European Peace Institute / News

jQuery(document).ready(function(){jQuery("#isloaderfor-txehka").fadeOut(2000, function () { jQuery(".pagwrap-txehka").fadeIn(1000);});});

“Stabilization denotes a level of robustness that not all member states are comfortable with,” Michael Grant, Deputy Permanent Representative of Canada to the UN, told the audience at a March 23rd IPI book launch. The book, UN Peacekeeping Doctrine in a New Era: Adapting to Stabilisation, Protection and New Threats (edited by Cedric de Coning, Chiyuki Aoi, and John Karlsrud), seeks to address the growing gap between practice and doctrine in peacekeeping.

“Stabilization is not counterterrorism, [but] peacekeepers operate where spoilers are present, and …if we don’t train and equip peacekeepers for stabilization missions, then their lives will be at risk.” said Mr. Grant, summing up a key challenge presented by recent UN missions to the traditional peacekeeping principles of consent, impartiality and minimum use of force.”

The Permanent Mission of Canada co-sponsored the event along with the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI).

Cedric de Coning, co-editor of the book, argued that a gap between practice and doctrine affects the abilities of an operation to achieve its aims, thus imperiling the lives of civilians and peacekeepers. He noted that military contingents deployed under the UN flag are particularly concerned with doctrine, as it determines the circumstances and manner in which they are permitted or expected to use force.

Vigorously calling for clarity around the use of the term stabilization, Dr. de Coning said, “We must better define what we mean by stabilization, so we avoid doing stabilization with a peacekeeping mindset.” He warned that “the larger the potential room for misunderstanding and misperception, the larger the potential for ineffectiveness that these missions have.”

While Aditi Gorur, Director of the Protecting Civilians in Conflict Program at the Stimson Center, made clear her belief that stabilization missions do not pose a threat to the principles of peacekeeping, she argued that the word “stabilization” holds no meaning at the UN. This view was based on her visits to Haiti, Central African Republic (CAR), Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), and Mali, where stabilization missions are currently underway.

Ms. Gorur discussed several different interpretations of stabilization she had heard in the field, and noted that field staff rarely see force as an inherent part of stabilization. Remarking that “60 people in a room means 72 opinions on the definition of stabilization,” Ms. Gorur nonetheless proposed to define stabilization efforts as missions “that try in some way to support the transfer of territorial control from spoilers to legitimate authorities.” With the exception of the Force Intervention Brigade in DRC, she argued that even the use of force towards such a goal was not necessarily incompatible with the traditional principles of peacekeeping.

Dimitry Titov, Assistant Secretary-General for the Rule of Law and Security Institutions at UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations (UNDPKO), chose not to emphasize the definition of stabilization as the key issue, instead taking the stance that “whether we call these activities early peacebuilding, stabilization, peace consolidation, the most crucial thing is delivery.” Mr. Titov agreed that “debating the issue was right,” but that “delivery is key… and if we don’t deliver on whatever concept we have, then we have failed very badly.” Mr. Titov also emphasized that stabilization is a complex endeavor, in which military or kinetic operations can play only a limited role.

David Gressly, Deputy Special Representative of the Secretary General for the UN Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO), argued that there was a need for stabilization to “go back to basics.” Addressing the aims of the UN Security Council, which authorizes peace operations to address threats to international peace and security, Mr. Gressly said, “I think we’re looking for a degree of stability so that there’s a reasonable expectation the country will not return to a significant level of threat.” He extolled the importance of working with the host government, saying, “We need to establish what our exit conditions look like and get that agreement with a government early on.”

Mr. Gressly, who was heavily involved in stabilization missions in both Mali and DRC, summed up the importance of clarity around the term “stabilization” by saying, “We’re not looking for perfection, just a degree of stability. If we can define that better then we’ll be in a better position to achieve it.”

Arthur Boutellis, Director of IPI’s Brian Urquhart Center for Peace Operations, moderated the discussion.

jQuery(document).ready(function(){jQuery("#isloaderfor-phlwev").fadeOut(2000, function () { jQuery(".pagwrap-phlwev").fadeIn(1000);});}); Did you attend? Find yourself in our photo gallery of the event on Facebook >>

Amina Mohammed, the Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations, told a thronged reception at IPI that the gender parity policy that she and Secretary-General António Guterres have championed at the UN must run through the entire organization.

“We want to see gender parity not just at the level of USG and ASG in positions of decision-making—that is incredibly important—but for sustainability, we realize that we don’t have many young women coming in at the bottom,” she said.

“Gender parity is not just about the top,” she told the overflow 777 Club gathering on March 16, 2017. “It’s about the bottom up and our institutions at the country level generating discussion that when you go to help countries, more than half the number of people around the table creating solutions are women, and that will engender the possibilities, the integrity, the expertise that women have to look at different dimensions and bring the solutions.”

She acknowledged the challenge of breaking out of the UN bubble and said that the best way of doing that might be deepening the engagement with the young.

“I don’t think there is a better way of breaking that than using young people who today don’t see borders. They don’t see what the old people see, many like us, but they will if the intergenerational handover that we do doesn’t involve them.”

