S/PV.9719 Security Council

In accordance with rule 37 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, I invite the representatives of Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Brazil, Burundi, Cambodia, Canada, Chile, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Egypt, Ethiopia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Latvia, Lebanon, Malaysia, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Nepal, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, the Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Rwanda, Serbia, Somalia, South Africa, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Tunisia, Türkiye, the United Arab Emirates, Uruguay and Viet Nam 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: Mr. Jean- Pierre Lacroix, Under-Secretary-General for Peace Operations; Ms. Comfort Ero, President and Chief Executive Officer of the International Crisis Group; and Mr. Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, President and Chief Executive Officer of the International Peace Institute. In accordance with rule 39 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, I also invite His Excellency Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis, Head of the Delegation of the European Union to the United Nations, to participate in this meeting. The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. I wish to draw the attention of Council members to document S/2024/638, which contains the text of a letter dated 27 August 2024 from the representative of Slovenia to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General, transmitting a concept note on the item under consideration. I now give the floor to Mr. Lacroix. Mr. Lacroix: I welcome this opportunity to once again brief the Security Council. Today’s open debate is timely as we prepare for the Summit of the Future, and ahead of the Peacekeeping Ministerial Conference next May. I am very pleased to acknowledge the presence of my excellent co-briefers today, namely, Ms. Comfort Ero and Mr. Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein. And I am encouraged by the large number of Member States inscribed as speakers, symbolizing their strong support for peacekeeping. Now in its seventy-seventh year, United Nations peacekeeping remains a cornerstone of multilateralism in action. However, peacekeeping faces formidable challenges, as does the multilateral system writ large. United Nations peacekeeping operations can only ever be as strong as the collective support of the United Nations membership. As geopolitical tensions have mounted, including here in the Council, and amid shifting global and regional dynamics, peacekeeping operations are increasingly unable to rely on Member States to act in a strong, unified manner to support peacekeeping efforts and the political processes they are mandated to support. In parallel, conflict is evolving. Peacekeeping missions are increasingly confronting drivers of conflict that have no borders, such as transnational organized crime, the illegal exploitation of natural resources and the impact of climate change. Non-State actors engaged in those illicit activities are also weaponizing cheap technologies, such as improvised explosive devices and drones, and are propagating disinformation and hate speech. In such circumstances, at least one of the parties to a conflict often lacks any political ambition beyond fuelling disorder, making them reluctant parties to peace. Despite all those challenges, today over 70,000 peacekeepers bravely continue their vital work. Each day, they make a difference in protecting civilians, clearing mines and explosive remnants of war, monitoring fragile ceasefires and preventing an escalation of hostilities. I recently witnessed that first-hand at the Drodro camp for displaced persons in the Democratic Republic of the Congo’s Ituri province. There, United Nations peacekeepers are alone in protecting over 100,000 civilians displaced as a result of ongoing fighting. In southern Lebanon, the personnel of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) serve under the daily threat posed by the continued exchanges of fire across the Blue Line. As the only channel of communication between the two sides, the mission plays a critical role in avoiding miscalculation and misunderstanding between the two sides. I sincerely thank the Council for its confidence in UNIFIL by unanimously extending its mandate last month. Allow me to share five messages on the key prerequisites for effective peacekeeping. First, the ultimate objective of all peacekeeping operations is political. All United Nations peacekeeping operations are designed to support peace agreements between parties to a conflict. In South Sudan, for example, the United Nations Mission in South Sudan is engaging key stakeholders, at both national and local levels, to advance inclusive, consensual political solutions. At the very least, peacekeeping aims to build confidence and create conditions for a durable political process to take hold. While little progress has been achieved on the political process in Cyprus since 2017, the United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus continues its efforts to maintain calm, playing a preventive role and promoting an environment conducive for negotiations and an eventual settlement. Yet there is only so much that peacekeeping can do on its own. For peacekeepers to be effective, the Council and the wider membership must muster strong, consistent and unified support for peacekeeping missions — and particularly to encourage the parties to the conflict to reach and implement political solutions to it. A peacekeeping operation is, and should always be, one of the most concrete expressions of the collective resolve of the Security Council to effectively address conflict. I encourage the Council to fully leverage all the tools at its disposal to support peacekeeping mandates. I acknowledge, and I am grateful for, the often-significant efforts by Council members to forge unity behind peacekeeping mandates while bridging differences and considering various viewpoints, including those of the host State and regional actors. Importantly, the bilateral engagement of all United Nations States Members with parties to conflict must be consistent with the decisions taken by the Council. All Member States should exert their diplomatic influence to back the political processes that peacekeeping operations are deployed to support and to encourage adversaries to commit to a peace agreement and its implementation. Such diplomatic support can make all the difference in crucial moments. We need broad coalitions of Member States to undergird the political efforts of peacekeepers. That was a central feature of all successful examples of peacekeeping operations, such as in Timor-Leste, Liberia, Côte d’Ivoire and Sierra Leone, to name just a few places. Secondly, the optimal performance of peacekeeping operations depends on mandates that provide clear strategic direction. They must be prioritized, achievable, adaptable to changing circumstances and sufficiently resourced. That is a critical factor for any mission to be fit for purpose. I recognize progress made by the Council in that regard despite serious challenges. The Secretariat will continue to do its part, including by providing regular, clear and frank assessments as well as realistic recommendations and scenarios to support the Council’s decision-making. We also welcome the Council’s views on what the Secretariat should do to improve. Mandates must also have the resources to match the Council’s ambitions. Adopting long, detailed mandates without the requisite resources raises unrealistic expectations, which has the potential to fuel frustration among host States and their populations and provides fertile ground for misinformation and disinformation. Thirdly, today’s complex challenges can be addressed only through networked multilateralism and strong partnerships — locally, regionally and globally. Organized crime, non-State armed groups with extremist ideologies or the effects of climate change — many of today’s conflict drivers do not respect national borders. Peacekeeping must adopt a much more integrated operational model with the wider United Nations system and regional and international partners. In Abyei, for example, the United Nations Interim Security Force for Abyei (UNISFA) is successfully striking local peace agreements among herders and farmers, who compete over increasingly scarce natural resources, such as land and water. It has done so by working alongside United Nations and non-United Nations partners on the ground to facilitate a series of conferences ahead of cattle migration season, with the aim of preventing conflict and ensuring a peaceful resolution to the disputes that frequently arise in this season. Member States should provide the mandates, resources and administrative flexibility that allow us to engage in such critical partnerships. Fourthly, peacekeeping operations themselves must continually seek improvement. We need to continue to invest in strengthening peacekeeping tools in order to make them more effective and adaptable to today’s and tomorrow’s challenges. We are currently looking at ways to update and adapt the Action for Peacekeeping Plus initiative by seeking to address systemic challenges that we have not yet sufficiently tackled. That could involve areas such as community engagement and a better use of digital technologies. As I have previously conveyed to the Council, I remain committed to regularly update it on the challenges we face and the progress we achieve. The latest Action for Peacekeeping Plus progress report, which I circulated to all member States of the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations last week, documents improvements and challenges in key areas. Allow me to highlight a few. The safety, security and well-being of peacekeepers remains an overriding concern. Over the past few years, the number of peacekeeper fatalities due to malicious acts has decreased from 33 in 2022 — of which 15 were from the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (MINUSMA) — to seven in 2023 to four, thus far, in 2024. Of course, that is four too many. The closure of MINUSMA contributed to the decrease, but more important has been the considerable action taken by all peacekeeping missions and Headquarters to enhance peacekeepers security. Worrisomely, however, the total number of hostile acts has increased across missions. The emerging threat of uncrewed aerial vehicles is a growing concern. Peacekeeping operations are not immune to that threat, and 2024 marked the first recorded attack by an improvised armed uncrewed aircraft system (UAS) on a United Nations mission. The Department of Peace Operations is working closely with the Department of Operational Support to equip more peacekeepers with counter-UAS systems and training, but much more work is needed in cooperation with Member States. We are also continuing to implement the comprehensive action plan to improve the security of peacekeepers. Progress has been made in ensuring speedy and effective evacuation of injured peacekeepers. Both the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA) and UNISFA established casualty evacuation coordination cells, revised guidance and conducted trainings and stress tests. Violent crimes against peacekeepers are appalling and unacceptable. We will soon launch a database for Member States, as mandated under resolution 2589 (2021), and, of course, we will continue to diligently pursue accountability for such crimes. The Department of Operational Support has developed the mental health strategy for united nations uniformed personnel and will soon launch the United Nations MindCompanion digital platform in 16 languages. But we must all remember that too many peacekeepers succumb to illness, which remains the predominant cause of peacekeeper fatalities. We all pay tribute to all fallen peacekeepers. Further progress on the safety and security of peacekeepers depends on sustained Member State support, including through the provision of specialized skills, equipment and expertise. Effective mandate delivery demands that peacekeepers have the right capabilities and mindsets. Member States and the Secretariat are working collaboratively to maintain the readiness of military and police units for deployment to field missions. The Peacekeeping Ministerial process has been instrumental in addressing capacity gaps. The last Ministerial meeting, in Accra in December 2023, resulted in 60 Member States announcing new pledges, for which we are grateful. The next Ministerial meeting, in Berlin in May 2025, will be a key opportunity to look at the future of peacekeeping operations and to pledge critical capabilities for both current and possible future operational mission models. Important conceptual work for that event is already under way. I wish to thank Germany for hosting the conference, and I am also very grateful to Ghana for having hosted the previous and very successful conference. The women and peace and security agenda is a political and strategic imperative in all our efforts. Global trends concerning women’s rights are deeply worrisome, but the advocacy and engagement of our peacekeeping operations has made a difference. In the Central African Republic, for example, the Mission is supporting the Government’s voter registration process, including through efforts to promote women’s organizations and civic education and to provide birth certificates and protection measures so as to enable women’s full, equal and meaningful participation in the upcoming local elections. Looking at our own ranks, we have met or surpassed all targets within the uniformed gender parity strategy 2018–2028, with the notable exception being for military contingents. And all military missions are led by men. In all but a few instances, Member States have nominated only men for these positions. We strongly urge Member States to make military leadership positions at home more accessible to women and to nominate them for service in our peacekeeping operations. On the civilian side, we have been more successful, with women comprising 46 per cent of Heads and Deputy Heads of Mission positions in the multidimensional missions. Strategic and operational integration within missions and with our partners is pivotal for greater effectiveness. We continue to strengthen integrated analysis and planning. In the Central African Republic, for example, MINUSCA developed a political strategy that provided a five-year strategic vision and a Mission plan. And eight of our missions have Special Representative-approved mission plans. To ensure that this number increases, the Department of Peace Operations is developing a package of guidance and support for missions so that they all have mission plans informed by a political strategy. Effective integration is equally critical during phases of transition. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the joint disengagement plan signed by the Government and the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO) in November 2023 is the key reference for the Mission’s gradual, responsible and sustainable withdrawal. MONUSCO is guided by a body of lessons learned from its own transition experience so far and from other peacekeeping transitions. We are also in the process of documenting important lessons from the experience of MINUSMA. Going forward, we must further integrate the multilateral system to more ably address the drivers of conflict that span over regions and continents. I also would like to emphasize that, in all peacekeeping mission contexts, the United Nations remains fully committed to preventing sexual exploitation and abuse and achieve accountability. We continue to strengthen our efforts to ensure accountability, including when personnel must be repatriated due to misconduct. We continue to prioritize maintaining the highest standards of conduct for all peacekeeping personnel and protecting victims’ rights. My fifth and final message is that even with all the political commitment and necessary investments, peacekeeping obviously has its limits. Blue Helmets can act robustly to protect civilians, but they do not fight wars. Where there is no ceasefire or political agreement, enforcement action carried out by partners may be required. The unanimous adoption of resolution 2719 (2023) marked a major milestone by enabling African Union-led peace support operations to access United Nations assessed contributions on a case-by-case basis. Significant progress has already been achieved in the operationalization of the resolution, including the finalization of the joint African Union-United Nations road map for implementation focused on four thematic workstreams. We are working very well with our African Union Commission counterparts to elevate our joint operational readiness for a time when we may be called to deploy in support of an African Union peace operation, backed by United Nations assessed contributions. We are at a pivotal moment. Two weeks from now, the Summit of the Future will present world leaders with a once-in-a-generation opportunity to bolster and restore trust in the multilateral system, and the jury is still out on whether Member States remain fully committed to multilateral solutions to crises. The Summit will be a moment to reappraise and reaffirm the inherent strengths that have made peacekeeping successful for nearly eight decades. I am hopeful that world leaders will adopt an ambitious Pact for the Future that gives a clear and strong mandate to continue our efforts to make peacekeeping fit for the challenges of today and tomorrow. Peacekeeping has proven itself as a key tool of the Council, and it must continue to adapt to meet future challenges. In the run up to the next Peacekeeping Ministerial meeting, we will continue to explore the reforms and possible models that may enable United Nations peacekeeping, and peace operations more generally, to address the evolving nature of conflict. The onus is on all of us to ensure that we are ready. Every day, United Nations peacekeepers are bravely saving countless lives for a relatively small investment. But their missions need the attention, political backing and resources that they deserve. There are few better tools for securing peace in a fragile age.

