Burundi and Sierra Leone, we also need a common understanding of the role the PBC can realistically play to further promote peacebuilding at that stage. The PBC should help support the relevant actors to come to a common vision. It should ensure that the stakeholders focus on agreed and shared priorities. It should help countries address obstacles to peacebuilding and obtain clear commitments from the Government concerned and the international community on the implementation of the peacebuilding agenda. The Commission should raise awareness; it must not be reduced to the role of a fundraiser. Moreover, enhancing partnerships with international financial institutions and major regional actors in order to help build coherence remains a critical task. In that context, we welcome the increased interaction and cooperation with the World Bank. In our view, such collaboration should also be deepened on the ground. The established interaction with the group of fragile States is also a positive step. A mutual understanding of how the PBC can best support the implementation of the Monrovia road map of June 2011 needs to be achieved. Greater clarity on how the PBC can contribute to the high-level forum on aid effectiveness to be held in Busan in November, and on its follow-up, is also needed. My second point relates to the implementation of the civilian capacities review. Making civilian capacity available in an effective, appropriate and timely manner to support peacebuilding in conflict affected countries is the best way to secure national ownership and to render peace and reconstruction sustainable. We therefore welcome the Secretary-General’s report on civilian capacity in the aftermath of conflict (see S/2011/85) and its just approach to making better use of existing resources within the United Nations to that end. We advocate concrete steps towards strengthening and using national, international and United Nations capabilities in post-conflict situations without delay. South Sudan should be a starting point. Critical needs, notably the establishment of Government institutions and justice, need to be addressed swiftly. Attention should be paid to identifying and effectively supporting national capacities, including those of diasporas. My third point concerns the strengthening of women’s participation in peacebuilding. Fostering women’s engagement in peacebuilding requires integrating that effort into all activities and providing dedicated funding for women’s needs. One crucial point in that context is the need for clarity, comparability and consistency across the United Nations in monitoring the impact of its agenda on gender-related issues. We therefore agree with the necessity mentioned in the recent report of the Secretary-General on women and peace and security (S/2011/598*) to develop consistent means of tracking and reporting of spending on gender equality and women’s empowerment within the next year. The United Nations presence in conflict and post-conflict situations should strive to achieve greater coherence. Sector specific gender expertise is needed for the effective implementation of the women and peace and security objectives. While several countries appear to be graduating from fragility, there is scope to maximize the impact of peacebuilding by further developing its strategic approach and by bridging the policy-practice gap. We stand ready to work to that end with countries emerging from conflict, the United Nations and all relevant stakeholders.

I thank Ms. Judy Cheng-Hopkins and Ambassador Sylvie Lucas for their briefings. It seems clear from what we have heard this morning that we are making real strides as the international community towards providing support for countries emerging from conflict. We are now much better equipped to help them as a collective community to tackle the challenges that they face. However, what we have also heard this morning is that we still have some way to go. Peacebuilding is a collective endeavour and all of us must work together to raise our game. A key element of that is getting strong and effective leadership in the field. The United Kingdom would like to note that the recent appointment of experienced individuals with strong peacebuilding backgrounds, such as the Special Representatives of the Secretary-General in Libya and South Sudan, indicates that we are making progress in that direction. It is possible to put the people with the right skills on the ground. Such leadership is important not only in the context of a mission but also in non-mission settings. In the latter, it is essential that resident coordinators also have the right skills and experience to tackle the challenges that they face in post-conflict settings. They must be able to access the right kind of support from Headquarters and the wider international system in a timely way. The political support that the Peacebuilding Support Office has provided to the United Nations team in Guinea is quite a good example of that. We are also pleased to hear in the briefing of Ms. Cheng-Hopkins that the United Nations has sustained its momentum on integrated mission planning. That is absolutely essential. A process that brings together all key actors and clearly sets out the sector leads and the necessary benchmarks to gauge progress is the most effective way to ensure well- coordinated delivery. In that regard, we would again like to point out what we think was a good example, namely, the pre-assessment planning process for Libya. That involved a team that brought together all relevant parts of the United Nations system and the World Bank into the same conversation sufficiently in advance. As Assistant Secretary-General Cheng-Hopkins pointed out during her briefing, the review of civilian capacities is clearly an important vehicle to improve United Nations performance on peacebuilding. The United Kingdom welcomes the Secretary-General’s report (see S/2011/85). Of course, we look forward to hearing about the results that have been achieved in the field in consequence of that initiative in the near future. The report rightly places the principle of national ownership front and centre. In that regard, we look forward to progress on identifying and supporting national sources of capacity and on building global South capacities and triangular cooperation to find the most appropriate civilian expertise for the context. Turning now to a critical issue, which is that of