European Peace Institute / News

Recent health emergencies such as the 2018–2020 Ebola crisis in DRC, in conjunction with the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, demonstrate the importance of health responses that take the local context into account, especially in settings that are already affected by violent conflict. When humanitarian health responses fail to understand and adapt to their impact on conflict dynamics, they risk exacerbating those dynamics, impeding the health response, and placing health workers at risk. As healthcare becomes increasingly and globally politicized, it is more crucial than ever to recognize the links between health and peace and promote a more deliberate approach to delivering emergency health responses in violent conflict environments.

In this context, this paper first discusses the global normative environment for emergency health responses in situations of violent conflict and proposals to strengthen the links between international health and peace activities, especially the GHPI. Second, it examines the concepts at the core of the GHPI initiative and considers their operationalization in violent conflict environments. Third, it summarizes the emergency health response to the 2018–2020 Ebola epidemic in eastern DRC, how it interacted disastrously with conflict dynamics, and the lessons learned from the experience. Finally, it highlights several risk areas that emergency health interventions working at the humanitarian-peace nexus in conflict will likely face and considers options for mitigating their impact.

The paper concludes by offering the following recommendations, aimed at supporting the further development of the conceptual framework for the health and peace agenda and informing the operationalization of the GHPI and similar initiatives.

• WHO should develop the GHPI conceptual framework further, including by elaborating on when health actors should pursue peace-responsive programming and how they should coordinate with peace and security actors, as well as the relationship between the GHPI and political processes.
• WHO should design a strategy to operationalize the GHPI in violent conflict settings, including by developing tools, guidance, and training on conflict-sensitive analysis and programming; identifying the political skills required of those leading the implementation of such programming; and clarifying how to manage ethical dilemmas.
• The Executive Office of the Secretary-General should conduct a formal assessment of the Ebola emergency coordinator position during the 2018–2020 Ebola crisis.
• The UN Department for Safety and Security should review security risk assessment processes and safety and security measures and develop an inventory of safety and security measures that could be used in place of armed security.
• The UN Department of Peace Operations should review operational guidance for armed escorts and area security during site visits.

Download

In recent years, the UN has embarked on an ambitious project to use data more extensively and effectively to improve the safety of peacekeepers and the implementation of peace operations’ mandates. The increasing availability of various types of data in UN peace operations and the development of new tools for its acquisition and analysis present novel opportunities, enhancing peace operations’ ability to predict and respond to violence; understand the population’s sentiments towards peacekeepers; and provide better analysis to senior mission leadership, UN headquarters, and the UN Security Council. However, UN peace operations’ greater use of data also increases their vulnerability to irresponsible handling of data, information leaks, and cyberattacks and raises ethical challenges over data ownership, host-state sovereignty, the potential to cause social harm, and algorithmic biases.

This issue brief provides an overview of how UN peace operations acquire data and use it in their decision making. It also discusses UN policy frameworks on responsible data management and analyzes the challenges peace operations face in acquiring, using, and disseminating data. It concludes with recommendations for member states, UN headquarters, and peace operations personnel to manage and use data more responsibly and effectively:

• Improve the data-management skills of UN personnel;
• Strengthen the policy framework for the effective and responsible use of data;
• Provide adequate and predictable funding for data acquisition, analysis, and use;
• Enhance internal and external communication about the ways in which UN peace operations gather and use data; and
• Encourage the proactive use of data in strategic decision making.

Download

Recent anti-UN protests have fueled concerns that some UN peacekeeping operations are facing a “crisis of legitimacy” among host-state populations. Without local legitimacy, there are questions about whether peacekeepers should be present. Peacekeeping operations also depend on local legitimacy to effectively implement their mandates. It is therefore important to understand how local populations perceive UN peacekeepers.

While researchers have studied local perceptions within specific peacekeeping contexts and compared historical data on local perceptions in past peacekeeping operations, few have compared recent data on local perceptions of current missions. This article therefore explores existing data on local perceptions of the four current multidimensional UN peacekeeping operations: the missions in the Central African Republic (CAR), the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Mali, and South Sudan. This data points to several cross-cutting insights that could help inform conversations around local perceptions of UN peacekeeping.

The paper concludes that there is wide variation in perceptions of peacekeepers, both between and within peacekeeping contexts and across time. This means that it rarely makes sense to talk about UN peacekeeping operations having or lacking “legitimacy.” Instead, they have multiple “legitimacies.” Understanding the factors behind these legitimacies requires better data on and nuanced analysis of local perceptions.