I thank Mr. Lacroix for his briefing. I now give the floor to Ms. Ero. Ms. Ero: I thank you, Mr. President, for inviting me to address the Council today. As most members of the Security Council know, the International Crisis Group is a global conflict prevention organization, and it has analysts covering almost all the countries where the United Nations has peace operations. My colleagues work closely with United Nations officials, and I am very glad to give my presentation alongside the Under-Secretary-General. We also talk with the governments and citizens of those countries and, where possible, with non-State armed groups. I want to align myself with the five messages that the Under-Secretary-General just conveyed in his presentation, and I want to share three additional messages with the Council based on my colleagues’ research in places where the United Nations has peacekeeping operations. My first message for Council members is a simple one: United Nations peacekeeping operations are still valuable and retain significant strengths. There has been much talk about the decline of peacekeeping. We have written about that ourselves. Some analysts suggest that regional organizations or ad hoc missions will replace United Nations forces. It is true that United Nations peacekeeping operations have shrunk overall in the past decade. And the International Crisis Group supports initiatives, such as resolution 2719 (2023), which the Under-Secretary-General just mentioned, on African Union-led peace operations, that can enable other organizations to take the lead in addressing some crises. But as the process of deploying the Multinational Security Support Mission in Haiti has just demonstrated, standing up ad hoc missions can be a complex and time-consuming process. By contrast, the United Nations has developed, since the end of the cold war, a unique set of mechanisms to manage force generation, deployment and sustainment. There is always room for improvement to the United Nations systems, and I think the Under-Secretary-General was outlining that in his own presentation. I am glad that the draft Pact for the Future calls on the Secretary- General to review all forms of United Nations peace operations. The Council and wider United Nations must value and reinforce United Nations operations and not write them off. My second message to the Council is that we must remember that many civilians judge peace operations by the physical security that they can offer or that they fail to provide, as we are seeing in some instances. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, we have seen public discontent with United Nations peacekeepers’ failures to halt violence against civilians explode into angry, and even deadly, anti-United Nations protests. In the Central African Republic too, our analysts report that the population is sceptical of the United Nations ability to stop violence. But when violence does erupt, civilians flee towards United Nations bases in hope of safety. When the United Nations provides convoy security — as it does as in the Central African capital, Bangui — people travel safely. In some cases, civilians do not grasp the mandates and limits peacekeepers themselves face. The United Nations still needs to do more to understand how communities perceive the United Nations and, in turn, how the United Nations can work to meet those communities’ expectations. But it is also a reminder of an old truth: when the Council mandates United Nations forces to protect civilians, it must ensure that they have the means and political backing to fulfil that goal, exactly as the Under- Secretary-General stated in his remarks. If the Council does not do so, it undermines the United Nations credibility and its chances of success. My third and final message to the Council is that in many of the countries that the International Crisis Group covers United Nations peacekeeping operations no longer play a major political role, even where the Organization has thousands of personnel on the ground. In the immediate post-cold war period, the United Nations mediated the ends of wars from Central America to South-East Asia. The Blue Helmets helped the resulting agreements stick. Today, however, the United Nations frequently defers to other actors  — whether individual States or regional organizations — to lead on peacemaking and mediation. In many cases, that is absolutely the right strategy to take. The Crisis Group also works with a range of actors to address conflict, assessing who to work with on a case-by-case basis. In some cases — as in South Sudan — the United Nations has succeeded in supporting community-level peace initiatives, even when its national-level leverage has shrunk. But elsewhere  — as in the case of Western Sahara, for example  — the United Nations keeps peacekeepers in places where the political strategies that they were once meant to serve have long evaporated. Therefore, the Council has the capacity and a responsibility to address that political gap. When Council members give good support to United Nations representatives — for example, as they have done with Ambassador Lamamra in the case of the Sudan  — it can give representatives the extra traction they need to succeed in their jobs. When, in contrast, Members States, including those on the Security Council, follow policies that undermine or marginalize the United Nations politically, those representatives cannot do their job properly. The Council should not set up representatives of the United Nations for failure. United Nations peacekeeping operations, which have taken on many forms and responsibilities since the very first peacekeeping mission in 1946, are among the most adaptive parts of the United Nations peace and security toolbox. In conclusion, despite the diplomatic differences and difficulties that Council members face, it is incumbent on them to give United Nations peacekeeping operations the political support they need to end wars and protect the vulnerable.

I thank Ms. Ero for her briefing. I give the floor to Mr. Al Hussein. Mr. Al Hussein: I thank you, Mr. President, for inviting the International Peace Institute to participate in this discussion. I am delighted to be joining my friends Under Secretary General Jean-Pierre Lacroix and Comfort Ero from the International Crisis Group. And it is a pleasure to see you, Mr. President, preside over the Council during this key month. I recall with admiration Slovenia’s skilful performance the previous time you, Sir, served here in the 1990s, along with President Danilo Türk and Ambassador Sanja Štiglic. At that time, I had recently arrived in New York, after serving as a United Nations peacekeeper in the former Yugoslavia. Thirty years ago, in Croatia, the United Nations had 15 battalions or formed units drawn from 11 different countries, representing almost all the corners of the world: Canada from North America; Argentina from South America; Kenya from Africa; Jordan, Nepal and Indonesia from Asia; Ukraine, the Russian Federation and Poland from Eastern Europe; and Belgium and Denmark from Western Europe. There was even a United States battalion further south in what was later known as a preventive deployment mission in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, now the Republic of North Macedonia. What a time it was then — to have American and Russian formed units working in the same overall theatre, under a French-led United Nations military command, and all answering to a Japanese Special Representative of the Secretary-General Yasushi Akashi. There were military observers, civilian police and civil affairs officers from everywhere. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, there was an equally impressive breadth of representation when it came to formed units — France, the United Kingdom, Türkiye, Egypt, Malaysia, Bangladesh, Sweden, the Netherlands, the Nordic countries and others. That is not to say that all of it was an assurance of triumph — of course not, far from it. While the United Nations did achieve some tactical successes in the former Yugoslavia, and there was much bravery, regrettably, as in Rwanda in 1994, there were also cowardice, colossal errors of judgment and eye-watering cruelties, many of which we could not or did not stop. But we were there, almost all of us, together, experiencing the pain, together, and hopefully learning from it, together. Beyond the former Yugoslavia, there were smaller military observer missions, election support missions and, later, executive-style missions reminiscent of the first operation in the Republic of the Congo — a complete kaleidoscope of United Nations peace instruments. I do not need to describe the current situation. The decline in the willingness of States to host missions that they consider to be past their sell-by date and the reluctance of others to provide a critical mass of political support to end what are now seemingly interminable conflicts are plain to see, as explained in the briefings by my two colleagues. At the heart of it, however, lies the Organization’s flagging belief in itself, in its ability to be a peace organization in the hardest of circumstances, and that is perhaps the clearest sign of its low bow before defeatism. It is as obvious as it is painful, and the willingness of many in the United Nations to subcontract in their minds the difficult responsibilities of enforcement action to the African Union (AU) also speaks to it. The AU should be viewed as a strategic partner of the United Nations and nothing else. Sadly, the United Nations today, in peace and security terms, appears then to be a stump of what it once was, and not because the need for the United Nations peace function has somehow dissolved either. Unfortunately, some of the signs have been there for many years. When I joined the Council 10 years ago, out of the 80-odd agenda items at the time, the focus was almost entirely on Africa. It was as if the Security Council was another AU Peace and Security Council, but in New York. It gave the impression that the African States had the monopoly over threats to international peace and security. Were there no conflicts elsewhere in the world, beyond Haiti or Afghanistan, in South America or in Asia, for example, that also merited being on the Council’s agenda? How did it get like that, so lopsided and now so difficult to navigate? While there are many causes that can be worked into an explanation, with some clearly geopolitical roots and other roots deriving from the challenges of counter-terrorism, I will focus just on one. When Colin Powell, while serving as the United States Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the early 1990s, made clear his belief that his country should never place its military personnel in harm’s way where there was no direct national interest, he inadvertently set in motion a chain reaction. From the very beginning of the United Nations, the Irish, Fijians, Nepalese and many others had done just that — sent peacekeepers into theatres where there was no possible motive for being there other than in the service of the collective will, as the Kenyans are now trying to do in Haiti. And yet, almost overnight, the Powell doctrine became contagious, spreading through capitals — and particularly parliaments — with many asking aloud why they were committing their people to dangerous United Nations missions. I remember the military head of my country’s armed forces shouting and asking that very question over the phone early one morning in 2000. That inflammation contributed in part to my country, Jordan, deciding, along with India, to withdraw its battalions from the United Nations Mission in Sierra Leone — something that was unheard of at the time. The proximate trigger was the mandate being changed by the permanent members, with neither Kamlesh Sharma, the Permanent Representative of India, nor myself knowing anything about it, as we had not been consulted. Around that time, I told the Council that while we wanted to serve the United Nations, we were not comfortable being viewed as a sort of underclass of the Organization, in a United Nations divided between masters and servants, a United Nations stratified between bankers and soldiers, where we would be the only ones relied on to do the riskiest jobs, and especially not when only 2 out of the 15 Council members at the time were contributing sizable numbers to United Nations peace operations. President Barack Obama’s attempt in 2015 to rally the international community to dig deep and renew its commitment to United Nations peacekeeping, especially in the most difficult circumstances, seemed to work for a while, but it came too late to reverse the decline — the rot was simply too well-established. We have two simple points on what could be done. It has always been the case with the United Nations that if one chooses the right people and inserts them into even the tightest of spots, often, and against all odds, small miracles happen, and they happen fast. As Ms. Ero said, the Council should worry less about the precise structure of future mandates and concentrate more on ensuring that the right people are chosen, in keeping with Article 101, paragraph 3, of the Charter of the United Nations, and then let them work unfettered, without any burdensome instructions finding their way into mandates. The Council simply needs to give them the support they require. Secondly, with the Council so divided, our recommendation is that it go back to basics. When there is an emerging or actual threat to international peace and security, the Council should mandate, with absolutely no predetermination, the Secretary-General to go in person to the heart of the hotspot and weigh the situation, before reporting to the Council with a battery of suggestions. That is all the Council should do as the first step, no more than that. When the Secretary- General reports back, the Council can begin to tailor a logical response. In other words, one must allow the wound to determine the type of surgery required, as best understood by one’s most senior surgeon. The Secretary-General is the person who leads the Organization. It is the Secretary-General who has the most complete grasp of the entire United Nations system. It is the Secretary-General who also has the clearest vision of the strategic chessboard. My last and associated point is that the Security Council  — and particularly its permanent members  — selects the Secretary-General, while the General Assembly appoints them. The Council is therefore duty-bound to trust the Secretary-General and in the latter’s impartial and good judgment, when speaking of matters relating to peace and security. If members believe the Secretary-General is capable of it, then respect his abilities accordingly, mandate and send him, listen to him and then respond to the crisis accordingly.

I thank Mr. Al Hussein for his briefing. I shall now make a statement in my capacity as the representative of Slovenia. I thank Under-Secretary-General Jean-Pierre Lacroix, Ms. Comfort Ero and Mr. Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein for their insightful briefings, which, I believe, have truly enriched our discussions today. They gave us a lot of food for thought, and they gave us a push to act, so I thank them very much for that. United Nations peace operations continue to represent one of the most effective tools at the Security Council’s disposal for maintaining peace and security. At the same time, they reflect multilateralism at its finest, with Member States collectively and in solidarity addressing the challenges to peace and security faced by a fellow Member State. It is therefore no surprise that peacekeeping operations and the Blue Helmets are recognized by the global public as one of the most visible symbols of the United Nations. And yet, it has been 10 years since the most recent new United Nations peace operation was mandated, while several operations have been through drawdowns and withdrawals as a result of the lack of host country and popular support. The unity of the Security Council, a sine qua non for the success of any mission, has also been increasingly lacking. And all that has occurred in spite of the world becoming less peaceful and in spite of the likelihood of another major conflict being at its highest in recent times, according to the Global Peace Index of 2024. In recent years, peace operations have suffered from a crisis of confidence. They have struggled because of the mismatch between their mandates and the expectations of Governments and populations. And they have not been able to adjust to the changing security environment and challenges. With the highest-ever number of ongoing conflicts and civilian casualties, new threats and challenges, including the increasing pressure put on States and communities by climate change and water insecurity, we — now more than ever — need United Nations peacekeeping that is fit for purpose and that enjoys the strong and united political support of the Council. We need operations with defined strategic objectives instead of mandatory tasks. We need to devise operations with mandates that will match the expectations of host Governments and civilian populations. While the Council needs to engage with host countries and listen to their views, it should also expect the host country to show responsibility in improving governance and in protecting the civilian population. We need operations that follow the core principles of United Nations peacekeeping — consent, impartiality and the non-use of force — and we need to strictly follow the principle of the primacy of politics. In looking for fresh ideas, we should build on United Nations experience, lessons learned and good practices, and we heard many ideas today as well. We should also build stronger partnerships with regional, national and local partners. Regional organizations have a unique understanding of local dynamics thanks to their closer partnerships with host States and other regional actors. They can play a vital role in creating a safe environment for effective engagement by peacekeeping operations. The Council needs to build on good examples of partnerships, such as resolution 2719 (2023) on the financing for African Union (AU) peace support operations, the authorization of the support provided by the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo to the Southern African Development Community Mission to the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the joint United Nations-AU efforts in preserving security gains in Somalia. We are encouraged by the significant progress already achieved through the Action for Peacekeeping initiative and its implementation strategy. That progress must reflect a shift towards more agile and responsive peacekeeping that adapts to the evolving nature of global conflicts. The effectiveness and legitimacy of peace operations rests upon their ability to reflect and address the needs of the communities they serve. A more inclusive, people-centred United Nations peacekeeping calls for greater community engagement, promotion of the empowerment of women and youth, inclusive political processes, accountability and transparency and stronger partnerships with civil society. Integrating gender perspectives into all aspects of peace operations, from planning to execution, and creating opportunities for women and youth engagement in peacebuilding activities and economic recovery are critical. In conclusion, I would like to take this opportunity to express our appreciation of all troop-contributing countries and their staff. I would like to extend our condolences to the families of all United Nations personnel who have made the ultimate sacrifice while providing security and support to people around the world in their search for peace. We pay tribute to all the brave women and men who risk their lives every day to deliver on our promise of leaving no one behind. Their courage and dedication remain at the core of our peacekeeping efforts. I resume my functions as President of the Council. I shall now give the floor to those members of the Council who wish to make statements.

