UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Statement delivered by Col Steve Jones, representative of Australia to the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations on behalf of Australia, Canada and New Zealand

Peacekeeping – Progress and Challenges

New York 29 March 2004

Mr Chairman

I have the honour to make this statement on behalf of the CANZ Group of countries - Canada, New Zealand and Australia.

Firstly, on behalf of the Group, let me join other delegations in thanking the Secretary General
for his comprehensive report (A/58/694), and Under Secretary-General Guehenno for his informative presentation on the work of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations. Both have highlighted the extensive achievements during the past 12 months and provided much food for thought on the challenges and priorities for the year ahead.

We would particularly like to highlight the improved consultation that has occurred between Member States and the Secretariat. The degree of information sharing has improved and we look forward to a continuation of this improved transparency, especially if we wish to be able to rapidly deploy personnel and equipment to conflict areas. If we wish to deploy rapidly, then the Secretariat needs to provide early warning to potential Troop Contributing Countries in order that the necessary preparations in the respective Member States can be made. We also urge greater emphasis be placed on improving the relationship between the Security Council Working Group on Peacekeeping Operations and troop-contributing countries. Despite the Note (S/2002/56) of 14 January 2002, by the President of the Security Council outlining their agreement in principle of convening joint meetings of the Security Council Working Group on Peacekeeping Operations and troop-contributing countries as an additional mechanism in strengthening cooperation which was very welcome there has been little progress as far as using the mechanism to better effect.

We welcome the significant progress that has been made in improving mission planning. The successful utilisation of the Integrated Mission Task Force concept and the deployment of the multidisciplinary assessment mission for Liberia have proven the utility of these concepts and we look forward to hearing about the revisions that will occur as a result of the lessons learnt and best practices from that experience. We agree that it is critical to get the full integrated planning process right and request that the Secretariat brief the committee as early as possible on the draft template for integrated mission planning that is currently under development. We must ensure that mission planning commences as early as possible and addresses the whole spectrum of activities across the peace continuum from Conflict prevention through Peacekeeping to peace-building.

While much progress has been achieved in improving our capacity to rapidly deploy, particularly in the areas of logistic support and training, we note the considerable difficulties that continue to inhibit our ability to achieve the 90 day deployment goal and fully endorse the need to assess the mechanisms to improve all aspects of pre-mandate operational preparedness with the goal of truncating preparation timelines. To this end, we urge the Secretariat to work closely with interested member states in conducting this assessment and report back to the Committee at its next meeting.

We note the progress that has been achieved in enhancing the African Peacekeeping Capacity and look forward to receiving the report later this year. We agree with the need to improve regional cooperation including the need to enhance peacekeeping capacities of regional organisation, as well as the manner that such operations are financed. We look forward to receiving the briefs on the initiatives being developed, especially in Africa, but also note that a similar focus needs to be given to the Asia/Pacific region, and the Americas.

We commend the Secretariat for the significant achievements in the area of training. The development and implementation of the Standardized Generic Training Modules Level 1 and the pre-deployment training for the HQ were key outcomes. The deployment of the 10 mission training cells as the prelude for the establishment of integrated mission training cells is welcomed. We should note, even if it is to state the obvious, that pre-deployment training, which applies as well to the mission leadership, is of no less importance than integrated mission planning. We look forward, therefore, to being briefed on the training strategy for civilian staff that will be developed in 2004 and support the need for it to be developed in harmony with other training efforts within DPKO.

The importance of the early introduction of a disarmament, demobilisation, rehabilitation and reintegration (DDRR) program cannot be underestimated and it is therefore essential that the Missions’ budgets include funding for the early reintegration of ex-combatants. Given the number of potential peacekeeping operations on the horizon we need to ensure that the operational modalities for DDRR are developed as soon as possible. These modalities should be developed taking cognisance of the need to develop workable arrangements for the UN system-wide coordination of DDRR policy and strategy.

The importance of the re-establishment of the Rule of Law within mission areas cannot be underestimated as it is the basis of the exit strategy for peacekeeping operations. We therefore strongly support the need to ensure that missions are provided with the specific mandates, strategic planning and resources to meet the challenges. The overall integration of rule of law elements within mission planning and implementation, and with DPKO in general needs to be a focus of this Committee's work. We also need to explore the possibility of building greater rule of law capacities in the UN system in a manner which better integrates all its elements (police; corrections; judiciary; legislation; transitional legal codes etc), perhaps even by establishing a Rule of Law unit within DPKO, which would include and integrate all of these components. In this regard we commend the work to date of the Criminal Law and Judicial Advisory Unit and urge the Secretariat to maintain the dialogue with member states on this important issue. We look forward to further positive Rule of Law initiatives especially further to their implementation in the Mission in Liberia.

Improving performance must draw on learning from the past and others. Impressive progress has been made in establishing a solid and transparent working relationship with Member States using the Best Practices Unit as the point of entry into DPKO. It is noted that this Unit still has a formidable workload and we urge DPKO to ensure that the workload is prioritised appropriately and encourage the PBPU to develop partnerships with other organisations eg the Military and Police Advisers Community to assist where appropriate.

We thank the Secretariat for the briefing on Discipline given earlier this month. Much progress has been made but we must remain vigilant to ensure that our peacekeepers understand the requirements and are held accountable for inappropriate conduct and behaviour. We must ensure that mechanisms are in place to monitor transgressions and in this regard we support the establishment of a Personnel Conduct Officer in each mission to act as the mission's ombudsman.

