Refugees International logo
donate now

Peacekeeping & Peacebuilding: The Report of the High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change

DRC 2003 - UN Peacekeeper Transport
By Peter Gantz
12/07/2004

Peacekeeping and Peacebuilding:
The Report of the High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change


A new report from an international group of eminent persons has proposed a series of reforms designed to update the UN’s ability to tackle the threats and challenges facing the world today, including poverty, infectious diseases, armed conflicts (both between states and within states), weapons of mass destruction, terrorism, and organized criminal organizations. 

On December 3, the High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, appointed in 2003 by Secretary-General Kofi Annan after the bitter Security Council debate over Iraq, released its report on reforming the United Nations for the 21st Century: A more secure world: Our shared responsibility.  The report’s recommendations are a good starting point for improving the effectiveness and relevance of the UN in dealing with some of the world’s most difficult problems.

In the area of peacekeeping and peacebuilding, the report breaks some new ground—but not enough. It reiterates points made in the Brahimi Report on UN Peacekeeping Reform and in the Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, the Responsibility to Protect. Nonetheless, the report may still prove to be valuable, since it includes ideas for improving the effectiveness of UN peacekeeping within a comprehensive reform agenda that, given the political weight behind the report, may become a roadmap for actual implementation of much-needed reforms.

The report does make a few notable contributions to the policy debate over how to make the international response to state failure and post-conflict situations more effective.  Foremost is the recommendation to create a Peacebuilding Commission, with a Peacebuilding Support Office (PSO) in the Secretariat.  This proposal addresses a serious gap in the UN system, which has no institutional capacity specifically directed at preventing state failure and assisting with the transition from conflict.  The Peacebuilding Commission would identify failing states, organize proactive assistance for those states, and assist in planning and marshalling efforts of the international community in post-conflict settings.  The PSO would give the Peacebuilding Commission appropriate Secretariat support and ensure an integrated response from the UN Secretariat to state failure and post-conflict field operations.

There are several other important recommendations for reforming the UN in the area of peace and security:

  • The report suggests the creation of an additional Deputy Secretary-General position for peace and security.  This would help further unify UN efforts and activities.
  • The UN should establish a robust mechanism for rule of law assistance.  Without effective rule of law, all other activities in post-conflict and/or state failure situations are doomed to failure.
  • The UN should have a small corps of senior civilian police officers and managers (in the range of 50 to 100 personnel) who could rapidly deploy to new missions and organize the start-up of the police component of the peace operation.  This civilian police corps should be joined with the rule of law capacity-building mechanism as the importance of a holistic approach to rule of law and public security should not be underestimated.
  • A standing fund for peacebuilding should be established at the level of at least $250 million to finance the critical programs needed for an effective and lasting transition from state failure or conflict.
  • Member states should support and fully fund the proposed Directorate of Security and make implementation of a new UN staff security system a priority for 2005.

The report identifies the many problems facing the UN as it seeks to address failed states and post-conflict situations.  For example, it notes that there are not enough qualified peacekeepers to meet the demand.  Member states that provide most of the peacekeepers do not have the logistical support capacities to effectively deploy and maintain those troops.  The UN is unable to devote sufficient energy and resources to vital and integral tasks such as disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration efforts and rule of law, democratization, and civilian policing programs.

The report fails to address some of these problems. To deal with gaps in logistical support, the report says that member states that have logistical capacities should make those capacities available to the UN.  Similarly, for missions without enough troops and/or with an insufficient mandate, the report says the Security Council should authorize sufficient troop strength to carry out the mandate, and should support mandates that can effectively address the situation.  Developed states should do more to create capacity within their military forces for peace operations, and states with advanced militaries should create rapid response components that can reinforce UN peace operations.  None of this is new.  It would have been more useful for the High Level Panel to propose innovative solutions to these dilemmas, rather than restating them.

The report comes at a critical juncture for the UN and its member states.  It could lead to a vital overhaul of the UN and a redefinition of collective security, but only if member states accept the core premise of the report, that "today's threats recognize no national boundaries, are connected, and must be addressed at the global and regional as well as the national levels."  In particular, the U.S. will have to take the lead in supporting change at the UN if change is to occur.

Unfortunately, a constructive U.S. role in this important debate seems unlikely at the moment.  The UN and Secretary-General Kofi Annan are under attack in Washington. It is ironic that the U.S., which has long been a lonely champion for UN reform, may find itself cut off from a serious and thoughtful discussion about reworking parts of the UN system when such a discussion seems finally within reach.


Peter H. Gantz is Peacekeeping Advocate with Refugees International, and is Executive Coordinator of the Partnership for Effective Peace Operations.

Search

Stay Informed

Sign up for our Email updates

Resources

What I can do to help

Photo Gallery

Visual Mission Sri Lanka 2003- RI's Larry David with deming machinery

RI's Advocate Larry Thompson is standing beside a flail (demining machine). 

Go to Photo Gallery

 

Act Now!

Donate to Iraq Fund

Join us on Facebook