S/PV.6897 Security Council

Under rule 37 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, I invite the representatives of Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Croatia, Denmark, Indonesia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Japan, Liberia, Luxembourg, Malaysia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, the Republic of Korea, Senegal, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand and Turkey to participate in this meeting. Under rule 39 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, I invite Mr. Abulkalam Abdul Momen, Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission and Permanent Representative of Bangladesh, to participate in this meeting. Under rule 39 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, I invite Mr. Ioannis Vrailas, Deputy Head of the Delegation of the European Union to the United Nations, to participate in this meeting. Under rule 39 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, I invite Mr. Téte António, Permanent Observer of the African Union to the United Nations, to participate in this meeting. The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. I wish to draw the attention of Council members to document S/2012/746, which contains the report of the Secretary-General on peacebuilding in the aftermath of conflict. I welcome the presence of the Secretary-General, His Excellency Mr. Ban Ki-moon, and invite him to take the floor.

I commend Morocco for its initiative in convening this open debate. Peacebuilding is one of the main objectives of the United Nations. It brings together actors from across the United Nations system, my envoys and representatives, whose negotiation and mediation efforts help to achieve and sustain political settlements; political and peacekeeping missions, which assist in implementing peace and transition agreements and lay the foundations for sustainable peace; and the agencies, funds and programmes whose efforts deliver peace dividends, support recovery and kick-start development. In my 2009 report (S/2009/304) on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict, I identified the first two years after the end of conflict as the key window of opportunity to begin building sustainable peace. I also laid out an action agenda for an improved response by the United Nations system during this period. The United Nations has made significant progress in advancing that agenda. United Nations missions and country teams are working more closely together. The United Nations has also become more agile in deploying senior leaders, specialized experts and staff to the field. We have strengthened and expanded our partnerships, including with the World Bank and regional organizations. And through the civilian capacity initiative, we are broadening and deepening the pool of institution-building expertise in key capacity gap areas. The outcome of these various efforts has been a more coherent, timely and effective response to the immediate post-conflict priorities. Our progress in supporting the participation of women in peacebuilding has been more mixed. There have been notable achievements in the areas of conflict resolution, gender- responsive planning, financing and the rule of law. However, there has been less progress in governance and economic recovery. Much more remains to be done to implement the seven-point action plan in my 2010 report on women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2012/466). Despite the strides we have made, major peacebuilding challenges remain. Many countries continue to experience instability years after the end of armed conflict, with high levels of relapse into violence. Ninety per cent of conflicts between 2000 and 2009 occurred in countries that had previously experienced civil war. The reasons for relapse vary by country, but there is a common thread — a deficit of trust in the wake of conflict between different political parties and social groups, between State and society, and between the State and its international partners. Experience has revealed three elements that are critical to preventing relapse and producing more resilient States and societies: inclusivity, institution-building, and sustained international support. Inclusive approaches to peacebuilding begin with political settlements and convincing all parties to a conflict that their core objectives can be resolved through dialogue and negotiation, rather than through recourse to violence. Inclusive processes anchored in the rule of law also lower corruption and make public administration more transparent and predictable, and social service delivery more effective. Our support to Yemen’s transition shows how the United Nations is pursuing an inclusive approach. My Special Adviser has engaged with a range of opposition groups, youth, women and civil society organizations, paving the way for their participation in the national dialogue conference and laying the foundations for subsequent stages of the transition. Functioning institutions are essential for establishing popular confidence in the State and preventing violent conflict. For the international community, a key challenge is balancing long-term support for institution-building with the need to demonstrate early and tangible outcomes that benefit people. There is a vital need for an early focus on restoring core administrative and financial management systems, and on delivering social services. Strengthening institutions means strengthening the rule of law. Member States have recognized, in the Declaration of the High-level Meeting of the General Assembly on the Rule of Law at the National and International Levels (resolution 67/1), adopted by the General Assembly in September, the importance of rule of law institutions that are accessible and responsive to the needs and rights of all individuals, and that promote trust, social cohesion and economic prosperity. Efforts in this area should include ensuring full and equal access to informal institutions, as well as strengthening the interface between formal and informal institutions. Good governance and the rule of law, as well as effective, transparent, accountable and democratic institutions, are critical for sustainable development. Member States recognized that at this year’s United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, and the current discussions on the post-2015 development agenda offer an opportunity to take this recognition forward. Building institutions and other peacebuilding tasks can take a generation. This highlights the need for sustained international political and financial support. It also underscores the importance of mutual accountability over the long term, which creates a more balanced partnership between donors and recipient Governments. This approach is reflected in the Peacebuilding Commission’s instruments of engagement and has been endorsed by the Group of Seven Plus and its development partners. Transition compacts can provide a basis for improved trust and deeper partnerships between countries emerging from conflict and the wider international community. I encourage Member States to support their development and use. For development partners, this entails a greater willingness to use national oversight and financial systems, and to assume risk. Pooled funds, such as the Peacebuilding Fund, can help to reduce such risk. Post-conflict countries, development partners and the United Nations all have their part to play in translating these insights into practice. I stand ready to report further on this pursuit so that, together, we can get peacebuilding right.

I thank the Secretary-General for participating in this meeting and for his statement. I reiterate our full appreciation of his skilled leadership of the Organization and his efforts in the service of its objectives and of furthering the principles on which it is based. We wish him every success. I now give the floor to Mr. Momen. Mr. Momen: I wish to thank you, Sir, for inviting me to take part in this debate in my capacity as the Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission. The Commission is pleased to contribute to the Council’s consideration of the Secretary-General’s report on peacebuilding in the aftermath of conflict (S/2012/746). The Commission was briefed on 20 July on the emerging findings and recommendations of the Secretary-General’s report, and shared its views on the areas that could be further emphasized. The Commission then met on 26 November to discuss the final report. We commend the Assistant Secretary- General for Peacebuilding Support, Ms. Judy Cheng- Hopkins, for her efforts and those of her team. The Commission took note with appreciation of the Secretary-General’s report. The periodic reporting of the Secretary-General to the Security Council and the General Assembly on peacebuilding in the aftermath of conflict offers an opportunity to take stock of how the United Nations operational entities play a role in supporting post-conflict countries in addressing the root causes of and preventing relapse into conflict. Delivering results on the ground, focusing on national capacity development, and building institutions that are necessary for recovery from conflict are all key elements of this. In this regard, the Commission noted the importance of the main themes contained in this year’s report: inclusivity, institution-building, sustained international support and mutual accountability. Through its political declaration adopted at the high- level event on “Peacebuilding: Way towards sustainable peace and security”, which took place on 25 September, the Commission drew attention to these themes among its broader membership at the highest political level, and sought to reinvigorate the political commitment to the overarching peacebuilding objectives in post- conflict countries. The Commission noted the analysis and recommendations made in this year’s report with respect to women’s participation in peacebuilding. In its interaction with the Secretariat ahead of the release of the report, the Commission emphasized the need for programmes to be designed with a view to enhancing the integration of women and youth as agents for inclusive post-conflict recovery and reconstruction. The Commission realizes that, while progress is being achieved in mainstreaming a gender dimension in peacebuilding, there is a need for additional efforts and focus on investment in the socioeconomic and political empowerment of women in post-conflict societies. Experience-sharing, particularly through South-South and triangular cooperation in specific thematic areas, can contribute to achieving the objective of women’s empowerment. The Secretary-General’s report contains three specifi c recommendations addressed to the Peacebuilding Commission, which have been well-received. We realize that those recommendations are also in line with the recommendations of the 2010 Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture, which the Commission has been addressing through an annual road map of actions. In that regard, I wish to briefly make some specific remarks on each. First, we have taken steps to strengthen our approach to promoting and improving collaboration, coherence and the alignment of partners behind national peacebuilding strategies in the countries on the Commission’s agenda. Our focus has been on strengthening partnership with national Governments, the World Bank and the African Development Bank. We have also resumed consultations with the African Union and the Economic Community of West African States. We are making progress in identifying specific areas where the Commission can contribute to improving alignment with those institutions. We believe that such alignment, especially with the World Bank and the African Development Bank, in support of newly developed national poverty reduction strategies, will help to channel much-needed resources to otherwise underfunded peacebuilding priorities and bring attention to country-specific challenges. Such efforts could contribute to strengthening country ownership and would enhance mutual commitments. While continuing to strengthen and deepen the partnership with the World Bank and the African Development Bank, the Commission is also prioritizing its outreach to foundations and private corporations. Our immediate objective will be to identify practical entry points that could help encourage these critical actors to support peacebuilding objectives in the countries on the Commission’s agenda. Secondly, the Commission is also making progress in identifying options for differentiated and flexible forms of engagement with the countries on its agenda, with a view to enhancing the Commission’s impact on the ground. In that regard, we are taking practical steps to enhance linkages with country- level actors and mechanisms, including Special and Executive Representatives of the Secretary-General, and to strengthen coordination among all actors. We are increasingly focused on identifying areas of complementarity, collaboration and coherence. Our efforts are still a work in progress, but we are committed to continuing to sharpen our tools in this area. Thirdly, and lastly, the Secretary-General encouraged the Security Council and the Peacebuilding Commission to build on the excellent and most useful debate and interactive dialogue that took place under the Colombian presidency this past July (see S/PV.6805). I express special thanks to Ambassador Néstor Osorio, Permanent Representative of Colombia, for his efforts. In a letter that I addressed to the President of the Council, I summarized the practical outcome of the July interaction to allow for follow-up dialogue with the Council. We are thankful that the Council has responded by requesting specific advice from the Liberia and the Sierra Leone configurations ahead of its September deliberations on the renewal of the mandates of the United Nations Mission in Liberia and the United Nations Integrated Peacebuilding Office in Sierra Leone, respectively. In that connection, the Commission is proceeding with the development and formulation of its advice in collaboration with key United Nations and non-United Nations actors in both countries. In November, the Commission’s Working Group on Lessons Learned convened discussions with key operational actors to look at where the Commission could add value to Security Council discussions on United Nations missions in transition. There are initial and important findings that need to be put into practice, following further discussions between the two organs. The United Nations peacebuilding agenda is in the normative phase. While not perfect, our efforts are making a difference and are worthy of our collective commitment and investment. For its part, the Peacebuilding Commission is committed to enhancing its impact in the field and to supporting United Nations and global efforts to accompany the countries emerging from conflict on an irreversible path to peace and development. Looking ahead, the Commission stresses the need to draw on lessons learned from country-specific experiences in terms of good practices, challenges and opportunities. We invite the Secretary-General to place particular emphasis in his future reports on the practicality of his recommendations in terms of impacts on the ground and the operational effectiveness of the United Nations in post-conflict countries. That would also allow us to set clear peacebuilding targets and should also stimulate serious evaluation of the Organization’s policies and tools in support of those targets. For its part, the Commission will continue to look forward to working closely with the United Nations and other non-United Nations partners, such as the international financial institutions, in support of more coordinated and coherent response to those priority areas, as relevant, in the countries on its agenda.

I thank Mr. Momen for his briefing. I shall now give the floor to the members of the Security Council.

As this is most likely to be the last public meeting of the Security Council in which I will have the honour to speak as the representative of Germany in the course of our current membership in the Council, I would like to express my delegation’s gratitude to you, Mr. President, and all the members of the Council for the excellent cooperation we have enjoyed during the past two years. Working with all the members has really been a gratifying and great experience. I also wish to express my delegation’s sincere appreciation and thanks to the Security Council secretariat, to the team led by Movses Abelian and to all other staff members of the United Nations, without forgetting the interpreters, who have worked behind the scenes, for their professionalism and unwavering support during that period. As we leave the Council, we will continue to serve the United Nations family as best as we can, based on the very same principles that have guided us in the past two years. We express our best wishes to the five new incoming members. With regard to peacebuilding, let me thank you, Mr. President, for organizing this important debate and for preparing the draft presidential statemement, which we fully support. Let me also thank the Secretary- General and the Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), Ambassador Abulkalam Abdul Momen, respectively, for the insightful statement and briefing this morning. Germany aligns itself with the statement to be delivered later in this debate on behalf of the European Union. We share the analysis contained in the report of the Secretary-General (S/2012/746) that progress has been achieved — in strengthening and expanding United Nations partnerships in the area of peacebuilding, including with international financial institutions; in launching the United Nations civilian capacities initiative; in improving coordination between United Nations missions and country teams on the ground; and in providing timely support during critical phases of transition through the United Nations Peacebuilding Fund, just to mention a few areas. However, much more needs to be done in order to deliver on commitments and to further enhance the impact on the ground. We need to continue to adapt our engagement in peacebuilding to changing and evolving circumstances in countries emerging from conflict. That also requires a regular reassessment of the actual impact and effectiveness of our engagement on a post-conflict country’s capacity to achieve its national peacebuilding goals. In that context, let me briefly highlight four points that seem of particular importance to us. First, with regard to institution- and capacity- building, we need to understand the term institution-building in a very broad sense. This is the approach my country adopts in its bilateral development cooperation. Institution-building, or rather State-building, is not only about constructing Government institutions and State capacity. It is about the whole social fabric of a society, about how a State interacts with its society. Therefore, guaranteeing the active participation of women, supporting the establishment of a vibrant civil society or integrating former child soldiers into their local communities can equally be part of institution-building. Also, we must think in medium and long-term perspectives. We all know that building States from scratch takes decades, not years. We therefore strongly support the Secretary-General’s call on Governments and their international partners to carefully pace, sequence and adjust institutional reform programmes, balancing long-term support for institution-building with a need to achieve early and tangible outcomes through the restoration of core Government functions or service delivery. In that context, the United Nations civilian capacity initiative is a crucial tool in ensuring the transfer of knowledge on how to build institutions and how to train the people who will run those institutions. We welcome the establishment of the online platform CAPMATCH, which connects those seeking expertise with potential providers, fostering in particular South-South and triangular cooperation. Secondly, with regard to women’s engagement in peacebuilding, each conflict is unique. There is no one-size-fits-all approach. However, in all stages of the peacebuilding process, including negotiating peace agreements and introducing development programmes, we need a stronger role for women. We take note of the as yet modest progress on the implementation of the Secretary-General’s seven-point action plan on gender-responsive peacebuilding, bearing in mind that ensuring women’s participation in peacebuilding is, first and foremost, the responsibility of national actors. It requires a sincere and long-term commitment to the full inclusion of women in international policy. We support the Secretary-General in his call on United Nations entities and Member States to take more systematic action to ensure women’s participation in peace processes and to report to the Security Council on the concrete results of efforts to ensure that gender- relevant provisions are included in ceasefire and peace agreements. Let me share with you the fact that the German Government yesterday adopted the first German national action plan to implement resolution 1325 (2000) on women and peace and security. It should intensify and better coordinate our national efforts to promote the role of women in peacebuilding. Thirdly, on the role of the Peacebuilding Commission, I would like to reiterate that the PBC must make better use of the political leverage of its individual members. PBC member States need to do better in assisting the PBC Chairpersons in their important work. Members of the PBC Organizational Committee and the PBC country configurations have a responsibility to help the PBC have a true impact on the ground. The PBC was designed to include members of various United Nations bodies, including from seven members of the Council, precisely for the reason that those members bring their political weight and experience from other bodies to the PBC’s activities. The intergovernmental nature of the PBC needs to be much better used in order to support the countries on its agenda in achieving their peacebuilding priorities. Furthermore, the PBC Organizational Committee can take better advantage of its unique intergovernmental structure. It could therefore potentially serve as an ideal platform, a connecting tissue, to create stronger links between developments that have taken place outside of the United Nations, such as the activities of the World Bank and initiatives such as the New Deal for Engagement in Fragile States, agreed on in Busan in 2011, and the United Nations peacebuilding agenda. Fourthly and lastly, with regard to peacebuilding and the post-2015 process, progress towards achieving the Millennium Development Goals has been slow in fragile and conflict-ridden countries. The outcome document of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (resolution 66/288, annex) notes that countries in situations of conflict need special attention in order to achieve sustainable development and that that requires good governance, including the rule of law and effective, transparent, accountable and democratic institutions. Any post-2015 process will also have to tackle the root causes of conflict. Germany therefore welcomes the Secretary-General’s call on Member States to support the incorporation of peace and security considerations into the post-2015 development agenda. The PBC could facilitate constructive dialogue in that regard. While several countries appear to be graduating from fragility, there is room to maximize the impact of peacebuilding efforts by further developing our strategic approaches and bridging the gap between policies conceived in New York and their successful implementation on the ground. Germany has supported the Peacebuilding Fund with a new contribution of $6.5 million in 2012, thus bringing our combined contribution up to $25 million. My country stands ready to work to that end with countries emerging from conflict, the United Nations and all relevant stakeholders.

Let me start by thanking the Moroccan presidency for taking the initiative to promote this discussion on peacebuilding, the importance of which is well reflected in the list of speakers that we have before us. I also thank Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon for his insightful presentation and for his report (S/2012/746), and I thank Ambassador Abulkalam Abdul Momen for his important contribution. Portugal, naturally, also shares the positions that will be presented later on by the observer of the European Union. The debate we are having today and the various other debates on peacebuilding in which we have actively participated over the past two years constitute solid evidence of the importance of post-conflict peace consolidation in the various areas of United Nations action. There is certainly much that we can improve, but there is also a wide consensus across the United Nations on the need to support the crucial transition phase of peacebuilding between immediate post- conflict peacekeeping and long-term development assistance. When we speak of support to peacebuilding processes, it seems obvious that there is no one-size-fits- all formula that can be applied, regardless of the context. The basic choices and the definition of priorities must be made by the countries themselves, while the role of the international community is essentially one of support, not of replacing the State in the fulfilment of its functions. In the end, a successful transition from conflict into peace is the work and the accomplishment of each State and its society. Having said that, our experience of support to various peacebuilding processes allows us to draw some lessons and identify certain areas that are particularly important in order to ensure that peace gains are sustainable and that societies do not relapse into conflict. In that respect, we very much share the emphasis on institution-building and inclusivity in the Secretary-General’s report. Without strong institutions that can deliver basic services and ensure respect for the rule of law, it will always be very difficult to create a sustainable environment of confidence and accountability, for both national and international actors. It is also a crucial element for promoting investment and the creation of job opportunities. International coordinated support is therefore required, bearing in mind that institution-building is a long-term commitment. The United Nations certainly plays a central role in ensuring sustained international support in that area, working closely with other peacebuilding actors and national stakeholders, while taking into account the specific social and political dynamics. Equally important is the promotion of inclusivity in the peacebuilding processes, that is, making sure that the various sectors of society are represented, not only in political institutions, but also in the definition of the country’s core objectives, which is an essential confidence-building measure, one that increases the legitimacy of political transition. I would highlight in particular the role of women and of youth in peacebuilding strategies from the early stages of those processes. Indeed, there is certainly much that can still be done to raise awareness and empower women as agents in the prevention and resolution of conflicts, as well as in the fulfilment of development goals. That objective is attained through the active encouragement of women’s participation in decision-making, management and education and their access to economic resources. With regard to youth, it is necessary to promote concrete policies for encouraging youth employment, adopting measures and programmes that aim to facilitate access of youth to the labour market, particularly in post-conflict settings, as a way to bridge the consolidation of peace and security with investment in sustainable development. Still on the issue of priority areas, we believe that recent Security Council debates on cross-national issues, such as those on transnational organized crime in West Africa (S/PV.6717) or on the Sahel (S/PV.6882), are very promising and represent an attempt to provide a regional dimension to our work. It is important that peacebuilding actors, including the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), also adopt such a regional approach in their work and make good use of existing regional instruments. Regional offices of the United Nations, such as the United Nations Office for West Africa and the United Nations Regional Office for Central Africa, can play a relevant role in that process. Today’s debate takes place in the wider context of the process of reflection on the relation between the PBC and other organs of the United Nations, in particular, the Security Council. Our discussions on the latest PBC report and the interactive dialogue between the Security Council and the chairs of the country-specific configurations last July were valuable contributions to such a reflection. Recent reports on peacebuilding acknowledge some progress in the interaction between the two organs and provide recommendations on how their relations can be strengthened. We should work collectively to improve our working methods in order to allow us to draw regularly on the advice of the chairs of country-specific configurations. There is certainly room for the Council to seek and make better use of the PBC’s advice, especially when discussing mandate renewal, but also as an early warning for potential setbacks in peace consolidation in specific countries. As always, Portugal stands ready to engage in an open and creative discussion on ways to advance the peacebuilding agenda as part of more efficient and integrated action by the international community throughout the various post-conflict stages and the stages of peace consolidation in the countries involved. Indeed, the success of peacebuilding efforts represents our collective success with regard to achieving sustainable security, stability and development. With that, I conclude my remarks on the issue at hand. But since this is probably Portugal’s last intervention in an open meeting of this Council as one of its elected members, allow me a few but very sincere final words. First, I express, on behalf of my delegation and on my own behalf, how privileged and honoured we felt to have had the unique opportunity throughout the last two years of participating in and contributing to the activity and deliberations of the Security Council and all of its subsidiary organs and working groups. I also offer a word of thanks to all colleagues — permanent representatives, fellow deputy permanent representatives, political coordinators and experts of all delegations that shared this table with us — for their cooperation, understanding, professionalism and friendship. Here I also include the delegations of Brazil, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Gabon, Lebanon and Nigeria, whose mandates ended last year. I also wish to thank the Secretary-General for his leadership, commitment and availability and advice. I thank all the members of the Secretariat, especially Mr. Movses Abelian and his able team, and the entire hidden army that is essential for the functioning of the Council — the interpreters, the translators, conference officers, security agents, technicians. media people and all staff without whom the functioning of the Council would be impossible. Finally, I offer a word of welcome and encouragement to the new members of the Council that will embark on this daunting endeavour — Argentina, Australia, Luxembourg, the Republic of Korea and Rwanda. I wish them every success in their work for the benefit of international peace and security.