I thank Under- Secretary-General Lacroix, International Crisis Group Chief Executive Officer Ero and International Peace Institute President Al-Hussein for their valuable insights and their continued support for United Nations peacekeeping. Let me also thank the brave peacekeepers who put their lives at risk across the world every day and pay tribute to those peacekeepers who lost their lives in the pursuit of peace this year. United Nations peacekeeping is an indispensable element of the Security Council’s toolbox for global peace and security and an important symbol of global cooperation. As peacekeeping faces new and systemic challenges, as we have heard, we must protect and improve that tool for the future. I would like to make three broad points this morning. First, peacekeeping faces evolving challenges. Those include the need to maintain the relationship with host States and the importance of setting clear expectations regarding the responsibilities of host States. That should reduce the risk of accelerated withdrawals of missions, as we have seen recently. In addition, rising misinformation and disinformation against missions puts the safety and security of our peacekeepers at risk. Peacekeeping needs stronger partnership and collaboration with and the political support and consent of host nations in order to ensure the effective delivery of mandates and well-planned transitions. Secondly, we should continue to adapt our approach to meet the unique needs of each context. Peacekeeping works best when there is a political process to support or a peace to keep. New missions should be better tailored, nimbler and more flexible, with focused and realistic mandates. We must continue to strengthen missions by boosting peacekeeping intelligence and situational awareness, embracing new technologies, such as artificial intelligence, and tackling sexual exploitation and abuse. We must all reaffirm our commitment to the Action for Peacekeeping Strategy and support its implementation. Sustainable transitions that are guided by best practices and lessons learned and that safeguard the protection of civilians will also help to ensure that the gains from missions are preserved. Thirdly, we should recognize the progress made on the women and peace and security agenda and commit to ensuring that all peace operations are fully representative of and safe for women. Women’s contributions are integral in all stages of peacekeeping missions, including drawdowns, transitions and withdrawals. The United Kingdom will continue to help to create an enabling environment for women peacekeepers through our support for the Elsie Initiative Fund and the Senior Women Talent Pipeline and through our bilateral training by the British Peace Support Team. The United Kingdom remains a committed supporter of United Nations peacekeeping, including through the deployment of peacekeepers and military advisers, and of peacekeeping reform. We look forward to more discussions, including at the Peacekeeping Ministerial Conference in Berlin and its preparatory conferences, on the ways we can help peacekeeping evolve in order to ensure that it can effectively respond to the challenges of the future.

I would like to thank Under-Secretary-General Jean- Pierre Lacroix for his introductory remarks, as well as Ms. Comfort Ero and Prince Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, Presidents and Chief Executive Officers of the International Crisis Group and the International Peace Institute, respectively, two renowned organizations with which Switzerland works closely, including on the future of peacekeeping. I would also like to join my colleagues in thanking the Blue Helmets for their commitment. Every day, these courageous women and men do remarkable work in the service of peace, often in very difficult circumstances, as we have heard. In particular, we pay tribute to the 4,300 Blue Helmets who have given their lives since 1948 to protect the lives of others. In May, on the occasion of the day dedicated to peacekeepers, the Secretary-General stated that those men and women “represent multilateralism in action” and that their efforts embody the commitment to prevention contained in the New Agenda for Peace. Given the thousands of lives saved, we fully concur with that assessment. On that same occasion, one year earlier, in 2023, as part of the commemoration of the 75th anniversary of United Nations peacekeeping operations, our Minister of Defence had the honour of presiding over a Council debate on the funding of the African Union’s peace support operations (see S/PV.9329). The debate kick-started a process that culminated in the adoption of resolution 2719 (2023) in December 2023. That resolution, as we have heard, was a decisive milestone in the cooperation between the United Nations and regional actors, foremost among which is the African Union. Over 75 years, peacekeeping operations have been able to adapt, often successfully, to the many challenges, frequently in very innovative way  — for example, through reinforcing civilian protection mandates or including climate advisers. Now, however, peacekeeping is threatened in a more fundamental way by tensions between States, a fraying consensus and dwindling acceptance by host States. It is thus important to continue proactively tailoring that tool, given those fundamental changes. Our support for peacekeeping must look to the future if we are to succeed in adapting. I would like to offer the following three thoughts on the Council’s role in that regard. First, peacekeeping must be people-centred. Peacekeeping operations never take place in a vacuum: they form part of an existing historical, cultural, social and economic context and must underpin a political process. That process must involve all stakeholders, in particular women, whose meaningful participation boosts the likelihood of success and helps to mitigate the risks facing missions. That is why peacekeeping operations must always be tied to the political and peace process. If that process is to be stable, it must be grounded in the rule of law, which peacekeeping operations can help to strengthen or rebuild if we give them the necessary mandates and resources. Likewise, the management of natural resources and the impact of climate change must be factored in more consistently when the Council devises mandates. Secondly, a one-size-fits-all approach does not apply to peacekeeping. The aim is to develop adjustable mission models so as to better address concrete situations. The Council must therefore have at its disposal a range of mission formats that it can deploy and sequence as needed, and, as we have heard, those formats must be clear and realistic. The reinforcement of cooperation with regional organizations is a promising path and should be expedited. Strict compliance with international humanitarian and human rights law must be a prerequisite for United Nations support. Furthermore, the use of innovative solutions, for example, based on new technology, must be promoted in this changing world. Lastly, peacekeeping is a collective effort, as we have heard. Partnership, trust and transparency among the Security Council, the Secretariat, troop- and police-contributing countries, host States and peacekeeping operations are critical. The Council’s unity is important to the credibility of peacekeeping operations, their acceptance on the ground and, ultimately, the safety of Blue Helmets. Peacekeeping operations are the ultimate expression of solidarity between nations, and they have proven their worth. Ongoing discussions, in particular in the context of the New Agenda for Peace and the Summit of the Future, must enable peacekeeping operations to continue protecting lives and remain one of the United Nations key tools. The Council must seize the opportunity, and we must have the courage to adapt, drawing on experience and the lessons learned from recent developments. In the run-up to our presidency of the Council in October and the African Union’s visit to New York, we are delighted to be contributing to this debate, particularly as regards the implementation of resolution 2719 (2023). Switzerland will continue to actively support peace operations in terms of staffing, funding and design.

I thank Under-Secretary- General Lacroix for his comprehensive briefing and Ms. Ero and Prince Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein for their comprehensive briefings. At the outset, I would like to commend the efforts and bravery of United Nations peacekeepers around the world. Their unwavering commitment allows missions to operate in extremely complex situations and challenging security environments. Malta remains firm in its commitment to the safety and security of peacekeepers. We strongly condemn all attacks against missions, some of which may amount to war crimes under international law. As noted in the fifth progress report on Action for Peacekeeping Plus, 196 peacekeepers lost their lives to malicious acts between January 2017 and September 2024. We mourn their ultimate sacrifice for maintaining peace. Peacekeepers continue to face growing challenges on the ground, including restrictions to their freedom of movement and the increasing presence of mercenaries. This is deeply worrisome. In addition, the threats posed by small, commercial uncrewed aerial vehicles, particularly in Africa, is also of increasing concern. The role of peacekeeping missions in the maintenance of peace and stability and the protection of civilians is invaluable. Malta strongly supports the New Agenda for Peace, the Action for Peacekeeping initiative and the implementation plan for the Action for Peacekeeping Plus. The most recent progress report highlighted that missions are making progress in planning and evaluation, including in the monitoring of mandate implementation. In that regard, we welcome the Department of Peace Operations package of guidance and support aimed at ensuring that all mission plans are based on a political strategy. The best way to improve peacekeeping operations is to adopt a holistic approach to many cross-cutting issues, such as human rights, climate change and the women, peace and security agenda. To that end, two fundamental things are needed. First, peacekeeping missions must garner broad political support and must have adequate and predictable funding. European Union member States are strongly committed to that objective and, together, contribute one quarter of the United Nations peacekeeping budget. Secondly, missions must have credible and realistic mandates that are based on clear political strategies to ensure the protection of civilians and respect for and the promotion of human rights. Malta also recognizes the negative effects that peacekeeping operations can have on the environment and host communities. It is therefore critical for the Security Council to increase its attention to that challenge and act accordingly. That means deploying green, responsible missions that are efficient in their use of natural resources. Moreover, we reaffirm our strong commitment to upholding the women and peace and security agenda as a fundamental pillar of any peace process. Robust women and peace and security mandates are crucial to advancing women’s rights and ensuring women’s full, equal, meaningful and safe participation in all aspects of the maintenance of peace and security. Especially during transitions, gender equality must remain at the core of the United Nations strategy, footprint and capacity to support sustainable peacekeeping. In that regard, we commend the Secretariat’s ongoing efforts. As the Secretary-General highlighted in his New Agenda for Peace, there often is a persistent gap between missions’ mandates and what they actually deliver. That is also due to the extremely challenging and volatile environments in which they operate. To narrow such gaps, peace operations should take advantage of the full range of civilian capacities and expertise across the United Nations system and better adapt to ever- evolving threats. In that regard, the upcoming Summit of the Future will also be an opportunity for in-depth reflection on the future of peacekeeping. Malta stands ready to engage with all stakeholders to ensure that peacekeeping operations remain a fundamental pillar of peace and stability around the world.

Mozambique highly commends Slovenia’s presidency for convening this important and timely meeting. We express our profound gratitude for the insightful briefings by the Under- Secretary-General for Peace Operations, Mr. Jean- Pierre Lacroix, by the President and Chief Executive Officer of the International Crisis Group, Ms. Comfort Ero, and by the President and Chief Executive Officer of the International Peace Institute, Mr. Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, who has been serving the United Nations for a long time. The role of United Nations peacekeeping operations has been of fundamental importance to peace and security around the world. In that connection, we wish to pay tribute to all peacekeepers who are serving the cause of humankind and that of the United Nations. The Charter of the United Nations does not define, describe or even mention the concept of peacekeeping operations in its Articles, but that should not be construed as an omission. The function of peacekeeping missions is strongly grounded on the first purpose of the United Nations, contained in Article 1 of the Charter, “to maintain international peace and security”. Peacekeeping operations are an indispensable tool of the Security Council in its duty to take effective collective measures that seek to make peace, to keep peace or to build peace. As Members of the United Nations, we are aware that since their inception in 1948, peacekeeping missions have contributed enormously to our collective security. Mozambique has had our share of experience with United Nations peacekeeping operations, in the years 1992–1994. Named ONUMOZ, after the Portuguese acronym for the United Nations Operation in Mozambique, the operation was, at the time, one of the largest, one of the shortest and also, in the view of the United Nations membership, one of the most successful. As we celebrate 30 years of the completion of ONUMOZ, we are engaged in our own reflection to identify the main factors that led to that success. We strongly believe success can be attributed to the following main reasons: first, the political will of the parties to end the conflict; secondly, the political will that was embodied in a binding peace agreement between the parties; thirdly, the overwhelming will of the Mozambican people to bring that devastating, apartheid-induced war to an end; and fourthly, strong support at the regional and international levels for the settlement of the conflict. On the United Nations side, we are of the view that the following factors were to be taken into account: first, a clear, realistic and well-designed mandate by the Security Council and Secretary-General; secondly, careful and detailed planning by the United Nations Secretariat; thirdly, respect for the status-of-forces agreement between the host country and the United Nations Secretariat; fourthly, the allocation of resources commensurate with the planned mission; fifthly, a full convergence of the scope of understanding between the Security Council and the Secretary-General; and sixthly, awareness of the fact that even a fragile State — or, in other cases, a failed State — is entitled to its sovereignty and deserves respect and attention. Ultimately, peace is in that State’s supreme interests, and they must own the peace process. We wish to echo what Switzerland just said — one-size-fits-all is a principle that does not fit the tailoring of peacekeeping operations. Each country has its own complexities, and each conflict has its own specificities. It is therefore incumbent upon the Security Council and the Secretariat to take adequate measures that fit each situation. In that context, we think it is imperative to rethink partnerships with regional, subregional and local organizations in order to develop tailored mission models. We therefore call on the United Nations and the African Union Peace and Security Council to effectively implement resolution 2719 (2023). My final comment is that, more than seven decades after the establishment of peacekeeping operations, we need to strengthen the link that binds the peacemaking, peacekeeping and peacebuilding continuum. Virtually every nation that needs a peacekeeping operation also requires a degree of the other two actions. In most cases, a peacekeeping operation that is completely detached from peacemaking and peacebuilding has a very diminished likelihood of succeeding.

I would like to express my appreciation to Under-Secretary-General Lacroix, Ms. Comfort Ero and Mr. Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein and for their valuable briefings. The Republic of Korea recognizes the essential role of United Nations peacekeeping operations in maintaining global peace and security. We are proud to be a major troop-contributing country, having contributed to 16 peacekeeping missions since we joined the United Nations 33 years ago, and we are currently contributing to the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon and the United Nations Mission in South Sudan. We are also one of the largest financial contributors to United Nations peacekeeping operations. Based on our experience and commitment to peacekeeping operations, we would like to make the following points today. First, there must be a renewed consensus that peacekeeping operations, which are the Security Council’s own creation, should remain one of the most effective tools for maintaining international peace and security, and therefore the Council must provide stronger and more unified support for peacekeeping operations. In recent years, peacekeeping operations have faced unprecedented challenges. Some in Africa find themselves in situations in which there is no peace to keep. In addition, the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (MINUSMA) faced an abrupt drawdown last year owing to strained relations with the host country. These challenges should not be attributed to the failure of peacekeeping operations as an instrument, but rather to the conditions that prevent them from achieving their mandate. The Republic of Korea, as Chair of the Security Council Working Group on Peacekeeping Operations, is committed to leading efforts to secure greater support for peacekeeping operations from the wider United Nations membership and will strive to build synergies with other peacekeeping operation-related forums, including the General Assembly’s Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations and the Peacekeeping Ministerial. We have convened two meetings so far this year to reinvigorate the Working Group and plan to contribute to deliberations about the future of United Nations peacekeeping operations. Secondly, we should better address the transition of peacekeeping operations in Africa, which is today’s most pressing and daunting task. If poorly managed, transitions carry many risks, including security vacuums, escalation or relapse into conflict and threats to the safety of peacekeepers. Drawing on lessons from MINUSMA and ongoing transitions, we would like to emphasize the importance of managing the relationship with the host country and enhancing close cooperation with regional and subregional organizations if we are to facilitate a successful transition. We fully support a complementary partnership with the African Union in that regard, including through the implementation of resolution 2719 (2023). We also support the strengthening of coordination between the Peacebuilding Commission and the Security Council. Thirdly, peacekeeping operations must constantly reform and adapt to changing realities. Peacekeeping operations must do more to address emerging security threats, such as the malicious use of technologies and the spread of misinformation and disinformation. In addition, as highlighted during today’s joint media stakeout, peacekeeping operations should play a critical role in mitigating the adverse effects of climate change. Korea has supported such efforts through our financial contributions of extrabudgetary funds. Fourthly and finally, peacekeeping operations need to be more inclusive. That means encouraging the participation of women in peacekeeping operations. Women peacekeepers can bring added value in building trust with local communities. We are proud to contribute to the Elsie Initiative Fund for Uniformed Women in Peace Operations and the training programme for women peacekeepers. Peacekeeping operations also need to engage more directly with local populations, as winning the hearts and minds of host communities is key to successful peacekeeping. In conclusion, since the first mission in 1948, peacekeeping operations have evolved in response to the changing nature of conflicts and the international political environment. We should make collective efforts to make United Nations peacekeeping operations more efficient and effective.

