S/PV.7561 Security Council

I wish to warmly welcome the Secretary-General, Ministers and other representatives present in the Security Council Chamber. Their presence today underscores the importance of the subject matter under discussion. In accordance with rule 37 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, I invite the representatives of Algeria, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Botswana, Brazil, Cambodia, Canada, Colombia, Croatia, Cyprus, Ecuador, Egypt, Estonia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Germany, Guatemala, Hungary, India, Indonesia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Liechtenstein, Mexico, Montenegro, Morocco, the Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, Palau, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, the Republic of Korea, Romania, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, the Sudan, Switzerland, the Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, Uruguay and Zimbabwe to participate in this meeting. In accordance with rule 39 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, I invite the following briefers to participate in this meeting: His Excellency Mr. Olof Skoog, Permanent Representative of Sweden and Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission, and Ms. Ouided Bouchamaoui, President of the Tunisian Confederation of Industry, Trade and Handicrafts and Nobel Peace Prize laureate 2015 for the Tunisian National Dialogue Quartet. In accordance with rule 39 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, I invite the following to participate in this meeting: His Excellency Mr. Christian Leffler, Deputy Secretary-General for Global and Economic Issues of the European External Action Service of the European Union, and His Excellency Mr. Philip Spoerri, Head of Delegation and Permanent Observer of the International Committee of the Red Cross to the United Nations. I propose that the Council invite the Permanent Observer of the Observer State of the Holy See to the United Nations, to participate in the meeting, in accordance with the provisional rules of procedure and the previous practice in that regard. There being no objection, it is so decided. 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/2015/730, which contains the report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations and conflict prevention. I also wish to draw the attention of Council members to document S/2015/845, which contains a letter dated 5 November 2015 from the Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General, transmitting a concept paper on the item under consideration. I now give the floor to the Secretary-General.

I thank the United Kingdom for convening this discussion. I would like to start by offering my condolences to the Government and people of France for the losses of life and injuries in the atrocious terrorist attack of last Friday. In the aftermath of other terrorist bombings in recent days in Beirut and Baghdad, and the apparent bombing of a Russian aeroplane, we see the continuing peril of terrorism and, indeed, the mounting threat from Daesh. No grievance or cause can justify such acts. I have just returned from the Group of 20 leaders meeting, which was held in Antalya, Turkey, where I was encouraged by the shared resolve to combine security- based counter-terrorism measures with preventive steps that address governance failures, injustice, exclusion and other drivers of extremist violence. There was also consensus on the need for our response to uphold the rule of law and to avoid being ruled by fear and inflaming tensions further still. I am especially concerned about reprisals or further discrimination against Muslims, in particular Muslim refugees and migrants. That would just exacerbate the alienation on which terrorists feed. The world must come together to defeat terrorist groups, to bring perpetrators to justice and to break the vicious cycle of radicalization. Today’s discussion here in the Security Council is therefore especially timely. I again thank the United Kingdom for focusing the attention of the Security Council on security, development and the root causes of conflicts. Members will all recall that in the 2005 Summit Outcome, world leaders declared that “development, peace and security and human rights are interlinked and mutually reinforcing” (General Assembly resolution 60/1, para. 9). The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1) builds on that understanding by taking an integrated approach, and by including Goal 16 on achieving peaceful and inclusive societies, providing access to justice and building accountable institutions. Today’s violent conflicts and violent extremism are often rooted in a mix of exclusion, inequality, mismanagement of natural resources, corruption, oppression, governance failures, and the frustration and alienation that accompany a lack of jobs and opportunities. Yet our responses have not caught up to these realities. We are not yet properly integrating United Nations action across the interdependent pillars of our work: peace, development and human rights. Today, I should like to make four main points. First, we must focus greater energy on prevention. We have long known this. Now the message is coming through again from the recent major reviews of peace operations, peacebuilding and the women and peace and security agenda. Prevention demands the concerted use of preventive diplomacy and good offices, but it also means that the 2030 Agenda and Sustainable Development Goals must become a bigger part of our strategies. Development that leaves people behind sows the seeds of instability and violence. Well-targeted development assistance can help to address risk factors such as inequality and marginalization. Well-timed development measures can help at critical moments when societies are emerging from conflict and risk lapsing back into it. Prevention is not something to be turned on and turned off; it should instead be an integral part of United Nations action in all contexts. Secondly, a heightened focus on prevention means a sharper focus on human rights. Violations of human rights are often our best early warning signs of trouble, yet too often Member States and the United Nations system itself have been reluctant to recognize the centrality of human rights. Human Rights Up Front calls for three types of change within the United Nations system: cultural change to ensure that staff recognize prevention and protection as a core responsibility; operational change to streamline our analysis and deploy teams with small footprints to assist national authorities before crises emerge; and earlier and more transparent engagement with national authorities and other Member States on deteriorating situations. The initiative is being rolled out. A system for early warning and quick response is in place. Staff have a better understanding of how their work reinforces pillars other than their own. And in a number of instances, Human Rights Up Front has enabled the United Nations system to react to warning signs more quickly and effectively than in the past. We are grateful that the Council has received briefings by the Secretariat on situations of concern on a systematic basis. Now we should strive for the day when Member States take early and effective action on such situations. We look to Member States to more fully embrace Human Rights Up Front as a means to protect their people and strengthen their sovereignty. Thirdly, we need to strengthen coherence among all actors. The 2030 Agenda calls on us to move from silos to synergy; to move from fragmentation to partnership. The United Nations system must pool its strengths to bring strong analysis to the Security Council and Peacebuilding Commission. Fourthly, we need adequate, predictable financing for our good offices and mediation work; for our country teams and for the Peacebuilding Fund. We also need to be bold when necessary, for example in rebuilding Syria and supporting the countries that are generously hosting large numbers of refugees, including Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey. There is a growing global call for a recovery plan for the region, perhaps akin to the Marshall Plan in scale. I urge the Security Council to give this idea due consideration when the day arrives, as I know we hope it will soon. The human costs of our failures can be seen in all too many places. The suffering and setbacks weigh heavily on my conscience, as they should on us all. At the same time, we have the tools with which to do better. Let us use them.

I thank the Secretary-General for his statement. I now give the floor to Mr. Skoog. Mr. Skoog: I wish to thank you, Madam, for organizing this debate and inviting me to brief the Security Council on behalf of the Peacebuilding Commission. This debate on security, development and the root causes of conflict is both important and timely. The Peacebuilding Commission, which I represent here today, was set up 10 years ago to address challenges around bridging the gap between security and development. This debate offers an opportunity to reflect on our common successes and shortcomings so far. Of course, it is only by addressing the root causes of conflict that we can contribute to building lasting peace. In 2015, the international community has confirmed that sustainable development cannot be realized without peace and security, and that peace and security will be at risk without sustainable development. Less than two months ago, Heads of State confirmed, inter alia, the intention to promote peaceful, just and inclusive societies that are free from fear and violence. Two weeks ago, the Secretary-General and the President of the International Committee of the Red Cross issued an unprecedented joint warning about the impact of today’s conflicts on civilians and appealed for urgent and concrete action to address human suffering and insecurity. They referred to the fact that the world is at a turning point and called upon States to redouble their efforts to find sustainable solutions to conflicts and take concrete steps to that effect. I want to pay a tribute to the mission statement that the Secretary- General put forward this morning to that respect. I think it is up to all the rest of us to heed that call, too. The issue, of course, is how we go about it. The United Nations and the international community at large must become better at supporting efforts to build and sustain peace. As part of this, we must do more to avoid relapse into conflict and step up efforts to prevent conflict from occurring in the first place. There needs to be a renewed determination that includes seizing the opportunity of the three reviews related to peace operations currently under way. The challenge is to turn normative developments and political momentum into concrete reforms for better operational response. I should like to highlight three shifts that I believe will be necessary in order to better support efforts to sustain peace: more emphasis on prevention, increased inclusivity and strengthened coherence. I will describe what each of these shifts entails, and also touch upon where and how the Peacebuilding Commission can add value. First of all, preventing lapse and relapse into conflict should move to the fore of United Nations engagement and build on the realization that building peace is a primarily political process that requires sustained and long-term engagement. One of the most effective ways to sustain peace and prevent conflicts is by building national capacity, strengthening domestic institutions and supporting good governance. Furthermore, countries that are prone to conflict need support from international partners that are willing and able to stay for the long haul. We need to consider adjusting our horizons from the standard three-to-five-year programme cycles to frameworks that rather span 15 to 30 years. As the report (see S/2015/490) on the peacebuilding review points out, creating legitimate institutions that can help prevent relapse takes a generation. The PBC provides a forum for countries that are not in situations of immediate conflict but where sustained attention is needed and where root causes of conflict need to be addressed. Successful peacebuilding and preventive work also requires sound political analysis as the foundation of international support, both in conflict and post-conflict settings. For that, increased conflict-assessment capacity is needed. United Nations efforts should be systematically underpinned by an analysis of conflict and fragility. In addition, the United Nations should better utilize all the tools at its disposal for preventing conflicts, including the peacebuilding architecture. I would like to recognize the important work done by the Peacebuilding Fund in supporting integrated, time-sensitive and risk-taking work across the United Nations system. As recommended by the reports of the reviews, it is crucial that sufficient and predictable resources be provided to that important tool. To better respond to the needs of conflict-prone countries, we should do much more to strengthen the capacity of regional actors, who are often first responders. Peace can emerge only from within societies, and build on inclusive national ownership. Transparent and accessible institutions that are accountable for, and responsive to, the needs of the entirety of its population are crucial for building trust and strengthening the relationship between States and citizens. Inclusivity is at the core of the work of the Peacebuilding Commission. As part of its convening role, the PBC is uniquely placed to listen and consult with a broad range of stakeholders at the local, national and regional levels. Furthermore, it is set up to support national and local ownership. The countries with which the PBC engages are always in the lead. Our role is to support their processes. We cannot address inclusivity without mentioning the importance of including women as actors in all aspects of our work. The Peacebuilding Commission is currently developing a gender strategy to ensure more systematic and strategic engagement on the topic. Furthermore, in a few weeks’ time, we will discuss the issue of youth and peacebuilding, an agenda that has not yet received as much attention as it should. It is important that youth not be seen as primarily victims of violence in conflict. And our focus not be on youth as a potential risk group or perpetrators, but as actors. The last shift I would like to call for concerns the way we collaborate with one another. Responding to challenges of conflict and post-conflict countries demands of all of us that we do more and better within our respective mandates. International actors need to start acting more coherently. That applies across the United Nations system, the international financial institutions and regional and national actors. By overcoming short-sighted turf wars, we would not only increase the efficacy of the Organization but, even more important, provide more effective support for the societies that it was set up to help. I believe the Peacebuilding Commission can help break down some of the silos and address fragmentation and duplication of effort. Through its convening role of a wide array of critical regional and international actors, we can help bring a peacebuilding perspective to deliberations of the principal organs of the United Nations. Furthermore, the Commission can provide strategic assessments of United Nations efforts on the ground and actionable recommendations in specific country contexts, as well as contribute to donor coherence. The importance of increased coherence across the United Nations spectrum is perhaps never more evident than during transitions. Getting transitions right requires genuine integration of peace and development. It also requires an understanding of inherently complex interrelationships and a shift away from a linear understanding of conflicts. We can learn from successful examples such as the transition in Sierra Leone. In the years ahead, we will have a chance to demonstrate in Liberia that we are able to work through joined-up approaches across areas of security, development and human rights. As Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission this year, I have worked very closely with the six country configurations. I know we all strive to diversify our working methods and adopt more flexible tools of engagement. That work that has already begun, but I think we can do more, and better, to assist more countries in need of peacebuilding efforts. In conclusion, I look forward to forging a closer relationship with the Council to bring to bear the complementary advice that the PBC can offer. There is scope for enhanced collaboration, drawing upon both bodies’ respective mandates.

I thank Mr. Skoog for his briefing. I now give the floor to Ms. Bouchamaoui.

It is an honour and a privilege for me to participate in this debate for the first time, in the great forum of the United Nations that watches over peace and security in the world. I would like to warmly thank the Council presidency for inviting me to contribute to this debate on a complex theme of obvious timeliness, namely, “Security, development and the root causes of conflict”. My thoughts go out to all those who perished in the recent attacks in the Sinai, Beirut and Paris. As members are aware, I come from Tunisia, a country that in 2010 initiated what came to be known as the Arab Spring. Five years later, unfortunately, it is clear that Arab States live in dread of the increased radicalism plaguing the region and threatening peace and security in thе world. Мy contribution to this debate will be informed by my country’s past and current experience, as well as by a tragic and marked environment of the outbreak of violent armed conflicts in our region. I will try to emphasize what the international community can do to help alleviate the situation. In recent years, we have experienced situations of transition characterized by profound crises in society and a challenge to existing models of development. While the scenario has improved with regard to freedoms, in particular of expression and association, people have also experienced a deterioration in their purchasing power, while unemployment among young graduates is higher than ever. The countries of our region are undergoing an unprecedented social and economic crisis. The decades-long marginalization of the peoples of our region and the humiliation they experience because of the inconsistency of policies, particularly with regard to the Palestinian cause, have produced in our youth a sense of mistrust vis-à-vis the West. Hence a segment of society turns its back on universal values ​and attempts to draw our countries into identity controversies, leading to perverse effects such as extremism and terrorism. The reasons for the emergence of terrorism and the growing insecurity in Tunisia do not lie strictly in Tunisian-Tunisian considerations; they are, among others, the result of a disastrous management of the Libyan conflict. Today, recent developments on the south-east border of our country and the collapse of any form of State institution in neighbouring Libya pose an increasing risk of destabilization in Tunisia. Should that happen, the consequences would not be limited just to small Tunisia. Immediately, Europe and the rest of the world would be affected. Security threats are more interconnected than ever. In our region, terrorism, wars, intra-State and cross- border trafficking of all kinds, and mass migrations make our security indivisible. Therefore, a proactive and coordinated commitment and the implementation of enhanced security strategies are needed to implement quick and effective actions and to provide common solutions to threats that endanger life, peace and development. If we want to move things along in order to establish democracy, we have to develop substantial programmes in support of affected countries and help them throughout the entire process of putting in place the rule of law, development, institution-building and raising awareness among the people so that they act as responsible citizens. To do that, a culture of democracy and citizenship must first be further strengthened. And there must be a process to establish a new social contract, through which the challenges of democracy and civic duties are clearly spelled out to avoid backsliding. Although it is impacted by the same ills that affect neighbouring countries, Tunisia is considered as an exception because we have been able to avoid conflict through dialogue and compromise before it was too late. What we have achieved is so exceptional that the Nobel Committee qualified our action as exemplary and awarded us the Nobel Peace Prize this year. With globalization occurring at breakneck speed and changes now occurring on the planetary level, the deep-seated crises in the countries of our region increasingly push people to the margins of the development process brought about by globalization. The longer that situation persists, the longer solutions to the crises will be compromised in the short- and medium-terms. The risks that could loom on the security and stability of those countries and their impacts on the region will be increasingly significant. At a time where instability and insecurity in our region can rapidly deteriorate further and have negative repercussions on the whole region, Tunisia nevertheless still holds a specific position, which can give hope that a democratic transition, a successful and enduring one, is possible. The stakes are high because that could be an example for other Arab societies in turmoil and change and seeking to make their transition to modernity. It behooves the entire free world sharing universal values, with its commitment to democracy and respect for human rights, to see the Tunisian model succeed. That would demonstrate that Islam and democracy are indeed compatible, and that the troubles afflicting our societies are not inevitable. Tunisia is a small country. Its problems are commensurate. It would suffice for the world to commit to that vision so that we could save the last hope of the Arab Spring. Alone, we might not succeed. We have limited resources, but have chosen to share the values of freedom, dignity, openness and global citizenship, and we certainly shall not renounce such values. To all our friends, we launch this appeal for solidarity and joint mobilization. Together, we will reinstate peace and security, stem the sources of despair and give our peoples, our youth, a strong signal that the world of tomorrow could be more fair, act with more solidarity and respectful of such values. Let us therefore rise to the occasion of history.

I thank Ms. Bouchamaoui for her briefing. I shall now make a statement in my capacity as the Secretary of State for International Development of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. I thank the Secretary-General, Ms. Bouchamaoui and Ambassador Skoog for their statements. I am very pleased to be presiding over the Security Council again today, the first Development Minister to be doing so. That is because development and security are intrinsically linked. The United Kingdom sends its heartfelt condolences to those tragically caught up in terrorism. From Paris to Syria, from South Sudan to Yemen, from Beirut to Sharm el-Sheikh, we see more clearly than ever the pain, suffering and cost of conflict — the human cost. The Council heard yesterday about the bloodshed in Syria (see S/PV.7560), which has shattered so many lives. But let us also look at the social and the economic cost to the whole country and to future generations. It is estimated that the Syrian conflict has turned the clock back on that country’s development by 30 years, and it is conflict-affected States that are the most off-track for achieving the Millennium Development Goals. The reality is that, if we are to achieve the new global goals for ending poverty and to live up to our promise to leave no one behind, then preventing conflict and building peaceful societies is absolutely vital. The past 15 years have shown us that trying to build development in any country without a solid foundation of peace and stability is like trying to build a house on sand: it will simply be washed away when crisis hits. How can we make sure that solid foundations are in place? Stability is not only about addressing war and conflict, it is about countries having strong economies and healthy and educated populations. Critically, it is about the strength of their institutions. Our Prime Minister has called it the golden thread of development. Stability means the rule of law, property rights and an independent judiciary, because the poorest people in the world are not just going hungry. They lack justice. They want jobs. They want the right to own their own land and to build their own businesses. If individuals do not have a voice in society, it does not mean that their grievances are not there, only that no fair forum exists for them to be heard. And so grievances fester and build. Stability means rights for girls and women. We know that girls and women are those most vulnerable when crises hit, and they must be an integral part of any peacebuilding and conflict solution. The ongoing high- level review on women and peace and security will be critical to that. Women’s economic empowerment is essential to sustainable development. Recent research suggests that if women in every country had the chance to play the same role in economic markets as men, as much as $28 trillion would be added to the global economy by 2025. Stability means a society and institutions free of corruption. Corruption is bad for development. It is bad for the poorest. It is bad for business. It corrodes the fabric of society and public institutions, acting as a perverse welfare system that transfers resources from the poor to the rich. Therefore, addressing those issues can build the backbone of a stable State. Without them, individuals cannot fulfil their potential. Communities cannot thrive. Businesses will not invest. The whole country stagnates. It is not only national institutions that matter. The strength of international institutions is critical as well. We know that the Security Council has a vital role in peacekeeping decisions and swift humanitarian actions — a vital role in ensuring that international humanitarian law is adhered to when conflict erupts and in helping to find political solutions. But as the Secretary-General’s report on the United Nations and conflict prevention (S/2015/730), the report of the High-level Independent Panel on Peace Operations (see S/2015/446) and the report of the Advisory Group of Experts on the Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture (see S/2015/490) set out, increasingly our international institutions need to take on a greater role in addressing the underlying causes of fragility and conflict. That means prioritizing conflict-prevention as much as its resolution by taking early action when faced with the signs of a deteriorating situation. It means moving from peacekeeping to peacebuilding by investing in basic services in fragile and conflict-affected States; by helping to build a stronger economy and jobs; by supporting strong and accountable institutions, the rule of law, respect for human rights, free and fair access to markets, the rights of girls and women; and by tackling corruption. That progress should be achieved through the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. The United Kingdom believes that that is strongly in our national interest and that of every country. Investment in prosperity and stability overseas is critical, if we do not want global problems to end up on our own doorsteps. Exclusion and the lack of development provide fertile ground for extremism, terrorism, organized crime and conflict to thrive, and they also drive migration. The United Kingdom has made a historic commitment to spending 0.7 per cent of its national income on development, with much of that already spent in fragile States and conflict-ridden countries. We support development and peacebuilding through the United Nations and have committed United Kingdom troops to United Nations operations in Somalia and South Sudan. We believe that such investments and steps are the right thing to do, and right for our national interest, too. This is about saving the next generation from the scourge of war and allowing all individuals the opportunity to live the life and build the future that they want, free from violence or the threat of it. It is also about global prosperity, peace and security, because conflict is costly in every sense. If we act now and together, we can build a better, more prosperous and more secure planet for us all. I now resume my functions as President of the Security Council. I shall now give the floor to the other members of the Council.

I would like to thank the Secretary-General for his reports. Madam President, you are voting with your feet by being here and presiding over today’s meeting. The United Kingdom’s leadership on this issue and continued emphasis on the link between security and development is extremely important. I would also like to thank Mr. Skoog for his briefing, and to welcome Ms. Bouchamaoui to the Council and congratulate her on her Nobel Prize, which we do not often get to do in the Security Council. Much more important than the Prize, however, is her resilience and stubborn determination, and that of the Tunisian people, to build a stable and prosperous democracy. The one thing they do not have to worry about is the possibility of the world turning its back on them. We are completely with them and in awe of what they have done so far, and we will be their enduring partner, through thick and thin, as they move forward. We know how difficult that is, and it is important not only for Tunisia but also for the entire region and the world as a whole. Before I begin, I also want to offer my deepest condolences to Ambassador Delattre and the people of France. His great nation is America’s oldest ally. We share history, values and ideals. We have stood together time and again, and today we do so with a heavy heart but with more determination than ever. We are ready to help in any way we can. We also extend our condolences to the families of those lost in the apparent bomb attack on the Russian plane, as well as to the victims and the families of those victims of the horrific attacks in Lebanon and Iraq. We are dealing with a brutal movement, and it must be stopped in its tracks. Every week we meet in this Chamber and debate how best to respond to an ever-evolving set of threats to international peace and security. Last week we convened on Somalia (see S/PV.7554), a country where we are supporting both security operations against violent terrorists and parallel efforts to assist a political transition. We met on Syria, where a revolution that began against a repressive regime has mutated into that regime’s indiscriminate killing of masses of civilians on a daily basis. That, of course, is a war with ramifications that touch all of us and that has enabled the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant. We also adopted a resolution on Burundi (resolution 2248 (2015)), where at least 280,000 people have fled their homes, with many seeking shelter in neighbouring countries. In 1941, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt introduced the idea of the four freedoms — freedom of speech, freedom of worship, freedom from want and freedom from fear. All of them are intertwined, and to pretend otherwise is perilous. We — all the States Members of the United Nations — must dedicate ourselves to tackling the causes of fear and want in our societies. We must build strong institutions that respect human rights and are accountable to our peoples and their needs. As the crises in the headlines remind us — and, indeed, as last week’s horrific events in Paris, Beirut and Baghdad underscore — today the threats to international peace and security are diverse. Our approach to countering them must be similarly multifaceted. That requires not just the effective use of every tool in our toolbox but also a complete picture of the threats and the factors driving them. Today the Council has a welcome opportunity to discuss one root cause that is too often overlooked — underdevelopment. As President Obama has said, “[I]t is the lack of development, when people have no education and no jobs and no hope, when they feel that their basic human dignity is being violated, that helps to fuel so much of the tension, the conflict and the instability in our world.” (A/70/PV.11, p. 2) That causal connection is recognized in the Sustainable Development Goals adopted by the General Assembly in September (resolution 70/1), in which Goal 16 explicitly notes that an absence of development endangers peace and security. Of course, the reverse is also true. Development is not a panacea that will eliminate all threats. We all know that there are certain people who become terrorists despite being very well off and coming from lives of privilege. But in many contexts, and particularly in the places where we deploy peacekeepers and political teams, development challenges, including a lack of economic opportunity, poor governance and human-rights abuses, are themselves the kerosene that fuels instability. It is the job of development agencies to directly address many of those drivers, but I would like to briefly describe three ways in which the Council can also help. First, the Council must encourage and enable the recognition of development concerns and their integration into security assessments, peacekeeping strategies and peacebuilding programmes. That will enable us to have a more nuanced understanding of the dynamics shaping the conditions on the ground and thereby improve the design of our interventions. We cannot just play “whack-a-mole” once a conflict is already brewing. To that end, the United States supports the Secretariat’s efforts to break down “stovepipes” across the United Nations system in order to enable us to make more holistic and nuanced assessments and responses. And, as proposed through the Human Rights Up Front initiative, we should also seek operational changes within the United Nations system that promote system-wide analysis and early warning in situations of concern. Such early warnings will enable more timely action aimed at preventing or responding to large-scale violations of human rights. I believe that that is what we are now seeking to do in Burundi and have been over the course of the past year. Secondly, we must ensure that peacekeeping is accompanied by peacebuilding. The success of peacebuilding programmes is of direct interest to the Council, because it will help determine whether or not a country lapses back into conflict and right back onto the Council’s agenda. Recent events in Burundi have underscored just how conflict-affected countries can progress with peacebuilding and development but then slip back into crisis, causing such heartbreak for so many. The 2015 peacebuilding architecture review (S/2015/490) offers a valuable opportunity for strengthening the peacebuilding architecture of the United Nations and ensuring that it integrates political, security, development, human rights and rule-of-law activities. We all know that we need to work through how to make the relationship between the Security Council and the peacebuilding architecture more effective. Thirdly and lastly, we must be realistic in our planning. As we design peacekeeping missions, we must ensure that they not only address all facets of whatever conflict is currently before us, but also that they are equipped to maintain security while critical progress is being made in development. Consider Sierra Leone, where the United Nations maintained a presence whose form evolved alongside the country’s transition from civil war to immediate post-conflict peacebuilding to development. That transition continues, but it has already produced a stronger Government and a more resilient community that was able to withstand and eventually defeat Ebola. The case of Sierra Leone reminds us that not long ago there would have been those who questioned the relevance of a disease, an epidemic such as Ebola, to the Council’s work. We have since seen how directly something like that can threaten regional and international security. In this new era, we cannot choose the drivers of conflict and insecurity that we wish to address. We must instead seek to identify and better understand all of them, in order to more effectively fulfil our mandate. Today’s debate represents an important step in this direction.

I would like to start by thanking the Secretary-General for his briefing and the Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission, Mr. Skoog, and Ms. Bouchamaoui, for their insightful remarks. We welcome this timely debate organized by the Permanent Mission of the United Kingdom. My delegation aligns itself with the statement to be delivered on behalf of the European Union later today. Peaceful societies based on the rule of law, respect for human rights and accountable and inclusive institutions are both essential conditions for development and the outcomes of development. The Security Council has a clear role to play within its Charter responsibilities in conflict prevention, leading countries out of conflict, and supporting the creation of peaceful societies. Better, more coherent cooperation with the Peacebuilding Commission, as discussed by the Council on other occasions, is highly conducive to this end. While today’s subject is vast and the issues are many, let me focus on rule-of-law and prevention issues. All conflicts, whatever their nature, have a very clear pattern — the breakdown of governance, impunity and lawlessness, exclusion and marginalization, abuse of power and corruption, and a total disregard for human rights. The final report of the African Union Commission of Inquiry on South Sudan points, inter alia, to the limited attention paid to democracy and structural transformation, the failure to address issues of marginalization and exclusion, long-standing intra-South grievances, and the the failure to address accountability issues. In the Central African Republic, the weakness of State institutions has been a boon for armed groups, which extort, racketeer, impose illegal taxes, keep a tight hold on the exploitation of natural resources, and siphon off millions of much-needed funds, while the State struggles to provide even the most basic of services. In conflict after conflict, the continued failure to address lingering grievances and redress the exclusion and marginalization of certain groups within a society has led to explosive consequences. These are all sobering examples, reminders that building accountable governance and rule-of-law institutions and extending governmental authority to conflict-affected areas are critical, as are targeting and combating terrorism, which is increasingly setting its sights on each and every one of us. Targeted efforts to address key rule-of-law gaps that underpin a conflict must begin early. Ensuring national ownership of these efforts increases the likelihood that the initiatives will be sustained long after peacekeepers are gone. For rule-of law-mandates to have an impact, identifying and sequencing the most appropriate activities is key. United Nations missions need to be given adequate and predictable resources, in terms of both expertise and programmatic support, to fulfil their rule-of-law mandates. Effective coordination of all actors on the ground — peacekeeping operations, regional organizations, bilateral actors and United Nations entities — is required. We regret to note that, while the rule of law has increasingly become part and parcel of peacekeeping mandates, the subject itself as a cross-cutting issue only rarely finds its way into the Security Council agenda. Given its importance in State-building, post-conflict recovery and sustaining peace, this is hardly the right approach, in our view. We need to bring the rule of law back into the Council’s focus. With respect to prevention, while affirmations of its importance are many, more often than not, the Council tends to do too little too late in terms of action. In a world of ever-more complex and protracted conflicts and the worst humanitarian crisis since the end of the Second World War, we should do a lot more to prevent the breakdown of peace, rather than trying to fix it when it is broken. As the Secretary-General noted earlier today, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1) should be part and parcel of the preventive effort. We have to be much better at reading the warning signs. Among them, violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms are often the first early-warning signs of a conflict. Persistent, unaddressed human- rights violations are also an obstacle to reconciliation and peacebuilding processes and therefore to inclusive development. Implementation of the Human Rights Up Front initiative is of utmost importance in strengthening preventive, peacebuilding and development efforts. To strengthen its preventive capacity, the Council needs to revisit the instruments it has for the purpose. Horizon-scanning, informal Department of Political Affairs briefings, better use of interactive dialogues with regional partners, more coherent analytical capacity within the Secretariat can all contribute to an earlier recognition of the warning signs and prompter acting upon them before they degrade into conflict. A key element of prevention is inclusivity — on which the briefers have already spoken earlier this morning —, with particular reference to the minorities and vulnerable groups of a society, including young people, women and girls. Peace and development will not hold without meaningful and active women’s participation. Since the adoption of landmark resolution 1325 (2000), considerable progress has been achieved, but even today, this progress remains far too uneven and not irreversible. We need but look at the lists of the participants and mediators in peace talks, from which, with a few positive exceptions, women are largely missing. But without their voices and participation, peace and development, be it in Syria, Yemen, South Sudan or anywhere else, is much harder to achieve. While not diminishing our focus on women as victims of conflict, a lot more needs to be done to reinforce the role of women as protagonists, leaders of peacemaking, development and counter-terrorism efforts. Finally, I would like to make reference to the implementation of the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), which we see as an important preventive measure and a facilitator of development efforts. The all-too- easy access to weapons makes conflict situations even more entrenched. In some cases, even a small number of illicit weapons can have a disproportionate impact on a country’s development, as in the case of small island developing States. Implementation of the ATT facilitates sustainable development as it reduces the risk of arms getting into the wrong hands and allowing peace and development efforts to be undermined.

We would like to reiterate today our solidarity with and our condolences to France for the terrorist attacks on French soil, as well as to Lebanon, the Russian Federation, Iraq, Syria and the many countries that are being assaulted on a daily basis by the terrible phenomenon of terrorism. We welcome the presence of the Secretary of State for International Development of the United Kingdom, and express our gratitude for the words of Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon; Mr. Olof Skoog, Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission; and Ms. Ouided Bouchamaoui, President of the Tunisian Confederation of Industry, Trade and Handicrafts, together with those of the other ministers and representatives participating in this debate. The interrelationship between sustainable development, international peace and security and human rights is reflected in the many statements issued by the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council and the Security Council, based on their respective perspectives and mandates. Socioeconomic imbalances are often one of the main root causes of conflicts. Venezuela considers it extremely important to give people the necessary means for creating foundations for inclusive, sustainable, fair and equitable development. Development rooted in social justice must be part of any process or model that guarantees peace. During the sixty-ninth session of the General Assembly, all countries, many of them represented by Heads of State and Government, engaged in a broad inclusive participatory process and discussed issues of an economic and social nature. They agreed on important development principles and objectives and established the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1), including a follow-up and review mechanism, with a view to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals. A broad consensus was reached on giving differential treatment to countries with different levels of development, on the ground that there is no one-size-fits-all model of development, and on the need to create and implement various financial support and cooperation approaches to help achieve sustainable development. For us, it is solely up to the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council to address these economic and social issues, including the process of following up and monitoring the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. We again wish to draw attention to the fact that it is the intention of the Security Council to encroach upon areas that are within the exclusive competence of other organs of the United Nations, in particular the General Assembly. The President’s concept note (S/2015/845, annex) insists that the Security Council has a role to play when addressing what it believes to be other root causes of conflicts. In particular, it maintains that the Council can contribute to peacebuilding by promoting and supporting electoral processes, constitution-making and the building of inclusive and transparent institutions. On that point, we should note that the Security Council cannot establish just one type of political institutional model to support development processes without violating one of the basic principles of the Charter of the United Nations — the principle of sovereignty. The sovereignty of every country lies with its people. Each people develops its own political, economic and social systems and its own legal and institutional frameworks, which are most suited to its own interests, culture and history. It is incumbent upon the people themselves to make the changes that they believe are necessary. It is a process that falls only to the nationals of a given country. It cannot be imposed or controlled by any other country or international body. Many of the root causes of the conflicts that have developed in the twentieth century and which are destroying the fabric of the twenty-first century stem from the major political and military Powers imposing political, economic and social models and visions of development on developing countries that find themselves within the geopolitical sphere of influence of developed countries. Many conflicts in South-East Asia, Latin America, Africa and the Middle East have been linked to that practice, which was developed by the former colonial Powers and the new major economic and military Powers. Furthermore, since we can all agree that poverty, exclusion, inequality and social injustice are the root causes of conflicts affecting international peace and security, the Council must also identify foreign interference as one of the root causes of the conflicts that arise when developing countries decide on their own economic and social models in order to be able to resolve their major development problems. That occurs in countries that have attempted to control and manage their own natural resources, develop processes of agricultural reform, democratize the distribution of their nations’ wealth or simply diversify and extend the sphere of their trade relations. Countries with their own development models have very often suffered interference, political destabilization and even military intervention because the major Powers, which have economic or geopolitical interests in those nations, are opposed to the sovereign decisions that those countries have taken. In order to justify foreign interference, veritable media wars are started. A country is criticized very often because of its political model, an inappropriate understanding of its human rights record or for violating other democratic principles, which in most cases are not even being adhered to by the interfering country itself or by the regional allies supporting that country in its political or military action. That creates an international environment that justifies foreign interference. The situation in North Africa and the Middle East is a sad example of that practice, which has brought so much pain and suffering to those countries. War, with its burden of death and destruction, has led to their losing every possibility of development, at least in the medium term. One of the root causes of conflict where the Security Council can act decisively is linked to colonialism, that is, in cases of foreign occupation. Western Sahara and Palestine, with its territories occupied by Israel, are the most poignant examples in the unhappy, long-standing record of the Council as a result of the Council’s paralysis and inability to resolve the situations. Those are two situations of ongoing conflict that are clearly within the scope of the Security Council and which should be resolved so as to prevent greater conflict. The concept note asks what the Security Council can do to address the root causes of conflicts? We can restate that question and ask, can the Security Council address the root causes of conflicts? In that regard, it is worthwhile referring to some of the statements in the report of the Advisory Group of Expertson the Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture. The Advisory Group highlights in its report that the United Nations and we believe, the Security Council in particular, has “yet to absorb fully how their tools and actions must adapt, and, in general, often prefer militarized responses. The very nature of such responses, with their emphasis on short-term security and their correspondingly heavy resourcing needs, can sometimes take away support and attention from achieving sustainable peace.” (S/2015/490, para. 121) The recent case of the adoption of Security Council resolution 2240 (2015), which considers the use of military force as a way of resolving the migrant crisis in the Mediterranean, clearly reveals the tendency of some members of the Security Council to use force and short- term solutions. An organ that favours the use of force and short-term solutions is not the most appropriate body for addressing the root causes of conflicts. We believe that one of the tools used by the Security Council that best reflects the short-term view that it uses to resolve problems and which does absolutely nothing to address the root causes of conflicts is the sanctions committees. More than 50 per cent of the sanctions committees address situations in African countries with protracted conflicts derived mostly from the colonial presence and the deformations that that presence has created to ensure its political control. The root causes of those conflicts include ethnic, religious and national differences, tribal organizations, poverty and exclusion, divisions and country organizations that were artificially created by colonialism. However, sanctions committees are designed to exercise punitive actions that could be military, economic or political in nature. Regrettably, very often they become extensions of the presence of former colonial Powers in those countries. There are very few successful examples of sanctions committees. The Security Council should give that issue special consideration and attention, especially because countries under a sanctions regime face major limitations and obstacles to achieving sustainable development. Most of the time, those countries have already sunk into the deepest poverty and social exclusion and are in constant military conflict. Finally, Latin America and the Caribbean is an area of peace. Our region presents to the world a situation in which, after many years of ongoing conflict caused by foreign interference, interventionism and social injustice, we have reached the twenty-first century as an area of peace, free of nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction. We have a new architecture of regional organizations that have been created and revitalized by the thrust of our regional leadership, such as the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America, the Union of South American Nations, Petrocaribe, Mercosur, the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, the Latin American Federation of Contractors’ Associations and the Caribbean Community. That has made it possible for us to address our own regional problems from a southern perspective and promote our own inclusive models, which are inspired by participatory democracy with full respect for the sovereignty of countries and the principle of non-interference. Since the Government of President Hugo Chavez Frías, our own national experience has given us a Constitution approved by a process of referendums that includes the most progressive human rights provisions, accountability and broad popular participation. The action of the Government has been directed towards recovering our sovereign right to manage our main natural resources in order to ensure effective action to counter poverty, exclusion and gender inequality and to ensure human rights for all. Today, Venezuela is a peaceful country. In spite of constant foreign interference, we are a young country that is strengthening its own model of law based on our own experiences and the situation in our country. We are a factor for the stabilization of peace for Latin America and the Caribbean. As I mentioned earlier, Simón Bolivar and our liberation armies crossed our borders only 200 years ago to free and create more than five South American nations. We have the moral ground, the experience and the conviction to work for development, social justice and peace.