She said she had taken heart during the current Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) meetings at the enthusiasm she had encountered. “That’s even more special that we’re here in CSW week and we’re speaking together,” she said. “I enjoy not just the joy and energy around the UN, but when we walk into those rooms that are usually full of men, there are a lot of women.”

She reminded people that it had been two decades since the phrase “women’s rights are human rights” arose but warned that here was a need to keep pressing the point and at undiminished volume. “In some places we’re losing a lot of those gains that we had and we ought to ask, ‘What’s gone wrong 20 years later?” she said. “I’m sure at the time we said that, we’d never have thought that 20 years on we’d still be saying it, sometimes screaming at the top of our voices.”

She spoke fondly of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). “I’m often asked which of the SDGs are my favorite, and I will continue to say, ‘You know, they’re like my kids. Every single one of them is special, but together they’re amazing.’

“And that’s how everyone ought to take them,” she asserted. “Because if you know the work that went into creating every single one of them, you’ll remember they’ve got many parents.”

She noted the Secretary-General’s emphasis on prevention, the 2030 Agenda, and “sustaining peace,” and said they represented the best way to bring people together around global goals.

“Leave people behind anywhere in the world, and you’ll get unexpected results,” she said, mentioning terrorism and migration as two of them. “We’re challenged by that across the world—it’s not just about the developing world, but it’s about a world that has lost its moral compass, and we have to try to bring that back again.”

She praised IPI for being a “huge supporter of the integration of gender into its events” and said she drew inspiration for the future from the dedication represented by the people in the room. “The people in this room give me a lot of hope,” she said.

“There’s many of you here who do this as your day job, and night job. That commitment and passion—we want to open up the door to make sure that we ‘do’ rather than just talk about it. We’ve talked and we’ve negotiated, we’ve written, and now we have these tools, and we have to take them out there.”

As member states continue to discuss what sustaining peace means in practice, it is important to examine how peace operations can be designed and implemented to help build self-sustaining peace rather than just prevent relapse into conflict. In particular, considering most current peace operations are deployed in countries with weak state institutions, we should consider how they can support the return and extension of state authority.

This issue brief focuses on what activities peace operations can undertake that would contribute toward sustaining peace under a mandate to restore and extend state authority. It suggests that the primacy of politics, people-centered approaches, context-sensitive analysis, performance legitimacy, and rule of law, rather than simply stabilization, must drive this process.

This issue brief is part of the International Peace Institute’s (IPI) attempt to reframe prevention for the purpose of sustaining peace through a series of conversations from October 2016 to May 2017.

Download

On Tuesday, March 14th, IPI together with the Permanent Mission of the Kingdom of Thailand to the United Nations are cohosting a policy forum on women’s economic empowerment in fragile communities. Speakers at the event will share their insights on how closing the gender gap can build more resilient peace and sustainable development.

Remarks will begin at 1:15pm EST.

Even in the world’s most stable countries, women continue to face workplace inequality, the gender wage gap, and exploitation in informal employment. In societies affected by conflict, women face further obstacles to full participation in the economy, including fragile public safety and uncertain access to justice. Yet their exclusion comes at a high cost, limiting both peace and development. The gender gap costs the sub-Saharan African economy up to 105 billion dollars per year, while GDP could increase globally by at least 12 trillion dollars if women participated equally to men.

Where communities are affected by fragility, gender equality is critical to violence prevention. An often-overlooked effect of women’s economic empowerment is their ability to participate in political life and influence peace and transition processes. Indeed, work often brings women the resources, status, and networks needed for civic engagement or political campaigns. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Sustaining Peace framework, and many National Action Plans on Women, Peace, and Security recognize this link between inclusion, peace, and equitable growth.

At this policy forum, speakers will discuss how these frameworks coalesce to amplify the benefits of women’s economic empowerment. Drawing on examples from sub-Saharan Africa, Tunisia, and Thailand, the discussion will consider country-level efforts and the current data on the impact of closing the gender gap in fragile communities.

Opening Remarks:
H.E. Police General Adul Sangsingkeo, Minister of Social Development and Human Security, Thailand

Speakers:
Dr. Ayodele Odusola, Chief Economist for Africa, United Nations Development Program
Ms. Andrea Ó Súilleabháin, Senior Policy Analyst, IPI
Dr. Saisuree Chutikul, Senior Adviser, National Committee to Draft and Review Thailand’s National Action Plan on Women, Peace, and Security
Dr. Sita Sumrit, Chief of Women and Children Empowerment Program, Thailand Institute of Justice

Moderator:
Mr. Youssef Mahmoud, Senior Adviser, IPI

On Tuesday, March 14th, IPI together with the Government of Estonia are cohosting a policy forum on men’s roles in preventing violence against women and promoting gender equality. Ministers from Estonia, Finland, and Namibia will share examples of national initiatives that engage men and boys to stand against violence.

Remarks will begin at 4:15pm EST.

In many societies, men are in a position to bring change on gender equality, as they continue to hold the majority of policymaking and public positions worldwide. Yet their participation in preventing and eliminating violence against women has often been overlooked. Today, more men and boys are taking a stand through efforts like the White Ribbon Campaign, which unites men from different countries and different backgrounds in declaring that they will never commit, excuse, or remain silent about violence against women. Globally, UN Women’s HeForShe movement reaches out to men and boys as agents of change for gender equality.