Let me extend my thanks to Under-Secretary-General Lacroix, Ms. Comfort Ero and Mr. Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein for their insightful briefings. Our discussion today is timely. It comes as we are negotiating the Pact for the Future, a document that covers the crucial matter of United Nations peacekeeping operations, which represent a central component of international peace efforts. However, with the evolving nature of threats and the current security and diplomatic landscape, such operations are showing their limitations due to several considerations. Among them is a lack of a much-needed robust posture in their mandate settings. It is therefore essential that during the Berlin Ministerial Conference, we reflect on how to design more offensive and peace enforcement-oriented mandates for United Nations peacekeeping operations. We seize this occasion to voice our support for the recommendations made by the Secretary-General through the Action for Peacekeeping and Action for Peacekeeping Plus initiatives. We also take good note of the Secretary-General policy brief on the New Agenda for Peace. In that regard, Algeria believes that discussions on strengthening peacekeeping operations should address several points: First, there is a need to design adaptable and achievable mandates that provide clear strategic directions for United Nations peacekeeping operations based on the realities, priorities and conditions on the ground. The Security Council resolutions related to mandate renewals of United Nations missions need to be streamlined. They should take on board the essence of previous resolutions and the historical background of the matter discussed, without exclusion or biased selectivity. Secondly, it is also necessary to include, from the onset of each mission, clear elements that set out the transition processes and sequenced exit strategy that will enable it to consolidate its security gains. Any exit strategy must be based on realistic and implementable benchmarks. That would provide the Council and the host country, in relevant settings, with the required visibility. Thirdly, cooperation with the host country, in relevant settings, needs to be further strengthened in accordance with the relevant legal frameworks and the mandate of the mission in question. We must ensure that the Organization’s duly considers national priorities. In a conflict situation, relationships with all parties have to be balanced and fair. This is an essential prerequisite for the legitimacy of the peacekeeping operation. Fourthly, the mandate of peacekeeping missions must include a human rights component in order to monitor the human rights situation on the ground and to report violations by the parties to the conflict. Some United Nations missions do not yet have such a tool. As a result, their presence on the ground lacks legitimacy and credibility. Fifthly, in our view, fostering partnerships with regional and subregional organizations, primarily the African Union, is essential. As mentioned nine years ago by the High-Level Independent Panel on Peace Operations, the United Nations cannot face the multidimensional nature of threats alone. The adoption of resolution 2719 (2023) therefore represented, for us, an important milestone. However, its implementation must be based on a realistic and balanced approach that takes into account the capabilities of all involved actors. Sixthly, the primacy of political solutions to conflict needs to be reflected in the mandate of United Nations peacekeeping operations. It has to be done by providing good offices and setting a conducive environment for dialogue between the relevant actors. In that regard, United Nations peacekeeping missions are responsible for upholding the principles, as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, of equal rights and self- determination of peoples under foreign occupation. Let me conclude by expressing Algeria’s readiness to contribute to peacekeeping efforts. Algeria is ready to put at the disposal of the United Nations and the international community its knowledge and expertise in the prevention of conflicts and in the maintenance of international peace and security.

I would like to thank Mr. Lacroix, Ms. Ero and Prince Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein for their briefings. I would like to stress three points. First, the success of peacekeeping depends on our ability to find political solutions. In order to foster the conditions to restore peace, the Security Council entrusts peacekeeping operations with essential tasks: support for political processes, the protection of civilians, the delivery of humanitarian aid, the protection of human rights and State capacity-building. But one thing is clear: only political solutions make it possible to achieve lasting peace after the withdrawal of peacekeeping operations. That requires the support of all actors — Security Council members, host States, States involved in peace processes and neighbouring countries. It is important for the Council to be united around a clear political objective and in its support for peacekeeping operations in the implementation of their mandates. That is the surest way to ensure that commitments made in a peace process are respected. Cooperation between the host State and the United Nations is essential. There have been many success stories. I am thinking of the United Nations Observer Mission in Liberia, the United Nations Mission in Côte d’Ivoire and the United Nations Mission in Sierra Leone, a country that is currently a Council member. Regional and subregional organizations, as well as neighbouring States, also play a key role. Effective coordination with the United Nations other means of action is essential. The centrality of political strategies must be at the centre of our efforts. We hope that the Secretary-General’s New Agenda for Peace will reinforce our collective efforts in that direction. At the same time, peacekeeping operations must continue their efforts to adapt to new challenges and to each context. With that in mind, France supports the Action for Peacekeeping (A4P) initiative and its A4P+ implementation strategy. That support has resulted in the allocation of €7 million over the past two years. France is promoting an ambitious vision of peacekeeping. Our intention is to support the United Nations in meeting new challenges, in particular efforts to combat information manipulation and the strategic communication of organizations, digital transformation and peacekeeping training, for example, in countering improvised explosive devices. We will be providing more than €1 million over the next four years for strategic research. France also has almost 700 personnel deployed in peacekeeping organizations, most of them in the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon. Women play a key role in our ambition. France is implementing the women and peace and security agenda through a national action plan for the period 2021-2025. In that respect, I would like to commend the commitment of troop- and police-contributing countries to enhance the impact of peacekeeping. And I pay tribute to those who have made the ultimate sacrifice in that noble work. The momentum generated by the New Agenda for Peace must be maintained in order to encourage the Council to establish realistic mandates based on political priorities that are clear, more inclusive and environmentally friendly. France, which has contributed to that work, is continuing to play its full part, in particular in the run-up to the Summit of the Future. Finally, strengthening partnerships is essential. The adoption of resolution 2719 (2023) on African peacekeeping operations last December provides us with a framework to strengthen the complementarity between the United Nations and the African Union. France welcomes the efforts made to establish a clear implementation framework, and it is contributing €250,000 for 2024 and will continue to support the work under way. I am also thinking of the partnership with the European Union, the member States of which deploy more than 5,000 personnel in peace operations. The European Union has allocated €1.5 billion to support conflict prevention and security efforts in sub-Saharan Africa for the period 2021-2027. France will continue to support all those efforts.

I thank Under-Secretary-General Lacroix for his briefing. I have listened carefully to the statements made by the other two briefers. At present, the international and regional security situations are undergoing profound changes. United Nations peacekeeping operations are at a new crossroads. It is imperative for the Security Council to stay focused on the new situation and challenges, comprehensively review and take stock of lessons learned and calibrate in a timely manner the direction of peacekeeping operations. I will focus on four points in my remarks today. First, the three principles of United Nations peacekeeping, namely, the consent of the parties, impartiality and the non-use of force except in self- defence and the defence of the mandate, have been developed over many years of practice, following some painful lessons along the way. They must remain long-term guiding principles. Many of the challenges presently facing peacekeeping organizations are related to the pivoting away from those principles in terms of missions’ mandates and their operation. In the current discussion of how peacekeeping organizations should be transformed and reinvigorated, it is necessary to reiterate, first and foremost, the importance of adhering to the three principles of peacekeeping. Peacekeeping organizations should not be drawn into the domestic affairs of the countries concerned and should not get involved as a party to their disputes or conflicts. Secondly, there have been many success stories over the decades with regard to peacekeeping organizations, a United Nations initiative. However, we must recognize that peacekeeping operations are not a panacea. Peacekeeping operations require basic conditions for their deployment and success. Above all, there needs to be a credible and forward-looking political process. In other words, there must be a peace to keep. The Secretary-General, in the New Agenda for Peace, notes that peacekeeping organizations must be deployed based on and in support of a clearly identified political process. That should serve as important guidance for the transformation of peacekeeping. Expecting peacekeeping organizations to be a superman and combat scourges and save the day is unrealistic. Requesting peacekeeping organizations to be a back- up man without acknowledging the specifics of a given situation is even more irresponsible. Here, I wish to point out in particular that the United Nations has deployed peacekeeping operations in Haiti on several occasions, but none of them have proven effective. The lessons learned must be fully acknowledged so that past mistakes are not repeated. It is clear that in Haiti the conditions for the deployment of a United Nations peacekeeping operation are not currently in place. Thirdly, peacekeeping missions should have a core mandate that enjoys overall stability. Multidimensional peacekeeping operations deployed in response to internal conflicts within a country should assist, but not replace, the autonomous efforts of the host country. The operation’s core mandate must reflect the realities on the ground and be consistent with the priorities of the host country, not the political priorities or even the political correctness of others. The Council should avoid expanding missions’ mandates at every renewal, as that will only lead to inflated mandates that lack focus, thereby making implementation difficult. The long-term stay of a mission is not an end in itself. Such a presence may bring new challenges and problems to the mission. Once the situation in the country concerned has stabilized, the Security Council should promptly formulate a clear and actionable exit strategy for the mission, so as to ensure a smooth and orderly transition of the relevant tasks to the Government of the country concerned and other United Nations agencies. Fourthly, on the basis of the three points I just mentioned, I wish to point out the need for the performance of peacekeeping operations to be comprehensively improved. By performance, I mean not only the individual peacekeepers’ personal competence and performance, but also the overall quality and effectiveness of the work of the mission as a whole. The mission should maintain good cooperation with the country concerned. Winning the support of the Government and the people of the country concerned is conducive to steering it towards gradually embarking on the path of durable peace and security and sustainable development. Mission leaders should demonstrate leadership and ensure high morale and discipline among all mission personnel. In view of the increasing security risks faced by peacekeepers, the United Nations system as a whole should improve its emergency response mechanism and minimize casualties. It should be noted that peacekeeping assessments account for two thirds of the Organization’s total assessed budget. That calls for the strongest financial discipline in all aspects of peacekeeping operations, from decision-making to implementation, in order to eliminate waste. There is a need to broaden supply channels for peacekeeping materiel procurement so as to effectively improve cost effectiveness. Conditions permitting, peacekeeping missions should focus on their social impact on the ground and strive to leave a “blue legacy” even after their exit. Enhancing Africa’s capacity to maintain peace and stability on its own and bolstering support for regional arrangements in Africa are important directions in the United Nations peacekeeping transformation. China supports the provision of adequate, predictable and sustainable financial support for African Union-led peace operations. We look forward to the framework arrangements set out in resolution 2719 (2023) being operationalized at an early date. Last week, the summit of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation was successfully held in Beijing. The overall characterization of China-Africa relations has been elevated to an all- weather China-Africa community with a shared future for the new era. China will work with Africa in the next three years to implement 10 partnership initiatives for joining hands to advance modernization for China and Africa, which includes the partnership initiative for common security. China will take measures to help African countries to build military and national defence capabilities, train national military personnel and police and law enforcement officers from Africa and take action to help Africa rid itself of land mines. China will always be there for Africa, as a good partner, working shoulder to shoulder in pursuit of high-quality development and greater security.

I thank Slovenia for hosting this important discussion and our speakers for their interventions. This discussion comes at a time when peacekeeping is under intense strain. That strain is due to the unprecedented fracturing of the political support that United Nations peacekeeping missions have traditionally enjoyed. Unnecessary divisions within the Security Council have weakened support for peacekeeping, the ability of missions to implement their mandates effectively, confidence in and support for the United Nations among host Governments and parties to conflicts and the ability of civilians to reap the benefits of peace. Many host Governments, with the support of some Security Council members, have politicized mandates, cherry-picking certain tasks and undermining others that have enjoyed long-standing support, including those related to human rights. As a result, mandates less accurately reflect and respond to the conflict, and disappointment grows. The Council has faced moments of deep division many times in its history. Yet even in those difficult periods, peacekeeping has been an area in which we could come together and cooperate in order to address some of the most concerning threats to international peace and security. In that spirit, the United States continues to look for ways to strengthen and refine United Nations peacekeeping and bolster our collective support for this vital tool. We do not agree with those who have lost faith in it. The United States believes that we should be improving the peacekeeping models we have today while expanding the menu of options to ensure that the response is well-suited to conflict dynamics and political environments. We should also be vigilant to preserve institutional expertise and frameworks regarding United Nations peacekeeping. Multidimensional peacekeeping has proven effective at achieving difficult objectives: protecting civilians, supporting peace agreements, bolstering the capacities of responsible host Governments and preventing the recurrence of conflict. We continue to believe in this tool and will continue to support current and new multidimensional missions as appropriate. At the same time, we must also explore other models that may be needed in different scenarios. In some cases, a more targeted mandate, focusing on a more specific and limited set of objectives, may be better suited to the context and more successful at securing broad support from the Council. In some cases, it may be more appropriate and effective for the African Union (AU) or a regional organization to lead the response, and with the historic adoption of resolution 2719 (2023), we now have a mechanism for the United Nations to support AU peace support operations authorized by the Council. As we explore new models and consider the range of tools, we must maintain focus on key factors that are important to the success and the integrity of United Nations peacekeeping missions, old and new. First, we must remain committed to the core principles of peacekeeping, including impartiality. United Nations missions do not exist as service providers to host Governments. They are impartial actors with a mandate to address threats to international peace and security, regardless of the source of that threat. Secondly, missions must operate free of obstruction in order to effectively implement their mandates and to ensure the safety and security of their own personnel. When peacekeepers encounter obstruction or access restrictions, the Council has a duty to act swiftly to support the mission and ensure its free operation in accordance with its status-of-forces agreement. Lastly, we should always bear in mind that missions exist to serve populations, to create a safer and more secure environment for civilians whose lives are torn apart by conflict. Civilians expect peacekeepers to protect them from violence. We learned that lesson the hard way, after the tragedies in Rwanda and Srebrenica. Whether in current models or new models, protecting civilians and creating a more peaceful and secure environment for them should be at the core of peacekeeping. On a related point, peacekeeping operations create the space for durable political solutions, which requires the genuine inclusion of women, youth and other marginalized groups. In conclusion, let me emphasize again that United Nations peacekeeping is an invaluable tool with a long history of responding effectively to prevent and mitigate conflicts. The United States looks forward to working with its fellow Council members to protect and strengthen this extraordinary tool.

