S/PV.9884 Security Council

I would like to warmly welcome the Secretary-General, ministers and other high-level representatives present in the Security Council Chamber. Their presence today underscores the importance of the subject matter under discussion. Before each member is a list of speakers who have requested to participate in accordance with rules 37 and 39 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, as well as the previous practice of the Council in this regard. We propose that they be invited to participate in this meeting. There being no objection, it is so decided. The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. I wish to draw the attention of Council members to document S/2025/141, which contains the text of a letter dated 6 March 2025 from the Permanent Representative of Denmark to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General, transmitting a concept paper on the item under consideration. I now give the floor to the Secretary-General, His Excellency Mr. António Guterres.

I thank the Government of Denmark for convening this high-level discussion. United Nations peace operations safeguard people and communities in some of the most desperate places on earth. These operations comprise both peacekeeping operations and special political missions. Their work ranges from early warning to preventive diplomacy, from peacemaking to verifying peace agreements and to protecting civilians, from negotiating ceasefires to helping parties to implement them on the ground, and to electoral support and observer missions. Collectively, these operations represent a critical tool at the Security Council’s disposal to maintain international peace and security in a variety of contexts. Since the first special political mission and peacekeeping operation were deployed in 1948, our peace operations have grown, adapted and evolved. Time and again, they allow us to mount tailored responses that have saved lives, reduced violence, prevented the expansion and spillover of deadly conflicts and stopped atrocities. Peace operations are designed to be not only an effective example of multilateralism in action but a cost-effective one. At their best, they show how, when the United Nations comes together to address challenges, the burden is diminished on individual countries alone. But as we all know, peace operations face serious barriers that demand new approaches. Wars are becoming more complex and more deadly. They last longer and are more enmeshed in global and regional dynamics. Negotiated settlements have been harder to achieve. Meanwhile, our peace operations are confronted with a complex interplay of threats, many of which do not respect national borders. Terror and extremist groups, organized crime, the weaponization of new technologies and That is a grim diagnosis, but we must face facts. The good news is that, through the Pact for the Future (General Assembly resolution 79/1), Member States committed to working to adapt peace operations for the future. This is an important opportunity to gain a shared understanding of what makes peace operations successful, what is hindering their effectiveness and what new models we can use to make them more adaptable, flexible and resilient, while recognizing the limitations in situations in which there is little or no peace to keep. My recent proposals to the Council in the context of Haiti are a good example. We must keep working for a political process — owned and led by the Haitian people — that restores democratic institutions through elections. And the United Nations has a clear role to play in supporting stability and security, while addressing the root causes of the appalling crisis. The United Nations stands ready to assume the responsibility of the logistical and operational expenditures, including transportation, medical capabilities and support for the national police, that can support an international force established by Member States that is able to confront the gangs in Haiti and create conditions for peace. And the salaries of the force are paid through the trust fund that already exists. That is a good example of how we can design a tailored and collective approach to peace operations in an extremely complex and dangerous environment. Other examples of adapting our peace operations include the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, which recently developed an adaptation plan to support the parties in upholding their obligations under resolution 1701 (2006), and our operations in Abyei in the Sudan, where we reconfigured our peace operations into a multinational force. We also increasingly see the enormous benefits of strengthening cooperation with regional and subregional organizations. Resolution 2719 (2023) is an important example. That breakthrough has lifted our partnership with the African Union to a new level as we work to establish peace enforcement missions under the responsibility of the African Union, supported by the United Nations. We are now working actively across our two secretariats to meet the vision of the resolution, and I urge Council members to fully support that work. It is time to build on those examples and continue adapting our peace operations for current and future challenges. Work is now under way to review all forms of peace operations, as requested by Member States in the Pact for the Future. The review will aim to critically examine those tools and propose concrete recommendations to make them fit for today. That will include extensive consultations with Member States and others to inform and inspire recommendations. The review will build on the analysis presented in the New Agenda for Peace. It will be informed by the first comprehensive study of the history of special political missions in the 80 years of the United Nations, which will be released soon. And the review will reflect the Pact’s call to ensure that peace operations engage at the earliest possible stage in planning transitions with host countries, United Nations country teams and local and regional groups. The review also aligns with the Pact’s call on the Council to ensure that (spoke in French) Throughout the review, we will hold extensive consultations to capture as wide a spectrum of views as possible and to benefit from worldwide expertise, ranging from that of Member States, host States, troop- and police-contributing countries and financial contributors to that of regional organizations, civil society and academia, in addition to the expertise of our own senior officials and experts within United Nations peace operations and the Secretariat. And of course, the review will help inform our efforts through our UN80 Initiative, with a view to finding efficiencies and improvements across our work, given the continued funding challenges we face as an organization. Today’s open debate provides a vital opportunity for the Council to share perspectives and ideas to inform the review process. I urge all members to contribute. And I call on the Council to continue working to overcome divisions and disagreements around peace operations and to build the unified and consistent political support that our peace operations — and the women and men who conduct them — are in such great need of.

I thank the Secretary-General for his briefing. I now give the floor to Ms. Russo. Ms. Russo: I thank you, Mr. President, for inviting the International Peace Institute to participate in today’s discussion on advancing adaptability in United Nations peace operations. It is a pleasure to be here and to speak today on a topic that is at the core of the Institute’s work. Nearly 80 years ago, the United Nations was founded first and foremost as an organization for the maintenance of peace. And United Nations peace operations have been a flagship tool to achieve that aim. Over the decades, United Nations missions have succeeded more often than not in multiple regions of the world; those successes include operations in El Salvador, Mozambique, Sierra Leone, Namibia, Colombia, Cambodia, Timor-Leste and elsewhere. And even in cases in which missions have not fully implemented their mandates, so-called failures often have more to do with the severity of the context than with the failure of the tool itself. Yet, as we look at the world today, some may wonder whether the United Nations has lost its way as a peace organization, unable to address some of the world’s largest crises, including in some contexts in which there are missions deployed. The fact that peace operations are effective is one of the most verified findings in international relations literature, which shows that United Nations peace operations can shorten the duration of conflict, strengthen the durability of peace, prevent spillover into neighbouring countries and protect civilians from violence. Yet there is often a dissonance between those findings and the lived experiences of those in conflict settings. Peace operations are not a perfect tool, but they are one of the best collective security measures that we have, and the role of the United Nations in leading and backstopping missions is indispensable. To that end, I would like to briefly touch on four recommendations for the consideration of the Council and the Secretary-General on how the United Nations can advance peace operations that are fit to address current and emerging crises. First, there is a need to return to a stronger planning culture within the Secretariat. That has been recommended in multiple landmark peace operations reviews and was identified in the recent independent study conducted by the Department of To enable the type of innovative and flexible responses that today’s conflicts require, the United Nations needs more than just greater planning capacity; officials should also engage in regular scenario-planning and be encouraged to take risks and put forward new ideas. That requires a cultural shift to ensure that moments of crisis are not responded to with usual ways of thinking and template approaches. That cultural shift will help not only to facilitate more tailored responses when new mission deployments are required but will also help current missions to better adapt throughout their life cycle. Secondly and relatedly, the United Nations must embrace a risk-tolerant culture around peace operations. In my work as a researcher, time and again, I hear from peacekeepers that they are afraid to take risks and make mistakes. Recent crises have only entrenched that mentality, as peacekeepers often feel that the best they can do is to keep their heads down and not make waves. Personnel are structurally disincentivized from trying new things and from reporting what does not work in the field for fear that their budgets and jobs may suffer the consequences. New and innovative ways of working require courage and a culture that creates space for trying, and even failing, with the aim of learning and improving. That culture must come from the top, from within the Secretariat and from Member States. Thirdly, while mission planning and innovation cannot ignore political realities, neither should the Secretariat self-censor when it comes to options that appear politically unfeasible. Twenty-five years ago, the Brahimi report (see S/2000/809) noted that the Secretariat should tell the Council what it needs to hear, not what it wants to hear. However, because political space within the Council has become so constrained, there is a risk of the Secretariat censoring itself and pre-emptively lowering the bar on what is possible. Instead, it should present a wide range of options to the Council and leave it to the Council to adjust the bar if it is unable to overcome its political divisions. Contexts such as those in the Sudan and Haiti require bold ideas, and the people in those countries deserve ambitious action. Fourthly, the Council should consider both the advantages and the risks that come with pursuing a modular approach to peace operations. Under a modular approach, mandated sets of activities, such as electoral support, human rights monitoring and security sector reform, are treated like building blocks that can be scaled up or down over the lifespan of a mission. It also invites the participation of a wider set of actors, with the United Nations country team, for example, leading peacebuilding activities while the mission focuses on a narrower set of peacekeeping tasks. That approach offers advantages by promoting more tailored responses to individual contexts, aligning mandates with the resources available and potentially easing some of the political barriers within the Council and with the host State in order to achieve consent. It could also alleviate the cliff that comes with mission transitions by scaling down some peacekeeping tasks, even as other peacebuilding activities remain ongoing. At the same time, there are risks to consider. While it is true that some tasks within multidimensional mandates may be added at the behest of Council members, they are also included out of recognition that consolidating peace requires more than signing In conclusion, I would like to say a word on the review of the future of all forms of peace operations, as called for in the Pact for the Future (General Assembly resolution 79/1). While the Secretariat will play a key, leading role in carrying out that request from Member States, stakeholders outside of the United Nations also have a crucial role to play. Civil society organizations and those living in current or former peace operations contexts have a unique added value in reflecting on what works and what does not work, and their views should be included as part of a people-centred approach. Furthermore, academics and other experts have built up a substantial body of knowledge on United Nations peace operations, and their perspectives can complement the internal view to provide a broader reflection on the opportunities and challenges facing United Nations-led operations. To that end, the International Peace Institute, along with other civil society organizations, is calling for an inside-outside approach that draws on the substantial expertise of a broad, cross-regional group of academics, civil society organizations and independent experts. The role of the “third United Nations” has always been important in promoting new ideas and in holding the United Nations accountable for its performance, and we view that role as integral to the review of peace operations. We therefore call on the Secretary-General and Member States to recognize that role and facilitate the substantive inclusion of third United Nations actors in the review process, in partnership with the Secretariat. Our world is in need of a strong and inclusive United Nations that is able to act as a global leader in peace. It requires bold leadership, clear vision and ambitious thinking. That is not an easy task. However, the fact that it is difficult is indicative of its importance. I thank you, Mr. President, for allowing me to share my thoughts.

