Statement by H.E. Gary Quinlan, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Australia to the United Nations, during the Security Council debate on Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict on 26 June 2009
(as delivered)
Thank you, Mr. President.
At the outset, I would like to thank the Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs for his briefing this morning and, through him, to commend the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs for their tireless efforts in advancing the protection of civilians. I would also like to commend the Secretary-General for his latest comprehensive report (S/2009/277) on this very serious subject. The breadth of the report is striking and serves to remind us of the challenges we need to overcome if we are really serious about affording protection to civilians.
Given the constraints of time, it is not possible, obviously, to do justice to the report in its entirety; rather, I will focus my remarks on three areas of particular importance for Australia.
First, the question of humanitarian access remains a critical challenge for the Council and for Member States. It is vital that people in need have access to humanitarian assistance. While we may all agree on that broad principle, in practice constraints on access deprive millions of vulnerable people of life-saving assistance. The annex to the Secretary-General’s report helpfully seeks to unpack this issue, highlighting the key types of constraints that are faced and identifying practical measures that need to be taken to overcome them.
As emphasized by the Secretary-General, Member States need to increase their efforts to address these constraints to access. In particular, there is a clear need for action to streamline bureaucratic procedures to facilitate humanitarian assistance. While we welcome the efforts of many States in that regard, there remain too many instances where onerous bureaucratic restrictions jeopardize timely responses and add to the cost and reduce the effectiveness of humanitarian operations.
Furthermore, all parties to a conflict must respect international humanitarian law and protect humanitarian personnel, assets and facilities. To this end, it is important for all parties, including non-State actors, to cooperate with humanitarian organizations to
establish arrangements that allow for the safe passage of humanitarian workers and relief items to affected populations.
We also support increased efforts to build partnerships and strengthen coordination between affected States, regional organizations, the United Nations system, the Red Cross movement, and the broader international humanitarian community. Strong partnerships built on trust and mutual respect are clearly essential to ensuring access.
The second issue I would like to touch on is the inclusion of protection of civilians tasks in peacekeeping mandates. The will to mandate for the protection of civilians has a growing consensus, as demonstrated by the recognition of such mandates in the report of the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations for the first time earlier this year.
Nevertheless, there is a commonly identified gap between the strategic and operational levels in United Nations protection of civilians mandates. The absence of guidelines and training for peacekeepers on protection tasks contributes to the ineffective implementation of mandates. We would encourage the development of such guidelines and training to assist mission personnel in understanding how to effectively implement their mandates. We would also encourage closer cooperation between the Security Council, the Secretariat, and troop- and police-contributing countries in developing and implementing realistic mandates.
The third point I would like to touch on is that the Council needs to be more willing to consider country situations in which civilians are at risk. The experience of the past 10 years has demonstrated that the Council accepts its responsibility to address the protection needs of civilians in internal conflicts. We welcome the Council’s attention to the needs of civilians in such conflicts, from Afghanistan to the Sudan, from the Democratic Republic of the Congo to Timor-Leste.
However, there is clearly a need for greater consistency in the Council’s approach. Too often still, the Council appears unwilling to address the plight of civilians in many internal armed conflicts, notwithstanding the obvious destabilizing effects and regional consequences of such conflicts. In failing to do so, the Council falls short of its obligations under the Charter.
The Council does not want for policy options in addressing such threats. Chapters VI, VII and VIII of the Charter, as demonstrated by past Council practice, provide the Council with adequate tools to make a difference, including the condemnation of violations of international humanitarian law, targeted measures such as sanctions, the utilization of international criminal justice mechanisms to end impunity, and the authorization of the use of force. What is lacking at times, as we know, is the political resolve of the Council to use those tools to protect civilians and of the broader membership to support such Council action.
Australia looks forward to continuing to work with the Council, other Member States and the Secretariat in advancing our collective consideration of these important issues.