Despite these campaigns and commitments, violence against women remains one of the most prevalent human rights violations in the world, regardless of country or continent. To address deeply ingrained violence and inequalities, traditional gender roles and social norms must continue to change. At this policy forum, speakers will address how men can play a stronger role, including as role models for positive masculinities. Drawing on examples from Estonia, Finland, and Namibia, they will discuss national initiatives that transform commitments on violence against women into tangible actions. Reflecting on UN action and recent research, the panel will also discuss how men and men’s organizations can more actively contribute to gender equality.

Speakers:
Mr. Rait Kuuse, Deputy Minister of Social Affairs, Estonia
Ms. Pirkko Mattila, Minister of Social Affairs and Health, Finland
Hon. Doreen Sioka, Minister of Gender Equality and Child Welfare, Namibia
Mr. Yannick Glemarec, Assistant Secretary-General and Deputy Executive Director, UN Women
Mr. Christian Veske, Stakeholder Relations Officer, European Institute for Gender Equality

Moderator:
Mr. Warren Hoge, Senior Adviser, International Peace Institute

On November 24, 2016, the government of Colombia and the biggest guerrilla group in the country, the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia–Ejército del Pueblo (FARC-EP), signed a final peace agreement. This accord put an end to the longest armed conflict in the Western Hemisphere and to long and convoluted peace talks.

Timeline of the peace process in Colombia (Click to view full graphic)

What elements of the process contributed to its success? While it may be too early to properly speak of “lessons learned,” IPI’s latest paper highlights the key elements that seemed to have worked and those that made progress difficult. Over the course of the process, several factors emerged as central, both to its successful resolution and to the problems likely to arise during implementation:

• A limited agenda: Previous talks with the FARC-EP had been burdened by an extremely long agenda that included many issues the public believed should not be settled in a negotiation with an insurgent group. Reflecting this experience, the agreed final agenda addressed just six issues.
• A peace process removed from Colombia: Cuba’s hosting of the negotiations buffered the talks from the daily occurrences of war and politics in Colombia and provided a controlled environment. While this proved to be essential for the parties to come to an agreement, it left many Colombians feeling removed from the process and limited their sense of ownership.
• A strategic use of the international community: The dialogue was guided by a central premise: this would be a process “for Colombians, by Colombians.” This meant that the government tightly controlled the process and excluded the possibility of an external mediator. Nonetheless, the Colombian government reached out to and mobilized the international community. Although the involvement of these actors was essential to the successful outcome of the talks, it did not translate into wider legitimacy inside Colombia.

This report will be available in Spanish shortly.

Download

jQuery(document).ready(function(){jQuery("#isloaderfor-tcaelk").fadeOut(2000, function () { jQuery(".pagwrap-tcaelk").fadeIn(1000);});});

The ability of the United Nations to successfully reform itself and deliver on promises to sustain peace will ultimately depend not only on the primacy of politics but also on effective management of and support to a full spectrum of peace operations in the field. This was the view shared by experts and practitioners at a recent IPI Seminar on UN Field Support for Peace Operations, opened by Olivier Landour, from the Directorate general for International Relations and Strategy (DGRIS) of the French Ministry of Defense, and Atul Khare, Under-Secretary-General for Field Support at the United Nations.

There is broad consensus that the UN currently has a unique window of opportunity to undertake reforms, and that the new Secretary-General is committed to moving towards greater decentralization, simplification, flexibility, transparency, and accountability. Participants from across the Secretariat, UN member-states’ missions, and academia convened for a closed-door discussion (under the Chatham House rule of non-attribution) on the nature of the challenges faced and the objectives reforms should aim at, and to suggest what steps could be taken to ensure UN field support becomes better “fit for purpose.”

In introducing the seminar, Arthur Boutellis, Director of IPI’s Center for Peace Operations, noted that the 2015 High Level Independent Panel on Peace Operations (HIPPO) had stressed the need for more agile field support. “The HIPPO Report pointed to the fact that mission requirements are still treated as exceptions to headquarters-focused policies, even though field missions account for over 80 % of UN Secretariat spending, 55 % of its staff, and 90 % of its procurement,” he said. He also quoted Secretary-General António Guterres saying that “the United Nations needs to be nimble, efficient and effective. It must focus more on delivery and less on process; more on people and less on bureaucracy.”

The four sessions of this day-long seminar delved further into specific aspects of field support, starting with a session framing the “broader picture” by asking the question, “What does UN field support fit for purposes look like?” This was followed by sessions on human resources and staffing, UN field support to African Union and other non-UN operations, and the role of key enablers such as medical, engineering, and aviation capabilities.

The ambassadors from Canada, the United States, Norway, Ethiopia, the Republic of Korea, and France guided the conversations throughout the day. Fabrizio Hochschild, Assistant Secretary-General for Strategic Coordination in the Executive Office of the Secretary-General (EOSG) delivered a lunchtime keynote speech highlighting how effective leadership and field support are two of the most needed resources in field missions.