I thank Ms. Russo for her briefing. I shall now make a statement in my capacity as Minister for Foreign Affairs of Denmark. Let me start by thanking Secretary-General Guterres and Ms. Russo, from the International Peace Institute, for their insightful briefings. It is our shared goal to improve United Nations peace operations. To achieve that goal, their commitment and their recommendations are truly important. I also wish to extend my sincere thanks to colleagues and friends who have travelled a long way to join us here today. And last but not least, I wish to thank fellow elected members Pakistan and the Republic of Korea for coming together with Denmark to form a Council trio dedicated to United Nations peace operations. We all share a strong interest in making United Nations peace operations fit- for-purpose in a rapidly changing world. To Denmark, the starting point is clear: despite their shortcomings, United Nations peace operations are indispensable to maintaining international peace and security. For millions, the blue flag and the Blue Helmets are symbols of hope. To the families sheltering in an internally displaced people’s camp in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, they mean protection. To the communities affected by climate change in South Sudan, they mean support. To the women and girls facing erasure and persecution in Afghanistan, the blue flag means inclusion. United Nations peace operations are one example of the promise Our discussion today comes at a pivotal moment. In September, world leaders adopted the Pact for the Future (General Assembly resolution 79/1). They called for a review of the future of all forms of United Nations peace operations. Today our debate offers an opportunity to take stock, realign and recommit and, importantly, to pave the way for fit-for-purpose tools. Allow me to raise three recommendations: one on mandates, one on partnerships and one on women and peace and security. First, the peace operations of the future must move beyond a one-size-fits- all approach. To understand conflict, we must embrace complexity, and we must uphold the primacy of politics. No two countries are the same. No two conflicts are the same. We need to move away from fixed templates and embrace new and more modular approaches. That also means better planning and viable transition plans and exit strategies. To Denmark, it is clear that, in order to do so, mission mandates must be flexible and realistic. They must be based on clear political strategies that enable the missions to carry out their tasks as the conflict changes over time to deliver on the protection of civilians and peacebuilding outcomes, including human rights and the rule of law. The Council has a key role to play. It needs to show political will. It needs to be vigilant and responsive. And it must have the courage to adapt existing mandates in the light of evolving conflict dynamics. Secondly, just as no nation can address conflict alone, peace is a collective effort. Therefore, the United Nations will always operate in an environment alongside other actors. In that regard, we should rethink partnerships. At all levels, local actors are crucial to ownership and sustainable peace. That includes closer collaboration with regional and subregional organizations, especially the African Union (AU). Denmark therefore fully supports resolution 2719 (2023) on African Union-led peace support operations. We strongly encourage its implementation, including joint efforts by the AU and the United Nations. Both have their comparative and complementary advantages. In the same vein, United Nations agencies, funds and programmes have valuable knowledge, expertise and networks. The Peacebuilding Commission offers a unique platform for dialogue. Should we make use of those resources? Of course, we should. This is not about overstepping mandates. It is about using them to their fullest potential, pooling our resources instead of guarding them. Thirdly, the women and peace and security agenda must remain central. We mark the twenty-fifth anniversary of the agenda this year, but there is still a long way to go. We must heed the calls in the New Agenda for Peace and the Pact for the Future (General Assembly resolution 79/1). We must recommit to the equality, protection and participation of women in peace processes. Let me be clear: gender equality cannot wait until peace time. In conflicts across the globe, women are demanding their rightful place at the table. Including women is not just the right thing to do; it is the smart thing to do. Inclusive peace processes lead to more lasting peace. While there is significant room — and need — for change, some fundamentals must remain. International humanitarian law and human rights law is non-negotiable, as is accountability for serious violations of international law, regardless of who commits them. That provides a strong basis for the continued evolution of United Nations peace operations. In conclusion, peace operations are an indispensable tool for peace and stability. That has been the case for more than 75 years. We must do everything in our power I look forward to hearing the statements to be delivered, and I thank Council members once again for joining this debate. I now resume my functions as President of the Council. I call on the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Panama.

We thank the delegation of Denmark for organizing this timely open debate. We also thank the Secretary-General and Ms. Jenna Russo, Director of Research at the International Peace Institute, for their valuable contributions, which reaffirm and demonstrate why peace operations and multilateralism are fundamental pillars for preserving and ensuring international peace and security. Peace operations are evolving, and their mandates must adapt to new realities. We are facing unsustainable socioeconomic inequality, the struggle for natural resources, new technologies and extremism. Each of those challenges is interconnected, and their consequences go beyond established borders. We encourage those present to take into account the components of climate, peace and security in every decision and stage of the peace process. We understand that there is a link between the lack of critical resources such as water, food and fertile soil as causes of conflicts that lead to criminal activities and the recruitment of gangs. Panama believes that issue is closely related to international peace and security. In Latin America and the Caribbean, transnational organized crime, coupled with disinformation campaigns that worsen the already serious crisis of confidence in institutions and the global order, represents a major threat which, if not properly addressed, endangers international peace and security. Their destabilizing influence hinders the social and economic progress of nations and accelerates the weakening of States and their institutions, increasing corruption. It also undermines democracy by promoting violence, forced displacement, internal conflict and irregular migration. By way of example, the case of Haiti is a regrettable illustration of how local and international organized crime can fuel, prolong or exacerbate conflicts by financing and providing illicit resources to criminal groups. Panama, under the leadership of President José Raúl Mulino Quintero, recognizes the efforts of the Multinational Security Support Mission in Haiti. However, we regret that they are insufficient. We therefore call for the creation of the necessary conditions for our actions to have a real impact. In that regard, we express our readiness to support the options presented in the letter of the Secretary-General to strengthen both the United Nations Integrated Office in Haiti and the Multinational Security Support Mission, including the possible establishment of a dedicated support office for the latter (see S/2025/122). Moreover, we underline the importance of having a road map to assess a possible transition to a peacekeeping operation. Panama calls on Member States to continue to support the noble Haitian people, beset by criminal gangs that keep that symbol of freedom and independence in the Americas mired in the greatest drama of mourning and suffering in its history. In order to prevent more tragedies such as that from arising and to mitigate the tragedy in Haiti, Panama is of the view that a permanent preventive and peacebuilding approach should be urgently implemented by the Member States in all aspects of peacekeeping operations and special political missions. Only through ongoing dialogue, genuine political commitment, the defence of multilateralism and the strengthening of democratic institutions will we be able to improve our ability to respond and revitalize peace operations. We must also not forget that it is vital to ensure the physical, mental and emotional security of peacekeepers. The risks they face in the field are increasingly complex and cause post-traumatic effects that affect their performance and can jeopardize the success of operations and the reputation of the United Nations. If we really want to revitalize peace operations, they must be based on grass-roots peacebuilding, as that is the only way to ensure the full development and resilience of the local population to prevent crises. In that sense, the peacebuilding architecture review process and the Peacebuilding Commission play an essential role. The Peacebuilding Commission has proven to be a mechanism that can help countries in transition take ownership of their processes and, at the same time, not lose sight of the involvement of all actors in decision-making. In that context, Panama promotes the participation of women and youth in reconciliation processes. The leadership and perspectives of both are fundamental to achieving lasting peace in transition and conflict zones. There is compelling evidence that peace agreements are more likely to endure when women are protagonists in peacebuilding processes. We support the Secretary-General’s vision to find synergies between the United Nations and regional and local actors. Transitions between phases of a peace mission should therefore be better assessed and applied in a tailored, people-centred approach, taking into account each national reality. We welcome the independent study on the future of peace operations as a road map to strengthen the adaptability of peace operations in view of the Berlin Ministerial Conference in May. We hope that the Conference will strengthen the commitment of States to ensure predictable and sustainable funding for the proper functioning of the proposed new models. Likewise, as mentioned in the study, we urgently call for enhancing the coordination of peace operations with local authorities and regional organizations, such as the African Union, the European Union, the League of Arab States, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, the Organization of American States and the Caribbean Community. Peacekeeping missions must safeguard the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, particularly those of territorial integrity and sovereignty, concepts and truths that Panama firmly and vehemently defends and protects, noting that today is the International Day for the Right to the Truth Concerning Gross Human Rights Violations and for the Dignity of Victims. We reiterate that the Council can count on Panama’s support to continue strengthening multilateralism as a mechanism to face global challenges. We are committed to defending the order that we have built together, which must always serve as our North Star in the pursuit of the common good, with respect and adherence to the principles of international and humanitarian law. Only that focus and openness to innovation will ensure the revitalization of the United Nations and its operations, thereby bolstering the respect that the institution deserves and the legitimacy it has built and demonstrated in its 80 years of existence, and we must champion that legitimacy.

I also thank the Secretary-General and the Director of the International Peace Institute for their insightful briefings. Today’s meeting is particularly timely as it provides an important opportunity to reflect on the future of peacekeeping ahead of the Peacekeeping Ministerial in May. As a long-standing financial and troop-contributing country, the Republic of Korea proposes four key approaches to strengthen United Nations peace operations. First, the Security Council should develop more agile and tailored mandates in order to adapt to changing circumstances and political developments on the ground. That approach requires regular assessment, going beyond routine renewals, to effectively address the multifaceted challenges we face today. Such tailored mandates must be accompanied by clear political strategies, predictable and sustainable funding and cooperation with host Governments and key stakeholders. We also encourage the Security Council Working Group on Peacekeeping Operations to facilitate discussion on how to better adapt mandates to changing realities. We welcome the recent independent study conducted by the Department of Peace Operations and look forward to engaging in further discussions on its valuable recommendations and future strategies. Secondly, comprehensive strategies that cover the entire life cycle of peace operations should be developed based on the tailored mandates, taking into consideration the entire peace continuum  — from prevention and peacekeeping to peacebuilding and long-term development. As clearly emphasized in the recommendations of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), early-stage planning must take into account transition and withdrawal scenarios so as to ensure safe evacuation of peacekeepers and to prevent relapse into conflict. In that regard, the Peacebuilding Commission is well positioned to coordinate efforts across the United Nations system and beyond. The 2025 peacebuilding architecture review also presents a timely opportunity to strengthen the PBC’s role in peace operation transitions, fostering a more comprehensive approach. As the informal coordinator between the Security Council and the PBC, Korea is committed to establishing a collaborative framework between those two entities, ensuring that peace operations are effectively aligned with long-term peacebuilding strategies. Thirdly, strengthening technological capabilities of peace operations is critical for safer and greener operations. While advanced technologies present new challenges — such as weaponized drones and cybersecurity threats, they also offer valuable opportunities to improve operational effectiveness and early-warning systems. Korea is actively engaged in efforts to harness technologies by providing explosive hazard awareness training and improvised explosive device threat mitigation training to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations troop-contributing countries under the Triangular Partnership Programme. Furthermore, we are implementing a Smart Camp project for the Korean Hanbit Unit of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan, focusing on improving base security and environmental sustainability. We look forward to co-hosting the third preparatory meeting of the Peacekeeping Ministerial with Pakistan this April in Fourthly, peace operations must prioritize a people-centred approach, respecting host countries’ priorities and national ownership. That approach views local populations not just as beneficiaries of peacekeeping efforts, but as active participants in the implementation of the peace process. Building trust with host nations and local populations is essential for mission success and for a lasting and positive legacy. Korea, for its part, has been committed to promoting the people-centred approach. Our unit in South Sudan has been actively supporting grass-roots initiatives like rice cultivation and vocational training to improve community resilience and quality of life. Social innovation, alongside technological contributions, plays a key role in nurturing long-term trust and sustaining peace. The Republic of Korea reaffirms its steadfast commitment to actively contributing to advancing reform efforts and shaping the future of United Nations peace operations, in close collaboration with the United Nations and other partners, including the trio initiative with Denmark and Pakistan. As we engage in this year’s critical discussions — encompassing peacekeeping missions, the peacebuilding architecture review and the Secretary-General’s review  — we underscore the importance of ensuring that those processes are well-coordinated and mutually reinforcing.