First, let me express our sincere appreciation for the cooperation of outgoing members of the Security Council: Columbia, Germany, India, Portugal and South Africa. Each of them has made a significant contribution to the work of the Council over the last two years, and it has been a pleasure working with them. I would also like to thank the Secretary-General for his comments today and for all his efforts to improve United Nations support for countries emerging from conflict. I also thank Ambassador Momen for his thoughtful briefing and his valuable efforts as Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC). We appreciate the important work of the Peacebuilding Commission, the Peacebuilding Fund and the Peacebuilding Support Office, and we are grateful for the steady progress they have made in supporting countries in transition. We have discussed peacebuilding often in this Chamber, both in general terms and in addressing countries on the Council’s agenda. We have agreed on core issues — the imperative of national ownership, the priority of building effective and credible institutions, the need for international efforts to be flexible and tailored to context and the necessity of incorporating women and youth in our peacebuilding strategies. The stakes are high. Without effective strategies to consolidate and sustain peace, fragile settlements are vulnerable to reversal and renewed violence. Governing capacities are easily overwhelmed, economies cannot restart and communities cannot rebuild. Today, I would like to touch on three issues that warrant greater attention and improvement in our collective efforts: building institutions, gender- responsive peacebuilding and division of labour based on core competencies. While every transition is unique, post-conflict authorities all struggle to build or rebuild effective democratic institutions that can meet basic needs, whether securing the streets, providing access to justice, delivering public services or enabling economic activity. That requires significant attention to public sector capacity at all levels of Government and to the institutional foundations of a vibrant civil society and a healthy private sector. The international community has made concrete progress assisting institutional development, but we can do better. The United States appreciates the Secretary- General’s call for a more responsive approach to balancing long-term support for institution-building with the need to achieve early and tangible outcomes — the restoration of core Government functions and service delivery. We believe strongly that countries with their own experience of transition from conflict or crisis have valuable expertise and perspectives that can assist others. We also welcome efforts in the Security Council to explore ways to factor that critical issue into the design and oversight of mandates. Robust participation of women is crucial to peacebuilding. We applaud the Secretary-General’s candour about insufficient progress on the seven- point action plan for gender-responsive peacebuilding, particularly in the areas of governance and economic recovery. Women’s needs and concerns must be given greater attention in Government administration, particularly at the subnational level and especially in the composition of and access to public services. Women’s centrality to economic recovery — notably their potential roles in the agricultural supply chain and in small business — also deserves more focus. From Haiti to Burma, the United Nations has a growing track record of assisting women in post-conflict situations, whether through disarmament, demobilization and reintegration efforts or training and employment programmes. We encourage the United Nations, together with other partners, to scale up those efforts and good practices more systematically. The issue of international roles and responsibilities has been a constant theme since the Secretary-General’s first report on peacebuilding in the aftermath of conflict (S/2009/304). We have urged the United Nations system, together with outside partners, to develop a division of labour in supporting post-conflict countries that reflects comparative advantages. We appreciate the Secretary-General’s charge to peacekeeping missions and United Nations country teams to develop partnerships on that basis. We are pleased by the recent establishment of the global focal point on the rule of law that will bring the United Nations Development Programme and the Department of Peacekeeping Operations into closer alignment, and we look forward to the forthcoming review of international efforts on public administration. We commend the PBC’s recent successes in strengthening partnerships with the World Bank and the African Development Bank, and encourage the PBC to explore further collaboration with the private sector and philanthropic and other non-governmental organizations. We welcome ongoing dialogue with the PBC and other actors to reinforce peacebuilding partnerships and the concept of dividing labour according to comparative advantages. Finally, the United States also thanks Bangladesh for its leadership in convening the high-level event on peacebuilding on the margins of the General Assembly general debate in September. This event raised the visibility of our common interests in effective peacebuilding, and its resultant declaration reflects our shared priorities going forward. Healing the wounds of war and building peace in the aftermath of conflict is one of the most complex and compelling tasks we face in the Council, and one we cannot neglect. The alternative is only more violence, more suffering and more instability. Though the challenges are formidable, there is too much at stake for conflict-affected people, their neighbours and the international community to neglect peacebuilding processes. We must make every effort to accelerate progress.

At the outset, I would like to thank you, Mr. President, for having made sure to include the item of post-conflict peacebuilding on the agenda of the Security Council. I would also like to thank the Secretary-General for his briefing and the Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission, Ambassador Momen, for his work in leading the Commission and for his extremely instructive briefing. The Security Council has always promoted peacebuilding in the aftermath of conflict, as manifested by its initiatives in Sierra Leone, Liberia and, more recently, Timor-Leste. The public debates held recently and the resolutions and presidential statements subsequently adopted speak eloquently of this new direction in the Council’s action. Although post-conflict peacebuilding is a long- term process that does not usually yield immediately quantifiable results, it remains true that the efforts made in that framework are vital to ensuring lasting peace and security and providing opportunities for sustainable development. Thus, since the 2005 World Summit, the issue of peacebuilding has been at centre stage in the United Nations work in countries emerging from conflict. Peacebuilding takes place after the re-establishment of peace in order to make the United Nations presence more visible and efficient. In that context, the United Nations must consider in an integrated and consistent fashion all the problems that arise from conflict or are exacerbated by it. In coordination with the Government of the country concerned, it must propose ways to build a viable State that respects fundamental freedoms and strives to ensure good democratic, political and economic governance. It is true that the international community’s recent initiatives in post-conflict peacebuilding have met with mixed success. That is because the approaches adopted have often varied in accordance with the influence, and above all the perceived value, of the country concerned. As countries emerging from conflict are often unstable, sometimes for years at a time, and some fall back into violence, the peacebuilding approach must represent the resolve of the international community to ensure that the country emerging from conflict does not fall back into violence due to lack of appropriate support and means. Togo therefore welcomes the progress made since 2010 on ensuring lasting peace in countries emerging from conflict, even if the international community’s expectations have not been met in certain countries, such as Guinea-Bissau, given the repeated interference of the military in political life. These results have been possible partly because of the Peacebuilding Commission, which, because of its structure and mandate, plays a very important role in the political, economic, social, security and human rights spheres. However, if the Peacebuilding Commission’s actions are to be sustained, the States concerned must exercise national ownership over them. National ownership is all the more necessary in that it enables a harmonious implementation of the projects already begun and obviates competition between the agencies of the United Nations system and development partners on the ground. In a country that is rebuilding after conflict, the political sphere must take priority in that it must help reorganize and establish new institutions and prepare for and organize democratic, free and transparent elections. In other words, it must lay out and establish a programme of good governance. We welcome the fact that the United Nations is investing more and more in the preparation and organization of elections, since failure to organize elections well or a lack of transparency often leads to violence that could give rise to another conflict. Peacebuilding in a country emerging from armed conflict requires that the root causes of the conflict be taken into account. These can be internal or external. This is why, in pursuing peacebuilding, all stakeholders in the conflict must be involved so that they can all make their contribution to rebuilding a country that has been torn apart by conflict. In that respect, my country welcomes the the international community’s increasing awareness of the important role that women play in the search for lasting peace and security. But if the process must be open to everyone, the political parties or the organizations that these parties belong to must be strengthened in accordance with the basic principles of peacebuilding, including national ownership, partnership and mutual responsibilty. Such capacity-building requires the consistent support of the international community. We often note that the assistance expected by a country emerging from conflict is not forthcoming because of various factors, including a lack of confidence, whether the country is considered of interest, and investors’ lack of enthusiasm for that country. That is why Togo believes that the country involved and development partners must from the outset establish a contract of mutual commitment based on accommodations among the parties in order to identify and locate responsibility, should there be a failure to respect commitments. In conclusion, Togo would like to thank the international community for its efforts to provde sustainable assistance to countries emerging from conflict, especially in Africa. We urge it to do more to ensure that such countries do not fall back into violence. To that end, my country supports the draft presidential statement to be adopted later in the debate.

We thank the Secretary-General for his briefing on peacebuilding in the aftermath of conflict. We have carefully considered the relevant report (S/2012/746). We would specifically like to thank the Permanent Representative of Bangladesh, Mr. Momen, for his productive chairing of the Peacebuilding Commission in 2012. There is no doubt that, in order to be effective, peacebuilding support must be provided in a timely and adequate fashion and must be focused on addressing those tasks that are directly related to eradicating the root causes of the conflict. An absolute priority in this sense must be compliance with the principles of respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of post-conflict countries, as well as the identification of national peacebuilding responsibilities and priorities. A lead role in meeting those responsibilities must be played by the Government of the country concerned. An important priority in peacebuilding is assistance in restoring security in countries where national armies or police are not able to fully carry out their functions. In such cases, assisting in the reform of the security sector, programmes of demobilization, reintegration and disarmament as well as demining are crucial. Closely related to that is the need to restore the rule of law in post-conflict countries. Core responsibilities for addressing those tasks rest with the national judicial mechanisms. However, United Nations support can be provided in building the requisite capacities. The end of the critical phase of a crisis that was rooted in a conflict between political forces or national or sectarian groups does not yet mean that the process of national reconciliation is on track. Consolidating achieved outcomes can take many years and require the international community to take additional efforts by providing mediation services or assisting in electoral processes. In the post-conflict phase, it is important to take into account more than just political aspects, in that assistance in economic development, addressing urgent social challenges and job creation are critical factors in mitigating political contradictions. A particular role here must be played by United Nations funds and programmes. Many factors in conflicts are regional in dimension. They include organized crime, inter-ethnic or inter-tribal frictions, drug trafficking, and the transboundary spread of weapons, which call for appropriate reactions from the international community. Peacebuilding assistance is not limited only to the activities that I have mentioned. The nature of conflict is diverse, and therefore assistance in eradicating the causes, so that measures can be more effective, must be tailored to each country, taking into account the unique nature of each. In the United Nations, through peacekeeping operations, the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) offices and the PBC country configurations, a great amount of peacebuilding effort is under way. Those activities come with considerable challenges and complexities and call for the coordinated efforts of States, United Nations funds and programmes, regional organizations, the United Nations Secretariat and international financial institutions. To date, however, international assistance has, for the most part, been fragmented. Clearly, there is a need to improve coordination and the division of labour between the participants in those processes and a need to systematize the peacebuilding processes, including enhancing the efforts of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture. The compilation of the United Nations experience and analysing it would be extremely useful for the adoption of decisions in the area of peacebuilding and for enhancing its effectiveness. We are convinced that identifying new priorities or areas of peacebuilding should be based on specific results in the field. Attempts to agree on common or general approaches in peacebuilding are being undertaken. For example, in September a contact group on the rule of law was established between the Department of Peacekeeping Operations and United Nations Development Programme. We hope that the United Nations Secretariat will inform us on the activities of the mechanism. The idea of transition pacts also needs some preliminary analysis. A particular role in the coordination of peacebuilding support for post-conflict countries lies with the United Nations Peacebuilding Commission. It has considerable experience in direct dialogue with national Governments, bolstered by instruments for mutual oversight over the implementation of obligations and the coordination of efforts by international players in achieving the priorities identified by post-conflict countries. Here too, we are certain that, beyond the activities of the country configurations, the PBC could be more actively involved in the discussion of system-wide issues, such as the transition from peacekeeping to peacebuilding and the leveraging of national and international civilian capacities in post- conflict periods. The sending of skilled civilian experts to post-conflict areas is an important instrument in peacebuilding activities. However, the establishment of new mechanisms in the United Nations to make use of such expertsor to change existing mechanisms needs to be carried out with the oversight and consent of Member States. The mandates must be made clear and there must be clarity in the rules of selection so as to ensure the high qualifications of such experts. For our part, we will be ready to take an active part in peacebuilding activities in the United Nations and in constructive discussions of the issues of international assistance in the post-conflict restoration of countries and regions that are affected by armed conflicts.

I wish to thank Morocco for the initiative of holding today’s open debate to discuss post-conflict peacebuilding. I would also like to express my appreciation to Secretary- General Ban Ki-moon and Ambassador Momen, the Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), for their respective statements. Post-conflict peacebuilding plays an effective role in eliminating the root causes of conflict. It has an important bearing on achieving endurable peace and sustainable development. Over the years, the United Nations has been an active partner in post-conflict peacebuilding in the countries where it has chosen to work, where it has accumulated rich experiences and achieved remarkable results. However, the organizations involved also face a number of challenges. Here I want to emphasize four points. First, it is imperative to respect the ownership of the countries concerned in post-conflict peacebuilding. Post-conflict countries bear the primary responsibility for their own peacebuilding. In assisting with peacebuilding efforts, the United Nations and the relevant agencies should strengthen partnerships with the countries concerned, respect the priorities set by those countries, and help them draw up their integrated peacebuilding strategy based on their own conditions. In the implementation of peacebuilding strategies, it is important to emphasize capacity-building and personnel training in those countries, fully utilizing their existing human resources and expertise, and to enhance their level of governance. Secondly, it is important to tackle, as a matter of priority, the root causes of conflict in post-conflict peacebuilding, especially those related to economic and social development. In post-conflict countries and regions, economic reconstruction should be the constant and overarching theme. Efforts to strengthen economic security and development should be carried out in parallel. Justice and the rule of law are important in their own right; however, development merits the primary attention. Only by achieving economic reconstruction and recovery and only when people can enjoy the peace dividend will there be an overall situation that enables the promotion of political reconciliation, the stabilization of security and the establishment of a political basis for the peace process. Thirdly, post-conflict peacebuilding should enjoy adequate and guaranteed resources. The international community’s swift and timely support in the form of assistance is important in terms of achieving peacebuilding objectives. The United Nations should continue to pay attention to the financing requirements of reconstruction programmes in the countries concerned. The Organization should also urge the international community to continue to provide assistance to peacebuilding activities within those countries and to work together to broaden the channels for financing. In that connection, China commends the United Nations Peacebuilding Fund for the active role it has played and supports its efforts to improve its work in enhancing the evaluation of the projects that it has carried out and in enhancing the efficiency of the utilization of resources. Fourthly, it is important to strengthen coordination and cooperation in post-conflict peacebuilding. The United Nations should continue to play a leadership role in post-conflict peacebuilding efforts and should seek to establish a stable relationship, or coordination, with the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and other international partners. At the same time, it is important to bring into play the unique advantages of regional organizations, including the African Union, and subregional organizations in that respect. The relevant agencies within the United Nations system should have a clear division of labour and work together more effectively. The United Nations Peacebuilding Commission may have a greater role to play in helping post-conflict countries in their peacebuilding activities. China has been a strong supporter of peacebuilding efforts in post-conflict countries and is ready to play its due role in helping those countries in achieving durable peace and sustainable development. The Chinese delegation supports the draft presidential statement that will be adopted at the end of today’s meeting and wishes to thank the Permanent Mission of Morocco to the United Nations for their efforts in that regard.

South Africa commends the delegation of Morocco for organizing this important open debate on post-conflict peacebuilding. We also wish to thank the Secretary-General as well as the Permanent Representative of Bangladesh, Ambassador Abulkalam Abdul Momen, the Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), for their respective statements. South Africa aligns itself with the statement to be delivered later today by the Permanent Representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. In South Africa’s view, the Peacebuilding Commission remains a critical tool for the international community in the broad realm of conflict prevention and peace consolidation. The progress that has been registered by the countries on its agenda is a clear testimony to the value added by the Commission to national peacebuilding efforts. While the PBC has registered some gains in a number of areas, the reversals in the peace consolidation phase we have witnessed recently in Guinea-Bissau and the Central African Republic reflect the challenges faced by the Commission. It is therefore my delegation’s assessment that the Commission continues to evolve and that it has not yet reached its full potential. Today’s reflection on the achievements and challenges of the PBC is therefore crucial, as we continue to assess the effectiveness and lessons learned thus far. We are encouraged by the progress made by the PBC and its country-specific configurations in the countries on its agenda, and we welcome the 8 October report of the Secretary-General on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2012/746). The PBC has adapted to the diverse peacebuilding requirements of countries emerging from conflict and has become more agile in responding to them. It has done so through developing integrated strategic frameworks, setting shared objectives and timelines in relevant mission environments, expanding partnerships with the World Bank and regional organizations, institution-building through the deployment of civilian capacities, and through financial support during critical transitional moments from the Peacebuilding Fund. In moving forward to increase the effectiveness of the PBC, we concur with the three priority directions for peacebuilding set out by the Secretary-General, namely, inclusivity, institution-building and sustained international support. Countries in post-conflict situations often have weak human and institutional capacities. It is important to build local institutional and human capacities and to provide training in order to create new capacities and enhance those that already exist. We welcome the process led by the United Nations Development Programme on strengthening the United Nations system-wide approach to capacity development for peacebuilding. My delegation cannot overemphasize the importance, in developing those capacities, of forging partnerships at the local, regional and subregional levels, in order to exploit the unique advantages inherent in human capacities at those levels. In that regard, on 15 December the African Union Commission and the United Nations the Department of Political Affairs convened a continental workshop in Bujumbura on the development of an African Union strategy and framework for reconstructing public service and administration in post-conflict countries. The workshop sought to address key issues relating to public service and administration facing post- conflict countries, including the restoration of human resource capacity, legitimacy and public confidence, effectiveness and efficiency, and inclusivity and equitable distribution. It further sought to share lessons learned, experiences and best practices on how to strengthen the public sector and administration after conflict, in pursuit of sustainable peace and development. It is important, in developing those capacities, that national ownership be emphasized at all stages of the peacebuilding process. Increased coordination is crucial for ensuring effective international efforts in post-conflict situations and international interventions. United Nations efforts are often fragmented and the Organization struggles to pull its critical resources together and to maximize the strength of collective effort. In that regard, South Africa strongly supports the call for greater coherence, coordination and interaction among the various United Nations organs and agencies, especially in the field. Greater coordination has the potential to avert duplication of efforts and to maximize output at a time of limited and constantly shrinking resources. The relationship between the Security Council and the PBC is something we have often discussed. It is perhaps the most important relationship, given the mandate of the two bodies. My delegation is pleased to note that the PBC’s relationship with the Council has continuously developed during the reporting period. That positive development is evidenced, inter alia, by the introduction of informal interactions between the Council and the chairs of the country configurations. We would like once again to stress the need for the Council to consider flexible working methods so as to allow the PBC to effectively play its role in advising the Council on post-conflict situations. Whereas the Council has incorporated peacebuilding tasks in most peacekeeping mandates, we nevertheless stress that the advice of the PBC should be sought at all times where it is deemed relevant. We once again emphasize that peacekeeping and peacebuilding should be mutually reinforcing in the pursuit of lasting peace in post- conflict countries. Peacebuilding in post-conflict countries requires a substantive injection of resources. We believe that timely, sustainable and predictable financing remains a crucial ingredient in realizing the objectives of peacebuilding. We therefore emphasize the need for the United Nations to consider utilizing sustainable mechanisms as a means of kick-starting peacebuilding activities in countries emerging from conflict, including assessed contributions, especially with regard to quick-impact projects. Such projects are critical for the consolidation of peace dividends, so as to avert a total relapse into conflict. The international community should provide flexible and risk-tolerant funding mechanisms for countries emerging from conflict. Sustainable peacebuilding requires that those previously marginalized at the political, social and economic levels be included in peacekeeping and peacebuilding processes. In that regard, the role of women in the post-conflict setting cannot be ignored. Therefore, measures to enhance women’s engagement in conflict prevention, resolution and peacebuilding, including the protection and promotion of their rights, are critical. On the issue of peacebuilding, South Africa reiterates its commitment to the work of the PBC, because we believe it has a critical role to play in conflict prevention, including in the early detection of root causes and in identifying potential triggers of conflict. There is no shortcut to sustainable peacebuilding. Long-term and sustainable partnerships will have to be forged and significant financial and resource investments will have to be made if we are to avoid relapses into conflict. Before I conclude, we would like to note that this is probably the last public statement that South Africa will deliver in the Chamber as an elected member of the Security Council in its current term. We would like to express our appreciation to the members of the General Assembly for having given us this opportunity to serve the interests of international peace and security. We thank all delegations with which we have worked for their spirit of cooperation and congeniality over the past two years. We thank the Secretariat for its unwavering assistance, and we wish all the incoming five members of the Council the very best during their terms.