Download

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-rvuczo").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-rvuczo").fadeIn(300);});});

IPI together with the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs cohosted the thirteenth annual Trygve Lie Symposium on September 21st on the topic of “Civil Society’s Crucial Contribution to Promoting and Protecting Human Rights.” The event took on a particularly urgent tenor this year as recent attacks on human rights all over the world were juxtaposed against the 75th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the 25th anniversary of the adoption of the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders.

The discussion focused on recognizing the contributions of civil society in the fight for human rights. Panelists addressed contemporary threats to fundamental freedoms and the interrelated challenge of repression of civil society towards the essential questions of the event: Why is civil society getting weaker? And what can we do to strengthen it in the struggle for human rights?

Key to understanding the increased repression of civil society is an analysis of the factors that have contributed to recent attacks on human rights and human rights defenders. H.E. Anniken Huitfeldt, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Norway, provided the necessary framework. She opened with a reflection on 75 years of progress in fulfilling human rights but contrasted this progress with the rise of authoritarianism and democratic backsliding in the last decade. All speakers made clear that under authoritarian governments, disinformation campaigns, pushback against women’s and LGBTIQ+ rights, impunity for rights violations, concerted attacks against journalists and free speech, and military aggression thrive.

While the weakening of democratic institutions is tied to the rise of authoritarian tactics, panelists articulated the way a strong and supported civil society sector goes hand in hand with a strong democracy. Hina Jilani, Member of The Elders, illustrated the full scope of the kind of antidote to authoritarianism that civil society can be in her remarks: “Human rights defenders are not only a part of strengthening democracy, they are an indication of democratization itself and a model of further development.” Within this relationship between civil society and democracy, Lysa John, Secretary-General of CIVICUS identified how an explosion of civic action has been met with equal levels of repression and backlash. Calling 2020, “the year of censorship and surveillance,” she highlighted recent attempts to restrict dissent and the great threat that a loss or weakening of our fundamental freedoms of assembly and expression pose to civic organizing.

As the conversation came to a close, speakers provided strategies to combat the tactics deployed against civil society. Ulrika Modéer, UN Assistant Secretary-General highlighted the kind of intersectional approach that can maximize the contributions of civil society if the private sector and increased funding is leveraged to build greater institutional support. Zane Dalgor, Director-General of the Department of International Relations and Cooperation of South Africa offered an important reminder not to romanticize or generalize when we invoke “civil society” because it is not homogenous. Instead, he called for a deeper analysis of the financial backing of certain organizations and a closer look at the weakening of progressive civil society as a way of analyzing how authoritarian governments may be instrumentalizing civic organizations.

Opening Remarks:
Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, President and CEO of the International Peace Institute

Speakers:
H.E. Anniken Huitfeldt, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Norway
Hina Jilani, Member of The Elders, Advocate at the Supreme Court of Pakistan, Member of the High-Level Panel of Legal Experts on Media Freedom, and founder of Pakistan’s first all-women law firm, as well as Pakistan’s first Legal Aid Center and the Women’s Action Forum (Virtual)
Lysa John, Secretary-General of CIVICUS
Ulrika Modéer, UN Assistant Secretary-General and Director of the Bureau of External Relations and Advocacy, UNDP

Moderator:
Douglas Rutzen, President of the International Centre for Not-For-Profit Law (ICNL)

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-xbienu").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-xbienu").fadeIn(300);});});

In 2021, during their time as elected members of the UN Security Council, the Governments of Ireland, Mexico, and Kenya initiated the “Presidency Trio for Women, Peace and Security” in an effort to advance the implementation of the WPS Agenda. Since then, the activism of these three countries has evolved into the “Shared Commitments on WPS.” As of 2023, sixteen past and present UN Security Council members have joined the Shared Commitments. Today, all five newly elected member countries to the Council have pledged their commitment to making the WPS Agenda a priority. But world leaders, policymakers, practitioners, researchers, and women across the world know that there remains work to be done to bridge the gap between verbal commitment and the tangible implementation of goals.

To build on the momentum of the Presidency Trio and work towards that implementation, IPI together with the Permanent Mission of Ireland to the UN and the Sasakawa Peace Foundation, in collaboration with the Permanent Missions of the Republic of Slovenia, Japan, Switzerland, and Mexico, cohosted a symposium on September 20th entitled, “Innovations in Implementing the Women, Peace, and Security Agenda.”