Pakistan congratulates Denmark on its successful presidency of the Security Council for this month, and we are glad to see you, Mr. President, personally preside over this important and timely debate on peacekeeping. This debate has assumed greater relevance and significance in the context of the Secretary-General’s review of peace operations and the 20-year review of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture. Bearing in mind the importance of United Nations peace operations for maintaining international peace and security, Pakistan joined hands with Denmark and the Republic of Korea, as a trio, to keep the focus of the Council on peace operations during our terms on the Council. We thank the Secretary-General, António Guterres, for highlighting the challenges that United Nations peacekeeping operations face today and for his suggestions on how to make them more adaptable. We also thank Ms. Jenna Russo, Director of Research at the International Peace Institute, for her insightful briefing. United Nations peacekeeping operations are important and cost-effective instruments for maintaining international peace and security. The first two peacekeeping operations  — the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization in the Middle East and the United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan, established in 1948 and 1949, respectively — exemplified the observation and monitoring type of operations for inter-State conflicts. From there, peace operations have evolved significantly over the past 76 years to meet the requirements of changing times and realities. Originally conceived for inter-State conflicts, they have since also been applied in intra-State conflicts and civil wars, undertaking the multidimensional responsibilities of supporting political processes; protecting civilians; assisting in the disarmament, demobilization and reintegration of former combatants; restoring the rule of law; and building institutions, along with other important peacekeeping and peacebuilding mandates. It is noteworthy that, over the past decade, the Security Council has not mandated a new peacekeeping operation, despite the apparent need on a few occasions. While that may hint at the challenges that peace operations face today, in our view, the United Nations must not shy away from utilizing this tool, which has continued to serve it so well. Indeed, we need to continue to adapt peacekeeping to correspond to The new realities and challenges that confront today’s peace operations are increasingly shaped by, first, divergent objectives and priorities resulting from increased geopolitical rivalries; secondly, a lack of political will; thirdly, the insufficient allocation of resources; fourthly, the proliferation of non-State actors; fifthly, the changing nature of conflicts; and sixthly, the weaponization of new technologies and the information space. Pakistan advocates the following main lines of response to the challenges confronting United Nations peace operations. First, the success of peacekeeping depends on a strong political undertaking by the States Members of the United Nations, particularly the members of the Security Council. The Council should provide unified and consistent support to all peace operations to ensure the effective implementation of their mandates. The space left by the United Nations and the Security Council is being filled increasingly by negative actors and soldiers of fortune in many theatres, thereby spreading the threats to international peace and security. That space needs to be reclaimed. Second, the Council should tailor the mandates of missions according to the realities on the ground. Mandates should be clear, focused, realistic and achievable. From ceasefire monitoring to robust peacekeeping and enforcement to multidimensional missions, each situation requires the use of a different customized approach that must serve the purpose. Third, to ensure a path to success, peacekeeping operations should be deployed in support of clearly identified political objectives. The primacy of political solutions for the resolution of conflict should, therefore, continue to guide our work. Fourth, with a budget of $5.59 billion, United Nations peacekeeping worldwide constitutes just 0.3 per cent of global military spending. Numerous studies have shown that United Nations peacekeeping is one of the most cost-effective ways of enhancing global security by addressing armed conflicts and saving lives. The Council must ensure that commensurate resources are placed at the disposal of peacekeepers to perform their mandates. Increasingly, the missions are asked to do more with less. That mismatch in resources, capabilities and mandates must be addressed. Fifth, the weaponization of new technologies has increased the threats to the safety and security of the United Nations peacekeeping. Peacekeepers should receive appropriate training, modern equipment and adequate resources to perform their mandates in a safe and effective manner. Sixth, it is also crucial that United Nations peacekeeping operations leave a positive legacy. For that, transitions and drawdowns should be deliberate, well- thought-out and carefully planned and executed. The possible effects of drawdowns on overall peace and stability on the ground, and important objectives such as the protection of civilians, must remain the primary factor in decision-making so that the gains made on the ground over the years are not reversed. Seventh, peace operations should always be part of a peace continuum approach. That entails more proactive and systematic engagement with the Peacebuilding Commission. Tangible peacebuilding projects should start early in the life of multidimensional peacekeeping operations. That would facilitate sustained, long- term peacebuilding support and funding, while incentivizing cooperative relations with host countries. Pakistan has a long association with United Nations peacekeeping operations. We are a host country, one of the longest-serving and leading troop contributors and a founding member of the Peacebuilding Commission. Over the years, Pakistan has deployed 235,000 peacekeepers in 48 missions across the globe. One hundred and eighty-one Pakistani peacekeepers have paid the ultimate sacrifice in the service of international peace and security, while 3,267 Pakistani men and women are proudly serving as Blue Helmets in seven missions today. Pakistan is host to the United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan, which was established in 1949 to monitor the ceasefire along the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir, a dispute that remains on the agenda of the Security Council and one that awaits a just and final settlement in accordance with the relevant resolutions of the Council that promised to the Kashmiri people the right to self- determination through a United Nations supervised plebiscite. It is the responsibility of the Council to ensure the realization of that right for the Kashmiri people and to promote a just and lasting settlement of the Jammu and Kashmir dispute by taking measures to implement its own resolutions. As others have said and I too echo, it is important to address the real causes of conflict and establish durable peace. In conclusion, let me note that Pakistan also remains closely engaged at the policy and conceptual levels in responding to the evolution of United Nations peacekeeping. In that regard, Pakistan will host the United Nations Peacekeeping Ministerial preparatory meeting in Islamabad next month from 15 April, the outcomes of which will feed into the ongoing deliberations on the future of United Nations peace operations. Peacekeeping will also remain among Pakistan’s top priorities during our present term on the Security Council.

I would like to congratulate Denmark for organizing this very important high-level open debate. I welcome the Secretary-General, and I thank him for his briefing to the Security Council. I also thank Ms. Russo of the International Peace Institute for her presentation. As we prepare to celebrate the eightieth anniversary of the United Nations, we cannot think of a United Nations mechanism that is more effective, universally acceptable and indispensable for the maintenance of international peace and security than United Nations peace operations. From Cyprus to the Middle East and Africa, and from Haiti and Colombia to Afghanistan, United Nations peacekeeping operations and special political missions have contributed to building an environment conducive to political dialogue and the peaceful settlement of disputes. It is indeed effective multilateralism in action, as the Secretary-General eloquently mentioned in his New Agenda for Peace. My country, Greece, expresses its sincere gratitude to the men and women peacekeepers, who are committed to serving under the most challenging circumstances, and honours the memory of all those who have lost their lives in the line of duty. At the same time, we condemn in the strongest possible terms all attacks and hostile acts against peacekeepers, which are directed against the United Nations system itself. As a troop-contributing country and a European Union (EU) member State, Greece strongly supports EU civilian and military missions and operations, which directly implement Security Council mandates, such as the EU military operations in the Mediterranean and in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as those operating in line with Security Council resolutions, such as Operation Aspides in the Red Sea region and Operation ATALANTA in the Horn of Africa. In particular, we note the growing importance of the maritime dimension in United Nations In September 2024, we adopted the Pact for the Future (General Assembly resolution 79/1), with which we committed to adapt peace operations to better respond to existing challenges and new realities. We now look forward to the review, as mandated by the Pact, of the future of all forms of United Nations peace operations, which should focus mainly on the following three priority areas. First, we echo all those asking for increased efficiency of peace operations. The pursuit of efficiency should be multilevel, starting from better coordination among the Secretariat components, between Headquarters and the missions and between the United Nations system and Member States, especially troop- and police-contributing countries. Lessons learned in Mali, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and elsewhere demonstrate the need to take into account the priorities and responsibilities of host countries while planning a peace operation mandate. Secondly, peace operations can succeed only when political solutions are actively pursued and have predictable, adequate and sustained financing. The Council should therefore ensure that the primacy of politics remains a central element of peace operations and should reflect on adaptable and effective mission models while devising transition and exit strategies, where appropriate. In pursuit of that objective, the Council should benefit from the invaluable experience of specialized Secretariat departments, such as the five components of the Office of Rule of Law and Security Institutions. Moreover, Greece looks forward to the results of the ongoing 2025 peacebuilding architecture review, in the hope that it will add value in securing adequate, predictable and sustainable funding. Thirdly, Greece reaffirms the importance of enhanced collaboration between the United Nations and regional and subregional organizations, in particular the African Union, including their peace support operations and peace enforcement authorized by the Security Council to maintain or restore international peace and security. My country also supports the Secretary-General’s call for a new generation of peace enforcement missions and counter-terrorism operations, led by African partners with a Security Council mandate under Chapters VII and VIII of the Charter of the United Nations, with guaranteed funding through assessed contributions. Regarding some cross-cutting issues, I cannot stress enough the need that all peace operations must prioritize the promotion of the women and peace and security agenda, while bearing in mind that armed conflicts disproportionally affect women and girls. Moreover, the Council must ensure that the protection of children be at the core of any mission’s mandate and that the highest standards of child protection and gender capacity and training are integrated into all missions. That brings me to my last point, namely, accountability. We consider accountability for crimes against peacekeepers and of peacekeepers themselves to be an issue of paramount importance. In that vein, my country is ready to engage in discussions for a comprehensive international legal framework that would clarify the circumstances under which Member States can exercise jurisdiction for misconduct and crimes committed by United Nations officials and experts on mission, as well as the categories of individuals and crimes subject to that jurisdiction. In conclusion, Greece is committed to working towards strengthening political unity within the Council on the issue of peacekeeping and expresses its sincere hope that the upcoming United Nations Peacekeeping Ministerial in Berlin will create positive momentum for advancing adaptability in peacekeeping operations. Allow me to begin by emphasizing that meaningful progress in United Nations peacekeeping requires a shared vision and strong political will and support. We welcome the fact that debates on peacekeeping have become regular features in the Security Council. We trust that this conversation will pave the way for meaningful progress in Berlin. Without finding common understanding, it will be challenging to adapt key concepts, provide the necessary capabilities and financial resources and address pressing operational challenges effectively. We must ensure that peacekeeping is adapted to respond effectively both to immediate needs and unforeseen challenges. Peacekeeping must be comfortable with constantly evolving challenges and demands, including through integrating technology-driven solutions that will enable faster decision-making and more effective conflict resolution. Let me therefore highlight key areas that we identify as important in our decisive action. First, we must better integrate peacekeeping and peacebuilding. To achieve long-term stability, it is vital to address the root causes of instability and conflicts. That must be coupled with the strengthening of democratic institutions, the rule of law and good governance, including an effective and accountable security sector. Simultaneously, promoting inclusive socioeconomic development and enhancing societal resilience are key. Those interconnected elements form the foundation for stability, sustainable development and lasting peace. As we discuss the future of United Nations peacekeeping and simultaneously undertake a review of the peacebuilding architecture, we must seize the opportunity to increase synergies among prevention, peacekeeping and peacebuilding. We welcome the Peacebuilding Commission’s written advice to the Council on the topic of today’s discussion and the important role it has played in transition contexts. Secondly, we must strengthen political solutions in peacekeeping. Missions must be proactive, not just reactive. That requires enhancing early-warning and rapid-response capabilities to address conflicts before they escalate. Furthermore, it requires the development of flexible, regionally tailored mechanisms to ensure smooth transitions between diplomatic engagement, peacekeeping, post-conflict stabilization and sustaining peace. Thirdly, we must enhance coordination within and beyond the United Nations. The Security Council must strengthen its collaboration within the United Nations system, particularly by better utilizing the Military Staff Committee. Improved coordination with United Nations development agencies will support smooth transitions from conflict stabilization and post-conflict rehabilitation to long- term resilience-building. In addition, the Security Council should foster greater collaboration with regional and global partners such as, for example, the African Union and the European Union, international financial institutions and civil society. Doing so will ensure a truly comprehensive, global approach. A commitment to protecting civilians  — especially women, children, older persons, persons with disabilities and marginalized communities — by integrating human security perspectives into mission planning is a must. Inclusive societies are resilient societies. We also stress that child protection capacities must be adequately highlighted during United Nations mission transitions, in line with resolution 2764 (2024). The Security Council must elevate inclusive dialogue and mediation as central pillars of peacekeeping. Ensuring the broad-based, meaningful participation of women, youth and local actors is essential, in line with the women and peace and Peacekeeping must adopt a more flexible and adaptable modus operandi. Slovenia believes that the proposed modular approach with scalable models adaptable to changing realities represents the right step forward. However, much more needs to be done. In conclusion, let me stress that the future of United Nations peace operations hinges on our collective ability to adapt, innovate and integrate responses across the entire peace continuum. Advancing adaptability is not only about real-time crisis response; it is also about anticipating future challenges to ensure that United Nations peace efforts remain proactive, inclusive and results-driven. Through those efforts, we can help create a more peaceful, stable and secure world in which peace is not only maintained but truly sustained.