I thank Under-Secretary- General Lacroix, Ms. Ero and Mr. Al Hussein for their respective briefings. Peacekeeping operations remain one of the most effective tools available to the United Nations to promote international peace and security, yet they face increasingly complex challenges today. Japan believes that peacekeeping operations can best perform when there is a strong and collective will from all actors, including Member States, the Security Council, host countries, troop- and police-contributing countries, regional organizations, financial contributors, the Secretariat and missions. The Security Council, in particular, has a critical role in driving an active and coherent political strategy, which is key to effective peacekeeping operations. In order to maintain and even strengthen the performance of United Nations peacekeeping, I would like to highlight three points. First, mandates for peacekeeping operations need to be realistic and achievable, with a clear strategic objective. For that purpose, the Security Council must ensure that peacekeeping mandates accommodate the needs and expectations of host Governments and their people, while upholding the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and international law. We also call on the Council to maintain close communication with troop-contributing countries, police-contributing countries and missions on the ground in order to understand their capabilities and challenges. Secondly, in order to achieve sustainable peace, the Security Council must take a horizontal approach that not only focuses on peacekeeping led by the military and police but also considers peacebuilding and prevention. In the open debate held under Japan’s presidency in March (see S/PV.9574), many Member States stressed the importance of the Council’s role in preventing conflict and its recurrence and the need to address the root causes of conflicts through a comprehensive approach that encompasses peace, humanitarian and development aspects. They also emphasized that the Council should focus more on individuals from the local community, including women and youth, for their society to be resilient and sustainable. In that regard, the Council needs to ensure that peace operations develop exit strategies and viable transition plans from the earliest stage possible, in close coordination with host countries and United Nations country teams. At United Nations Headquarters, Japan continues to encourage the Security Council to better utilize the advisory role of the Peacebuilding Commission to incorporate a prevention perspective into its work, including in the mandates of peace operations. Thirdly, the safety and security of peacekeepers must be prioritized. Peacekeeping missions can fully implement their mandates only when they can operate safely and with firm support from troop- and police-contributing countries. In order to mitigate the risks to peacekeepers, Japan continues to support United Nations efforts to develop and provide training programmes in areas including counter-improvised explosive devices, peacekeeping intelligence in countering misinformation and disinformation, and medical capacity. In that regard, Japan intends to co-host, with Uruguay, in December, the preparatory meeting of the 2025 United Nations Peacekeeping Ministerial Conference to deepen international discussion on training and partnership. The role of regional organizations, in particular the African Union (AU), becomes more significant in conjunction with United Nations peacekeeping. Thus, it is important to enhance the capabilities of their personnel. In that regard, Japan will support capacity- building for the personnel of AU-led peace support operations through the United Nations Triangular Partnership Programme. When those conditions are met, there will be greater unity among all stakeholders, leading to stronger political support for effective peace operations. Japan reiterates our continued commitment to collective efforts to strengthen United Nations peacekeeping, including the initiatives under the Action for Peacekeeping initiative.

I thank you, Mr. President, for convening this important open debate. Sierra Leone commends troop- and police-contributing countries and all peacekeepers and, in addition, pays tribute to the police- and troop-contributing countries and peacekeepers who have paid the ultimate price. I thank the briefers, Under-Secretary-General Jean-Pierre Lacroix, Ms. Comfort Ero and Prince Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein for their valuable briefings. In May, on the International Day of United Nations Peacekeepers, the Secretary-General reminded us of two important truisms: first, that peace is humanity’s highest ideal; and secondly, that achieving that ideal is hard work. Certainly, as we look around the world throughout this century, we see that peace and security and the pacific settlement of disputes as envisioned in Article 33 of the Charter of the United Nations has been limited. Nevertheless, it is an ideal that is worth aspiring to, making the mandate of the Security Council and the tools for achieving that ideal, including peacekeeping, of critical importance. While peacekeeping operations have been a cornerstone of efforts to maintain global peace and security, conflict dynamics over the past decades have generated a range of challenges to United Nations peacekeeping operations that have necessitated a significant evolution from traditional peacekeeping missions mandated to support inter-State ceasefires and peace agreements. Peace operations have evolved over time to address intra-State conflict, State fragility, scenarios involving the asymmetric use of force, asymmetric access to and distribution of resources and non-State violent extremist threats. The rise of multidimensional peace operations in recent years reflects that shift, as the United Nations has gradually expanded its role into State-building, stabilization, the protection of civilians, human rights monitoring, institutional capacity-building and the robust use of force. That shift also recognizes the multifaceted causes of conflict and the necessity of addressing both the root causes and the forces that perpetuate it. Today’s conflict trends and geopolitical dynamics may require another evolution in the current and future design and application of peace operations, if the United Nations is to remain relevant and effective in the maintenance of international peace and security. In strengthening United Nations peacekeeping, with reflections for the future, Sierra Leone would like to emphasize the following three points. First, we acknowledge that United Nations peacekeeping operations are integral to the achievement of global peace and security. As the human experience continues to be characterized, unfortunately, by competition and conflict, evidence shows that there have been approximately 268 wars, including the World Wars, regional wars and civil wars, since the 1900s. Since 1948, there have been 72 United Nations peacekeeping operations deployed around the globe, charged with preventing and managing violent conflict between and within States and with supporting national actors in protecting and building peace after conflict. As stated by Under-Secretary-General Lacroix previously, there is a positive correlation between peacekeeping operations and lower levels of violence in conflict zones, and there is indisputable evidence to conclude that having a Blue Helmet force in place “not only works at stopping conflicts but works better than anything else experts know”. There is overwhelming evidence that United Nations peace operations provide opportunities for dialogue and sustainable resolution, thereby reducing the incidence of conflict recurrence. Peacekeeping missions mandated by the Council continue to be a beacon of hope and action for hundreds of millions of men, women and children, with the aim of restoring peace, order and human dignity. Secondly, peacekeeping missions must be driven by clear mandates and strategies. Maintaining peace in an increasingly polarized world characterized by heightened competition for resources, volatility in geopolitical alliances, more destructive weapons of war and significant threats to multilateralism requires clearly defined rules and models for interaction, cooperation and collaboration by Member States, especially with regard to resolving conflicts. United Nations peacekeeping operations must be deployed as strategic political tools within an arsenal of strategies for conflict resolution and State-building. Peacekeeping operations are not ends in themselves but rather are to be established within the context of a relevant and thorough assessment of a conflict situation and for the express purpose of supporting peace agreements between the conflicting parties. The objective of resolving conflict and achieving lasting peace must be well-articulated by the Security Council in our decisions and statements. While there might be initial differences of opinion on the need for and scope of peacekeeping, the ultimate decision to deploy a peacekeeping operation must be based on a commitment to the overarching principles of securing peace and human dignity, respect for sovereign equality and cooperation in the conflict situation, as envisaged in the Charter of the United Nations. A new approach for configuring peacekeeping operations to meet the challenges of today and tomorrow must always be based on adherence to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and to upholding human rights. The New Agenda for Peace notes that “without the basic norms enshrined in the Charter … international relations could degenerate into chaos”, and in doing so lays emphasis on the importance of adherence to the legitimate and collective enforcement actions authorized by the Security Council. The political will of Member States, especially Council members, is paramount to establishing the legitimacy and success of peacekeeping operations. Support by Member States remains critical, as does a clear mandate that establishes the boundaries of the operation to ensure the same level of acceptance and commitment throughout the life of a peacekeeping mission. Turning to my third point, the multidimensional complexity of the causes and nature of conflicts necessitates more adaptive and people-centred mission models that can effectively respond to complex crises and changing situations. While acknowledging that the demands on peacekeeping operations are ever- expanding, the United Nations has had to adapt and respond to the practical needs of conflict situations, resulting in an evolution of the scope of operations to include issues such as the protection of civilians, gender-based sexual violence, food insecurity, climate change and transitional justice. Accommodating and institutionalizing that diversity of mission mandates requires a renewed commitment to a dynamic partnership between Member States and the United Nations peacekeeping administration that considers the capabilities required to match the scale and complexity of operations. Partnerships with regional arrangements for peacekeeping remains critical, and Sierra Leone continues to applaud the significance of resolution 2719 (2023), on the financing of African Union-led peace support operations. Innovative partnership formats, such as those endorsed by the Security Council in resolution 2699 (2023) mandating the Multinational Security Support Mission in Haiti and in resolution 2746 (2024) authorizing support from the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo to the Southern African Development Community Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo is also critical. Partnerships in peacekeeping operations with host countries must cover the continuum of approval, which encompasses joint planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation. As peace and security processes must be nationally owned and led, a successful peacekeeping operation must include the strengthening of national Governments’ capacities to protect, including through the rule of law, security sector reform and inclusive political processes. Effective partnerships with local and national authorities are particularly important in the success of interventions aimed at providing physical protection and deterring attacks on civilians through active patrols, early warning systems, community alert networks and public information and reporting systems. Allow me close by stressing the significance of prevention and peacebuilding as key elements for improving the global peace and security architecture. We must make a case for proactive preventive actions across all development settings such that our social, economic and political institutions, systems and processes are responsive to the needs of people. Configuring United Nations peacekeeping to meet the challenges of today and tomorrow requires that we expand our expectations and tools beyond ending wars and instead work to prevent them from occurring and reoccurring.

I would like to thank the briefers Under-Secretary-General Lacroix, Ms. Ero and Mr. Al Hussein for their insightful briefs. We gather today at a crucial moment for international peace and security, because while we reflect on the current state of United Nations peacekeeping, the world is not at peace, and for many, there is no security. The United Nations was established to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, and United Nations peacekeeping has evolved as one of the main tools to achieve that purpose. It remains the cornerstone of our collective efforts to prevent, stabilize and resolve conflicts peacefully. However, the evolving nature of conflicts, marked by complex domestic, geopolitical and transnational factors, necessitates a continuous adaptation of our peacekeeping strategies and tools. With 11 active missions, peacekeepers continue to operate in some of the most challenging environments, providing critical support to conflict-affected communities. Reports of the Secretary-General, across the spectrum of conflict situations increasingly highlight the need for enhanced protection of civilians, greater accountability and improved operational effectiveness. While significant progress has been made, there remain persistent challenges. The rising threat of terrorism, open threats to peacekeepers by armed groups and the impacts of climate change all exert additional pressure on our peacekeeping efforts. Those challenges are coupled with amplified threats to the lives of our peacekeepers, greater barriers to the execution of their mandates, including unwieldy bureaucratic measures, and dwindling host nation support. Those challenges demand our urgent attention. The Secretary-General’s New Agenda for Peace, grounded in trust, solidarity and universality, underscores the necessity for a holistic approach to peacekeeping — one that integrates conflict prevention, peace enforcement and peacebuilding to create a sustainable pathway to peace and security. It is now time for us to put the lessons learned into practice. In some ways, we have already begun updating our approach to peacekeeping. In that vein, we commend the adoption of resolution 2719 (2023), which represents a pivotal stride towards empowering regional organizations and improving the efficacy of peacekeeping operations through enhancing the partnership between the United Nations and the African Union. We must now implement resolution 2719 (2023). Similarly, the endorsement by the Council of the Multinational Security Support Mission in Haiti, led by Kenya, represents another approach, aimed at stabilizing security in order for a political process facilitated by the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) to move forward. However, it must be underscored that, while regional and subregional organizations such as the African Union and CARICOM play a crucial role in the region, that by no means absolves the Security Council of its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. In looking ahead to the Summit of the Future, the 2025 peacekeeping ministerial meeting and the future of peacekeeping, I would like to proffer some suggestions. First, the ultimate success of a peacekeeping operation is when a sustainable political solution is achieved through the process the peacekeeping operation was established to support and the peacekeeping operation is no longer needed. We must therefore do more to ensure that parties to the conflict agree to, and implement, political solutions. To do that, the Council must be united, as our briefers have stressed. Secondly, we must strengthen the capacities of peace operations through enhanced training, modernized equipment and improved strategic planning. Moreover, the principles of transparency and accountability must remain at the forefront of our peacekeeping mandates. Thirdly, as we confront a changing threat landscape and consider policy or operational reorientations, we must ensure that the highest standards of conduct and respect for human rights and international and humanitarian law are upheld and remain a central pillar of peace operations. Ensuring the safety and well-being of civilians must remain paramount in all our endeavours. Fourthly, as we plan for peace operations, we must factor in the impacts of climate change, since they can act as threat multipliers, exacerbating vulnerabilities and compounding existing grievances. Finally, peacekeeping must be inclusive, with the full and equal participation of women at all levels of command, in all phases of operations and planning and in all decision-making processes. That is truly an essential ingredient for sustainable peace. We must also enhance the implementation of resolution 2250 (2015) on youth, peace and security and ensure that youth play a key role in conflict prevention and resolution efforts. In conclusion, we salute the many peacekeepers around the world and those who have paid the ultimate price in pursuit of peace. I reaffirm Guyana’s firm commitment to working collaboratively with all stakeholders to strengthen peacekeeping frameworks.