A consistent theme to emerge from these discussions was the need to learn from past attempts to reform the UN system, many of which were undertaken in response to concerns regarding issues such as recruitment, terms of service, and collaborative delivery. In particular, more than one speaker emphasized that the UN is ultimately a political body comprised of member-states, whose cooperation is as essential to the adoption and implementation of reform as that of Secretariat and field staff. Accordingly, the Secretary-General and senior UN staff can play a key role in generating and presenting options for reform that can align the interests of states, UN staff, and the individuals and communities that field missions are intended to serve.

Participants endorsed the idea that field support needs to be accountable for outcomes, rather than exclusively for compliance with rules, many of which were set up when the UN was primarily a conference-servicing organization with negligible field presence. In sequencing reforms to bring about such changes, key speakers emphasized the idea that “form should follow function.” Bureaucracies tend to address problems by expanding and undertaking structural reorganizations; instead, the UN today will be best served by a focus on people and delivery.

The seminar was organized with support from the French Ministry of Defense’s Department for International Relations and Strategy (DGRIS), as part of a three-year “New Issues Observatory” project. Ongoing research undertaken as part of this project was presented on a number of panels, and discussions will inform policy reports which will be published in coming months on different field support themes. Previously, as part of the New Issues Observatory project, IPI hosted various seminars including “UN Peace Operations in Violent and Asymmetric Threat Environments,” and “UN Peace Operations Reform.”

On Tuesday, February 28th, IPI together with the Permanent Mission of Germany to the United Nations, are cohosting the launch of IPI’s forthcoming report, “Made in Havana: How Colombia and the FARC Agreed to End the War” by Renata Segura and Delphine Mechoulan.

Remarks will begin at 1:15pm EST.

The signature of a peace agreement between the government of Colombia and the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia- Ejército del Pueblo (FARC-EP) brought an end to the longest-running conflict in the Western hemisphere. The case study evaluates the peace process in Colombia after decades of failed attempts, examines the mechanics of the peace process, and looks in detail at the role of the international community in Havana. It is the result of research carried out in the context of IPI’s Lessons from Mediation project, including dozens of interviews in New York and Colombia.

Opening Remarks:
H.E. Ms. María Emma Mejía Vélez, Permanent Representative of Colombia to the United Nations

Speakers:
Ms. Teresa Whitfield, Officer-in-Charge, Policy and Mediation Division, United Nations Department of Political Affairs
Dr. Renata Segura, Associate Director, Social Science Research Council
Ms. Delphine Mechoulan, Policy Analyst, International Peace Institute
Mr. Daniel García Peña, Professor of Political Science at the National University of Bogota

Moderator:
Mr. Arthur Boutellis, Director of IPI’s Brian Urquhart Center for Peace Operations

On Wednesday, March 1st, IPI together with Humanitarian Outcomes cohosted a policy forum event on strengthening humanitarian response in insecure contexts.

Secure Access in Volatile Environments (SAVE)—a three-year research program carried out by Humanitarian Outcomes and the Global Public Policy Institute—explored how to deliver an effective humanitarian response amid high levels of insecurity. Based on fieldwork in four of the most insecure aid settings—Afghanistan, south-central Somalia, South Sudan, and Syria—the project identified good practices and recommendations on how organizations can improve their operations. The SAVE study and its findings are particularly relevant in light of ongoing debates at the UN regarding the safety of aid workers and related issues of access and quality of humanitarian operations in conflict settings.

This event builds on the findings of SAVE’s research on Presence and Coverage and those of other recent studies on the impact of insecurity on humanitarian operations, such as the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs’ To Stay and Deliver study, Médecins Sans Frontières’ Emergency Gap: Insecurity study, and the Independent Commission on Multilateralism’s Policy Paper on “Humanitarian Engagements.” Based on this research, the event seeks to identify lessons learned, best practices, and operational and policy recommendations on how to improve humanitarian access and coverage of needs in insecure settings.

Speakers:
Dr. Abby Stoddard, lead researcher, Secure Access in Volatile Environments (SAVE), Presence and Coverage; Partner, Humanitarian Outcomes
H.E. Ms. Joanne Adamson, Deputy Head of the Delegation of the European Union to the United Nations
Mr. Pete Buth, lead author, Emergency Gap: Insecurity; former Deputy Director of Operations, Médecins Sans Frontières Holland
Mr. Simon Butt, Senior Security Advisor, United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs

Moderator:
Dr. Els Debuf, Head of Humanitarian Affairs, International Peace Institute

The United Nations’ peace and security pillar has prevented the recurrence of conflict and protected civilians in many countries around the world. However, the peace and security architecture now faces deep challenges, with three reviews in 2015 pointing to the need for organizational reform. In one of his first decisions, the new Secretary-General António Gutteres tasked an Internal Review Team (IRT) to make recommendations on organizational change, following the recommendations of the high-level independent panel on peace operations, the advisory group of experts on peacebuilding and the 1325 review. As an interim measure, he gave initial instructions on the co-location of regional groupings of Department of Political Affairs (DPA) and Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) and the creation of an Executive Committee (EC) in his office.