I thank Secretary-General Guterres for his remarks and ongoing efforts to adapt United Nations peacekeeping to evolving challenges in order to ensure that it remains fit for purpose. And I thank Foreign Minister Rasmussen for his leadership in organizing this very timely debate. I also thank Ms. Jenna Russo of the International Peace Institute for her insightful briefing. And I join others who expressed appreciation for those participating in peace operations on the ground, often at great risk to themselves, and to those who have made the ultimate sacrifice. United Nations peacekeeping represents an effective tool to address threats to international peace and security with the political support and financial backing of the international community. In a wide variety of threat environments, United Nations peacekeeping missions have reduced and contained violence, shortened conflicts, fostered economic growth in host countries, strengthened State sovereignty and facilitated political settlements leading to lasting peace. Many people across the globe today are better off because, at a difficult moment in their country’s history, the United Nations deployed peacekeepers. At the same time, we must also recognize that United Nations peacekeeping today faces a variety of challenges. Those include an increasingly multipolar international system leading to a lack of consensus on mission mandates; misaligned expectations among the Security Council, missions and host nations; declining or fractured host State cooperation and consent; interference from neighbouring Member States; and the weaponization of new and emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence and drones or counter-drones. All of those concerns affect the safety and security of peacekeepers, thereby further complicating conflict dynamics. United Nations peacekeeping must overcome those challenges to better meet the global security threats of today and tomorrow. To that end, Mr. President, the United States is focused on three initial aspects of peacekeeping reform. First, we must have accountability for performance. Robust accountability measures for all components of a peacekeeping mission will enhance the effectiveness and efficiencies of United Nations peacekeeping missions. Capacity-building and training of troop- and police-contributing countries must be tied to improving the performance of units on the ground. As the global leader in peacekeeping capacity- building, the United States has adapted its strategies with partners to ensure its programmes have measurable effects on the ground. In addition, accountability for mission performance for both civilian and uniformed personnel should include both incentivizing positive performance and imposing expedient consequences for performance failures, conduct and discipline issues and inaction in the face of imminent threat of physical violence against civilians. For example, systematically Resolution 2436 (2018) called on the United Nations to improve peacekeeping methods to measure performance, but gaps remain. We must use available data and performance results to ensure that all components of a peacekeeping operation are held accountable for performance. While the system and assessment processes are providing readiness data, United Nations decision-making on force generation must be based on the performance record of troop- and police-contributing countries and on a demonstrated commitment to uphold the principles of peacekeeping, not on political sensitivities and considerations. Secondly, we call on the Secretariat and on troop- and police-contributing countries to accelerate and expand efforts to prevent and address sexual exploitation and abuse, including by holding accountable both perpetrators and empowered officials who look the other way. We demand that the Secretariat and all United Nations peacekeeping operations uphold the United Nations zero-tolerance policy by withholding reimbursements to mission personnel and repatriating units and contingents that commit sexual exploitation and abuse. We must all continue to focus on prevention efforts, the repatriation and prosecution of individuals and units who commit sexual exploitation and abuse, and support to victims to demonstrate our genuine commitment to ending the scourge of sexual exploitation and abuse in United Nations peacekeeping. Thirdly, the lack of integrated planning that leads to a clear, strategic end state is a glaring gap. We must therefore improve planning in New York and strengthen planning between the Secretariat and missions to ensure integrated operational planning at the mission level. Missions can effectively prioritize resources only with clear and well-identified benchmarks for mandate implementation and by improving the use of data already collected to make stronger evidence-based decisions. Through those efforts and others, we can collectively work to promote the efficient use of resources while maintaining mission effectiveness. We will push for those needed reforms, all of which align with our priority to return the focus of the United Nations to its original purpose: maintaining international peace and security. As the world’s largest financial contributor to United Nations peacekeeping, the United States will drive innovation, promote the highest standards of performance, demand accountability and seek to ensure a return on our investment in peacekeeping. Since 2016, the United States has contributed more than $15 billion in United Nations peacekeeping assessments. In addition, the United States has invested more than $1.8 billion in peacekeeping capacity-building programmes, with more than 60 per cent of deployed peacekeepers benefiting from our training. As the top funder of United Nations peacekeeping, we expect our common-sense reform priorities to undergird United Nations reform efforts as we continue to evaluate how we can more efficiently support those missions in more effectively and efficiently delivering on their mandates. The international community deserves a United Nations peacekeeping enterprise that is more efficient, accountable and adaptable. Collectively, we must work to strengthen and adapt United Nations peacekeeping now, at the upcoming United Nations Peacekeeping Ministerial in Berlin and into the future.

Guyana thanks Denmark for organizing this meeting. Indeed, it is most relevant, as it comes at a time when United Nations peace operations’ efficacy is being tested in the 11 ongoing missions around the globe. I also thank the Secretary-General and Ms. Jenna Russo for their informative The maintenance of international peace and security remains a core function of the United Nations. Indeed, the raison d’être for the United Nations was to prevent future global conflicts. However, the global landscape has evolved dramatically, with conflicts becoming increasingly complex, protracted and often driven by non-State actors, including transnational criminal networks. Threat multipliers, such as climate change, food insecurity, increased demand for natural resources and the use of technology for misinformation and disinformation, further exacerbate the situation. Recently, we have heard reports of United Nations peace operations being outmanned and outgunned, with the rules of engagement unsuitable for the challenges at hand. At the same time, the United Nations must continue to be the standard bearer of international best practices. We need look no further than the past three months for testimony to that rapid evolution in the global peace and security landscape. Developments include the events in the area of operation of the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which saw incursions into, and the takeover of, major cities in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo and the disarming of United Nations peacekeepers by the Mouvement du 23 Mars; the direct attacks on United Nations peacekeepers, and, alarmingly, the unlawful detention of peacekeepers and civilian contractors of the United Nations Interim Security Force for Abyei by the Rapid Support Forces on 28 February; and the 7 March attack on the helicopter of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) in Nasir, South Sudan, which claimed the lives of, among others, one UNMISS personnel, and injured two others. Those evolving challenges demand a corresponding evolution in United Nations peace operations, so as to ensure their adaptability and effectiveness in fulfilling their mandates. Guyana recognizes the crucial role that United Nations peace operations play in conflict prevention, peacemaking and peacebuilding. We believe that ensuring their adaptability requires a multi-faceted approach and suggest the following five key areas. First, there must be a focus on enhanced partnerships. Effective peace operations necessitate strong partnerships. That includes deeper collaboration with regional organizations, such as the African Union and, in our own region, the Caribbean Community, while leveraging their unique understanding of local contexts. We must also strengthen partnerships with host countries, ensuring their ownership and engagement in the peace process. Furthermore, collaboration with civil society organizations, including women and youth, is vital for inclusive and sustainable peacebuilding. Secondly, there is a need for improved mandates and resource allocation. Mandates must be clear, realistic and adaptable to the specific context. They must be informed by thorough conflict analysis and consider long-term peacebuilding needs. Critically, mandates must be matched with adequate resources — both financial and human. We reiterate the importance of predictable and sustainable funding for peace operations, allowing for long-term planning and effective implementation. Thirdly, peacekeeping capabilities need to be strengthened. Peacekeepers must be adequately trained and equipped to address the complex challenges that they face. That includes specialized training on issues such as the protection of civilians, conflict-related sexual violence and the rule of law. We also emphasize the importance of incorporating new technologies, such as unmanned aerial systems and data analytics, to enhance situational awareness and improve operational effectiveness. Fourthly, prioritizing peacebuilding and sustaining peace are necessary. Peace operations must move beyond simply maintaining a fragile peace and focus on Fifthly and lastly, promoting inclusivity and gender equality is vital. The meaningful participation of women in all aspects of peace operations is essential. We must ensure that women are represented at all levels, from peacekeeping forces to peace negotiations. Furthermore, peace operations must be sensitive to the specific needs of women and girls and be adequately resourced to address issues such as conflict-related sexual violence. In conclusion, Guyana believes that a reformed and adaptable United Nations peace operations architecture is crucial for maintaining international peace and security. We therefore welcome the potential new models of peacekeeping operations, which will be the focus of the upcoming Berlin Peacekeeping Ministerial Meeting. We stand ready to work with all Member States to strengthen United Nations peace operations and ensure their continued relevance in the face of evolving global challenges. We commend the Secretary-General’s efforts in that regard and reiterate our commitment to supporting his vision for a more effective and responsive United Nations. Lastly, we pay tribute to the United Nations peacekeepers who have paid the ultimate price in the maintenance of international peace and security and express our sincerest condolences to their families and the Governments and the people of the countries from which they hail. Dame Barbara Woodward (United Kingdom): I thank you, Mr. President, for convening this meeting. I also thank the Secretary-General and Ms. Russo for their briefings. As we have heard many times this morning, United Nations peace operations make a vital contribution to building and sustaining peace around the world and, in order to remain effective, United Nations peace operations need to become more agile and responsive, while embracing innovation to combat modern security threats. I want to pay tribute to the peacekeepers serving bravely around the world. The Council must support peacekeepers and defend them when they are under attack. The United Kingdom condemns all attacks on United Nations peacekeepers. We express our deep condolences to the families of peacekeepers who have died serving in the field, including in attacks this year on peacekeepers in the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic. I will highlight three areas in which the United Kingdom encourages further steps to strengthen peacekeeping. First, peace operations need to be able to adapt quickly to changing political and security contexts wherever they operate. Missions should have clear objectives that are informed by local realities and regularly reviewed. That requires enhanced strategic planning, greater operational flexibility and a sharper focus on supporting Secondly, peace operations should be equipped to meet modern security challenges. Asymmetric threats, misinformation and new technologies are reshaping global conflicts. The United Nations needs to harness innovation, using data- driven decision-making, intelligence-led approaches and digital tools to enhance the operational effectiveness of peacekeeping missions and protect civilians and peacekeepers. And peacekeepers require specialized capabilities matching the realities they face. Training on emerging threats, including cyberwarfare, disinformation campaigns and climate-related security risks, should become an integral part of peacekeeping preparedness. Thirdly, the success of United Nations peace operations is contingent, as you said, Mr. President, on inclusive partnerships. Greater collaboration at the national, regional and international levels, including with regional organizations and civil society, as well as improved coordination across the United Nations system, will all improve delivery. A complementary, mutually reinforcing approach to peacekeeping and peacebuilding activities is also critical. The United Kingdom remains a steadfast advocate for strengthening women’s participation in peacekeeping, recognizing their essential role in building lasting peace. In conclusion, the United Kingdom reaffirms its commitment to United Nations peace operations. We look forward to discussing how to further support adaptation at the peacekeeping ministerial in May.

I would like to thank the Secretary- General and Ms. Russo for their very enlightening presentations. I would also like to thank Denmark for organizing this open debate on an essential topic during its presidency. We all know that, in these times of polarization, doubt and even questioning of the United Nations, the ability to assume the responsibilities that the Charter of the United Nations assigns to each body in the service of peace is critical. Close cooperation among the Council, the Secretary-General and the Secretariat, and all States involved in peacekeeping is essential. We also all know that peacekeeping is at the heart of the work of the United Nations and of the Security Council in particular. In recent years, the world has been gripped not only by a resurgence of conflict, but even by a temptation to justify the unrestrained use of force to settle disputes. More than ever, this forum must retain its calling to work for peace, to propose political solutions and to negotiate compromises, while remaining in line with the Charter of the United Nations and the basic principles it guarantees. On behalf of France, I would like to emphasize three points. First, there have been many successes since peacekeeping operations came into existence, conflicts have been resolved, or the United Nations presence has succeeded in suspending hostilities. But examples abound of operations that have been faced with insurmountable difficulties, resulting in the lives of the troops involved being put at risk or in counterproductive stalemates. We owe it to the troops involved, whom I applaud, to provide conditions for deployment that limit the risks inherent in their missions. France pays tribute to all those who have been wounded or killed in operations. Their sacrifice compels us to be extremely vigilant in defining their role. We owe it to those who place their trust in the United Nations to be realistic and clear in defining the mandate. It is always the result of a negotiation in which everyone’s interests must be taken into account. But we must beware of ambiguity or poorly formulated solutions. Secondly, whether the Security Council can live up to the responsibility conferred on it by the Charter of the United Nations and overcome its divisions to respond to crises depends on the ability of its members to agree. We did that in unanimously adopting resolution 2773 (2024) at a time when the crisis in the east of the Democratic Republic of the Congo was accelerating dangerously. Experience shows that the Council’s ability to speak with one voice is a significant factor in the success of peace operations. When that consensus exists, the Council can draw on the vast experience that exists within the United Nations system and among the Member States, in particular the troop-contributing countries, to deploy missions that are suited to the objectives it has set for itself. Furthermore, the unity of the Council encourages the parties to the conflict to realize the value of peace negotiations. Division facilitates manipulation; unity encourages compromise. That brings me to the third point that I would like to stress on behalf of France. As I alluded to earlier, peacekeeping is one of the tools of the United Nations within a broader range. Its success depends on the United Nations ability to mobilize other tools in a coherent way. That means, for example, seeking synergies between peacekeeping and peacebuilding, in particular with regard to transitions. It means strengthening partnerships, particularly with regional organizations involved in crisis management. Last December, the Security Council decided to apply resolution 2719 (2023) to the African Union Support and Stabilisation Mission in Somalia (see S/PV.9828). France supported that decision, which is an example of the Council’s ability to define new approaches to strengthen the effectiveness of its action. That also involves linking the purely politico-military dimensions with social dimensions such as taking into account the role of women. That is the essence of the women and peace and security agenda, which we support. The international community expects the Council to play its role as guarantor of peace and security, drawing on the unique capacity of the United Nations to deploy peace operations on its own or in partnership with regional initiatives. France will remain committed to that, in particular during the follow-up conferences in April in Islamabad and then in May in Berlin.