I would like to thank Mr. Jean-Pierre Lacroix, Under- Secretary-General for Peace Operations; Ms. Comfort Ero, President and Chief Executive Officer of the International Crisis Group; and Mr. Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, President and Chief Executive Officer of the International Peace Institute, for their valuable briefings. My country contributes to peacekeeping operations in four countries, and as we are only a few weeks away from adopting the Pact for the Future, which establishes key commitments for adapting peace operations to today’s challenges, this debate is especially important. I would therefore like to highlight some key elements to ensure that the necessary support for United Nations peacekeeping operations is mobilized. First, it is crucial to achieve effective coordination among the actors involved in peace missions in order to support an inclusive political strategy that addresses the root causes of conflicts. Conducting an open dialogue on mandate strategies with host countries and reflecting their progress with data and indicators in reports to the Security Council would ensure that mandates are effective and are adjusted in line with current local circumstances, but above all with the evolution of such circumstances. Coordination among stakeholders is indispensable to the success of missions. That is why the Action for Peacekeeping initiative and its implementation strategy, Action for Peacekeeping Plus, which Ecuador supports, play a fundamental role. Secondly, mandates must be clear, prioritized and achievable, aligned with realities on the ground. That approach is key to defining strategic objectives and prioritizing mission tasks, and the Security Council has a leading role in that. Thirdly, adequate and sustainable funding is a fundamental and indispensable pillar, not only for United Nations peace missions, but also for complementary efforts. In that regard, I highlight the leadership of the A3  — Gabon, Ghana and Mozambique, at the time — in adopting resolution 2719 (2023) in December 2023, when Ecuador was presiding over the Security Council. The resolution established a framework for predictable and sustainable funding for African Union-led peace support operations, as well as other compliance frameworks. Strengthening the operations of regional and subregional organizations is crucial to ensure a coordinated response. Initiatives such as the Multinational Security Support Mission in Haiti, under the exemplary leadership of Kenya, with the participation of the Caribbean Community and authorized by resolution 2699 (2023), should have coordination mechanisms with the United Nations mission on the ground, and its mandate should be aligned in that regard. Fourthly, peacekeeping missions should initiate transition planning with host countries, United Nations country teams and other relevant national actors from the earliest stages of their operations. Early planning facilitates orderly and sustainable transitions, ensuring that local capacities are enhanced and responsibilities are transferred. Finally, I would also like to underline the importance of strategic communications. Successes must be highlighted, expectations managed, and misinformation and hate speech countered. Effective communication is necessary to ensure that coordination among all actors can become a reality. In conclusion, peacekeeping operations are instruments and tools that are constantly evolving, and they must move forward with a continuous process of improvement. We believe that we can learn from the mistakes of the past and face all the challenges of the future.

We listened carefully to the briefings of Under-Secretary-General for Peace Operations Jean- Pierre Lacroix, President and Chief Executive Officer of International Crisis Group Comfort Ero, and President and Chief Executive Officer of the International Peace Institute Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein. We would like to thank them for sharing their views. As one of the United Nations primary instruments for maintaining peace and security, peacekeeping has had a direct impact on the lives of millions of people for decades. Great hopes are pinned on peacekeeping operations, as they are designed to both address immediate problems and facilitate long-term crisis settlement. The changing nature and specificities of conflicts and dangerous operating conditions, often made difficult by the dire humanitarian and socioeconomic situation on the ground, undoubtedly require peacekeeping mechanisms to adapt. That is why the attention of the Member States and the United Nations Secretariat is focused on issues related to the future of peacekeeping and ways to transform it to ensure that it meets today’s challenges as well as possible, and on ways to boost the effectiveness of peacekeeping operations and ensure the safety of Blue Helmets and civilian personnel. Whatever transformations United Nations peacekeeping operations undergo, they must be premised on unconditional respect for the sovereignty of host countries, strict adherence to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and the basic principles of peacekeeping, which are the consent of the parties, impartiality and non-use of force, except for self-defence and protection of the mandate. Another crucial element in maintaining peace and security is cooperation between the United Nations and viable regional and subregional organizations. We advocate developing such cooperation on the basis of the Charter, primarily its Chapter VIII. We believe that regional integration organizations, primarily the African Union, have first-hand knowledge of the problems facing their member States and therefore can definitely play an important role in assisting States through their willingness to ensure the well-being and safety of their citizens. We advocate the consistent development of United Nations cooperation with the African Union and subregional organizations on the basis of the principle of African solutions to African problems. Furthermore, we believe that the key to the success of African operations is a level-headed assessment by the countries of the region of existing threats, with a view to finding ways to overcome them, as well as their willingness to bear the risks when responding to challenges to peace and security. It is also important that African countries have room to make their own decisions on how to deal with threats, irrespective of what form of financial assistance they receive from external players. That is precisely why we supported the resolution on financing African peacekeeping. We believe that the key to the effectiveness of the work of peacekeeping missions primarily lies in establishing conditions for direct dialogue between the parties to conflicts with a view to achieving a political settlement. That requires that missions focus on reaching agreement on the root causes of crises. We can hardly reach our goal if we fail to define the goal itself. Unfortunately, we are witnessing situations in which opinions on those issues significantly diverge, and not only between the warring parties but also between the main regional or non-regional stakeholders, as well as within the Security Council. Without unity in the Council, we are unlikely to agree on a clear and realistic mandate, build trust with the host country or ensure effective support for regional efforts. The lack of clear and achievable objectives for peacekeeping missions also makes it more difficult to achieve significant results in enhancing the missions’ effectiveness. We believe it is necessary to cut secondary and non-mandate tasks for peacekeepers, especially those related to human rights, gender and climate issues, which distract peacekeepers from performing their main duties and require significant funding. When determining a peacekeeping operation’s mandate, it is fundamentally important to take into account the views and needs of the host countries. Cooperation between the peacekeeping mission and the Secretariat with the host country’s Government, and unconditional respect for a host country’s legitimate interests, should also be prioritized. After all, constructive interaction with host countries is a prerequisite for the successful implementation of a peacekeeping mandate. Nevertheless, national authorities shoulder the primary responsibility for protecting civilians, eradicating the root causes of a crisis and ensuring post-conflict recovery. We should recall that resolving a domestic crisis in a country is a difficult, painstaking and often long- term process, which must be national in nature and should consider the interests of all population groups. There is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all formula. What is necessary therefore is a search for a unique solution based on the social, cultural, civilizational and historical particularities of each society. Only the Government of the host country can ensure such a durable social contract. The role of the international community in that regard is to extend the necessary political support, share its experiences and provide humanitarian and economic assistance. Ignoring the priorities and interests of the host country and its civilian population can only lead to worsening relations. That is closely related to the problem of growing misinformation and disinformation about the United Nations, which has been actively discussed recently in various forums within the Organization. Addressing this issue requires a comprehensive approach because negative comments against the United Nations are not always attempts to besmirch its reputation. Sometimes, those criticisms reflect the frustration of host countries and their populations. As such, they should not be ignored. Rather, United Nations peacekeeping missions should explain their mandate and actively reach out to ordinary people through radio, television, social media and various local quick-impact projects. All of that can help to build constructive cooperation with the host country and trust-based contacts and, as a result, can strengthen authority and credibility of the United Nations. Our country attaches great importance to United Nations peacekeeping operations. Russian peacekeepers are performing their duties in the Sudan, South Sudan, Western Sahara, the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Cyprus and the Middle East. Russia is one of the 10 major contributors to peacekeeping budgets. The training centres of the Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation provide high-quality training for both Russian and foreign peacekeepers, including women. We believe that the main areas of development for United Nations peacekeeping, let alone its future forms, should be agreed upon in an intergovernmental format. In that respect, the best forum is the General Assembly’s Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations, where most Member States, including troop-contributing countries and host countries, have the opportunity to hammer out shared approaches to the parameters of peacekeeping operations that should guide the Secretariat and missions on the ground. Only through strict compliance with the agreements and commitments reached between States, can we ensure the necessary level of trust between all parties concerned and, thus, enhance the effectiveness of peacekeeping missions and contribute to their ultimate success. We are convinced that the solidarity of Member States with regard to the principles of the functioning of peacekeeping operations will make it easier to resolve concomitant problems. In conclusion, we would like to take this opportunity to express our gratitude to the military, police and civilian personnel of United Nations peacekeeping missions for their unwavering commitment to fulfilling their noble duty in extremely difficult and dangerous conditions, with a daily risk to their lives.

Before continuing, I wish to remind all speakers to limit their statements to no more than three minutes in order to enable the Council to carry out its work expeditiously. Flashing lights on the collars of the microphones will prompt speakers to bring their remarks to a close after three minutes. I now give the floor to the representative of Egypt.

I thank you, Mr. President, for having convened this important open debate. We would also like to thank today’s briefers for their valuable briefings. Egypt recognizes the pivotal role of United Nations peacekeeping operations, being one of the first countries to support them. Egypt has always been among the top troop- and police-contributing countries to United Nations peacekeeping operations. The tasks of peacekeeping operations have evolved over time, with increasingly complex mandates and unprecedented difficulties that require carrying out complex tasks in non-conventional operational environments, with insufficient resources. Egypt’s vision on reforming the United Nations peacekeeping architecture encompasses several points, first and foremost, the primacy of political solutions and the need for clear, achievable and gradual priorities for peacekeeping operations, while taking the necessary measures to ensure the security and safety of the peacekeepers. We must also provide the necessary financial and in-kind resources to logically and fairly implement resolution 2719 (2023). We must also provide peacekeepers with the necessary training and must secure the support of host countries for building and sustaining peace, especially during transitional phases. Finally, we must bolster peace operations partnerships between the United Nations and regional organizations and enhance our interaction with the Peacebuilding Commission, whose establishment and work Egypt has firmly supported. Following the closure of the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (MINUSMA), Egypt believes that the United Nations system must continue the positive efforts that began years ago to carry out a strategic review of United Nations policies and mechanisms to support national ownership and national leadership, especially during transitional phases. We believe that this is one of the most important lessons learned if we are to strengthen future peacekeeping missions. Indeed, the entire international community has learned an important lesson, namely, that the consent of the host country is not a foregone conclusion. That is why it is important for the United Nations and all its relevant organs to act wisely and cautiously in order to ensure that consent, especially amid the political developments of the countries going through transitional phases. MINUSMA is a good example of that, considering the significant losses of individuals and equipment suffered by troop- and police-contributing countries, as well as the disharmony between the United Nations missions and host countries, which eventually affect the security and safety of the peacekeeping troops and the ability to establish a safe exit for individuals to return to their countries. We hope that this important dimension of peace operations will be addressed during the preparatory discussions for the Peacekeeping Ministerial Conference in Berlin, to be held in May 2025. Egypt and all Members seek more specialized and responsive peacekeeping operations that have the appropriate technological and deterrence capabilities to ensure success in peacekeeping and in enforcing peace, when necessary. In conclusion, I note the important role Egypt has played in peacekeeping training. We have succeeded in building the capacities of Egyptian, African and Arab United Nations peacekeepers through the Cairo International Center for Conflict Resolution, Peacekeeping and Peacebuilding, which focuses on the civilian component and United Nations framework policies, as well as a centre for peacekeeping training, which focuses on the police component, in addition to a similar military one, the Sadat centre for peacemaking, peacekeeping and peacebuilding, which is being developed by the Egyptian Ministry of Defence.

I now give the floor to Mr. Lambrinidis. Mr. Lambrinidis: I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its member States. The candidate countries North Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Georgia align themselves with this statement. First, I would like to thank Slovenia for organizing this important debate, as well as our briefers for their insightful remarks. Like many others in this room, we would also like to take this opportunity to honour those who have made the ultimate sacrifice in the pursuit of peace. As we speak, conflicts are proliferating across the globe and gross violations of the Charter of the United Nations and international law are widespread. We all know that. The increasing weaponization of strategic resources, the emergence of new areas, such as cyber, artificial intelligence and space, and the increasing impact of climate change and environmental degradation pose new threats to global peace and security. We must all recommit to promoting international cooperation, upholding the rules-based international order and strengthening networked multilateralism, with the United Nations at its core, if we are to advance our peacebuilding work. As such, partnerships are an indispensable pillar of the EU’s effort to promote global peace and security. The EU-United Nations strategic partnership on peace operations and crisis management is a key strand of our cooperation. We want to reinforce our strategic partnership by agreeing on a new set of priorities for 2025 to 2027. The European Union currently deploys 21 civilian and military missions and operations, some of which were established in parallel to United Nations missions, with a primary focus on Africa and with our African partners. Three EU operations directly implement Security Council mandates: Operation IRINI in the Mediterranean Sea; Operation Althea in Bosnia and Herzegovina; and Operation Aspides in the Red Sea. We coordinate on political messaging, information-sharing and critical issues. Making United Nations peacekeeping fit for the future will require the joint support of United Nations Member States for the United Nations continued leading role in peacekeeping. In that vein, we must do the following. First, we must ensure that United Nations peacekeeping operations receive full political support and adequate resources. EU member States contribute today more than 4,000 personnel to United Nations peacekeeping missions, as well as close to 24 per cent of the United Nations peacekeeping budget in 2024 alone. Support for political processes is also fundamental to achieving sustainable peace in host countries. Secondly, we must ensure that peace operations are adapted to present and future challenges, including through strengthening the role of regional organizations. And I take note, as have so many others, of the importance of resolution 2719 (2023). Thirdly, we must promote the implementation of the women and peace and security agenda; the youth, peace and security agenda; intensify efforts on climate and security; and increase the focus on conflict prevention and peacebuilding, as so many others have mentioned. The European Union fully supports the Secretary- General’s New Agenda for Peace. We look forward to seeing its recommendations reflected in the Pact for the Future. We also look forward to deepening our discussions on the future of United Nations peacekeeping in the context of the next peacekeeping ministerial in Germany in 2025. In conclusion, the upcoming Summit of the Future constitutes a unique opportunity to reinvigorate the multilateral system and make the United Nations fit for purpose. I want to thank again the Slovenian presidency for taking the initiative of convening today’s exceptionally important discussion.