Allow me first of all, Mr. President, to thank you for having convened this debate, which is on a matter of great importance and significance to Colombia. The statements by the Secretary-General and the Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), Ambassador Abulkalam Abdul Momen of Bangladesh, clearly show the progress achieved in peacebuilding with United Nations support at the same time as they call attention to the tasks remaining. Five priority areas were identified in 2009 as requiring support: political processes, security and protection of civilians, provision of basic services, restoration of core governmental functions, and economic revitalization, including job creation. Support in those five areas is fundamental to the success of any peacebuilding process. Because of that, while we welcome the progress set out in the Secretary- General’s report (S/2012/746), we believe we must strengthen the Organization’s activities and fund them at an appropriate level if we are to achieve the goals we have set for ourselves. The report recounts the progress made with respect to assistance to each of the countries currently in the process of peacebuilding, as well as with respect to the joint, coordinated efforts of missions and country teams, the development of integrated strategic frameworks, and increased ties with international financial institutions and regional organizations. While we agree that those are all crucial elements in building sustainable peace and development, future reports should offer recommendations as to the impact of United Nations actions on the ground and to developing the policies and tools used by the United Nations to support peacebuilding. We reiterate that the principal responsibility for peacebuilding initiatives falls to individual States and that, in the framework of the principle of national ownership, the various actors involved should stay constantly aligned and agree on action plans that are clear, inclusive and coherent. Inclusive political agreements place negotiation above violence, foster confidence and social cohesion, promote transparency and add to the legitimacy of political agreements. The building and strengthening of national institutional capacities must be the pillar for re-establishing the smooth functioning of public administration and strengthening the role of the State as the principal actor in the provision of high-quality public services. National activities aimed at establishing and building peace in the aftermath of conflict must be supported by effective civilian capacities in a timely manner, making use of existing national capacities so as to ensure a transition to stability and long-term development and to contribute to a progressive reduction in dependence upon the international community. The international community and the United Nations in particular must be prepared to provide, more swiftly and effectively, specialized civilian capacities and the necessary expertise, with a view to supporting national actors working to re-establish the rule of law, revitalize the economy, resume the provision of basic services to the population and develop the capacities necessary to ensure that such progress is sustained. To that end, we must strengthen sustained international political and financial support for peacebuilding processes. It is important to strengthen ties with the international financial institutions, regional development banks and non-traditional actors, including the private sector and philanthropic organizations, so as to promote strategies aimed at yielding long-term socioeconomic development. Colombia acknowledges the role played by women in conflict prevention and peacebuilding. The United Nations must promote the participation of women in the areasof conflict resolution, gender-inclusive planning, economic recovery and the rule of law. We reiterate the importance of starting and undertaking peacebuilding activities at the earliest stages of planning and carrying out peacekeeping operations, in particular through clear mandates. We recognize the contribution made by peacekeeping personnel and missions to such early peacebuilding. We wish to express special recognition for the continuing dedicated work of the PBC, which has made it possible to make progress on fundamental goals, including support for the identification of priorities in countries emerging from conflict, the strengthening of cooperation and coordination among principal actors, and the mobilization of international support. It is pivotal to continue to address the problems identified during the debate and the interactive dialogue held last July last, and thereby to promote the coordination and intensification of the work of the PBC and the Security Council. Strategies aimed at establishing a stable and lasting peace require adaptation to the specificities of each case. Such recognition must guide the discussions and decisions of the Council, so as to ensure that the measures adopted correspond to the political, economic and cultural characteristics of each situation. The implementation of effective peacebuilding strategies ensures lasting peace and development. Hence the United Nations must continue to ensure that countries, in peacebuilding processes, are able to overcome the causes of instability and conflict and thereby avert any resurgence of violence and build a lasting peace. In July last, when Colombia had the honour of presiding over the Council, we held an interactive debate and dialogue (see S/PV.6805) that we believe contributed to a deepening of the dialogue on the United Nations architecture for supporting peace processes, clarifying expectations relating to roles and responsibilities, and strengthening cooperation among the various United Nations agencies in New York and in the field. In that dialogue, the strengthening of national capacities and the creation of conditions conducive to allowing countries to regain their full independence and sovereignty and generate development and welfare for their people must be placed centre stage. With that aim, from the permanent forum provided by the General Assembly, we will continue to promote the exchange of experiences of countries that have been in situations of conflict and post-conflict, as well as South-South and triangular cooperation regarding initiatives related to disarmament, demobilization and reintegration; security sector reform; the restoration of the rule of law; and the reconstruction of national institutions, including ensuring justice and elaboratig strategies to revitalize the economy and reduce poverty. As we conclude our two-year term in the Security Council, I should like to convey to you, Mr. President, and to all my colleagues and all delegations our sincere gratitude for this honour and for the privilege of being part of the noble mission of promoting international peace and security. It has been an honour that we value highly, and my country will remain attentive and willing to contribute in any way necessary for the United Nations to ensure that international peace and security can be a reality. Sir Mark Lyall Grant (United Kingdom): I wish to thank you, Mr. President, for having convened this open debate. As this may be the last formal meeting of the Security Council in 2012, may I take this opportunity to thank the outgoing members — Colombia, India, Portugal, Germany and South Africa — for all their cooperation and their efforts on the Security Council over the past two years. I should also like to thank the Secretary-General for his comments and the Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission, Ambassador Momen, for his briefing this morning. In May of this year, my Council colleagues and I travelled to Côte d’Ivoire, Sierra Leone and Liberia. In Sierra Leone and Liberia, we saw how the United Nations system works closely with international and regional partners to be the bedrock of support for countries recovering from brutal civil wars. During our visit, we saw how the United Nations planned to support the successful and peaceful elections in Sierra Leone that took place just last month, a real turning point for the country. In Liberia, we saw how that United Nations is helping to re-establish the rule of law through building a functioning police, justice and corrections system. The United Kingdom recognizes the important role of the United Nations in helping national Governments and communities recover from the scourge of war. That is why we are the largest contributor to the United Nations Peacebuilding Fund, providing about $20 million a year. We are committed to spending one third of our rising aid budget in fragile and conflict- affected States. The United Kingdom welcomes the recent Secretary- General’s report on peacebuilding in the aftermath of conflict (S/2012/746). It is important that the Council and the broader membership regularly review the progress made by the United Nations on peacebuilding. The report shows that the United Nations is moving forward on key peacebuilding issues. Progress has been made on inclusivity and institution-building, but much work remains. Further attention is required in three key areas in particular. First, the United Nations must adapt the evolving international context for peacebuilding and adopt the principles outlined in the New Deal for Engagement in Fragile States. Agreed by the Group of Seven Plus (g7+) States, those principles set out how the international community can improve its support for countries emerging from conflict. Transparency of support, predictability of action and the building of national systems all are essential in improving the way in which the international community supports conflict-affected countries. We call on the whole United Nations system to ensure that its support for countries emerging from conflict adheres to those New Deal principles. To that I would like to add that we must also consider how the issue of conflict and fragility can be incorporated into the wider discussion on the post-2015 development framework. Secondly, the United Nations must improve the way in which it supports countries with missions in transition. Sustained, adaptable international support is vital. We see the success of such support in countries such as Timor-Leste, where there is a successful move from the United Nations Integrated Mission in Timor- Leste to a country team, or Sierra Leone, where in 2013 we should see the drawdown of the United Nations Integrated Peacebuilding Office in Sierra Leone and the country move onto a development path. To achieve successful transitions such as these, we need a well-coordinated United Nations system that plans strategically from the outset of a mission’s deployment. United Nations development actors must also plan ahead and be ready with the right programmes and the right resources. Thirdly, the United Nations must do more to encourage women’s engagement in avoiding and dealing with conflict. The Secretary-General’s report clearly shows that insufficient progress has been made on the role of women in building peace, and we must do more on that agenda. We are pleased that the presidential statement cites sexual violence in conflict. Peace cannot be built without ending the use of that terrible weapon of war. In May, the United Kingdom’s Foreign Minister launched his Preventing Sexual Violence Initiative. The Initiative works closely with the United Nations, international partners and civil society on a sustained campaign to build a global partnership to prevent sexual violence in conflict. We must ensure that the United Nations has the capabilities to deliver on that ambitious agenda. Since 2009, the Secretary-General has consistently identified the need for the United Nations to broaden and deepen the pool of civilian expertise for critical peacebuilding tasks, in particular, drawing on capacities from the global South. Recent figures show that over 20 per cent of civilian rule of law posts in United Nations missions remain vacant. That is unacceptable. If we truly want the United Nations to perform well in peacebuilding, we must deal with that shortcoming. We welcome the Secretary-General’s efforts to address the issue and look forward to discussions in the General Assembly and its subsidiary bodies on the proposals that he has put forward. Peacebuilding is a long-term project. It requires patience and perseverance. It is seldom linear and always complex. But we know that peacebuilding is absolutely critical to the maintenance of international peace and security, and in that, the United Nations has a unique and central role to play.

At the outset, let me also take the opportunity to commend and thank the five Council members who will depart at the end of the year — Germany, Colombia, India, Portugal and South Africa — and to thank them for their contributions and cooperation throughout the two years. I also thank the Secretary-General and the Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission for their briefings. I associate myself with the statement to be made on behalf of the European Union. Twenty years after the publication of the report by the former Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros Boutros- Ghali, entitled “An agenda for peace” (S/24111), the United Nations has provided itself with many means to meet the challenges of peacebuilding. Today we have an opportunity to take stock of the initiatives pursued in that domain. Peacebuilding is indeed a real challenge for the United Nations. It is essential that the international community have effective tools to avoid a recurrence or resurgence of violence in States made fragile by conflict. Current events provide numerous examples of the ongoing risks in post-conflict situations. Therefore, the entire United Nations must make the best use of the means at its disposal to meet the challenges of peacebuilding. I wish to address three issues presented as priorities in the report of the Secretary-General (S/2012/746). First, the peacebuilding process must be inclusive. No reconstruction effort is possible without genuine national ownership of the peacebuilding goals. To be sustainable, that reconstruction must be based on an inclusive process. Yesterday the Council again saw, with respect to the situation in the Central African Republic, that it is essential that all stakeholders accept the terms of the peacebuilding process and fully participate in it. The processes must entail a broad political dialogue in which the opposition, under a democratic framework, has its full place. Also, the lives of various segments of society must be taken into account. Addressing post-conflict peacebuilding must include enhancing the contribution of women. Women must have access in a more systematic manner, and on equal footing with men, in the political, economic, social and cultural domains. In that regard, we fully support the recommendation of the Secretary-General to ensure the active participation of women in all aspects of peacebuilding. The goals of his seven-point action plan must be implemented. Secondly, institution-building efforts must be strengthened. Institution-building is a key factor in the success of peacebuilding. But beyond the institutions, in the strict sense of the word, a broad enabling environment for peacebuilding must be established. That involves the implementation of security sector reform and disarmament, demobilization and reintegration processes. It also requires support for national reconciliation, establishing respect for rule of law, and the reintegration of the economic fabric. Setting up all of those elements presupposes excellent coordination of all actors involved over the long term in order to appropriately address the transition process. As a priority, coordination of all actors at all levels is crucial. The Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) — I commend its work here — can play a liaison role among various members of the international community, including States, international organizations and financial institutions. We encourage the PBC to step up efforts in those areas. The second aspect of transition is that it must be formulated with a view to the long term. Transition covers a number of realities, for example, transition from a peacekeeping operation to a special political mission, or from a political mission to the withdrawal of United Nations action. Setting up an appropriate sequence entails defining the criteria. However, it also involves expectations. For example, the transition plan established under the United Nations Integrated Mission in Timor-Leste was developed over the long term and in close coordination with the local authorities. It is an example of institutional reforms having been carefully adjusted in preparation for the withdrawal. Thirdly, international support must be lasting and based on the principle of mutual responsibilities. We know that peacebuilding involves long-term efforts. I would like to highlight two initiatives that are sources of hope for enduring peacebuilding, namely, the New Deal for Engagement in Fragile States, and the review of the civilian capacities initiative. To start, the role of the international community is to create the conditions for a country’s recovery. States receiving assistance should not continue to get it indefinitely. To deal with that, priority should be given to setting up contracts, such as the New Deal compact, which was defined during the Fourth High-level Forum on Aid Effectiveness, held in Busan. Such a contract would define a State’s commitments and therefore enable its full involvement in the undertaking. In that view, initiatives aimed at restoring a viable economic fabric must be especially encouraged. The joint event held in June by the Economic and Social Council and the Peacebuilding Commission on partnerships for job creation for young people was useful. However, what is important, obviously, is the specific implementation of those efforts on the ground. Secondly, to ensure the durability of the international community’s commitment, certain considerations were addressed, such as a review of civilian capacities. We would encourage the Secretary-General to continue to broaden and strengthen the use of civilian experts to fully meet immediate capacity-building requirements of States emerging from conflict. The issue of developing partnerships is a key element of the review. We believe that the long-term commitment of all partners represents the best hope. We note with interest the launching of the CAPMATCH initiative. In conclusion, I highlight that the robust mobilization of many players on these crucial issues has enabled the establishment of many impressive tools. It is now up to us to use them effectively, relying as much as possible on the synergies of the various available instruments. In that way the coherence of international action and the clarity of United Nations peacebuilding interventions can be assured.

At the outset, I would like to express our gratitude to the delegation of Morocco for the holding of this open debate. We welcome the adoption of the draft presidential statement later during this meeting as an outcome of today’s debate. I also thank the Secretary-General and Ambassador Abulkalam Abdul Momen of Bangladesh, in his capacity as Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission, for their briefings and insights. Azerbaijan strongly supports United Nations efforts to build sustainable peace in war-torn countries. Drawing conclusions from the Secretary-General’s detailed report (S/2012/746), I would like to focus on the following aspects of post-conflict peacebuilding. First, the report outlines the progress achieved in the implementation of the 2009 Agenda for Action and enunciates the need for further action, especially in the areas critical to averting a relapse into violence and to building sustainable peace. We believe that the significant progress in some areas should not obviate the need to place more emphasis on others, including governance, economic recovery, enhanced financial support and capacity-building assistance. Secondly, the sense of national ownership in peacebuilding is critical. The Governments of countries emerging from conflict bear the primary responsibility for peacebuilding, including for identifying their own needs and setting up national development agendas. In certain situations, when some parts of a national territory are conflict-affected, strategic planning and long-term preparation are required in order to launch an immediate and smooth recovery process once peace is reached. The international community should fully respect the sovereignty and independence of States and their national development choices. Thirdly, international assistance efforts can yield true results only if they strive to build and develop the national institutional capacities of post-conflict countries. Solid and self-sustainable national capacities are key prerequisites that underpin the effectiveness of peacebuilding. Rebuilding them requires consistent and predictable financial support commensurate with the expectations placed on the United Nations and recipient Governments. That approach brings us to the widely used concept of mutual accountability that aims to ensure the consistency of international assistance to national plans and priorities based on a balanced partnership between donors and recipient countries. Given the various challenges posed by post-conflict situations, that concept might not be applicable to and workable in all cases. We concur with the Secretary-General’s recognition of the need to elaborate risk assessments and analyses in post-conflict environments and to employ risk-tolerant approaches. Fourthly, peacebuilding is an integrated system and a web of different complementary and mutually reinforcing components. It is a complex process with a number of actors and spheres of engagement. Therefore, effective and efficient peacebuilding requires more coordinated and coherent actions among all organizations and donors. In that regard, we would like to stress the particular role of the Peacebuilding Commission in coordinating the activities of all relevant actors within and outside the United Nations. Its strategy of promoting improved coherence and aligning donors with national peacebuilding priorities should be further strengthened. Post-conflict peacebuilding is inextricably linked to the preceding peace process and its outcomes. An effective process of recovery, reconstruction and development in the aftermath of conflict can take root and succeed only if a genuine peace based on the generally accepted norms and principles of international law, in particular those pertaining to respect for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of States, is established on the ground. The legality and ethics of actions taken to achieve peace determine the success of peacebuilding agendas. Peacebuilding must not be directed at sustaining and legitimizing a status quo created as the result of violations of international law, in particular its peremptory norms such those prohibiting the threat or use of force, genocide and racial discrimination. Nor should it be used as a tool to consolidate a priori illegal and fait accompli-based solutions. The imposition of solutions incompatible with international law and with the principles and purposes of the United Nations will fail to provide the necessary foundations for enduring peace and long-term stability, such as those aimed at establishing a secure post-conflict environment, inclusivity, national unity, societal cohesion, national ownership and responsibility. To conclude, Mr. President, I would like to congratulate the five outgoing members of the Security Council — the Ambassadors of Colombia, Germany, India, Portugal and South Africa and their respective teams — on the successful completion of their two-year terms. I thank them for their significant contribution to the work of the Council during this period of increasing threats and challenges, as well as for their leadership in managing the activities of the relevant subsidiary bodies and their effective penholdership on other issues. I wish my colleagues and friends every success in their future endeavours.

We are grateful to you, Mr. President, for arranging today’s debate and we commend the Moroccan delegation for ably facilitating negotiations on the draft presidential statement, which we support. We also thank the Secretary-General and the Peacebuilding Commission Chairperson, Ambassador Abulkalam Abdul Momen, for their insightful briefings. We join others in paying tribute to the outgoing elected members of the Council — Columbia, India, Portugal, Germany and South Africa. Working with them has been a truly enriching experience. The Secretary-General’s progress report (S/2012/746) on peacebuilding in the aftermath of confl ict is a substantive addition to the series of reports on the subject. In his earlier reports, 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 the implementation of the peacebuilding agenda and gives priority directions for future work. In the context of the progress update, we welcome the enhanced effectiveness of the fi eld presence, which stresses stronger communication and coordination. An emphasis on assessment and planning helps forge consensus among stakeholders on priorities and resources. In that regard, it is a matter of satisfaction that an integrated strategic framework has been completed in nearly all missions. The current review of the integrated mission planning process should further streamline planning requirements. In terms of future directions, the report rightly underscores the importance of inclusivity, institution-building and sustained international support for peacebuilding. We support closer interaction between the United Nations and Governments to reinforce national ownership. We feel that it would have been useful for the report to have focused also on tasks aimed at preventing the relapse of conflict as well as long-term recovery plans and on the role of external actors. In addition, references to peacebuilding activities in the security and defence sectors, justice and corrections systems, basic Government functions and support to political processes would have been helpful. In that regard, the commendable achievements of United Nations peacekeeping missions in Liberia, Sierra Leone, Haiti and Timor-Leste are worthy of mention, as are those in Somalia and Darfur, where the United Nations and the African Union have jointly undertaken important peacebuilding-related tasks through peacekeeping. Our future work on peacebuilding must be guided by four key concepts. First is the imperative of national ownership. Secondly, there needs to be strict prioritization of targeted areas of peacebuilding based on specific needs and articulated with the consent of national authorities. Thirdly, there needs to be a sharper emphasis on the development aspect of peacebuilding. Finally, the nexus between peacekeeping and peacebuilding needs to be refined. The Peacebuilding Commission is the appropriate forum for discussing and implementing those concepts. The Commission has made important strides in the first seven years of its existence. The PBC’s work will improve with a refinement of the global discourse on peacebuilding and an augmentation of resources for peacebuilding. The buttressing of the PBC’s advocacy and resource-mobilization roles is important. The risk of relapse into conflict is a perennial challenge to peacebuilding. Peacekeepers acting as early peacebuilders can help to mitigate this risk. We attach high importance to factoring the gender perspective into peacebuilding endeavours. We believe that lasting peace will remain elusive unless the condition of women and other vulnerable groups is improved. For long-term economic recovery and social cohesion, women’s access to health care, education and entrepreneurial opportunities are essential. Women’s participation in mediation and policy formulation will promote the efficacy of peacebuilding efforts. The success of United Nations peacebuilding hinges on adequate financial resources. In this context, the Peacebuilding Fund has catalytic role to play in attracting other sources of funding. We therefore value the ongoing work on resource mobilization carried out by the Peacebuilding Support Office and the Peacebuilding Commission’s Working Group on Lessons Learned. International financial institutions and development actors also have a role to play in providing resources for peacebuilding. Besides finances, peacebuilding initiatives require adequate human resources. The Secretary-General’s civilian capacity initiative is important in identifying expertise to be tailored to specific post-conflict needs. The process should stand up to intergovernmental scrutiny, avoid duplication of roles, and be compliant with United Nations rules and procedures. In conclusion, we reiterate our strong commitment and support to United Nations peacebuilding endeavours. We share the hope that our collective peacebuilding efforts will benefit all conflict-affected peoples of the world.