I should like at the outset to thank you, Madam President, for having come to New York to the Security Council to preside over this meeting. Let me also say that this meeting is not just timely but also important, and that the theme of the maintenance of international peace and security, with a focus on peaceful societies and conflict prevention, is definitely what we need at this time. In this landmark year of the seventieth anniversary of the United Nations, important reviews of fundamental normative and operational tools are taking place, namely, peace operations, peacebuilding and the role of women in peace and security. This is also the year in which the General Assembly has adopted the Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1), with the international community more than ever aware of the need to strengthen prevention and the nexus between peace and security, human rights and development. In fact, it is universally understood that without peace and security and respect for human rights, the Sustainable Development Goals cannot be achieved and our collective commitment, enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, of saving succeeding generations from the scourge of war will remain only a dream. Our statement will focus on three issues: the root causes of conflict; the response of the United Nations in the context of preventing and addressing conflicts; and, briefly, Angola’s experience in conflict prevention and resolution. It is our conviction that with determination, preventive action and political will, war can be avoided. It is also our conviction that to achieve that goal, we must act first and foremost upon its root causes, which include, principally, political, economic and social exclusion. Political exclusion is expressed by the refusal to extend political representation and the right to participate in political life to large sectors of the population or to specific social, racial or religious groups of people inside a country. As political exclusion is unacceptable by any standard, it has the potential to cause dissent, thereby propelling those groups into conflict. The holding of democratic elections; institutions in which citizens recognize themselves; and the primacy of the rule of law are fundamental prerequisites for political inclusion and the building of peaceful societies and a fundamental tool for conflict prevention. Economic exclusion, emanating from the unequal distribution of wealth and a lack of economic opportunities for the citizens of a given country, result, in general, in unemployment, poverty and underdevelopment, culminating in social tension and, frequently, in conflict and violence. When economic exclusion is coupled with an authoritarian political system, those elements combine to trigger conflict, since the political authorities are in general unable to engage in dialogue, hear grievances or engage in seeking the peaceful resolution of conflict. The non-observance of due respect for human rights and collective liberties is among the main causes of the outbreak of conflicts that we have seen in the world. Respect for the other, despite political, social and national differences, is the basis for social peace and a sentiment of belonging to a community. To build peaceful societies, the existence of a free and responsible citizenry, aware of its duties, is an imperative, as is a culture of peace, tolerance and the acceptance of the differences inherent in social plurality. The main responsibility for addressing the root causes of conflict lies with State authorities. The United Nations can and should support national efforts to sustain peace and prevent conflict. As we have heard, in 2015 the United Nations is engaged in a process to review its peacebuilding architecture. Angola and Australia are honoured to co-facilitate the intergovernmental phase of that process. The report of the Advisory Group of Experts (see S/2015/490), to which earlier speakers have referred, draws certain conclusions that are relevant to our current debate. The concept of sustaining peace outlined in the report calls for a systemic response from the United Nations before, during and after an armed conflict and for an urgent bridging of the existing silos that impede efficient delivery by our Organization. The report also calls for change in the mindset and perception of conflict prevention by States Members of the United Nations. Angola shares the belief that a new approach is needed that considers that conflict prevention and resolution as an area of intervention for not only the Security Council but also other United Nations main bodies, namely, the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council. We further believe that it is only by creating the necessary synergies among these organs that the United Nations will be able to act transversally in addressing conflict prevention, taking into consideration the three pillars: peace and security, development and human rights. The maintenance of international peace and security should focus primarily on conflict prevention and peacebuilding efforts aimed at resolving the root causes of conflict and, in so doing, seek long-term solutions aimed at sustaining peace. Let me now share some of our experiences in Angola. On 11 November, Angola commemorated its fortieth anniversary, a day of vital significance in our country, which was embroiled for many years in a military conflict that deeply affected it. The loss of an untold number of human lives and the destruction of the social and economic infrastructure obliged the Angolan people to find ways to stop the war and initiate the process of rebuilding. From this it emerged that a deep-rooted quest for peace was vitally needed to build in Angola a peaceful society for future generations. After the signing of a peace agreement in 2002, Angolans had a strong resolve to address the root causes of the conflict and start a genuine process of fundamental reconstruction and peacebuilding. One of the measures taken was the granting of a general amnesty to all combatants who accepted the ceasefire and peace agreement. In the Angolan context, this has had major importance in ensuring the lasting peace that has prevailed since 2002. Angola engaged in demining; a disarmament, demobilization and reintegration process; and the voluntary collection of small arms and light weapons in order to control their flow. It also established a democratic institution and a legal review process, as well as institutional actors in support of individual and collective freedoms, such as the Ombudsman. After the end of the war, two general elections took place, and in 2017 a new ballot initiative will be held. Angola has a relatively fast- growing economy, plural opinions are expressed, and civil society is making headway. The nation is stronger and moving towards harmonious development. A lot remains to be done, but the results achieved so far give us hope for a brighter future. In the international arena, Angola has been supporting other countries in conflict prevention and resolution efforts, while sharing its experiences and strengthening its participation in peacebuilding efforts, particularly in the volatile Great Lakes region. The Kimberly Process of diamond certification, of which Angola is currently the Chair, is a concrete instance of multilateral cooperation on the critical issue of natural resources fuelling conflicts. It has played a crucial role in sustaining peace in the country while it turned diamonds from a tool of war into an instrument of peace and sustainability. Angola has consistently advocated dialogue as a means to diffuse tensions, promote understanding and, ultimately, address the root causes of conflicts. That has been our commitment in return for the support our country received from the United Nations and from which it benefitted during the most difficult years of our recent history.

I wish to thank and congratulate you, Madam President, for presiding over this open debate. I also thank the Secretary-General, the Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission and Ms. Bouchamaoui for their briefings. I will focus on four points: first, security and sustainable development; secondly, the prevention of conflicts and their root causes; thirdly, the comprehensive responses and the building of resilient societies; and fourthly, a series of comments on the role of the Security Council. On the first point, it is clear that the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1), unlike the Millennium Development Goals, was designed as a transformative vision for the entire international community. For the first time, a development agenda adopted by the international community includes a goal — Goal 16 of the Sustainable Development Goals — on the challenges to peace, security, good governance and justice. We have adopted the 17 Sustainable Development Goals that can be reached within a generation, but what I want to point out is that if the international commitment to meeting those Goals were strengthened, the risk of extremist aberrations would diminish radically. In them we are committed to an international community with citizens whose basic political and socioeconomic needs are satisfied. We have no doubt about that. Long-term sustainable security is strongly linked to inclusive, sustainable development. Our responsibilities in that regard are shared, not separate. Conflict prevention one of the key elements to achieving the goal of peaceful societies, and to prevent conflicts it is essential first and foremost is to analyse their root causes. I am referring not just to internal causes, such as institutional fragility, corruption and social exclusion, but also to external causes, such as illegal trafficking, terrorism, violent extremism and climate change. Let us recall that at the Arria Formula meeting on climate change that the Security Council held on 30 June, it was suggested that the Secretary- General needed to update his 2009 report entitled “Climate change and its possible implications for security” (A/64/350), which for the first time defined climate change as a threat multiplier for global security. All such internal and external factors can sever the relationship of trust that citizens should have with their States. On the third point, citizens have issued a call on the international community and their own Governments to offer consistent responses with a multidimensional focus and the clear objective of building resilient societies based on trust and accountability. Sustainable societies must have such cross-cutting elements as respect for human rights and the inclusion of women as active participants in all phases of peacebuilding, pursuant to resolution 2242 (2015) on women and peace and security. This multidimensional focus must apply not only to policies, but also to those who implement them. It fundamentally calls for efforts to overcome the fragmentation of the United Nations system, and thus the importance of today’s debate. I would like to conclude with four comments on the role the Security Council should assume in that regard. First, there is prevention. In the matter of preventing conflict, the Council should strive to ensure that early warning systems with analytical capacities lead to early action. More and better use should be made of Chapter VI of the Charter of the United Nations and of the provisions of Article 99 on the relationship of the Secretary-General with the Council. Secondly, it is also important for the Council to demonstrate flexibility in its interinstitutional relationships. That flexibility should be seen in the efforts of the Council through, for example, the adaptation of the mandates of peacekeeping operations and special political missions, depending on the circumstances and individual needs of the moment and, when appropriate, incorporating the multidimensional approach to which I referred earlier. In that regard, quick-impact projects would make it possible to bridge the gap between stabilization and development. Thirdly, it is essential to improve the relationship between the Council and the Peacebuilding Commission. Let us not forget that this instrument encompasses three key elements for preventing conflicts: peace, security and development. Finally, we must keep in mind that in certain contexts, neither the United Nations nor the Council are the only actors, much less the most suitable ones. That is particularly relevant to Africa, a continent where peace, security and development are closely interlinked, and that has an organization — the African Union — that is resolved to assume those responsibilities. Spain believes it essential to take concrete measures to enable a more effective, operative relationship between the Security Council and the African Union and its Peace and Security Council.

China thanks the delegation of the United Kingdom for its initiative to convene today’s open debate. I also welcome Ms. Greening, Secretary of State for International Development of the United Kingdom, presiding over the meeting. I also wish to thank Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Ambassador Skoog and Ms. Bouchamaoui for their briefings. China extends its sympathy and condolences to France and other countries over the recent terrorist attacks. China condemns these attacks, including the downing of the Russian aircraft in the Sinai, in the strongest terms. I offer my condolences and sympathy to the Government and the people of France, Russia and other countrires and to the bereaved families and the wounded. Peace and development are the theme of our times and the common aspiration of all the peoples. The United Nations, as the most universal, representative and authoritative international Organization, is an important platform for member States to seek peace, development and cooperation. The present world is far from peaceful. Regional conflicts are spreading and the root causes have yet to be eliminated. Violations of the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations take place from time to time. The imbalance in international development is striking. Developing countries, African countries in particular, are deeply affected by poverty and underdevelopment. The path to achieving lasting peace and common prosperity is long. Establishing a new type of international relationship centred around win-win cooperation and building a community of common destiny for humankind is a fundamental guarantee for promoting peace and development and eliminating the root causes of conflicts around the world. The international community should make joint efforts in that regard. First, in order to firmly uphold the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, all countries must be treated equally and their sovereignty and territorial integrity must be respected. There should be no intervention in the internal affairs of other countries and the rights of other countries to independently choose their social systems and development paths should be respected. It is important to peacefully settle disputes through dialogue and negotiation. Support must be given to the countries concerned and regional organizations in their efforts to seek peaceful settlements to disputes through dialogue, negotiations, mediation and good offices. Secondly, to work towards establishing a more just and rational new international political and economic order and to establish a mutual, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable concept of security in international relations, a win-win for all philosophy must be promoted. In the pursuit of national interests, the reasonable concerns of other countries must be addressed. International cooperation must be advocated for properly addressing global challenges. International affairs must be dealt with through negotiations among all countries. Thirdly, to fully implement the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (resolution 70/1) and eradicate poverty and achieve equitable, open, comprehensive and innovative development, the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities in international development cooperation must be upheld. The developed countries should honour their commitments and undertake their obligations in a timely manner and support the developing countries, in particular African countries, in their efforts to achieve development and implement the sustainable development agenda. Fourthly, to respect the diversity of civilizations and promote dialogue and exchanges, we must recall that there is no such thing as inferiority and superiority when it comes to different civilizations, cultures and religions. They must all be respected and treated equally. The principle of harmony in diversity and the coexistence of differences must be upheld, and efforts must be made to promote dialogue, exchanges and learning from each other among different civilizations, cultures and religions so that dialogue among civilizations can become a bridge for enhancing friendship among countries and maintaining world peace. The Security Council has the primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security and it is duty-bound to remove the root causes of conflicts. The Security Council should closely cooperate and coordinate with other United Nations agencies to conduct preventive diplomacy and maintain and build peace. Peaceful means and coercive actions must be used comprehensively in order to settle disputes. The Council should strongly support regional organizations in their efforts to properly address regional conflicts. In assuming their responsibilities under the Charter of the United Nations, Council members should proceed from an assessment of the overall situation and ensure that the Council’s actions are unified and effective, thereby maintaining the unity and authority of the Security Council. Terrorism is the most serious challenge facing the international community. The Security Council should greatly coordinate international counter-terrorism efforts and promote the parties concerned to strengthen counter-terrorism cooperation and form a unified front in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and other recognized fundamental principles of international relations. The Council should ensure the effective implementation of resolutions on counter-terrorism and the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, including by taking action to combat terrorist activities that use the Internet to incite and plan terrorist activities and by cutting off their channels of external support, recruitment and ideological propaganda. In that regard, international counter-terrorism efforts should address both the symptoms and the root causes without double standards.

The Nigerian delegation thanks you, Madam President, for convening this open debate on a topic of considerable contemporary importance. We also thank you for the concept note (S/2015/845, annex) provided to guide our discussions today. We acknowledge the presence of participating Ministers and welcome them to the Security Council. Our appreciation goes to the Secretary-General for his moral voice; the Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission, Ambassador Skoog; and Ms. Ouided Bouchamaoui for the insightful briefings they provided on a complex and multifaceted issue. The interdependence between security and development is widely acknowledged, and I have heard every delegation speak about it this morning. One cannot exist without the other. That point is duly recognized in resolution 2171 (2014), which underscores the need for a comprehensive approach to conflict prevention through the promotion of sustained economic growth and development, poverty eradication and good governance. That important underlying message in resolution 2171 (2014) and the principle of conflict prevention articulated by the report of the Secretary-General on the future of United Nations peace operations (S/2015/730) both provide an appropriate point of departure for our deliberations today. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are a testament to the global recognition of the interlinkages between development and security. The reiteration of the nexus between security and development by both the Security Council and the General Assembly are clear indications of the critical need for a holistic approach by all United Nations entities for the maintenance of peace and security. To ensure tangible outcomes, there must be a coordinated approach on the part of United Nations entities to the implementation of the SDGs. The multidimensional nature of development implies that all hands must be on deck. In our view, strengthened engagements between United Nations entities and national actors would provide opportunities to evaluate the implementation of development priorities, which could strengthen peace and prevent conflict and instability. The establishment of credible institutions at the national level is a prerequisite for sustaining peace and promoting development. The need to strengthen State institutions has become more compelling in view of contemporary challenges to global security. Fragile States and those recovering from conflict must also institute accountability mechanisms designed to ensure good governance and the equitable distribution of peace dividends. As a preventive measure, States should also adopt a pragmatic and contextualized approach to address the root causes of conflict. In societies where young people are the victims of poverty and exclusion and the opportunities for short- and medium-term development are diminished, the propensity for violence and social unrest increases. That situation is more delicate in conflict-prone areas, where the risk of the recruitment, coercion and indoctrination of young people into armed groups and terrorist organizations is higher. Mitigating that risk requires a concerted effort on the part of Governments, communities and other stakeholders to create opportunities for young people and give them a greater sense of belonging. Nigeria would like to see the Security Council adopt a comprehensive approach that prioritizes renewed and strengthened partnerships with other United Nations entities, such as the Peacebuilding Commission, the Economic and Social Council and the United Nations Development Programme. That, we believe, would facilitate access to economic opportunities for young people. At the regional level, it is noteworthy that African economies have attained some measure of growth over the past few years. Today, Africa should begin translating those economic gains into social gains for all members of society. That is why we see merit in the Council’s support for strengthening institutions and mobilizing resources for inclusive development. States can be sensitized to the need for the mutual exchange of information and support with regard to the scope, sequencing and pace of the reform efforts required to sustain the long-term development agenda. African States are already incorporating the SDGs into their development outlook as outlined by the African Union’s Agenda 2063. We expect that to give impetus to the objectives of maximizing the use of Africa’s resources for the benefit of its people. Experience has shown that promoting greater inclusion is a viable path to creating peaceful societies. At the national level, the Nigerian Government is taking concrete steps to meet our security challenges and foster peace through inclusive development. Our soft approach to countering violent extremism has adopted a multidimensional strategy to addressing the root cause of radicalization and violent extremism, and is designed to employ practical measures to halt violent extremism in the short term and prevent future occurrences in the long term. The programme has been successfully employed to address some of the key economic, social, religious, political and cultural issues that fuel the radicalization upon which the insurgency feeds. Through that soft approach we have instituted a wide range of reforms in our educational system. We have also created greater economic opportunities and provided life skills to those at risk of radicalization. Security and development are two sides of the same coin, in both concept and practice. One aims to increase freedom of choice, while the other seeks to ensure that those choices can be made in a secure environment. The Security Council can provide the leadership that is so essential to promoting synergy in the United Nations partnership for peace, security and development. The Council must accord a more central role to preventive diplomacy in its policies and strategies in the maintenance of international peace and security. The Council should also work more closely with the Peacebuilding Commission, the United Nations Development Programme and other key actors within the United Nations system to promote peace, stability, security and development in countries emerging from conflict.

The topic that the British presidency has chosen for today’s debate, despite its innocuous appearance, poses, in our view, certain risks for the Security Council. On the one hand, it does not take much imagination to understand that there is a definite link between security and development. The danger lies in making that an absolute truth in a hasty attempt to craft some sort of universal approach to resolving problems in the context of security and development. The Council does not have the requisite Charter-based prerogatives for that, nor the requisite toolkit. To go beyond its purview while the world is witnessing heightened conflicts that demand the Council’s practical intervention, we risk seriously degrading the Council’s effectiveness. Development has inherent value. To promote it, the United Nations has the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council and other bodies. For the Security Council to encroach on those prerogatives would be inappropriate, as well as simply counterproductive. On the other hand, excessive focus on any one aspect of security means that we lose sight of many others, including territorial, ideological, historical, religious, psychological, environmental and technological aspects. Today, a particularly dangerous challenge is the threat of terrorism, the theory and practice of which involves essentially declaring war on the civilized world. A separate aspect is the emergence of conflict as the result of outside interference. Let it be recalled that Iraq, Libya, Syria and even Yugoslavia were far from the poorest of States, but their territories fell prey to some of the deadliest crises of our time. Now, as the world map is ever changing, various regions are seeing sweeping and swift geopolitical transformations. The world is witnessing a rise in the risk of conflict. There is a constantly increasing eruption of crises, which are compounded by armed clashes and difficult socioeconomic situations. There is a hardening of interethnic and sectarian antagonisms, which is being exploited by terrorist and extremists of all stripes. In that situation, the Security Council must not get bogged down in theoretical research but must keep its finger on the pulse of international life, speedily responding to any harbingers of trouble that could arise in the security sphere. We have constantly called for efforts to seek collective, agreed approaches to resolving existing issues by establishing a fairer and more sustainable architecture for international relations. The United Nations is, in that regard, a completely unique platform. However, we are convinced that the development of shared approaches with respect to issues that concern the future and current world, namely, questions of international law, human rights and development — in other words, essentially peacebuilding — is a role that should fall to the General Assembly, where, under the Charter of the United Nations, each nation has a vote. Every State has a vote, whether small or large, strong or weak, rich or poor. Countries are not all the same, but they are all part of human history. The development of States is a process that cannot be forced into implementation. There is no one right answer. The process can be assisted but not imposed. Over the past years we have seen the development of various concepts conceived by a limited group of States, in which development assistance is conditioned on adherence to very strict criteria with regard to State-building. We believe that particular care should be taken in disseminating such concepts, especially at the international level. On the one hand, there is the issue of interference in the internal affairs of States. Donors impose particular standards that they claim ensure transparency. On the other hand, donors do not honour their pledges for aid to development and technology transfer. There has been a lack of progress in alleviating the debt burden and a certain avoidance of issues that some find uncomfortable, such as increasing the participation of developing countries in the activities of global governance bodies, instead of establishing transparent and agreed rules to foster free trade, investment and open competition, as well as ensuring developing countries’ access to technologies. We are witnessing the fragmentation of the international economy, the creation of closed economic alliances and a stalemate in efforts to reform international financial institutions. We have repeatedly heard the argument that human rights violations are one of the root causes of crises. However, everyone is well aware of countries that have extremely harsh laws in that regard, but on whose territories there are no conflicts. Indeed, in an number of cases, no one even complains about them. In recent years, we have frequently encountered initiatives in the drafting of United Nations documents aimed at promoting the idea that the existence of national resources is allegedly a root cause of conflict. As a primary measure to combat that so-called evil, there have been proposals to increase the transparency of the extractive sectors, in particular by admitting into those countries some allegedly socially responsible international corporations — of course from the West. Actually, there is no direct link between those phenomena. There is no lack of countries in the world whose the extractive industries are totally closed to foreign players, but there are no conflicts there. If conflicts arise in natural resource-rich countries, then the majority of those cases are not linked to a lack of transparency. With regard to the linkage between security and development, one must acknowledge the destructive impact on both sides of the equation of the phenomenon of unilaterally imposed economic sanctions, which are used by some members of the international community to serve particular political aims. Sanctions imposed by circumventing the Security Council at the very beginning of the conflict in Syria had, of course, the effect of worsening the situation of the Syrian people. But did they help resolve the conflict? Of course not. The very goal of such sanctions was to exacerbate the conflict and to achieve the infamous goal espoused by a number of capitals, namely, regime change in Damascus. We are seeing the full consequences of that now. What do the economic sanctions imposed at various times against the Sudan, Zimbabwe and Myanmar have to do with peace? We believe that the recent General Assembly resolution 70/5 on anti-Cuba sanctions has the broader significance of representing the growing understanding within the international community of the unsuitability of that practice. The Security Council naturally plays the most important role in conflict prevention. It is one of our primary tasks. However, there can be no one-size-fits- all approach in that regard. Each conflict situation is unique and there is a need in every case to duly address its specific civilizational, historical, national and religious characteristics. Of particular importance in that respect is the intellectual capital and the knowledge of countries and their specificities, as well as the historical memory of United Nations experts. There is a need to build capacity in that regard rather than generate new coordinating structures or bodies, as is sometimes suggested. The Security Council needs to be particularly careful and respectful of sovereign States that have fallen on hard times, and offer them help rather than a public thrashing. In conclusion, we have unstintingly stood for peaceful societies and successful conflict prevention. To our mind, one sine qua non in that respect is non-intervention in the internal affairs of States and respectful dialogue with sovereign authorities.

We welcome the presence of Secretary of State Greening and thank the United Kingdom presidency for convening this open debate. We also appreciate the briefings made by the Secretary-General, the Chairman of the Peacebuilding Commission, and the President of the Tunisian Confederation of Industry, Trade and Handicrafts and Nobel Peace Prize laureate for the Tunisian National Dialogue Quartet. In a scenario of growing and new threats, it is essential to use multidimensional approaches to address the root causes of destabilizing processes that lead to conflicts. It is imperative to take such an approach in order to neutralize various forms of violence and its worst manifestation, terrorism. The world has recently been disturbed by heinous actions against universal values based on unity, multicultural coexistence and tolerance, which all civilizations and cultures should promote. Security and development, as recognized by the Council in its presidential statement S/PRST/2015/3 on inclusive development of 19 January, are closely interrelated, mutually reinforcing, and essential to achieving peace sustainable. Therefore, it is a question not of the competence of the various organs of the United Nations system, but rather of how the international community as a whole, the United Nations, other international organizations and civil society, recognizing the interdependence among the pillars of peace, security and development, responds to these challenges to peace. Coordination and complementarity are essential to the search for sustainable solutions. In these efforts, the substantive action of the Council must be linked to the challenges of effective prevention. The consequences of inaction in the face of cycles of violence and tensions should be among the concerns of this organ if we are to fully exercise our responsibilities. The Human Rights Up Front initiative is an effective way to identify the early signs and anticipate negative developments. The availability of better information on the ground can allow the United Nations and the Council to act promptly when crises or instability arise. In that context, we reiterate the critical role and participation of women in the processes of conflict and post-conflict prevention. The adoption of resolution 1325 (2000) was a turning point in efforts to promote the enhanced engagement of women in the decision-making process and political leadership in areas linked to peace and security. We hope that the informal group of experts on women and peace and security, established under resolution 2242 (2015), will contribute to that. National ownership is critical in addressing the cycle of prevention and crisis response, and reinforces the interdependence of the three pillars. Respect for the rule of law, human rights, building effective, inclusive, accountable and transparent institutions that ensure accountability are sine qua non for achieving inclusive societies and facilitating the creation of conditions conducive to lasting and stable peace. In that regard, the work of the Peacebuilding Commission, bridging the gap between security and development, is indicative of the need to seek interaction between the various bodies, always from the perspective of efficient coordination. We stress the importance of regional and subregional organizations. Coordinated work with the Council will contribute to a better understanding of the root causes that affect the proliferation of conflicts, and will identify responses that take into account the historical and cultural contexts that are indispensable to enhancing the legitimacy and effectiveness of these contexts. Its tasks in the areas of preventive diplomacy and mediation should be strengthened, with the full cooperation of United Nations. In the context of all this, we suggest that additional opportunities for relations with institutions of the United Nations system be evaluated so as to contribute to the political heritage that should be available to the Council. It is essential to adopt an integrated approach that seeks complementarity rather than logic based on exclusive competences. As was recognized by the President of the Republic of Chile, Michelle Bachelet, in January, and included in the presidential statement adopted at that time, we reiterate the call to adopt a comprehensive and integrated approach that incorporates and strengthens the coherence of political and security activities, development, human rights and the promotion of the rule of law, and that addresses the root causes of each conflict.

I thank the United Kingdom for convening this meeting on security, development and the root causes of conflict. I also thank the Secretary-General for his briefing. I thank Ambassador Olof Skoog, Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission, and Ms. Ouided Bouchamaoui, President of the Tunisian Confederation of Industry, Trade and Handicrafts and Nobel Peace Prize laureate of 2015, for their briefings. Clearly, the lasting maintenance of international peace and security requires the settlement and prevention of ongoing conflicts, particularly by way of socioeconomic development. Chad endorses the Secretary-General’s appeals for the entire United Nations system, including the Security Council, to work for conflict prevention. It is all the more important as conflict prevention is the main topic of three reports on the review of United Nations peacekeeping operations — the report of the High-level Independent Panel on Peace Operations (see S/2015/446), the report of the Secretary-General, entitled “The future of United Nations peace operations: implementation of the recommendations of the High-level Independent Panel on Peace Operations” (S/2015/682) and the report of the Advisory Group of Experts on the Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture (see S/2015/490) — and the study on the implementation of resolution 1325 (2000). We welcome the General Assembly’s contribution to building normative prevention capacity and the efforts of the Secretary-General and his Special Envoys and Special Representatives, which have contributed to the prevention of more than one conflict worldwide. Nonetheless, several observations attest to the fact that we are far from a world free of war, especially given the increasing number of conflicts. Moreover, a number of reports and analyses attest to the limits pertaining to prevention. In those circumstances, it is clear that the current United Nations methods for conflict prevention need to be reviewed. In order to do that, it is necessary to deal with the root causes of conflicts, which include the issue of development. In general, the causes of conflicts can be endogenous, notably involving problems stemming from governance and political transitions, the inequality and exclusion of certain segments of the population and issues of public management. There are also exogenous factors, characterized by assaults on the sovereignty of States and the outside destabilization of regimes and institutions, which lead to new conflicts that wind up becoming more costly and devastating, although they could have been prevented. Concerning Africa, the various reports on the root causes of conflicts and the promotion of lasting peace and development, the Secretary-General has continued to stress that there should be greater emphasis on the link among peace, security and development. That is an extremely close relationship, which has been recognized by various United Nations bodies, in particular by the Security Council. For Chad, there can be no peace and security without development. In that connection, it is important that concrete actions be taken to bolster the prevention and resolution of conflicts, while bringing women and youth on-board in the process. Although the Security Council does not treat with issues of development, there are nonetheless questions relating to development that have an impact international peace and security. The matter of migrants is a perfect example. Approaches implemented by the Security Council that take into account matters of security, governance and development, such as the United Nations integrated strategy for the Sahel, should be welcomed. The actual implementation of the strategy, however, is still taking some time. We would therefore call for an emphasis to be placed on the situation of youth and women in the implementation of the strategy. We also call on international organizations, financial institutions and donors to finance activities seeking to create opportunities for that part of the population. Those types of initiatives will serve to combat threats such as violent extremism and terrorism. To conclude, we call upon the United Nations, including the Security Council, to endorse the Secretary-General’s recommendations contained in his most recent report (S/2015/730) on the causes of conflict and promoting lasting peace and development for Africa. Support for the African Union’s Agenda 2063 in particular will help shore up development for the sake of peace of security.

At the outset, allow me to welcome you, Madam President, and thank you for your comprehensive and excellent statement. I also extend my appreciation Secretary- General Ban Ki-moon, Mr. Olof Skoog and Nobel Laureate Ouided Bouchamaoui. We congratulate her, for it is truly a great honour and distinction that an Arab woman has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. The United Nations and the international community have been making great efforts in order to maintain international peace and security and promote development and human rights. Despite ongoing regional conflicts, we have managed to make courageous and tangible progress in those fields at all levels, but we have not worked sufficiently to highlight the complementarity of those fields. No one denies the close relationship that has been reflected in the manner the Security Council has chosen to address daily global conflicts as well as threats to global security. Addressing the root causes of conflicts and violence should be the focus of the ongoing efforts made by the Security Council in the maintenance of international peace and security, especially because the conflicts of today are both intra- and inter-State in nature. We call upon all parties to shoulder their responsibilities in order to prevent conflicts and never to overlook the primary root causes of conflicts and violence. Given the close relationship between sustainable development and security, there can be no national development without a protective security system in place, and the converse is true. The peacebuilding architecture encompasses and links both concepts. That is why I underscore the importance of supporting peacebuilding operations in a concerted and systematic manner, given their role in developing security, the rule of law and justice and the part they play in combating poverty, unemployment and corruption. As development and security are interdependent, how can we maintain that complementarity in a way that achieves security, stability and development? Let me propose a few ideas to help us maintain that complementarity and overcome related obstacles. First, we need to start by facing all the challenges that hinder the achievement of security and development and undermine peacebuilding efforts. We need a common and collective vision that recognizes the close complimentary roles of security and development, including strategies and mechanisms, while promoting human rights and the rule of law and achieving justice, so as to build secure societies and the required corresponding stable environments. Those mechanisms should not be an end in and of themselves. We should not stop establishing them without continuing to develop them. Secondly, we need to utilize and invest in the potential of all members of all our societies. Marginalizing certain segments of our societies, especially youth, is an extremely dangerous policy, especially because they influence and are influenced by their economic, social and security surroundings. In that regard, I would like to stress that the recent terrorist attacks should motivate us to uproot the reasons for such acts that have depleted our resources and, most important, resulted in the loss of numerous innocent lives of those who have rejected terrorism. My country numbers among those which have been beset by such barbaric attacks. That is why we accord the utmost importance to combating terrorism, which is threatening our population, and in particular our youth. We have spared no effort in that regard, the most recent example of which was our participation in Global Forum on Youth, Peace and Security. We should enhance the role of young people by establishing a sustainable mechanism to protect them and increase their engagement in political processes and the maintenance of international peace and security in our countries. Coordination among United Nations bodies is critically important because the Organization’s decisions and their implementation should not be the exclusive responsibility of the Security Council. We need a diverse toolkit to enhance the complementarity between security and development. We should not prioritize the interests of particular countries. We need the political will of all countries, especially those that can play a significant role in such efforts, and recourse to regional organizations and their potential in peacebuilding efforts. Fourthly, at the national level social responsibility requires the engagement of Governments and the reconsideration of national policies and goals in order to harmonize our efforts with the needs of the current context and with the work of the United Nations. We stress the importance of national ownership because reform should arise within countries and not be imposed from outside. In conclusion, there are three key elements related to the issue of security and development: complementarity, partnership and inclusiveness. As we strengthen the integration of and complementarity between security and development, we should work to make every sector of our societies a positive factor in peacebuilding and not a threat to it. We must assess our progress in responding to contemporary needs, which requires us to harmonize the need to address security threats with the political priorities we are implementing by upgrading our plans and strategies at all levels, in which security and development are intertwined and mutually reinforcing.