I now give the floor to the representative of Ethiopia.

I thank you, Madam President, for giving me the floor. We thank the Slovenian presidency for organizing this open debate. We also wish to thank the Under-Secretary-General for Peace Operations and the other briefers this morning for their insightful remarks. While United Nations peacekeeping can be a fundamental tool for collective security, the current state of United Nations peacekeeping requires comprehensive reflection. From my country’s extensive involvement with United Nations peacekeeping missions and African Union peace support operations, we wish to raise a few points on what we see to be a challenge and considerations in the effort to improve United Nations peacekeeping. Out of the 11 existing United Nations peacekeeping missions, five of them are on the African continent. While the number and size of peacekeeping missions in other parts of the world continue to decrease, the missions in Africa remain extensive in terms of their sizes and mandates, with prolonged stays in the host countries. The declining trend in the acceptability of peacekeeping missions is not solely attributed to the missions themselves. It should also be seen in the context of global politics; the lack of international cooperation and synergy on development and national capacity-building; and issues of eroding credibility surrounding the Security Council, the changing threat landscape and the modus operandi of the peacekeeping missions themselves. I will raise the following four points that we believe would help better design United Nations peacekeeping for the future, Peacekeeping missions should be a measure of last resort, not tools for reasons of expediency. In that regard, first, peace processes and other initiatives the United Nations associates itself with must have the ownership of national governments. Peacekeeping missions that result from political processes with no national ownership are bound to face challenges during implementation. Furthermore, we believe priority should be given to regional mechanisms and solutions. Regional peace support and peacemaking efforts have demonstrated a comparative advantage. The Security Council is best placed to play a supporting role for those mechanisms. Secondly, with regard to the complementarity of peace and development, peacekeeping missions operate in a complex national context. In many instances, the host countries are under sanctions of one type or another and have extremely limited access to international cooperation. That creates an unnecessary perception of competition for resources between the peacekeeping missions and the host countries. That is not tenable. The missions will be more effective in the delivery of their objectives if the host countries and communities are able to access adequate development finance enabling the provision of public service and the creation of reliable national capability. That would give the States concerned the policy space to decide on their national security and political dispensation. Thirdly, the credibility and transparency of processes at the Secretariat and in the Security Council is a critical element. The representation deficit in the Security Council as it applies to Africa is a standing challenge peacekeeping will continue to face. That structural and historical problem must be resolved for the decisions of the Council, including those establishing peacekeeping missions, to enjoy better credibility. In the meantime, host countries and other concerned States must be sufficiently involved in the preparation of threat analysis, mission design and decision-making. Finally in relation to the peacekeeping missions themselves, we are of the view that the approach taken to ensure the safety and security of peacekeepers should not result in secluding peacekeeping missions from the community they are intended to protect. The overmilitarization of peacekeeping and overemphasis on the use of new technologies creates an unduly cautious environment owing to its impact on the sovereignty of the host countries. There is a need to address that concern with adequate consideration of the concerns of the host countries. In conclusion, the United Nations, as part of its efforts for peacemaking, should be more proactive in advocating and taking concrete measures towards enhanced support for national capacity, strengthened roles and responsibilities for regional organizations and enhanced cooperation with the United Nations while preserving the elements of autonomy, solidarity and context-relevant means of operation.

I now give the floor to the representative of Pakistan.

We congratulate Slovenia for convening this meeting, and we welcome the thoughtful interventions that have been heard from Under-Secretary-General Lacroix, Ms. Comfort Ero and my brother Prince Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein of the International Peace Institute. United Nations peacekeeping is a success story. There is a clear correlation between the presence or absence of peacekeepers and the level of violence in conflict zones. Peacekeeping is also a cost-effective option, especially when compared to national operations for peacekeeping. Pakistan has a long and close involvement with peacekeeping. We have hosted since 1949 one of the oldest United Nations missions, the United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan, which observes the ceasefire along the line of control in disputed Jammu and Kashmir. Over the years, we have also deployed 230,000 peacekeepers in 46 missions and lost 181 peacekeepers in those operations. As conflicts have become more complex, Pakistan joined and supported the concept of multidimensional peacekeeping during our last term on the Security Council, and United Nations peacekeeping has improved considerably with the implementation of the Action for Peacekeeping and the Action for Peacekeeping Plus plans. But, in recent times, we have encountered challenges. They arise from terrorist groups, organized criminal networks, external interventions, higher host country expectations, resource limitations and the erosion of unified support in the Security Council. Pakistan advocates the following main lines of response to the challenges confronting United Nations peacekeeping. First, the international community, in particular the United Nations and the Security Council, should extend full support to those, like the African Union, who are prepared to take more robust operations where necessary. Pakistan welcomes resolution 2719 (2023) and calls for its effective implementation. Secondly, we need to see how to supplement and strengthen national and regional capacities, especially in Africa but also elsewhere, for pre-emptive conflict prevention, cross-border interdiction, control over the illegal exploitation of natural resources and the promotion of intra- and inter-State cooperation. Thirdly, we should do everything possible to strengthen and further improve the continuing traditional United Nations peacekeeping operations, such as those in Central Africa, the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, South Sudan and perhaps elsewhere. They require realistic mandates, adequate resources and unified support from the Security Council, United Nations troop- and police-contributing countries and the United Nations itself, at headquarters and in the field. The emphasis must be on performance and competence. Fourthly, peacekeeping missions should put greater emphasis on promoting local peace arrangements at the community level, wherever possible, to reduce violence. The successful efforts of the Pakistani peacekeepers in Abyei are a good example. Fifthly, the Council should create dedicated and effective political mechanisms to address the root causes of conflict and disputes. That will require greater cooperation among members of the Security Council, especially the permanent members, notwithstanding their geopolitical rivalries. Sixthly, peacebuilding efforts should be reinforced with the participation of the Peacebuilding Commission, the United Nations development agencies and the Resident Coordinator system, as well as international financial institutions. Finally, we will also need to devise appropriate mechanisms for the seamless implementation of such a comprehensive strategy. That should involve the Security Council, the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations, the Peacebuilding Commission and regional and cross-regional organizations, such as the African Union and perhaps the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. Pakistan looks forward to contributing actively to building those responses to the current challenges at the preparatory ministerial meeting to be held in March 2025 in Islamabad, co-sponsored by the Republic of Korea, and during our forthcoming tenure on the Security Council and in the Peacebuilding Commission.

I now give the floor to the representative of Morocco.

I would like to congratulate Slovenia on its presidency of the Security Council for this month and for organizing today’s open debate on a key issue for the United Nations and its work on peace and security. I would also like to thank the Under-Secretary-General, Jean- Pierre Lacroix, Ms. Comfort Ero and Mr. Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein for their briefings and the enlightening information they shared. We welcome the Council’s ongoing attention to the effectiveness of peacekeeping operations. We also welcome the continued efforts of the Secretary-General, who has made reflecting on the future of peacekeeping a central element of his policy paper on the New Agenda for Peace. However, the efforts made to ensure the effectiveness and adaptability of peacekeeping operations are struggling to keep pace with the changing nature of conflicts and the geopolitical landscape. The crisis of confidence currently facing United Nations peacekeeping is the most tangible expression of that. Responding to the current security challenges, which are as numerous as they are complex, requires new approaches that make it possible to both anticipate and prevent, but also to intervene and ensure that peace is sustained. We reiterate our firm conviction that the establishment of lasting peace requires, as an absolute necessity, investment in the peace-security- development nexus in order to eliminate the root causes of conflicts and strengthen States’ ability to prevent and respond to crisis risks. That is why we are convinced that the future of peacekeeping must be viewed through a broader lens that also includes the various tools at the disposal of the United Nations, such as special political missions and regional presences, so as to ensure complementarity between their actions and that they all receive the necessary political and financial support. We also firmly believe that there is no need for further reform of United Nations peacekeeping operations. What we need are additional efforts for the effective implementation of existing commitments and a resolute determination on the part of all stakeholders to play their full role in ensuring that peacekeeping is effective. Morocco, which has been committed to supporting United Nations peacekeeping efforts for decades, would like to emphasize the following points. First, the Security Council must show a united front to maintain strong political support throughout the life cycle of missions, in particular when the momentum for peace wanes. Secondly, peacekeeping operations must not be forced to take on mandates and tasks that run counter to the principles of peacekeeping, at the risk of being doomed to failure. It is important for the Security Council to focus more on defining strategic objectives and to draft clear, targeted, realistic and achievable mandates, in consultation with host States and troop- and police-contributing countries. Thirdly, it is equally crucial that peacekeeping operations receive all the support and financial, human and logistical resources necessary to enable them to carry out the tasks entrusted to them in the best possible conditions. Fourthly, complementarity and coordination between the Security Council and the Peacebuilding Commission must also be strengthened. The Commission, its country configurations and the Peacebuilding Fund play a central role in strengthening the integration between peacekeeping and peacebuilding, so that it is accompanied by economic recovery and capacity- building efforts, based on national ownership. The Central African Republic configuration, chaired by the Kingdom of Morocco, is continuing its good practice of sharing recommendations with the Security Council, based on the priorities of peacebuilding in the Central African Republic, on the eve of every renewal of the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic mandate. Fifthly and finally, as we witness an increasing regionalization of conflicts, there is an urgent need to establish partnerships for peace and security with the relevant regional and subregional organizations, while recalling that the maintenance of international peace and security is primarily and exclusively the responsibility of the Security Council. I would conclude by noting that we must also act decisively in all aspects of the peace continuum, namely, conflict prevention, peacekeeping and peacebuilding, while remaining united by the ultimate goal of implementing political solutions for lasting peace.

I now give the floor to the representative of Chile.

We thank Slovenia for the opportunity to participate in this open debate, and we wish it a successful presidency of the Security Council this month. We take note of the briefings and statements that we have heard today. This debate allows us to renew our country’s commitment to peace operations in their broadest sense. We recognize that the various operations have proven to be a useful instrument with which to de-escalate conflicts, promote peace and facilitate the development of countries through the joint action of the United Nations and its programmes. However, over the past five years, the size and deployment locations of operations have decreased. Indeed, operations have had to face new challenges, such as pandemics and disinformation, among others. We call for unity in the Security Council regarding the decisions that are to be taken on matters of peace and stability in the States in which peace missions are deployed, given that it is essential for the parties to conflict to see a united and determined body that is capable of responding to changes on the ground and open to dialogue. That can contribute to the legitimacy of and support for those operations. As we have said on many occasions, devising sequenced mandates that are based on evidence from the field is key to strengthening peace operations. That requires the military and political command of missions to interact with various local actors, including civil society in all its diversity, in order to build a sustainable and lasting peace. The Security Council must strengthen its engagement with local actors, civil society organizations, women’s and youth groups, academics, journalists and activists in general, in order to ensure that their perspectives and experiences are taken into account in decision-making processes. In that regard, we emphasize the role of women in peace operations. As various studies and the Secretary- General’s reports have shown, women’s participation in conflict resolution is beneficial because peacekeeping becomes more effective as a result, improving the overall performance of those processes through greater access to communities, contributing to the promotion of human rights and the protection of civilians and encouraging women to participate actively in political and peace processes. All of that leads to the mitigation of conflicts and confrontations. Indeed, women elicit greater trust when providing care to victims of gender- based violence and are able to enhance access to and communication with women and girls. They become a source of inspiration and role models for other women and girls affected by armed conflict. Ensuring the participation of women in processes involving mediation, negotiation and the signing of agreements within the framework of international peacekeeping is one of the main challenges that must be met in order to achieve a more democratic and inclusive policy. It is also one of the basic pillars of resolution 1325 (2000), recognizing the fundamental role of women’s participation in building a lasting peace and the international commitment to gender equality. It is worth recalling that decisions on peace that do not reflect women’s voices, realities and rights are not sustainable. The inclusion of women in those processes sheds light on needs that were not considered in the past. Those gender provisions have incalculable effects on the well-being of the women they affect and on the community as a whole. I conclude by stressing that the future of operations is inextricably linked with an effective, decisive Security Council that is open to dialogue. That dialogue must involve the various actors on the ground and must always take into account the voices of civil society in all its diversity.

I now give the floor to the representative of Indonesia.

I thank Slovenia for convening this meeting and the briefers for their insights. Peacekeeping is the hallmark of the United Nations. When Indonesians talk about the United Nations, the image of the Blue Helmets always comes to mind. Being a major troop-contributing country, there is among Indonesians a sense of pride in the fact that we are contributing to global peace. Indeed, the legacy of United Nations peacekeeping is indisputable. Yet, that legacy is being challenged on all fronts. Amid rising expectations and the expansion of mandates, resources and support are diminishing. Peacekeeping is often subject to geopolitical power plays that take place in this Chamber. Some host countries are losing faith in peacekeeping missions, often creating dangerous vacuums and risking further conflict and relapse. That raises the following questions: what can be done to ensure that United Nations peacekeeping remains effective? How can greater trust in peacekeeping operations be fostered? How do we ensure sufficient resources, and how do we adapt peacekeeping to the evolving global and regional architecture? In that context, allow me to highlight three points. First, it is important to devise realistic and achievable mandates through a tailored approach. Devising realistic mandates hinges on an understanding of the specific needs and challenges; dialogue and collaboration with host authorities are key to enhancing the effectiveness of mandates. Mandates should be forward-looking, incorporating space for a transition strategy to be developed. That will enhance a smooth transition to political solutions, preventing the relapse of conflict. Indonesia effectively promotes community engagement, which we faithfully implement with our deployed peacekeepers. An awareness of the local context will ensure mutual trust between peacekeepers and host communities. Secondly, peacekeeping demands investment in expertise and resources. Investing in training and capacity-building will ensure that peacekeepers are equipped for challenges in complex environments. Peacekeeping technology enhances civilian protection and response to emerging threats by strengthening missions’ strategic communication. Indonesia also calls for predictable and sustainable financing, and we welcome the adoption of resolution 2719 (2023) in support of lasting peace in Africa. Thirdly, advancing the role of women is fundamental. The future of peacekeeping will increasingly depend on women as agents of peace for a resilient and sustainable future. We need to ensure that peacekeeping missions are more conducive to the participation of women peacekeepers by providing support for their safety and well-being. Without a fundamental shift in our approach, lasting peace will remain elusive. Rest assured of Indonesia’s commitment to that end.