This event brought together voices from civil society and national governments. Against the dire contemporary backdrop of global polarization, paralysis at the leadership level, and pushback on gender and human rights, panelists acknowledged the need for increased political will and essential transnational and cross-sector collaboration; but they also reminded the audience of current initiatives and future ambitions that have the potential to creatively address the challenges ahead.

In his opening remarks, H.E. Micheál Martin TD, Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Defence of Ireland, established one of the unifying messages of the discussion and the backbone of the WPS agenda: “It’s a simple and clear fact that women must be involved in making the policies that shape our lives and livelihoods.”

The panel discussion that followed was shaped by the transformative and urgent energy of the WPS agenda as speakers outlined the kind of coalitional network, strategy, and action across international, national, community, and civil society lines that will be required to more justly and comprehensively implement it on a global scale.

H.E. Tanja Fajon, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign and European Affairs of Slovenia, called for national accountability on the involvement of women: “We have to start from the inside…we have to lead by example.” She emphasized the importance of strengthening women’s participation at all levels of national diplomacy. Dr. Nadine Gasman, President of the National Institute of Women in Mexico, further elaborated on the need for work at the national level with an emphasis on the crucial role of community and local action within countries to “rebuild the social fabric from women’s perspective.”

Through a historical callback to Resolution 1325, the civil society roots of the agenda, and the trajectory of WPS in the multilateral arena, H.E. Pascale Baeriswyl, Permanent Representative of Switzerland to the UN, tied local and national commitment back to the international alliances and the role of leadership on the Security Council to implement an agenda that needs political will.

Kaavya Asoka, Executive Director of the NGO Working Group on Women, Peace and Security, concluded the discussion with a reminder that “women’s rights are not negotiable,” and that the implementation of the WPS agenda will “require extraordinary coordination and commitment from member states on the Security Council to hold the line, protect the normative agenda, and implement it, not just during thematic debates in WPS spaces, but in the most difficult negotiations processes in Syria, Myanmar, Sudan and all others on the Security Council’s agenda.”

Welcoming Remarks:

Dr. Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, President and CEO of the International Peace Institute

Opening Remarks:
H.E. Mr. Micheál Martin TD, Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Defence, Ireland
H.E. Ms. KAMIKAWA Yōko, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Japan

Speakers:
H.E. Ms. Tanja Fajon, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign and European Affairs, Slovenia
H.E. Ms. Pascale Baeriswyl, Permanent Representative of Switzerland to the UN
Dr. Nadine Gasman, President of the National Institute of Women, Mexico
Ms. Sarah Hendriks, Deputy Executive Director a.i. for Policy, Programmes, Civil Society & Intergovernmental Support, UN Women
Ms. Ilze Brands Kehris, Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights at the UN
Ms. Kaavya Asoka, Executive Director, the NGO Working Group on Women, Peace and Security

Moderator:
Dr. Adam Lupel, Vice President and COO of the International Peace Institute

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-dlojaq").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-dlojaq").fadeIn(300);});});

On Sunday, September 17, 2023, IPI held its eighteenth annual Ministerial Working Dinner on the Middle East in its Trygve Lie Center for Peace, Security, and Development. The dinner drew the participation of foreign ministers and other high-level representatives.

The event was chaired by IPI President Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein and co-hosted by Qatar and the European Union, represented respectively by Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al-Thani, Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Qatar, and Josep Borrell, Vice President and High Representative of European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.

Participants had a frank discussion on regional issues held under the Chatham House Rule.

Attendees included Hadja Lahbib, Minister of Foreign Affairs and European Affairs, and of Defence of the Kingdom of Belgium; Lars Lokke Rasmussen, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Denmark; Fuad Mohammad Hussein, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Iraq; Ayman Safadi, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Expatriates of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan; Murat Nurtleu, Deputy Prime Minister, and Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan; Abdallah Bouhabib, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Emigrants of Lebanon; Dominique Hasler, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Education, and Sport of the Principality of Liechtenstein; Catherine Colonna, Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs of France; Micheál Martin, Minister for Foreign Affairs and Defence of Ireland; Sheikh Jarrah Jaber Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs; Jean Asselborn, Minister of Foreign Affairs and European Affairs of Luxembourg; Khalifa Shaheen Almarar, State Secretary of the United Arab Emirates; Sayyid Badr bin Hamad bin Hamood Albusaidi, Foreign Minister of the Sultanate of Oman; Riyad Al-Maliki, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the State of Palestine; Ahmet Yildiz, Deputy Minister of Foreign of Republic of Türkiye; Anniken Huitfeldt, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Norway; Mohammed bin Abdulaziz Al-Khulaifi, Minister of State to the State of Qatar; Lolwah Rasshid Al-Khater, Minister of State for International Cooperation to the State of Qatar; Sameh Hassan Shoukry Selim, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Arab Republic of Egypt; and Abdullatif bin Rashid Al Zayani, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Bahrain.