roles and responsibilities, the United Kingdom feels that we really need to do more in that area. In particular, we would like to point to the need to make progress on the rule of law. That is an area where, frankly, the least amount of progress has been made since the Secretary-General’s report of 2009 (S/2009/304). We know that our failure to resolve that affects delivery on the ground. The World Development Report 2011 has provided evidence that there are crucial gaps in the international system in the provision of support for the rule of law, and that the United Nations has a key role to play in that regard. Such continued gaps mean that countries are often unable to access the support that they need on key issues, such as justice reform. We welcome efforts at more joint programming, which improves coordination among actors in the field. However, that is not the whole story. We need greater clarity over which part of the system is the global service provider for which specific function under the rule of law heading. We need a framework that is clear, but also flexible enough to be able to adapt to the realities in the field. We hope that he Secretary-General’s report in 2012 can demonstrate real progress on the issue. Ms. Cheng-Hopkins rightly said that Member States need to be engaged in that discussion if progress is to be made. The United Kingdom agrees with that and strongly supports it. As Member States that are also members of the governing boards of the funds and programmes, we must be ready to actively support integration in those forums rather than fragmentation. Finally, the United Kingdom welcomes the update on women’s participation in peacebuilding and the partnership between the United Nations Peacebuilding Support Office and UN-Women. We welcome the fact that progress is being made in the areas of mediation and political dialogue and in integrating gender equality into post-conflict needs assessment and rule of law work. However, there is still much to be done to ensure the participation of women at all stages of peacebuilding, including the appointment of more women as special envoys and chief mediators. In the words of UN-Women chief, Michelle Bachelet, if women are not represented at the negotiating table, society itself is not represented.

I would like to thank Assistant Secretary- General Judy Cheng-Hopkins for her comprehensive briefing on the Organization’s progress on post-conflict peacebuilding. We would also like to thank Ms. Sylvie Lucas for her briefing. I may be repeating what has perhaps already been said this morning when I say that the primary role of States that have experienced the active phase of conflict is furthering national reconciliation and rebuilding safe and favourable living conditions for the entire population of the country. That is absolutely essential in order to avoid renewed conflict. Experience shows that, in most cases, countries exhausted by war or crises are unable to address by themselves the entire range of problems related to rebuilding security, ensuring law and order, protecting human rights and alleviating poverty. There is a significant need for international assistance in that regard. We are convinced that there can be no successful and long-term benefits of peacekeeping support without State ownership of the process. Countries must define their own peacebuilding priorities, and national Government bodies must manage the implementation of those goals. That has been confirmed by experience in Liberia, Sierra Leone and Timor-Leste, where the capacity of the international community to take account of the interests and priorities of the host country was leveraged by the readiness of national Governments to assume responsibility for implementing reform. As has been noted, the United Nations undoubtedly has a special role to play in coordinating international efforts in post-conflict peacebuilding. This work requires the coordinated efforts of Member States, United Nations programme and funds, the Secretariat, regional organizations and international financial institutions. I would also note that United Nations peacekeeping operations now undertake many early-stage peacebuilding tasks. In addressing their principal task of disengaging the warring parties, stabilizing the situation and establishing conditions conducive to a political process, United Nations peacekeepers are also playing a critical role in creating conditions favourable to providing more significant peacebuilding support. We should, however, take into account the fact that peacebuilding is a multifaceted and long-term process that extends far beyond the limited time frame of peacekeeping operations. Therefore, providing basic assistance to States for institution-building, development and social and economic stability falls to the Organization’s specialized agencies, whose efforts must not be duplicated but mutually reinforcing. In that context, we support statements concerning the activity of the Peacebuilding Commission, which is striving to formulate recommendations to ensure uninterrupted and coordinated international support for countries emerging from conflict. We note with pleasure the heightened attention being accorded by Member States and the Secretariat to various aspects of peacebuilding that require further consideration and the development of strategies and frameworks for practical implementation. In that respect, I would refer in particular to security sector reform, strengthening the rule of law and the development of civilian capacities. It is clear that positive peacebuilding results have been achieved by regional actors, including neighbouring countries and subregional organizations. A fine example of such regional cooperation is the experience of several African countries that have overcome conflict and achieved some success in peacebuilding. Such countries are ready to share their experiences and could be the source of initiatives that could be successfully implemented by States that have recently emerged from crises. Such experiences are tried and tested, empirical examples, and not just theories. The Peacebuilding Fund is an important mechanism for rapid financing that helps to attract long-term resources for reconstruction. It is important that we support its work, and my country, Russia, has confirmed its policy in that respect by making an annual contribution of $2 million to the Fund, which we will continue to provide.