We would like to thank Secretary-General António Guterres and Ms. Jenna Russo for their assessments. We welcome the high-level representatives at our meeting today. Today we are discussing a very voluminous section of the United Nations activities in the maintenance of peace and security — specifically, peace operations. That notion includes peacekeeping operations and special political missions. They are all United Nations instruments whose efforts are centred on politics. However, those two categories of United Nations presence differ significantly in terms of their mandates, their goals and the forces and means they use, as well as in the way they In various United Nations intergovernmental forums, we have repeatedly stated the need for the Security Council to develop clear and realistic mandates for peacekeeping operations and special political missions. It is indeed not easy to achieve consensus in the Council with regard to missions’ mandates. In addition to the obvious objectives, mandates take on the priorities of various participants in the negotiation process, and even the Secretariat itself at times takes an interest in certain elements. As a result, what we have been doing in practice for many years was not to focus the mandates but, on the contrary, to broaden the range of objectives assigned to missions. In addition to their traditional political functions, in some cases special political missions must assist countries in such areas as law enforcement, drafting basic laws and constitutions and holding elections. There have also been attempts to substantiate the idea that special political missions can help protect civilians, which, in our view, is not the case. Peacekeepers, on the contrary, have been assigned secondary tasks related to human rights, gender and climate issues. As a result, we ended up in a situation where missions have been present in countries for decades, incurring billions of dollars of expenses for the international community. And not many of them can boast of success: conflicts are spiralling and people are losing hope for positive change. Moreover, the involvement of international players in domestic political processes may give rise to legitimate concerns among host Governments about the risks of interference in their internal affairs. The flip side of the coin is the fear that those Governments may lose their power as soon as such support missions leave the country. That gap between the actual results and the cost of missions is becoming an increasingly stronger annoyance. All of that confirms that the Organization’s peacekeeping and political activities need to be re-examined, improved and brought back to realistic scenarios. However, what we have primarily observed is attempts at justification — that host countries are misbehaving, that the contingents are not properly trained, that the geopolitical context is hindering efforts or that misinformation is to blame for everything. Moreover, we run the risk that in the near future the situation will be compounded by the United Nations financial crisis. We are convinced that progress is impossible until we conduct an honest analysis of why host States are questioning the need to host missions and opting for other more effective forms of assistance. Only after such an analysis will we be able to find political, rather than technical, solutions to the emerging problems. In that regard, the merely formalistic search for so-called “innovative” solutions and new approaches, which are often artificial innovations, seems ill-advised. For example, we do not support the proposal to develop certain modules that either repeat some components of existing mandates or duplicate the tasks of other United Nations bodies. It makes no sense to theorize about the forms of future conflicts having to do with natural disasters, cybersecurity and maritime security while we are still facing quite traditional inter-State and internal crises today — and tomorrow may well encounter completely unpredictable challenges. Meanwhile, political problems remain unaddressed. We see foreign ideologies being imposed on host countries under the guise of promoting some kind of universal values; and peacekeeping operations cannot improve their intelligence-gathering capabilities because of the lack of confidence that confidentiality will be maintained or that the information will be used impartially, compounded by the fact that information is being collected from unreliable sources. We believe that any discussions on the future of peacekeeping and any initiatives on reforming this institution should be worked out and discussed — not at individual conferences in European countries, but within the Security Council and the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations of the General Assembly, which is a unique platform where all stakeholders are represented, including troop- contributing countries. Given the work being done by the Secretary-General to prepare a review of the future of all United Nations peace operations, we would like to underscore that it is imperative to have thorough consultations with Member States and take their views into account. We also believe that it is necessary to assess which tasks assigned to peacekeeping operations and special political missions really help to achieve sustainable peace and which ones are not meaningful or even delay attaining a fragile balance on the path towards reconciliation. It is important to realistically assess what is truly within the capabilities of peace operations and what is not and, instead, requires the will of the warring parties, bilateral assistance or the involvement of regional organizations, such as the African Union. We are also convinced that whatever changes United Nations peacekeeping operations undergo, they must be based on unconditional respect for the sovereignty of the host States and strict compliance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and the basic principles of peacekeeping — namely, consent of the parties, impartiality and the non-use of force except in self-defence and for the protection of the mandate. In conclusion, I would like to express our support for the United Nations peacekeeping operations and special political missions, whose troops, police and civilian personnel continue discharging their duties to save and alleviate the suffering of people, sometimes paying the highest price. We are convinced that peacekeeping operations and special political missions will continue to be needed in future. And the future itself will tell us which forms will prove to be most viable.

At the outset, I commend the Danish presidency for convening this timely and important high-level open debate on advancing adaptability in United Nations peace operations. I also extend my gratitude to His Excellency Secretary-General Guterres for his insightful remarks and thank Ms. Russo, Director of Research at the International Peace Institute and Head of the Brian Urquhart Center for Peace Operations, for her contribution. As a proud African nation, we speak from a continent that has both hosted and contributed significantly to United Nations peace operations for decades. Africa’s perspective is shaped by direct experience — as a host of peacekeeping missions, as a troop-contributing country and as a region that understands intimately the critical importance of effective peace operations. For over 75 years, United Nations peace The Pact for the Future (General Assembly resolution 79/1), adopted in September 2024, rightfully emphasizes the need for adaptation, and nowhere is that more evident than in Africa, where the complexity of conflicts demands innovative approaches. In that vein, let me address several critical points. First, our African experience in peacekeeping operations has taught us that success depends on two interlinked principles: clear strategic planning and operational adaptability. Each peacekeeping mission should have well-defined objectives and exit strategies from the beginning. Those parameters should be designed to accommodate the dynamic nature of conflict situations. What begins as peacekeeping missions may require a swift transition to peace enforcement or, conversely, a rapid shift towards peacebuilding initiatives. For example, United Nations peacekeeping missions in Mali, the Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo illustrate that crucial intersection between strategic planning and operational flexibility. Secondly, on the development-security nexus, our experience shows that sustainable and lasting peace is impossible to achieve without addressing the underlying development challenges. The Silencing the Guns initiative demonstrates how peace, security and development are inextricably linked on the African context. We strongly advocate for the increased nationalization of United Nations posts and the prioritization of local procurement. That approach not only builds sustainable local capacity but also ensures more cost-effective operations while stimulating local economies. The economic multiplier effect of local procurement cannot be understated in post-conflict recovery. Thirdly, on system-wide cooperation, Africa has pioneered innovative partnerships between the United Nations and regional organizations, particularly through United Nations-African Union (AU) hybrid operations. Building on the historic adoption of resolution 2719 (2023), we must strengthen the partnership between the United Nations and the African Union. That includes predictable and sustainable financing for AU-led peace support operations and enhanced coordination mechanisms. The success of several hybrid operations proves the value of that approach. Last but not least, concerning the primacy of politics, we cannot emphasize enough that sustainable peace requires inclusive political solutions. Peace operations must be better aligned with local political processes and reconciliation efforts. That means ensuring that mandates prioritize support for inclusive dialogue and national ownership of peace processes. Looking ahead to the United Nations Peacekeeping Ministerial in Berlin in May, we must remember that the effectiveness of United Nations peace operations has a direct impact on millions of lives across our continent. The forthcoming review of United Nations peace operations presents an opportunity to reshape missions in line with contemporary challenges. In conclusion, Somalia remains committed to working with the Security Council and all Member States to ensure that United Nations peace operations evolve into more adaptable, effective and responsive instruments for maintaining international peace and security. Mr. Fu Cong (China) (spoke in Chinese) I welcome Foreign Minister Rasmussen as he presides over this meeting today and thank Secretary-General Guterres for his briefing. I also listened attentively to the suggestions proposed by Ms. Russo. I wish to make the following points. First, the three principles of peacekeeping — the consent of the parties, impartiality and the non-use of force except in self-defence and defence of the mandate — must always be upheld as fundamental guidelines. They are based on long-standing United Nations practice and must always serve as guiding principles. Any deviation from those principles may lead to unforeseen and complex consequences that run counter to the purpose of peacekeeping. Secondly, it is essential to maintain stable cooperative relations with host countries. That is a prerequisite for the smooth conduct of peace operations and key to their success. It is also critical to improving adaptability. To that end, missions must maintain constructive communication with host countries and ensure mutual trust and cooperation. Communication with local populations must be strengthened to enhance their understanding of, and support for, a mission’s mandate and the methods used to implement it. Peace operations with relevant mandates should, while respecting a host country’s ownership, help to strengthen its capacity for independent development, improve governance and achieve sustainable development so as to further solidify the bases for peace and enhance the public’s sense of betterment, thereby gaining its support. Thirdly, we must remain focused on core mandates. Peace operations must support clear political processes and not replace them. Peace operations cannot be expected to solve all problems. China welcomes the Secretary-General’s proposal, in his New Agenda for Peace, to establish mandates that are clear, prioritized and achievable and that are in line with evolving situations. It must be emphasized that, regardless of how mandates are adapted, they must remain focused on their core goals. We must put an end to the strange phenomenon according to which every mandate renewal leads to its expansion, and we must prevent the unchecked growth of so-called Christmas-tree mandates. Recently, Member States have engaged in informal discussions on modular mandates. Whether such mandates can bring about meaningful change is, in our view, a matter that requires further study. Fourthly, continued efforts must be made to improve the overall performance of peace operations, which are responsible for the efficient use of resources. Therefore, an operation-wide culture of efficiency must be promoted in order to enhance overall performance. Planning must ensure the scientific and rational deployment of forces, with clear and feasible strategies for mission transition and withdrawal. In terms of logistics, efforts must be made to diversify procurement channels and improve cost effectiveness. On the financial front, strict fiscal discipline must be maintained to prevent waste and ensure transparency and accountability. Furthermore, the empowering role of new technologies must be actively and properly leveraged to enhance the performance of peacekeeping operations. Fifthly, the unique role of regional organizations must be brought into play. The continued development of partnerships between the United Nations and regional organizations is conducive to leveraging regional strengths to address regional issues. China supports the deepening of United Nations-African Union (AU) cooperation and supports the provision of sufficient, predictable and sustainable funding for AU-led peace operations. We look forward to the early and full implementation Achieving world peace is a common aspiration of all nations and the unwavering pursuit of China. As the second-largest financial contributor and a major troop contributor to United Nations peacekeeping operations, China has consistently provided all-round support for United Nations peace efforts through concrete actions, actively meeting its responsibilities to maintain international peace and security. This year marks the thirty-fifth anniversary of China’s participation in United Nations peacekeeping operations. To date, China has taken part in 25 United Nations peacekeeping missions, deploying a total of more than 50,000 peacekeepers. Looking ahead, China will continue to be a supporter of, and a participant in, United Nations peacekeeping operations and will make greater contributions to global peace and development.