At the outset, let me thank the delegation of the Kingdom of Morocco for having organized this open debate. We also express our appreciation to Ms. Judy Cheng-Hopkins and Ambassador Momen for their presentations, as well as the Secretariat for the report before us (S/2012/746), concerning the progress made in improving the coherence, efficiency and internal accountability in peacebuilding activities. Seven years after its establishment, the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) has not yet reached its full potential or entirely fulfilled the purpose for which it was originally established. However, it is clear that it has made significant achievements; the contribution of the Commission to the countries under its care is increasing over time. Evidence of this is the expansion of country configurations through the advisory role of the PBC, working to secure the foundations for lasting peace and national reconciliation. Building on what the Security Council’s debate in July (see S/PV.6805) when we met to consider the fifth report of the Peacebuilding Commission (S/2012/70), my remarks will focus on the following six points. First, the Peacebuilding Commission should help to ensure that donor support is in line with national peacebuilding plans, and accommodate national priorities that address the root causes of conflict and the actions to overcome them. We agree with the report of the Secretary-General, and the established practice of the Commission itself, that the countries directly concerned must set the course and provide leadership in the implementation of those plans. Secondly, the Commission should help ensure that collective efforts generate coordinated and coherent action in the field by all stakeholders, including by exploring such alternatives as simple and flexible collaboration with other partners, such as foundations and the private sector. This aid must at all times complement and support the efforts and initiatives undertaken by national actors, and the entire process should be initiated upon the request and consent of the country under consideration. Thirdly, in order to enhance its role in building partnerships within and outside the United Nations system and with the competent authorities of the affected country, the Commission should be, as far as the United Nations is concerned, the builder of bridges between various intergovernmental bodies of the Organization, such as the Security Council, the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council. In that sense, and as we pointed out in July in this very Chamber, the Commission is a link between the Security Council, whose mandate is limited to the maintenance of international peace and security, the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council. The latter two bodies have mandates in development and democratic governance. For that reason, the boundary between peacemaking and peacebuilding is not clear, which is why a good understanding between the Security Council and the Peacebuilding Commission would enhance compliance with the mandates of both bodies, especially on the ground. It is important to forge alliances between these bodies, and between the United Nations and the multilateral financial institutions. Fourthly, the report of the Secretary-General prominently addresses the issue of women’s participation in peacebuilding processes. We endorse the notion that women are key agents for attaining lasting peace. During our presidency of the Council in October, we promoted a presidential statement on the matter (S/PRST/2012/23). In that respect, we recognize all efforts undertaken by the Secretary-General to ensure the participation of women and the availability of experts on gender issues in peace processes, especially peacebuilding processes. Fifthly, it is critical that in the earliest stages of any peace process broad sectors of society and a wide range of relevant national actors be included in order to better address the root causes of conflict and give greater legitimacy to the consolidation of peace and all that it entails. The active participation of national actors supports the national responsibility in the achievement of peacebuilding goals and ensures that national policies are developed in a way that benefits the common good. In this, women can also play a conciliatory role. Sixthly, all efforts made by the United Nations and partners on the ground will be for naught if national capabilities are not generated and democratic institutions whose role is recognized and respected by the population are not built. In that regard, we find it relevant to refer to civilian capacity and the availability of experts in developing countries who can contribute to developing national capacity and establishing peacebuilding institutions. That entails both the idea of national ownership and participatory processes and focused international cooperation, which also favours South-South cooperation. In conclusion, we have taken note of the suggestions and recommendations that the Secretary-General makes in his report. We welcome the vast majority of them without hesitation. This is the last formal meeting of the Council in which we will participate with colleagues with whom we have worked intensively in the past year — including, seated to either side of me, Ambassador Hardeep Singh Puri and Ambassador Peter Wittig, as well as Ambassador Néstor Osorio, Ambassador Baso Sangqu and Ambassador José Filipe Moraes Cabral. We shall genuinely miss them. Each one of them, with his support teams, singular contributions to the work of the Council and unique personality, has made a profound impression on us. Working with them has been an unforgettable experience. We wish them every success in their future endeavours, which will no doubt serve to confirm to the rest of us elected members of the Security Council that life goes on after serving on the Council.

Let me begin by thanking you, Mr. President, for organizing today’s open debate on a subject that is of vital importance for the work of the Security Council. I would also like to thank the Secretary-General for his statement and for his report on peacebuilding in the aftermath of conflict (S/2012/746). Our thanks are due in particular to Ambassador Abulkalam Abdul Momen of Bangladesh for his statement today and for his able stewardship of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) this year. I would also like to thank the Secretariat team so ably led by Ms. Judy Cheng-Hopkins. Once described as the missing middle between peacekeeping and durable peace, the establishment of the Peacebuilding Commission was in response to the widely felt need of the international community to assist post-conflict societies to attain sustainable peace. The PBC, its Organizational Committee and its country- specific configurations have done commendable work in mainstreaming peacebuilding in post-conflict countries. The Council’s continuous engagement on peacebuilding in recent times has also helped to emphasize the critical role of peacebuilding. In that context, we welcome the progress made in implementing the Secretary-General’s Agenda for Action. Inclusivity, institution-building and sustained and meaningful international engagement, which are the priorities identified by the Secretary-General, are useful guides to peacebuilding ventures in the future. Inclusive polity and governance, including the provision of basic services and peace, security and a stable social order, continue to be the key peacebuilding tasks. Success in their implementation will impact upon subsequent efforts at economic and social revitalization. In turn, that success will depend upon the ability of the international community to provide the resources required and to generate greater coherence among entities, programmes and field operatives, with a view to promoting an integrated approach to sustainable peacebuilding. We believe that peacebuilding activities should draw from achievements in the field: the PBC being an advisory body, the expectations are that its country- specific configurations will deliver core peacebuilding tasks with agility and nimbleness. With much effort invested in its mechanisms at Headquarters, the time has now come to test our ability to make a difference to the people and societies in post-conflict situations. Inclusivity is a sign of healthy societies. Women and youth should be fully included in peacebuilding activities. However, efforts in that regard are demanding and resource-intensive. Also, the widening gap between our aspirations and field programmes need to be narrowed by means of suitable programmes and enhanced resource commitments. My delegation encourages the PBC to work in that regard with international and regional financial institutions, so that tangible peace dividends are made available to the population in post-conflict societies. It is also necessary to avoid an over-reliance on the supply side of the equation by relegating peacebuilding programmes to a secondary place. Conflicts today are vastly different that those of the past. Their intra-State character, natural-resource dimension, transnational crime aspect, illicit trafficking in drugs and weapons component and regional dimension demand an integrated approach. Establishing institutions of governance, socioeconomic development, youth employment, transitional justice national reconciliation, electoral support and constitution-building are tasks that require coherent and sustained assistance from the international community. That, in turn, requires political will, matching resources and readiness for long-term engagement, while taking into consideration local conditions. It is therefore important for the PBC to align its objectives with national priorities and to ensure that all plans and programmes are implemented under national leadership and ownership and through national institutions, so that the gains are sustainable even is slow. It is also important that peacebuilding start from a firm foundation of successful peacekeeping. As a responsible global citizen with broad experience with nation-building, which is most relevant for countries on the PBC’s agenda, India has been a regular contributor to the Peacebuilding Fund. Apart from our participation in peacekeeping missions, we have also partnered extensively with national authorities in post-conflict countries, in particular in Africa, with a view to supporting their national efforts at peacebuilding, including in sectors such as human- resource development, institutional capacity-building, information technology and so forth. We will continue to partner with post-conflict countries bilaterally and through the United Nations in meeting the challenges of peacekeeping and peacebuilding. As this is the last public meeting of the Council this year, let me avail myself of this opportunity to thank all the members of the Council, the wider United Nations membership and the Secretariat for their cooperation during the past two years as we have made our modest contribution to the maintenance of international peace and security. I would also like to extend a very warm welcome the five newly elected members, namely, Argentina, Australia, Luxembourg, the Republic of Korea and Rwanda. I wish them great success during the next two years.

I shall now make a statement in my capacity as the representative of Morocco. I would like to start by expressing my gratitude to the Secretary-General for his statement and for his report on peacebuilding in the aftermath of conflict (S/2012/746), including the important recommendations therein. I also wish to thank the Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) for his briefing. My delegation of course associates itself with the statement to be delivered later in this meeting by the representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran on behalf of the Non-aligned Movement. By virtue of its half-century partnership with the United Nations in peacebuilding and peacekeeping efforts, my country was keen to devote the last open meeting of its presidency to the issue of peacebuilding in the aftermath of conflict. The challenges associated with post-conflict peacebuilding in connection with security, development and human rights require coordination and the rational use of resources and efforts. Peacebuilding is often connected to the very delicate management of the transition from the establishment of peace to ensuring sustainable peace. That makes it very important to coordinate national, regional and international efforts in countries emerging from conflict in order to achieve stability. That coordination requires prioritizing peacebuilding strategies in order to align and harmonize them with national policies and to involve all stakeholders. The involvement of all national actors and national ownership are prerequisites of peacebuilding efforts. National authorities must maintain the primary responsibility for peacebuilding in the aftermath of conflict, and for maintaining and sustaining peace in their country. However, support for those efforts will also depend on building clear, balanced, results-based and sustainable partnerships among all stakeholders that are based on accountability, because the three main axes of peacebuilding — the identification of needs, sustainable support and the allocation of roles to the stakeholders — constitute an important approach to the success of peacebuilding. Also important is the use of the various peacebuilding and peacekeeping tools in a comprehensive and integrated way to avoid redundancy and duplication and to adopt a phased approach that takes into consideration the priorities of each case individually and within the available resources. In that context, the Peacebuilding Commission can play a very important role because its establishment was the beginning of a new approach by the United Nations to addressing post-conflict situations based on linking peacekeeping and security. Now that nearly seven years have passed since the establishment of the Commission, we can truly say that it has proven its effectiveness, given the multiple achievements that have benefitted the countries on the Commission’s agenda. The Commission is also now in a position to provide even more experience and advice for the benefit of the Security Council. Morocco believes that the success of any peacebuilding effort will depend on the extent of its comprehensiveness, inclusiveness, effectiveness, sustainability and attention to human development and social and economic matters. That requires the availability of the necessary resources and predictable financing on a timely basis. In that context, we must also reaffirm the need to promote cooperation with the various financial institutions of the United Nations and international and regional development banks, as well as the participation of other international bodies through triangular and South-South cooperation. Attention should be paid to regional and subregional cooperation, South-South cooperation and triangular cooperation also in order to confront the challenges that hamper peacebuilding and peace consolidation efforts. In the critical immediate aftermath of conflicts, countries have proven the importance of building and consolidating institutional capacities and the rule of law, security sector reform and other justice reforms, which necessitate incorporating civilian expertise in peacebuilding, including mobilizing the capacities of developing countries, particularly those of women and youth. Based on ithis conviction and the importance of that aspect, and in order to promote an exchange of expertise, Morocco, together with Qatar and Norway, on 10 November organized a workshop to promote civilian capacities in the Arab world. That was an occasion to highlight the importance of building national capacities in post-conflict stages. It also laid the cornerstone for cooperation and the exchange of expertise among Arab countries, aimed at a promising partnership between the League of Arab States and the United Nations. Morocco is committed to maintaining its cooperation with the United Nations in peacekeeping efforts, especially in our Arab and African neighbourhoods. (spoke in English) Now that five of our colleagues are about to leave the Security Council, I would like to say that it has been a real privilege and pleasure for Morocco to serve for one year with them. I would like to congratulate them on their outstanding performance in 2011 and 2012. (spoke in Spanish) We will miss their ability to manage delicate matters with determination, elegance, impartiality and a firm belief in and commitment to the goals of the United Nations. (spoke in Arabic) I now resume my functions as President of the Council. After consultations among Council members, I have been authorized to make the following statement on their behalf. “The Security Council recalls its resolutions and the statements of its President on post-confl ict peacebuilding, in particular S/PRST/2009/23, S/PRST/2010/20, S/PRST/2011/2 and S/PRST/2011/4, and reaffi rms the critical importance of peacebuilding as the foundation for sustainable peace and development in the aftermath of confl ict. “The Security Council takes note with appreciation of the Secretary-General’s report on peacebuilding in the aftermath of conflict (S/2012/746). “The Security Council reaffirms that national ownership and national responsibility are key to establishing sustainable peace and reaffirms also the primary responsibility of national authorities in identifying their priorities and strategies for post- conflict peacebuilding. “The Security Council emphasizes the importance of inclusivity in advancing national peacebuilding processes and objectives in order to ensure that the needs of all segments of society are taken into account. The Council calls on the United Nations to support national efforts to include relevant national actors in peacebuilding activities and processes. “The Security Council welcomes initiatives of post-conflict countries to reduce poverty, deter conflict and provide better conditions to their populations and underlines that the primary responsibility for successful peacebuilding lies with Governments and relevant national actors, including civil society, in countries emerging from conflict and that the United Nations can play a critical role in support of national reconciliation, security sector reform, demobilization, disarmament and reintegration, restoring the rule of law and national institutions, revitalizing the economy, and providing basic services and other key peacebuilding efforts in post-confl ict countries. “The Security Council reaffirms that sustainable peace requires an integrated approach based on coherence among political, security, development and human rights, including gender equality, rule of law and justice activities. In this regard, the Council stresses the importance of the rule of law as one of the key elements of peacebuilding, emphasizing that courts must provide justice and equal protection under the law for all citizens and recognizing the need for enhanced efforts aimed at capacity-building in justice and security institutions, especially in the police, prosecutorial, judicial and corrections sectors. “The Security Council stresses the need for more coordinated, coherent and integrated peacebuilding efforts and emphasizes that better coordination between United Nations missions, United Nations country teams and other regional and development actors, including regional organizations, is of paramount importance in ensuring greater efficiency and effectiveness in the delivery of critical peacebuilding tasks. The Council further emphasizes the need for greater clarity on the respective roles and responsibilities of these actors in the delivery of critical peacebuilding tasks, based on their comparative advantages. “The Security Council recalls its resolution 1645 (2005) and recognizes the important role of the Peacebuilding Commission in advancing and supporting an integrated and coherent approach to peacebuilding, including promoting improved coherence and alignment of partner policies around national peacebuilding strategies and priorities. The Council reiterates its support for the work of the Commission and expresses its continued willingness to make use of its advisory, advocacy and resource mobilization role, including through targeted advice on international and national commitment to long-term peacebuilding objectives in countries on the Commission’s agenda. The Council further emphasizes the role of the Peacebuilding Commission in support of seamless transition of mandated missions in countries on its agenda, in particular through the mobilization of sustained international support to critical national capacity needs. “The Security Council notes with appreciation the contribution that peacekeepers and peacekeeping missions make to early peacebuilding and emphasizes that mandated peacebuilding tasks must also contribute to long-term peacebuilding objectives in order to ensure sustainable progress towards achieving peacebuilding objectives and facilitating drawdown and transition of peacekeeping missions. The Council recognizes the need to integrate mission expertise and experience into the development of peacebuilding strategies. “The Security Council further emphasizes the importance of focused, well-defined, balanced and sustained support to partnerships with post-conflict countries, on the basis of mutual commitments, to implement national strategies aimed at effective peacebuilding, including reconstruction and building of institutions necessary for recovery from conflict, which are based on the achievement of results and mutual accountability. The Council urges Member States and other partners to increase efforts towards achieving the objective of ensuring sustained and predictable financing for peacebuilding, including through the Peacebuilding Fund and multi-donor trust funds. “The Security Council underlines the importance of effective collaboration with international financial institutions, regional development banks and the private sector in ensuring support for job creation and the long-term socioeconomic development needs of post-conflict countries. “The Security Council encourages national Governments, the United Nations and regional and subregional organizations to broaden and deepen the pool of civilian expertise for peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict, including from countries with relevant experience in post- conflict peacebuilding or democratic transition, giving particular attention to mobilizing capacities from developing countries and from women as vital for successful United Nations peacebuilding endeavours. The Council also encourages national Governments, the United Nations and regional and subregional organizations to use existing civilian expertise and further develop it, bearing in mind the necessity to minimize possible duplication of efforts and to ensure its consistency and complementarity. The Council further underlines the importance that intergovernmental deliberations take forward the process in accordance with General Assembly resolution 66/255 and the imperative of mandating and deploying civilian expertise in compliance with relevant United Nations rules and procedures. “The Security Council underlines the usefulness of sharing the experience of countries which have gone through conflict and post- conflict situations and comparable transitions and emphasizes the importance of effective regional, South-South and triangular cooperation. “The Security Council recognizes the important role of women in the prevention and resolution of conflicts and in peacebuilding and underlines the primary role of national Governments affected by armed conflict to enhance participation of women in the prevention and resolution of conflict and in peacebuilding within the framework of the women, peace and security agenda, including by consulting relevant women’s organizations from the earliest stages of planning and priority-setting. The Council welcomes the call of the Secretary- General for enhanced participation, representation and involvement of women in the prevention and resolution of armed conflict and in peacebuilding, as well as for a stronger commitment to address challenges to such engagement of women at all levels. “The Security Council reiterates the importance of addressing crimes committed against women in armed conflict, including killing and maiming and sexual violence issues from the outset of peace processes, mediation efforts, ceasefires and peace agreements, particularly in provisions for security arrangements, transitional justice and reparations as well as in the context of security sector reform. “The Security Council emphasizes the importance of investing in the economic capacities of women and youth for stable post-conflict recovery and encourages Member States to support such investment. “The Security Council reaffirms its decision in paragraph 14 of its resolution 1998 (2011) to continue to include specific provisions for the protection of children in the mandates of relevant United Nations missions. The Security Council recognizes that transnational organized crime, including illegal activities such as drug trafficking and illicit trade in arms, negatively impact the consolidation of peace in countries emerging from conflict, and underlines the importance of increasing international and regional cooperation on the basis of common and shared responsibility to address them effectively and build national capacities on crime prevention and criminal justice. The Council underlines, in this regard, the importance of enhancing cooperation among peacebuilding actors within the same region, to address these challenges in a coordinated manner and in close collaboration with and with the consent of relevant national authorities, regional and subregional organizations as well as United Nations regional offices. “The Security Council requests the Secretary- General to brief the Council and the General Assembly by December 2013 and submit a report no later than December 2014 on further progress in the United Nations peacebuilding efforts in the aftermath of conflict, including the issue of women’s participation in peacebuilding, and placing particular emphasis on the impact on the ground, including lessons learned from United Nations peacebuilding activities in country- specific contexts, and on progress in taking forward the elements included in this statement, taking into consideration the views of the Peacebuilding Commission.” This statement will be issued as a document of the Security Council under the symbol S/PRST/2012/29. I wish to remind all speakers to limit their statements to no more than four minutes in order to enable the Council to carry out its work expeditiously. Delegations with lengthy statements are kindly requested to circulate the texts in writing and to deliver a condensed version when speaking in the Chamber. I now give the floor to the representative of Brazil.

I thank you, Mr. President, for convening this open debate on post- conflict peacebuilding. We hope that the discussions today will help to further strengthen the United Nations support to countries emerging from conflict. We thank the Secretary-General for his report (S/2012/746) and for his briefing this morning. We also express appreciation to the Peacebuilding Support Office for its able work. Brazil is grateful to Ambassador Abulkalam Abdul Momen for his statement and for his leadership as Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC). Brazil has been an early and active supporter of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture. As Chair of the Guinea-Bissau country-specific configuration and member of the organizational committee of the PBC, we have striven to advance the notion that post- conflict settings require a comprehensive approach that takes into account the linkages between security and development as fundamental elements for achieving sustainable peace. It is our firm belief that peacebuilding is an essential tool with which to bridge the existing gaps between those two dimensions and to effectively address the root causes of conflict. We fully agree with the Secretary-General that national ownership must be a cornerstone of peacebuilding processes. Peacebuilding activities should be designed in accordance with national strategies and priorities and should strengthen local institutions. In this regard, the nurturing of national capacities and the restoration of core Government functions, including in the field of basic services, should be a key component of our efforts. As the report highlights, it is essential that the United Nations entities develop a comprehensive approach to institution-building and that missions and country teams establish effective partnerships in this area. The contribution of women to peacebuilding efforts must also be continuously emphasized. Women are often the leading actors in shaping reconciliation, preventing conflicts and bolstering economic revitalization. We share the Secretary-General’s assessment that additional efforts to increase their role in the fields of governance and economic recovery are needed. We commend the emphasis placed in the report on the need to deepen the interaction between the PBC and other United Nations bodies, such as the Security Council. It is our hope that the Council will build on the discussions held during the interactive dialogue last July. Enhancing the relationship between the Council and the Peacebuilding Commission is essential. A dialogue between the Council and the country-specific configurations — on a regular basis and in the context of mandate renewals — could be a useful tool for that purpose. Furthermore, the United Nations peacebuilding actors must continue to reach out to other institutions outside the United Nations system and work to ensure that the support of all actors is coordinated, coherent and aligned behind national priorities. Brazil is particularly pleased to note the growing interaction with the international financial institutions and the efforts being made by the PBC to foster dialogue with regional and subregional organizations. The idea of mutual accountability, as outlined in the report, should be seen as the joint identification of strategic objectives and priority actions by post- conflict countries and the international community. Besides, it is crucial that the international community understand the realities of the affected countries and therefore develop, as recommended by the report, a more risk-tolerant perspective. May I once more reiterate that the Brazil will continue to engage in providing assistance to countries emerging from conflict and work with other Member States to make the United Nations peacebuilding architecture ever more effective.