We thank the United Kingdom for convening this debate and you, Madam Secretary, for presiding over this meeting. We want also to express our condolences to the Government and people of France over the horrific attacks that took place in Paris on Friday, and to the Governments of Lebanon and Iraq over the attacks in Beirut and Baghdad. As others have said, terrorism is a scourge that affects all of us. I want also to thank the Secretary-General and Ambassador Skoog, as well as Nobel laureate Ms. Bouchamaoui, for their briefings. I pay particular tribute to Ms. Bouchamaoui for the inspiration that Tunisia and her colleagues have given the rest of us. We share the assessment of most speakers today that this debate marks an important recognition by the Council that security and development are intrinsically linked and must be considered in their interconnections. The Council does not and cannot operate in a theoreticl vacuum. New Zealand has made no secret of its belief that the Security Council should do more to prevent conflict. Since joining the Council in January, we have pushed for a greater focus on the part of the Council and the wider United Nations system on emerging crises and preventing countries from sliding into conflict. This has led us to call for attention to developments in Burundi and, earlier this year, in Guinea Bissau, and for a credible response to the situation in Israel and the occupied territories, which we regard as dangerous and unsustainable. It has led us to support discrete, informal options for Council engagement on emerging crises that are sensitive to concerns regarding national sovereignty. We have encouraged informal briefings by the Secretariat where appropriate, and see potential in making greater use of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Conflict Prevention and Resolution in Africa. We have also made efforts to explore targeted interventions, such as statements and Council missions, and to call for more meaningful coordination with regional actors, who are often at the forefront of prevention efforts. Conflict prevention will remain a primary focus for New Zealand for the remainder of its term. Today’s debate offers the opportunity to consider one specific aspect of prevention. To sustain peace, we need to get better at addressing the root causes and drivers of conflict. There is a growing recognition — led by the pioneering work of post-conflict countries themselves through the g7+ initiative, under the leadership of Timor-Leste — that security and development needs are closely interlinked, particularly in fragile and post- conflict States. For most societies, inclusive growth and development are critical elements in preventing the emergence or reoccurrence of conflict. But prospects for development are in turn contingent on maintaining a stable environment, underpinned by institutions that provide security, effective governance, and the rule of law. As others have noted, this has been acknowledged in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1), notably through Goal 16. This relationship between a stable, secure environment and sustainable development was also acknowledged in the Small Island Developing States (SIDS) Accelerated Modalities of Action Pathway, agreed at the 2014 International Conference on SIDS, and was also a strong theme of the open debate convened by the Council in July on the peace and security challenges facing small island developing States (see S/PV.7499). As we all know and acknowledge, the Security Council is not the primary actor in addressing many of these challenges, but it can and must play an important role in addressing them and in ensuring that its work in addressing threats to peace and security is linked up with and complements the work of the wider United Nations system and with relevant regional actors. The Council needs to ensure that it reflects these understandings in its mandates. Its interventions need to be tailored to the specific drivers of conflict in each setting, and to be based on a clear assessment of the roles that Council-mandated missions can most effectively play, based on the Council’s comparative advantage. The Council must also be proactive in seeking more effective coordination with other international actors. Where it mandates development-related activities, whether they be quick impact projects or targeted support to core institutions, the Council is invariably reliant on other international development actors with more specialized expertise and longer time horizons. This means bridging the silos between different pillars of the United Nations, including development, security and human rights. It also means reaching out to enhance cooperation with others beyond the United Nations system, including the international financial institutions, regional organizations, non-governmental organizations and bilateral donors. We have yet to fully realize the potential of the Peacebuilding Commission to coordinate peacebuilding actors or to achieve the kind of partnership with the Council that was originally envisaged. We firmly believe that there must be closer engagement with and more systematic involvement of country configuration Chairs in Council discussions, given the valuable knowledge and insights they can provide. We also need to ensure that United Nations missions are equipped with the resources and expertise they need to identify and address the drivers of conflict and to manage emerging threats. We therefore strongly support the recommendation of the High-level Independent Panel on United Nations Peace Operations for much greater investment in the political component of peace operations, and in conflict- prevention efforts more generally. It is for these reasons that New Zealand has recently significantly increased its funding to the Department of Political Affairs. We also acknowledge the good work being done by United Nations Development Programme on conflict prevention. Our understanding of the requirements of conflict prevention and the relationship between peace and development has advanced significantly in the past decade. It is incumbent on the international community, and the United Nations in particular, to translate these understandings into action. New Zealand will continue to champion greater up-front attention, investment, practical innovation and courage in exercising the Security Council’s responsibilities under the Charter of the United Nations for preventing conflict.

I should like to begin by thanking the United Kingdom presidency and you, Madam, for having organized this important open debate on security, development and the root causes of conflict. I would also like to thank the Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission, the Swedish Ambassador, and Ms. Bouchamaoui. We extend our heartfelt congratulations, once again, to her, and to all our friends in Tunisia, on this outstanding achievement of winning the Nobel Peace Prize, which honours all of Tunisia. This debate comes at a trying time: the despicable and barbaric attacks in Paris have cast France, and at least 19 other countries, into mourning and shocked the international community as a whole. In recent days many other countries have also been struck by terrorism. Allow me to reiterate what President Hollande said yesterday morning before the French Parliament, which met in Versailles: those attacks will never change the face of France, land of liberty; they will only strengthen our determination to combat terrorism, always and everywhere; and they make working together more important than ever for the future of this planet and for solidarity between peoples. This debate also comes in the wake of the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (resolution 70/1) by our Heads of State and Government, which sets forth, in a very creative manner, the road map for the international community with regard to sustainable development for the next 15 years. I must say that is a noteworthy success for the United Nations, and it is a major step, as well a wonderful message of hope, in our common fight against poverty and inequality. Finally, this debate takes place two weeks before the launch of the twenty-first session of the Conference of the Parties (COP21) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, in Paris on 30 November. Everyone understands how much the outcome of the climate conference will be critical, not only for our environment, but also for our security and collective well-being. Today I would like to highlight two topics, governance and the climate. The first topic is a key factor in both conflict prevention and development. When we began to discuss what would follow the Millennium Development Goals, one thing was clear to all: countries at war saw the poorest results with respect to the Millennium Development Goals. Given that simple fact, a new discussion began on including governance in the new development framework. France therefore welcomes the fact that the Sustainable Development Goals include a goal on governance, that is Goal 16, which is dedicated “to the promotion of peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, the provision of access to justice for all, and building effective, accountable institutions at all levels”. That goal is key because it signifies that all the members of the international community recognize the interrelationship between poverty eradication and the promotion of sustainable development, peace and security, on the one hand, and good governance, on the other. That interrelationship, we know, is complicated; it requires detailed consideration; and that is why the precise spelling out of the goal was strenuously negotiated. But now we have an invaluable tool which, fortunately, goes beyond a narrow, binary concept of development, as do security matters. Among the 12 targets of that goal, allow me to mention a few, because I feel they are particularly relevant to our discussion today: reducing all forms of violence; promoting the rule of law; combating illicit financial flows and arms trafficking; combating corruption; strengthening public institutions; and promoting legislation against discrimination. As we can see from the enumeration of those few targets, the international community, particularly the development community, fully recognizes the interrelationship between peace and security, governance and development. We welcome that fact, and we attach the greatest importance to the sound implementation of Goal 16, which concerns all countries. The issue of climate is the second point I would like to emphasize in my statement. Everyone knows today that climate is a development issue. Why? Because the primary victims of climate change are the poorest and most vulnerable. A few days ago, the World Bank published an important report which highlights the point that, in the absence of action on climate change, 100 million additional people could risk falling into extreme poverty. Last June, on the initiative of Spain and Malaysia and with the participation of my German and Bangladeshi counterparts, we held meetings on the links between climate and security. Those meetings made us aware of the genuine risks that climate change poses for security, with the consequences that are becoming increasingly clear in terms of natural disasters, the competition for increasingly scarce resources and climate displacement. We are 15 days away from the start of the COP21 in Paris, a major event for our planet. I myself am returning from a pre-COP21. It was an informal ministerial consultation. My conclusion from those three days of meetings is very positive, although much remains to be done collectively. As the French Foreign Minister, Laurent Fabius, said following the event: “We have taken an important step, but we remain mobilized more than ever and the road ahead is long”. It is very encouraging to see that there is a true desire, one very widely shared, to move forward and achieve a far-reaching, universal and legally binding agreement in December in Paris. Genuine progress has been made, for example, regarding the principle of a regular upward revision of the commitments of States or the financing of climate policies. But it is clear that much remains to be done before a universal, legally binding agreement that is commensurate with the climate challenge can be reached in Paris. As Council members know, this is a unique opportunity. We have a collective duty to succeed together. As the Secretary- General has said many times, and quite rightly so: “There is no plan B, because there is no planet B”. And so I would like to take advantage of the presence of many ministers here today to thank them for their engagement in climate matters, but also to call on them to mobilize their efforts to ensure that the best agreement possible is reached in Paris in the interest of guaranteeing a future for future generations.

Madam President, I thank you for convening and for presiding over this debate, to which we all attach importance. We believe that the debate today on the interlinkages between security, development and the root causes of conflict is apt and timely. I wish to also express my appreciation to Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, to Ambassador Olaf Skoog, Permanent Representative of Sweden and Chair of the United Nations Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), and to Ms. Bouchamaoui, the Nobel Peace Prize laureate 2015, for their compelling briefings. As a member of the PBC, my delegation fully endorses the statement delivered by Ambassador Skoog. I wish to make additional points focusing on three issues, namely: timing and process issues; the security and development nexus; and, in the context of the response by the United Nations, breaking down silos and addressing fragmentations. My focus will be more on the structural or systemic aspects rather than the substantive issues, with a view to highlighting areas to which the Council should give more attention. If one takes an expansive view of lessons learned from the conflicts today, it is not inconceivable that in the medium to long term, new or increased pressures and stresses on institutions and society at different levels will continue to be the main drivers of conflict in various situations and scenarios around the world. To counter that dire prognosis, we firmly support urgent improvements to make prevention capacities more effective at all levels, especially at the United Nations. In that connection, our discussion today affords a timely opportunity to take stock and further discuss possible measures to improve the Council’s effectiveness in maintaining international peace and security. At the same time, the ongoing review processes of United Nations peace operations, peacebuilding architecture and women and peace and security could also benefit from the outcomes of this discussion. This Council has an important role to play in security and development in the context of nation-building and the maintenance of international peace and security, which are two sides of the same coin. A possible opportunity to be explored would be the integration of development considerations into peacekeeping or political missions from the outset. That ties into the vision of holistic missions, with clear time frames. for stabilization activities alongside peacebuilding activities, including to strengthen the rule of law and security institutions, among others. However, that does not imply that such activities should or do happen in a linear or sequential manner. I should rather emphasize that at the point of going in, we should be clear that the United Nations cannot be in a country indefinitely. In our view, the discussions initiated by Slovakia and South Africa under the auspices of the Group of Friends of Security Sector Reform, particularly their latest round, held on 2 October, as noted in document S/2015/868, have yielded interesting and relevant proposals on how considerations of the security and development nexus could be practically integrated into current frameworks and structures. In terms of policy and coordination, the Council should be at the forefront in creating conditions that can enable the PBC to fulfil its mandated tasks, including by working in a coherent manner alongside the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council. The PBC is the bridge linking security and development at the structural and institutional level. As such, its role must be reinforced so that its potential for assisting countries in transitions and in emerging from conflict can be maximized. At the same time, the importance of coherence and coordination with other actors and partners cannot be overstated. In our view, by connecting more frequently and substantively with partners such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the Food and Agriculture Organization and other relevant agencies, the Council could better examine and analyse specific scenarios and situations. Horizon scanning could prove useful and would be worth revisiting as soon as possible. Among the core messages of the report of the Advisory Group of Experts on the peacebuilding architecture review (see S/2015/490) is that a focus on sustaining peace should be a common element throughout all activities covered under the three pillars of the United Nations — peace and security, development and human rights. In regard to how the Council can play its part by further breaking down silos and addressing fragmentation at the intergovernmental level, we are of the view that the recommendations of the report, especially in paragraphs 132 to 135 and paragraphs 160, 169, 179, 187, 189 and 190, among others, merit serious attention. In conclusion, while we recognize that ensuring coordinated action on the part of and between United Nations agencies and partners has always been a key challenge, we believe that it is critical as a first step in ensuring coherence within currently ongoing review processes. As members of the United Nations, we should all seize the opportunity to address this systemic problem so as to enable the United Nations to deliver better and as one.

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. To that end, I take this opportunity to remind speakers that the presidency will use the flashing lights on the collars of the microphones to prompt them to bring their remarks to a close. 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 would also like to inform everybody that we will be carrying on the open debate right through the lunch hour, as we have a large number of speakers. I now give the floor to the Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation of the Netherlands.

I would like to start by thanking you, Madam President, and the United Kingdom for convening today’s important debate. The horrors of the recent terrorist attacks on innocent people in various parts of the world remind us that a threat to one is a threat to all. We have a shared responsibility to build a more secure world. The world is winning the fight against poverty. Never before have so many people escaped hardship in such a short time. But we know that in the years ahead, poverty will become more and more concentrated in places affected by violence and injustice. Ten years from now, four out of five poor people will have to deal with fear and human insecurity as part of their daily lives. The construction of roads, schools and hospitals will not bring about development if people do not feel safe. Strong, inclusive institutions are often taken for granted by people like me who come from peaceful and prosperous societies. It is like the ground under our feet — we do not think about it, we just walk on it. But imagine if the ground were constantly trembling beneath us. Imagine waking up every morning not knowing who to turn to for protection, realizing that one’s freedom, job or business could be taken away just like that by someone more powerful. Remember Mohamed Bouazizi, who triggered the Arab Spring by setting himself on fire because he was fed up with being exploited every day by the police. Justice and strong, inclusive institutions are the bridge between development and peace, and the foundation for trust between citizens and Government. But that works only if the law is not used to exclude the many to the benefit of the few. The rule of law is not the same as rule by law. Today, the Security Council is discussing the nexus between security and development, and some are worried that talking about peace and conflict prevention in the context of development will securitize the development discourse. But I think the opposite is true. Bringing a development perspective to issues of conflict prevention and peace will enable us to focus better and earlier on emerging conflicts and instability. As the Council tries to focus more on prevention, it must pay attention to development. Issues such as inequality, poverty and unemployment have a tremendous impact on the risk of conflict. We should view development indicators as the canaries in the coal mine, while justice and legitimate institutions act as an immune system that can help to protect countries from violence and from development in reverse. Recent reports on peace operations, peacebuilding and conflict prevention offer the Security Council a wealth of suggestions for addressing root causes at a much earlier stage. For the Netherlands, two issues stand out. First, we support the view that the Security Council should engage much earlier when a conflict starts to develop, by adopting a more flexible and sequenced approach on the basis of conflict analysis. Horizon scanning and briefings from the Secretary-General could help the Council in that task. The African-led International Support Mission in Mali organized by the Economic Community of West African States is a good example. It was authorized in resolution 2085 (2012) and later became part of the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali. Secondly, creative approaches are needed to finance conflict prevention, mediation and peacebuilding. It is simply unsustainable to rely on a few voluntary donors to support that very important and central function of the United Nations. The burden should be shared more equally among States and stakeholders. With the adoption of the global Sustainable Development Goals (General Assembly resolution 70/1), the world has turned the importance of peace and development into an agenda for action. We must deliver on the pledge we made less than two months ago that no one would be left behind. We cannot allow fragile and conflict-affected areas to become the ghettos of the world.

I now give the floor to the Minister of State for Cooperation of Rwanda.

Rwanda would like to join others in thanking you and your delegation, Madam President, for organizing today’s important debate. On behalf of my Government and the people of Rwanda, I would like to offer our sincere condolences to the Government and people of France, especially the families affected, for their losses in the terrorist attacks on Friday. I would like to thank the Secretary-General for his briefing. His presence here today once again highlights his commitment to peace, security and development as a core part of the work of his Office. I would also like to thank my good friend Ambassador Skoog, Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission, and Ms. Ouided Bouchamaoui for their briefings. The concept note provided for today’s open debate pertinently highlights the nexus between peace, security and development (S/2015/845, annex). That nexus is a fact in that, since the end of the Cold War, the pursuit of lasting peace has become, together with sustainable development, a global imperative. Today, it is obvious that peace is conducive to development and vice versa. Indeed, development, if achieved, contributes decisively to the elimination of several of the root causes of conflict, and if poverty is reduced, social inequities diminish, which allows for a more optimum allocation of scarce resources, which, in turn, can certainly help to prevent many of the situations that exacerbate conflict. As His Excellency President Paul Kagame recently stated at the Peace and Democracy Prize event in Tangiers, Morocco, which was held under the theme “From shocks to co-emergence”, “Peace is the starting point for growth and development ... It is a condition produced when citizens are taken seriously as individuals, as stakeholders, and mobilized towards good politics and fully included in governance”. In many situations, however, those goals are pursued separately, which then renders them unsustainable. Simply put, policymakers and practitioners do not agree on which should be the higher priority. We believe that current global trends necessitate a pro-active approach to making peace, security and development a mutually reinforcing and intertwined package, at both the national and the international levels. At the national level, we are of the view that advancing governance and the rule of law, combating corruption, improving transparency and accountability, and building confidence in our people lay a strong foundation for sustainable development, durable peace and security. That has been true in our case, and all the economic and social progress that we have been able to achieve in the past 21 years rests on our leadership’s commitment to ultimately ensuring that all citizens enjoy safety, security and inclusive and democratic governance. The international community has an important role to play, in that it should assist in building local capacity for peace-sensitive development in order to enable Governments to formulate and implement policies that take the realities of conflict into account, thereby minimizing the risk of the need for development interventions. Conflict sensitivity entails ways of reducing conflict, helping communities to build peace and enabling institutions to address the structural causes of conflict. In that regard, we value the Peacebuilding Commission’s sustained efforts in post-conflict situations since 2005, despite the considerable challenges. We note with appreciation the recommendations of the Advisory Group of Experts on the 2015 Review of the United Nations Peacebuilding Architecture (see S/2015/490), which proved once again that the architecture is inadequate, underresourced and largely neglected by Member States, as well as by the Security Council. It is our hope that the international community will rise to the occasion and find ways to effectively implement the review’s recommendations. Lastly, with billions of people still living in poverty around the world and with growing populations, the depletion of natural resources, the adverse impacts of environmental degradation and the recent crises in public health and migration and the spread of all types of extremism, including terrorism, there is clearly a need for strong and effective global cooperation. The adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1), along with its 17 Sustainable Development Goals, builds on the premise that an integrated approach that addresses peace, security and development is necessary. Goal 16 specifically recognizes that sustainable development cannot be realized without peace and security and that peace and security will be at risk without sustainable development. Improving the conditions for social justice, in particular, is fundamental to the promotion of peace in a variety of contexts throughout the world. The Sustainable Development Goals should serve as effective tools in realizing inclusive development for all and in determining the right course of action to follow as we strive to achieve an inclusive and widespread economic development that gives more people a greater stake now in avoiding violent disruption, while offering them credible hope for a better future for themselves and their children.

I now give the floor to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs and Cooperation of Portugal.

I would like to begin by expressing Portugal’s complete solidarity with France. Here, in the Security Council Chamber, I wish to reiterate, on behalf of Portugal, our strongest condemnation of the heinous, cowardly and utterly unjustifiable terrorist attack committed in Paris this past 13 November. I would also like to pay a public tribute to the victims, including two Portuguese citizens, and send condolences to their families. It was not just an attack on France. It was a barbaric attack perpetrated by a group of radical individuals against all those who uphold the principles and values of the Charter of the United Nations, namely, the 193 States Members of the Organization. Portugal expresses its full support to France, our European partner and ally. In the light of that attack and others that preceded it, in Beirut for instance, the international community has the legal right and the moral duty to act in a concerted effort to put an end to Daesh, a radical and terrorist entity. In doing so, we will not give in to fear nor surrender our values, particularly with regard to human rights. I would also reiterate Portugal’s support for the actions undertaken by the United Nations and the Security Council to prevent and combat terrorism. That attack makes the choice of the subject for this debate by the United Kingdom extremely timely. I would like to underline the importance of the perspective that Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon shared with us, as well as the relevant statements made by Ambassador Olof Skoog and Ms. Ouided Bouchamaoui, to whom I pay tribute for her role in building democracy in Tunisia. Portugal is well aware that investing in development brings security benefits. Consequently, our development cooperation assigns absolute priority to strengthening the link between peace and security, sustainable development and human rights, which reflects the Sustainable Development Goals that were adopted in September (General Assembly resolution 70/1). In that regard, we attach particular importance to sectors that have a structural and multiplier effect, such as governance, the rule of law, human rights, education, health care and institutional capacity-building, while promoting the participation of women and girls and the eradication of all forms of gender-based violence. In that context, I congratulate Spain for the debate organized in October on women and peace and security (see S/PV.7533) in the framework of resolution 1325 (2000). In addition to the already ineluctable role of civil-society actors, I stress also the importance of the perspective of inclusive development, given the growing role of the private sector in the mutually reinforcing relationship between security and development. Indeed, there will be no eradication of poverty without the creation of wealth. And without the eradication of poverty and the consequent promotion of the dignity of every human life, we will always be subject to the threats to peace and stability that will subsequently arise. I therefore stress the importance of social responsibility and encourage the Secretary- General to continue promoting the United Nations Global Compact. In this world of immediacy and media sensationalism in which we live, the numerous successes of the Organization and the Council in conflict prevention sometimes go unnoticed. It is only fair that we acknowledge these accomplishments. Undoubtedly, in this respect no news is good news. However, given the deterioration of crises such as those in Syria, Libya and elsewhere, we — and the Council in particular — must conclude that there are lessons to be learned so that in the future we can better undertake the responsibility to protect, as well as responsibility while protecting. To paraphrase Kofi Annan, in dealing with any given country we should not presume to know more about its reality than those who live there. We all subscribe to effective multilateralism and the central role played by the United Nations. Whatever the terminology in vogue — “cross-cutting”, “system-wide coherence”, “delivering as one” and “breaking down silos” — if we are to be effective we have to promote an attitude of cooperation rather than duplication, sharing rather than competition, and structural collective responsibility instead of short-term individual interests. When speaking of conflict prevention, early warning mechanisms and capacity for concerted action are particularly relevant. Much has been done concerning cooperation between international and regional organizations, but there remains substantial room for improvement. The European Union, whose statement in this debate Portugal naturally endorses, has been strongly committed in this regard, particularly with the United Nations and the African Union. Africa in general, and West Africa in particular, require special attention with respect to preventing possible relapses into conflict. In this context, we welcome the concerted action of the international community in Guinea-Bissau, including the United Nations, the African Union, the Economic Community of West African States, the European Union and the Community of Portuguese-speaking Countries (CPLP). On the subject of the CPLP, I take this opportunity to acknowledge Angola, an elected member of the Council with an important vote that recently celebrated 40 years of independence. In response to the invitation addressed to us, Portugal decided to be represented here today at the political level in order to underline the priority it attaches to conflict prevention, particularly against the background of the close link between security and development. This was reflected in the constant priority with which we promoted preventive diplomacy during our previous mandate in the Council, in 2011 and 2012, wither through the improvement of the working methods that we sought to launch, aimed at a more expeditious and effective response of the Council; or in the high- level briefing on new challenges to international peace and security that we organized in November 2011 (see S/PV.6668) with a view to preventing conflicts in the medium and long terms. To the extent of our capacities, especially as Chair of the Informal Working Group on Documentation and Other Procedural Matters and during the month of our presidency, as well as throughout our mandate, we promoted interaction and fought ritualized inertia and rigidity of methods. Our aim was to free up time in order to focus on early warning, enhancing the most possible systematic use of diplomatic means available for conflict prevention, for example by sounding out United Nations regional offices and responsible parties of the Peacebuilding Commission. In addition, in this vein we fully supported the British horizon-scanning initiative, which allowed for informal analysis and discussion, thereby increasing the preventive intervention capacity of the Council. We also advocated recourse to meetings under the Arria Formula, facilitating civil society’s access to the Council. In the aforementioned briefing on new challenges, it became evident that contemporary phenomena such as climate change and its impact on oceans — which, in particular, threatens small island developing States and promotes transnational organized crime, migration and pandemics — require a collective response that, to be effective, will need to be more integrated and systematic. Although these issues follow under the purview of other forums, the Council must remain mindful of the increasing impact of these challenges as causes of conflict. The Council should therefore not fear the audacity of innovation and, as such, would have every advantage in developing a more comprehensive, systematic, coordinated and informed approach in this regard. In this context, we reiterate our proposal for setting up an informal working group of the Security Council on the new challenges to international peace and security. Such a sustained monitoring mechanism of these issues, by analysing the Secretary-General’s reports as well as those of other relevant bodies and agencies, and other institutions, would be of an asset of great added value for the conflict-prevention capacity of the United Nations, and of the Council in particular, precisely in the perspective of today’s debate. In conclusion, conflict prevention was part of the genesis of the United Nations 70 years ago, and sustainable development is at the heart of its future. The Security Council is part of that dynamic. It cannot be insulated from it and must therefore interact with the other competent bodies in this field. Security and development are comprehensively interlinked and they either reinforce or undermine each other. Furthermore, new challenges to international peace and security that are closely related to development increasingly tend to degenerate into instability and insecurity. Although conflict prevention is first and foremost the responsibility of States themselves, it is up to the Council, as the primary body responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security, to assume its responsibilities and, at the political level, lead efforts to prevent conflicts that appear on the horizon. The Council should always be mindful that the cost of preventing a conflict is always negligible compared to the price paid in human lives, and this should be reflected in its action. Portugal, which in December celebrates 60 years since its accession to the United Nations, will continue to be at the forefront of promoting conflict prevention so that the culture of prevention, to which we committed at the 2005 World Summit, can effectively materialize.

I now give the floor to the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Thailand.

Peace and security will not be sustainable without development. Likewise, development cannot be sustainable without peace and security. Their mutually reinforcing nature has proven to be indisputable. I thank the United Kingdom and Chile for their efforts earlier in the year to highlight the development dimension, aiming at preventing conflict. Far too often, the international community has reacted in order to resolve conflicts rather than proactively prevent them. The Security Council has had to respond to crises and deal with their sorrowful aftermath rather than tackling emerging threats early on. Thailand believes that investing in development is a cost-effective way to prevent conflict. Conflict resolution often is too little, too late, following dire humanitarian consequences. Often, conflict stems from the absence of just or inclusive socioeconomic development, which fosters discontent, discord and strife. When economic fruits are not fairly shared and distributed, and when the gap between the haves and the have-nots becomes too wide and when it cuts across religions, ethnicities and ideologies, existing tensions tend to be exacerbated, and the risk of conflict tends to increase. In Thailand’s view, development ought to be holistic, inclusive and beneficial to all for it to be sustainable and conducive to peace. It must address persisting poverty and inequality and ensure equitable access to resources, quality education, decent work and justice. We must leave no man, woman or child behind. As an ardent supporter of the women and peace and security agenda, Thailand advocates a greater role for women at all stages of the peace process as well as in promoting development. We must also focus our development programmes on our youth so as to help them realize their full potential and dissuade them from violent extremist leanings. Development alone, however, is not enough. We must also create conditions conducive to a peaceful society in which human rights, the rule of law and good governance are promoted and upheld. Thailand champions a comprehensive approach to peace, security and development. This is evident in the way in which our peacekeepers, who are actually more like early peacebuilders, carry out their duties. They are very much invested in their peacekeeping responsibilities and in helping local populations improve their livelihoods and stand on their own feet. They are strongly committed to building peace and to preventing any further relapse into conflict. The United Nations system can achieve more by working in a coordinated manner to maximize the tools at its disposal to reinforce the work of concerned agencies. When various bodies are acting in concert, the Security Council in particular can lend the necessary political weight to support preventive action. We agree with the Secretary-General that United Nations conflict-prevention tools must be strengthened, used proactively and deployed rapidly. We support the use of good offices and preventive diplomacy, as well as early-warning systems based on informed analyses of the dynamics on the ground. Peacekeeping, peacebuilding and special political missions are essential to prevent conflict from recurring. These are tools that need adequate resources. The United Nations also must work closely with Member States, who have the primary responsibility for conflict prevention, to ensure sustainability. United Nations training and capacity-building programmes in conflict prevention should be continued and expanded. It is also crucial to deepen cooperation with regional organizations, as they are normally better informed and closely engaged with the dynamics and key players in the region. Their conflict-prevention capabilities and tools can complement those of the United Nations, to the benefit of countries neighbouring the conflict areas. Today we are facing increasingly complex conflicts that require a more prompt, effective and coordinated response. Thailand stands ready to work with the United Nations and our partners worldwide to tackle the root causes of conflict, prevent conflict from happening, and sustain peace through development work.

I now give the floor to Mr. Christian Leffler, Deputy Secretary-General for Global and Economic Issues of the European External Action Service of the European Union,. Mr. Leffler: Following the terrible events that took place in Paris last Friday and the carnage in Beirut just the day before, let me start my intervention by presenting our condolences to the Governments and peoples of France and Lebanon. Those attacks, as well as those on the Russian airliner, in Iraq and elsewhere where terrorists strike, are an attack on us all. They are an affront to humankind and a challenge to the fundamental values that we have committed collectively to defend. I have the honour to speak in this debate on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its member States. The candidate countries the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Albania, the country of the Stabilization and Association Process and potential candidate Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova, Armenia and Georgia, align themselves with this statement. I would like to start by thanking the presidency for having convened this timely and pertinent debate. I would also like to express our appreciation to the Secretary-General, Ambassador Skoog and Ms. Bouchamaoui for their opening remarks. As the Council has stated in the past, security and development are closely interlinked and mutually reinforcing. This is recognized very clearly in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1). We know that poverty, inequality, weak and ineffective institutions as well as the adverse effects of climate change are drivers of conflict. Equally, for sustainable development to be possible, we need freedom from violence and conflict. And neither lasting peace nor sustainable development can be fully realized without respect for human rights and the rule of law. As we tackle these global challenges, the role of security and development actors can and should be complementary. We welcome the strong message of the United Nations peace operations and peacebuilding reviews that sustaining peace should be a unifying thread running through the work of the United Nations. Building peace, preventing conflict and strengthening international security are core objectives of the European Union, and we remain committed to taking a comprehensive approach to security and development issues. We are pleased to see that the Council is increasingly looking beyond the immediate symptoms of existing crises and adopting a more forward-looking approach. We all need to invest more in prevention. It is the EU’s conviction that sustainable development is an important preventive element. The Security Council has intensified its preventive work and its focus on post-conflict peacebuilding so as to prevent relapses into violence. The EU believes that we should continue in that direction through, for instance, horizon-scanning briefings, ensuring that longer-term peacebuilding is considered in mission mandates, and by strengthening and reforming the advisory role of the Peacebuilding Commission. For the same reasons, we are pleased that counterterrorism and fighting illicit flows, drug trafficking, transnational organized crime and small- arms proliferation have long been on the Council’s agenda. The Council must now step up its interaction with other parts of the United Nations system to maximize coherence in these areas. The EU has always insisted on the need to prevent or tackle conflicts and crises comprehensively. In our interconnected world, our own security relies on human security around the globe. That includes investing in human rights, but also mainstreaming that priority by embracing human rights-based approaches. In that context, women’s empowerment is essential. Women are crucial agents of conflict prevention, and realizing gender equality will make a crucial contribution to sustainable development. The United Nations is currently engaged in a period of strategic reflection at several levels. The result must be comprehensive and ambitious. We should develop synergies between the 2030 Agenda and the three peace and security reviews. Let me finally mention a few recent initiatives that we have been working on in the European Union. First, we are refining the sharing of conflict-analyses with partners, which should lead to coherent approaches to State-building and peacebuilding. Secondly, we have set up an EU trust fund for stability and for addressing the root causes of irregular migration and displaced persons in Africa, which will address the causes and effects of conflict and instability that lead to displacement and migration. Thirdly, we are developing the EU-wide strategic framework for supporting security-sector reform. The primary responsibility for conflict prevention and sustainable development lies with Member States. But the international community has a role to play, including the Council within its mandate. A clear message in the 2030 Agenda is the need for a comprehensive and integrated approach to tackling global challenges. We must bridge peace, development and security and work together to achieve a safer, more prosperous and more sustainable world.

I wish to remind everyone to please stay within the four-minute time limit that we have set out and on which the Council has agreed on numerous occasions in the past. There are so many people who want to participate in this debate, and I want to be fair to all of them. I now give the floor to the representative of Brazil.