I welcome Your Excellency Mr. Lars Løkke Rasmussen, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Denmark, to the Security Council. Sierra Leone commends Denmark’s presidency for convening this important and timely open debate to advance fresh thinking and a forward-looking vision on United Nations peace operations. I thank His Excellency Mr. António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations, for his insightful briefing on strengthening the effectiveness of integrated United Nations peace operations, and I also thank Ms. Jenna Russo for her important contribution. Over the past eight decades, the United Nations has deployed more than 120 peace operations in more than 50 countries, and, to a very large extent, those missions have helped to prevent, manage and resolve conflicts, while protecting civilians in some of the world’s most fragile contexts. Peace operations remain a principal instrument in the United Nations efforts to maintain international peace and security. Sierra Leone speaks from lived experience, both as a former beneficiary of United Nations peacekeeping and a current contributor to peace and security efforts. As we pay tribute to all peacekeepers and peace operation personnel and honour those who have made the ultimate sacrifice, we echo the prevailing view that peace operations have made significant contributions, with notable achievements, even under some of the most difficult conditions. Just over two decades ago, Sierra Leone was in the throes of a brutal civil war. The United Nations Mission in Sierra Leone marked a turning point. With robust support and partnership, the Mission assisted in disarming more than 75,000 ex-combatants, restored State authority and oversaw our first post-conflict democratic elections. What once seemed an intractable conflict became one of the United Nations landmark peacekeeping success stories. The Mission at the time seen as a prototype for the United Nations new emphasis on peacebuilding showed how a well-resourced and adaptable United Nations operation can help a country to rebuild, reconcile and reclaim its future. However, today’s operating environment for peace operations is far more complex and perilous. In many conflict zones, there is tragically no peace to keep. Nearly 98 per cent of United Nations peacekeepers now serve in missions mandated to protect civilians, with most deployed in active conflict settings, often absent a comprehensive political settlement. That reflects how United Nations peace operations are increasingly required to engage in multidimensional responses, addressing not just security, but State-building, stabilization and the root causes of conflict. The Pact for the Future (General Assembly resolution 79/1) acknowledges those challenges and rightly underscores the need to adapt peace operations to better respond to existing challenges and new realities, through stronger links to political solutions and more sustainable financing. Those priorities echo the In the light of those realities, and as said already by some members, the Security Council must ensure that peace operations are equipped with mandates that are clear, realistic, agile and adaptable, informed by the situation on the ground and shaped through inclusive engagement with key stakeholders. Against that backdrop, Sierra Leone wishes to highlight four key points. First, peace operations must be guided by mandates grounded in political objectives and strategies, supported by comprehensive threat assessments. In a polarized global landscape marked by geopolitical tensions, resource competition and shifting alliances, peacekeeping must be deployed as part of broader political efforts aimed at sustainable peace. Mandates should be outcome-oriented and linked to political processes and peacebuilding efforts. They should also leverage the convening role of the Peacebuilding Commission and the capacity of United Nations country teams. A successful peace operation must lead to long-term investment in reconciliation, recovery and development. Regular reviews and adaptive planning, including well-defined exit strategies and transition plans, should be built into mission mandates. That must be done in close consultation with host Governments, field missions and local communities to ensure ownership and mutual accountability, as outlined in resolution 2594 (2021). Secondly, United Nations peace operations should leverage the comparative advantages of regional and subregional organizations. Strategic and operational partnerships, particularly in Africa, have proven essential to tailoring responses to context-specific challenges. That is why the adoption of resolution 2719 (2023) is a landmark feat, as it marks a significant step towards predictable and sustainable financing for African Union-led peace support operations. When regional arrangements are empowered with sufficient resources and legitimacy, they can be more effective in supporting the full peace continuum, from conflict response and stabilization to reconstruction and peacebuilding. Thirdly, predictable and sustainable financing remains the lifeblood of effective peace operations. No amount of mandate innovation or tactical agility can compensate for underfunding. That is especially true for African-led peace support operations, which frequently face funding gaps and excessive reliance on voluntary contributions. The adoption of resolution 2719 (2023) must now be followed by strong and full implementation. Funding arrangements must be shielded from political shifts and driven by the needs of the missions and the civilians they protect. The United Nations and Member States — particularly the members of the Security Council — must stand behind those missions, politically and financially. Fourthly, both the United Nations and troop-contributing countries should invest in enhancing the capabilities and professional competence of peacekeepers to respond to emerging threats. Stand-by forces should be supported through non-discriminatory recruitment, regular training and mission-specific preparations, including on conflict resolution, the protection of civilians, the women and peace and security and youth, peace and security agendas and the climate-security nexus. Technology and innovation must be harnessed to improve situational awareness, communications and early-warning capabilities. Peacekeepers must deploy with the appropriate equipment, tools and skills to respond to modern challenges, including transnational terrorism and violent criminal activities by gangs, where the line between peacekeeping and peace enforcement is increasingly blurred. Moreover, recognizing the disproportionate impact of conflict on women, girls and children, we call for robust protection services to be integrated into all missions. That Addressing the growing mistrust and resistance towards peace operations requires that missions operate transparently and uphold the highest standards of conduct. Accountability must be ensured not only for violations by peacekeepers, but also for crimes committed against them. Strengthening triangular cooperation among the United Nations, troop-contributing countries and host States is key to advancing the implementation of resolution 2589 (2021). In conclusion, Sierra Leone reaffirms its commitment to the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of effective, responsible and transformative peacekeeping. We will continue to contribute to shaping the future of peace operations grounded in solidarity, partnership and people-centred strategies. We look forward to the outcomes of the upcoming Peacekeeping Ministerial in Berlin as an opportunity to deepen collective commitments and chart a bold and unified path forward.

I wish, at the outset, to convey my thanks to the Danish presidency and especially to you, Minister Rasmussen, for scheduling and presiding over this important open debate. We also thank the Secretary-General for his insightful briefing and Ms. Jenna Russo for her presentation. And we also wish to join other members of the Council in paying tribute to all Blue Helmets for the great sacrifice that they make to maintain peace and security all over the world. We consider this ongoing debate on the future of United Nations peace operations and their adaptability to be an important matter for the Council and for the international community, particularly in a context in which United Nations peace operations are facing tremendous challenges. The Pact for the Future (General Assembly resolution 79/1) already set the tone through the request made to the Secretary-General to undertake a review on the future of United Nations peace operations. We therefore look forward to receiving the report on that review. Also, as we prepare for the Berlin Peacekeeping Ministerial next May, we underscore the importance of using all possible opportunities to build a unified vision of what the future of peacekeeping operations will be, particularly in terms of adaptability to a changing world. Notwithstanding its belief that United Nations peace operations remain a relevant tool at our disposal in our collective efforts to maintain international peace and security, Algeria is of the view that those operations are showing their limits and that they require important adjustments in order to respond properly to new challenges. In that regard, I wish to highlight the following three points. First, the mandate conferred to United Nations peace operations must be streamlined and focused on the core issues, without losing sight of the central raison d’être of the missions and defining the end point early on. We are witnessing, in some cases, what can be described as Christmas tree mandates, under which United Nations missions are tasked with an overwhelming number of responsibilities, thereby hindering their ability to undertake focused and targeted engagements. Secondly, adaptability comes through the ability to gather relevant information from the ground. Equipping all United Nations peace operations — without any biased exceptions  — with a strong human rights and protection of civilians component, is a necessity to improve the work of United Nations missions on the ground, by monitoring and reporting violations of human rights. Yet, for a long time, we have been lectured on many occasions by some partners on the strategic importance of human rights monitoring and reporting and on the need to uphold international law, including international humanitarian law. Curiously, however, when it comes to the Thirdly, partnerships are essential to advance the adaptability of United Nations peace operations. We insist on stronger cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations, particularly the African Union (AU), which is a reliable partner in that regard. The general belief in Africa is that the adoption of resolution 2719 (2023) marked an important first step towards full access to United Nations assessed contribution for AU-led peace support operations. However, that step remains insufficient and must be followed by significant efforts to lend concrete expression to, and ensure the concrete implementation of, Chapter VIII of the Charter of the United Nations. The upcoming discussions on the financing of the African Union Support and Stabilization Mission in Somalia should be seized to send the right message, and the implementation of the hybrid model of resolution 2719 (2023) for that first case in Somalia seems to be, for the time being, the only viable solution. Fourthly, adaptability comes through further promoting political solutions and injecting a peacebuilding dimension into the mandate of United Nations peace operations. It is essential that United Nations peace operations uphold the primacy of dialogue, respect for international law and the right of peoples under foreign occupation to self-determination, as part of political efforts on the ground. Also, building national institutions and aligning with national priorities, in close cooperation with the host country, must guide the work of United Nations operations. In conclusion, I wish to reiterate Algeria’s commitment to supporting the work of United Nations peace operations by putting its expertise in the maintenance of international peace and security at the disposal of the United Nations and the international community.

I now give the floor to the Federal Minister for European and International Affairs of Austria.

It is an honour to participate in this really interesting high-level debate and to hear all the contributions. I have the honour of addressing the Council against the backdrop of a changing world — a world in which the fundamental principles of our international order are being increasingly challenged and a world full of uncertainty, growing insecurity and ever-greater humanitarian needs. We have seen as much in Ukraine, with Russia’s waging of an illegal and unprovoked, full-scale war of aggression against its neighbour, violating the Charter of the United Nations and causing years of suffering for the entire population. As I myself witnessed 10 days ago in Kyiv, Ukrainians want and deserve peace, but it must be a comprehensive, just and lasting peace based on the principles of the Charter and international law. It must not be a peace dictated by the aggressor or a third actor. Vienna will always be ready to serve as a hub for dialogue to bring about such a peace. That growing insecurity is not confined to Europe. We see it unfolding across the world, including in the Middle East, where the horrific terrorist attack by Hamas on Israel on 7 October 2023, which I strongly condemn, plunged the entire region further into a devastating conflict. All the innocent victims of that conflict deserve our empathy. Tens of thousands have been killed. Gazans are suffering in a humanitarian situation that can be described only as a catastrophe. And many hostages are still being held illegally in horrendous conditions by Hamas. The Middle East needs a comprehensive, just and lasting peace based on the two-State solution in accordance with the relevant Security Council resolutions, whereby two democratic States, We cannot accept living in a world in which the powerful take what they can and the weak suffer what they must. We must uphold the principles of the rule of law. We must protect the international rules-based system, which was built on the ashes of World War II, after the horrors of the despicable crimes of the Holocaust. In today’s world, we need the United Nations more than ever, and the members of the Council bear a special responsibility in that regard. Allow me to quote Spider-Man in saying that with great power, comes great responsibility. I therefore came here, only three weeks after taking up office as Austria’s Foreign Minister, to reaffirm our support for the United Nations, effective multilateralism and a world in which might does not make right but in which the rule of law prevails — the world’s best hope of safeguarding our common future and the individual freedoms of each and every one of us. No organization is perfect. I therefore support the efforts of Secretary-General Guterres to make the United Nations fit for purpose: yes to its reform, no to its replacement. That is why we must all work hard together to deliver on the promises of the Charter of the United Nations. Peace operations are no exception; they are and will remain a fundamental building block of multilateral crisis management. As a contribution to international peace and security, 100,000 Austrians have served as peacekeepers around the world since 1960, including with the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, in the Western Balkans and in Africa, helping to protect civilians, maintain peace and monitor ceasefires. And we will continue to be a reliable partner in that regard. In order to adapt peace operations to the challenges of our time, about which we have heard much, the United Nations must have a flexible peace operations toolbox. First, we must adopt a holistic approach to peace. Peace is not simply the absence of hostilities but is about building just, inclusive and prosperous societies and sustainable social fabrics. That entails addressing the underlying factors of conflict, such as access to scarce resources, as well as inequality, poverty, climate change and human rights violations. Increasing protectionism will fuel the potential for such conflict. We must also never view peace merely through the eyes of men. Instead, we must fully and meaningfully involve women and girls in all stages of peace processes. Secondly, peace operations can be successful only if there are underlying political solutions. They can keep peace only if there is a peace to keep. Austria has always prioritized dialogue and mediation in its foreign policy. We will continue to offer our good offices. Vienna, as the site of one of the United Nations Headquarters, will remain a place in which to forge peace and foster dialogue, including by facilitating talks behind closed doors. Thirdly, Austria advocates for a new system of networked multilateralism through strengthened partnerships. While maintaining its leadership role, the United Nations must become interlinked and more integrated with regional and subregional organizations, such as the African Union, the European Union, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the League of Arab States, to name but a The question is not whether multilateralism is needed but how we can adapt it to meet the needs of our changing world. We have to deliver. Of that I am sure. I want to emphasize that Austria will remain a champion of multilateralism — a champion of a multilateral system that remains effective, adaptable and inclusive; a champion of genuine dialogue, cooperation and the rebuilding of much-needed trust; and a champion of the rule of law and respect for our common norms worldwide. On the basis of that commitment, Austria would be honoured to serve as an elected member of the Council for the 2027 to 2028 term.