Against this background, the Center on International Cooperation (CIC) has produced a report entitled “Restructuring the UN Secretariat to Strengthen Preventative Diplomacy and Peace Operations” that analyzes managerial and structural challenges at UN headquarters that reduce performance on the ground, and assesses options for organizational change. On February 21st, the findings of this report were presented by Sarah Cliffe and Alexandra Novosseloff at a recent IPI closed-door roundtable event on “Restructuring the Peace and Security Pillar of the UN Secretariat” held under Chatham house rule.

The report identified that there are many operational challenges of large missions overwhelming a broader “culture of prevention”; the fragmentation of the system and of UN actors into silos, which undermines coherent action; the absence of clear political strategies to guide peace operations and enable sustainable solutions to crises; the lack of authority and resources for peacebuilding; competition between the departments of political affairs and peacekeeping operations; the multiplicity of UN actors and fragmented initiatives for political, security and justice institutional support; and the disconnect between operations and field support.

The paper presents four clusters of options for restructuring: (1) dedicated management options (e.g. second Deputy Secretary-General); (2) fusion models (e.g. merging DPKO/DPA and/or DPKO/DFS); (3) form-follows-function models (e.g. clearly delineating political, operational and “institution building” functions); and (4) peacebuilding options (e.g. integrating peacebuilding more closely with other EOSG cross pillar functions). The authors underlined that no one model is perfect, with competing pros/cons and various levels of political feasibility associated to each. The authors also described the paper’s analysis of budget issues and of practical policy considerations in selecting the most appropriate option.

Participants agreed with the paper’s conclusions that strong leadership and management are key factors to implement reform of the peace and security pillar. The authors noted that, in consultations on the paper, there had been general agreement on this, but that on the other hand when asked whether stronger leadership and management was enough to resolve the problems without organizational change, the clear conclusion was “No. The structures also need to be improved to deliver the functions needed.” Participants further stressed the need to overcome silos and to ensure coherence among departments to bring an end to the competition between the departments of peacekeeping operations, political affairs and field support, in particular; as well as to better link the capacities of agency, funds and programmes with those of the peace and security pillar, as has been done in the global focal point for police, justice and corrections.. The “static” UN work culture and its rigid rules and procedures were also mentioned; participants called for greater flexibility in order to adapt to the realities missions are confronted with on the ground. They stressed the need to rebalance the relationship between the Security Council and the Secretariat and to ensure timely and effective information-sharing.

The responsibility of Member States on the Security Council, particularly the P5, and their relation to the UN Secretariat was also discussed. The Council is often paralyzed and fails to take necessary action because of division amongst its members. This is particularly true in the case when preventative action is required, as was the case in Burundi. Among the participants, there was a broad consensus on the need to shift the UN’s work to more upstream conflict prevention.

Lastly, the need to change the way the budgets are negotiated was strongly acknowledged by all participants, as well as the need for a better strategic discussion between the Secretariat and the members of the Fifth Committee prior to the negotiations. The strategic budget analysis in the report was noted as useful, and participants felt that this type of more strategic-level analysis is urgently needed for the next budget discussions.

Participants welcomed strong leadership and direction from the office of the Secretary General and encouraged the work of the Internal Review Team (IRT) on the Secretariat’s Peace and Security Architecture due to report in June 2017. They however cautioned that reform will require the sustained support from a broad range of Member States at a time when there is pressure for budget reductions from major financial contributors.

The roundtable event was moderated by Arthur Boutellis, Director of the IPI Brian Urquhart Center for Peace Operations.

The Ebola outbreak of 2014–2016 was a fast-moving, multidimensional emergency that presented unprecedented challenges for the multilateral system. In response to the outbreak in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone, the UN established the first-ever emergency health mission, the UN Mission for Ebola Emergency Response (UNMEER).

UNMEER is an important case study of how the UN, with member-state support, can provide a whole-of-system response through coordination, partnership, and creative use of existing tools. This report, therefore, asks three questions about this groundbreaking mission: was it needed, was it properly structured, and did it deliver? In answering these questions, it offers eight broad lessons for UN crisis response:

• A sequenced approach and flexible mandate allow for better responses to unanticipated challenges.

  Ebola cases by month (Click to view full graphic)

  UNMEER Response Timeline (Click to view full graphic)

• Effective responses draw upon the full range of UN tools and implementing partners based on the principle of comparative advantage, but they must take into account the challenge of integrating distinct organizational cultures.
• Flexible and predictable funding is critical for rapidly scaling up responses to multidimensional crises.
• Local engagement with key stakeholders during the peak of a crisis enhances long-term effectiveness.
• A system-wide communications strategy, bolstered by strong communications capacity in the field, is required from the outset.
• High-level coordination and oversight can provide flexibility and quick reaction.
• Close proximity to frontline responders and the site of the crisis enhances field coordination.
• A regional office can improve coordination across borders, but it must be joined with a strategy to account for the specificity of national and local contexts.

Download

A workshop on “Life Below Water” was held at IPI on February 13th, 2017 to gather advice and counsel for participants in an Ocean Conference to be held at the United Nations in June.