Let me reiterate our heartfelt condolences to France, Lebanon and the Russian Federation, which have been brutally victimized by terror in the past few days. Thank you for organizing this open debate, Mr. President. 1 also wish to thank the Secretary-General and the Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission for their briefings. Let me also congratulate Ms. Bouchamaoui for the vital contribution of the Tunisian National Dialogue Quartet to ensuring peace and democracy in Tunisia. Brazil has long upheld the notion that development and security are closely interconnected, mutually reinforcing and central to the achievement of lasting peace. Experience has demonstrated that achieving development leads a country to strengthen its commitment to peace and stability. That positive link was the subject of an open debate promoted by Brazil’s most recent presidency of the Security Council in February 2011 (see S/PV.6479). However, the relationship between security and development cannot be understood from a simplistic perspective. We should clearly reject any notion that poverty itself might constitute a threat to peace. One should not lose sight of the fact that the gravest threats to international peace and security, including world wars, have historically risen from tensions between developed industrial nations. Militaristic agendas and the unilateral use of force are far more significant sources of instability than poverty per se. A broad and strong consensus has emerged on the centrality of conflict prevention to the promotion of peace, as the Secretary-General states in his latest report on the matter (S/2015/730). The issue was also highlighted by all three high-level reviews conducted this year, since preventive approaches are consistent with more effective peace operations, more comprehensive peacebuilding efforts and more empowering initiatives on the women and peace and security agenda. Adopting a multidimensional approach to conflict prevention is therefore a wise strategy. Traditional instruments to solve disputes and avert wars, including mediation, good offices and conciliation measures, remain essential. Nevertheless, preventive diplomacy goes far beyond those tools. Understanding and tackling the root causes of conflict are a key step in preventing the emergence of new hostilities. While every crisis derives from a specific context, some challenges are particularly frequent, including economic and social inequality, disputes regarding the ownership of land and natural resources, human rights violations, the insufficient participation of women and the marginalization of minorities and vulnerable populations. Other structural factors, often linked to the behaviour of developed countries, also contribute to international instability. In order to genuinely face the underlying causes of conflicts, the Security Council should also consider measures to control the flow of arms, promote nuclear disarmament, ensure respect for the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations concerning the use of force, enforce withdrawal from illegally occupied territories and expand the participation of developing countries in the Council’s deliberations. A situation that deserves particular attention in that regard is the extreme case of “de-development” that is taking place in Palestine as a result of our collective inability to translate into reality our commitment to a two-State solution. The national report of the State of Palestine, submitted by Palestine to the Economic and Social Council in 2014 (E/2014/60, annex), unveils the root causes of a protracted conflict that requires priority attention from the Security Council. Discerning the root causes of a particular conflict is a complex endeavour that should not be confused with the attainment of a development agenda. The first silo to be broken down by this debate is the erroneous perception that only developing countries need to build peaceful and inclusive societies. Moreover, the various challenges faced by all countries in areas related to public order should not be interpreted as threats to peace, security or stability. In that regard, it is worth stressing the key legal and practical distinction between conflict and violence. The notion of conflict describes a politically motivated situation that might represent a threat to international peace and security. Response to conflicts may involve instruments associated with collective responsibility or security. The concept of violence, on the other hand, can relate to a purely domestic challenge within the realm of public security that is subject to national laws. Although international cooperation, upon request, can be a useful tool to curb violence, we are dealing with different spheres of responsibility to which different remedies should be applied. In other words, the Security Council is not mandated, for instance, to reduce high levels of homicide or criminality in a given country. From the point of view of international humanitarian law, the Geneva Conventions that apply to conflict prescribe, as a rule, that force, when resorted to, must observe the criterion of proportionality. Conversely, in situations of domestic violence, different criteria apply; every casualty or injury caused by a State public agent must be accounted for according to domestic penal laws. Utmost care must be taken not to bring issues of internal public order into a body that deals with conflicts and threats to international peace and security. Such a mistaken approach could exacerbate the problems rather than help to solve them. Having engraved the principle of the peaceful settlement of disputes into our Constitution, Brazil will continue to contribute towards a virtuous cycle of security and development in our region and beyond. We are proud to belong to a zone of peace, as defined by the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States. In conclusion, allow me to reiterate the long- standing commitment of Brazil to the prevention of conflict through dialogue, diplomacy and development.

I now give the floor to the representative of Guatemala.

First, I would like to express our gratitude to your delegation, Mr. President, for organizing this open debate on an issue of high priority, as well as for the concept note (S/2015/845, annex) that you have prepared, which contains valuable guidance for our deliberations today. We also wish to thank the other speakers who have preceded us for their statements. Before I continue, I would like to take this opportunity to express our condemnation of the multiple terrorist attacks perpetrated in recent days and to express our solidarity with those friendly countries, which have faced such difficult circumstances. My delegation associates itself with the statement made by the representative of Iran on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. We wish to add some additional thoughts. For Guatemala, the commitment to multilateralism and the United Nations is a cornerstone of its foreign policy. Our strong multilateral vocation is based on the conviction that global challenges, such as the maintenance of peace and security, the battle against poverty, the encouragement of sustainable development and the promotion of the rule of law, can be addressed effectively only within the framework of multilateralism and the United Nations. Less than two months ago, we adopted a new development agenda, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1), in which Member States affirmed that, without peace and security, we cannot achieve development. Goal 16 of the Sustainable Development Goals, for instance, reflects the need to build peaceful, just and inclusive societies and provide equal access to justice, based on the respect for human rights and good governance. That is why we believe it is necessary to ensure that all the instruments available to the Council be proportionate to the needs in the fight against crimes committed against the civilian population and contain strong elements of deterrence, accountability and justice. It is important that the lessons learned from the worst failures and best practices guide our future work. The Human Rights Council, the International Criminal Court and the specialized criminal courts have an important role to play in this respect. Over the years, we have all advocated a greater commitment to conflict prevention rather than dealing with threats to peace after the conflict has developed. In conflict prevention, we must deal with the underlying causes through an open and inclusive dialogue, involving all the parties concerned, from the State and civil society to the grass-roots level. We reaffirm our commitment to fostering a culture of prevention of armed conflicts as a means of addressing the interrelated problems of security and development and of strengthening the capacity of the United Nations to prevent armed conflicts. Guatemala, as a member of the Peacebuilding Commission, considers it imperative to provide the assistance needed by countries that are emerging from conflict, and trying to restore democratic institutions, in order to ensure inclusive dialogue with all the parties concerned and guarantee the necessary national reconciliation. It is only in that way that we can we stay on the path of peace, stability and development without risking regression. The Commission is in a good position to promote greater coherence and synergy in the policies and actions implemented in the three peacebuilding dimensions: political, security and development. In that respect, we express our full support for the recommendations included in the report of the Advisory Group of Experts on the Review of the United Nations Peacebuilding Architecture (see S/2015/490). We support the Peacebuilding Commission’s advisory role to the Security Council and the General Assembly. That advisory role should encourage the integrated strengthening and long-term commitment of both the United Nations and other entities to countries emerging from conflict. Our country shares a commitment to the pursuit of sustainable development and peace in countries emerging from conflict and recognizes the value of the relationship between the Security Council and the Peacebuilding Commission to better address the conflicts and situations in those countries. In conclusion and taking into account the various conflicts, it is important to ask ourselves if we are keeping the founding promise of the Organization to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war. As stakeholders in the international system, that should be our goal, and it can be achieved if we improve our efforts to build and maintain peace. My delegation is committed to that goal.

I now give the floor to the representative of India.

It is a pleasure to see you, Mr. President, presiding over this meeting. The topic of today’s debate is interesting. It posits the concepts of development and security together and seeks a greater understanding of the root causes of conflict. Most of us would agree that development and peace are mutually supportive. Eradicating poverty, providing basic human development and economic opportunity will certainly strengthen the foundation for peace and stability. It is true that grievances driven by a sense of deprivation, which is often linked to the absence of development, can at times lead to conflict, in particular within countries. People who do not have the means to shape their own destiny are susceptible to being caught in a vicious cycle of hopelessness, despair and anger. The recent adoption of the transformative 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1) is both an acknowledgement and a response by the international community that ending poverty and achieving sustainable developing is an urgent task. That being said, the terrible events of last week, in Beirut and Paris, and the downing of a Russian airliner over Egypt last month demonstrate to us that the greatest threat to peace and security comes from violent extremism and religious fanaticism, not from the absence of economic and social development. It is the purveyors of hate and those who characterize others as infidels who are responsible for the violence that threaten our civilizational values. We need to also acknowledge that it is the absence of State authority, or weak State authority, that provides the breeding ground for extremist organizations to operate. Terrorism is evil, as is violent extremism. The lack of economic and social development cannot be a justification for either. Terrorism has to be eliminated. The events of last week have shown so tragically that there can be no alternative. All terrorist organizations  — Daesh and Al-Shabaab, Lashkar-e-Tayyiba and Al-Qaida — have an ideological basis that contradicts the basic tenets of humankind. Ideology alone, however, is not enough to sustain terrorists. They need financing and space to operate. That is, unfortunately, provided to them, and that is what needs to be addressed collectively. The events of last week also highlight our unfinished business in the fight against terrorism. Leaders had, at the 2005 World Summit, decided that expeditious action would be taken to finalize the comprehensive convention on international terrorism. That has not happened. The price that we pay for procrastination is often in human lives. That should not be allowed to continue. Terrorism takes away the foremost of human rights  — the right to life. It is truly a crime against humanity. In conclusion, I refer to the tendency of the Security Council to encroach on the jurisdiction of the General Assembly. Just because the three pillars of the United Nations — peace and security, development and human rights  — are interdependent, it does not ipso facto mean that the Security Council must allocate all these functions to itself. The Security Council is a non-representative, limited member body with opaque working methods. It cannot presume to prescribe policy choices on issues of development and social inclusion to the wider membership of the United Nations. The Council will, however, have our full support in its efforts to curb dangerous and extremist trends. The consolidation of political processes and solutions, while also building durable State institutions, will go a long way in addressing extremism and radicalization. We would encourage the Council to pursue such solutions.

I now give the floor to the representative of Iraq.

First and foremost, we express our condolences to the people of France, Russia and Lebanon. We in Iraq are also affected by the continuing and multiform terrorist operations. We see martyrs die every day. We want to express our thanks to you and your country, Mr. President, for preparing and organizing this open debate on a subject that is of growing importance, given the close link between security challenges and the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals. The best way to guarantee sustainable peace and tolerance and to prevent conflicts is to reinforce sustainable development and to guarantee equal opportunities for all. We also need to establish justice in the distribution of national wealth, without excluding anyone on the basis of race, ethnic origin or belief. The objective of creating secure and inclusive societies, based on a solid foundation, is defined in Goal 16 of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1). Creating such societies requires respect for the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, as well as for international law, which prohibits interference in the internal affairs of States. Such interference exacerbates divisions, including divisions based on religion and belief, and creates insecurity at the domestic level. It unleashes conflict, which leads to destruction and massacres within local societies. It also undermines the development gains that States have achieved over previous decades  — gains that are being lost in the wars we are seeing at the moment. Fair and equal participation and access to resources between neighbouring States along a river, for example, prevent conflict between the countries on that river. The absence of justice and equality in regard to water quotas impedes the sustainable development of the area through which that water flows, which contravenes the right to water. Furthermore, mutual investment in the water of an international river contributes to sustainable development among the countries along that river, and that closes the door on conflict. The spread of Takfiri thinking or apostasy throughout the modern world demonstrates the lack of global security, as well as the failure of the international community to face up to the Takfiri thinking of schools whose teaching deviates from regular education. Such thinking permits massacres, hostage-taking, sexual enslavement, immolation and the other crimes that are being committed against those who hold different religious or other beliefs. The failure to address such delinquent thinking and to eliminate it is a strategic failure of the mechanisms that have been established to eradicate terrorism, namely the programmes within the United Nations or outside it. We must not forget that the pressure on the environment, the scarcity of natural resources and climate change itself are all factors that contribute to the outbreak of wars and conflict. Given that reality, Iraq has made its contribution to the document on climate change whose adoption we expect to see in Paris. Women can contribute to the prevention of conflicts and peacebuilding. Women’s rights must be guaranteed by societies and women must not be excluded or deprived of their rights, especially since they often suffer the most in situations of armed conflict. In Iraq, we are making progress towards the completion of a national plan to apply resolution 1325 (2000) on women and peace and security, including with respect to decision-making in those areas.

I now give the floor to the representative of Liechtenstein.

At the outset, I would like to express the heartfelt condolences of the people and Government of Liechtenstein to all those affected by the recent terrorist attacks committed by Daesh in France, Lebanon, Iraq and elsewhere. When adopting the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1) in September, our Heads of State and Government recognized that peace and security will be at risk without sustainable development. We are grateful to the presidency for organizing today’s debate, which offers a first opportunity to explore some of the relevant issues. The concept paper (S/2015/845, annex) rightly places strong emphasis on the need for prevention. Conflict prevention and the promotion of peaceful societies, as established in Sustainable Development Goal 16, go hand in hand. Serious violations of human rights are often a key indicator of conflict to come and are thus a key aspect of prevention. Two key elements must be in place for the Security Council to play its rightful role in that regard. First, the Council must have access to relevant information at an early stage. Secondly, the Council must be willing to take decisive action on the information before it. Concerning the first aspect, the United Nations system has significantly enhanced its early warning capacity over the past few years. Generally speaking, the information necessary for the Council to act in a preventive manner is available within the United Nations system. That, however, will have an effect only if such information is placed before the Council in time. In that respect, the Human Rights Up Front initiative should prove to be an important advance. The decisive aspect, however, is Council members’ resolve to take action when the relevant information is before them, especially when a situation is about to escalate and could result in atrocity crimes. The code of conduct on Security Council action against atrocity crimes, which 106 States support at the moment, gives hope that the Council will become more effective at prevention. Resolution 2248 (2015) on Burundi, which was adopted by consensus last Friday, is certainly a positive signal. We look forward to seeing more States support the code of conduct and also to its consistent application, especially by those Council members who have already signed it. We also hope that it will serve as an additional incentive for the Secretariat to be very proactive in forwarding information to the Security Council. The Council can also play a much stronger role in helping to create accountable institutions and ensuring equal access to justice as a key ingredient of sustainable peace. Such efforts should focus primarily on the strengthening of national judiciaries, which is the best way to ensure a lasting contribution to sustainable development in the countries concerned. Capacity- building and technical assistance can be made availabIe, and are already being made available, by different parts of the United Nations system. If necessary, hybrid models can be put in place, particularly in situations of transition from armed conflict. There are also great opportunities for the Peacebuilding Commission in that regard. In most cases, justice efforts should be driven by the countries concerned, but at the same time the Council should consistently call on them to fulfil their obligation to fight impunity for the most serious crimes and should mandate international assistance where needed. Where a country is clearly unwilling to provide justice, with impunity impeding sustainable peace, the Council should consider referring situations to the International Criminal Court. However, given its track record in that regard, the Council should reconsider its referral modalities; in particular, it should ensure a strategy for effective follow-up. There are several specific aspects of the 2030 Agenda that merit separate discussion, but the issue of human trafficking, in particular, is a challenge that would be worthy of an open debate in the Security Council. Human trafficking is not merely one of the great human rights challenges and tragedies of our time; it can also destabilize societies and pose a threat to international peace and security. We hope that such a debate could galvanize a coordinated approach to human trafficking across the United Nations system.

I now give the floor to the representative of Australia.

It is well understood that prevention is always better than cure. Conflict prevention was the reason that the United Nations was created, yet it remains a predominantly crisis- driven Organization, reliant on traditional response mechanisms that are straining to meet increasing need, particularly as contemporary conflicts are becoming more complex and asymmetrical and posing ever greater threats to a larger number of civilians. The evidence drawing the link between peace and security and development is overwhelming. The report of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, States of Fragility 2015: Meeting Post-2015 Ambitions, affirms that conflict can lead to a reversal of national development gains by more than 20 years. The World Bank has also identified the correlation between violence and poverty. As others have mentioned, Sustainable Development Goal 16 affirms the universal recognition accorded to promoting just, peaceful and inclusive societies and to preventing conflict. In order to achieve sustainable peace and security, the United Nations must address the root causes of conflict and end the cycle of violence and relapse. That requires an integrated approach. The Security Council has a crucial role to play in addressing that. First, more regular and comprehensive briefings of the Council on fragile and conflict affected countries — informed by a range of stakeholders — could promote better understanding of the drivers and root causes. Secondly, the Council should enable the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) to play the bridging and advocacy role envisioned when the PBC was established in 2005. In that regard, we welcome the involvement of the Chair of the PBC in today’s debate. Thirdly, the Council should consider how other United Nations bodies can contribute to peace and security. Programmes run by the United Nations Development Group to support the rule of law, anticorruption and effective and accountable institutions, can help in addressing the drivers of conflict and in sustaining peace following conflict. In turn, those considerations could help ensure that Security Council mandates draw on the full range of the United Nations conflict prevention, mediation and development tools. The Council’s mandates should reinforce ongoing United Nations peacebuilding, State-building and associated development efforts in the field to help prevent future conflict and build the foundations of a peaceful and inclusive State. The United Nations must also ensure greater operational cohesion at Headquarters and in the field, reinforced by appropriate leadership, capacity and resources for United Nations peace operations and country teams. The successful United Nations Integrated Mission in Timor-Leste provided a useful example of how that can be done. As co-facilitator, with Angola, of the consultations on the review of United Nations peacebuilding, we look forward to further discussions with the United Nations membership on reforms to the way the United Nations does its core business of preventing conflict and building sustainable peace and security. Today’s debate, which has highlighted the important role that development plays in achieving sustainable peace, contributes to that crucial reform work.

I now give the floor to the representative of Italy.

Italy aligns itself with the statement delivered on behalf of the European Union, and I will add some national remarks. In Italy’s view, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1) and the ongoing reviews of peacekeeping, peacebuilding and women and peace and security have some underlying themes in common, including the importance of conflict prevention, the need to break down silos and foster an integrated approach towards the three pillars of the Organization, and the central role of human rights, respect for which is essential to fostering real progress across the board. The rhetorical battle on conflict prevention has been won. There is broad consensus on its centrality and on the great risks that can arise from inaction. Yet, at the same time, prevention has become more difficult. We must renew our collective commitment to conflict prevention and operationalize the emerging broad consensus among the membership. Allow me to share some of Italy’s ideas. First, with respect to raising awareness, we must recognize that today’s security challenges are different from those of the past and that the security landscape before us is rapidly changing. In September, we adopted the ambitious 2030 Agenda, which introduces an integrated approach to sustainable development by linking together the five P’s: people, prosperity, partnership, planet and peace. While respecting the various roles and mandates of the United Nations bodies, closer attention should be paid to broader security issues, which are a matter of concern for a growing part of the membership, and to furthering closer cooperation between the General Assembly and the Security Council. As an example of best practices, allow me to refer to the open debate held, during the New Zealand presidency of the Council, on peace and security challenges facing small island developing States (S/PV.7499). We fully supported that initiative and followed it up with a ministerial meeting in Milan with our partners from the small island developing States, on climate adaptation and food security. Secondly, in fostering an integrated approach and addressing the root causes, today’s challenges are complex by nature. As we advocate that the United Nations must not work in silos, we should refrain from using the same approach. Today we are faced with the biggest refugee crisis since the Second World War, causing, inter alia, increased migration pressure on the Mediterranean region, where too many lives have already been lost. As a Mediterranean country whose navy is daily engaged in protecting and saving human lives, we understand that there is no quick fix to that phenomenon. It must be tackled from different angles: through development by addressing the root causes; politically, by finding solutions to the crises we are facing; and by respecting human rights and the rights of refugees. As highlighted at last week’s summit on migration, held in Malta between the European Union and Africa, only an integrated approach addressing the root causes can promote a long-term solution. In that regard, as stated by Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi, during the recent Summit of the Group of 20, implementing the recently adopted Sustainable Development Goals will also play a critical role in the prevention of violent extremist acts. Thirdly, we must revitalize the preventive tools at the disposal of the Council, collectively renew our focus on the peaceful settlement of disputes under Chapter VI of the Charter of the United Nations and deepen our partnerships with regional and subregional organizations, in particular with the African Union, under Chapter VIII. In the same spirit, Italy believes in closer cooperation between the Security Council and the Peacebuilding Commission, for instance by inviting the Chairs of the country-specific configurations to participate in Council meetings, as appropriate. We also welcome the strengthening of early warning mechanisms, such as the updated analysis framework developed by the Office of the Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, the principle of the responsibility to protect, the Human Rights Up Front initiative and the role of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. All of those represent valuable tools whose potential should be fully exploited. My last point is on funding. First, if we are to tackle the root causes of potential conflicts, we must first and foremost respect our commitment to financing the 2030 Agenda that we have just adopted. In that respect, I can announce that the budgetary law currently under consideration by our Parliament aims to increase the official development assistance (ODA) resources of Italy’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation by 40 per cent, in 2016. The ultimate goal is for Italy’s ODA to reach 0.7 per cent of its gross national income by the 2030 Agenda deadline. Secondly and finally, with respect to resourcing United Nations preventive tools and peacebuilding activities, the reviews we have carried out highlight that investing in prevention is not only a moral obligation but also a smart investment, as the cost of conflict intervention has become increasingly high. We must now build on that awareness by significantly strengthening the resources devoted to those activities, thereby ensuring a more reliable and predictable funding of the Secretariat’s core prevention and mediation capacities. In the same spirit, it is important that peacebuilding activities be regularly and predictably funded to diminish the chances of conflict relapse. I congratulate the President on the initiative of addressing these issues in this open debate.

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

Speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), let me begin by thanking you, Sir, for convening this debate. I also convey my thanks to the Secretary-General for his briefing. At the outset, I would like to express my deepest condolences to the people and Government of France, Iraq, Russia and Lebanon for the tragic loss of life of a number of their fellow citizens, as a result of the recent heinous terrorist acts. NAM acknowledges the interconnectedness of economic development, social development, environmental protection, peace and security, human rights and the rule of law. Efforts to transform the United Nations into a more effective instrument for preventing conflict should take into account the need for a balanced, coherent and comprehensive approach, in accordance with its Charter and international law. In this context, it is critical that all principal organs of the United Nations play an active role in devloping and implementing a more effective collective security system, in accordance with their respective functions and powers. NAM believes that it is indispensable for United Nations Member States to develop common perceptions and agreed approaches to address existing, new and emerging threats and challenges to international peace and security, as well as the root causes of conflict. Such approaches to collective security would be legitimate only if they were developed in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter and by all Member States acting together. The active participation of each and every principal organ of the United Nations is crucial, acting in the exercise of its respective functions and powers without upsetting the balance established by the Charter. NAM underlines the collective desire to establish a peaceful and prosperous world as well as a just and equitable world order that remains encumbered by fundamental impediments. These impediments are, inter alia, the severe adverse impact of the reoccurring global financial and economic crisis on the economic growth and development of developing countries, which could lead to increasing poverty and deprivation in these countries; the continuing lack of resources and underdevelopment of the majority of the developing world; the continuing unequal terms of trade and the lack of cooperation by developed countries; and the coercive and unilateral measures imposed by some of them and the use of force or the threat of the use of force. The rich and powerful countries continue to exercise an inordinate influence in determining the nature and direction of international relations, including economic and trade relations as well as the rules governing those relations, many of which are at the expense of developing countries.While NAM supports United Nations peacekeeping operations, we stress that United Nations peacekeeping operations should not be used as a substitute for addressing the root causes of conflicts. Rather, the root causes should be addressed in a coherent, well-planned, coordinated and comprehensive manner with other political, social, economic and development instruments. In the framework of this open debate, NAM also welcomes the establishment of and supports the Peacebuilding Commission as a coordinated, coherent and integrated institutional mechanism to address the special needs of countries emerging from conflict towards recovery, reintegration and reconstruction, upon their request and in accordance with the principle of national ownership. We underline the need for the Peacebuilding Commission to establish a dynamic partnership with regional and subregional organizations and to ensure that regional efforts receive the requisite attention and support. Integrated peacebuilding strategies and programmes, if consistent and in line with host-country strategies and programmes, could sustain peace and prevent the re-emergence of hostilities and conflicts. Finally, even though we welcome today’s debate as a contribution to enhancing the understanding of the interlinkages between security and development, it is important to stress that this issue goes beyond the core competencies of the Security Council.

I now give the floor to the representative of Colombia.

I thank you, Sir, for convening this open debate. I should also like to thank the representative of Sweden for his briefing as Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission, and of course, Ms. Bouchamaoui for her very inspiring statement this morning. I express my condolences to the Government of France, to Lebanon and its people, and to Russia for the downing of its plane. These are all acts that we condemn vigorously. This debate could not be taking place at a more appropriate time. At the Sustainable Agenda Summit our leaders afirmed that peace and security would be in danger without sustainable development. We have also reviewed the reports on peacekeeping operations and the peacebuilding architecture, as well as that on the women and peace and security agenda, which appeals for a strengthened role for women in the maintenance and building of peace, not only as a party affected by the war but also as a fundamental part in the prevention, management and resolution of conflicts and the achievement of lasting peace, which will allow us to think of peacebuilding as a cross-cutting process that takes place before, during and after conflict. The concept note before us (S/2015/845, annex) makes it clear that the Council recognizes that this is a complex and multifaceted relationship that is specific to each case. Allow me to cite the example of my own country, Colombia, where we have identified the convergence between the sustainable development targets and some of the points that have seen the greatest progress in our negotiations in Havana on the cessation of hostilities and the building of a stable and lasting peace. Forty-seven of the seventy points agreed upon are consistent with the 47 sustainable development targets, the accomplishment of which will, I am sure, allow us to close the gaps between rural and urban Colombia towards a lasting and sustainable peace. Through its tools, the Council should create a solid basis to prevent relapse into conflict and generate sustainable peace, whose inclusive processes must always be based on national ownership. Peacekeeping operations and special political missions are instruments whereby we can restore conditions of basic security and trust in the political process, and strengthen national capacities in the long term, facilitating the path towards peacebuilding and, at the same time, sustainable development. Cooperation between the Security Council and the Peacebuilding Commission, of which we are a member, has yielded important results and must be strengthened with a view to overcoming fragmentation. The advisory role of the Commission, the diversity of its membership, its nature as a bridge between the Security Council and the General Assembly and among the three pillars of development, human rights and security, make it the appropriate mechanism to coordinate processes leading to sustainable peace. Finally, when missions are established they must be structured on the existing capacities of the countries concerned and the activities of country teams must be integrated into peacebuilding activities. In this way and at the time of transition or the conclusion of the mission, the country will be left with strengthened support to enable it to continue in its peacebuilding process towards lasting peace.

I now give the floor to the representative of Mexico.

Mexico thanks you, Mr. President, for convening this debate on a subject that is very relevant in the light of the events of recent days in Europe and the Middle East. We take this opportunity to extend our sincere condolences to the delegations of Russia, Lebanon and France for the loss of human lives and the wounds incurred from the recent attacks. The changing nature of the violent conflicts in different regions of the world is entrenched in inequality, exclusion, the lack of equal opportunities and jobs, frustration and social alienation. It suffices to look at the news headlines of the past few days to understand that our Organization’s work to maintain international peace and security, prevent conflicts and establish peaceful societies remains fragile and insufficient. All United Nations organs, within their respective remits, and the international community as a whole must keep pace with these realities and work better and more appropriately to improve our capacity for prevention and response to build and maintain peace. We cannot allow current conflicts to continue to cause havoc or the conflicts of the past to return with renewed violence. Among the broad range of recommendations derived from the review processes of United Nations peacekeeping operations and the peacebuilding architecture, perhaps none better reflects the objective and spirit of this meeting than that stressed by the team headed by Ambassador Gert Rosenthal to change the epicentre of peacebuilding efforts from the reactive perspective that has prevailed for years to a preventive one. In that regard, the focus on building and consolidating peace should, in my delegation’s opinion, be the guiding theme that allows us to reduce the gap between the silos referred to in the concept note before us (S/2015/845, annex). We believe that the Peacebuilding Commission can and must play an important role in this exercise. The lessons learned over the past decade reveal us that, in order to be successful, peacebuilding requires a comprehensive focus on conflicts through the establishment of a solid and unidirectional linkage among the three pillars of the work of the United Nations: peace and security, human rights and development. Reversing fragmentation of efforts will require coherent collective action to that end. In order to translate recommendations into action, we must approach prevention, peacebuilding and peacekeeping as a political process that requires sustained attention and long-term commitment and action. As part of that dynamic, the necessary consent of Member States should serve to bolster the principle of national ownership. The principle of national ownership must be strengthened. We can build national capacities, strengthen institutions and support good governance if we involve the greatest number of stakeholders from the very start, including, of course, women at every stage. International, regional and subregional financial organizations, when their constituent bodies allow, can accompany and bolster the efforts of the United Nations in addressing the causes of conflict in a preventive manner. As the Secretary-General noted at the beginning of this meeting, the issue of financial resources is also relevant to strengthening the Organization’s prevention and response capacities. My delegation believes that there is no better investment than investing in peace, development and security for our societies. We believe that the requests and mandates to do more must be accompanied by a predictable budgetary structure and strategic planning that allows us to strengthen efficiency and effectiveness. We therefore support and will continue to support firmly the important recommendations made by the Advisory Group of Experts on the Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture and the High-level Independent Panel on Peace Operations in favour of the immediate adoption of proposals to establish a special and separate account for special political missions, which are among the main tools of the Council and the Organization in prevention, mediation and conflict resolution. Prevention is urgent and the risks of inaction are greater than ever. The current session of the General Assembly, focused on the follow-up of the review processes in different bodies and commissions, provides us with a valuable opportunity to convert our rhetorical commitments into early and effective action aimed at the prevention of violence and the establishment of peaceful societies.

I now give the floor to the representative of Hungary.

Let me start by thanking the United Kingdom presidency for this opportunity and also joining others in offering our deepest condolences to victims, families of victims, people, and governments of countries who have been affected by the recent terrorist attacks. Two months ago, our Heads of State and Government pledged to foster peaceful, just and inclusive societies that are free from fear and violence. That is clearly a noble but interrelated task that requires a lot of stakeholders. The implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1) requires a fresh look at the relationship between peace and development. Indeed, this very issue of relationship has provoked extended debate in the Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals, and the debate was partly put to rest by an innovative suggestion to place less emphasis on what peace and security can do for development and to utilize a reverse approach that was more in line with the mandate of the Group. From then, on the Open Working Group focused on what kind of development could promote peace and security. That is how Goal 16 and other interrelated elements — such as the fight against inequality and discrimination, the principle of inclusivity, women’s empowerment and the leave-no-one-behind principle — took shape and later commanded strong support in Agenda 2030. Goal 16 and related goals therefore are not about peace and security. They are much more than that. First of all, they are cornerstones for the full implementation of the social pillar. They are also important drivers and enablers for the economic and environmental pillars of sustainable development. Agenda 2030 when implemented will ensure that situations threatening international peace and security arise less frequently. The Agenda will also assist in the fight against terrorism and extremism, areas where the Council also has to act, albeit with different tools. Successful implementation will therefore lighten the burden on the Council and assist it in making solutions more robust and longstanding. This, however, does not take away the authority of the Council. First, the onus is squarely on the Security Council to find solutions to conflicts so that affected countries and communities can start their journey towards sustainable development. Secondly, as many others have mentioned, conflicts wipe out whatever progress is made in the field of development. Therefore, the Council must put much more emphasis on prevention. The need for interaction can be best understood by taking a quick look at the current refugee/migration crisis. Until we put an end to the conflicts, we will have no solution for the refugee crisis. Here, the Council has a special responsibility to find and enforce political solutions. Inaction by the Council cannot be substituted by the compassion of others or rectified by addressing the humanitarian consequences. While the Council must do the firefighting, only sustainable development is capable of taking care of the root causes that led or contributed to the conflict. Moving away from conflicts, human mobility has all kinds of other causes. The current migration trends are symptoms of underlying causes such as economic hardship, environmental degradation, food and water scarcity, and so on. In essence, these are different forms of unsustainability, be it economic, environmental or social. In these cases, the implementation of Agenda 2030 is the primary solution, while the Council has an important supportive role to play. Agenda 2030 does not change the authority of any organ. Therefore, there is no need to reinforce the division lines. To the contrary, the integrated nature of threats will require ever closer cooperation. To cement this understanding and for changing our narrative, debates like this are useful. However to really change our course we must transform our words into action.

I now give the floor to the representative of Ethiopia.

I am pleased to see you, Mr. President, presiding over this very important meeting. I want also to thank you for providing an excellent concept paper (S/2015/845, annex). We express our condolences to France, Russia, Lebanon, Iraq and all those that have been affected by the recent heinous terrorist attacks. But there is one question that cries out for an answer. What is it that the international community can do to ensure greater cooperation that matches the challenge we face — cooperation that surpasses the level of cooperation and coordination that we know exists within the terrorist camp? That is the question. When our leaders adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1), they fully recognized that the ambitious Sustainable Development Goals, which are universal in nature, could be attained without peace and security. They were also convinced that, without ensuring sustainable development, it would not be possible to address the root causes of conflicts and achieve durable peace and stability. This strong political message is reinforced by the outcome of the review on peace operations, the report on the review of the peacebuilding architecture (see S/2015/490) and the global study on the implementation of resolution 1325 (2000). All these reviews agree on a number of issues, among which is the need to address the problems created by institutional fragmentation. The nexus between security and development is no longer a matter of theoretical debate; it is a practical issue that we need to seriously consider if we are to achieve lasting peace and prosperity. That is why it is absolutely necessary to build synergy and coherence among all stakeholders — the entire United Nations system, regional and subregional organizations, Member States and others — in the effort to build a peaceful and inclusive world. Of course, we all know this and have been saying so for quite some time, but what has been lacking is concrete action to change the way we do things so as to better respond to the challenges. We believe that there are things that the Council can and indeed should do within its purview without unduly infringing upon the competencies of other organs and bodies within the United Nations system. The prevention, management and resolution of conflicts, as well as peacebuilding and post-conflict reconstruction, cannot be effectively addressed without understanding the linkages between security and development. Reduced preoccupation with jurisdiction and turf and greater emphasis on enlightened self-interest might do the trick. In this regard, I could not agree more with the remark made by the Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission this morning: “By overcoming short-sighted turf wars, we would not only increase the efficacy of the Organization but, even more important, provide more effective support for the societies that it was set up to help.” The implication for the Council is very clear. Its deliberations and decisions should be informed by a thorough analysis of the security-development nexus and its actions through the range of tools at its disposal to prevent, manage and resolve conflicts should reflect this important dynamic. That is what I believe will make the difference in translating our words into action and effectively address the multifaceted challenges that we are facing today.

I now give the floor to the representative of Germany.