I now give the floor to the representative of Czechia.

Czechia aligns itself with the statement to be delivered on behalf of the European Union and wishes to add the following remarks in its national capacity. I would like to thank Denmark for the opportunity to contribute to ensuring that United Nations peace operations can effectively respond to current challenges. Adapting those operations to new realities is crucial for their success and a long- term contribution to stability and security in crisis areas worldwide. Peacekeeping mandates must be clearly defined, yet flexible enough to respond to shifting security and political situations. Every operation should be part of a broader diplomatic strategy rather than being a stand-alone security measure. We therefore support integrating peacekeeping with diplomatic processes to ensure that military and civilian components contribute to long-term political solutions. Czechia has actively participated in past United Nations missions, including in the deployment of dedicated units. We aim to continue our military and police participation while strengthening our role in strategic planning, mission evaluation and civilian expert support, which are essential for sustaining peace. Czechia emphasizes the following principles. First, there is a need for stronger coordination with regional partners. Coordination with the African Union, the European Union and others must be systematic, practical and based on the sharing of resources, expertise and information. Improved coordination will ensure stronger political and operational support. Secondly, flexible mandates are necessary. Regular assessments and adjustments are essential for peace operations to respond effectively in real time. Static, overly rigid mandates hinder effective peace strategies. Thirdly, there is a need to build local capacities. Stability requires more than security stabilization. Peace operations must support the rule of law, improve governance and promote participation and inclusive administration to sustain peace after international forces withdraw. Fourthly, there is a need to combat harmful information. Distrust in peacekeeping often results from manipulated information. The United Nations should strengthen strategic communication, direct engagement with communities and information campaigns to enhance trust and legitimacy. Fifthly, a strong commitment to the women and peace and security agenda is necessary. In order to achieve lasting peace, it is essential to guarantee the full, equal, meaningful and safe participation of women in peacebuilding and peacekeeping efforts. In addition, Czechia aligns itself with the statement to be delivered on behalf of the Group of Friends on Climate and Security.

I now give the floor to the representative of Kazakhstan.

I thank the Danish presidency for highlighting new approaches to peacemaking and peacebuilding. Kazakhstan is deeply committed to enlarging its contribution to United Nations peacekeeping. In March 2024, Kazakhstan deployed its first national peacekeeping contingent to the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force. Recently, the Parliament of Kazakhstan approved the deployment of 430 military personnel in Lebanon, Cyprus, Western Sahara, the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, South Sudan, Abyei and the Middle East. United Nations peace operations now face heightened risks from asymmetric warfare, urban conflict and terrorist threats, which endanger peacekeepers, civilians and humanitarian workers. A dedicated intelligence unit is essential to enhance situational awareness, risk assessment and proactive decision-making through drones, satellite imagery and artificial intelligence-powered analytics. Equally crucial is the establishment of a United Nations rapid reaction force with pre-identified troops and logistical support that is ready to deploy within 72 hours during crises. Kazakhstan stands ready to contribute, offering specialized unmanned aerial vehicles, medical and engineering units. Peace operations today extend beyond combat and monitoring to the rule of law; human rights; humanitarian aid; disarmament, demobilization and reintegration; electoral security; security sector reform; mine action and crime prevention. Mission mandates must remain clear, flexible and adaptable to evolving situations, ensuring smooth transitions from peacekeeping to peacebuilding. Stronger regional partnerships with organizations such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Collective Security Treaty Organisation, the European Union and the African Union can leverage their expertise, legitimacy and operational presence. Kazakhstan Peace Operations Centre collaborates with the United Nations Regional Centre for Sustainable Development Goals for Central Asia and Afghanistan, in which 18 United Nations agencies help train peacekeepers in political, development and humanitarian dimensions. We prioritize preparing peacekeepers to be politically astute, people-oriented and culturally aware, ensuring meaningful engagement with local communities, leaders and civil society. Training must address both combat threats, such as terrorism, and cybercrime and the broader responsibilities of modern peacekeeping. Kazakhstan is also committed to the women and peace and security agenda, increasing women’s participation in peacekeeping to enhance mission effectiveness. To sustain operations and consolidate gains, we call for predictable, long-term financing. Enhanced oversight, accountability and independent investigations are essential to ensure integrity, enforce discipline and maintain community trust. Kazakhstan remains committed to working with international partners to develop strategic solutions for present and future challenges in an evolving world.

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

We take this opportunity to congratulate Denmark on presiding over the Security Council for this month. We commend the Danish presidency for convening this timely high-level open debate to continue the discussion on advancing adaptability in current and future United Nations peace operations, which we all agree are at an inflection point. South Africa thus aligns itself with United Nations peace operations remain relevant and a key mechanism for the maintenance of international peace and security amid myriad and, at times, multifaceted global security challenges. Those challenges necessitate multilateral responses to improve the performance and effectiveness of peace operations. Our task is to work as a collective to devise new strategies and innovative approaches, as and when necessary, to address transient and perennial challenges that may impact peace operations. For that reason, South Africa wishes to share the following views. The effectiveness and success of peace operations is contingent primarily on the nature of the mandates decided by the Security Council and the political will of the parties to the conflict. It is vital that the mandates of peace operations are not only realistic and achievable but also have clear strategic objectives that take into account the operational environment. Given that the consent of host States is a key tenet in United Nations peace operations, it is essential that the demands of the host States be considered in the decision-making on and implementation of mandates. Deployments by regional and subregional organizations, such as the African Union and the Southern African Development Community, if authorized and supported accordingly by the United Nations, could offset the limitations of United Nations peacekeeping operations and complement the role of the Organization in maintaining peace and security. That has been demonstrated by the African Union Mission in Somalia/the African Union Transition Mission in Somalia/the African Union Support and Stabilization Mission in Somalia, among other operations. In that regard, we look forward to the institutionalization of such partnerships between the United Nations and regional arrangements and the accelerated implementation of resolution 2719 (2023). The Security Council should draw upon its wealth of experiences, lessons learned and best practices from previous and current peace operations when mandating new operations in response to new realities. We believe that past experiences provide a firm foundation for the elaboration of adaptable and nimble peace operations that are fit for purpose. The review of the Secretary-General of all United Nations peace operations requested in the Pact for the Future (General Assembly resolution 79/1) is pivotal in providing additional guidance to Member States and other relevant stakeholders on the future of all United Nations peace operations, both special political missions and peacekeeping operations. The recent drawdown and withdrawal of some peace operations have highlighted the need for early contingency planning and integrated approaches to transitions. There is a strong desire for the mainstreaming of tailored peacebuilding activities throughout the continuum of peace operations. That approach will assist host States in sustaining peace after the withdrawal of peace operations. With the advent of rapid technological developments, it is inevitable that peace operations will need to leverage relevant technologies to enhance their operations. That cutting-edge approach will require not only relevant technologies but also requisite skilled personnel across the geographic spectrum where the United Nations has a peace operations footprint. Fundamentally, adequate and sustainable resources must be availed for peace operations to continually adapt and be effective. The recently launched UN80 In conclusion, we maintain that the prevention of conflict remains the most cost- effective way of maintaining and sustaining global peace and security. Ultimately the adaptability of United Nations peace operations will depend on the unity of the Security Council. For our part, South Africa will continue to actively participate in relevant forums to strengthen United Nations peace operations.

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 Indonesia.

I thank you, Madam President, for convening this important meeting. I also thank the Secretary-General and the briefer for their insights. Peacekeeping operations embody the core spirit of the Charter of the United Nations  — our collective commitment to lasting peace. It bridges the transition from conflict to peace, becoming the beacon of hope for affected communities. Yet peacekeepers are often taken for granted, with increasingly complex mandates and growing expectations often not matched by the resources and support they deserve. As the global security situation evolves, we must all invest in more effective peacekeeping operations to ensure that the United Nations peacekeeping remains credible, effective and responsive in adapting to new realities and complex challenges. That requires United Nations peacekeeping that is better fit for purpose, fit for challenges and fit for success. Allow me to elaborate. First, a better fit-for-purpose United Nations peacekeeping requires clear, realistic and achievable mandates — not ones that overburden missions with auxiliary tasks that are often disconnected with core challenges on the ground. The Security Council must ensure that the mandates are truly guided by the reality on the ground, in close consultation with the host countries, as well as the troop- and police-contributing countries. Through informed decision-making, the Council can avoid narrow political interests that could compromise the credibility of peacekeeping operations. Secondly, we must ensure that United Nations peacekeeping is more fit for challenges. Peacekeeping operations are facing growing threats from terrorism, cyberattacks and misinformation campaign. To remain effective, peacekeeping operations must integrate the use of modern technology in order to improve situational awareness and operational effectiveness. That will also contribute to the safety of the peacekeepers, especially when they operate in high-risk environment. The Council should be able to put into effect the full implementation of digital transformation, upskilling and reskilling of United Nations peacekeeping. Thirdly, we must strive towards United Nations peacekeeping that is fit for success. Support and resources for peacekeeping operations must be sustained. It is also crucial for the Council to strengthen its partnerships with other United Nations bodies and regional organizations and to promote greater collaboration between the United Nations system and international financial institutions. Such collaboration would maximize the use of resources, leveraging knowledge and different skills and ensuring that all tools are utilized to address the challenges on the ground. The future of international peace and security depends on our ability to adapt, innovate and strengthen the United Nations peacekeeping architecture. Indonesia

I now give the floor to the representative of Türkiye.