The Ocean Conference is the first of its kind, providing a forum for member states to adopt a call to action outlining concrete, action-oriented commitments to support the implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 14. SDG 14 outlines the UN’s commitment to “conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development.”

The workshop was co-sponsored by Secure Fisheries, One Earth Future Foundation, the Permanent Mission of Sweden to the United Nations, the World Ocean Council and the International Peace Institute. The discussion was conducted under the Chatham House rule of non-attribution.

The key takeaways from the event were:

June’s Ocean Conference should establish multi-stakeholder, expert working groups for SDG 14 to work in coordination with UN agencies. These working groups would allow for multi-stakeholder engagement by matching the specific needs and capabilities of member states–such as access to technology, capacity building and funding–with the services of the relevant stakeholders.

The forum further recommended that the international community strengthen data-sharing initiatives between stakeholders. Specifically, it endorsed the establishment of a data-collection hub for the purpose of better identifying gaps and avoiding overlapping efforts, while building trust and creating synergies between the various communities, including governments, scientists and industry.

The workshop also highlighted the importance of incentivizing the implementation of SDG 14 to finance ministries and industry representatives worldwide. It was suggested that an expert working group be established in order to “make the case” for the economic benefits of sustainable interaction with the world’s seas and oceans.

Lastly, the workshop advocated a global communication strategy that would lay out an aspirational vision for the oceans. This strategy would employ a “naming and faming” approach, putting the emphasis on ocean success stories that support bringing the aims of SDG 14 to bear at all levels–global, regional, national and municipal–and would be targeted towards civil society, the private sector, academics, practitioners, and ordinary citizens.

Welcoming remarks were made by IPI Vice President Adam Lupel.

Jimena Leiva-Roesch, IPI Research Fellow, served as a chair during the discussions. 

Read the Meeting Brief

jQuery(document).ready(function(){jQuery("#isloaderfor-rqyouc").fadeOut(2000, function () { jQuery(".pagwrap-rqyouc").fadeIn(1000);});});

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan of Turkey called on the nations of the region to cement regional cooperation and leadership in the fight against terrorism and instability in the Middle East. President Erdoğan was speaking at the International Peace Institute (IPI) Global Leaders Series presentation in Manama, Bahrain, that brought together an audience of more than 400 people from government, civil society, media, and the private sector.

Highlighting his concerns about the situation in Syria, President Erdoğan said, “We do not want Syria to be torn apart, we are against it, and you should know that there are those who work on dividing Syria and Iraq at the same time, by exploiting sectarian differences.”

President Erdoğan disclosed plans to “create a terror-free safe zone 4,000 to 5,000 square kilometers inside Syria.” This zone will enable those who have been displaced from their homes to find refuge. He called on Turkey’s Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) partners to provide support and invest in infrastructure, so that those affected by violence can begin to rebuild communities.

The Turkish leader reiterated that regional cooperation was also required to address conflicts in Iraq, Libya, Yemen, and occupied Palestinian territories. He emphasized that regional stability could not be achieved in the long run if the longstanding Palestinian crisis is not addressed first. He reiterated that regional partners have a responsibility to actively define a collective approach to these conflicts in order to secure peace in the region. He stressed the importance of cooperation and integration across various sectors.

Bahrain Foreign Minister Khalid bin Ahmed Al Khalifa also expressed his gratitude to the International Peace Institute for organizing the event and providing the forum for Mr. Erdoğan to share his vision for peace in the Middle East.

The event was moderated by Nejib Friji, Director of IPI’s Middle East and North Africa Office (IPI MENA).

Related Coverage:
“Erdogan lays out Turkish plan to create safe zones in Syria” (Xinhua , February 14, 2017)
“Erdogan urges joint anti-terror efforts from GCC countries” (Famagusta Gazette, February 14, 2017)
“‘On This Geography, Both Our Sufferings And Fates Are Joined‘” (Public, February 14, 2017)
“Erdogan calls for safe zone in northern Syria” (The Peninsula, February 13, 2017)
“Turkey aims to create Daesh-free zone in northern Syria, Erdogan says” (Daily Sabah, February 13, 2017)
“Erdogan lays out Turkish plan to create safe zones in Syria” (TRT World, February 13, 2017)

In Arabic:

Al Wasat, February 14, 2017
Akhbar Al Khaleej, February 14, 2017
Akhbar Al Khaleej Online, February 14, 2017
Al Bilad, February 14, 2017
Al Bilad Online, February 14, 2017
Al Watan, February 14, 2017
Al Ayam, February 14, 2017
Al Ayam Online, February 14, 2017
Al Wasat Online, February 13, 2017

In Turkish:

Turkiya Manset, February 14, 2017

Authorized in January 2009, the UN Support Office for the African Union Mission in Somalia (UNSOA) was an unprecedented operation. Through UNSOA, the Department of Field Support used the UN’s assessed contributions to directly support a non-UN regional peace operation (AMISOM). Although this significantly enhanced AMISOM’s capabilities and increased its overall effectiveness, UNSOA faced numerous challenges that severely inhibited its ability to deliver on all its mandated tasks.