We very much welcome this extremely timely debate on the link between security and development. It is a truism that security and development are interlinked and mutually reinforcing. Long-term peace and security are not possible without sustainable development and vice-versa. That is why it is so important for the United Nations system to “break down the silos”, as the excellent concept note (S/2015/845, annex) prepared for this debate rightly points out. It is time that all parts of the United Nations system take account of the connection between security and development and act accordingly. Making the United Nations fit for purpose is not only about more efficiency, better capacities and lighter procedures, but also about changing mindsets. Let me highlight three points that are of immediate importance to us. First, the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1) was a truly global success, not least because we overcame one important impediment to global progress, namely, our tendency to see the world as divided between North and South, with development and progress being a one-way street. In adopting the Agenda, we have created high expectations for improved coherence and a comprehensive approach in tackling the challenges of the twenty-first century. This also applies, by the way, to the United Nations system. I shall cite but one example. Reducing violence in all its forms, as pledged in Goal 16 of the Agenda, will require new forms of cooperation between the Security Council and other parts of the United Nations system. Secondly, as German Foreign Minister Steinmeier underlined during the high-level week of the General Assembly, human rights, peace and security are inextricably intertwined and have to be dealt with as such within the United Nations system. Gross and systematic human rights violations are often a root cause of conflict and one of the main reasons why people flee their homelands. Introducing human rights tasks into the mandates of peacekeeping missions, and making these tasks more and more comprehensive over the years, was an important step. But we need to think about how we can do this more systematically, and how we can make the best possible use of the synergies between the many parts of the United Nations system. Incidentally, a smart human rights policy is among the best safeguards against crises. Thirdly, we are in the midst of the most severe global refugee crisis since the Second World War. Sixty million people have fled their homes. In Germany alone, we expect to receive more than 1 million refugees in the course of this year, and there will be more. If we want to come to grips with this situation, we will need to develop answers at the national, regional and, of course, global levels. The root causes are manifold, and include armed conflict, lack of good governance, poverty or a general lack of prospects to sustain a living. Refugees fear for their lives as war has destroyed their homes. Others flee because they are persecuted at home for their beliefs or their way of life. The United Nations system is a crucial part of the global response. Thousands of people are committed to helping refugees and improving living conditions in the countries of origin and the transit countries. We are deeply grateful to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the International Organization for Migration, the World Food Programme, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and countless other organizations for their indispensable and outstanding efforts. But we need to better combine their work. We need to reframe our perspective to focus on what is necessary — what needs to be done — and not on whose turf it is. From the United Nations country teams to the Security Council, we need to be aware that these are extraordinary times. Business as usual cannot be the answer. To conclude, there are many more examples underlining the necessity of jointly resolving security and development issues, let us draw on the entire wealth of United Nations instruments to this end. The effects will be mutually reinforcing. Positive economic prospects and sustainable development will lead to more stability and thus eventually bring about peace and long-term security. A stable level of security is a precondition for economic activity and in the end prosperity, which is in the best interests of all.

I now give the floor to the representative of Estonia.

May I begin by expressing my most profound and sincere condolences to the families of those who died in the terrorist attacks on Friday in Paris. To the peoples of France, and the other countries that have been victims of attacks — Lebanon, Iraq and Russia — we also extend our condolences. (spoke in English) I warmly thank the United Kingdom presidency for organizing this timely debate. Let me also thank the Secretary-General, the Permanent Representative of Sweden, and Ms. Bouchamaoui for their remarks. Estonia aligns itself with the statement delivered by the observer of the European Union. We welcome the topic of today’s debate, which very accurately links together the three pillars of the United Nations system: peace and security, development and human rights. Peace and security are the basis prerequisites for achieving sustainable development. Conflict and violence undermine development gains achieved over decades. At the same time, without development and human rights there will be no durable peace and stability. The risks of armed conflicts and crises, forced migration, weak economies and corrupt Governments, poor education, climate change and natural disasters — just to name a few — are all closely linked and need to be addressed comprehensively. As voiced by our President during this year’s Sustainable Development Goals debate (see A/70/PV.8), the linkages between peace and security, development and human rights are clearly recognized in the recently adopted 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1). The promotion of peaceful and inclusive societies, providing access to justice for all, and building effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels are essential to achieving sustainable development. Strong national institutions can be based only on the rule of law and must respect property rights, freedom of speech and the media, open political choice, and access to justice. Creating reliable institutions is also a central part of the transformation needed to enable countries prone to or emerging from conflict to foster development, stability and peace. The rule of law is essential to both preventing and to dealing with the consequences of violence and conflict, as well as transnational organized crime, trafficking and illicit financial flows that directly impact sustainable development. I am pleased to see that the Council is taking a more forward-looking approach. We must invest more in conflict prevention. It is very hard to end ongoing crises that often turn into armed conflicts. It is easier and less costly, in every sense, to prevent violent conflicts from escalating. The Council has a key role to play in prevention, and bridging silos across the development, security and human rights pillars is central to supporting prevention efforts. The Security Council has increased its focus on peacebuilding to reduce the risk of relapse into violence. The Council should continue addressing peacebuilding through horizon-scanning briefings, by ensuring that longer-term peacebuilding is considered in mission mandates, and by strengthening and reforming the advisory role of the Peacebuilding Commission. We encourage the Security Council to address peacebuilding as early as possible. Addressing the interdependence between peace and security and development includes the protection of human rights, including attention to women’s rights, also through their participation in peace consolidation. While the primary responsibility for conflict prevention and sustainable development falls on Member States, the international institutions must do their part. The United Nations system needs to work in a more integrated, flexible and coordinated fashion, both at Headquarters and at country level, to respond to the current global challenges, and give more weight to prevention and early warning tools.

I now give the floor to the representative of Kazakhstan.

I commend the presidency of the United Kingdom for convening this debate on the maintenance of international peace and security, which is most timely indeed. Kazakhstan expresses its sincerest condolences to and solidarity with the peoples and Governments of countries suffering and affected by the brutal attacks, and stands united with all for global security. The series of terrorist attacks in rapid succession in so many countries, combined with the displacement of millions of refugees, pose the most prominent threats to global peace today. We have to act promptly to avert the actions of State and non-State actors that create political, economic and social turmoil. This calls for massive multidimensional strategies on all fronts, led by the United Nations, together with Member States. My delegation proposes that the United Nations convene a global meeting on peace and security at the highest level of Heads of State to evolve contemporary means to fight and eliminate the root causes of conflicts, terrorism and extremism. We need to reinforce preventive diplomacy and peacebuilding, coordinated with political mediation, the rule of law, human rights, national reconciliation, and the improvement of living standards. These have to be complemented by creating public awareness, especially among our youth, of the dangers of recruitment by extremist groups. They must also foster a culture of peace, as Kazakhstan has done by promoting inter-ethnic dialogue, creating the Assembly of People of Kazakhstan, and hosting the triennial Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions. The escalation of violence and bloodshed is alarming and new approaches must be conceived. That is why, in addressing the General Assembly in September this year (see A/70/PV.13), President Nursultan Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan delineated some proposals, which I submit for consideration today. First, our thrust has to shift from routine conflict prevention and post-conflict recovery to a new development strategy that would considerably eliminate or reduce the threat of war and conflicts. He therefore proposed the launch of a new trend in global development under the 2045 global strategic initiative. The first step on this road could be the development under United Nations auspices of a concept entitled NEW FUTURE, which means nuclear, energy, water, food security, understanding, trust and urgent reforms. Secondly, we propose that the Economic and Social Council be transformed into a global development council, comprising United Nations Member States elected by the General Assembly and the heads of all United Nations specialized agencies, including the International Monetary Fund. It would become a global economic regulator promoting economic and social growth worldwide. Thirdly, Kazakhstan offers to organize at the highest level a United Nations international conference designed to reaffirm the basic principles of international law and good governance to combat the weakening role of global institutions and international law. Fourthly, Kazakhstan proposes to establish a United Nations unified global network to counter international terrorism and extremism, as an outcome of the Secretary-General’s forthcoming comprehensive plan of action to combat terrorism. Fifthly, the United Nations system, the Security Council, the Department of Political Affairs, the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council must work closely with regional structures to find comprehensive strategic solutions as proposed above. A better coordination should be established among the United Nations system, international and regional structures, parliamentarians, religious leaders, media and civil society, all engaging in concerted global efforts. These aim at overall national capacity-building with the participation of women at every stage. We must also go towards the larger concept of human security, moving away from State security to people-centred security. Finally, my country stands ready to be a reliable partner in the larger multilateral action to preserve international peace and security.

I now give the floor to the representative of Belgium.

First, Belgium joins in today’s expressions of sympathy to France and the French people. Experience and facts reveal an inextricable link between peace and security, on the one hand, and inclusive and sustainable development, on the other. Resolution 2171 (2014) and the presidential statement of 19 January (S/PRST/2015/3) recognize this interdependence and the need to develop a global and integrated approach to addressing the underlying causes of conflicts and preventing them. This means in particular strengthening the rule of law and institutions, promoting sustainable and inclusive development, combating poverty and exclusion, promoting good governance and democracy, and encouraging political and religious tolerance. The Security Council is not indifferent to the idea that security, development and human rights must be treated in an integrated manner. However, the results in terms of conflict prevention and establishing lasting peace remain debatable. The marked increase in crises and their nature oblige us to reconsider the gravity and attention that we accord to conflict prevention. In Syria, Libya, the Central African Republic or South Sudan, the conflicts have become enmired and more complex with every passing year, entailing serious humanitarian consequences and threats to those countries’ future. We must attach greater importance to the early warning signs of conflict, including not only serious human rights violations and language inciting intolerance, hatred or radicalization, but also social, economic and religious marginalization. The United Nations has excellent prevention tools at its disposal, such as the good offices of the Secretary- General and his special envoys, the Standby Team of Senior Mediation Advisers, peace and development advisers, regional offices, the Office on Genocide Prevention and Responsibility to Protect and the Human Rights Up Front initiative. Furthermore, the United Nations could make better use of its significant presence in the field, including, for example, peace missions, country teams, human rights offices and humanitarian teams. Above all, the system must operate more consistently in order to prevent conflict, both in risk analysis and at the operational level. We therefore welcome the emphasis that has been placed on that point of view in the report of the Secretary- General on the implementation of recommendations of the High-level Independent Panel on Peace Operations (see S/2015/446). The Security Council can heighten its understanding of the link among peace, security, development and human rights through field visits focused on prevention or information-gathering, and by paying the required attention to information emanating from the field itself, including from outside traditional channels. Civil society should be heard more often, including in Arria Formula meetings. The advisory role of the Peacebuilding Commission must carry more weight in the eyes of the Security Council, for example in the cases of countries in transition or when a situation is no longer seen as urgent. The current review of the peacebuilding architecture affords us the opportunity to make progress to that end. In that regard, I welcome the presence of the Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission at today’s meeting. Without consensus among the permanent Council members, our early warning and prevention mechanisms will be for naught. Belgium supports the initiative led by France, Mexico and the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group to promote the voluntary limitation of the use of the right of veto in cases of mass atrocities. Finally, the Security Council is regularly called on to define mandates on the strengthening of institutions and the rule of law, particularly in the ​security and justice sectors. Security sector reform is indeed a decisive component in stabilizing peace, peacebuilding and conflict prevention. However, it is a very long-term process that requires a strong political will and the commitment of all concerned stakeholders. Belgium therefore welcomes the adoption of resolution 2151 (2014) and calls on the Security Council to ensure its follow-up. As has already been stated in the Council, every conflict is unique. There is no universal, ready- made solution, but it is essential to recognize that making peace and security sustainable requires a firm commitment to prevention.

I now give the floor to the representative of Slovakia.

At the outset, may I express our solidarity with the victims of the recent and brutal attacks of terror in Paris, Beirut, Baghdad and many other places throughout the world. We must join efforts, overcome our differences and take all possible steps to fight any kind of violent extremism, terrorism and brutality based on hatred. That is our primary task. Slovakia thanks the United Kingdom presidency for having taken the initiative to convene today’s open debate focusing on the correlation between the maintenance of peace and security and development through the promotion of peaceful societies. I also wish to thank Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Ambassador Skoog, the Permanent Representative of Sweden and Mrs. Bouchamaoui for their respective briefings. While we align ourselves with the statement delivered by the observer of the European Union, I would like to make some remarks in my national capacity. No one questions any longer the importance of security for development and the role that development plays in preventing conflict. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1) offers a unique opportunity to create a continuum linking peaceful, inclusive and safe societies and development efforts. The inclusion of Goal 16 and its related targets in the new post-2015 development agenda reflects the growing recognition of the importance of peace, safety and good governance within the traditional development paradigm. As was outlined in the concept note (S/2015/845, annex) for this debate, we fully recognize the need to understand more deeply the shared objectives that cut across the security/ development spectrum and would require joint action in the fields of both security and development. Support for security sector reform is one of those shared objectives that link the security and development spectrums. Slovakia and South Africa, as co-Chairs of the Group of Friends of Security Sector Reform (SSR), organized a high-level event that took place during the general debate to discuss the link between development and the security sector. We looked in particular at the impact that the adoption of Goal 16 might have on SSR. The outcome and recommendations of that meeting were made available to all Member States. Slovakia welcomed the Security Council meeting, held in August under the presidency of Nigeria (see S/PV.7508), that focused on the further implementation of resolution 2151 (2014). As a result of recent discussions, we would like to put forward three key points and recommendations. First is the issue of transition and national ownership. Successful SSR will allow for the transition from instability and repeated cycles of violence to a path of stability, institutional development and maturity. As outlined in the report of the High-level Independent Panel on Peace Operations (see S/2015/446), we should work more effectively and consistently on political strategies that will support the emergence of a nationally owned vision and full commitment to reforms that address the source of conflict. Second is capacity-building. To solidify commitment to SSR, development partners need to be ready to support targeted capacity-building for institutions and training for security forces, including by enhancing their understanding of human rights norms and obligations and gender-related issues, among others. Support for the reintegration of former combatants is a huge challenge and currently remains a gap area from which development partners have withdrawn in recent years. Third is the issue of partnerships. We welcome the progress made in strengthening the partnerships between, inter alia, the African Union and European Union on SSR. Going forward, we should ensure that the Council is more closely engaged when concerted action is needed to support partnerships and coherence beyond the United Nations. South Sudan, the Central African Republic and Mali are cases in point. Too often, we have gone ahead with building up capacities and institutions without a political strategy underpinning those initiatives. In the area of SSR, this can have abysmal consequences for the safety of people and communities. Finally, I would like to commend the work of the United Nations Security Sector Reform Task Force, which brings together the security and development arms of the Organization to develop coherent United Nations strategies. As we concluded during the high- level event on SSR held in October in New York, the work of the inter-agency Task Force should be strengthened and complemented through an international delivery network on security sector reform.

I now give the floor to the representative of Croatia.

Before addressing the issues of today’s open debate, I want to express my deepest condolences to all those affected by the recent terrorist attacks and the massive loss of life in France, Lebanon and Iraq and in the downing of the Russian civilian aircraft. Let me start by commending the presidency of the United Kingdom for convening this very timely open debate, which acknowledges the mutually reinforcing link between peace and development. Croatia aligns itself with the statement delivered by the observer of the European Union. I shall make some additional brief remarks in my national capacity. Speaking from the experience of a country that once hosted one of the largest and most successful peace operations in United Nations history, I would like to make the following points. True and encompassing development cannot be achieved and sustained without peace; peace cannot be achieved and sustained without justice; and neither peace nor development nor justice are truly possible without respect for human rights and the rule of law. That link has often been acknowledged, even at the highest political level, yet a coherent, comprehensive and implementable approach to crisis situations is still lacking. Clearly there is a need to “break down the silos”, as stated in the concept note (S/2015/845, annex), and work together across all three United Nations pillars. There is a need to fully understand not only the complexity of each of the pillars but also their mutual interdependence and potential. The new 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1) is not only the best starting point for a new approach, but also a matrix on how to do it. The three important review processes  — on peacekeeping operations, the peacebuilding architecture and the implementation of resolution 1325 (2000) — must focus on the link among peace, development and human rights, and go beyond operational improvements. They should provide a foundation for a paradigm change. Open, inclusive and effective partnerships are needed, both among key stakeholders within countries and with international partners. That includes the pivotal role of regional and subregional organizations, as well as other sustainable development stakeholders, such as civil society, the private sector and development organizations. Understanding the root causes of conflict is crucial to conflict prevention, as well as to building and sustaining peace. To that end, we believe that the Security Council could make better use of available insights and analysis. In that context, enhanced cooperation with the Economic and Social Council and the Human Rights Council comes to mind. I would like to underline the importance and potential of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC). Due to its composition and mandate, and especially through its convening role in bringing together all relevant regional and international actors, the PBC can bring a new perspective and advice to the Council’s deliberations and decision-making. There is an evident and urgent need for greater focus on conflict prevention. The number of ongoing conflicts and wars and their enormous human, economic, social and political costs clearly underscore that urgency. Extreme poverty, social inequality or exclusion, the uncontrolled exploitation of natural resources, youth unemployment, lack of basic services, including health care and education, to name a few, can be drivers of conflict and sources of instability that can have dire consequences way beyonod national borders, as we can witness in the current migrant and refugee crises. Therefore the 2030 Agenda, with all its goals and targets, has to be regarded not only in the context of development but also as an important contributor to peace and security. That is the key message we should take from today’s important meeting.

I now give the floor to the representative of Ecuador.

First of all, I would like to express our deepest condolences and solidarity with the Government and people of France, in particular to the families of the victims of the heinous terrorist attacks perpetrated Friday night in Paris, as well as to the Governments and peoples of Lebanon and Russia for the tragedies of recent weeks. Ecuador unequivocally rejects all forms of terrorism. Overcoming poverty is a moral imperative of humankind because, for the first time in our history, poverty is not caused by a lack of resources, but by the existence of perverse and exclusive systems. We believe that the best strategy to overcome poverty is by reducing social, economic, territorial, environmental and cultural gaps. In that respect, inequality  — reflected in the opulence of some compared to the intolerable misery of others — is a great affront to our human dignity and one of the most deep-rooted causes of conflict. It is clear that the three pillars on which the United Natins is founded — development, peace and security and human rights  — are interlinked. The negotiators of the San Francisco Conference recognized that reality and therefore endowed our Organization with different organs with the aim of promoting those three pillars. For that reason, the Economic and Social Council was created to undertake studies and reports on international affairs pertaining to economic, social, cultural, education, health and other related matters. The Security Council was established with a mandate from Member States to assume the primary responsibility of maintaining international peace and security. The General Assembly, the universally representative body, may discuss all relevant issues under the Charter of the United Nations or that pertain to the powers and functions of any other organ created by the Charter. That same founding document defines the respective tasks of each of the main organs and outlines the mechanisms for cooperation and coordination among them. The delegation of Ecuador therefore reiterates its concern over this new attempt by the Security Council to address issues that, under the Charter of the United Nations, belong either to the Economic and Social Council or the General Assembly and its subsidiary bodies. This growing trend on the part of the Security Council contravenes the founding principles of our Organization. The Council claims to be seized of issues related to the maintenance of international peace and security that in fatc belong to other spheres, and infringes on the rights and prerogatives of other United Nations organs, which ultimately does not strengthen our work but, on the contrary, undermines it.

I now give the floor to the representative of Uruguay.

At the outset, let me congratulate the United Kingdom on assuming the presidency of the Security Council this month. I thank you, Sir, for convening this open debate, which is of the utmost importance for Uruguay. I also wish to thank Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon; the Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission, Ambassador Olof Skoog; and Ms. Bouchamaoui, President of the Tunisian Confederation of Industry, Trade and Handicrafts for their briefings. The due consideration of the three pillars of the United Nations — peace, security and development — is essential to face the major challenges of maintaining peace and international security. The multidimensional nature of conflicts, as well as new and growing threats to the stability of nations, require coordinated responses that take different national contexts into account and are able to offer realistic and sustainable alternatives to complex situations. We are convinced that the structural causes of such conflicts are rooted in many cases in rivalries and historical tensions, as well as in the struggle for control of natural resources, ethnic disputes and the creation of artificial boundaries that do not reflect local realities. Similarly, poor governance, corruption, growing dissatisfaction with the lack of opportunities and inequality among and within States are also decisive factors. Analysing and identifying the underlying causes of conflict and the actions that should be taken to mitigate them are the best and most useful forms of prevention. There can be no guarantees of international security if we do not make greater efforts to prevent entire populations from dying of preventable causes, take urgent steps to eradicate hunger in the world and respect the human rights of all without discrimination based on race, sex or religion. Extreme poverty, hunger, exclusion and limited access to basic services such as health, housing and sanitation are just some of the factors that aggravate internal tensions and provoke confrontations. However, we believe that even if such factors do not by themselves result in armed confrontation, the international community has a vital obligation and role to play in overcoming them and promoting an international environment conducive to ensuring that all developing countries can maximize their potential and guarantee respect for their peoples’ basic human rights. While the development of effective, accountable and transparent institutions, the protection of fundamental freedoms and strengthening of the security sector represent some of the main elements of inclusive and peaceful societies, gaps in those areas can certainly contribute to the development of conflicts. If the root causes of conflict are not addressed, reconstruction efforts are doomed to be merely superficial and perishable. Given that undeniable reality, we believe it is essential to ramp up international efforts to support the countries that need it most and encourage the creation of national development strategies for the medium and long term. In that context, the role of international cooperation is particularly important for meeting immediate needs and building capacity for sustainable development. For these reasons, Uruguay believes firmly that there is a close link between security and development. Security efforts must therefore necessarily be accompanied by strengthening action in areas that, while not directly related to security, have an undeniable impact on it. Every area of the United Nations system must play its part, and if we are to obtain the most effective results it is important that the responsibilities of each be respected and their needs taken into account in a democratic and transparent way. Such efforts must also be accompanied by measures aimed at reinforcing and, where necessary, reforming the security sector in countries dealing with conflict, as well as strengthening their institutions and judicial systems and the rule of law. The role of the United Nations is key to the cooperation and support that the international community can offer in that regard. We also believe it is essential to stress the importance of ensuring that the goals in these areas are attainable, credible and clear. Similarly, peacebuilding requires not only strengthened institutions, good governance and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms but also a productive system and economic and social development capable of supporting achievements in other areas. Uruguay, as a major troop-contributing country, has experienced the strong positive impact that building stronger, more inclusive and resilient societies can have on the ground, and recognizes the importance of a political vision focused on rights and on the prevention and resolution of conflicts. We also believe that women have a key role to play in the prevention and resolution of conflicts and would like to emphasize the importance of ensuring their effective inclusion in peace agreement frameworks and peacebuilding processes. Today more than ever, we have a moral obligation to renew our political will and commitment to peace. The humanitarian crisis that Syria and Iraq are facing, the recent terrorist attacks in Beirut and Paris and the deaths caused by the actions of Boko Haram compel us to commit to and support the millions of civilians who are demanding answers.

I now give the floor to the representative of Armenia.

I thank you for the choice of theme for today’s debate, Mr. President. It is timely and reflects evolving thinking on consolidating the efforts of the United Nations system to promote the three pillars of its activities. The current thinking presented for our collective judgement emphasizes without equivocation that the most important goal ahead of us is creating synergies, coherence and coordination across the entire United Nations system. That there is a need for such coherence is beyond dispute. The three recent reviews of our peacebuilding architecture and peace operations state this clearly. The often conspicuous fragmentation of the activities of all the actors involved undermines the sustainability of the mutually reinforcing, interrelated and indivisible primary objectives of our Organization, its three pillars. It is true, of course, that the recognition and pursuit of this goal are not new. We hope that the current drive to revisit the continued objective of synergies, coherence and coordination will produce tangible results. Of course, we acknowledge and commend the progress achieved so far. The collective endeavour within the United Nations to develop a legislative and operational capacity for coherence is a welcome and encouraging development. However, in highlighting the goal of concrete results, we must emphasize the prevention at an early stage of situations that, if not addressed, can result in conflicts, major humanitarian crises and, not least, atrocity crimes. The Secretary-General makes a cogent and eloquent point when he concludes in his report (S/2015/730) that prioritizing conflict prevention is by far our most pragmatic and cost-effective option. While we fully concur with that conclusion, it is of course the human cost of conflicts that eventually moves the conscience of the United Nations system. It is now an accepted truth that, in the words of the Secretary- General, the rhetorical battle on conflict prevention has been won. It is equally true that it is possible to detect conflict situations at a considerably earlier stage, because more often than not they are a reaction to the persistent injustice, discrimination and the denial of rights that are major examples of the root causes of conflict. We speak from experience. The human-rights aspect of conflict prevention should be a prominent focus for the entire United Nations system, including, not least, the Council. In that regard, the Security Council could draw useful lessons from its own commendable leadership on the particular issue of women, peace and security. One such conclusion might be that all human rights are a function of security. In fact, the Advisory Group of Experts on the Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture has provided a useful and elaborate analysis of inclusive societies (see S/2015/490). Civil society is indispensable to conflict prevention. From the international perspective, preventing the outbreak of or relapse into conflict also involves a change of mindset. Assessing the root causes in any conflict situation and debate about the action to be taken has never been isolated from a specific context involving the multiple and not necessarily concurring interests of international actors. From our own particular experience, we have been witness to systematic abuse of the international system and the manipulation of interests aimed at disrupting an international mediation effort, forum shopping and selectively interpreting international law. The international consolidation of peace efforts is a desirable and indispensable objective in conflict prevention and conflict resolution. Whether it is achievable and sustainable in all situations is the dominant challenge, since it revolves around the basic capacity of Member States to surmount narrow interests for the sake of broader peace efforts. There is clearly an urgent need for effective collective action on conflict prevention. However, the function of prevention is debated against the background of a deteriorating international context, as a result of which smaller States suffer the strains of vulnerability. The Council needs to be reminded that the powers bestowed on it by all nations are to enable it to advance peace and security for all. Today’s debate is taking place in the immediate aftermath of some atrocious acts of terrorism committed against the people of France. The depth of cruelty has left us shattered and shaken. We bow our heads before the victims and express our deepest condolences to our brothers and sisters, the people of France. The persistence of terrorism reveals the international system’s vulnerability to those who are outside international norms and laws. The current change in the conflict paradigm is equally a challenge to the prevention paradigm. As ever, we need consolidation and urgent solutions. We welcome the Secretary- General’s efforts to create specific tools under the leadership of the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force. Armenia has been a constant and committed supporter of the Special Adviser to the Secretary- General on the Prevention of Genocide. The Special Adviser, jointly with the Special Adviser on the Responsibility to Protect, has put together an important tool for prevention, the Framework of Analysis for Atrocity Crimes. Resolution 28/34 of the Human Rights Council, sponsored by Armenia, duly reflects that tool. The Special Adviser and his Office deserve recognition of their efforts to detect emerging risks. The Office is indispensable to the overall machinery of prevention and therefore merits continued support for strengthening its capacity. Finally, the regional context of conflict prevention requires broad recognition and support. The division of labour, coordination and the non-duplication of efforts and activities are the building blocks for the effective use of the capacities of regional organizations in conflict prevention and conflict resolution. There is a good example of such regional efforts in our case. Armenia consistently welcomes the support that the international community, the United Nations and the Secretary-General provide to the co-Chairmanship of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe Minsk Group in the peaceful resolution of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict.

I now give the floor to His Excellency Archbishop Bernardito Cleopas, Permanent Observer of the Holy See to the United Nations. Archbishop Auza: At the very outset, my delegation expresses its profound sympathy for all the victims of the terrorist attacks in Paris, Beirut and elsewhere. Our hearts and prayers go out to all those who mourn. Pope Francis, in his address to the General Assembly of the United Nations on 25 September, affirmed: “War is the negation of all rights and a dramatic assault on the environment. If we want true integral human development for all, we must work tirelessly to avoid war between nations and between peoples.” (A/70/PV.3, p. 5) United Nations affirmations that development, peace and security and human rights are intimately connected and mutually reinforcing abound, making that link one of the guiding principles for peacebuilding and peacekeeping. Member States have just adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development with its Sustainable Development Goals, thereby expressing their determination “to foster peaceful, just and inclusive societies which are free from fear and violence. There can be no sustainable development without peace and no peace without sustainable development” (General Assembly resolution 70/1, p. 2). That consensus decision must be translated into reality if we are to succeed in sparing present and future generations from the scourge of violence and in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. Evaluations of the Millennium Development Goals show that countries in conflict have lagged far behind in achieving those Goals and, indeed, many have retrogressed, thereby amply demonstrating that development can thrive only in the context of peaceful societies. The recognition of that fact at the level of principle must be translated on the ground into a common approach to building peace, sustaining development and fostering human rights. To avoid fragmentation, the insight that development, peace and security and human rights frequently overlap and coincide must find concrete expression in the manner in which the various United Nations bodies and agencies operate on the ground. Official development assistance figures and peacekeeping budgets show how conflicts are not just an intolerable burden for people, but also an enormous strain for the international community, including financially speaking. Development projects that could help to prevent conflicts must come first, as they could substantially lessen future expenses in peacekeeping operations. By the same token, resources spent on peacekeeping operations should be shifted to development projects as soon as possible, once situations start to stabilize. Even though the Security Council’s objective is not development per se, it could help to mobilize resources for development as a key component of its peace and security objectives. The Holy See wishes to underline the important role that grass-roots movements, faith-based organizations and local communities play in the prevention of conflict and in peacebuilding. Without their support it would be very hard for the international community to build peace and end conflicts. Their strengths lie neither in material resources nor in scientific expertise nor in political power, but in their being locally rooted enablers of individuals and societies, and in their capacity to produce and nurture leaders who are able to inspire concrete action, develop a rapport of immediacy with individuals and communities, and rally people to work together for something greater than themselves. However, they can also become major obstacles to peace if they show partiality or indeed become parties to the conflict. Conflict prevention and peacebuilding are not as dramatic and urgent as winding up active conflicts, but they do require even greater attention, commitment and sometimes more resources than ending wars and civil strife does. They require perseverance, long-term vision and commitment. They are consolidated through thousands of daily actions that are the building blocks of just and peaceful societies. They are realized when both leaders and citizens transcend selfish interests for the common good, reject a spirit of vengeance and take the high road of healing and reconciliation. Those elements underpin every effort towards achieving sustainable development, durable peace and societies that are more respectful of human rights. Without them, military interventions and peacekeeping missions alone will not solve the root causes of conflict.

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

We thank the delegation of the United Kingdom for convening this timely open debate on the theme of security, development and the root causes of conflict. Indeed, the search for the root causes of conflict seems extremely relevant today, in the aftermath of the 13 November terrorist attack in Paris. I would like to take this opportunity to express my delegation’s deep sympathy and condolences to the families of the victims, as well as to the people of France. Today, it is more clear than ever that we are in need of new and stronger ways to address the evolving threats to peace. The United Nations must reinvent itself so as to be fit for purpose and find a way to respond to conflicts in an agile, coherent, coordinated way, while staying mindful of the root causes of conflicts. In that vein, my delegation welcomes the Security Council’s recognition of the need to revisit the fundamental challenge of identifying the linkage between security and development. We echo the sentiments of the Secretary-General, who stated that peacebuilding must be a thread that runs through all our actions across the life cycle of conflicts. The Republic of Korea knows at first hand the importance of the link between peace and security and development. In the aftermath of the Korean War in the 1950s, the United Nations Korean Reconstruction Agency helped stabilize our war-torn country and provided much-needed relief. Today, the Republic of Korea is both a troop-contributor and a provider of assessed contributions to United Nations peacekeeping. This year alone, we have dedicated $7.5 million to post- conflict reconstruction, providing assistance to fragile post-conflict States in need of rehabilitation. My delegation would like to highlight the following three points in an effort to contribute to today’s discussion on security and development. First, more emphasis should be placed on peacebuilding, as it lies at the nexus of security and development. United Nations peacebuilding, when established back in 2005, was founded specifically to address the challenge of bridging the gap between security and development. What we recognize today — perhaps more clearly than 10 years ago  — is that the notion of peacebuilding should be understood as encompassing not only efforts to prevent relapses into conflict, but also efforts to prevent the lapse into conflict in the first place. The growing emphasis on prevention  — before, during and after a conflict  — requires the Security Council to have a better grasp of the reconstruction and institution-building efforts necessary for recovery from conflict and to support strategies for sustainable development. That is exactly what the Peacebuilding Commission, an advisory body to the Council, was created to do. The Security Council must actively and more frequently seek the Commission’s advice in both its formal and its informal deliberations. In that regard, we welcome the recent trend of inviting the Commission to present its views to the Security Council. Secondly, we feel that the key to a successful mission is a well-defined mandate. Mandates need to be better crafted by the Security Council so that mission goals are more clearly articulated and integrated with existing local realities and stakeholders. A solution may lie in better integration among the various United Nation bodies whose goals intersect. Breaking down silos can help conflict-prevention efforts by tapping into expertise so as to better understand the scope of problems while seeking enhanced coordination with various stakeholders. More frequent open debates and Arria Formula meetings could be useful in that regard. The Council should also aim to improve its working methods so as to promote a more inclusive, effective and transparent approach. On that point, we urge the Security Council to seriously consider the recommendations of the High-level Independent Panel on Peace Operations (see S/2015/446), especially those addressing the need to establish the practice of a sequenced mandate that would allow the Council to respond in a more tailored and context-sensitive manner. Thirdly, the Security Council and the United Nations as a whole, should strive for better cooperation with regional organizations, in particular the African Union (AU). Close consultations with regional stakeholders can provide early warning, conflict analysis and insight into the specific dynamics of a particular region. Strengthening partnerships with regional organizations, such as the African Union, was one of the issues emphasized during the recent seminar on the implementation of the High-level Panel’s recommendations in Seoul. Participants pointed out that the current ad hoc cooperation between the United Nations and the African Union should evolve into a more strategic and institutionalized relationship, with the possibility of providing contributions to AU missions approved by the Security Council. It is with that in mind that the Republic of Korea renewed its pledge in September to strengthen our partnership with the African Union so as to enhance its peacekeeping capacity. Finally, we believe that there is no better time than the present to address the root causes of conflict, as there are three parallel reviews being conducted simultaneously  — those on the peacebuilding architecture, on United Nations peace operations, and on Security Council resolution 1325 (2000) on women and peace and security. If done correctly, they should yield synergies that could revamp the way in which the United Nations carries out its mandate on the maintenance of peace and security. In that regard, my delegation welcomes the high-level debate on United Nations and peace and security to be convened in May next year aimed at building support among Member States.

I now give the floor to the representative of Indonesia.