Let me begin by thanking Denmark for organizing this timely and important debate, under your able leadership, Madam President. I would also like to thank the briefers for their insightful remarks. First and foremost, we would like to pay tribute to the peacekeepers who lost their lives in the pursuit of peace this year. Their sacrifice is a solemn reminder of the dangers faced by those who serve under the United Nations flag. This meeting is quite timely, as it will also prepare the ground for the important discussions that are expected to take place on the future of the United Nations peacekeeping at the Ministerial Meeting, to be held in Berlin in May. For over 75 years, United Nations peacekeeping missions have played a vital role in fostering stability, supporting peace agreements and protecting civilians. And Türkiye has proudly contributed to those efforts. Now it is incumbent upon all of us to ensure that peacekeeping remains relevant and responsive to the evolving challenges to global peace and security. We cannot afford to continue business as usual  — not when the international landscape is undergoing profound transformation and peacekeeping missions are increasingly deployed in multidimensional, high-risk environments. Nor can we demand for more from peacekeeping operations by expanding their mandates without providing the necessary resources. United Nations peacekeeping operations must be backed by genuine political will if they are to realize their mandates. We have seen time and again that United Nations peace operations deliver best when there is strong commitment from all actors involved. That is precisely where the Security Council must play its essential role in fulfilling its primary responsibility. United Nations peacekeeping is not just about military or technical engagements. The Organization’s vast experience in the field shows us clearly that lasting peace is achieved through political solutions. Therefore, the primacy of politics must become a guiding principle of United Nations peacekeeping. In that context, mediation deserves a central role and should be more widely utilized, not only to bring conflicts to peaceful political ends, but also to prevent and address their root causes. Türkiye’s strong commitment to mediation and preventive diplomacy will continue unabated. Our experience confirms that when used meaningfully and at the right time, mediation can prevent escalation and foster durable peace. Peacebuilding must also remain an internal component of peace operations. Once peace takes hold on the ground, we must minimize the risk of relapse and lay solid foundations for sustainable peace. That includes support for inclusive governance, local capacity-building and economic and social recovery. And yet we are witnessing shrinking resources for development and humanitarian assistance. That only increases the importance of maintaining focus on the peacebuilding phase. We cannot risk losing the progress we have achieved. In conclusion, we welcome the opportunity to contribute to the upcoming Ministerial Meeting in Berlin, to the United Nations peacebuilding architecture review and to broader efforts in order to ensure that United Nations peace operations remain fit for purpose in a changing world. We stand ready to continue engaging constructively, to share our experiences and to support initiatives that improve the effectiveness, adaptability and legitimacy of United Nations peacekeeping.

Egypt aligns itself with the statement to be delivered by the representative of Uganda on behalf of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries. I expend my deep appreciation to my dear friend, Ms. Jenna Russo, for her excellent briefing. As one of the top troop- and police-contributing countries, in addition to being one of the co-facilitators for the upcoming peacebuilding architecture review, Egypt reaffirms that peace operations are still effective United Nations tools in the promotion and maintenance of international peace and security. However, we acknowledge the persistent challenges and rising threats in that regard. We therefore believe that there is a need for the upcoming United Nations review for peace operations, mandated by the Pact for the Future (General Assembly resolution 79/1), to focus on a dynamic, resourceful and collaborative approach that will enhance the adaptability of peace operations, especially through the following. First, the Security Council must thrive to draft clear, focused, sequenced, prioritized, realistic and achievable mandates. In addition, the United Nations should ensure increasing investment in adequate capabilities, including human, logistical and financial resources, so that missions can handle complex multifaceted threats. In that context, we look forward to the upcoming Berlin Peacekeeping Ministerial Meeting as an opportunity to discuss the future of peacekeeping and how to make it more adaptable and to address capability gaps. Second, we are concerned with the continued challenges facing the financing of United Nations peace operations and insist that all Member States have the duty to make their financial contributions in full, on time and without conditions in order to ensure the sustainability and success of peacekeeping efforts. Third, there is a need to work on building trust and partnership with host countries and fostering national and local ownership and leadership. Furthermore, expectations with regard to the nature and objectives of mandated peacebuilding activities that United Nations peace operations can undertake throughout the life cycle of a mission must be managed through robust strategic communications strategies to confront the widespread misinformation, disinformation and hate speech targeting peacekeepers globally. Fourth, we recognize the challenges associated with transitions and encourage the Secretariat, United Nations peacekeepers, Resident Coordinators, United Nations country teams and other relevant actors to work closely with host States to ensure that strategic and operational decisions concerning transitions take into account host country priorities and the preparedness of host Governments and other relevant national stakeholders, with a view to safeguarding peace gains and promoting further progress. Fifth, it is important for transition financing plans to be established at an early stage. In that regard we stress the need for sufficient funding to support peacebuilding activities during transitions and throughout the life cycle of peacekeeping operations. We note, therefore, the increasing demands on the Peacebuilding Fund arising from the transition and closure of United Nations peacekeeping missions and encourage the Peacebuilding Fund to intensify its efforts to adequately address and prioritize those demands in a coherent manner. Sixth, we insist that the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) should play a vital role in supporting countries during and after transitions of peace operations, in cooperation with the entire United Nations system and in full conformity with national ownership and needs. Finally, we affirm the importance of close cooperation between the United Nations and regional and subregional organizations in the maintenance of international peace and security, in view of resolution 2719 (2023), while recognizing the importance of strengthening close partnership and coordination with the African Union (AU) in order to ensure coherent political and operational strategies for AU-led peace support operations authorized by the Security Council. We acknowledge, in that regard, the revised AU post-conflict reconstruction and development policy as a framework to support African countries emerging from conflict.

I now give the floor to the representative of Switzerland.

At the outset, I would like to join my colleagues in thanking the Secretary-General and Ms. Russo for their briefings. We welcome this debate on the future of peace operations under the Danish presidency. For the women and men deployed on the ground, this is not an abstract discussion. I would therefore like to start by paying tribute to the Blue Helmets who work day in day out to keep the peace. Our thoughts are especially with those who have lost their lives or been injured in the course of their duties and with their families. As we just heard, peacekeeping is at a crossroads. Let me offer three areas of reflection. First, as others said, peace operations remain an essential tool, but continuous adaptation is necessary. Our recent term as an elected member of the Council has made us more aware of the challenges facing multidimensional operations. In our view, that means refocusing the mandates of such operations on activities in which the United Nations has a comparative advantage. In other cases, partnerships can be established with regional and subregional organizations and entities. By adopting resolution 2719 (2023), the Council demonstrated its capacity for innovation and adaptation. I have warm memories of the informal discussions between the Security Council and the African Union Peace and Security Council during our retreat in October, and I encourage both Councils to continue that dialogue. Maintaining United Nations standards, particularly in terms of human rights, must be ensured, and the protection of civilians must remain at the centre of mandates. Secondly, in order to adapt to the realities on the ground, the Council must have as many options as possible and must make the best possible use of the resources at its disposal. That also applies to the Military Staff Committee, whose expertise currently seems to be underused. The Secretary-General’s forthcoming report mandated by the Pact for the Future (General Assembly resolution 79/1) should include innovative adaptation proposals. It could draw on the independent study carried out by the former Special Representative of the Secretary-General, Mr. El- Ghassim Wane, who proposes a modular approach. The leadership structures at Headquarters and in the missions can be better aligned with the implementation of future mandates. In that regard, we welcome the recent evaluation of the Office of Military Affairs and support its conclusions. Thirdly, missions must be deployed to support political solutions to conflicts, as we heard, and therefore benefit from a clearly formulated mandate to that effect. The unity of the Council is essential for the credibility of peace operations, for their Peace operations are an expression of the important solidarity among nations, and they have proven their worth. With an eye on the Ministerial Meeting in Berlin and the review of peace operations, we have the opportunity to reaffirm our commitment to peace and to make the necessary resources available. Switzerland will continue to support peace operations with personnel, finances, training and expertise.

I now give the floor to the representative of Ecuador.

I welcome the convening of this timely debate, only a few months after the adoption of the Pact for the Future (General Assembly resolution 79/1), which sets out key commitments to adapt peace operations to today’s challenges, and after a session of the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations that failed to reach consensus. Effective coordination among the actors involved in peace operations is indispensable for their success. It is the only way to develop inclusive political strategies that address the root causes of conflict. For Ecuador, the increase in misinformation and disinformation and their negative effects on the performance and safety of personnel deployed in peace operations is particularly alarming. Disinformation is a global danger that undermines trust in societies and, ultimately, peace. The adaptability of peace operations will depend to a large extent on their ability to effectively communicate their mandate, activities, achievements and mistakes to a population increasingly exposed to fake news, rumour, opinions and untruths presented as facts. Strategic communications will remain critical to managing expectations, countering lies and building trust between peace missions and the localities in which they operate. Moreover, it is essential that mandates are clear, prioritized, realistic and achievable, in line with local realities. That case-by-case approach is key to defining strategic objectives and clearly prioritizing mission tasks. Mandates must also be supported by adequate resources and by the operations and initiatives of regional and subregional organizations, especially in Africa, but not only in that continent. Resolution 2719 (2023), to which numerous delegations referred, and which was adopted under the Ecuadorian presidency of the Security Council in December 2023, is a step in that direction. Innovative initiatives such as the Multinational Security Support Mission in Haiti, authorized in 2023 by resolution 2699 (2023), must also have coordination mechanisms with the United Nations, including regarding the provision of resources, and their mandates must focus on the ultimate goal, which is to provide the population with security. Lastly, mandates must also take into account the danger posed to peacekeeping missions by transnational organized crime, which is often the economic basis of conflicts. Criminal networks tend to be closely intertwined with armed groups, but also with Government officials and local actors who are also the partners on which peacekeeping missions depend to fulfil their mandates. I hope that today’s debate will enable progress to be made on building peace operations that are better prepared to face those challenges and contribute effectively to building sustainable peace.

I now give the floor to the representative of Latvia. We welcome the holding of this open debate and thank the briefers for sharing their insights. United Nations peace operations are an essential instrument for the maintenance of international peace and security. For almost eight decades, United Nations peacekeeping operations and special political missions have embodied multilateralism in action. Peacekeepers from all over the world have come together to provide collective responses to international challenges. The mandates and tasks of peace operations have advanced the full application of international law, including the Charter of the United Nations. However, United Nations peace operations cannot succeed without the steadfast support of the Security Council. The role of the Security Council is crucial in pursuing political solutions that operations are designed to support. The ability to adapt is key to successful peace operations. To ensure the continued effectiveness and relevance of these instruments, it is imperative that we bring them in line with current realities and requirements. The review of United Nations peace operations requested in the Pact for the Future (General Assembly resolution 79/1) should address peace operations holistically to ensure that we have a toolbox that responds to different and changing circumstances. Therefore, allow me to outline three priorities in that regard. First, to achieve their goals, United Nations peace operations must be fully integrated into long-term United Nations system-wide efforts aimed at fostering peace and stability. Overcoming the silo approach is of paramount importance. From the outset, when planning or adapting United Nations peace operations, they must be synced with other lines of United Nations action, such as political engagement and mediation, peacebuilding projects and development programmes. To effectively embed United Nations peace operations in broader United Nations efforts, the Council should actively engage with other United Nations institutions, including the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) and the Economic and Social Council. In that regard, the United Nations peacebuilding architecture review should provide options for a stronger cooperation between the PBC and the Council. Secondly, United Nations peace operations should address the needs on the ground, in line with the security aspirations of local populations. The protection of civilians should remain a priority task. As suggested in the recent study on the future and new models of peacekeeping, modular approaches could help to avoid overstretched, costly mission mandates and ensure that peace operations are targeted, agile and well-suited to their unique situation. Combining several models into one tailored package would also foster clarity about an operation’s strategic goals on a day-to-day basis. Such a modular approach would not only be relevant when establishing a peace operation but could also assist in designing different phases across an operation’s life cycle, including downsizing, transition and exit. Furthermore, it is essential to enhance the operational planning, including contingency planning, of United Nations peacekeeping operations. Thirdly, engagement with partners and stakeholders across all levels is of paramount importance to ensure that peace operations can effectively implement their mandates. In addition to a proactive approach to keep buy-in from host nations, the United Nations should also engage more actively with neighbouring States, as well as regional and subregional organizations, which can have a positive impact on regional security dynamics. While recognizing the comparative advantage of the In conclusion, we must use the current momentum to ensure that United Nations peace operations stay ahead of the curve and continue to deliver on their mandates in an increasingly complex international environment. The United Nations Peacekeeping Ministerial in Berlin and the Secretary-General’s review of United Nations peace operations provide us with an outstanding opportunity to deliver on that task. To succeed, those deliberations will need to factor in all relevant developments, including emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence and challenges to information integrity. The results of those efforts will determine not only the future of United Nations peace operations but will shape the future of the United Nations as a whole.

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.