Also present were Luise Amtsberg, Federal Government Commissioner for Human Rights Policy and Humanitarian Assistance; Jasem Mohamed AlBudaiwi, Secretary General of the Gulf Cooperation Council; Mirjana Spoljaric Egger, President of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC); Prince Turki AlFaisal, Chairman of the King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies and member of IPI’s International Advisory Council; Hissein Brahim Taha, Secretary-General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation; Amr Moussa, Former Secretary General of the League of Arab States and member of IPI’s International Advisory Council; Rosemary A. DiCarlo, United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Political and Peacebuilding Affairs; Mary Robinson, Chair of the Elders, First female President of Ireland, former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights; Miguel Moratinos, High Representative for the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations; Philippe Lazzarini, Commissioner-General of United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East; Ferid Belhaj, Vice President of the World Bank; Jeffrey Feltman, Former USG –DPPA and John C. Whitehead Visiting Fellow in International Diplomacy in the Foreign Policy program, Brookings Institute; Daniel Levy, President of US / Middle East Project (USMEP); Tor Wennesland, UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process and Personal Representative of the UN Secretary-General to the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority; Sven Koopmans, EU Special Representative for the Middle East Peace Process; and Alya Ahmed Saif Al-Thani, Permanent Representative of Qatar to the UN.

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-bjxgyj").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-bjxgyj").fadeIn(300);});});

Panelists for a high-level policy forum cohosted by IPI and the Open Society Foundations (OSF) on September 12th assessed the current health of the multilateral system and outlined strategies to strengthen multilateralism as a whole in a timely conversation ahead of the 78th Session of the General Assembly. In a bid for hope, they highlighted opportunities to bolster collective efforts and collaboration within the international community in the face of the converging and increasingly complex challenges of our time. The discussion was anchored in the principle of inclusion as speakers offered their recommendations for meaningful reform, gender equity, empowering states of all sizes, and building innovative alliances across nations, civil society, and the private sector.

IPI has been involved in the central debates of the multilateral system for many years, and this event provided the latest intervention on the evolving state of multilateralism with an updated question: Is the multilateral system on the verge of collapse? To shed light on both pressure points and areas for growth alike, the policy forum was framed by empirical data in the findings of the Multilateralism Index, produced in 2022 by IPI and the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP), and drew on the results of a new global poll by OSF conducted in May and July of this year. The poll, “Open Society Barometer: Can Democracy Deliver?” surveyed more than 36,000 respondents from 30 countries representing the views of more than 5.5. billion people on global solidarity, democracy, human rights, financing for climate change and debt, and international governance.

President of the 78th Session of the General Assembly, H.E. Dennis Francis, set the tone for what will be required of all global decision makers for a cohesive multilateral system built for the advancement of all people. He delivered a call to lead by example and a pledge of transparency from the very top of the UN-based system. He highlighted three key strategies: restore trust by “vehemently denouncing behavior that violates the cherished tenets of the UN Charter;” reassess meaningful and complementary engagement in the international system; and insist on inclusion through the empowerment and involvement of all populations.

Addressing the speed and complexity of modern challenges will require agile solutions that recognize our interdependence and are willing to think imaginatively about future partnerships and alliances that break from the existing international architecture. For this task, Former President of Liberia and Nobel Peace Laureate H.E. Ellen Johnson Sirleaf emphasized the need to “prioritize the most vulnerable, marginalized populations,” in the decision-making processes that most affect them as those “who bear the brunt of interconnected challenges.” She noted the particular significance of women’s participation as key for development and sustainable peace and an essential piece of the multilateral puzzle.