I thank the United Kingdom presidency for convening this timely open debate. Indonesia associates itself with the statement made by the representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. It is deeply shocking to learn that the international community was confronted with yet another act of shameful terror in Paris last Friday, which claimed innocent lives and inflicted massive pain and sorrow on French society. Indonesia joins the chorus of Member States in condemning such a cowardly act and expresses its sympathy to the Government and people of France. More than ever, the United Nations system and the international community must place greater emphasis on the peaceful resolution of disputes and conflict prevention. That must be reinforced by a much-needed comprehensive approach and partnership effort on the part of all Member States. In that context, Indonesia welcomes the clear emphasis on political solutions to conflict, mediation and conflict prevention in the recent report of the High-level Panel on Peace Operations (see S/2015/446), the report of the Secretary-General entitled “The future of United Nations peace operations: implementation of the High-level Independent Panel on Peace Operations” (S/2015/682), the report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations and conflict prevention (S/2015/730) and the report of the Advisory Group of Experts on the Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture (see S/2015/490). We also concur with the emphasis therein, and in today’s concept note (S/2015/845, annex), on an integrated approach in which there must no unbridgeable silos separating development from peace and security and human rights. Indeed, Indonesia is supportive of a holistic approach, which it has long advocated at both the regional and the multilateral levels. We are passionately convinced of the primacy of dialogue, peaceful political processes and equitable development since we ourselves have directly reaped their fruit. Our once restive province of Aceh would not have become stable and peaceful, if such a combination had not been implemented and owned by the people. While my delegation shares the enthusiasm of many others here today and in the recent Fourth Committee debates, where prevention and comprehensiveness with more responsive United Nations mechanisms have been stressed, we also underscore the need for the Security Council to function effectively. The Council must fully uphold the principles of justice, international law, human rights law and humanitarian law. On the question of what more the Security Council can do to break down silos so as to foster a more comprehensive undertaking, my delegation would like to offer following additional points. First, we have noted that no one has disagreed with the need to advance a holistic approach to promoting peace and security. It is very encouraging that the Council also stresses such an approach. All principal organs of the United Nations and their subsidiary entities have their respective mandates. They work best when they stay within their respective domains, while collaborating and cooperating with each other and with external stakeholders, including relevant regional organizations. Any undertaking to promote sustainable peace and prevent armed conflict should make the best use of drawing on the strengths of the entire United Nations system. In that context, Indonesia welcomes the two recommendations by the Advisory Group of Experts on the Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture. The General Assembly, in its future quadrennial comprehensive policy reviews, should include a specific focus on sustaining peace and on examining the success of the United Nations system in bringing together development, humanitarian and peace and security actions. The Secretary-General should consider having objectives that incorporate peace into performance compacts with the heads of all of the relevant departments in the Secretariat and other United Nations entities. Secondly, the future intergovernmental consideration of the aforementioned reports in the various United Nations platforms will be a valuable opportunity for the entire spectrum of Member States to re-evaluate the working of the United Nations system in peacemaking, peacekeeping and peacebuilding, and to see how best to harness their respective wisdom and experiences so as to help advance international peace and well-being. Thirdly, in the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1), world leaders have clearly underscored poverty eradication as the overarching goal of the new Agenda, with the imperative of integrating the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development at all levels. In that regard, Sustainable Development Goal 16 addresses the promotion of peaceful and inclusive societies. Correspondingly, achieving other Goals, along with Goal 17 on strengthening the means of implementation and revitalizing the global partnership, coupled with the role played by the High-level Political Forum in the Goals review framework, will also be critical in buttressing a comprehensive and well-supported effort. Finally, Indonesia reiterates the fundamental importance of embracing and practicing a sound principles-based paradigm to address and resolve conflicts in a peaceful manner, including by addressing the root causes of conflicts. We are ready to extend our support to the United Nations system and the relevant stakeholders in order to help promote effective approaches to sustainable peace and development.

I now give the floor to the representative of Pakistan.

Before addressing today’s topic, we would like to convey our deep condolences to the people and the Governments of France, Lebanon, Iraq and Russia on the loss precious lives resulting from the detestable recent terrorist attacks. We thank the United Kingdom presidency for organizing today’s debate and for its useful concept note (S/2015/845, annex) to inform the discussion. I would also like to thank the Secretary-General for his thoughtful remarks this morning. The link between peace and security, development and human rights is indeed inextricable. It is true that the lack of development and of respect for human rights can endanger international peace and security. However, without peace and security, lack of development and violations of human rights are a certainty. While we must study the linkages between these three pillars, we believe that peace and security is a prerequisite if development goals are to be achieved and if human rights are to be respected and promoted. The Security Council’s responsibility is in the arena of international peace and security. Ensuring national peace, security and stability is the responsibility of each sovereign State. Accordingly, primary responsibility in cases where there is a lack of development or the absence of ideal human rights conditions also lies with Member States. By pronouncing on development and human rights at the national level, the Security Council will be going beyond its mandate of maintaining international peace and security. We believe that the Council’s ingress on such issues should be avoided, for the following reasons. First, there are international institutions, especially United Nations institutions, that oversee issues pertaining to development and human rights. They are more suited to taking measures necessitated by circumstances. If the Council were to start taking up these responsibilities, the United Nations bodies mandated to deal with these issues would lose their relevance and importance. Secondly, when we considered the annual report of the Security Council (A/70/2) in the General Assembly last week, we were told that the Security Council met more than 250 times last year. This excluded meetings of its numerous subsidiary bodies; the Council, therefore, does not need to be burdened further with work that would, at best, be a duplication of effort. Thirdly, the Council needs to ask itself if its structure and working methods are conducive to a role that includes taking up these issues. It has only 10 elected members. Its openness, transparency and accountability continue to be questioned by the wider membership. By contrast, the Human Rights Council, for example, comprises 47 elected members. Lastly, the Council already has a large number of situations on its plate, ones pertaining to its primary mandate. If the Council were to spend its time on cross- cutting issues, the amount of time that it can spend on areas that fall under its direct responsibility is bound to decrease. Pakistan believes that United Nations bodies should fulfil their responsibilities within their prescribed mandates. Issues, indeed, are interlinked. But United Nations bodies working within their respective mandates can cooperate effectively with one another, and Member States can continue to interact meaningfully with one another and with all such United Nations bodies. Together we can address most, if not all, issues in a comprehensive and holistic manner. Mr. President, we welcome your delegation’s desire to work towards a presidential statement in a manner that enables you to take into account the views expressed by Member States. We hope that in that draft statement you will take into account the views expressed by Pakistan as well. I think that I stopped before the light started blinking.

I now give the floor to the representative of Romania.

I would like first to congratulate the British presidency of the Security Council for having organized this timely open debate on a topic of such great relevance. More than 1.5 billion people live in countries affected by violent conflict, and few of them have been successful in achieving any of the targets of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015. The rule of law, human rights, peace and security, and development are often viewed as de facto separate concepts. The reality is that the problems we face today in the global arena are not limited to these predefined categories. Challenges such as poverty, insecurity, violent conflict and terrorism transcend those boundaries. Terrorism threatens the core sovereignty of a country; it constitutes a direct violation of the United Nations Charter and a great impediment to the implementation of the Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1). (spoke in French) Allow me once again to offer our sincerest and deepest condolences to France in connection with the appalling terrorist attacks carried out in Paris. (spoke in English) Killing innocent people based on ideology represents not just an attack on Paris, Ankara or Beirut, but an attack on all of humankind. Therefore, it is not just Paris, Ankara or Beirut that we should pray for: it is the world. We must stand together in hunting down the perpetrators and bringing them to justice. Poverty does not cause terrorism, but it can fuel resentments that terrorists then exploit, which is why sustainable development must be part of efforts to counter violent extremism. Development is, indeed, the thread that runs through the 2030 Agenda, and the rise to prominence of the strong interconnection between the three dimensions of sustainable development — economic, social and environmental — is a significant change compared with the previous MDGs. As we have already learned, there can be no development without peace and no peace without development, and there can be none of the aforementioned without respect for human rights. These are the three pillars of the United Nations: if one of them is weak, the whole structure will be weak. Balance is key. As a global Agenda that all States Members of the United Nations have signed at the highest level, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) should be inspiring calls to action. Although some countries were reluctant to recognize the fact that poor governance fuels civil conflict and hinders development, the period from 2001 to 2015 proved that fragile States, characterized by weak governance, have had the greatest difficulty in achieving the MDGs. I am proud to say that Romania, together with Mexico and the Republic of Korea, has established the Group of Friends on Governance for Sustainable Development, as a flexible and informal space to discuss issues related to good governance and foster cooperation between multiple actors. By including SDG 16, the 2030 Agenda recognizes that global sustainable development is not possible without progress in the realms of good governance, inclusion, sustainable peace and security. The report of the Secretary-General on overall policy matters pertaining to special political missions (A/70/400), dated 30 September, shows that the global peace and security landscape has continued to deteriorate in 2015 and that the number of major wars has tripled since 2008. It calls for an urgent global effort not only to respond to the proliferating number of crises, but also to prevent them from emerging. Prevention is first and foremost the responsibility of member States. Therefore, the Security Council’s mission of maintaining international peace and security should be based on an integrated approach of conflict management, preventive action and institution-building, coordination among different actors, reinforced partnerships with regional organizations and strong national ownership. As we can see from the current situation, ungoverned spaces and post-conflict societies can generate security threats not only for neighbouring countries, but also for the international community as a whole. This is also one of the main findings of Romania’s national security strategy and of the European Union (EU) common security strategy, and we fully support the European Union statement made earlier. Finally, the 2030 Agenda demonstrates that where there is a will, there is a way. Given the multitude of challenges to the international order, we believe that a strong and effective United Nations, placed at the heart of the multilateral system, is the appropriate forum for addressing those challenges.

I now give the floor to the representative of Morocco.

May I begin by discharging a sad duty and expressing the full support and solidarity of the Moroccan people with France in connection with the barbaric acts that took place, as well as our deepest condolences. We express our sympathy and support to the families of the victims and to the people of Lebanon, Russia and Turkey, who have also been struck by heinous terrorist acts. We offer our deep condolences to them and to all countries affected by the scourge of terrorism. We condemn in the strongest possible terms all of these horrific acts, which require us to take decisions that are up to the challenges that we are all facing. I wish to thank the United Kingdom for having organized this open debate in the Security Council on this item of great relevance, on a cross-cutting subject that is extremely important to the international community as a whole. I thank you, Mr. President, for the clear and precise concept note (S/2015/845, annex), which underlines current challenges and calls for a renewed vision of the nexus between peace, security and development. Security and stability are the pillars of development, without which our countries cannot improve their social situations or carry out their development initiatives. Therefore, a holistic approach to addressing issues of peace and security, development and human rights is all the more necessary, given that we live in a world that is becoming increasingly globalized, and characterized by interdependence among States and societies, which influence each other in the political, economic, security and other spheres. The current situation serves to illustrate that the traditional forms of cooperation need to be reviewed. We hope that this debate will allow us to enter into a wide-ranging consideration of ways to improve that. We have responsibility as Members of the United Nations to ensure that the links among the main organs of the United Nations established by the Charter are effective and functional. To that end, we need to come up with a vision and to find solutions in the short term so that we can work together for a sustainable peace. The root causes of conflict and instability are well known, and they are often the same from country to country  — exclusion, political and economic marginalization, unequal access to justice, the absence of effective mechanisms to promote and protect human rights, corruption, transnational crime and illegal trafficking, especially in light weapons. Those are just a few examples. On the other hand, the establishment of inclusive political and economic systems, the promotion of the rule of law and the strengthening of State institutions are often cited as effective solutions to attacking those underlying causes. All of those reforms are necessary, of course, and we must continue to support countries that are at risk in those areas. Nevertheless, we need to broaden our range of action. We need to implement the holistic vision we are all calling for. Among the means to succeed, we should make certain adjustments in the way in which we cooperate, whether we are talking about cooperation between Member States and the Secretariat or between different United Nations departments and agencies. For example, as a way to provide members of the Security Council further information on the challenges of development, the Council could consider including the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in these discussions, or even the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. Given the existence of its country offices, UNDP is the best agency to brief the members of the Security Council on such issues. In his statement this morning, the representative of Venezuela drew an unacceptable parallel between the Palestinian question and that of the Moroccan Sahara. We must remind that delegation that the question of the Sahara is not one of decolonization, but of achieving Morocco’s territorial integrity. The Security Council took up the issue pursuant to Chapter VI of the Charter of the United Nations, which pertains to the peaceful settlement of disputes. The question of the Sahara — perhaps Venezuela is unaware — is the subject of a political process led under the auspices of the Secretary-General and facilitated by his Personal Envoy to achieve a mutually acceptable political solution. During the past 10 months alone, Personal Envoy Christopher Ross has been to the region five times. Morocco assures the Special Envoy that it remains fully comitted to that process. Peace and security are threatened by other factors — expansionism, threats to neighbours due to links with illegal traffickers and massive violations of human rights. Venezuela is threatening the security of its neighbours and is trying to absorb a neighbouring State Member of the United Nations just because that small country has discovered oil reserves. Venezuela persecutes the nationals of neighbouring States by violating the rules of good neighbourliness and the principle of respect for territorial integrity, which is at the cornerstone of the Organization. Venezuela has links with drug trafficking networks that threaten the regional security and territorial integrity of another neighbouring State, which has appeared on the front pages of the international press. It is paradoxical that a country that represents a threat to its enemies can talk about peace and security. It would have the moral legitimacy to do so if it were to respect good neighbourliness, an inalienable right set out in the Charter. It is important that the General Assembly be careful in the election of members to the Security Council by taking into account their contribution to international peace and security, as stipulated by Article 23 of the Charter of the United Nations. In conclusion, I would like to reiterate the need for an integrated and consistent approach to achieve the high goals of the United Nations with regard to peace and security, development and human rights, all of which place the human being at the centre of its concerns.

I now give the floor to the representative of Peru.

Allow me congratulate you, Mr. President, on your initiative in organizing this open debate on the close relationship between two pillars of the Organization, namely, development and the maintenance of international security. We thank the presidency for drafting the concept note (S/2015/845, annex), and the Secretary-General for his briefing. At the outset, we would like to reiterate our condolences to, and solidarity with, France in connection with the barbarous it suffered recently. The Charter of the United Nations sets out the tasks of the Organization under three fundamental and interdependent pillars — ensuring international peace and security, achieving development and promoting and protecting human rights. On that basis, we believe that the work of the Organization ought to be focused on individual persons and on ensuring their human rights, including the right to development, all the while fostering peaceful and inclusive societies in order to ensure sustainable development, while leaving no one behind. In the same vein, the international community adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1) at the highest level possible. Its implementation is now our priority and requires a renewed and strengthened global partnership to ensure the appropriate means of implementation. As noted in Agenda 2030, sustainable development cannot be achieved without peace and security. In turn, peace and security are at risk without sustainable development. On the one hand, that implies the need to revitalize cooperation in the area of international security through disarmament and non-proliferation initiatives and by generating confidence-building measures to prevent conflicts and an arms race and having at our disposal tools to address humanitarian crises. On the other hand, we must recognize that many of today’s armed conflicts are embedded in contexts of deep structural gaps. That makes it imperative to address the structural causes of violence, among which are inequality, exclusion and discrimination for any reason. It is therefore urgent and necessary to implement policies aimed at social, economic and financial inclusion, with the goal of reducing the inequality and disparity that generate dissatisfaction and so as to create the conditions for an inclusive society in which all individuals enjoy equal opportunities. That is particularly important in societies with ethnic and cultural diversity, where there is a greater risk for discrimination and exclusion. Aware that social inclusion policies allow the building of stable, just and peaceful societies, my country sponsors the General Assembly resolution entitled “Promoting social integration through social inclusion”, a draft of which the Third Committee adopted this morning. Similarly, the Goals of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development  — specifically Goal 10, on equitable societies, and Goal 16, on peaceful societies  — are consistent with that view. While the implementation of the ambitious Agenda is the responsibility of each State, it is essential to have a favourable international environment in which peace and security prevail. In that regard, we need the Security Council to comply with its role in the promotion of peace so that the enormous budgets we allocate to military expenditures can be reallocated to finance the means of implementation required to eradicate poverty. Peru believes that combating economic inequality and social exclusion, promoting respect for the rule of law, ensuring the full and effective enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms for all individuals, and safeguarding and promoting cultural diversity contribute to the stability and social cohesion that foster a climate of peace. That holistic vision is reflected in the multidimensional mandates in many of the peacekeeping operations established by the Council. Therefore, the work aimed at development and restoring the rule of law plays an increasingly important role in the mandate of those missions. The United Nations must also support development and social inclusion efforts in post-conflict situations in order to definitively break the cycle of conflict by directly attacking its root causes. My country therefore wishes to underline the role of the Peacebuilding Commission in that undertaking. To conclude, I wish to emphasize that Peru, which has suffered violence in the past, is committed to building peaceful and inclusive societies at the national level. That is the best way to guarantee international peace and security.

I now give the floor to the representative of Switzerland.

At the outset, let me state that Switzerland is deeply shocked and saddened by the terrorist attacks committed in the recent weeks. Switzerland strongly condemns those heinous acts, which go against the fundamental values of any society. We extend our deep condolences to the families of the victims and to all affected countries. Peace and security, development and human rights are closely linked. That observation is not new, yet we are still struggling to adequately directing our efforts. In that regard, it seems necessary to recall one of the conclusions of the review of peacekeeping operations, namely, the need to find political solutions to safeguard peace and avoid conflicts. Switzerland welcomes this opportunity to discuss ways that might enable us to better meet the different aspects of this problem. I will focus my remarks on three points. First, Switzerland calls for boosting conflict prevention. Conflicts are straining the countries concerned and represent a step backwards in terms of development. Moreover, efforts to stabilize countries emerging from conflict and help them to build sustainable peace are costly. The best way to lower those costs and, above all, to avoid suffering is to prevent conflicts. Strengthening human rights and the rule of law are among the ways the Security Council can contribute to a preventive agenda. Careful monitoring of contexts in which human rights violations occur can serve as an early warning mechanism, while timely Security Council reaction following such violations can contribute to the swift adoption of measures. More generally, the Security Council could play a more robust role in promoting accountability — for example, by referring specific situations to the International Criminal Court or by adopting sanctions against perpetrators of violations. Nevertheless, conflict prevention is not only about tools and instruments; it is first and foremost about political will and leadership at the national, regional and international levels. Secondly, the United Nations has a broad range of tools at its disposal. It is crucial to use them in a flexible, consistent and context-specific manner. In that way it will be possible to resort more often to light-footprint engagements that take into account existing United Nations capacities and draw on them for support. Those capacities, which include mediation, good offices and special political missions, should also be strengthened institutionally and financially. In particular, we should make better use of the capacities of the peacebuilding architecture, which is strengthened by its mandate to address the root causes of conflict and to build bridges among the different actors in the field. It is particularly well placed to support an appropriate response. Thirdly, the commitment of the United Nations to peace needs to be more consistent. That is particularly visible in situations of transition between the different forms of United Nations engagement. However, in order to ensure smooth transitions, we must encourage consistency as soon as the Security Council begins to take up the situation in a country. That consistency must not be driven by any institutional or financial consideration. United Nations efforts must be guided by the needs on the ground. In that connection, joint and participatory analysis and planning, conducted prior to deployment in the field, are essential. The Human Rights Up Front initiative is of particular value in that regard, as it enables all stakeholders to respond in a coherent and comprehensive manner and it ensures that field expertise is taken into consideration. Finally, not only does the United Nations have to assume responsibility in this area. The establishment of partnerships is also crucial — with the World Bank, for example. In recent months, we have seen both a decrease in available resources and a continuing increase in the needs in the areas of peace and security, development and humanitarian affairs. Switzerland is aware of the growing number of challenges our world faces, including that of the shrinking space in the field for civilian, humanitarian and development actors. Based on their long-standing presence on the ground, United Nations funds and programmes can often play a positive role in peacebuilding, as demonstrated by the Joint Programme of the United Nations Development Programme and the Department of Political Affairs on Building National Capacities for Conflict Prevention and the Global Focal Point for Police, Justice and Corrections, which are supported by Switzerland. That gives us the confidence that we have the necessary expertise and capacities at our disposal.

I now give the floor to the representative of Canada.

Before beginning my statement, allow me to offer condolences from the Government and the people of Canada to those from many nations affected by the recent terrorist acts in France, Lebanon, Iraq, Egypt and Turkey. I am sure we can all agree on the broad principles of security and development and the root causes of conflict: first, that peace is a fundamental precondition for development, as well as a development outcome in its own right, and, secondly, that sustainable development over the long term means addressing drivers of conflict, exclusion and violence — and that includes support for advancing democracy, good governance and human rights. Acting on those principles starts with prevention. We have seen the results of responding only when a crisis comes to a head: an international system stretched to its limits and failing to respond adequately or in a timely way. Investing in prevention means addressing drivers of conflict at all levels and building the concept of sustaining peace into all phases of our engagements. Canada believes there is no need for new mandates or institutions to do that, rather it requires using the tools we already have; it requires leadership from the Council, the Secretary-General and the relevant organs of the United Nations; and it requires ongoing support from Member States. As a simple first measure, it would be of considerable value to Council deliberations were relevant bodies, such as the United Nations Development Programme, the Department of Political Affairs, the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, UN-Women, the Peacebuilding Commission and the Human Rights Council, to give regular briefings on country situations. Such briefings should be integrated and grounded in joint United Nations analysis. We also need to build strong relationships between all actors, making the sharing of information, ideas and resources a natural part of our activities. As we know from the New Deal for Engagement in Fragile States, solutions that are country-led and inclusive are more likely to be perceived as legitimate and to match the unique characteristics of specific conflicts. Additionally, as has been proved, involving civil society and investing in women’s participation at all levels and at all stages builds a culture of dialogue and makes peace more likely to be sustainable. (spoke in French) Too often, we have seen a relapse into violent conflict once a peace agreement has been signed. Even an inclusive and comprehensive peace agreement needs to be sustained and supported against unexpected shocks and the sometimes predictable setbacks. First and foremost, sustainable peace requires not only resources, it takes time and determination. Moreover, the way in which the international community supports a process can evolve. As we saw in Sierra Leone, providing support in a sequenced way, whereby the Peacebuilding Commission pursues its commitment to peace when the issue is no longer before the Security Council, should be part of the normal course of affairs. We also welcome the recommendations of the Advisory Group of Experts aimed at stepping up the conflict prevention and peacebuilding roles of United Nations country teams and Resident Coordinators. We encourage the strengthening of the joint programme of the United Nations Development Programme and the Department of Political Affairs on building national capacities for conflict prevention. Whatever our commitment, the United Nations cannot be truly effective without adequate resources. The report of the Advisory Group of Experts (see S/2015/490) calls for predictable funding for peacebuilding. How that is achieved is open for discussion, but it is undeniably a prerequisite for success. (spoke in English) The topic of this debate is a vast one. We do, though, have the very useful recent high-level reviews of peace operations and of the peacebuilding architecture and the global review of resolution 1325 (2000), to which we can refer. A great deal of good work has been done; it is now up to all of us to work on effective implementation.

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

Let me start by conveying South Africa’s condolences to the Government and the people of France, who this past Friday experienced the cruelty of terrorism. We would like to thank you, Sir, for the concept note (S/2015/845, annex) circulated on security, development and the root causes of conflict. We also thank the Secretary-General for his briefing. South Africa associates itself with the statement delivered by the representative of Iran on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. We wish to make several additional remarks in our national capacity. South Africa fully supports the assertion in the 2030 Agenda on Sustainable Development to the effect that sustainable development cannot be realized without peace and security, and peace and security will be at risk without sustainable development. In that regard, peace and security will continue to elude us if we do not address the nexus between security and development. By and large, today’s conflicts have their origins in disputes related to economic development issues, including socioeconomic marginalization; the disproportionate and unequal distribution of resources, wealth and power within societies; the lack of participatory democratic processes; corruption; and the illegal exploitation of mineral resources, which fuels those conflicts. For sustainable peace and stability to be established, it is essential to promote economic development and good governance, and to build strong State institutions that act to mediate disagreements and disputes within a given country in order to avoid violent conflict. While it is important for the Security Council to take into account and consideration the developmental and socioeconomic causes of conflict, the Council should not in any way encroach upon the mandate of other principal United Nations bodies, such as the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council, as well as the Peace Building Commission, which are entrusted with that mandate. It is unfortunate that the Council encroaches upon the mandate of other bodies while neglecting its own mandate as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations. In that regard, the Council remains ineffective, failing to adequately address key peace and security matters in places such as Palestine, Syria and Western Sahara. South Africa is of the firm view that it is vital to integrate developmental aspects in international efforts in the areas of conflict prevention, resolution and management, including post-conflict peacebuilding. In that regard, we welcome the work of other members of the international community, including the World Bank as a critical partner in our collective conflict prevention and peacebuilding efforts. In all such efforts, the national context, policy space and specific needs of the host country must be respected and protected. Nationally owned interventions and development strategies must be supported in addressing rising levels of unemployment, poverty reduction and gender inequality. In addition to working closely with the national authorities of the State, greater collaboration and coordination with regional and continental bodies will be a fundamental prerequisite for greater synergy and strategic coherence in our approaches. There is a need to draw on strong partnerships between the United Nations and regional bodies, not only in terms of their comparative advantage in addressing conflicts and responding to them, but in promoting regional efforts geared towards greater regional development and prosperity. This is underpinned by the realization that instability and underdevelopment in one country have an impact on an entire region, and in turn on global stability, as they create sanctuaries in which transnational crime and terrorism can thrive. The stability of States is increasingly being challenged by their lack of capacity to meet the aspirations of their populations. In an increasingly unequal world, the redistributive capacity of the State must be strengthened. Inclusiveness in governance also needs to be addressed, because a more inclusive governance model is more likely to prevent recourse to armed struggle to further political interests. A healthy civil society that promotes dialogue and provides a voice to those who feel marginalized will go a long way towards providing non-violent forums for the peaceful resolution of political disputes. National reconciliation efforts also need to be put in place in order to address the collective wounds and the recourse to vengeful sentiments that can fuel relapses into conflict. South Africa has experienced the healing effects of bodies such as the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and we wish to encourage countries that are emerging from conflict to investigate the possible use of such restorative mechanisms. The causes of conflict repeat themselves and are never fully addressed when countries emerge from conflict. Therefore, global attention should remain in place even after violent conflicts have been resolved. During that time, consolidating the dividends of peace needs to be the foremost consideration, with a robust emphasis on stimulating economic development. A happy and prosperous society is a peaceful society. That needs to set the tone for preventive action and sustainable peace. We live in a world characterized by greater inter-connectivity and mutual dependence. It is of paramount importance to attend speedily to violent conflicts, which often emanate from areas of the world that are not geographically proximate.

I now give the floor to the representative of Ireland.

I would like to thank the United Kingdom for organizing today’s timely debate on this important subject. I would like also to express my country’s deepest condolences to the Government and the people of France following last Friday’s atrocities in Paris. Our sympathies go also to the Government and the people of Lebanon over their own recent suffering at the hands of terrorists. Last week’s terrible events were assaults on fundamental human freedoms and values. They must be condemned unreservedly. They reinforce our determination to eradicate the scourge of terrorism from our societies. Central to that, of course, is the need to remove environments of grievance and inequality within which terrorists can flourish. We have to go to the roots of conflict situations and tackle the problems of inequality and disadvantage that all too frequently underlie them. There is clear evidence to show the deep interconnections among underdevelopment, fragility and conflict. In many parts of the world there is a vicious cycle linking those, which must be broken. Only in that way can we hope to build peaceful and inclusive societies that protect human rights, provide a stable and prosperous environment and allow all human beings to reach their full potential. As our Heads of State and Government recognized less than two months ago, there can be no sustainable development without peace and no peace without sustainable development. Both of those conditions are predicated on the promotion and protection of human rights, without discrimination. The agreement adopted in September is often referred to as the 2030 Agenda, but it is important to remind ourselves of its full title, namely, “Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”. The Agenda is about nothing less than transformation: transforming the conditions in which we all live and transforming the future we offer our children. The challenges we face globally are huge and urgent, and we must all work collectively to overcome them. One in four people in the world today lives in an area that suffers from repeated cycles of violence. People living in such areas are more than twice as likely to be undernourished as those in other developing countries; more than three times as likely to miss school; and twice as likely to see their children die before the age of 5. And the cycle continues, piling insecurity on top of poverty and fuelling further insecurity and, in many cases, conflict. A specific Goal in the 2030 Agenda recognizes that fact of life — and indeed, of death. It recognizes that reducing violence, insecurity and fragility is a legitimate objective of development policy and that it is essential for sustainable long-term growth, stability and poverty reduction. The 2030 Agenda, which world leaders endorsed in September, has enshrined that objective in Goal 16 and its accompanying targets. That is the most formal expression to date of a connection that has in fact been made for a number of years now. The 2011 New Deal for Engagement in Fragile States and this year’s reviews of the United Nations peace operations and peacebuilding architecture all point to the need to rebalance programming efforts and resources in support of conflict prevention and peacebuilding. The 2030 Agenda makes clear that we must use all of the tools at our disposal to ensure that we do not pursue sustainable development without addressing the root causes of conflict. It also makes clear, for example, that we cannot address inequality without addressing human rights and that we cannot pursue economic growth without recognizing the impact that it has on the environment and stability. We are embarking on an integrated and holistic approach to these great global challenges, which we believe is the one that offers the greatest prospect of success. It is the challenge and the opportunity of sustainable development. All States Members of the United Nations have committed themselves to this integrated approach. It follows that the United Nations and each of its organs should reflect that integration and the interconnectedness of all the goals and targets. We must all come out of our silos. The Council, of course, has particular responsibilities under the Charter of the United Nations. But it must also play its role in ensuring that progress is made on the interconnected and interdependent priorities of peace and development. The Council must recognize the central importance of the achievement of both peace and development of ensuring that we have inclusive institutions, the rule of law, the protection of human rights and access to justice. The inclusion of a dedicated goal on peaceful and inclusive societies in the 2030 Agenda is a platform for the promotion and protection of human rights for all. Ireland trusts that, with the 2030 Agenda now agreed as the basis for our work over the next 15 years, a major effort will be made to ensure coherence and unity across the United Nations system in tackling issues related to security, development and the root causes of conflict.

I now give the floor to the representative of Paraguay.

At the outset, allow me to convey my deepest condolences and express the full solidarity of the Government and the people of the Republic of Paraguay to our sister nations of Iraq, Lebanon and France following the barbaric attacks that struck those three nations during the past week, in which hundreds of their citizens lost their lives. Those attacks have once again tested the will and strength of the international community before the implacable scourge of terrorism. On behalf of my delegation, I would like to extend congratulations to the United Kingdom on its presidency of the Security Council, which has facilitated this open debate on security, development and the root causes of conflict — an issue of vital importance to many societies in the current international circumstances. The fact that the Security Council has decided to convene an open debate on this issue not only reaffirms the crucial importance of the principles set out in the recently adopted Sustainable Development Goals, wherein Heads of State and Government again reaffirmed that sustainable development cannot be realized without peace and security and, furthermore, that peace and security is in serious jeopardy without the essential preconditions of development. There can be no gainsaying the growing role that the Council must play in terms of conflict prevention, through increasingly effective, efficient, decisive and active efforts, free of the operational constrains that could imply a political link, or vice versa, with some root causes of conflict being linked to certain States, or the marginalization of others. I believe that many will agree that the root causes of conflict hamper and sometimes outright prevent the establishment of the conditions necessary for development. Building and strengthening development clearly requires peaceful and sustainable conditions over a relatively long period of time, during which a broad base of inclusion and social justice should develop, including equal access to public services. Moreover, the fostering of an environment conducive to development requires the gradual strengthening of social and political institutions to ensure that the most vulnerable groups, particularly women and children, have access to the benefits of development. We must not forget that the Council, per se, lacks functions and mandates regarding development. In the light of that, the Council must renew and strengthen its partnerships with the General Assembly and its subsidiary bodies with a view to coordinating policies and efforts so that the Council’s conflict prevention may have direct and indirect effects, based on its international peace and security functions. The gradual implementation of the development commitments is especially timely now, given the recent adoption here at Headquarters of the post-2015 development agenda. It is our responsibility, together with the international community as a whole, to harmonize efforts towards the gradual strengthening of the progress achieved in development — just as we did 15 years ago with the Millennium Development Goals — and thereby significantly reduce the factors that influence the root causes of conflict.

I now give the floor to the representative of Israel.

In just the last two weeks we have witnessed outrageous acts of terror around the world. Terror is terror and should be condemned loudly wherever it happens and whoever the victims are. I would like to express my sincere condolences and deepest sympathy to the French Republic and to the French people in the wake of the horrific attacks on Paris, the City of Light, this past weekend. Israel understands the pain and devastation of terrorism first hand. We know the people of France are strong and resilient. They should know that the people and the State of Israel stand by them in friendship and solidarity at all times, and especially at these difficult moments. The adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1) marks a new era of unprecedented global partnership to combat the greatest global challenge, namely, the eradication of poverty in all its forms and dimensions. However, as events in Syria, Beirut, the Sinai and Iraq make painfully clear, such noble goals will remain beyond reach unless the challenges of national and international peace and security are met head on. The growing interdependence of security and development is evident from the conditions of instability and underdevelopment across the globe today. Countries in situations of prolonged conflict suffer from decreased economic productivity, dramatically increased levels of poverty and declining health outcomes. Without the stability of enduring peace, the promise of sustainable development will remain unfulfilled. Moreover, due to the increasingly brutal nature of some of those conflicts, it has become ever more difficult for the international community to support the peacebuilding initiatives and institutions so desperately needed. The rules of the game have changed, but the international community has yet to respond adequately to the new reality. We must develop up-to-date mechanisms that will enable us to help the victims of conflict in the short-term, and to improve the conflict prevention capacities of those States in the long-term. Unless the community of nations takes action, the decline of political institutions and civil society in war- torn States will undermine the possibility of future development for generations to come. Only an inclusive approach, in which all stakeholders collaborate to address the challenges, can succeed. Stability and security are key to unlocking the full potential of developing States. However, without a comprehensive commitment to the goal of an inclusive society, the benefits of peace and the promise of sustainable development will remain elusive. In the twenty-first century, no nation can prosper if it neglects the building blocks of progress, namely, accountable institutions, the rule of law, respect for human rights and the empowerment of women. That lesson is particularly relevant for many in Israel’s region of the world, the Middle East. The disintegration of nation States and national borders that we have witnessed did not happen over night, nor where they uncontrollable. It is a direct result of decades of neglect, corrupt leadership and mistaken priorities in our region. Throughout these lost years, some in the international community stood silent, turning a blind eye to dangerous ideologies and at times collaborating with leaders responsible for harming their own people. When children are indoctrinated instead of educated, it breeds fundamentalism. When women are segregated from the rest of society, instead of being integrated into decision-making positions, important voices of moderation are being silenced. When leaders ignore desperate cries for more freedom and more opportunity, the result is a people without hope and a future without progress. When dangerous fundamentalist ideologies masquerade as legitimate religious views and are exported throughout the world, it leads to terror. And when we go out of our way to find a justification for some acts of terror, we lose our moral compass. The only sure path to both security and development is the promotion of free and open societies. However, we must not take that easy way out. We must not allow the failure to achieve developmental success become an excuse for violence, and we must not delude ourselves that the root causes of conflict are limited to weak institutions and slow economic growth. Over the past two months, hundreds of innocent Israeli men, women, and children have been brutally stabbed in the streets, intentionally run over at bus stops and deliberately shot at on their way to work — all for the crime of being Jews living in Israel. In many meetings in the Security Council, we have heard about the root causes of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and much blame has been placed on Israel for lack of progress, all the while downplaying, and at times ignoring, Palestinian reluctance to negotiate, as well as Palestinian terror and incitement. The wave of terror that Israel faces is not about lack of development. It is about the culture of hatred that pervades Palestinian educational institutions and the Palestinian media and incitement by Palestinian leaders. While each conflict is different, no discussion of the root causes of terror anywhere in the word can be complete unless it addresses the dehumanization of the other, which all too often lies at its heart. The road to a peaceful, prosperous and secure planet is long and winding but well worth the journey. Let us commit to work together in the spirit of friendship and in the name of humankind to make that dream a reality.