I now give the floor to the representative of Luxembourg.

I thank you, Sir, for organizing this open debate on peacebuilding, and I thank the Secretary-General for his briefing and his report (S/2012/746), which takes stock of the progress made since the previous report of 2009 (S/2009/304) and identifies those areas where renewed efforts are necessary. I welcome the briefing by the Chair of the Organizational Committee of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), and I would like to highlight the quality of the presidential statement just adopted (S/PRST/2012/29). I fully associate myself with the statement to be made by the observer of the European Union. I would like to raise the following points in my national capacity, by focusing on the three priority areas highlighted in the report: inclusion, institution-building and improving partnerships. My experience as Chair of the Guinea country-specific configuration of the Peacebuilding Commission has shown me the importance of these areas among the efforts undertaken to support post-conflict countries on their paths towards sustainable peace. Concerning inclusion, it is indispensable that all peacebuilding stakeholders of a given society have the means to be heard. More substantial efforts must be undertaken to ensure full participation by women and girls in peacebuilding and state-building processes, be it in peace negotiations, in efforts for national reconciliation or when it comes to equal representation at all levels — legislative, executive and judiciary — of a State’s institutions . We need to pay particular attention to the material conditions allowing women to play a more complete role in society. We also need to engage in a relentless fight against all forms of violence targeting women and girls. The inclusion into peacebuilding processes of all segments of a population, in particular the most vulnerable groups, is in our view the best way to prevent, both in the short and in the long terms, the flaring up of frustrations that could lead to a relapse into conflict and violence. In the same vein, we call for the efforts to establish fair and sustainable state institutions to be redoubled. This is not just a question of capacity-building for public administration, but also of harmonizing the State’s responsibilities — in particular its sovereign functions — and the means to exercise them in a responsible and inclusive manner. We must approach State reform in a comprehensive manner, respecting the separation of powers. There can be no effective Government without legislators to which it is accountable or without courts to which citizens can turn to have their rights enforced. That is where the Peacebuilding Commission has real added value, because its approach to peace is comprehensive and because it recognizes and reinforces the intrinsic links between promoting sustainable socioeconomic development, maintaining international peace and security and respect for human rights and the rule of law. Concerning the improvement of partnerships, we see the New Deal for Engagement in Fragile States as a perfect example of ownership and leadership from the South, having been elaborated by the Group of Seven Plus. Luxembourg welcomes, in particular, the endorsement of the New Deal by the Republic of Guinea, as well as by the five other Member States that are on the PBC agenda. These countries have the courage to address difficult questions of State-building, which implies a revision of the social contract in order to place the State at the service of its citizens. My delegation believes that, since we will soon be one of the elected members of the Council, it is opportune to further strengthen the relationship between the PBC and the Security Council. Its role in maintaining international attention on the countries on its agenda gives the PBC a unique capacity in the United Nations system, as does its ability to link subjects of interest to this Council, on the one hand, and the other main bodies of the United Nations, on the other. It would appear particularly useful to benefit from the knowledge and analysis of the Chairpersons of the country-specific configurations during consultations of the Council, as well as throughout the mandate cycles of United Nations missions. While the Special Representatives of the Secretary-General inform the Council about activities of the United Nations system, the Chairpersons of the country-specific configurations can inform it about the peacebuilding activities on the part of a much wider array of stakeholders, including bilateral, multilateral and regional partners, as well as those from civil society and the private sector. The Security Council can count on Luxembourg’s continued commitment to deepening and improving partnerships for peacebuilding, be it in the Guinea configuration of the PBC, in the Security Council or in other relevant forums of our Organization.

I give the floor to the representative of New Zealand.

We thank you, Mr. President, for organizing this debate. We also wish to thank the Secretary-General for his commendably brief and focused report (S/2012/746) and recommendations, and Ambassador Momen, Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission, for his briefing. However, as we read that Secretary-General’s report, we cannot escape the conclusion that the United Nations discussion of peacebuilding is still beset by its continued focus mainly on post-conflict environments. It is, of course, vital that once a conflict is over, the United Nations play a key role in helping prevent a relapse, and the Secretary-General has demonstrated that the United Nations is developing some very useful methods in that regard. But it is no less vital that there be effective peacebuilding from the very earliest phases of peacekeeping operations, which raises issues that have not yet received sufficient attention from this Council, and we urge that, in 2013, it should return to that unfinished business. There is another point about peacebuilding that was only implicit in the Secretary-General’s report, but is right at the heart of this Council’s responsibilities and should therefore, we believe, be highlighted , namely, the vital role of the peacebuilding methodology of not only preventing relapse into conflict, but also preventing and containing conflict in the first place. That is touched on in the report’s introduction, and we urge that, in future reports, such a wider applicability of the methodology should be expanded. The report tells us that the accumulated experience of the United Nations reveals three key elements of peacebuilding methodology that really do work: inclusivity in political settlements and processes, institution-building, and sustained international support. We should reflect, I think, on how different might things have been in the situation in Syria, if the United Nations, including this Council, had much earlier applied those three concepts, particularly inclusivity. When we look at the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo and should consider how much better things might now be in the Kivus if the United Nations had insisted — much earlier and much more firmly — on real political inclusivity and on building effective institutions. In the context of inclusivity, we join Brazil and Luxembourg in welcoming the Secretary-General’s focus on the role of women in peace processes. As for sustained international support, Timor- Leste comes quickly to mind, particularly following the smooth transition of the United Nations Integrated Mission in Timor-Leste over the past year. We should not forget, however, that, in 2006, we all failed Timor- Leste. We underestimated the importance of sustained international support, and the Timorese paid an unacceptable price. Although Timor-Leste will not be on the active 2013 agenda, its experience teaches us that this Council should not prematurely wind back international support for United Nations peacebuilding. The lesson is clear. Premature cost-cutting is a false economy; too often it simply transfers costs to vulnerable civilian populations, and before long, the United Nations has to return to expensive peacekeeping. Like Luxembourg, we welcome the Secretary- General’s reference to the initiative of the Group of Seven Plus countries, including Timor-Leste, which have emerged from conflict, and they deserve our respect and admiration for their efforts now to help others. We particularly support their five peacebuilding goals, and we urge that this Council take each of those goals to heart as key benchmarks when constructing or reviewing mission mandates. I also join others in stressing the importance of improving the United Nations capacity to rapidly identify and deploy relevant civilian capacities. The United Nations will struggle to be a credible and effective contributor in early peacebuilding settings, unless it is substantially better at deploying the right people with the right experience in a more timely manner. I echo and commend the Secretary-General’s recommendations to promote further improvements in the way the Peacebuilding Commission and the Security Council work together. Indeed, those recommendations take us, I think, back to last month’s debate on Council working methods, when we proposed that the Council focus on practical changes that would improve its effectiveness. So I welcome the Secretary- General’s identification of the interaction between the Peacebuilding Commission and Security Council as another practical area where working methods improvements would enhance effectiveness, and I urge that this Council carry forward that idea into its 2013 discussions on reforming working methods. Finally, as they will be leaving the Council in a few days, Mr. President, I would like to convey New Zealand’s warm thanks to our friends from Colombia, Germany, India, Portugal and South Africa for their tireless work on behalf of us all. They have done us proud.

I give the floor to the representative of Australia.

I thank you, Mr. President, for convening this debate. I also wish thank the Secretary-General for his report (S/2012/746) and briefing, as well as Ambassador Momen for his statement and valuable work as Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC). Peacebuilding is vital work. We know that about half of the countries emerging from conflict relapse into violence within five years — the situations preoccupying the Council today provide ample evidence of that. Ensuring that we take advantage of the critical post-conflict window to shore up peace is one of the most important endeavours we can undertake. Australia looks forward to working with others to advance the peacebuilding agenda in the Council. We hope to draw on experiences from peacebuilding partnerships in our own region. We welcome progress within the United Nations system, including work to enhance mission integration and efforts to clarify roles and responsibilities, such as the designation of the United Nations Development Programme and the Department of Peacekeeping Operations designation as a joint global focal point for the rule of law; enhanced partnerships with the World Bank and regional organizations; and work to improve deployment of personnel with the right skill sets, including importantly those from the global South, through the civilian capacities initiative. I would like now to focus on three aspects of the Secretary-General’s report. I would first like to address the question of transitions. Transitions and drawdowns can be as important to maintaining stability as initial deployments. We welcome the vital work under way on the part of the Secretariat to develop a transitions policy. It is a particularly topical issue, given the many transitions in progress, including the drawdown of the United Nations Integrated Mission in Timor-Leste (UNMIT), on the subject of which we welcome the presidential statement issued yesterday (S/PRST/2012/27), the reconfiguration of the United Nations Mission in Liberia and the planned drawdown of the United Nations Integrated Peacebuilding Office in Sierra Leone. The Joint Transition Plan of the Timor- Leste Government and UNMlT provides an especially useful model. Australia, the Solomon Islands and regional partners are also working together to draw down the Regional Assistance Mission to the Solomon Islands (RAMSI) in 2013. Key lessons from that experience include the importance of beginning transition planning early and of emphasizing national capacity development. Successful transitions require inclusive national ownership, as well as flexibility and strong coordination with multilateral, bilateral and non-governmental partners. They should be conditions-based, not driven by artificial timelines. The participation of women is vital. That leads to my second point of focus, namely, women’s participation. The issue is not simply one of equity. Experience consistently demonstrates that peacebuilding processes that involve women are more likely to succeed. The Secretary-General’s report points out that only modest progress has been made on the seven-point action plan for gender- responsive peacebuilding (see S/2010/466). We must do better. Australia welcomes the Secretary-General’s commitment to the issue as a priority for his second term. Enhancing women’s participation is incumbent on us all. Australia has been learning lessons on the issue through peace operations in our region. Since 2009, for example, the Regional Assistance Mission to the Solomon Islands’ Gender Adviser has provided advice across the range of the mission’s programmes and Government agencies. RAMSI’s assistance in addressing gender inequality also focuses on removing barriers to women’s participation in Government. The third issue I want to address is sustained international support. Peacebuilding is a long- term endeavour. Transforming institutions rarely takes less than a generation. It requires a long-term commitment. International support must be guided by the overarching principle of national ownership, if it is to be effective and sustainable. We welcome the efforts of countries emerging from conflict to clearly define their peacebuilding priorities. Australia is proud of our partnership agreement with Timor-Leste, which aligns our support with Timor-Leste’s own Strategic Development plan, and provides clear, measurable targets for Australian assistance. Finally, Australia believes that the PBC has an important role to play. The Commission needs to prioritize impact in the field. Its country configurations, for example, should continue to work in support of national actors and United Nations leadership teams. Australia has consistently urged a closer and more organic relationship between the PBC and the Council, emphasizing the advisory role that country configurations can play, especially on mandate renewals and transitions, and their potential role in early warning. In conclusion, let me assure the Council of Australia’s commitment to ensuring that the peacebuilding agenda delivers results on the ground for the 1.5 billion people living in countries affected by repeated cycles of violence.

I now give the floor to the representative of Argentina.

I am very grateful to the delegation of the Kingdom of Morocco for convening today’s open debate. I also thank the Secretary-General and the Permanent Representative of Bangladesh, Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) for their statements. As we said in our statement in the most recent debate on this topic in July (see S/PV.6805), we understand that the Security Council has a central role to play in organizing support for post-conflict countries, promoting the building of lasting peace and an environment conducive to comprehensive ongoing development, based on the rule of law, respect for fundamental rights and the progressive collective exercise of human, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, as well as promoting the strengthening of democratic institutions. The task is one of the greatest challenges the international community faces today, and one to which my country attaches particular importance. We believe that, when confronted with those challenges, it is necessary to support post-conflict strategies based on three elements. First is the principle of national responsibility in peacebuilding activities, based on the protection and promotion of human rights, guaranteeing the involvement of the societal sectors concerned throughout the reconstruction process, and honouring the priorities of local authorities, in such a way as ensure broad, inclusive, pluralistic discussions that will lead to engagement in collaborative actions aimed at addressing post-conflict challenges directly, effectively and in a legitimate manner. Secondly, the role that the United Nations plays in peacebuilding, which is to coordinate all international assistance, is an element that is indispensable to the success of peacebuilding efforts and to peacekeeping efforts as well. Thirdly, we point out the role of regional and subregional organizations, in accordance with the provision of Chapter VIII of the Charter, and the need to strengthen the capacities of regional systems in order to support countries that need to recover and rebuild after a conflict. Considering those elements, we appreciate the usefulness of the Secretary-General’s latest report on post-conflict peacebuilding (S/2012/746). We particularly note the progress made in implementing the programme proposed by the Secretary-General in 2009, which sought to make the United Nations capable of more coherent, timely and effective responses to peacebuilding needs, by, among other things, encouraging greater interaction and collaboration between United Nations teams on the ground and strengthening ties with regional organizations. Despite that progress, it is clear that a long road lies ahead. For example, in the matter of women and peace and security, we share the Secretary-General’s concern about the slow pace of progress in implementing his plan of action on women’s participation in peacebuilding initiatives in the various countries concerned. That is not only a matter of ethical and legal principles. It is a matter of noting and embracing practices known to foster coherence and effectiveness in restoring lasting and sustainable peace as well as in promoting sustainable development. We also call attention to the need to include young people and to respect the right of children to participate and be heard in those processes. On the other hand, we see a positive trend in providing civil capacities to affected countries, opening the way for innovative approaches to technical cooperation and for strengthening South-South cooperation. We agree with the Secretary-General about the need to give greater attention to an inclusive approach to peacebuilding, with full national involvement in building lasting peace. However, we should all recall something that we in Argentina know from our own experience, namely, that no strategy aimed at achieving genuine reconciliation can succeed unless it incorporates the principles of truth, memory, justice and reparation, and rejects impunity for any perpetrator of serious, heinous violations of human rights in the course of the conflict we are trying to recover from. Lastly, about the activities of the Peacebuilding Commission, we join the Secretary-General’s call to strengthen the work of the Commission to promote greater coherence and to adapt donors’ support to national peacebuilding plans. We also support strengthened relations between the Commission and the Security Council, including through interactive dialogue before the renewal of United Nations peacebuilding mission mandates, so that the Commission can fulfil the assessment role assigned to it by the United Nations and the Council can benefit more from the experience that the Commission has to offer. Finally, we express our solidarity with and respect for the work of the non-permanent members who are coming to the end of their terms on the Council. As Argentina is about to embark on a term itself, we also pledge our country’s commitment to fulfilling the responsibility to build on our accumulated common experience to help the Council strengthen, maintain and revitalize its mission, which is to maintain international peace and security.

I now give the floor to the representative of Japan.

At the outset, I would like to echo other representatives in expressing our appreciation to Ambassador Mohammed Loulichki, Permanent Representative of Morocco, for his leadership in convening today’s open debate. While we agree with the findings contained in the report of the Secretary-General (S/2012/746) to the effect that much more is needed to make an impact on the ground, Japan welcomes the significant progress made since the 2009 report (S/2009/304). In addition, Japan strongly supports the priority directions for peacebuilding outlined in the report. Japan attaches particular importance to the following observations. First, the importance of institutions in peacebuilding and, consequently, development, cannot be overemphasized. The restoration of core Government and service-delivery functions, based on national ownership and undertaken with an inclusive approach, are at the heart of State-building. The international community must come up with stronger mechanisms for aligning stakeholders to support that process. We also look forward to seeing positive results come out of the civilian capacities initiative. Secondly, the inclusion of women in all peacebuilding processes must be accelerated, particularly in the areas of governance and economic recovery, in accordance with the seven-point action plan. Thirdly, sustained international support is also crucial to the creation of space for countries to fully engage in institutional transformation, which can often take years, even decades. Fourthly, the concept of mutual accountability allows for equal partnership between the recipient Government and its international partners, as can be seen in the New Deal for Engagement in Fragile States, as well as in the declaration issued at the Tokyo Conference on Afghanistan held in Japan this summer. Japan has been a committed member of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) since its inception and currently serves as the Chair of the working group on lessons learned. We believe that the PBC has played, and will continue to play, a crucial role in taking forward the recommendations contained in the report. Needless to say, a stronger partnership with the Security Council is crucial for the PBC to realize its full potential, particularly when Council decisions directly affect the peacebuilding processes of the country on the agenda of the Commission. The meeting of the working group held on 21 November focused precisely on this point and emphasized the role of the PBC in ensuring sustained international support by consciously linking peace and security discussions to long-term development during United Nations mission transitions. The complexity and long-term nature of peacebuilding require a multifaceted and holistic approach. One example that Japan can present is that of the Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD) process, our primary framework for dialogue on development issues with our African partners. The TICAD process has since its inception placed great emphasis on the consolidation of peace as the basis of development. In that context, we are delighted to host our fifth TICAD in Yokohama next June. The current discussion on the post-2015 development agenda also provides an invaluable opportunity for Member States to reflect on the role of peacebuilding in long-term development. The Secretary-General has called for the inclusion of peacebuilding considerations such as security, justice and economic foundations into the post-2015 development agenda. The issue has been introduced in the post-Millennium Development Goals contact group, which Japan chairs. We are very much aware that challenges remain as to how to achieve convergence of the different views on how and in which form peacebuilding should be incorporated into the next development framework. We believe that human security, emphasizing the protection and empowerment of individuals through a holistic approach, plays a significant role in that context. Japan remains committed to pushing the discussion forward. In conclusion, I would like to reiterate Japan’s strong and lasting support for peacebuilding. Peacebuilding is a very long process, but Japan will continue to engage, both bilaterally and through the PBC, in the building of sustainable peace in post-conflict countries.

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

Mr. President, allow me to begin by expressing my sincere appreciation to you for having convened this timely open debate on the issue of post-conflict peacebuilding. Half a year has passed and a lot has happened since last July’s general debate (see S/PV.6805), based on the fifth annual report of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC). I also thank Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon for his initial briefing and his in-depth report (S/2012/746), which clearly illustrates the problems at hand and the priorities ahead. My appreciation also goes to the Chairman of the PBC, Ambassador Abdul Momen, for his insightful remarks. I am confident that the sixth annual report of the PBC will serve to help us better understand and define the nature and scope of the PBC’s role. As the Secretary-General’s report rightfully points out, the Peacebuilding Commission has over the past six years been steadily developing with a view to effectively carrying out its mandates by catalysing international efforts to assist countries emerging from conflict situations to achieve sustainable peace. Noticeable progress has been made due to factors that include more effective leadership of United Nations teams in the field; enhanced United Nations support for national capacity-building; ownership of peacebuilding processes; and an improved funding mechanism to support peacebuilding. Nevertheless, reality dictates that the situation in most, if not all, post-conflict countries and regions is still fragile, and the many challenges before us have hardly subsided. Two days ago, in the Central African Republic, which is one of the PBC’s country configurations, rebel forces relied on the use of force to make their point. That is only one of the many cases which demonstrate that the focus of peacebuilding efforts should be placed on preventing the recurrence of conflict. The Security Council must also be ready to swiftly respond to the recurrence of violence in post- conflict situations. Having said that, let me stress the following points from our national perspective. First, peacebuilding efforts should be exerted in such a way as to further strengthen and respect the national ownership of recipient countries. The ultimate goal of peacebuilding does not stop at stabilizing a post-conflict situation, but lies in establishing a basis for long-term sustainable development, which is impossible without the recipient countries’ own capability. In that regard, my delegation would like to stress that strengthening civilian capacity in the aftermath of conflict is the most critical ingredient for achieving and maintaining sustained peace. Secondly, inclusivity has proved important in addressing the root causes of conflict and increasing the legitimacy of a political settlement. The role of non-State actors and civil society needs to be recognized and integrated in peacebuilding efforts. The case of Yemen provides a good example. By including the extra-parliamentary opposition and other key constituencies such as civil society representatives, women’s groups and youths in the political process, Yemen’s national dialogue conference is on a stronger track for a transparent transitional process that is in keeping with international norms and standards. As such, my delegation welcomes the Secretary-General’s efforts to highlight the significance of inclusivity as one of the priority directions of his report. Thirdly, partnerships among all stakeholders, within and outside the United Nations system, should be strengthened, with the PBC playing the role of facilitator. The strategic partnerships of the United Nations with international and regional financial institutions, such as the World Bank and the African Development Bank, are crucial in securing financial resources and effective budget allocation. In that vein, we were pleased to witness intensified cooperation with the World Bank throughout the year, including the launch of a joint process to strengthen the alignment of the Peacebuilding Fund, the World Bank and other multilateral peacebuilding financing instruments in that respect. Finally, my delegation would like to emphasize the importance of a closer linkage and coordination between the Security Council and the Peacebuilding Commission in carrying out peacebuilding mandates and helping countries meet the multifaceted post- conflict demands. The Security Council should make clear what advice it needs from the PBC, and the PBC should develop a systematic method for assisting the Security Council to better utilize the lessons learned through its activities related to the six country-specific configurations. The accumulated lessons and experience of each of the country-specific configurations will add valuable perspective to the discourse of the Security Council. The Republic of Korea has been constructively contributing to peacebuilding activities, including as vice-chairperson of the PBC in 2009 and member of the Organizational Committee since 2008. Korea has recently made an additional donation of $500,000, bringing its total contribution to $4.5 million, since the establishment of Peacebuilding Fund in 2006. My delegation stands ready to further scale up our multifaceted contribution to the noble cause of peacebuilding and looks forward to further constructive discussions in the Security Council and the General Assembly on ways to implement and improve the PBC’s role, with a view to promoting a more secure and sustainable peace around the globe.