The progress this year in personnel issues has been solid, particularly in the area of HIV Policy. The current HIV/AIDS policy adviser has done excellent work and we encourage DPKO to continue these efforts.

Of equal importance is the progress that has been achieved on gender issues particularly the implementation of the recommendations contained in the Secretary General's report on women peace and security (S/2002/1154) and we look forward to continued progress. We also endorse the call by the Secretary General for member states to increase the number of women deployed on peacekeeping operations.

We also welcome the steps being made by the Secretariat in improving performance measurement as reflected in the Secretary Generals Report on peacekeeping operations performance for the 12 month period ending June 2003. The format of the recently produced annual performance reports for the respective missions now provide Member States with delivered outputs measured against indicators. We support this methodology of Performance Measurement. We also welcome the improvement in processing claims and note that the ensuing payment is not possible unless funds are available.

Mr Chairman

The progress this year has been achieved despite a significant increase in Peacekeeping activities which have placed significant demands on the staff of the Secretariat and TCCs.
As noted in the Secretary General noon briefing of 5 March “… the prospective start-up in the near future of so many missions is going to put a strain even on the expanded Peacekeeping Department.” We are ready to assist Mr Chairman but we must look to more innovative and expedient methods of taking on temporary staff during these periods of intense planning. TCC military’s have the luxury of calling on internal resources – unfortunately DPKO doesn’t – it is therefore up to us, the TCCs, to empower the Secretariat to be expeditious.
Mr Chairman

We strongly endorse the challenges that the Secretary General has identified for the year ahead - (1) To meet the increase in Demand for UN peacekeeping, particularly in Africa;
(2)To find ways to meet that Demand by Working with the Multiplicity of today’s peacekeeping partners; and (3) To enhance the safety and Security of all personnel serving in UN field missions.

We welcome the positive comments in the Secretary-General's Millennium Summit report on the valuable peacekeeping role that can be played by coalitions of the willing and other non-UN peacekeeping organisations. We also welcome the importance placed on ensuring a robust “blue beret” UN peacekeeping operation capable of protecting civilians. In Timor-Leste, the Congo, Liberia and most recently Haiti, we have seen coalitions take the lead in stabilising conflict situations ahead of the deployment of a "robust blue beret" UN peacekeeping mission. The reliance of the international community on such coalitions of the willing when faced by urgent crises underlines the need for further work to improve the capacity of the UN for rapid deployment - both of personnel and materiel – but it also reflects a new reality which we must work to utilise more efficiently. Critical to this is improved cooperation, integration and transition planning with non-UN peacekeeping partners. We therefore encourage further interaction between the Secretariat and regional organisations and relevant member states to develop these mechanisms.

The issue of safety and security of UN personnel needs to be kept at the forefront of our minds. The Secretary-General, in his address to the General Assembly, stressed the need to take more effective measures to protect the safety of UN staff. He emphasised that we are the United Nations and its staff are our staff. It is beholden on all member states to fully support initiatives that will improve the safety and security of our staff.

We welcome the significant practical steps that have been taken towards reducing the risk of attacks against personnel engaged in peace support operations. We also consider it important that an adequate legal regime is in place to ensure that there is no impunity for the perpetrators of such attacks. Accordingly, we welcome the Sixth Committee's recommendation that status-of-forces and status-of-mission agreements should include specific and practical measures to enhance personal safety and security based on the provisions of the Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel (A/56/5L.64). We urge those who have not already done so to become party to the Convention on Safety of UN and Associated Personnel. We would encourage all Member States to participate in the Ad-Hoc Committee, which will meet at the end of this month, to continue discussion on measures to enhance the existing protective legal regime for UN and associated personnel.

Incidents over the past few months tragically highlight the need for improved early warning and better threat analysis. As was discussed last October (C4) we need to investigate the provision of information gathering capabilities and analysis. The SG report notes the need for better information gathering and analytical capabilities if security in the field is to be adequately enhanced - a move our group fully endorses. If we are serious about safety and security the Special Committee needs to show flexibility on this question.

We note with concern that there remains a lack of coherence in the coordination of responsibility for the safety and security of UN personnel between the Office of UNSECOORD and DPKO as well as with the humanitarian agencies. This committee has for some time been requesting closer coordination between DPKO and UNSECOORD. We believe it may be premature for DPKO to seek approval for a mission security management unit given that the overall evaluation of the UN security management system has yet to be completed. While it may prove to be more effective under DPKO we feel it would be more appropriate to await the outcome of the evaluation before endorsing such a proposal. In any event, our delegations firmly reinforce the need for effective collaboration among DPKO, UNSECOORD and other UN agency partners on security management and cooperation in the development of any new mechanisms. We wish to see early results from the investigation into the bombing of the UN headquarters in Baghdad, and the outcomes of the overall evaluation of the UN security management system.

In conclusion Mr Chairman, we believe that it is essential that recommendations that we make in this Committee, by consensus, are carried forward into other Committees and Working Groups. We therefore urge all Committee Members to ensure that our colleagues in others Committees support our recommendations. Not to do so will undermine our support to our peacekeepers in the field and reduce the efficacy of the Secretariat’s ability to plan and manage peacekeeping operations.