I now give the floor to the representative of Japan.

Let me begin by expressing my sincere appreciation for your leadership, Mr. President, in convening today’s open debate. Before I go into the substance of my statement, like the speakers before me, I would like to extend my delegation’s condolences and sympathy to the people and Government of France, in connection with the terrorist attacks on 13 November. Likewise, our condolences go to the peoples and Governments of Lebanon and Iraq, which also recently suffered from atrocious terrorist attacks. Japan appreciates the fact that the Council is focusing its attention on the root causes of conflict. By using its political leverage for conflict prevention and peacebuilding in a timely manner, the Council can help avoid situations in which large-scale action is required. As an active member of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) and a newly elected member of the Council, Japan also welcomes the United Kingdom presidency’s initiative in inviting the Chair of the PBC to this session. Today, our eyes are fully open to the fact that peace and security and sustainable development are closely linked to each other. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1) aims at approaching the security/development spectrum in an integrated way. Goal 16 is epoch-making. All the Member States recognize the need for breaking down silos. In implementing that Goal, every principal organ of the United Nations has its role to play. In that respect, let me underscore three points. The first concerns the importance of the role to be played by the Council. I would suggest that the Council has a tendency to pay insufficient attention to the nexus that should connect it to other intergovernmental organizations when it discusses issues in New York. In order to break down silos and make the discussions within the United Nations system holistic, the Security Council should ensure coherence with the work of other bodies, such as the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council, the High-level Political Forum, the executive boards of funds and programmes and the Human Rights Council, in addition, of course, to the PBC. Particularly when it comes to laying the ground for peace and taking measures based on long-term projections, the Security Council should make full use of the comparative strengths of the relevant institutions. That would help the Council to lessen its already heavy workload. We believe that the Council should take the lead in reaching out to those bodies. Secondly, I would like to highlight the importance of giving more priority to conflict prevention on the ground. In that connection, the United Nations country team plays a crucial role, and its updates should enable the Secretariat to proactively brief the Security Council. That would allow the Council to be engaged at the outset in situations where increased tension is observed, thereby preventing tensions from escalating into conflicts. Lastly, I would like to stress the importance of institution-building in preventing conflict. It is for that very reason that the PBC Working Group on Lessons Learned, which Japan chairs, has focused on the annual theme of institution-building. Japan intends to submit a report on those activities by the end of 2015. We hope to make additional contributions to today’s theme with that report. Before closing, allow me to briefly touch on Japan’s engagement. Japan places human security at the centre of its policy. That concept emphasizes placing people at the heart of development policy and protecting them, through empowerment, from various threats, including conflict. Indeed, the concept of human security calls for that seamless and coherent way of supporting efforts aimed at sustaining peace and development, all the way from the phases of conflict prevention and resolution efforts to those of consolidation of peace, prevention of relapse, reconstruction and sustainable development. Japan is determined to take an active role in conflict prevention, peacebuilding, humanitarian assistance and development cooperation, through a holistic approach.

I now give the floor to the representative of Slovenia.

I would like to thank the United Kingdom presidency for organizing this debate. At the outset, I would like to express my deepest condolences and sympathy to the French people and the families of the innocent victims in last Friday’s terrorist attack in Paris. That was a heinous attack, and we strongly condemn it. We support the French Government in its efforts to bring all those who were involved in planning and executing the attack to justice. Those attacks, which are the latest in a horrible series, demand a larger, coordinated response on the part of the international community, in the spirit of solidarity. Slovenia is committed to a joint effort with the international community in combating terrorism and will contribute, to the best of its ability, to ensuring international and European security, as well as its own. Conflicts, violence and fragility have significant and long-term consequences for sustainable development. Without peace, efforts aimed at eradicating poverty cannot yield the expected sustainable results, and, to achieve the latter, serious actions oriented to long-term goals are needed to tackle the root causes.. The recently adopted 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1) recognizes a strong connection and interdependence between peace and security, human rights and development and gives special attention to countries most in need, including countries in conflict and post-conflict situations. At its core is a multidimensional approach to development. That is vital, especially given that the nature of conflicts has significantly changed. The key drivers of instability include a wide range of factors, some of which are political, economic, social and environmental. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development can be considered to be one of the tools available for fostering and strengthening cooperation between security and development actors. Recent developments have demonstrated the severity of security challenges worldwide. A global humanitarian and refugee crisis of this magnitude has not been seen for the past seven decades. The crisis in the Middle East persists, and humanitarian assistance alone cannot solve the security challenges, which require political solutions and efforts to tackle their root causes. In the past several weeks, Slovenia has been confronted with an immense refugee and migrant flow. Policies addressing that issue will require close cooperation on the part of the whole international community, and should incorporate a human rights- based approach. Cooperation between the countries of destination, origin and transit must be strengthened. Slovenia is committed to the peaceful resolution of conflicts. We believe that we should resort to diplomacy, mediation and conflict prevention wherever possible. To do so, we need to strengthen the conflict-prevention capabilities of the Organization, and, in particular, make greater and more effective use of Chapter VI of the Charter of the United Nations on the peaceful settlement of disputes. Within the United Nations, peacebuilding and peacekeeping are only two of the many tools available, and they should complement each other. But as conflicts are becoming ever more complex, we have to increase our cooperation with regional, subregional and other organizations. Cooperation between security and development actors, together with national Governments, must be established early enough in the peacebuilding process and maintained during conflict-prevention efforts so as to effectively address the root causes of conflicts. If conflict prevention is to succeed, we need to recognize potential threats to international peace and security as early as possible, and we need to ensure effective, collective action. In that regard, we welcome the Human Rights Up Front initiative as a new tool aimed at ensuring that the United Nations system takes effective action to prevent large-scale violations of human rights or international humanitarian law. Women can and should play an important part in all aspects of the peace and security agenda, including in conflict prevention. The promotion and protection of human rights represent an important element in preventing conflict and promoting development. Human rights violations and abuses present one of the early signs for the need to action. In particular, we must pay special attention to the situation of women and vulnerable groups.

I now give the floor to the representative of Poland.

Poland joins other delegations in strongly condemning the terrorist attacks in Paris on 13 November. Together with the whole international community, we are deeply shocked by that barbarous act, unprecedented in its scale. (spoke in French) We offer our sincere condolences to the bereaved families and express our solidarity with the people and Government of France. During this difficult period, our thoughts are with the victims of this tragedy, with all the women and men of Paris, as well as with the French nation. (spoke in English) Turning to the subject of today’s meeting, I would like to thank the United Kingdom for once again bringing to the Council the issue of the prevention of conflicts, with special focus on the interlinkages between development and peace and security. I also thank the briefers for their contributions to the debate. While Poland aligns itself with the statement delivered by the observer of the European Union, allow me to share with the Council a few additional thoughts from the national perspective. Our debate today has benefited greatly from a number of important documents released this year. I have in mind, in particular, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1), which sets up the development framework for the future. This year is also special in that three review processes of the peacebuilding architecture, peace operations and the implementation of resolution 1325 (2000) are under way. The Secretary-General’s reports and their recommendations provide a good basis for further work towards achieving better complementary in the United Nations security and development policies. The changing nature of conflicts requires a comprehensive approach to stopping them before they put international peace and security at risk. Prevention lies at the heart of the United Nations activities. That is also the foundation of the Human Rights Up Front initiative, which seeks to strengthen the early-warning capacities of the Organization. The United Nations has at its disposal the tools needed to strengthen national protection mechanisms and help countries become more resilient in the face of conflicts and human rights crises. The Security Council, for its part, could make wider use of horizon-scanning briefings. We are also in favour of strengthening cooperation between the Security Council and other United Nations bodies, including the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC). The Council could benefit broadly from PBC’s expertise and advice, in particular when considering transitions between various types of assistance. We hope that the ongoing peacebuilding architecture review process will contribute to that end. Poland would also like to underline the importance of effective national conflict-prevention policies, such as strengthening transparent and accountable State institutions, fighting corruption and promoting human rights and good governance. We also see the need for States to promote and maintain safe and enabling environments for civil society actors, who play an essential role in the prevention of human rights violations, which too often result in conflicts. The demand for conflict prevention, mediation and good offices is growing rapidly. The good office exchanges and the mutual reinforcement in mediation efforts between the United Nations and European Union should continue, and are most appreciated. Recent examples also show the growing role played by regional economic communities in Africa in mediation, such as the Economic Community of West African States and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development. We encourage the United Nations to intensify its efforts to support regional organizations on other continents in building their own mediation capacities. Last but not least, the Department of Political Affairs plays a central role in United Nations efforts to prevent and resolve conflicts around the world. We hope that Poland’s first contribution to the Department of Political Affairs multi-year appeal last year will strengthen the Department’s capacity to detect crises, allowing it to engage meaningfully in preventive diplomacy and the strengthening of democratization processes.

I now give the floor to the representative of Cyprus.

Please allow me, first of all, to convey our deepest condolences and sympathy to the people and Government of France at this difficult moment. (spoke in French) We are all Parisians. (spoke in English) Cyprus aligns itself with the statement delivered by the observer of the European Union. I would like, however, to make some additional remarks in my national capacity. In 2001, in its presidential statement S/PRST/2001/5, the Security Council underlined that security and development are closely interlinked and mutually reinforcing, and are key to attaining sustainable peace. Their relationship was recognized as complex, multifaceted, and case-specific. The statement also called for an approach to building a sustainable peace that incorporates and strengthens coherence between political, security, development, human rights and rule-of-law activities, and addresses the underlying causes of each conflict. That vision is now included in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1) adopted in September by our leaders. While, on the one hand, we have adopted an ambitious Agenda, on the other we have been witnessing ongoing turmoil, extremism, sectarianism, civil war and terrorism in many parts of the world, resulting in death, persecution, property dispossession, displacement, the destruction of cultural heritage and forced migration. In order to reverse such worrying developments, we should direct our efforts so that the countries and regions in conflict zones are turned into places in which sustainable development becomes a reality. That can be achieved only by tackling the root causes that have led to this unprecedented situation with its political instability and economic insecurity. The marginalization of communities and groups based on racial, ethnic, social, gender, religious, cultural and/or economic grounds undoubtedly contributes to the destabilization of societies and underlies many conflicts today. Social, ethnic and religious divides have been a critical factor in creating conflict in many regions of the world. Exclusion, discrimination and deprivation are causes of poverty and inequality that threaten social cohesion. Dealing with the imperatives of peace and security means reaching those who are most vulnerable, including women and girls, children and the elderly, people with disabilities, migrants, refugees, the internally displaced and indigenous and minority groups. An inclusive society should provide equal opportunities for all citizens regardless of their background, and in particular should ensure women’s equal participation at all levels, since they play a crucial role in the prevention and resolution of conflicts. Tolerance and sound democratic governance are the best ways to ensure peaceful coexistence and welfare. At the same time, strong and effective institutions that are transparent, corruption-free, accessible and accountable, along with democratic forms of participation, are essential ingredients for inclusive and sustained economic growth and peaceful and stable societies. Establishing peace, security and respect for fundamental freedoms, and combating discrimination and all forms of violence, are critical conditions for development, but they are also the outcomes of development. Addressing the sources of conflict requires a multidimensional approach that must take into account the interrelated areas of development, human rights, peace, security and the rule of law. We firmly believe that the 2030 Agenda provides us with a unique opportunity to act together in order to shape a safer, more peaceful, just and prosperous world for ourselves and for our children and future generations.

I now give the floor to the representative of Ukraine.

At the outset, I would like to offer our sincere condolences to the Government of France in the wake of the barbaric terrorist attacks in Paris. Ukraine condemns those deadly and brutal actions and our people are in solidarity with the people of France. I would like to thank the United Kingdom for convening this important and timely debate. Ukraine fully shares the common vision that sustainable development cannot be realized without peace and security, and that peace and security are at risk without sustainable development. But despite intensified efforts in the areas of conflict prevention and strengthening the relevant normative frameworks at the regional and global levels, there is a clear gap between discourse and practice. Today, more than 60 million people around the world have been displaced by wars and do not enjoy the standards of living and social protection that peaceful and safe societies should provide. In recent years we have witnessed a surge in violent conflicts and an ever- growing need for urgent humanitarian assistance. While Ukraine subscribes to the idea that conflict prevention and peacebuilding efforts must be nationally driven and owned, the transnational nature of security threats today often makes it difficult for States to protect themselves when acting entirely on their own. An effective and efficient collective security system capable of addressing the root causes of such threats, with the United Nations and the Security Council at its centre, is essential. Our interconnected security and development challenges require a more integrated approach to conflict prevention that can strengthen coherence between political, security, development, human rights and rule of law activities. Moreover, the complexity of the emergencies that the Security Council deals with demands consideration of the relevant economic, political and social dimensions of conflict. In that regard, Ukraine believes that recognition of the need for the Security Council, the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council and the Secretary-General to coordinate their activities within their respective mandates under the Charter of the United Nations, as stated in the 2005 World Summit Outcome (General Assembly resolution 60/1), is even more relevant today. It is critically important to identify the root causes of conflicts at an early stage. In today’s world it is not only internal socioeconomic development challenges and external competition for natural resources that can lay a foundation for the eruption of conflicts. We believe they can also be caused by neglect of the Charter’s purposes and principles, the precepts of international law and the essential tenets of territorial integrity and respect for other countries’ sovereignty. In that context, the Russian aggression in Ukraine is yet another piece of proof that the Council should play a more proactive role in conflict prevention. We believe firmly that sustainable development cannot be achieved in places where explosions are heard and civilians are killed. It cannot be achieved in places where aggressive ideologies reign that advocate one nation’s suppression by another and where key human rights and freedoms are violated. As a result of Russia’s treacherous annexation of Ukrainian Crimea and its aggression in Ukraine’s Donbas region, more than 8,000 people have been killed. Critical infrastructure has been ruined and Ukraine has been deprived of about one-fifth of its economic potential. That external aggression has led to the emergence of a new form of poverty — a sudden or unexpected kind — that is affecting the lives of more than 1.5 million internally displaced persons in Ukraine. Every day of the war in Donbas costs us around $5 million that we could be investing in sustainable development. And the internally displaced persons crisis is one of the most pressing problems for the whole region, not just for Ukraine. Ukraine aspires to peace and prosperity and, together with its partner States, has been making every possible effort to settle the conflict by peaceful diplomatic means. Once we have put an end to the military aggression, established peace and restored Ukraine’s full sovereignty over the Donbas region and Crimea, we will focus on returning millions of people to a normal life and restoring our economic and social infrastructure on a basis of sustainable development. Ukraine stands ready to accomplish this difficult task and calls on its international partners to cooperate with it to that end. We welcome the Security Council’s commitment to enhancing dialogue and fostering more unity among its members. Ukraine believes that improving the quality of interaction on conflict prevention will boost the effectiveness of the Council’s work. I would like to emphasize that preventive diplomacy is our common goal. If we wish to achieve sustainable development, it is crucial that all Member States recommit to the principle of conflict prevention. We must stay united in our peacebuilding efforts. A system-wide effort and the support of the entire membership are critical to effectively addressing the interdependence between peace, security and development. Ukraine is committed to making its contribution to achieving sustainable peace for development, including as one of the newly elected non-permanent members of the Security Council for the period from 2016 to 2017.

I now give the floor to the representative of the Syrian Arab Republic.

I would first like to offer my heartfelt condolences to the families of the victims of the terrorist attacks in my country and in Lebanon, Baghdad, France and all over the world. We firmly condemn such attacks and those who perpetrate, support or finance them. We would also like to express our deep condolences to the people and Government of the Russian Federation in the wake of the downing of a Russian plane over Egypt. Syria associates itself with the statement delivered earlier by the representative of Iran on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. We rely on the essential role of the Security Council, as stipulated in the Charter of the United Nations, in maintaining international peace and security and preventing conflict, based on how important we believe it is to ensure the creation of an environment conducive to development, stability, peace and inclusion, as well as to support the United Nations bodies that deal with development issues. In that regard, I would like to recall the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1), and in particular its paragraph 47, which cites the central role to be played by the high-level political forum on development, under the auspices of the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council, in systematically reviewing the Agenda. My delegation is therefore concerned by the holding of today’s meeting and the attempt to push the Council to consider development issues that are not part of its mandate under the Charter. Furthermore, we do not support the selection of Sustainable Development Goal 16 and its link with conflict prevention as part of the Council’s agenda. If we insist on the fact that the Security Council should not deal with issues outside its purview, such as development, we do so for the practical reason that we should neither dilute nor politicize international efforts when we are trying to achieve our common goals. Moreover, the exclusive mandate of the Security Council to address issues of international peace and security and conflict prevention needs to be operationalized in the light of the disappointing outcome of the Council’s work in this area. We need to concentrate on what is within the Council’s domain and not branch out into other areas. With respect to international peace and security and conflict prevention, we can make the Council more operational by doing the following. We must immediately and completely implement all Security Council resolutions that have not been implemented for years, in particular those on the occupied Syrian Golan, Palestine and Israeli nuclear disarmament of Palestine. Secondly, we call for the immediate, unpoliticized and impartial implementation of resolutions on fighting terrorism. Thirdly, we must uphold respect for the sovereignty of States and non-interference in the domestic affairs of States on the part of countries that have a great deal of influence in the Council and that arrogate to themselves the legitimacy that they deny to others without taking into account the choices made by peoples. We need to require accountability from those Governments that have taken unilateral decisions or poorly interpreted Council decisions in order to justify interference in other countries’ affairs, thereby spurring violence, extremism and terrorism in those countries and others in the region, as occurred in Libya after the military invasion. We also need to underscore the interference of some countries since 2011 in the internal affairs of my country, Syria, as they have sought to undermine the Syrian State by force, using what one speaker today called revolutionary terrorists or coercive unilateral economic measures that have made us lose decades of development and stability. Many questions remain before the Council for action, in particular certain resolutions, including resolutions 2170 (2014), 2178 (2014) and 2199 (2015), which prohibit the financing of terrorists and their travel to Syria and to stop the trade in oil and antiquities with them. The Council also needs to look into the catastrophic effect of unilateral economic sanctions implemented against Syria by European countries and the United States, with the resulting conflict, unemployment, disease and poverty, which are not the effects that the Charter or Council resolutions were designed to achieve, but are the result of the lack of political will and the failure of wealthy countries, including some on the Council, to live up to their historical obligations.

I now give the floor to the representative of Palau.

First, let me start by thanking the presidency and the Government of the United Kingdom for convening this very important debate. We thank His Excellency Mr. Olof Skoog for his briefing and add our admiration and congratulations to Ms. Bouchamaoui and the people of Tunisia. We condemn the terrorist attacks that occurred last week in France. Lebanon and Egypt. Our prayers and thoughts go to the families and friends of the victims of these tragic events. We stand in solidarity with France, Lebanon and the Russian Federation as well as the rest of peace-loving world in calling for and taking action to defeat the enemies of peace, freedom and humankind. Palau agrees with the statements made during the framing of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1), and that many speakers have reiterated today, to the effect that sustainable development is not possible without peace. In this Chamber, our challenge is to attest to the fact that peace and security are not possible without sustainable development. We think therefore that the Council’s mandate to maintain peace and security has to be adjusted to the realities of the twenty-first century. For instance, the Security Council has an obligation to take ownership of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the fight against climate change as part of its core working deliverables. Additionally, ethics for sustainable development should not only be embraced, but protected and facilitated by the Security Council. We believe that to achieve peace we have to reach back and deep into the component parts of the solid foundation required for peaceful and secure societies. We believe in what we have often heard about the need to win hearts and minds in order to win the war. That is true. However, we do not need to win the hearts and minds of our enemies, but of our own children, youth, elderly and leaders. We can win over their hearts and minds in favour of peace, not by imposition but by conviction demonstrated by achieving all the Goals contained in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, including the assurance that the plight of island nations at risk of being swallowed up by rising sea levels and the deteriorating health of the oceans are acknowledged as a peace and security matter in the Security Council. For us, this is the best way for the Council to ensure equal protection and security for everyone, with no one being left behind. Accordingly, we demonstrate that it is the quality rather than quantity of peacebuilding that is the key to successful peacekeeping. During the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, we heard many times that the new framework would help us to move away from business as usual. We therefore look to it to help us accomplish the required paradigm shift from more peacekeepers, more weapons and more logistical concerns to resources directed at eradicating poverty, educating youth and addressing the other core pillars of long-lasting sustainable development and peace. Quality peacebuilding will be achieved when experienced peacekeepers can be deployed quickly before a conflict worsens and when doctors, teachers, engineers and civil servants of all kinds are deployed to complement the work of military and police personnel, strengthening the often weakened core elements of a peaceful civil society that are required to repudiate extremism, terrorism and genocide. Consequently, the mandates arising in resolutions of the Security Council must be clear, dynamic and, most importantly, forge genuine and durable partnerships that hold the Council accountable to the citizens that it serves. I have one final thought to offer. We think that the significant celebration of the seventieth anniversary of the founding of the United Nations should take place in 2030, because only then will we have an indication as to whether the commitments we made in Sendai, Addis Ababa, New York and Paris resulted in a paradigm shift in the way we viewed, understood and took action on the issues of security, development and root causes of conflict, of the actions we committed to take in the year 2015. For instance, did we learn from the model that shows that there had been development advances in nations that had not had a war on their soil in the 70 years of existence of the United Nations, compared to a lack of development in those that had suffered conflicts? And did we take action accordingly? We hope that, in 2030, there will be less sadness because of terrorism and poverty and more development and peace.

I now give the floor to the observer of the International Committee of the Red Cross. Mr. Spoerri: The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) very much welcomes this debate and the Security Council’s concern for conflict prevention. It may seem unusual for the ICRC to speak in a debate on conflict prevention and peaceful societies. The ICRC does not engage in the politics of conflict prevention, development and peace. We do, however, engage in the suffering and deprivations of armed conflict on a daily basis, and it is from that suffering that we are speaking to the Council today. The ICRC’s mandate and mission mean that it sees first-hand the devastation that armed conflict brings to people’s individual lives and to the fabric and institutions of the societies in which they live. It is from this experience that we want to address the Council with four general observations. First, the humanitarian consequences of prolonged armed conflict are driving many millions of people deeper and deeper into poverty. The humanitarian consequences of armed conflict cause enormous development reversals as infrastructure and basic services are destroyed, people are forcibly displaced and whole communities are impoverished by conflict. In protracted conflicts in particular, we observe the entrenchment of poverty for millions of people, which will be extremely hard to reverse and is in stark contrast to the ambitions of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the United Nations. Secondly, the ICRC and other humanitarian organizations are increasingly engaged in development tasks in today’s armed conflicts. In the absence of conflict prevention and development institutions, our humanitarian operations are frequently required to support basic services and critical development infrastructure in health care, water, sewerage, electricity, heating, veterinary care, agricultural inputs and food. In the absence of development investment, millions of conflict-affected people depend on these fragile services for their survival. In many armed conflicts, particularly in urban settings, the ICRC is supporting long-term services and sophisticated infrastructure with short-term humanitarian budgets. In many places, that means that we are engaged in what may be described as “development holds” to prevent even further degradation of infrastructure and services, often for years at a time. To better meet these sustained humanitarian needs, we need closer links between humanitarian and development planning and financing. Thirdly, several features of contemporary armed conflict are in danger of making conflicts increasingly intractable and protracted. We notice that conflict spreads whenever it is not effectively addressed, and does not stop at State borders. In many of our operations today, we are managing a regional response to armed conflicts that spread and damage people’s lives across whole regions, as, for example, is the case today in the Middle East and the Lake Chad Basin. We also notice that the fragmentation and mutation of armed conflict contribute to the protractedness of armed conflict and the increase of poverty and suffering. Many States and many non-State armed groups are directly involved as belligerents in several of today’s armed conflicts. In our experience, the active engagement of so many parties to a conflict tends to create a momentum towards the mutation and continuity of that conflict rather than its resolution and termination. Finally, we feel bound to observe that poverty and suffering are much reduced in armed conflicts in which international humanitarian law is widely respected. It is evident to us that when international humanitarian law is not respected, the prospects of the people affected by conflict are significantly worsened and the opportunities for peace are greatly reduced by spirals of revenge and retaliation. These set in motion new grievances and increase the intractability of many armed conflicts today. We therefore urge the Council to work actively with States to ensure respect for international humanitarian law with the intention of reducing suffering and poverty in armed conflicts, de-escalating the levels of violence and shortening the duration of armed conflict. The ICRC thanks the Council very much for giving us this opportunity to take part in this important debate and to share our experience with it today. We recognize the Council’s determination to address conflict prevention across all three pillars of the United Nations work. We hope that our observations will help to inform the Council’s deliberations.

I now give the floor to the representative of Georgia.

Let me join others in thanking the presidency of the United Kingdom for organizing the debate. I also thank Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Ms. Bouchamaoui and Ambassador Skoog for their briefings. Georgia fully associates itself with the statement delivered earlier by the observer of the European Union. In addition, I would like to make some comments in my national capacity. First, let me join previous speakers in strongly condemning the despicable acts of terrorism that took place in Paris a few days ago, other atrocious acts of cowardice and terror we witnessed recently in Lebanon, and the downing of the Russian aircraft. Terrorism has no borders and no nationality, and none of us is immune to the threat. Hence, it is only through our unity — the unity of international community — that humankind will be able to vanquish darkness. Many examples in modern history demonstrate how security and development are intertwined in pre-conflict, conflict and post-conflict situations. The root causes of conflict are often the political, economic and social imbalances in society. We must therefore focus on good governance. Upholding the rule of law, strengthening independent judicial mechanisms, ending impunity, and ensuring accountability and responsive Government are some of the crucial measures to take on the path to ensuring sustainable development for all. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1) offers real hope for stability, prosperity and conflict prevention worldwide. Goal 16 on promoting peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, access to justice and effective, accountable and inclusive institutions is one of the central Goals, since the progress in all other areas largely depends on efficient governance. The international community can and must provide assistance in building capacities in countries struggling with development challenges, including for the purposes of preventing and combating terrorism and crime. But national ownership and determination to solve the problems, coupled with democratic reforms, good governance practices, the rule of law and the eradication of corruption are essential prerequisites. As a country that has undergone a dramatic change over the past decade through reform and modernization, and as a member of the Peacebuilding Commission, Georgia stands ready to share its successful experience with fellow Member States in the streamlining of all segments of the public sector, the establishment of a viable police force, the eradication of corruption and the provision of swift and efficacious Government services to all citizens. As we speak on the need for inclusive societies, let me stress how important it is that these goals be applied equally to people living in conflict-affected areas. The two Georgian regions of Abkhazia and Tskhinvali/South Ossetia are under illegal foreign military occupation. Georgian citizens residing in the Russian occupied territories are deprived of the minimal safeguards for their fundamental rights and freedoms. The most vulnerable groups of population cannot receive education in their mother tongue and freedom of movement and other fundamental rights are constantly denied. Let me reiterate that the men, women and children living in conflict situations should enjoy the benefits of development and progress like the rest of us, and the international community should spare no effort to that end. Although Georgia continues to be prevented from directly and fully addressing the needs of its citizens in the occupied regions, in cooperation with United Nations agencies, such as the United Nations Development Programme and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, we are implementing crucial confidence-building measures and promoting people-to-people contacts through meetings among professional communities, the training of experts and teachers, study visits and other activities. One of our key priorities is the provision of health-care services to those living beyond the occupation line, provided that the people in need are not prevented by the occupying Power from accessing these services. Addressing the needs of the local population on both sides of the artificial divide and improving the living conditions of the sundered communities is important not only from a purely humanitarian point of view, but also from the human security and peacebuilding perspectives.

I now give the floor to the representative of Egypt.

Allow me at the outset to thank the United Kingdom for having taken the initiative to convene an open debate of the Security Council on the issue of security, development and the root causes of conflict. There can be no doubt that this is a key issue that must be considered by many United Nations bodies, commensurate with their mandate and area of expertise. The link between security and development and understanding the root causes of conflict is key to addressing certain development issues at the international level, in particular security threats that are played out in military confrontations or strike at the heart of capital cities, as we saw recently in the senseless terrorist attacks on Baghdad, Beirut and Paris. We also face challenges resulting from poverty, famine and lack of health-care services, as well as those relating to sustainable development. We must therefore consider all of these factors when devising strategies to address existing issues. I should like to touch on several points that we deem key to understanding the link between security and development. First, the causes of conflict include poverty, unemployment, economic and social inequality, hatred, exclusion, lack of education or access thereto, and challenges linked to climate change. All of these have been exacerbated by the global economic and financial crisis and the lack of financial resources to deliver on sustainable development, particularly through official development assistance. We must therefore adopt a strategy of preventive diplomacy in order to tackle the root causes of conflict and prevent their spread or escalation. Priority must be accorded to prevention in order to bring about sustainable development for all States and all levels of society, eliminate poverty and exclusion, and promote democracy, the rule of law and gender equality. Secondly, the spread of terrorism has exacerbated the situation and complicated the picture. Terrorism represents a threat to international peace and security, as well as to sustainable development. Therefore, fighting terrorism is one of the most important elements in the context of the link between security and development. Thirdly, we need to identify the causes of conflict, which are very complex. Sometimes they are clear, such as the ones we have cited, but others must be further investigated. Here I am thinking in particular of those related to the fact that the international community has not discharged its duty to address decades-long conflicts that give rise to continuing hatred and deprive peoples of justice and development opportunities. Like cancer cells, they can have only negative effects, and here I am thinking of the Palestinian question. Fourthly, national responsibility is most important in terms of conflict prevention and the protection of civilians, in keeping with international instruments and Security Council resolutions. It is also important to respect the priorities and requirements set out by national authorities, in line with national sovereignty, so as to bring about social stability and peace. That requires support for regional initiatives, in particular the New Partnership for Africa’s Development. Fifthly, dealing with security and development issues and the root causes of conflict is a complex undertaking that should involve multiple United Nations bodies. We must not, however, allow any United Nations organs to encroach on the mandates of others. We must not burden the Security Council with issues such as sustainable development, which does not fall under its mandate, in keeping with the Charter of the United Nations. We must not allow the work of the Security Council to overlap with that of other bodies.

I now give the floor to the representative of Algeria.

I should like first and foremost to convey our heartfelt sympathy to and express our full solidarity with France in connection with the horrific attacks that struck Paris and the surrounding region last Friday. The horror of those attacks, only a few days after the events in Beirut and many other places, is a painful reminder that no one is safe and that strengthened international cooperation is imperative to combat the scourge of terrorism, which can never be justified. (spoke in English) I wish to thank the British presidency for the spirit in which it started the work of the Council this month, and we specifically appreciate, as reported to Member States by the President of the General Assembly, that the overall intention of the United Kingdom is to conduct the Council’s business in as transparent and interactive a manner as possible. We look forward to seeing all Security Council members following in this trailblazing endeavour. I also thank the British presidency for having convened this open debate and appreciate the valuable contributions of the Secretary-General; our colleague Olof Skoog, Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission; and Ms. Ouided Bouchamaoui. Development, security and human rights are intertwined, a linkage that Algeria has always strongly defended, including by promoting this idea, today enshrined in Sustainable Development Goal 16. Numerous General assembly resolutions, as well as continued efforts to improve the working methods of the Peacebuilding Commission, confirm this correlation. We also want to stress the importance of the normative work on women and peace and security and call for its implementation, in particular with respect to the prevention pillar, the participation of women in peace processes and countering violent extremism and terrorism. We also stress the importance of cross-border cooperation for the resolution of disputes and the equal priority to be given to the implementation of post-conflict reconstruction programmes for States transitioning out of conflict. Addressing the root causes of conflict means that we have to perform a thorough examination of past experiences, draw and learn lessons therefrom, and admit that the symptoms, however dire and harsh, are just the consequences of deeper problems and imbalances. If we do not investigate the reasons that led to conflict, we will continue our ever-riskier journey into uncharted and uncertain territory. We also deem it vital to stress that the Council and Member States, collectively and individually, should be careful about taking any action that might lead to institutional vacuums or lawlessness in countries that were or are still on the agenda of the Council. Thinking of the day after is also important, and working with regional organizations is equally so. In this regard, I would like to remind the Council that Africa faces complex, multidimensional challenges. I wish in this regard to underline the fact that the African Union has taken a number of initiatives, including the African Peace and Security Architecture, which supports efforts aimed at the prevention, management and resolution of crises and conflicts, post-conflict reconstruction and development. It is critical for us Africans to identify potential conflict situations as early as possible. The African Union continental early- warning system, created in 2002, is yet another such initiative and provides timely advice on potential conflicts and threats to peace and security. At the regional level, we support preventive action ranging from institution-building to preventive diplomacy, which protects and strengthens State sovereignty. In that regard, Algeria’s actions in the promotion of dialogue as a solution to the crisis in our neighbourhood has been widely recognized. The International Crisis Group, in its 12 October report on the Middle East and North Africa, noted that Algeria has emerged as an indispensable broker of stability in North Africa and the Sahel. It emphasized the fact that Algeria has at key moments promoted dialogue and State-building as the best means for lifting its neighbours out of crisis. While we are in favour of the development of Security Council tools for the prevention of conflicts, ranging from the use of peace operations to interventions through statements, resolutions and consultations with the Peacebuilding Commission, we emphasize that the Security Council may not be the only body that should address the development, peace and security nexus. Peace, security, inclusive institutions, the rule of law and access to justice should also be deliberated in the relevant forums: the Human Rights Council, the Sixth Committee, the Economic and Social Council and the General Assembly. We believe that enhanced coordination among all bodies under the Charter of the United Nations, including the Peacebuilding Commission and the Economic and Social Council, could contribute to a better understanding of the interlinkages between development issues and conflict prevention. We look forward to the Secretary-General’s plan of action on preventing violent extremism, to be issued later this year, since terrorism and violent extremism threaten to reverse much of the development progress made in recent decades.