As a representative of states facing existential challenges, Permanent Representative of Costa Rica to the UN Maritza Chan, reminded the audience of the pivotal role that small states can play if we provide them with the necessary resources and expertise on emergent technologies and dare to unlock their potential to address global problems in areas where they may already be leading the charge, such as AI advancement. Meghna Abraham, Executive Director of the Center for Economic and Social Rights, provided a voice for the civil society sector on the panel. She advocated for civil society as the model to follow in going beyond proscriptive silos and fostering innovative responses. Abraham firmly asserted the presence of numerous opportunities for reform but noted the contingency of those opportunities for change on “a shift in power and a shift in resources.” Underpinning panelists’ talking points, was the sentiment that in order to change the system so that it will actually work for people, enable them to survive, and have ownership in the multilateral process, we will need mobilization across disciplines and attention to the many contradictions of the very system designed to protect them.

Read the report>>

Opening Remarks:
H.E. Dennis Francis, President of the 78th Session of the General Assembly

Speakers:
Lord Mark Malloch-Brown, President, Open Society Foundations
H.E. Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Former President of Liberia, Nobel Peace Laureate, Former Chair of ECOWAS, Founder of the Ellen Johnson Presidential Center for Women and Development, Former Co-Chair of the Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response, and Co-Chair of the UN Secretary-General’s High-Level Advisory Board on Effective Multilateralism (HLAB)
H.E. Maritza Chan, Permanent Representative of Costa Rica to the United Nations
Meghna Abraham, Executive Director of the Center for Economic and Social Rights

Moderator:
Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, President and CEO, International Peace Institute

The United Nations has increasingly focused on the modernization of peace operations, including through the Strategy for the Digital Transformation of UN Peacekeeping. However, the full potential of the link between digital transformation, new technologies, and peacekeeping has not yet been realized, particularly when it comes to the protection of civilians (POC). Too often, the Department of Peace Operations (DPO) deploys new technological tools first and only then determines how to apply them to POC objectives. As a result, mission staff are often harnessing technologies for POC in an ad hoc manner.

One of the main ways new technologies can contribute to POC is through timely and effective early-warning mechanisms. Platforms like SAGE and Unite Aware can help missions analyze data on threats and violence against civilians. Intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance tools like satellite imagery and unarmed aerial vehicles (UAVs) can aid in the collection of such data. The monitoring of communication platforms can also provide contextual information and insight into trends in public opinion, giving clues about future waves of violence.

This paper attempts to contribute to the ongoing reflection on the interaction between new technologies and POC, particularly in relation to early warning. The paper reviews peace operations’ use of new technologies and data, which could be further used for early warning for POC. It then discusses the limitations and risks of the use of new technologies for POC, particularly around data protection and privacy. The paper concludes by calling for a theory of change for how new technologies can contribute to POC in peacekeeping operations.

Download

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-twoawb").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-twoawb").fadeIn(300);});});

With just a few months until the SDG and Climate Ambition Summits, and with COP28 fast approaching, member states must do more to meet their climate commitments. Current projections estimate a global 2.8-degree increase in temperature by 2100. The Paris Agreement’s goal to limit warming to a 1.5-degree increase is still achievable, but global carbon emissions must be cut by 45 percent.

In response to the recent IPCC synthesis report, the UN Secretary-General has launched an “acceleration agenda” to raise ambition on cutting emissions and achieve a quantum leap in the delivery of climate justice. Last year at COP27, the UN Secretary-General called for a Climate Solidarity Pact urging all big emitters to cut emissions, efforts to secure financing for emerging economies to reduce their emissions, and an “acceleration agenda” to advance the process. These efforts require stakeholders to come together to supercharge efforts for a just transition.

To accelerate action by governments, business, finance, local authorities, and civil society, and hear from “first movers and doers,” the UN Secretary-General is convening a Climate Ambition Summit at UN Headquarters in New York on September 20, 2023. And in the words of the Secretary-General, “The world is watching—and the planet can’t wait.”

Ahead of the Climate Ambition Summit, this policy forum on July 27th examined what could be achieved from the summit. IPI President and Chief Executive Officer Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein and Special Adviser to the Secretary-General on Climate Action and Just Transition Selwin Charles Hart discussed the Summit, ways to make it a success, and inspire climate action.  Al Hussein underscored that the Summit will be taking place against a backdrop where there is “a growing state of mistrust between the developing and the developed world.” At the core of this mistrust are the promises made that have not been kept.

Among the many issues affected by this distrust is the new loss and damage fund, which parties agreed to last year. Agreement on its details and operationalization will be a major test of trust and political will between countries. Read IPI’s report on loss and damage by Michael Franczak to learn more.