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

Two years ago, President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. told the General Assembly that the United Nations must forge ahead with its flagship tradition of global peacekeeping. Indeed, for 76 years now, United Nations peacekeepers have provided security and the political and peacebuilding support to help countries make the difficult early transition from conflict to peace. We recognize the service and sacrifice of the Blue Helmets, past and present, and we pay tribute to the resilience of the communities that they serve despite the many obstacles to peace. It is therefore fitting that all States Members of the United Nations continue to come together in a collective effort to strengthen the effectiveness and resilience of peacekeeping operations and to deliberate on how the Security Council can do better to provide peace operations with unified political support in delivering on their mandates and to ensure that they operate safely. The Council has primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security under the Charter of the United Nations. It determines when and where a United Nations peace operation should be deployed. In the increasingly complex and evolving conflict environments around the world, the work of the Security Council in defining the mandate of peace operations is critical. A clear and streamlined mandate helps to ensure the safety and security of peacekeepers and enables the implementation of measures to improve the preparedness and response of missions. The Council must continue to work with a wide range of stakeholders and partners in the international community, especially Member States and host countries, and with the Secretariat, on the basis of on agreed principles and political commitments, to ensure that peacekeeping operations are fit for the future. Lessons drawn from more than seven decades of United Nations peacekeeping experience must be distilled. We must build on those insights from across a range of experience in transitioning from conflict to peace. Acknowledging the complex security environments in which our peacekeepers operate, let us take our cue from country-led and country-owned solutions, which are vital, as are our multi-partner joint initiatives in security concerns, such as the Joint Appeal for Counter- Terrorism in Africa. There must be streamlined and coordinated support from funding partners and United Nations entities. Today I reiterate the commitment of the Philippines to the cause of United Nations peacekeeping operations around the world and our readiness to increase our engagement in this flagship endeavour of the United Nations. For over six decades now, the Philippines has actively participated in United Nations peacekeeping operations around the world to contribute to collaborative endeavours to help to make peace a reality. Since the Limbas Squadron flew to the Congo in 1963, we have deployed more than 14,000 Filipino peacemakers to 21 United Nations peacekeeping and special political missions in Africa, the Middle East and the Asia-Pacific region. Filipino peacekeepers have played critical roles not just in peacekeeping, but also in rebuilding communities, health care and promoting human rights, especially in regions affected by climate change and complex geopolitical conflicts. We pledge to increase our contribution to United Nations peacekeeping operations around the world and put more Filipino peacekeepers on the ground as our contribution to the maintenance of international peace and security and the rebuilding of communities scarred by conflicts. The Philippines will continue to deploy military and police personnel in any area, regardless of the security threat level. Our personnel will be following very strict standards of conduct and behaviour in the performance of their peacekeeping duties. The Philippines also commits to deploying more female peacekeepers in the future to enhance the holistic approach to peacekeeping operations. A greater number of skilled and trained female peacekeepers are vital to the success of peacekeeping operations. In that regard, we will continue to ensure that our pledges under the Peacekeeping Capability Readiness System are met. Our Government is committed to making available all necessary resources for peacekeeping operations within the agreed response time. As a trusted partner, an innovative pathfinder and a committed peacemaker, the Philippines will support all efforts to revitalize and further strengthen the effectiveness and resilience of United Nations peacekeeping operations for the benefit of present and future generations. With its wealth of experience in peacekeeping and peacebuilding, especially in Mindanao and the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in the southern Philippines, the Philippines stands ready to represent the interests of peace-loving Member States in the Security Council if elected as a non-permanent member for the period from 2027 to 2028. We thank Council members and request their support for our Council candidature in that regard. In the Council, we intend to constructively and concretely contribute in our collective efforts to forge a better future for all, where the rule of law, peace, security, fairness and justice govern our daily lives, and where women and children are also active agents for peace and development. As President Marcos Junior declared, “[n]o nation stands alone. The achievement of our national ambition requires a global environment that creates conditions that allow all nations, including ours, to thrive in peace. We need the United Nations to continue to work and we in the Philippines are determined to be part of that solution.” (A/77/PV.5, p. 4)

I now give the floor to the representative of Romania. Mr. Feruță (Romania). I want to acknowledge the important focus of the Slovenian presidency on reflections for the future of peacekeeping operations. I think that the input of the briefers this morning was very important, and we acknowledge that in view of the discussions ahead. I want to add a few points on behalf of Romania, in addition to the statement delivered by the European Union. First and foremost, I want to pay our deepest respects to the United Nations peacekeeping personnel — the brave women and men who risk their lives for a better, more secure and peaceful international community  — and extend a special tribute to the peacekeepers who have lost their lives or have been injured in the field. Peacekeeping has traditionally made up the very fabric of the work of the United Nations. It is at the core of the peace and security pillar and probably one of the most relevant tasks of the Security Council. However, we have recently noticed a decline in peacekeeping activity through the drawdown and ongoing withdrawal processes of several missions, which is why this debate is particularly important for reflecting on the future of the peacekeeping operations. From our point of view, peacekeeping operations remain vital in a context of growing tensions and an increasing number of armed conflicts across the globe. Romania has been a committed contributor to peacekeeping since 1991. Romanian military and police capabilities have been deployed in some of the most challenging missions and are currently present in 5 of the 11 peacekeeping operations in the United Nations: the United Nations Mission in South Sudan, the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA), the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo and the United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan. Rule of law activities in peacekeeping contribute to restoring and maintaining security, protecting civilians and creating the conditions for sustainable peace. Romania is pleased to contribute government-provided personnel to the corrections component of MINUSCA. In addition to contributing personnel, my Government has also created opportunities for capacity-building and provides trainers and facilitators for training courses organized by the Department of Peace Operations and organizes specific pre-deployment trainings every year. More specifically, as part of our pledge to support capacity-building in peacekeeping, we have trained police officers in 34 countries on four continents. There is no alternative to peacekeeping in conflict situations. However, there is always room for improving the efficiency and effectiveness of that essential activity. We expect to see more in-depth exchanges on the Secretary-General’s New Agenda for Peace next month. In that regard, increased ownership by host nations is critical, and regional support with full respect for international law is welcome. My delegation calls for greater cooperation between United Nations peacekeeping missions and the International Criminal Court in the field, which can lead only to greater accountability for atrocity crimes and justice for victims. Zero tolerance for sexual exploitation, sexual abuse and sexual harassment and an increase women’s participation in those operations in line with the women and peace and security framework need to be factored into the planning and deployment processes. We invite Member States to participate in this year’s high-level side event on women and peace and security organized during the high-level week to be held in a couple of weeks — an event that Romania is co-organizing with South Africa, Switzerland and the United States. We understand that robust peacekeeping activity can be maintained only through adequate and predictable financing, proper military systems and equipment and well-trained personnel. It is our common responsibility, as Member States, to find the appropriate solutions to address this changing environment.

I now give the floor to the representative of Italy.

I thank you, Madam President, for convening today’s open debate. Italy aligns itself with the statement by the observer of the European Union and would like to add the following remarks in its national capacity. One year ago, the New Agenda for Peace sent a clear message on the need to adapt United Nations peacekeeping to the current global security scenario. Success or failure of the strategic challenge of peacekeeping transitions will depend on the strength of our commitment, the effectiveness of our collective effort and cohesion among the main stakeholders. To achieve that goal, we must work on two main levels of trust. The first track concerns the build-up of peacekeeping operations. Regional organizations must be involved in the decision-making process, culminating in the adoption of the resolutions and mandates that they will implement. On that point, Italy acknowledges Africa’s significant and increasing contributions to international peace and security. The continent has demonstrated remarkable courage, leadership and ownership in addressing global challenges. We therefore welcome the landmark resolution 2719 (2023) on African Union-led peace support operations. At the same time, the Peacebuilding Commission should have a central role in forging ties with the local authorities and in building a network of peacebuilders and peacekeepers, with the ultimate goal of providing the Security Council with targeted, effective advice. That will help the Security Council to adopt mandates that can actually be implemented. The second track of trust concerns the implementation phase and the performance of peacekeepers. No matter which organization is called upon to execute a mandate, peacekeepers should receive top-level training before deployment. By stepping up and standardizing the performance of peacekeepers, we will strengthen trust among the Security Council, host countries and all relevant stakeholders. Moreover, and most importantly, peacekeeping operations will be more effective in protecting civilians and shielding the most vulnerable groups from threats. While adaptation is critical, we already have some solid ground and best practices to build on. The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, for example, has built over the years a successful model based on respect for the local culture, impartiality, credibility and closeness to the civilian population, thereby becoming one of the most stable and successful United Nations peacekeeping missions. Italy believes that tailored training was a key determinant of that result and therefore looks forward to sharing and offering such best practices for the sake of effective peacekeeping. Peace processes do not end as soon as the last soldier leaves the ground. It is therefore essential to consider peacebuilding and peacekeeping as complementary. By fostering stability, dialogue and inclusivity, effective peacebuilding can play a critical role in breaking the cycles of underdevelopment, uneven growth, unfair politics and the risk of militarization. However, it is not a silver bullet. To effectively tackle those vicious cycles, peacebuilding must be accompanied by comprehensive policies in economics, governance and security. Together, along with sustainable development, they can bring about sustainable peace. The United Nations system can count on Italy for the future of effective peacekeeping.

I now give the floor to the representative of Guatemala.

We thank the Republic of Slovenia for convening this debate and the briefers for their important contributions and efforts. The Republic of Guatemala attaches vital importance to United Nations peacekeeping operations as important tools in the international peace and security architecture. As a troop- and police-contributing country for more than two decades, my country has witnessed the impact of operations on the ground, especially when their mandates are clear, achievable, specific and in line with the priorities of host States, and when they have sufficient personnel and resources for their development and effective functioning in order to protect civilians and establish an inclusive and lasting peace. We have seen how peacekeeping efforts have advanced. However, we agree with the concept note (see S/2024/638) when it highlights the fact that conflicts have also evolved and become increasingly complex. That increases the risks of human rights violations, which my country condemns in the strongest terms. We therefore believe that the link between the human rights and peacekeeping agendas offers a unique strategy for shifting the paradigm from a culture of crisis mitigation to a culture of prevention, especially in a global context in which human rights tend to be restricted or attacked when security is prioritized. We urge the Council to incorporate the prevention and peacebuilding approach into its mandates for peacekeeping operations. Women have unique perspectives and valuable skills that enrich mission priorities and enhance the ability to address conflict in a holistic manner. Their presence not only promotes equality and inclusion, but also facilitates communication and trust-building with local stakeholders, especially in contexts in which women and children are the primary victims of conflict. Integrating women at all levels of peacekeeping operations is an essential strategy for achieving lasting and sustainable peace. We reaffirm our support for the implementation of a mental health strategy for United Nations uniformed personnel. We hope that the strengthening of peace operations will also be considered within the framework of the New Agenda for Peace and the Summit of the Future. We pay tribute to the peacekeepers who have given their lives, condemn in the strongest terms any acts of violence against United Nations personnel and consider accountability vital. Guatemala has paid the highest price as a troop- contributing country, having lost peacekeepers in combat. We honour their memory by deploying personnel with the highest level of training and commitment, who carry out their mandate without reservations. We hope that the United Nations will soon adopt a zero-reservation policy, so that we can achieve the highest level of performance in peacekeeping operations.

I now give the floor to the representative of Panama.

It is an honour for me to address the Security Council in my first statement to this organ of the United Nations. On behalf of the Government of the Republic of Panama, I acknowledge the presence of the members of the Security Council and congratulate Slovenia on assuming the presidency of the Council and organizing this important open debate, which invites us to reflect on the future of United Nations peacekeeping and the actions needed to strengthen it. I also thank the experts for their briefings. The Security Council plays a crucial role in responding to global threats to international peace and security. Those threats have evolved significantly, encompassing transnational issues such as terrorism, organized crime, trafficking in persons, drugs and arms, and the impact of climate change. The consequences of those threats have a devastating impact on people, forcing them to flee their homes and seek safety elsewhere, destabilizing entire regions and exacerbating humanitarian crises. Panama has directly witnessed that reality, having seen thousands of migrants who were forced to leave their countries owing to internal conflicts, economic hardship and natural disasters transit through our territory without proper authorization. That phenomenon poses enormous challenges for countries of origin, transit and destination, and underscores the urgent need for comprehensive responses from the international community. In that context, United Nations peacekeeping operations have proven to be an essential tool. Peace missions not only work to stabilize countries in conflict but also play a crucial role in establishing conditions conducive to the peaceful settlement of disputes, the reconstruction of societies affected by war and the establishment of a solid foundation for peace. In the face of the challenges and complexities facing peacekeeping operations, Panama considers the following points to be essential. First, mandates must be designed that are specific, achievable and adaptable to the realities on the ground. Secondly, there must be adequate and sustainable funding for peacekeeping operations, from both the United Nations and the African Union, Africa being the region where most peacekeeping operations are. Thirdly, the responsible and ethical use of new technologies must be promoted to improve the monitoring, security and management of peace operations. Fourthly, the full participation of women in all stages of peacekeeping must be ensured. In that regard, the Summit for the Future also provides us with a platform to strengthen our collective commitment to international peace and security in order to improve our responses to emerging threats. Panama recognizes the sacrifice made by United Nations personnel who lost their lives in the line of duty. To honour that sacrifice, Panama is committed to the search for innovative and effective solutions to strengthen United Nations peacekeeping operations.

There are still a number of speakers remaining on my list for this meeting. Given the lateness of the hour, I intend, with the concurrence of the members of the Council, to suspend the meeting until 3 p.m.