This report analyzes five sets of challenges that UNSOA faced from 2009 through to 2015. These challenges revolved around the expanding scope of UNSOA’s tasks, the clash between the UN and the AU’s organizational cultures, the highly insecure operating environment, the size of the theater of operations, and some of AMISOM’s idiosyncrasies.

On the basis of these challenges, the report offers several lessons for future UN support for regional peace operations:

• It is unwise to separate control over logistics from control over operations.
• The UN’s current bureaucratic rules and procedures are not quick or flexible enough to support forces dispersed over large distances in conducting sustained maneuver warfare.
• Regional organizations must put in place mechanisms to ensure accountability and transparency when using the UN’s assessed peacekeeping contributions.
• All stakeholders must share information better.
• The UN should explore how best its field missions can support the development of host-state national security forces.
• UN and AU field operations and planning processes need to be better linked.

Download

On Friday, February 3rd, IPI together with the Sustainable Development Goals Fund are cohosting a meeting on New Partnerships for Digital Education: Rising to the Challenge of SDG4. The panel discussion will focus on education, SDGs and technologies and how public and private actors can find new ways to partner in using digital education technologies.

Remarks will begin at 8:45am EST.

Raising quality education is at the core the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and its 17 Sustainable Development Goals. More than 50 million children in the world are out of primary school and it is estimated that 24 million children will never go to school. Education is a key driver for social change and poverty eradication. Every US$1 million invested in education translates into US$10 million in economic growth.

The meeting will focus on the following questions: What are concrete examples where the UN, Governments and the private sector are working together in making the best use of digital education? How can digital education contribute to intercultural dialogue and provide opportunities in conflict situations? What kind of partnerships have the greatest impact?

Speakers:
Ms. Paloma Durán, Director Sustainable Development Goals Fund
H.E. Mr. Anthony Bosah, Chargé d’Affaires, the Federal Republic of Nigeria to the UN
Ms. Madhavi Ashok, Senior Advisor and Team Leader, UN Partnerships at UNICEF
Mr. Cesar Alierta, President Foundation Telefonica

Moderator:
Ms. Jimena Leiva Roesch, Senior Policy Analyst, International Peace Institute

On Monday, February 6th, IPI together with Watchlist on Children and Armed Conflict, and the government of Estonia are cohosting a policy forum on child protection in peace processes. Speakers at the event will share their insights on how mediators and their teams can better protect the rights and security of children in the drafting of ceasefire and peace agreements.

Remarks will begin at 1:15pm EST.

The use and abuse of children in conflict situations is widely documented including in recent and ongoing conflicts. In Somalia, over half of the fighters in al-Shabaab may be children, according to the UN Secretary-General’s report to the Security Council this month. In the Central African Republic, the Secretary-General has reported frequent use of schools and hospitals by armed groups, denying children access to education and healthcare.

Many efforts to resolve conflict overlook the rights and needs of affected children. A study of 431 relevant documents from the UN Peacekeeping Database revealed that between 1999 and 2015 only 75 documents included references to children protection. According to Watchlist on Children and Armed Conflict, this gap led to a new guidance for mediators and their teams: the Checklist for drafting children and armed conflict provisions in peace agreements.

At this policy forum, speakers will discuss the Checklist, and how it can help ensure that future peace agreements include relevant, context-specific child protection provisions. Among other issues, they will reflect on the importance of release, disarmament, and psychosocial support for child soldiers. Drawing on specific examples of peace talks, such as the recent negotiations in Colombia, panelists will consider how mediators and envoys can better integrate children and armed conflict perspectives and concerns in peacemaking.

Opening Remarks:
H.E. Mr. Sven Jürgenson, Permanent Representative of the Republic of Estonia to the United Nations

Speakers:
Ms. Leila Zerrougui, Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict
Ms. Eva Smets, Executive Director of Watchlist on Children and Armed Conflict
H.E. Mr. Kai Sauer, Permanent Representative of Finland to the United Nations

Moderator:
Ms. Andrea Ó Súilleabháin, Senior Policy Analyst, IPI

On Tuesday, January 24th, at 1:15pm EST, IPI is hosting the latest event in its SRSG Series, featuring SRSG Michael Keating will discuss challenges facing Somalia, in light of its electoral process and political transition.

IPI Live Event Feed

The United Nations Assistance Mission in Somalia (UNSOM) was established on June 3, 2013, by UN Security Council Resolution 2102 to provide strategic policy advice to the Federal Government and the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM) on peacebuilding and state building. UNSOM was also mandated to help build the capacity of the Federal Government to promote respect for human rights and women’s empowerment, promote child protection, prevent conflict-related sexual and gender-based violence, and strengthen justice institutions.

As the mandate of UNSOM comes up for renewal, Somalia continues to face significant security concerns—as a result of increased attacks by al-Shabaab and the rise of ISIS-affiliated militant groups—and ongoing humanitarian challenges. On December 27th, 283 members of Somalia’s tenth parliament took their oath of office. The presidential election, which has been delayed, is due to take place later this month.