I give the floor to the representative of Switzerland.

Switzerland thanks the Secretary-General for his report on peacebuilding in the aftermath of conflict (S/2012/746). We remain convinced that, in order to respond to the challenges of our times, peacebuilding in general must be strengthened, and in particular, the United Nations peacebuilding architecture. The United Nations has a lot of experience behind it. We commend the Secretary-General and the Organization for the progress made to date. However, further progress is in order. Allow me to begin with three general comments on the report. First, the Secretary-General notes three peacebuilding priorities, namely, inclusivity, institution-building and sustained international support and mutual accountability. We welcome both the choice and the order of the three priorities. Our own experiences — particularly through the Swiss chairmanship of the Burundi country-specific configuration of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) — confirm that those priorities are critical in successful peacebuilding. The recent donors conference for Burundi, held in Geneva at the end of October, is a good illustration in that regard. It allowed an alignment of donors around a common agenda that had been prepared by Burundi through an inclusive process. The conference represented an important milestone in Burundi’s peacebuilding process, and we are optimistic regarding its long-term positive impact. The three principles also form important elements of the New Deal for Engagement in Fragile States, which was agreed in Busan last year and of which Switzerland is a signatory. The New Deal represents a useful framework for implementing measures aimed at mutual accountability, and, as noted in the report, transition compacts can help in formalizing long-term commitments among States and their partners. Secondly, we believe that a clear long-term vision for peacebuilding would help to better streamline our efforts. The present report sets clear priorities for effectively continuing earlier efforts. However, a strategic outlook for the overall peacebuilding architecture would be equally important. Discussions should not only address ways to respond to current challenges, but also elaborate a vision of United Nations peacebuilding in the next five to ten years. Even if it appears difficult, we should try to set targets for successful peacebuilding and develop a vision of the United Nation’s role in relation to other peacebuilding actors. Such a strategic discussion would also help us to better understand the existing links among the peacebuilding architecture and other core processes, such as the post-Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) process. The increasing gap between conflict- affected countries and other developing countries in achieving the MDGs is, indeed, worrying and constitutes a challenge to our effective efforts. We therefore strongly support the inclusion of peacebuilding considerations in the post-2015 development agenda. Thirdly, further progress is necessary on gender mainstreaming. The Secretary-General’s seven-point action plan for gender-responsive peacebuilding (see S/2010/466) represents a useful starting point. Progress has been encouraging, but further progress is needed, especially in governance and economic recovery. With the creation of UN-Women, the Secretary-General can count on the support of a strong partner. We expect to see a more systematic consideration and inclusion of gender-specific issues in peacebuilding in the future. Clearly, we were particularly interested in the section on the Peacebuilding Commission. We agree that further progress should be achieved, particularly on the points covered in the 2010 review (S/2010/393). Let me make five specific remarks in that regard. First and generally, we believe that there is further potential for peacebuilding actors to play a more central and strategic role within the overall United Nations architecture. That is particularly true for the PBC, as a consultative intergovernmental body, as well as the Peacebuilding Support Office (PBSO). It appears that their roles and added value have been neither understood nor exploited to the fullest extent possible. Secondly, increased efforts must aim to broaden dialogue and link the actors concerned. The PBC is uniquely placed to fulfil that role. It has — in large part thanks to the PBSO — invested considerable effort to reach out to the United Nations system, particularly the Security Council and other international organizations, such as the World Bank and the African Development Bank. Considerable progress has been achieved, and my view is that development banks are taking a more active role in peacebuilding. Those factors must be exploited to the fullest possible extent. Thirdly, with direct reference to my previous point, the relationship between the Security Council and the PBC is crucial. Regular exchanges between the two bodies, whether through open debates such as today’s, or more informal exchanges such as the dialogue organized by Colombia in July, are very useful. We are convinced that the Peacebuilding Commission can bring added value to the Council’s discussions. In particular, it can serve as a safety net for fragile countries that are not the immediate focus of the Council’s attention but that nonetheless require a degree of support. The fact that the PBC closely follows the countries on its agenda allows Council members to concentrate their efforts on other, more pressing situations. In return, on the other hand, the PBC needs the Council’s full support along with swift and flexible access to it in the event of a sudden deterioration on the ground. To conclude, I reiterate our belief that the challenges of peacebuilding should be urgently addressed and that the United Nations has an important role to play in that regard. We will continue to fully support efforts to that end and stand ready to contribute our share.

I now give the floor to the representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement on this important agenda item. I would like at the outset to thank you, Sir, for organizing this open debate. I would also like to express my appreciation to Ambassador Momen, Permanent Representative of Bangladesh and Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), for his tireless efforts and for his statement. The Non-Aligned Movement stresses once again its principled positions concerning post-conflict peacebuilding activities, as contained in the outcome document of the sixteenth Summit of Heads of States or Government of the Non-Aligned Movement, held in Iran in August. The 2009 report of the Secretary-General on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (S/2009/304) established an agenda for strengthening the United Nations response to peacebuilding challenges and for facilitating an earlier and more coherent response by the international community. Since then, several steps have been taken by the United Nations and the broad range of relevant actors to restore sustainable peace in countries emerging from conflict, as reflected in the Secretary-General’s latest report (S/2012/746). Nonetheless, we must recognize that much remains to be done to address the overall challenges of peacebuilding and to intensify the nexus between peace and development. In that regard, the Movement would like to stress several points. First, peacebuilding is continuously evolving. Much remains to be learned in order to devise the right policies and to identify an appropriate sequence of priorities that fully respond to the specifics of each local context. It is also necessary to take into account the multidimensionality of conflict situations and their changing nature, which requires a keen eye for the multifaceted root causes of conflicts. It is also important to further leverage our collective peacebuilding effort to guarantee more coordinated and coherent actions on the ground. That also requires the United Nations to maintain its central role in identifying a common vision of peacebuilding and in forging a closer partnership with all relevant actors, for the well-being of people emerging from conflicts. Second, the Movement would like to reiterate that all peacebuilding initiatives and planning should be based on the principles of national ownership and benefit from timely, predictable and sustainable financing. We also maintain our position that there can be no lasting and sustainable peace without development. The importance of economic recovery and the development dimension in the peacebuilding process therefore hardly needs reiteration. Third, with regard to the Peacebuilding Commission, the Movement believes that the Commission indeed constitutes a platform for a coordinated, coherent and integrated institutional mechanism to address the special needs of countries emerging from conflict. We also reiterate the central role of the Peacebuilding Commission in providing the United Nations with policy guidance and strategies in its post-conflict peacebuilding activities. In that regard, the PBC should give special attention to the need to develop national capacities and further institution-building through the appropriate mechanisms and with the requisite financial and technical resources. We endorse the recommendation of the Secretary- General’s report encouraging the Security Council and the Peacebuilding Commission to build on the important elements that emerged from the debate and interactive dialogue held in July 2012, and encouraging the Council to continue to articulate the advice that it requires from the Commission, including during mandate discussions. Moreover, we would like to emphasize that institutional relations between the PBC and the General Assembly, as well as with the Economic and Social Council, should also be further promoted. We would like also to underline the need for the PBC to develop multiple forms of engagement appropriate to the specific circumstances of different countries on a case-by-case basis and to their evolving needs, as well as to fully exert its preventive role in avoiding a relapse into conflict. Moreover, we had hoped that the Secretary-General’s report would further elaborate on how the respective roles and responsibilities of the PBC and United Nations actors in the field could be further clarified in order to enable the PBC to fully exercise its mandate. Fourth, turning to the part of the report on women and peacebuilding, the Movement underlines the need to alleviate the challenges faced by women and girls in post-conflict situations and to strengthen their effective participation in the peacebuilding process. The potential contribution that women can make to the peace process hardly needs reiteration. In that regard, the Movement appreciates the ongoing efforts of the Secretary-General to ensure women’s participation in and the availability of gender expertise to the peace process, and emphasizes that women are crucial partners in shoring up the three pillars of lasting peace: economic recovery, social cohesion and political legitimacy. Fifth, we believe that the priority areas contained in the 2009 report on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict should remain the same. In that context, we stress the need to reinforce the inclusiveness of the peacebuilding process and national reconciliation in order for all national actors to be in a position to meaningfully engage in the peacebuilding process. The active participation of all national actors, including marginalized groups, may ease the situation and contribute significantly to ensuring national ownership in achieving peacebuilding goals through a common vision of national development. The full and effective participation of women can further strengthen the process. Sixth, we reiterate that national ownership is a fundamental principle for reviewing civilian capacities. The Movement reaffirms the importance of existing civilian capacity within the developing world, and expresses its readiness to support national capacity- development and institution-building in support of peacebuilding activities in post-conflict situations, as well as enhanced regional, South-South and triangular cooperation. We would like also to underline the need to involve the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations and the Fifth Committee, which will continue to play a key role in the consideration of the review of civilian capacities, given its administrative and budgetary implications. Seventh, as underlined by the Secretary-General’s report, the rebuilding of national institutions requires sustained international political and financial support. Headquarters must ensure the ability to undertake these tasks in the field. In this connection, while emphasizing the necessity to ensure the sustainability of funding for countries on the agenda of the Peacebuilding Commission, we express our concern regarding the lack of coordination and coherence among financial donors resulting in duplication and redundancy in particular areas and the neglect of other catalytic projects. In this regard, we call for the setup of a mechanism within the PBC to review, within each country configuration, ways and means to ensure the unity of efforts by donors, in close collaboration with host countries. In conclusion, the Movement reiterates once again its full commitment to share its inputs and to constructively engage in future discussions on peacebuilding.

I give the floor to the representative of Malaysia.

I wish to extend my sincere congratulations to you, Sir, and your country, the Kingdom of Morocco, on assuming the presidency of the Security Council for this month. I also wish to align Malaysia with the statement made by the representative of Iran on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. My delegation would also like to thank the Secretary- General for the preparation of the report contained in document S/2012/746, entitled “Peacebuilding in the aftermath of conflict”. My delegation welcomes the report, its findings and conclusions. The report is an invaluable reference on progress related to peacebuilding in the aftermath of conflict. In this regard, my delegation wishes to share some pertinent views that Malaysia sees as important in relation to the report. Countries in transition from conflict have to endure many challenges emanating from within and outside their territory. Experience has proven that a Government emerging from conflict and embarking on institution-building, reconstruction and nation-building will require the support of the international community. Such reinforcement provides these countries with the needed assistance to successfully leave conflict behind. Navigating these challenges will determine the success or failure of transition from conflict to peace. Nation-building programmes and Government reform cannot be imposed by external entities. Instead, such sensitive political reform and nation-building efforts must be inclusive and have strong national ownership. This is important, as Governments of countries emerging from conflict have the experience and legal mandate to lead change for the nation. As such, national ownership requires United Nations peacebuilding efforts to play a supporting role in nation-building and reform. Such partnership would help to ensure sustainable peace in the country. However, given that the challenges differ from country to country, Malaysia shares a similar perspective on the need to develop principles and guidelines in the development of national capacity-building programmes. Another pertinent issue in successful transition experience is a strong national capacity-building programme, which must be developed under a coordinated peacebuilding programme. My delegation wishes to underscore the importance of the various fields of expertise, including justice, law enforcement, institution-building, economic development and inclusive social development programmes, which are needed when assisting countries emerging from conflict. In this regard, we stress the importance of partnership with countries that have experienced conflict as a source of potential providers of expertise and partnership in the development of programmes and module. Countries emerging from conflict cannot be successfully assisted without adequate financial resources. Malaysia welcomes the pledges made during the recent annual stakeholders meeting of the Peacebuilding Fund. We share the view that continued financial support is as important as political will in successfully moving to peace. Recent peacebuilding experience has shown that a successful recovery of countries from conflict requires prolonged and continued international financial support. While the timeframe may differ, countries emerging from conflict may require international support for up to 15 years or until such time as their national institutions can fulfil domestic needs in achieving political and economic stability. Malaysia wishes to reiterate the importance of the role played by the Peacebuilding Commission in developing strategies for peacebuilding, resource mobilization and civilian capacity, which are central to the success of peacebuilding initiatives. My delegation believes that peacebuilding strategies must emphasize the inclusion of civilian experts as the central pillar in nation-building and institutional and economic developments. While peacekeeping seeks to improve security and stability, peacebuilding encompasses a wider field in improving human security, economic development, employment and nation-building. An example of such experience can be seen in South-East Asia. Malaysia has been actively involved in facilitating talks between the Moro Islamic Liberation Front and the Government of the Philippines. Since 2002, Malaysia has contributed observers, including military, police and civilians experts, in the southern Philippines. We welcome the recent signing of a framework agreement on 15 October between the Government of the Philippines and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. Through the concept of moderation and constructive engagement, Malaysia will continue to apply such important values and principle in its approach in peacebuilding. Malaysia is of the view that the development of human capital is an essential element of peacebuilding. As a member of the Guinea configuration of the Peacebuilding Commission, Malaysia plays host to over 300 Guinean students at various Malaysian universities. Malaysia has been involved in the creation of employment opportunities in Guinea, with investments in the financial sector and direct participation in Guinea’s construction industry. Malaysia has continued to provide training and technical assistance in developing an inclusive national development programme in Guinea. So far, 81 Guinean officials have benefited under various human development programmes conducted under the auspices of the Malaysian Technical Cooperation Programme since 1993. Malaysia has been an active participant in international security and peacebuilding initiatives. Malaysia is of the view that assisting countries emerging from conflict entails the need for a well- developed peacebuilding strategy. We look forward to further contributing to the work on and development of peacebuilding strategies, development initiatives and the building of civilian capacities in support of countries in transition to peace.

I give the floor to Mr. Vrailas. Mr. Vrailas: I speak on behalf of the Europan Union (EU) and its member States. The acceding country Croatia; the candidate countries the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Iceland and Serbia; the countries of the Stabilization and Association Process and potential candidates Albania and Bosnia and Herzegovina; as well as Ukraine, Armenia and Georgia, align themselves with this statement. At the outset, allow me to congratulate the Permanent Representative of Bangladesh, Ambassador Momen, on his leadership as Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) over the past 12 months. Today’s debate represents a very good opportunity to take stock of the efforts and results achieved over the past years in the peacebuilding realm. In this context, let me start by putting one question forward: Are the United Nations and the international community better equipped today, compared to three years ago, to face the multifaceted challenges of peacebuilding? The answer, coming directly from the latest report of the Secretary-General (S/2012/746) of October 8, is yes. However, it is clear that there is still a long way to go. The report indicates areas where achievements have been accomplished in enhancing efforts to build lasting peace in post-conflict countries. Examples include accountability of United Nations leaders; deployment of senior leadership, field staff and experts; working within integrated strategic frameworks; partnerships with the international community; and institution-building expertise. However, the report also provides a frank assessment of the shortcomings and points out the critical areas where further work is required. These include gender-responsive planning, women’s engagement in peacebuilding and governance, and economic recovery. Tackling the challenges presented by post-conflict peacebuilding is an ongoing effort that requires the continuing commitment and coordinated and integrated efforts of all parties involved. While the United Nations is the most relevant entity capable of supporting the recovery of post-conflict countries, it cannot do so exclusively on its own. The United Nations must continue to align with its partners — including Member States, national counterparts, regional organizations and civil society actors — to collaboratively leverage their skills and expertise to ensure progress. All this must be done under the overarching principle of national ownership. The European Union and its member States stand ready to play their role. The Lisbon Treaty has, for the first time, explicitly enshrined as one of the key objectives of the EU’s external action to preserve peace, prevent conflicts and strengthen international security, in accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter. The EU is heavily involved in peacebuilding and has a wide array of external policies, instruments and tools — diplomacy, development cooperation, actions under the Common Foreign and Security Policy and the Common Security and Defence Policy, among others — aimed at assisting in addressing the challenges presented by it. Our effectiveness in pursuing the complex task of building peace depends not only on our ability to define the right mix of such policies, instruments and tools, but also to adopt comprehensive approaches to the assignment and ensure overall consistency. The European Union is already cooperating with the United Nations on peacebuilding efforts. The Secretary- General’s report acknowledges some of these examples, such as the United Nations-EU Partnership on Natural Resources and Conflict Prevention, a project that seeks to improve reporting on peacebuilding assistance in Liberia; the EU-UN-Women partnership on promoting women and peace and security; EU assistance to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) on insider mediation; and regular contact with United Nations counterparts working on conflict prevention and peacebuilding issues, principally the UNDP and the United Nations Department for Political Affairs. In the same vein, the European Union supports strongly the civilian capacity initiative. As the report of the Secretary-General states, the initiative will apply across the various responses of the United Nations system. We encourage the United Nations system to continue to work in finding the optimal ways to be more nimble, responsive and innovative in post-conflict situations. The European Union and its member States are eager to continue to pursue their peacebuilding efforts in the following three areas: the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) and the Peacebuilding Fund, the New Deal for International Engagement in Fragile States, and women in peacebuilding. On the PBC, we have been a firm supporter from the outset, and we remain determined to help that body realize its maximum potential. We share the view of the Secretary-General that the PBC should continue to explore lighter and more flexible forms of engagement. The PBC should better coordinate and support various United Nations and national actors in the field. These changes would allow the PBC to add greater value to Security Council decision-making and thereby strengthen the relationship between the two bodies. The Peacebuilding Fund is an integral part of the United Nations peacebuilding structure. It is a nimble funding mechanism strongly supported by many European Union member States. On the New Deal, we will further enhance our support, particularly through development aid, and sustain the International Dialogue on Peacebuilding and Statebuilding and the Group of Seven Plus fragile countries in piloting the New Deal, bearing in mind the need to prepare post-2015 contexts. We call for synergies between the PBC and the New Deal to be utilized so that work efforts are not duplicated and synergies are maximized. On women in peacebuilding, we will continue to advance women’s role in promoting peace and security. Last year, the Security Council reported that women’s participation in conflict resolution remained too low. Of the nine peace agreements signed since 2011, only two have provisions ensuring women’s rights. We need to ensure women’s participation in all stages of peace processes, and from early on. This will help guarantee the inclusion of women’s rights and perspectives in the later stages of the peace process. Women’s absence from formal peace negotiations results in their absence from bodies that are instrumental in laying the foundations for a new, post-conflict society, such as political decision-making bodies, constitutional and legislative reform commissions, and truth and reconciliation bodies. The European Union and its member States are firmly behind resolution 1325 (2000) and fully support setting concrete targets in the areas of women’s equal participation in the maintenance and promotion of peace and security, and for the mainstreaming of gender perspectives into confl ict prevention, peace negotiations, peacekeeping operations, peacebuilding and post-confl ict reconstruction. To conclude, the international community cannot fail to meet the challenge of supporting post-conflict countries in building lasting peace. The United Nations, with its global legitimacy, and in close partnership and coordination with the main actors, has a central role to play. The European Union and its member States remain resolutely determined actively to support these collective efforts to better assist countries in building sustainable peace.