I now give the floor to the representative of Kuwait.

At the outset, I wish to congratulate you, Mr. President, on presiding over the Security Council this month and to express thanks for the concept note (S/2015/845, annex) for our open debate today on security, development and the root causes of conflict. I also wish to thank Secretary- General Ban Ki-moon for his valuable briefing, which outlined the different tools and mechanisms available to prevent conflicts. Our debate today on the prevention of conflicts is very important. It is one of a series that have addressed this issue, together with a number of resolutions, such as resolution 2171 (2014), which specifies the Council’s role in this regard. Many parts of the world are witnessing conflicts and wars that are very complex and more intertwined than ever before. The number of civil wars has increased from 4 to 11 since 2008, and the nature of war and conflict has changed. Currently, we see many conflicts and wars inside countries and inside societies, whereas in the past they tended to be between two countries. Countries have employed many strategies to attain purposes that conflict with the principles underlying the work of the United Nations. Against that background, we must address the issue of conflicts and how to prevent them using the tools and mechanisms available to us. Today, as a result of conflicts, more than 60 million people either have been internally displaced or have fled as refugees. In 2015, more than $20 billion was spent on humanitarian assistance and more than $8 billion on peacekeeping operations. That tragic situation, the like of which has not been witnessed since the Second World War, pushes us to work together to benefit from the experiences of the past and to find new ways of preventing conflicts and of resolving them peacefully. Article 99 of the Charter of the United Nations gives the Secretary-General the right to bring to the attention of the Security Council any matter which in his opinion may threaten the maintenance of international peace and security. That is why we call on the Council to activate the mechanisms needed to establish an early- warning system for the purpose of preventing potential conflicts from breaking out. We must reinforce the support available to the relevant bodies, including the regional organizations, as they play a crucial role. International diplomacy and mediation and an early- warning system are the main elements that we should focus on to prevent conflicts. It is also important to consult the country offices of the United Nations. There is no straight path to peace, only a tortuous one. The post-2015 development agenda has opened up new horizons for achieving peace. In the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1, annex), Goal 16, on the establishment of peaceful societies and making justice available for all, confirms the strong link between peace and development. There can be no peace without development and no development without peace. That is why we must deal with any conflict before it gets out of hand. Finally, I wish to repeat that the Security Council needs to assume its responsibilities in maintaining peace and security, pursuant to the Charter of the United Nations. It also needs to work on dealing with the many important issues, such as the Palestinian conflict and the Syrian crisis. The fact that those conflicts remain unresolved shows how paralysed the Council is.

I now give the floor to the representative of Turkey.

At the outset, I would like to extend our deepest condolences to France, Lebanon and the Russian Federation on the recent terrorist attacks. As a country that has been a target of terrorism, most recently in Ankara in October, Turkey stands in solidarity with the international community in the fight against this universal scourge. I also wish to express our appreciation to the United Kingdom presidency for organizing this debate. People are at the centre of sustainable development, and the fundamental conditions for achieving development are peace and security. Preventing conflict, ensuring peaceful societies and promoting good governance and the rule of law are crucial enablers of sustainable development. Our 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1), including its Goals and targets, not only recognizes but also gives concrete expression to the link between peace and sustainable development, especially through Goal 16. Achieving sustainable development paves the way for peace, while stability in turn sets the stage for economic growth and sustainable development. In our view, both the quality and the quantity of growth are important. We need to strive to ensure that economic growth is inclusive and its benefits are shared by all. Inequality, not just of incomes but also of opportunities, is a source of social and political instability. That fact is the starting point of the overall emphasis that Turkey has placed on the concept of inclusivity, notably throughout most of its presidency of the Group of 20. Protracted armed conflicts and transnational threats against today’s security environment are inherently political issues and require political solutions, while poverty, social inequalities, the lack of inclusivity, the inefficient use of natural resources and ecological degradation are often among the causes that lead to crises. Addressing those causes will have a positive impact on the peaceful resolution of conflicts. Conflict prevention, peacebuilding, the promotion of durable peace and development are among the core United Nations activities that should be carried out using a comprehensive approach. Effective mediation, based on political inclusivity and technical expertise, is a cost-effective tool in conflict prevention and conflict- solving processes, especially with regard to addressing the root causes of problems. Another pillar of our strategic focus on United Nations efforts to sustain peace under the Charter of the United Nations is a stronger emphasis on peacebuilding alongside peace operations, with a view to addressing the full conflict cycle. The broad prospect of peacebuilding, encompassing a wide range of activities from development partnership to institution-building and from disarmament, demobilization and reintegration to security-sector reform processes and the promotion of human rights and the rule of law, makes it all the more relevant in a comprehensive approach. We believe that a focus on the interdependence of migration and development also merits attention in this debate. Turkey has a long history as a crossroads of migration. It is our firm belief that migration can be a significant driver of development. There exist many examples of the positive contributions that migrants have made to the economic growth and sustainable development of both source and destination countries. On the other hand, we cannot achieve our Sustainable Development Goals without addressing complex humanitarian emergencies. Effective measures must be taken by all to meet the needs of people living in areas affected by humanitarian crises. International cooperation should also strengthen the resilience of communities hosting refugees and strengthen burden- and responsibility-sharing, without at the same time cutting back on much needed official development assistance. That is why Turkey has long been defending the necessity of a stronger emphasis on the humanitarian-development nexus. Taking only palliative measures and ignoring the need to tackle the root causes of refugee and irregular migrant flows would yield only temporary and limited success. We need to focus on eliminating or at least reducing push factors, like wars, conflicts, human rights violations and economic deprivation in the countries of origin. Inclusiveness is important not only within countries, but also among countries. After all, we now have a new universal sustainable development Agenda, whose fundamental commitment is to leave no one behind. We certainly have a moral obligation to address inequality, but we also need to address inequality because we know that it hinders economic growth. We need to create a more inclusive and equitable system of global partnerships with the engagement of all advanced, emerging and developing countries based on mutual respect and benefit. Additionally, the enhancement of the representation and voice of developing countries in the global decision-making architecture are necessary in order to strengthen the resilience of global governance, as well as the trust of people in our system. Unfortunately, in too many cases, inaction by the Security Council on international peace and security issues has had a direct affect on the well-being of peoples. A more democratic, transparent, effective, accountable and representative Council will be key in addressing the challenges related to development and peace and security.

I now give the floor to the representative of Sierra Leone.

I have the honour to deliver this statement on behalf of the African States. Let me, at the outset, express our thoughts and prayers for all those who continue to suffer from the scourge of terrorism, not only most recently in France, but also in Lebanon and Egypt. We are deeply grateful to the United Kingdom presidency for calling for this debate at this time. We would also like to thank Secretary of State Greening and the Secretary-General for their statements. We associate ourselves with the statement made by the representative of Iran on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. The United Nations, as we know, was founded to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, to reaffirm our faith in fundamental human rights, and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom. The Organization has since then become the fundamental actor in joint efforts to seek common solutions to common problems that challenge humanity. The multiplicity of terrorist acts, the spread of organized crime and the growth of illegal economic activities in the world are impediments to the development that we seek and represent a growing risk to the stability and survival of some of our Member States. Terrorism remains one of the most potent threats to international peace and security. The recent events in Kenya, Lebanon, France and Egypt have once again demonstrated the need for the Organization to assume its role as the preeminent multilateral forum to address today’s crises and challenges. In that context, let me state Africa’s strongest condemnation of all terrorist acts. We call on the international community to adopt a zero-tolerance policy towards all acts of terrorism and to eradicate the structures of terrorism, its network of supporters, its financing centres, its training facilities and all those who seek to establish and foster incubators of hate. It is patently clear to all of us that national solutions are no longer sufficient to meet the current security threats, which are cross-border in structure and complex in nature. It is time for the United Nations to demonstrate the necessary political will to agree on a comprehensive convention on international terrorism. It is time to consolidate the normative framework against the increasingly complex and terrorist challenges that we face around the world. In this era of global transformation, peace, security and development have become ever more closely interlinked and mutually reinforcing. The African States emphasize the importance of peace and security as a necessary precondition for development, not only on our continent, but in the rest of the world. There can never be development in the absence of true peace and stability. As we proceed to implement the post-2015 development agenda, adopted recently in the form of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1), the African States would like to emphasize the imperative need for peaceful and inclusive societies as a key component for sustainable development. The African continent has made remarkable progress in becoming more prosperous and peaceful. In January of this year, in Addis Ababa, the African Union adopted Agenda 2063 as its 50-year transformative agenda for peace, security and development. Over the past two decades, Africa has made considerable progress in strengthening democratic governance through the support of regional and subregional organizations. The continent has adopted measures to address tensions and the threat of conflict. It also continues to monitor and promote human rights, build peace and security, and consolidate good governance. Much has been done, but much still remains to be done. The African States note the need for greater efforts to implement the peaceful settlement of disputes, as envisaged in Article 33 of the Charter of the United Nations. The peaceful settlement of disputes can only be achieved through frank and open dialogue based on mutual respect. Conflict prevention is a much more cost-effective and sustainable option than force. Mediation and prevention efforts, facilitation and the use of good offices remain central tools in managing situations of imminent and latent conflict. The African Union’s contribution to United Nations peacekeeping efforts demonstrates its strong commitment to the search for peace and stability, and it stands ready to increase its profile in the peacekeeping landscape. The ongoing 10-year review of the peacebuilding architecture is timely. It compels all of us to face head- on the challenges of building and sustaining peace and the ever-present risk of lapses or relapses into conflict. The broad focus of the review will be critical, given the need for comprehensive, integrated approaches in that area. We welcome the report of the Advisory Group of Experts on the Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture (see S/2015/490), which, in our view, covers most of the discussions and recommendations made repeatedly over the years by Member States, including countries on the Peacebuilding Commission’s agenda, the Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission, the Chairs of the country-specific configurations, civil society and partners, such as the international financial institutions. We must take the bold steps needed to translate our deliberations into a resolution that can bring about the transformation that we all seek. Peacebuilding is the work of all and must be at the core of the work of this Organization. The question is, of course, how to achieve peace and progress without creating avenues for waste or unnecessary duplication within the Organization. The business of peacebuilding must inform our inputs and must focus our minds on making sure that the recommendations contained in the reports of the Advisory Group become a reality. Of primary importance is the need to deploy the necessary resources to meet our overall aspirations of peace, security and development. In conclusion, as we consider the critical link between peace, security and development, partnerships with regional organizations and other relevant institutions must be given consideration. We also believe that the work of the Peacebuilding Commission and other actors must focus on the broader ideal and principle of sustaining peace before and after conflict. All principal organs of the United Nations and the United Nations system must focus on that broader objective, and we must consider new approaches that can break down institutional silos and ensure that we work collectively as one.

I now give the floor to the representative of Botswana.

I have the honour to deliver this statement on behalf of the member States of the Southern African Development Community (SADC). SADC aligns itself with the statement just delivered by the Permanent Representative of Sierra Leone on behalf of the African Group. Allow me to join in expressing our heartfelt condolences to the families and friends of the vicims following the tragic events in France and elsewhere, in which a significant number of human lives were lost as a result of terrorism and violent conflict. Allow me also to sincerely commend the British presidency of the Security Council for the initiative to hold this open debate at a time when there are serious threats to international peace and security. Today’s open debate, on security, development and the root causes of conflict, is very timely inasmuch as it affords the international community the opportunity to reflect on this important matter. The tragedies the world is currently experiencing serve to underscore the need to intensify global efforts towards the effective management and prevention of conflicts and terrorism in all their forms and manifestations. SADC sincerely commends the Council’s continued engagement with Member States on pertinent issues concerning the maintenance of international peace and security. The discourse regarding security and development is often a difficult one. While some would argue that security is needed to enhance development potential, others would advance arguments to the contrary. That clearly demonstrates the fact that the two issues are interrelated and that the attainment of both should be our ultimate aim. A deficit in either could result in untold suffering, leading to conflict. SADC believes that peace and security are prerequisites for the attainment of sustainable development. The two provide a conducive environment for development, which in turn results in improved quality of life for our citizens. Many reasons have been advanced as root causes of conflict throughout the world. We often see nations and communities tear each other apart for reasons such as the inequitable distribution of resources, the lack of good governance, social exclusion, political intolerance or environmental conflicts, among many others. Consequently, where such conflict situations exist, democracy and the rule of law are undermined, resulting in the suppression of individuals by the very machinery that ought to protect them. That glaring failure by States to fulfil their obligations to protect their citizens can be attributed to weak governance institutions, poor leadership, the marginalization of certain communities and the lack of inclusive development. In essence, conflict can be attributed to the absence of a positive social contract between those in power and civil society. As the United Nations marks its seventieth year of existence, it remains as relevant as ever as the only universally agreed platform for addressing international disputes through peaceful means. In accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, the Security Council is entrusted with the responsibility for maintaining of international peace and security. In that context, the Council needs to be more proactive and to invest more in conflict prevention, mediation and arbitration, instead of attempting to manage conflicts that are already raging. As we scan the horizon, any scenario that exhibits the potential for conflict should be met with unwavering resolve and all appropriate tools at the disposal of the international community should be put to use. In that regard, it is important to address any simmering situation before it escalates into a full-blown conflict that could lead to untold suffering and devastation, especially on the part of vulnerable social groups. While acknowledging the primacy of the United Nations in maintaining international peace and security, there are equally more important partners that must be involved. First and foremost, States and their citizens must play a leading role in finding solutions to their problems. Imposing solutions and maintaining a monopoly on making peace is counterproductive. It is therefore prudent for regional and subregional mechanisms to be at the fore of efforts to promote sustainable peace and development. For that reason, SADC remains committed to contributing to a stable, just and peaceful security architecture by strengthening effective, inclusive and accountable national and regional institutions. In that respect, the SADC nations have entered into bilateral and regional peace and security frameworks that seek, among other things, to address conflict within and among States. In conclusion, I wish to reiterate SADC’s constructive engagement with and commitment to working with the United Nations and with our own continental body, the African Union, to enhance international security and development. Taking place against the backdrop of devastating terrorism attacks on innocent civilians, today’s debate should serve to strengthen our resolve to combat conflict and all other forms of insecurity. We owe it to the multitudes of our people, our children and posterity to ensure a safe and secure environment that allows the human spirit to thrive to its fullest potential.

I now give the floor to the representative of Kenya.

I would like to begin by conveying my Government’s message of sympathy and condolence to the Governments of France and Lebanon following the recent terrorist atrocities. My delegation commends the presidency of the Security Council for convening this important debate. We are delighted to make our contribution. Kenya aligns itself with the statement delivered by the representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran on behalf of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries and by the representative of Sierra Leone on behalf of the African Group. Kenya attaches high priority to conflict prevention and to addressing the root causes of conflict, in equal importance, with regard to their impact on development. They are inseparably connected. It is indisputable that development has no worse enemy than war. Conflicts result in death, suffering and the displacement of entire populations. We recognize that the absence of peace and security in countries in conflict impedes sustainable development. Kenya therefore welcomes Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 16, on peace, justice and strong institutions. Nevertheless, we are convinced that Goal 16 is more of a development challenge and that it should not be seen as a security challenge. It should serve as a framework that supports the effective implementation of the rest of the SDGs. My delegation fully supports efforts aimed at assisting countries emerging from conflict. We concur with the view that this requires an approach that incorporates and strengthens coherence across the political, security, development and human rights sectors — an approach that also includes the rule of law and addresses the underlying causes of conflict. Security and development ultimately depend on respect for human rights and the rule of law. However, there are other equally important, interrelated considerations that need to be taken into account. Nothing happens in a vacuum. Many factors impact development, both within countries and among them. Such factors compel us to address pressing issues in the context of existing reality rather than in terms of the outcome we might wish for. That can sometimes be inconvenient. I would like to briefly underline my delegation’s views on the connection between peace and security and development in the context of supporting the Council’s prevention agenda and working to better understand the root causes of conflict. I will highlight four issues touching on the root causes of conflict and global governance. The point is not to revisit history as some distant, past event. We must understand the seeds of conflict in today’s world so that we can seek solutions from an accurate understanding of the root causes of conflict. The rule of law and human rights are vital to global security and prosperity. The rule of law must be seen to be fair, while addressing global injustices and inequality and promoting fairness. However, if we do not remain true to those ideals, they will not gain legitimacy and credibility in the eyes of others. None of the SDGs can be achieved without genuine transformation whereby our different communities can live together in peace and security. All countries should enjoy due rights, equal opportunities and fair participation in global, economic, financial and trade affairs. We have to give our people, not only in each nation but also throughout the world, the benefits of globalization, which unfortunately accrue to a few. They must at least have a chance to share in the prosperity. Finally, my delegation believes that the security of everyone is linked to that of everyone else. It is only by working together that we can make each other secure. As we consider how to address the issues of security, development and the root causes of conflict, we should not lose sight of the fact that our hope for success will hinge on upholding collective responsibility, global solidarity, the rule of law and mutual accountability.

I thank the represenative of Kenya for coming from his capital to participate in our debate and, as well, for being so prompt in his timing. I now give the floor to the representative of Norway.

Let me start by joining others in expressing my deepest condolences over the terrorist attacks in recent weeks. I have the honour to speak on behalf of the Nordic countries, namely, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Sweden and my own country, Norway. I will circulate my full statement. Let me make six points. First, social, economic and political exclusion are often the root causes of conflict. From Libya to Yemen and from Burkina Faso to Mali, the international community is trying to assist in building peace. State-building must be an integral part of peacebuilding. We must do more to create responsive institutions based on the rule of law and to foster inclusive politics in order to ensure that the social contract is established or, indeed, re-established. Secondly, inclusion is important for peace agreements to be sustainable. The inclusion of local communities, civil society and women in peace and reconciliation processes must be given higher priority. They bring to the table questions and concerns that are important to the entire population. Greater investment in gender equality and women’s empowerment is an investment in the stability of societies and the prevention of conflicts. Thirdly, conflict prevention and mediation must move to the forefront of our action. In the Secretary- General’s report on resolution 2171 (2014), on conflict prevention (S/2015/730), he calls for a collective recommitment. We agree. Member States must let the Secretary-General be more hands-on. The good offices function is too important to be micromanaged. Fourthly, the United Nations system is fragmented, which weakens our ability to prevent conflict and assist in building legitimate and resilient States. We, the Member States, contribute to such fragmentation through the way we fund the United Nations. We can do much more when it comes to coordinating our bilateral engagements. The review of the peacebuilding architecture proposes to make so-called peacebuilding compacts. We need to explore that and other ideas on how to foster closer cooperation among the main actors in peacebuilding. Fifthly, we need more reliable sources of funding for conflict prevention. It would save lives, but it would also safeguard development gains. Here is a calculation: the annual cost of the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic is approximately $628 million. The Nordic countries, indeed, supported the creation of the Mission in 2014. The United Nations Integrated Peacebuilding Office in the Central African Republic — in the same place — had a budget of merely $20 million in 2012. It is of course always difficult to make an exact calculation, but prevention is much more cost-efficient than the cure. We also need to invest more resources in building local capacity for peaceful conflict resolution. Sixthly, upholding human rights is one of the fundamental obligations of any Government. Often we see that deterioration in respect for human rights can be a telling sign, an early warning, of worse things to come. By addressing such situations and ensuring accountability for the violation of human rights, the worsening of those violations and conflict can be avoided. It is therefore important that the Security Council take those issues into account in its conflict prevention efforts. In conclusion, the Nordic countries urge the Council to focus on the primacy of politics in peace operations and in conflict prevention. The Security Council must put the politics of inclusion at the centre of efforts to address the root causes of conflict

I now give the floor to the representative of Montenegro.

Let me begin by offering my deep condolences to the victims of terrorist attacks in Paris and Lebanon. Montenegro is pleased to contribute to this important open debate. We warmly thank the United Kingdom for this initiative and for providing a platform for our deliberations. We also thank the Secretary- General, as well as the other briefers, for their important comments this morning. Montenegro aligns itself with the statement delivered on behalf of the European Union. We are all aware of the urgent need for a stronger and more effective United Nations, which is in all our interests and without which we will not achieve peace and security. We know that our Organization can do better, and that without peace and security, development will not happen. It is hard to remember a time when more crises were simultaneously preoccupying the United Nations, its agencies and the broader international community. And we know that the effects of conflicts are felt for years to come — years of missed opportunities and years destroying the chances of a generation. We need to do more to prevent conflict, as we live in an age where we have immediate access to information about potential risks of instability in countries around the world. The Security Council may consider making better use of the options at its disposal so as to prevent the emergence of conflicts. Making progress in shifting from a culture of reaction to one of prevention continues to be essential. The international community should recognize that early action can prevent enormous human suffering, fear and displacement. Needless to say, it is far more cost-effective. Ongoing crises are also a reason that Montenegro believes that cases of mass atrocities ought to be tackled with more decisiveness by the Security Council. However, the maintenance of international peace and security is not only the task of the United Nations and other international organizations. It is a process of individual, collective and institutional transformation, a process of inclusive development based on the universal values of respect for life, justice, solidarity, human rights and equality between men and women. For countries emerging from conflict with fragile peace, institution-building and reform is crucial. Such countries need targeted and effective international assistance, under the auspices of the United Nations, so that they will be in a position to provide protection for their people and deliver basic services. We should keep in mind that stability is about countries having a strong economy and healthy and educated population, as well as strong institutions. It is a long-term process, but it is a prerequisite for sustainable peace. It is important to recall that non-discrimination and the inclusion of all groups in the workings of society is an enormous asset and a key for stability. Transparency, accountability and effective management and oversight, with a view to strengthening the legitimacy and integrity of security and judicial institutions, is also important. Credible and legitimate governing institutions that are able to deal with their citizens’ most pressing needs — economic growth and jobs, basic services and access to justice — are of the utmost importance. The risk of extremism, terrorism, organized crime and conflict grows where people have no education and no hope for the future, where there is a lack of development and exclusion. It drives migration. We should keep in mind that the poorest people on the world not only lack food, but they also lack justice and jobs. Inclusive education provides young generations with self-confidence and ambition to be constructive and valued members of society. And it helps to bring about more sustainable peace. Moreover, addressing the realization of the human rights of young people is a way of influencing the social and economic conditions and the well-being and livelihood of future generations. Only by approaching the issue of violent extremism and promoting peace and security in that way can we ever hope to face the challenges of securing a lasting global peace and sustainable development. And this should be the primary responsibility of all Member States and regions. The problems and challenges facing the world today require a collective global response, and no other international organization enjoys the legitimacy and the capacity to unite the international community in common cause to find enduring solutions to conflicts and to ensure sustainable peace and development. Today’s knowledge about the root causes of conflict is much greater; we have a wider range of potential tools at our disposal that we should use with focus and dedication to achieve results. Working together towards a world that will bring about peace, security and development is our task, our challenge and our opportunity, and Montenegro is committed to playing its part.

I now give the floor to the representative of Cambodia.

I should like to join other colleagues in extending our deep condolences to the Government of France, the French people and the families of all the victims who lost their lives in a string of terrorist attacks in different locations, including a Cambodian restaurant — Le Petit Cambodge — in Paris on 13 November. Shocked and deeply saddened by the attacks, the Royal Government of Cambodia and the Cambodian people strongly condemn the abominable crimes and hope that the criminals will be severely punished. Permit me to congratulate you, Sir, on the United Kingdom’s accession to the presidency of the Council for this month, and to thank you for organizing this open ministerial debate on the foremost relevant topic at the present time. Your concept note (S/2015/845, annex) compels us to generate practical results to possibly achieve our commitments under the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1), and is likely to lead us on the path to equitable sharing and caring, which are the building blocks of the maintenance of international peace and security. We have a long road to travel and rigorous actions are needed. It is unfortunate that armed conflicts continue to rage and claim the lives of combatants and civilians alike, including children in some parts of the world. Violent extremism, which continues to pose threats to peace and security, has diminished our hope. We may understand the root causes of a conflict, yet we do not stand united enough to join together to address them. In that regard, my delegation buys into the ideas contained into the concept note, which rightly points out that the cycle of conflict arises from people being left out, marginalized, excluded and malnourished, and may therefore easily fall into the traps set by the groups of violent extremism, organized crime and terrorism. These factors could result in slow development. United Nations peacekeeping operations have played an important role in ending conflicts around the world and establishing peacebuilding principles in many regions. I believe that good governance and the rule of law are essential preconditions for stability, without which societies cannot function, let alone flourish. All Governments need the stability and predictability of good governance to flourish. Such partnerships at all levels of Government and society will be essential to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals and the broader 2030 Development Agenda. As a post-conflict country, Cambodia has achieved full peace. One of the solutions that can secure long- lasting peace is through win-win policy that addresses the needs of all parties concerned. Through its lessons learned, Cambodia’s win-win policy — initiated by Samdech Akka Moha Sena Padei Techo Hun Sen, Prime Minister of Cambodia, to wipe out the political and military organization of the Khmer Rouge at that time — contained three key points: securing a safe environment for peaceful coexistence; ensuring careers for those who were willing to integrate themselves into society; and safeguarding the property of those who defected to the Government. Despite the this policy, justice still needs to be handed down. In the case of Cambodia, the top perpetrators of serious crimes have been brought before the hybrid court whose functions are coordinated by the Royal Government of Cambodia and the United Nations. In a wider context, my country believes that the culture of peace must be cherished in the hearts of all people, regardless of their religious beliefs. Confidence-building measures and preventive-diplomacy, through multilateral and regional mechanisms, must be established. Similarly, mediating the interests of all social groups — be they poor, unequal or of any ethnic community — and adopting reconciliation in a step-by-step process on a variety of levels will ensure durable peace and security. The United Nations branches have their own role to play in establishing more peaceful and secured societies. However, conflicting interests have diminished the core value of each entity. I believe that we have not yet exhausted our efforts to save the whole world from sliding into conflict. In conclusion, I hope that our debate today will send a good message to the outside world that the United Nations is relevant in its endeavours to maintain international peace and security. In this regard, we must work to ensure the fundamental freedoms of all humankind. We must work to enhance and respect human dignity, international norms, equity and inclusiveness for all nations and population.

I now give the floor to the representative of Azerbaijan.

On behalf of the delegation of Azerbaijan, I would like to offer our deepest condolences to the families, people and Governments of the victims of recent terrorist attacks. Azerbaijan aligns itself with the statement delivered by the delegation of the Islamic Republic of Iran on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. Ensuring peace, security and development is a common aspiration that was set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, to which we solemnly recommitted ourselves on 23 October. It is also an integral part of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (General Assembly resolution 70/1) and should remain a core priority for international cooperation. The United Nations system, in particular the Security Council, is now required to focus as never before on the maintenance of international peace and security. In this statement, we would like to focus on unresolved protracted conflicts, their implications for peace and sustainable development, and the role of the Council in their resolution. Today, many armed conflicts around the world are enduring due to multicausal factors, actors and root causes. Situations of illegal occupation are often the most difficult conflicts to resolve. The persistence of such conflicts perpetuates cycle of violence and undermines regional stability. They have already resulted in the destruction of lives and property, the mass displacement of people, a region-wide refugee crisis, the proliferation of small arms and light weapons, and organized crime. Such situations require the serious attention and urgent action of the Security Council. In this context, primary focus should be placed on the implementation of the Council’s resolutions and on greater use of enforcement measures, including diplomatic, financial and economic sanctions to prevent and combat the status quo. The implementation of the Council’s resolutions is key to strengthening the role and legitimacy of the Council in the maintenance of international peace and security and to strengthening confidence in the capacity of the United Nations to advance peace. All efforts aimed at preventing and resolving conflicts must be based on the principle of respect for the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of States. Resolute and targeted measures are required to end impunity for the most serious crimes within international community and to bring the perpetrators to justice. The Nagorno Karabakh conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan is a notorious example of a protracted conflict situation. Instead of genuinely engaging in efforts to promote peace and regional stability, Armenia pursues its military aggression against Azerbaijan. Yet in 1993, the Security Council adopted resolutions 822 (1993), 853 (1993), 874 (1993) and 884 (1993), which reaffirm the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Republic of Azerbaijan, including the Nagorno Karabakh region, recognize and condemn the fact of invasion, and demand the immediate, complete and unconditional withdrawal of the occupying Armenian forces. Unfortunately, these resolutions are yet to be implemented. In the meantime, the occupying Power consolidates the status quo and carries on with its illegal practices. These include but are not limited to indiscriminate attacks against the civilian population along the front line, systematic violations of the ceasefire regime, forced demographic changes to prevent the displaced Azerbaijani population from exercising its right to return, illegal settlements on the occupied territories, and illegal exploitation of natural resources. Azerbaijan is interested in finding the quickest possible resolution to the conflict, but it can be resolved only on the basis of full respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Azerbaijan within its internationally recognized borders. The sooner Armenia withdraws its troops from the territories, the sooner we will be able to fully mobilize to work to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Maintaining international peace and security is central to the Organization, especially the Security Council. The Council’s primary duty is to resolve existing conflicts and prevent potential ones, and that is the only way it should contribute to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. In conclusion, on behalf of the delegation of Azerbaijan, I would like to thank the United Kingdom presidency for convening this open debate.

The representative of the Russian Federation has asked for the floor to make a further statement.

Today’s debate featured many speakers discussing many different things, and that has only strengthened our conviction that the Security Council is not the place to examine this issue. On top of that, some delegations attempted, with a persistence worthy of a better aim, to use the forum of the Council to express views that have no relation to today’s discussion in order to promote their national agendas, particularly the Ukrainian delegation. If the topic of the conflict in Donbas is to be raised, it is worth recalling the overthrow of the State in 2014, which was achieved with the support of a number of Western States and which began with bloodshed in Kyiv, and subsequently in other parts of the country as well. I would like to recommend to the Ukrainian delegation, which will be taking a seat on the Security Council next year, that they learn to restrict themselves to the subject under discussion and not to put on a political performance on the same issue every time.

Severaldelegations have asked for the floor to make further statements. I intend to accede to their requests. However, I would remind all delegations that are not Council members that they are limited to one additional statement only. I now call on the representative of Armenia.

I will be very brief. Listening to the statement of the Azerbaijani delegation, one comes to a very simple conclusion. Azerbaijan has turned Armenophobia into State propaganda at a level that is far beyond injurious. That alarming assessment has been voiced by international and intergovernmental institutions that specialize in combating racism. The speaker from Azerbaijan was referring to four Security Council resolutions that are more or less 20 years old. Meanwhile, Azerbaijan continues to reinterpret those resolutions, whose core requirement was the immediate cessation of all hostile acts and the establishment of a durable ceasefire. Azerbaijan not only failed to comply with that requirement, it intensified its aggression and its military operation against Armenia in Nagorno Karabakh, using mercenaries closely linked to notorious terrorist organizations. Regardless of Azerbaijan’s distractive stance, Armenia will continue its efforts to settle the Nagorno Karabakh conflict by exclusively peaceful means and on a basis of the purposes, principles and norms enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations.

I now call on the representative of Ukraine.

I would like to thank the representative of the Russian Federation for his recommendations, and I hope we will see each other more frequently around this table next year. I would first like to say that our statement fully coincided with the concept paper distributed before the meeting (S/2015/845, annex) and with the topic under discussion. I also have a very short recommendation for the Russian delegation. For us, a key goal is not just assembling here in order to discuss problems; it is also to solve those problems, and in order to do that, we first have to comply with the Security Council’s resolutions. I would like to remind the Russian representative of resolution 2202 (2015), and I really hope that his delegation will be able to start complying with its provisions and make every possible effort to fulfil those of the Minsk agreements as well.

I now call on the representative of Azerbaijan.

It has become a feature of Armenian policy to level accusations at a country whose territory it continues to occupy and whose civilians it has brutally massacred and continues to kill on a daily basis. It is unfortunate that the forum that the Security Council provides has once again been abused for the purpose of disseminating lies. The arguments on the Armenian side are particularly astonishing, and they are voiced in the Security Council, the very Chamber in which four resolutions were adopted that reaffirmed the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Azerbaijan, including the Nagorno Karabakh region, recognized and condemned the fact of invasion and demanded the immediate, complete and unconditional withdrawal of the occupying Armenian forces. To refresh the Armenian representative’s memory, it should be noted that it was the Armenian side that rejected the timetable for implementing the measures in the Security Council’s resolutions. While continuing to deny its involvement and role in the conflict, the Government of Armenia has openly asserted its ownership of the Nagorno Karabakh region of the Republic of Azerbaijan and exercised effective control over it. In its national security strategy for 2007, Armenia claimed to be acting as a guarantor of the security of Nagorno Karabakh. No explanation was provided, however, as to how those guarantees, which affect of a portion of Azerbaijan’s territory, accord with international law. The entity that Armenia tries to portray as independent, the Nagorno Karabakh republic, is nothing more than an occupation regime under the direct control of the Government of Armenia. All the key figures of the puppet regime illegally established by Armenia in the occupied Nagorno Karabakh region of Azerbaijan are in fact representatives of Armenia’s political system. The incumbent President of Armenia, Serzh Sargsyan, started his career by chairing the separatist self-defence committee from 1989 to 1993, a position that he left in 1993 in order to assume the post of Minister of Defence of Armenia. His predecessor, Robert Kocharyan, was the first so-called President of the occupation regime from 1992 to 1997. He then moved to Armenia, becoming Prime Minister, and from 1998 until 2008 served as its President. On 15 June 2015, President Serzh Sargsyan of the Republic of Armenia officially approved a rotation between the Deputy Chief of the General Staff of Armenia’s armed forces and the so-called Minister of Defence of the separatist regime. No further comments are necessary to explain the logic and attitude of the Armenian leadership concerning the issue of the protection of civilians and the peaceful settlement of conflicts.

The representative of the Russian Federation has asked for the floor to make a further statement.

I will be brief. I agree with my Ukrainian colleague that the primary responsibility of the Security Council is finding solutions to problems, however complex they may seem. As it happens, the Minsk agreements, as affirmed in resolution 2202 (2015), do indeed represent a format that provides for a solution. The main thing is to ensure that they are implemented in their entirety, and not selectively, without picking and choosing only those provisions that are to the liking of one side alone.

I would like to thank everyone for participating in this very full debate and for their patience, and the interpreters for all the work they have done today.