I shall now make a statement in my capacity as representative of Nigeria. I add my voice of appreciation to Assistant Secretary-General Cheng-Hopkins for her lucid and comprehensive briefing. I also want to thank Ambassador Sylvie Lucas, Chair of the peacebuilding configuration of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) for Guinea, for sharing her perspectives on the PBC with us. Nigeria greatly appreciates the continuing dialogue on the activities, progress and challenges of United Nations peacebuilding, given our common efforts to prevent post-conflict countries from sliding back into war. The Secretary-General’s agenda for action delineated the yardsticks for measuring the effectiveness of the efforts of the PBC, the Peacebuilding Support Office (PBSO), the Security Council, the integrated United Nations missions and other major actors in the peacebuilding arena. The PBC itself has outlined a road map of actions in 2011 to add value to its peacebuilding efforts. The road map identifies resource mobilization and the building of national capacities as core peacebuilding priorities. As a lightning rod for the United Nations major peacebuilding efforts, the PBSO has supported the progressive realization of the road map over the past year. Indeed, six years since the inception of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture, the PBC and the PBSO have undeniably transformed our collective vision of conflict resolution. The derivative of this renewed focus on benchmarks is an emerging resource-driven approach to peacebuilding by all the funds and agencies concerned with post-conflict peacebuilding. However, in this drive for results, we must never lose sight of the imperative to tailor all peacebuilding programmes to the specific needs of the host nation. As an ardent supporter of the peacebuilding agenda, Nigeria is convinced that the results-driven approach, complemented by national ownership, is a prerequisite for sustaining the high-level political commitment of Member States and international institutions alike to programmes that assist countries transitioning from conflict. It is our task in the Council to actively engage with the PBSO and the PBC in exchanging views on peacebuilding best practices and lessons learned. Besides providing immense benefits to countries on the agenda of the PBC, lessons learned can also benefit other nations emerging from a state of instability. A case in point is the new Libya, whose current leadership has reached out to the United Nations for post-conflict support and assistance. The vision of the National Transitional Council — and indeed, of all of us — of a peaceful, harmonious Libya cannot be realized without social structures in place to ensure the rule of law and the adequate provision of social and economic infrastructure. Over the past six years, the PBSO, the Peacebuilding Commission and the Peacebuilding Fund have acquired appreciable specialization in helping nations to their feet after devastating conflicts. Their wealth of knowledge should be mined for principles of peacebuilding that will be applicable even in countries that are not on the PBC’s agenda. The notion of early peacebuilding that PBC Chair Ambassador Gasana vociferously advocated in March should be developed, promoted and operationalized. To address the multidimensional challenges faced in post- conflict settings, we must recognize the thin line between traditional peacekeeping operations and peacebuilding. Through the rapid deployment of peacebuilding agents, we can lay the foundations for long-term peace, independent of external actors. Providing training for mission leadership and building national civilian capacity for achieving national ownership are also critical areas that require intense focus, as most States often lack national capacities in the aftermath of protracted conflict. Indeed, given the complexity of the threats to peace, there is an even greater imperative for the coordination of responses. A clear division of labour and accountability must be agreed, buttressed by a common strategic framework and aligned with the objectives of each peacebuilding exercise. In addition, I wish to emphasize the critical need for collaboration between the United Nations and the 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 (ECOWAS) and the African Union in peacebuilding in their various regions have been very remarkable and enormous. Turning specifically to Guinea-Bissau, we can say that the security sector reform programme is absolutely central to that country’s return to stability. While the ECOWAS road map has been proven to be an important rallying point, the country needs continued technical and financial assistance in the implementation of the road map’s steps. Therefore, all stakeholders must remain resolute in our support of the Guinea-Bissau Government. As was discussed in the Council only last Friday (see S/PV.6642), women must play a central role in conflict prevention and peacebuilding. Indeed, there is an urgent need to enhance the mobilization of resources available for initiatives to mainstream women in peacebuilding activities, in order to address their peacebuilding needs, promote gender equality and empower women in peacebuilding contexts. We want to call on all stakeholders in the peacebuilding effort to remain focused on all that can be achieved in the long term through a sustained commitment and indeed a collective and sustained effort. I now resume my functions as President of the Council. There are no more names inscribed on the list of speakers. The Security Council has thus concluded the present stage of its consideration of the item on its agenda.