Sweden associates itself with the statement just made by the observer of the European Union. We thank you, Mr. President, for convening this open debate, and the Secretary-General for his report in document S/2012/746. We agree that progress has been made. However, the international community must continue to enhance its ability effectively to manage the building of peace. Let me point to three challenges Sweden sees in this regard. The first is to ensure a well-coordinated response from the international community. We note with interest the new policy on United Nations transitions in the context of mission drawdown or withdrawal. Successful implementation will require early planning, jointly conducted by United Nations actors and host nation counterparts, in order to ensure smooth transition at all stages. That the United Nations is delivering as one is one important key in achieving a smooth transition, but it is not enough. Sweden would like to emphasize the importance of other aspects such as focusing on the United Nations Development Assistance Framework on peacebuilding priorities; ensuring that peacekeeping and peacebuilding efforts work in tandem; and ensuring that the United Nations system as a whole finds ways to coordinate more closely with the international financial institutions (IFIs) and bilateral partners, not least in regard to ensuring and mobilizing predictable and sustainable funding. The second challenge is ensuring a strengthened dialogue with and support to the host country through a joint compact. The international community will serve the host country best if it can ensure a sustained and common message on key issues. The establishment in the country configurations of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) of so-called statements of mutual commitments has proved to be a useful tool for dialogue and joint guidance. Equally, the New Deal for International Engagement in Fragile States and its compacts offer an excellent opportunity for the host country to elaborate a basis for joint efforts with bilateral partners, IFIs and the United Nations system. This will help to further national ownership, promote the use of national financial systems, and link security and peacebuilding priorities to financial sustainability, transparency and the fight against corruption. In setting up such instruments of mutual commitments, we should build on existing experiences, ensure alignment with national priorities, and avoid duplication or parallel reporting. One common basis for dialogue, commitments and reporting should be the aim. The third challenge relates to the importance of inclusivity. Sweden welcomes the focus on inclusivity in the Secretary-General’s report — an aspect that is key to dealing not only with reconciliation after violent conflict, but also with the root causes of conflicts. It is particularly important that we take a harder look at the way natural resources and land issues are handled, the role of extractive industries, adherence to the rule of law, and how revenues are collected and used for the common good. The report sensibly suggests that United Nations entities should ensure that factors contributing to marginalization should be identified early and addressed in peacebuilding strategies. Sweden’s heavy engagement in Liberia, bilaterally and by means of chairing the PBC Liberia configuration, aims at supporting inclusivity, reconciliation and decentralization efforts. Moreover, the justice and security hubs in Liberia funded by the Peacebuilding Fund will also help to provide services and a governmental presence throughout the whole country. We also support the emphasis in the Secretary- General’s report on enhancing efforts on gender. Regional cooperation can support this, as is shown by the regional dialogue on enhancing women’s leadership in peace and security in West Africa, organized recently by the United Nations Mission in Liberia in collaboration with other United Nations missions in the region. The recommendations were clear — to enhance the role of women in peacebuilding efforts, in particular as mediators, including in peace missions of the Economic Community of West African States. On the more structural side of our work in regard to peacebuilding, Sweden supports increased regular interaction between the PBC and the Security Council. We should build on the interactive dialogues of the past year. The Security Council could be more specific in seeking advice from the PBC, including in the context of peacekeeping mandate renewals. At the same time, we would invite the PBC for its part to further demonstrate the specific contributions it can make to the deliberations of the Security Council and the United Nations system as a whole. In the end, the effectiveness of the PBC will and must be measured in terms of its impact at the country level. To achieve impact, enhanced linkages to the field are crucial. Effective support to the Special Representatives of the Secretary-General and the country teams are essential elements in that regard.

I now give the floor to the representative of Denmark.

First, allow me to underscore that Denmark aligns itself with the statement of the European Union. Let me start by thanking the presidency of Morocco for having organized today’s timely debate focused on post-conflict peacebuilding. Denmark welcomes the report of the Secretary-General on peacebuilding in the aftermath of conflict (S/2012/746). We also wish to thank him for his personal commitment to strengthening the United Nations efforts towards building lasting peace in post-conflict countries. It is vital that we continue to strengthen the United Nations peacebuilding capabilities, and that the United Nations deliver timely, coherent and integrated support to nationally owned and led processes. In our view, the key to success lies in delivering actual concrete results on the ground that are inclusive and demand-driven. Ownership and leadership of the kind demonstrated by the Group of Seven Plus is noteworthy and should be encouraged. In this respect, partnerships of all interested parties — including the international financial institutions, civil society and the private sector — are all crucial to ensuring long-term stability, maximizing consistency and avoiding overlap. The Secretary-General’s report outlines how the implementation of the 2009 agenda has enabled the United Nations to provide “a more coherent, timely and effective response to immediate post-conflict priorities” (S/2012/746, para. 2). This is a welcome development and one that needs further focus and attention over a wide range of interrelated issues that the United Nations system faces on a daily basis. The report also acknowledges a number of areas where progress has been less impressive. It is of significant interest to Denmark that progress continue towards promoting and increasing the active participation of women in peacebuilding, governance and economic recovery. Denmark firmly supports resolution 1325 (2000) and the setting of concrete targets so as to ensure women’s equal participation in the promotion of peace and security. Post-conflict peacebuilding is increasingly high on our collective international agenda, and with good reason. No post-conflict or fragile country has achieved any of the Millennium Development Goals. The United Nations plays a central role in addressing this complex and pressing issue. To this end, Denmark has been a strong supporter of a more ambitious and more effective United Nations peacebuilding architecture, and Denmark is ready to deliver. Denmark hopes to become a member of the Organizational Committee of the Peacebuilding Commission in 2013. As highlighted in the Secretary- General’s report, the Peacebuilding Commission should continue to strengthen its political support to countries emerging from conflict in order to foster greater coherence among funds and initiatives and to mobilize international support. Furthermore, Denmark supports the work of the Peacebuilding Fund. The Fund provides crucial, timely and gap-filling financial support during critical transition moments. Consequently, Denmark has recently decided to renew its financial support by providing a new contribution of 50 million Danish kroner — some $8.6 million — for the years 2012-2014. It is our conviction that one of the key ingredients in a successful integrated approach to post-conflict peacebuilding involves quick and hassle-free deployment of civilian capacity, whether within the United Nations system or beyond. Allow me on this occasion to reaffirm Denmark’s support, including through substantial financial support, for the Secretary-General’s civilian capacity initiative and the team working diligently on furthering this important work. Denmark welcomes the Secretary-General’s report on civilian capacity in the aftermath of conflict (S/2011/527), and encourages further progress on this central aspect of post-conflict stabilization efforts. As co-Chair of the International Dialogue on Peacebuilding and Statebuilding, Denmark would like to encourage the United Nations system to bring even greater focus to the New Deal for International Engagement in Fragile States when working with conflict-affected and fragile countries. The Steering Group of the International Dialogue met earlier this week in Juba, South Sudan, and confirmed a strong focus on the implementation of the New Deal in pilot countries in coming years. The real challenge is in many ways to create a strong and lasting partnership at the country level. The United Nations has a key role to play in this regard. The ambition is to build peace and stronger States in some of the world’s poorest and most fragile nations, and the New Deal can make a real difference in that respect by supporting country-owned and country-led processes out of fragility. Fragile States are those furthest from reaching the Millennium Development Goals. This is not sustainable. Denmark believes we should draw upon the work of the International Dialogue on Peacebuilding and Statebuilding, including the peacebuilding and State-building goals, and work to ensure that a new development framework post-2015 recognizes that peace, security and development are interconnected. In conclusion, Denmark is committed to doing its part. We will, in coming years, further scale up our support to and cooperation with fragile States, and Denmark will continue to give full support to the work of the Secretary-General in this respect.

I now give the floor to the representative of Indonesia.

I thank you, Mr. President, for convening this important open debate on post- conflict peacebuilding. I should also like to thank the Secretary-General for his remarks, and express my appreciation to Ambassador Momen, Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), for his useful intervention. Indonesia aligns itself with the statement made by the representative of Iran on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. We commend the Secretary-General and his team for the progress made on what is a dynamic and difficult global agenda of helping conflict-affected countries navigate their way towards peace and development. Yet, a more intensive and constant effort by the United Nations and the international community is required to deepen the impact on the ground and strengthen the capacities and institutions of countries so that they can consolidate peace effectively. My delegation is heartened to learn that there has been significant progress in the context of the implementation of the 2009 Agenda for Action in peacebuilding and, more modestly, the seven-point action plan for gender-responsive peacebuilding. As mentioned in the Secretary-General’s report (S/2012/746), post-conflict countries often continue to experience instability years after the end of armed conflict, with high levels of relapse into violence. That situation is one of deep concern. The success of post-conflict countries depends predominantly on the quality of their nationally identified, owned and driven peacebuilding. At the same time, this quality in large measure depends on the support of a robust, responsive global peacebuilding architecture. Indonesia is thus pleased that the Peacebuilding Commission, as a key entity in global peacebuilding, has been making important strides to advance post- conflict issues and make the support to its agenda countries more coherent and sustainable. Indonesia fully supports the United Nations peacebuilding agenda in post-conflict countries and will continue to support the work of and vital role played by the Peacebuilding Commission, on which Indonesia serves as a member. While concurring with the Secretary- General’s recommendations to the PBC, I wish to make the following additional observations. First, the emphasis placed throughout the report on advancing the national ownership principle is very important. We also welcome the Security Council’s reaffirmation of this principle in its newly adopted presidential statement (S/PRST/2012/29). As underscored by President Yudhoyono in his remarks in September this year (see A/67/PV.6), the sense of ownership in peacebuilding is critical. We have to ensure that when we are supporting countries’ peacebuilding efforts, we get to know the needs and aspirations of all stakeholders better. In order to foster ownership, nationally identified priorities must be the blueprint of international support. Indonesia supports the Secretary-General’s observation concerning the need for the PBC to strengthen its strategy of promoting coherence and the alignment of donors with national peacebuilding plans. Secondly, effective peacebuilding is one that unlocks the potential for economic progress and development. To that end, the assistance of the United Nations system and relevant bilateral, regional and multilateral partners is crucial. In order to adequately assist post-conflict countries, the multi-sourced international support framework necessitates close coordination and collaboration among its actors. The PBC’s recommendations in this regard can play a vital role. We also believe that the support framework requires a more transparent and accountable process. Indonesia can testify to the significance of this, particularly given its experience of engagement in the context of bringing peace to Aceh after decades of conflict there. Thirdly, I should like us to continue to explore all available avenues in garnering support. My delegation is heartened that the Secretary-General has also encouraged the Commission to engage with the foundations and the private sector. As some may be aware, in 2008 Indonesia facilitated a PBC policy task force on partnering with traditional and non-traditional private sectors. Some of the recommendations made in its outcome document are reflected in the 2012 PBC road map of action and will, it is hoped, serve to broaden the base for resources and partnerships in post-conflict peacebuilding. Fourthly, we fully support the call on the Security Council and the PBC to build on debates and interactive dialogues such as this. Timely advice and views from the PBC to the Council enrich the Council’s actions. The valuable knowledge and insights developed by the PBC and Peacebuilding Support Office should be drawn on by other principal and subsidiary organs, as well as United Nations agencies and departments. We should not be hesitant to draw on the advantages offered by each. Fifthly, Indonesia supports the United Nations focus on enhancing the participation of women in peacebuilding. We commend the Security Council for adopting the landmark resolution 1325 (2000). We expect that the seven-point action plan for gender- responsive peacebuilding will be implemented tangibly. Indonesia is determined to furthering the participation of women in post-conflict peacebuilding at home, in the region and at the international level. The increased participation of women in peacebuilding must go beyond fulfilling quotas, and should also focus on bolstering capacity-building support for women’s participation, particularly in developing countries. In this context, we also stress the importance of drawing on the available capacities of women civilian experts of the global South in the United Nations global civilian capacities system currently being developed. As the world’s third largest democracy, which has traversed its own transition to a well-functioning democratic State, Indonesia bears witness to the different challenges and opportunities in building peace. We have directly seen the fruit of national capacity development. We have achieved major national reforms, including in the rule of law, governance, human rights, political processes, elections, media development, civil society and women’s participation. Finally, I should like to reiterate Indonesia’s unwavering support for the PBC in helping it to undertake robust and responsive actions to the needs of affected countries.

I now give the floor to the representative of Nigeria.

My delegation wishes to express its profound appreciation to the delegation of Morocco for its initiative in convening this timely debate. It is proper that the international focus be directed at mechanisms being employed to ensure durable peace in countries emerging from conflict. We thank the Secretary-General for his comments and appreciate the report that has provided the basis for our discussion today (S/2012/746). We also thank Ambassador Abulkalam Momen for his briefing. Today’s debate once again provides an opportunity to assess the progress of and challenges to our collective efforts to support peace and socio-economic development, as well as prefer strategies to assist countries emerging from conflict. Long before the inception of the Peacebuilding Commission, Nigeria undertook efforts to support post-conflict peacebuilding in various countries in Africa. The lessons from those experiences underline our deep concern that the scale and scope of the new forms of conflict, and the ever- present risk of relapse, are outpacing our collective ability to respond effectively to it. Recent developments and daunting challenges in the post-conflict recovery process have underscored the fact that peacebuilding requires a more integrated approach encompassing political inclusiveness, security, economic development, gender empowerment and participation, human rights and the rule of law, complementarities and coherence among the various actors and partners. Indeed, a comprehensive approach to peacebuilding requires partnership, consistency and coherence among the various actors. Our individual and collective commitment to the activities of the Peacebuilding Commission must be supportive and results-oriented. The commitment of members must extend beyond mere interests; it should also be reflected in our desire to share experiences and provide technical and financial contributions. Resources and funds are very critical factors for successful peacebuilding in countries emerging from conflicts. Therefore, the commitment of Member States should be reflected in their willingness to make financial contributions, as well as to share their experiences and provide technical assistance. Nigeria commends the steps taken by the Peacebuilding Support Office to continuously improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the Peacebuilding Fund. The Peacebuilding Fund’s third high-level stakeholders meeting of 29 November was a huge success. That laudable effort must be complemented by exploring other options for longer- term financing. Closely related to this is the need for greater accountability, monitoring and evaluation of peacebuilding projects and programmes, and to assist countries on the peacebuilding agenda to develop a mechanism of internal tax collection to boost their revenue basis. Nigeria is particularly encouraged by the increased attention to the important role of women in peacebuilding activities through the gender promotion initiative. Women play a crucial role in economic recovery, social cohesion and political legitimacy. Best practices can be replicated in the deployment of gender expertise in conflict and post-conflict contexts. We therefore call for greater women’s participation in peace and post-conflict processes. Threats to peace have cross-border implications and linkages, often requiring broader efforts and mechanisms at the regional and subregional levels. That is not only true of conflicts in West Africa, but is the case in most regions of the world. For that reason, we would like to emphasize the need to pay due attention to the regional dimensions of peacebuilding. Peacebuilding cannot be achieved using a short-term strategy. It requires a comprehensive and integrated strategy responsive to needs and priorities, as well as the long-term commitment of all actors at the national, regional and international levels. It is in this consideration that Nigeria has endeavoured to actively support post-conflict peacebuilding processes in the West African subregion. As a member of the Organizational Committee of the Peacebuilding Commission, we remain committed to supporting integrated peacekeeping strategies for sustainable peace and development. It is our fervent hope that this debate will provide new insights on impetus for enhancing post-conflict peacebuilding activities. We are also determined to work in concert with other stakeholders to make its impact positively felt.

I now give the floor to the representative of Armenia.

We also thank the Secretary-General for the presentation of his report on peacebuilding in the aftermath of conflict (S/2012/746) and the Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission, Ambassador Momen, for his active involvement and his statement. The frequency with which the Security Council addresses post-conflict peacebuilding reflects the importance that the international community attaches to the issue as a preventive tool against the recurrence of conflict and for the establishment of sustained security and stability, which are prerequisites for the maintenance of peace and development. We are all cognizant that, in different parts of the world, conflicts still hinder the prospects of regional peace and security. Further delay in the settlement of these conflicts not only undermines the regional cooperation and considerably limits the prerequisites of the peacebuilding efforts of regional and international actors, but also constitutes a serious security risk should they one day erupt from a dormant condition into an active one. Although each and every conflict and post-conflict situation is different, a conducive environment that leads to their individual solutions through peacebuilding strategies is an indispensable precondition. What we have learned throughout the long period of living with conflict and negotiating is that we should continue to be persistent and patient because the alternative — destruction and chaos — is unacceptable. Armenia remains committed to post-conflict peace initiatives and believes that the Security Council should further strengthen and advance development initiatives by supporting such peacebuilding mechanisms as the Peacebuilding Commission, which helps countries emerging from conflicts by offering targeted advice to their recovery, reintegration and reconstruction efforts. In that respect, it is important that the programmes adopted be country-specific, needs-based and target- oriented. Effective peacebuilding requires active engagement with local parties. That engagement should be multidimensional in nature, involving Governments and civil society, with a particular focus on women and youth, whose role in post-conflict rebuilding is difficult to underestimate. Particular attention should also be paid to rebuilding and re-evaluating the educational system in countries emerging from conflict. Moreover, all peacebuilding initiatives have to be inclusive in order to make a demonstrable difference in the lives of the people affected. In that regard, we endorse the recommendations and conclusions contained in the report of the Secretary-General. In addition, the contributions of international financial institutions, regional development banks and the private sector should play a decisive role in enhancing the coherence of peacebuilding efforts at the regional and subregional levels. Today the post-conflict period in our region offers a window of opportunity to provide basic security, deliver peace dividends, build confidence in the political process and strengthen core national ownership to lead peacebuilding efforts and lay the foundations for sustainable development in the aftermath of conflicts. The successful implementation of this agenda requires a basic level of political will, determination and national ownership, which are key to establishing sustainable peace. With those political conditions in place, the ability of the United Nations or any other intergovernmental, regional or national actor, including civil society, will be enhanced and supported. Armenia therefore welcomes Morocco’s initiative to hold this open debate, reflect on our experiences and highlight priority aspects for united, practical action in the coming year of 2013.

I give the floor to Mr. António. Mr. António: Let me start by joining others in commending you, Mr. President, and all the members of the Security Council for this timely initiative to organize an open debate during your country’s presidency of the Security Council on a very critical topic of vital interest to the African Union (AU) and the continent as a whole. I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate and thank the outgoing members of the Security Council for their contribution to advancing the cause of peace and security in the world, with a special mention of South Africa, a member of our organization, for its contribution, along with the other African members of the Security Council, in advancing the African agenda in this very important body. Africa’s vested interest in this subject matter is substantiated by the scale and complexity of the conflicts being witnessed on the continent today, ranging from illicit trafficking and the flow of drugs and weapons, transnational organized crime and wider regional implications. The experiences of the African Union in its efforts to address conflict situations on the continent have shown a direct correlation between sustainable peace and the scaling up of post-conflict reconstruction and peacebuilding, as well as development. It will be recalled that the African Union adopted a policy on Post-Conflict Reconstruction and Development (PRCD) in Banjul, the Gambia, in June 2006, aimed at improving the timeliness, effectiveness and coordination of peacebuilding activities in post- conflict countries and at laying the foundation for social justice and sustainable peace and development. The AU PCRD policy is underpinned by five core principles, namely, African leadership; national and local ownership; inclusiveness, equity and non-discrimination; cooperation and cohesion; and capacity-building for sustainability. The Commission has continued to work on post- conflict reconstruction and development through assessment missions to countries emerging from conflict and through raising the awareness of partners and Member States to permit them to provide the required support and exchange experiences. Moreover, in order to renew efforts aimed at post- conflict reconstruction and development with a view to consolidating peace where it has been achieved, the African Union, in July 2012, launched the African Solidarity Initiative, an AU-led process for mobilizing enhanced support from within the continent for post- conflict reconstruction and development in countries emerging from conflict. The overriding objective of the African Solidarity Initiative is to promote African solidarity commitments in support of African mutual reliance as part of an urgent agenda to significantly address the magnitude of the challenges being faced by the countries concerned in their reconstruction, peace consolidation, recovery and development. One overall intention is to promote a paradigm shift that puts African self-reliance centre stage as a key force for enhanced and effective development of the continent driven by the motto “Africa helping Africa”. As the continental flagship initiative, the African Solidarity Initiative is aimed at instituting an expanded and coordinated platform for mobilizing a higher level of support, particularly from Africa, for post- conflict reconstruction and development. Such support, while including financial contributions, would also target in-kind sharing of expertise, approaches, best practices, training facilities, familiarization schemes and capacity-building commitments as essential non-monetary forms of support. We at the African Union Commission are convinced that the launch of the African Solidarity Initiative will go a long way towards mobilizing from within the continent’s support for African countries emerging from conflict and consolidate and expand intra-African cooperation and mutual self- help, consistent with the AU policy on post-conflict reconstruction and development, as well as the 1975 Inter-African Convention Establishing an African Technical Cooperation Programme. In conclusion, we call on the international community at large to support the Africa-led efforts I have mentioned, aimed at building and consolidating peace in post-conflict situations, especially those countries on the agenda of the Peacebuilding Commission. In supporting those efforts, it is important to underscore as cornerstones the principles of complementarity and African ownership and leadership. The success of those efforts lies in the strong collaboration and coordination among the Peacebuilding Commission, the AU Commission and the regional economic communities.

I now give the floor to the representative of Croatia.