Speaker:
Mr. Michael Keating, Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Somalia and Head of UNSOM

Moderator:
Ambassador John Hirsch, Senior Adviser at IPI

On Wednesday, January 25th, at 1:15pm EST, IPI is hosting the latest event it its series featuring United Nations humanitarian coordinators and other senior humanitarian leaders from the field. Toby Lanzer, United Nations Assistant Secretary-General and Regional Humanitarian Coordinator for the Sahel, will engage in a conversation with the audience on the situation in the Sahel (Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, the Gambia, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, and Senegal) with a particular emphasis on Nigeria and the Lake Chad region. The event is an opportunity to identify the main challenges facing affected communities in the short term and discuss ways to ensure a more stable and prosperous future—in essence, to move “from providing aid to ending need.”

IPI Live Event Feed

The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) is responsible for bringing actors together to ensure a coherent response to emergencies. A key pillar of OCHA’s mandate—including through its in-country humanitarian coordinators—is to coordinate effective and principled humanitarian action in partnership with national and international actors. Such coordination is becoming ever more important, as the number of people affected by humanitarian crises has skyrocketed over the past decade, the cost of helping those most in need is steadily rising, and the number and diversity of actors on the ground engaged in humanitarian activities is steadily increasing.

Lake Chad is currently the scene of one of the world’s biggest crises. What are the factors behind it? How can the international community work with communities and governments of the concerned countries (Cameroon, Chad, Niger, and Nigeria) to tackle issues of the day and of tomorrow? To what extent is the situation in Lake Chad a microcosm of the broader Sahel region?

Speaker:
Mr. Toby Lanzer, United Nations Assistant Secretary-General and Regional Humanitarian Coordinator for the Sahel

Moderator:
Dr. Els Debuf, Senior Adviser and Head of Humanitarian Affairs at IPI

The preservation of human dignity and the desire to reduce human suffering are at the core of the contemporary international order and underpin all three pillars of the multilateral system anchored in the UN. Yet never before has the world witnessed humanitarian needs on such an epic scale and in so many simultaneous crises around the world. And never before has the gap between those needs and the international community’s capacity to deliver an adequate response appeared greater than it does today.

This policy paper aims to identify the main reasons for this reality and put forth a set of ideas and recommendations as to how the multilateral system anchored in the UN can better prevent and respond to humanitarian crises in the twenty-first century. This is part of a series of fifteen policy papers produced by the Independent Commission on Multilateralism (ICM), a two-year project launched by IPI in September 2014 to identify how the multilateral system can be made more “fit for purpose” for twenty-first-century challenges.

Based on extensive consultations with representatives of states, relevant UN entities, other humanitarian actors, and civil society, this paper details recommendations laid out in the ICM’s final report, published in September 2016. To address the main contemporary challenges to humanitarian action, it recommends that the UN, its member states, donors, and civil society take action in a number of areas:

• Conflict prevention, disaster risk deduction, and compliance with international law
• Access and delivery of humanitarian responses to people in need
• Adequate, timely, effective, efficient, and sustainable humanitarian responses

For other IPI news, events, and publications about humanitarian affairs, see here.

Download

United Nations Secretary-General-Designate António Guterres, Deputy Secretary-General-Designate Amina Mohammed, and members of the Secretary-General’s Transition Team met with civil society leaders in an event co-hosted by the International Peace Institute (IPI) and the United Nations Foundation at IPI on December 19, 2016.

The 90-minute meeting was the first gathering in what is meant to be the beginning of a constructive, ongoing working relationship between members of civil society and the Executive Office of the UN Secretary-General.

Represented at the discussion, billed as “A Conversation with United Nations Secretary-General–designate António Guterres,” were organizations from the peace and security, human rights, humanitarian affairs, development, climate change, and gender equality sectors.

The meeting was held under the Chatham House Rule of non-attribution. Among the subjects discussed were:

• promoting gender parity and respect for women’s rights across all sectors and particularly in conflict settings;
• promoting women’s health including in relation to sexual and reproductive rights;
• focusing UN humanitarian efforts on prevention;
• raising the visibility of the problem of violence against children;
• bringing evaluation and accountability to UN activities;
• confronting the threat that rising nationalism and populism pose to the UN and the human rights agenda;
• addressing the closing of civic space, particularly in conflict;
• pressing for measures to assure the end of sexual abuse by UN peacekeepers, including those in civilian roles;
• using the Secretary-General’s good offices to bring influence on the Security Council;
• stopping the erosion of respect for International Humanitarian Law in conflict settings;
• spearheading an effective and human rights-centered approach in sharing the responsibility of hosting forcibly displaced people.

Welcoming remarks were delivered by Adam Lupel, Vice-President of IPI, and Elizabeth Cousens, Deputy Chief Executive Officer of the UN Foundation. Minh-Thu Pham, the Foundation’s Executive Director for Policy, moderated the discussion.

Mr. Guterres and Ms. Mohammed started off the conversation, and then after listening intently to the civil society proposals, they each gave closing remarks. Mr. Guterres, a former Prime Minister of Portugal and UN High Commissioner for Refugees, becomes Secretary-General, succeeding Ban Ki-Moon, on January 1, 2017.