At the outset, I would like to thank the Secretary-General for his inspiring statement and for the report on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict that we are discussing today (S/2012/746). I would also like to thank Ambassador Momen for his statement on behalf of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) and for his able stewardship of the Commission in 2012. Croatia aligns itself with the statement previously delivered by the obseraver of the European Union. However, I would briefly like, in my national capacity, to make a few additional comments. Croatia welcomes the progress made in implementing the Agenda for Action outlined in the report of the Secretary-General contained in document S/2009/304, dated 11 June 2009. We are particularly encouraged by his recognition of the increased effectiveness of leadership on the ground and the improved functioning of the funding mechanisms in support of peacebuilding efforts. In that context, we also welcome the significant improvements in the completion of integrated strategic frameworks, and follow with interest the development of a new policy on United Nations transitions in the context of mission drawdown and withdrawal. Croatia welcomes the priorities for the upcoming period identified in the report of the Secretary- General, in particular the focus on inclusive peacebuilding processes, institution-building and sustained international engagement. In our view, inclusive country-owned and country-led initiatives, supported by the coherent, coordinated and sustainable engagement of the international community, are vital for States to successfully emerge from conflict. Croatia commends the initial progress made towards the implementation of the seven-point action plan for gender-responsive peacebuilding. We believe that the equal participation of women in political, transitional and peacebuilding processes is of crucial importance for their comprehensive and effective implementation. In that context, we strongly support further efforts aimed at strengthening the position of women in the such processes and at addressing their specific needs as set out in the Secretary-General’s 2010 report on women’s participation in peacebuilding (S/2010/466). Croatia welcomes a more interactive and dynamic relationship between the Security Council and the PBC. We are encouraged by the recent developments in that regard and we hope that the Council will continue to make clear what advice it needs from the PBC, particularly during mandate discussions. Furthermore, we welcome the possibility of informal interaction between the two bodies, which is a form of interaction we find particularly rewarding. Croatia acknowledges the work of the Group of Seven Plus countries aimed at clearly defining the ways by which the international partners should support their peacebuilding processes. Croatia believes that the New Deal principles, including national ownership and national responsibility for commitments undertaken and mutual accountability offer useful additional guidance for the Commission’s engagement with the countries on its agenda. Croatia strongly believes that rebuilding civilian capacities represents one of the most important fields of assistance to countries emerging from conflict. In that context, we closely follow the civilian capacities initiative and its results. We stand ready to further contribute to the broadening and deepening of the pool of civilian peacebuilding expertise, including through the newly established sharing platform, CAPMATCH. Finally, let me conclude by emphasizing the importance that my country attaches to the efforts aimed at greater coordination and coherence among multiple international actors engaged in peacebuilding processes, including the further clarification of their respective roles and responsibilities. We strongly believe that only through increased collaboration and, in particular, appropriate engagement by international financial institutions, regional and subregional organizations, private-sector and non-traditional donors, can we all maximize output and ensure effective international engagement in post-conflict situations.

I now give the floor to the representative of Thailand.

At the outset, I would like to express my delegation’s sincere appreciation to the President for convening today’s important open debate on post-conflict peacebuilding. I would also like to express our appreciation to the Secretary-General and the Chairperson of the Peacebuilding Commission for their important updates and contributions earlier today. Before I begin, I would also like to align my statement with the statement delivered today by the Permanent Representative of Iran, who spoke on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. The report of the Secretary-General on peacebuilding in the aftermath of conflict (S/2012/746) makes many insightful and critical assessments of international peacebuilding efforts, particularly since the last progress report issued in 2010 (S/2010/386). The latest report notes that progress has been significant. However, it also notes that there is much room for improvement. It underlines the need for the United Nations and the international community to continue to engage sustainably. It also stresses the need to be in tune with what countries emerging from conflict require for building lasting peace and for avoiding relapses into violence. My delegation shares many of the views expressed in the report and would like to take this opportunity to engage in the discussion by stressing a few points that we felt particularly worthy of reiteration. First and foremost, we would like to join others who have stressed the importance of the principle of national ownership and of hastening and prioritizing economic recovery and inclusive development in peacebuilding efforts. Without national ownership, countries emerging from conflict may lack the foundation needed to foster national leadership, which is critical to identifying a meaningful path to sustainable and inclusive development. A second and related priority is timely, predictable and sustainable financing and international support. In the current global climate of fiscal austerity, the report rightly mentions the need for mutual accountability so as to reinforce sustained international support. It also notes a promising effort to improve reporting on peacebuilding assistance through improved data. Those are important exercises, although we appreciate that the report acknowledges, first and foremost, the need to sustain international support for peacebuilding as an essential element of social and economic development in post-conflict countries. We are sorely aware of the fact that conflict-affected States lag behind in their attainment of the Millennium Development Goals, when compared with other developing countries. It is also our hope that the incorporation of peacebuilding considerations into the post-2015 development agenda will lead to more meaningful commitments in the future. Thirdly, my delegation believes that the international community must continue to focus its efforts on helping to build strong and responsive institutions and capacities in countries emerging from conflict. In the past, Thailand’s peacekeepers have also served as early peacebuilders and assisted in local and community development, sharing our best practices in areas such as agriculture, health and water resource management. We therefore welcome the opportunity to explore innovative avenues to further expand our opportunities to assist in the context of strengthening civilian capacity in the immediate aftermath of conflict. We feel that the global South has an important comparative advantage in that respect and can therefore play a role that could potentially have a great impact on helping to further consolidate peace in that manner. Last but not least, we also look forward to further gains on the part of the international community and the United Nations system itself in the context of women’s participation in peacebuilding in general and in conflict resolution processes in particular. Here, the role of women and the inclusion of gender-relevant issues will be critical in laying the strong foundations needed for an inclusive society and sustainable and inclusive development. In that connection, we also take a keen interest in the mention in the Secretary- General’s report of the drafting of minimum standards for gender-responsive transitional justice mechanisms and guidance concerning reparations for victims of conflict-related sexual violence. We look forward to receiving more information from the relevant United Nations entities involved in those efforts. As with any worthwhile endeavour, post-conflict peacebuilding requires sustained focus, attention and commitment from all of the parties involved. Continued discussions and debates like this one can only help to clarify roles and responsibilities and enhance the coordination of efforts in general and between pivotal actors such as the Security Council and the Peacebuilding Commission in particular. They also enhance partnerships with the wider international community aimed at taking potentially meaningful initiatives forward. We will continue to share our input in that regard and, together with the international community, continue to seek ways to fulfil what we view as our common responsibility to assist countries emerging from conflict to consolidate peace and prevent further conflict.

I now give the floor to the representative of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

I would like to commend you, Mr. President, for convening this meeting to discuss the topic of post-conflict peacebuilding. I am confident that our deliberations today will contribute greatly to the discussion of one of the most important items on the Security Council’s agenda. I would also like to thank the briefers for their valuable comments. In January 2011, during its presidency of the Security Council, Bosnia and Herzegovina held a debate on post-conflict institution-building (see S/PV.6472). The focus of the debate was the importance of national ownership and building national capacity, including resilient institutions, issues that were seen as core issues for a successful peacebuilding process. In line with the Secretary-General’s 2009 agenda and the 2010 review of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture (S/2010/393), the presidential statement contained in document S/PRST/2011/2 requested an impact assessment regarding the issue of contributing to building viable institutions in post-conflict countries, as well as recommendations to improve the effectiveness of the United Nations contribution to more effective, stable and sustainable institutions that can help prevent relapses into conflict. Almost two years after the debate, we are pleased to see that institution-building, along with inclusivity and sustained international support, are among the central topics of the Secretary-General’s report (S/2012/746). Many concrete recommendations and various developments resulted from the debate on institution-building and a few other debates in the Security Council on the issue of peacebuilding. Inclusivity and institution-building are critical in preventing relapses into violent conflict. Furthermore, they are vital for domestic accountability systems and are a more reliable base for the engagement of a State with the international community. Only a viable State with strong structures will contribute to peace and stability and be able to avoid a return to conflict. Dialogue with national actors in the earliest stages of peacebuilding is a conditio sine qua non for the success of early peacebuilding efforts. That process needs to be open, creative and transformative. It must include all relevant decision-makers who can contribute to post-conflict peacebuilding and recovery efforts. Rebuilding and transforming the functionality of country systems is essential primarily for a good transition from conflict, but also for the drawdown or closing of peacekeeping missions and peacebuilding offices. It is clear that the international community should invest more in strengthening its tools in that area. Finally, in order to improve that process, suitable, well-designed and practical accountability mechanisms must be in place. Early and substantial results need to be achieved through the restoration of core Government functions and delivery of services. In that way, balanced long-term support for the process of institution-building can be attained. Maintaining and developing partnerships for rebuilding institutions and sustainable peace requires constant and stable international political and financial support. In that context, we emphasize the importance of mutual accountability. Balanced partnerships between donors and recipient Governments are a prerequisite for ensuring long-term and lasting results and securing investments in peacekeeping or peacebuilding processes. The development of relevant national peacebuilding capacities is critical to ensuring an effective and sustainable handover of mission responsibility to host countries. In that regard, the donors need to develop flexible, risk-tolerant approaches, because the risk of inaction may outweigh the risks associated with action. The interaction between the Security Council and the Peacebuilding Commission should be continued in a more practical and sustained manner, which assumes the continuation of dialogue and a better articulation of the advice and analysis that the Council may receive from the Commission, especially during mandate discussions. Institution-building as a central pillar of sustainable peace was reinforced by the World Bank’s World Development Report 2011 and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s guidance to donors on supporting State-building in situations of conflict and fragility. The Group of Seven Plus conflict-affected countries are working on their efforts to implement the New Deal for engagement in fragile States, which emphasizes the importance of, and respect for, national priorities in funding peacebuilding efforts. The United Nations civilian capacities initiative aims at strengthening support for nationally owned institution-building. Bosnia and Herzegovina actively participates in the initiative, including through the online platform CAPMATCH, and stands ready to provide our first-hand experience in areas where we have a comparative advantage, knowledge and experience. As noted in the Secretary-General’s report, institutional support and capacity development are not quick fixes. Reforms can be detrimental if implemented too quickly, without national ownership or prematurely by authorities that lack legitimacy. Therefore, we can and need to do more in order to transform the mixed record in this area into success stories.

I now give the floor to the representative of Belarus.

I would like to express my gratitude to the delegation of Morocco, acting as President of the Council, for convening this important open debate on post-conflict peacebuilding. I would also like to express my gratitude to Assistant Secretary-General for Peacebuilding Support, as well as to the Permanent Representative of Bangladesh for his statement. Belarus aligns itself with the statement delievered earlier by the Permanent Representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. We consider peacebuilding to be an important factor that has a direct impact on settling conflicts, reducing the level of instability and ensuring post-conflict stability. The United Nations has garnered significant and unique experience in the area of peacebuilding, which is being successfully used in various regions of the world. At the same time, the process of emerging from conflict, establishing controls over domestic State procedures related to the law and order sector and making changes to the internal security situation of States is an extremely complex process, and it is comprehensive and multifaceted in nature. That significantly complicates peacebuilding efforts. The year 2005 saw the establishment of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) to address a whole range of peacebuilding tasks. In the short period since then, it has made substantive progress in its work in organizing the peacebuilding process and in dealing with a number of complex tasks. At the same time, as noted today by the Chairperson of the PBC, the Commission still has a lot to do. We hope that the Commission will continue to improve its work in organizing peacebuilding and strengthening cooperation with other entities through its efforts to find effective peacebuilding paths forward. As was already mentioned today, it is important to strengthen the institutional links between the PBC and the Security Council, the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council. Furthermore, it is necessary to establish closer partnerships with the relevant countries and international financial institutions, such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the African Development Bank. A key element necessary in enhancing peacebuilding activities is to establish clearer coordination, coherence and cooperation among various United Nations agencies and offices, both in New York and in those countries receiving post-conflict support and assistance. Given the limited resources available, it seems to us that that could enhance effectiveness and delivery. We believe that the greatest impact from post-conflict peacebuilding can only be achieved on the basis of full respect for the sovereignty of the countries concerned. States in post-conflict phases are responsible for ensuring peacebuilding in their territories. However, a comprehensive, coordinated and targeted approach is needed in that effort, taking into account the different domestic conditions in the countries involved. We note with satisfaction the increased attention to the status of women in conflict-affected countries and in States undergoing post-conflict peacebuilding. As the representative of a State that is actively involved in addressing human trafficking, I should like to draw attention to the fact that the United Nations Global Plan of Action to Combat Trafficking in Persons, adopted by consensus by the General Assembly, calls for human trafficking to be incorporated into broader United Nations strategies and programmes in order to address issues that also include the post-conflict recovery period. I believe that serious attention should be given to that aspect during the development of various peacebuilding programmes. As this is the last open debate of 2012, I would like to take the opportunity to wish everyone the best for the forthcoming year.

I now give the floor to the representative of Senegal.

Senegal commends your initiative, Mr. President, in convening this debate on peacebuilding in the aftermath of conflict. It is as important to address this challenge as it is to put an end to situations of open hostility. Allow me, on this occasion, to reiterate my warmest congratulations on your assumption of the presidency of the Council and, at the same time, to commend the skillful way in which your predecessor, Ambassador Majeev Singh Puri, guided this body in the month of November. No one has any doubt that, as we take stock, the Council has done useful work under the wise leadership of Morocco, a friendly country whose contribution to peace in Africa is well known and appreciated by all. I would therefore like to assure you, Sir, that my delegation will always be ready to support you for in pursuit of a resounding success to your presidency. The topic that brings us together today places the Council at the very heart of the issue of the viability and sustainability of peacekeeping in the world. Through this debate, therefore, we are called upon to look at the tools that could be utilized to ensure that lasting peace takes hold in countries emerging from conflict. As recalled by the World Bank in its World Development Report 2011, 90 per cent of conflicts between 2000 and 2009 occurred in countries where civil war had already taken place. That alarming fact leads us to take a critical look at the factors that might explain the relapse into conflict. The factors differ, depending on whether they arise from an unfavourable international context or from an unstable internal situation. The impact of trans-border situations and the presence of international criminal groups can therefore contribute to bringing about an unfavourable climate for transitions, which are often already fragile. Equally, the lack of consensus on the political process, discrimination or social inequalities, added to the dramatic impact of the economic situation, can provide fertile ground for the resurgence of crisis situations. Post-conflict peacebuilding would therefore seem to be less effective and efficient in conflict reduction than prevention of conflict in the first place. Success in such a volatile phase of peacebuilding more often than not requires that multiple needs be met. That fact clearly attests to the breadth and complexity of post-conflict situations, for both national authorities and the international community. That is why setting priorities for transition plans is truly essential. In doing so, it is crucial to ensure effective reform of the security sector beginning with disarmament, demobilization and reintegration, in order to better protect civilians. As the backbone of any national reconciliation process, an inclusive political dialogue remains necessary to guarantee the holding of free and democratic elections and in order to build the rule of law, based on robust institutions. That dual political and security foundation should be supported by strengthening national capacities to meet social needs, focusing on health, education and training, while also ensuring an economic recovery that is capable of promoting development, especially in the areas of agriculture and infrastructure. Seconding the Secretary-General’s recommendations in his latest report on peacebuilding in the aftermath of confl ict (S/2012/746), my delegation attaches particular importance to real and active participation by women in the transition process. Having considerable advantages in achieving the requirements I mentioned, women have always made an invaluable contribution to peacebuilding throughout the world, as witnessed by the many female Nobel Peace Prize winners, including Betty Williams, Mother Teresa, Aung San Suu Kyi and Kenya’s Wangari Muta Maathai. We are pleased to note that the report mentions considerable efforts in the area of eliciting women’s participation. Within this relatively narrow scope, it is important to engender an impetus for effective, sustained support from the international community. In that regard, the Peacebuilding Commission(PBC), as the relevant interactive intergovernmental body, has a major role to play, including in mobilizing the necessary funds for transition. Cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations should also be encouraged and strengthened. We therefore take this opportunity to welcome the quality of the strategic partnership that the African Union continues to develop with the United Nations through peacekeeping missions, such as those deployed in Somalia or Darfur. Such cooperation is all the more welcome for Africa because most countries on the PBC agenda are African. In conclusion, I would like to draw the Council’s attention to the need to provide the support I have just described as soon as hostilities end, because, even though that period is the most fragile, it is still the most conducive to the success of a skilfully conducted transition to lasting peace and development. The Council can be assured of Senegal’s unflagging and ongoingly renewed commitment, along with all peace-loving countries, to the realization of the ideal that today unites all people the world over.

I now give the floor to the representative of Liberia.

Liberia joins previous speakers in thanking you, Mr. President, for organizing this debate on the all-important issue of post- conflict peacebuilding. It conforms to the tradition of Morocco’s active involvement in the peacekeeping and peacebuilding efforts of the United Nations. It is also reflective of the Security Council’s continued interest in, and commitment to, peacebuilding as part of its larger responsibility for international peace and security, which we commend. We thank the Secretary-General for his insightful report (S/2012/746), which records the progress achieved in the United Nations support for peacebuilding activities in conflict-affected countries and charts future directions for the improvement of peacebuilding interventions by the United Nations system and its Member States. The emphasis on inclusivity resonates well, because we know that marginalization, alienation and the culture of exclusive politics are root causes of conflict. The report’s embrace of the principles of institution-building and statebuilding as core elements of peacebuilding is very encouraging. As a member of the Group of Seven Plus, Liberia subscribes to those principles and believes that they are critical to preventing a relapse into conflict and to building the resilience of States. Current trends, reflecting growing collaboration and cooperation between conflict-affected countries and the wider international community, have given peacebuilding in post-conflict settings a new dimension and dynamism. That cooperation can evolve into partnership when both parties agree on peacebuilding arrangements that are country-specific, avoid the one-solution-fits-all approach and ensure burden- sharing in implementing agreed strategies. Two years ago, Liberia was placed on the agenda of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC). That engagement followed earlier efforts by the United Nations to strengthen peace dividends by the infusion of emergency funding for peacebuilding activities. The direct engagement with the PBC, however, has provided an opportunity for Liberia to focus singularly on critical areas requiring urgent resuscitation — the security sector, the rule of law and national reconciliation. The responsibilities and accountabilities of both the Government and the PBC for achieving agreed objectives are encapsulated in a statement of mutual commitments. The partnership is driving a set of programmes and interventions that have become indispensable to the attainment of sustainable peace in Liberia. The support of the peacebuilding architecture, specifically the Liberia configuration of the PBC, the Peacebuilding Fund and the Peacebuilding Support Office, together with the United Nations Mission in Liberia, has been critical to the progress achieved in implementing strategies for reform of the security sector and the judiciary. They have also played a catalytic role in engendering support from bilateral partners. Through various cooperation arrangements, including South-South and triangular cooperation, institutions are being created and rehabilitated. That includes the development of policy and infrastructure as well as capacity enhancement to benefit the national police, the immigration service and the judiciary. Most notable among the programmes are plans for the construction of five justice and security hubs at strategic locations throughout the country, one of which is nearing completion. The hubs will contribute to the achievement of multiple objectives, which include, for justice institutions, decentralization and better delivery of their services; for citizens, greater access to justice mechanisms and a stronger sense of security; and, for the State, the extension of its authority throughout the entire territory of the country, in order to better provide protection to its people and more effectively monitor its borders. The completion of the justice hubs will bring monumental change, especially for Liberians in the hinterland of the country, who have suffered the effects of isolation and marginalization. National reconciliation is ultimately one of the most secure foundations upon which to build durable peace. For Liberia, reconciliation is paramount for national recovery, because it is only by addressing historical ethnic and social cleavages that the social fabric of Liberian society can be firmly restored. That is why the development of a plan for national reconciliation was prioritized in Liberia’s partnership with the PBC. With critical technical support from the United Nations Development Programme, a road map for national reconciliation was crafted. It benefited from consultations with the Liberia configuration. Most importantly, the road map received overwhelming support and validation from the Liberian people through country-wide consultations. I am pleased to say that the road map was formally endorsed at a national conference convened last week, together with a national vision for Liberia up to 2030. We know that peacebuilding does not come without challenges. That is a normal phenomenon and not peculiar to Liberia. As peacebuilding is a process to be approached from a long-term perspective, it is important to manage expectations for immediate or at least speedy results. Secondly, there is the challenge of predictable and sustained financial resources, as mentioned in the Secretary-General’s report, which, when lacking, generate uncertainty and anxiety. While the PBF is a stabilizing force in that regard, there is an expectation of greater fulfilment of the PBC mandate for resource mobilization. Strong partnerships, including with the international financial institutions, are important. My Government’s responsibility to ensure the sustainability of the investments made in the agreed priority areas is also a challenge, which is being met through gradual increases in budget allocations to specific sectors. Looking to the future, we can say that the implementation of all planned peacebuilding activities in Liberia will bring transformational change. We look forward to that eventuality. In the meantime, we remain appreciative of all of our partners, including those who are involved with the various United Nations peacebuilding entities or who are part of the United Nations system, for their steadfast support. We urge them to continue to accompany Liberia on the path to sustainable peace. Our thanks go to the members of the Liberia configuration for their support. A special word of appreciation is offered to Sweden, which has assumed the current chairmanship of the configuration on a full- time basis. Sweden is also playing a pivotal role on the ground in Monrovia in coordinating donor inputs and ensuring an integrated approach to meeting needs in priority areas, including the requirements for a smooth transition from peacekeeping to peacebuilding.

With the concurrence of the members of the Security Council, I now suspend the meeting until 3.45 p.m.