There are two cross-cutting themes at the core of the Summit: cooperation and acceleration. It highlights the need for cooperation across borders and across society to accelerate decarbonization and build climate-resilient societies. Engaging young people is critical, as evidenced by the Secretary-General’s establishment of a youth advisory group, whose input will feed into the summit and help push the needle.

Hart asserted that “we’ve run out of time. Decisions taken within this decade will make or break our efforts to have a livable, sustainable, prosperous, and secure future. Human activity has caused this problem, and human ingenuity and creativity can get us out.”

Speakers:
Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, President and Chief Executive Officer, International Peace Institute
Selwin Charles Hart, Special Adviser to the Secretary-General on Climate Action and Just Transition

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-klueso").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-klueso").fadeIn(300);});}); Download the Report

The women, peace, and security (WPS) agenda consists of four pillars, including participation and protection. However, engagement on these pillars has often been disconnected, with inadequate attention to the relationship between them. This can undermine progress on both pillars, as efforts to promote women’s meaningful participation in peacebuilding processes fall short without adequate protection measures that make that participation possible.

On July 26th, IPI hosted a launch event to share research findings on the nexus of women’s protection and participation in Libya presented in a new report authored by scholars Catherine Turner and Aisling Swaine. This report builds on previous IPI research focused on protection and participation in Northern Ireland.

During the event, participants heard directly from women representing civil society organizations in the region. Founder and CEO of Karama Hibaaq Osman discussed her work with the WPS agenda and some of the challenges she’s encountered. Osman highlighted Resolution 1325, which is non-binding and falls to the discretion of governments, many of whom do not see it as a priority, leaving its success in the hands of civil society and women’s organizations. While discussing gender parity and the relevancy of women’s integration into specific male-dominated roles, such as defense minister or director of the CIA, Osman urged participants to ask the question “Is the military becoming feminized, or are the women becoming militarized?”

Co-Founder and CEO of the Libyan Women’s Platform for Peace Zahra’ Langhi, drew upon her 12 years of activism in Libya and asserted that women’s participation is grounded in traditional, customary mechanisms and local contexts, “It is not enough to empower women, we need to dis-empower warlords.”

UN Women Policy Specialist Sarah Taylor outlined key recommendations, one of which includes responding to evolving threats and evolving participation spaces, both online and offline. Senior Gender Advisor and Chief of Gender Equality Section, United Nations Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL) Nada Darwazeh expressed that we don’t need women with a PhD or women to be fully engaged in politics: “What matters is that they’re there.”

The launch event provided an opportunity to share the report’s findings with policymakers and to engage in conversation with other researchers and practitioners. It further sought to help member states and UN officials align policies related to women’s protection and participation with the realities on the ground.

Welcoming Remarks:
Adam Lupel, Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, International Peace Institute

Speakers:
Catherine Turner, Associate Professor of International Law and Deputy Director of the Durham Global Security Institute, Durham Law School (virtual)
Aisling Swaine, Professor of Gender Studies in the School of Social Policy, Social Work and Social Justice, University College Dublin (virtual)
Hibaaq Osman, Founder and CEO of Karama
Zahra’ Langhi, Co-Founder and CEO of the Libyan Women’s Platform for Peace
Nada Darwazeh, Senior Gender Advisor and Chief of Gender Equality Section, United Nations Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL) (virtual)
Sarah Taylor, Policy Specialist, UN Women

Moderator:
Phoebe Donnelly, Senior Fellow and Head of Women, Peace, and Security, International Peace Institute

Historically, the women, peace, and security (WPS) agenda’s four pillars—prevention, protection, participation, and relief and recovery—have largely developed along separate trajectories. This has started to change with the UN Security Council’s recent progress in recognizing the link between women’s participation in peace and security and their protection, as well as the need to create “enabling environments” for women’s participation. Nonetheless, there is often a gap between international frameworks on participation and protection and the realities experienced by women, especially in conflict-affected contexts.

To address that gap, this paper analyzes the experiences of women in Libya and the obstacles they face when participating in peace and security and political processes. Using an ecological framework, it details the risks that women who participate encounter at six levels: individual, interpersonal, community, national institutional, societal, and global institutional. Through this analysis, the report deepens the evidence for and understanding of the critical relationship between protection and participation, broadens analysis of and provides pointers for the mainstreaming of WPS in UN mission mandates, and provides a new framework to advance the creation of safe and enabling environments for women’s participation.

In order to advance women’s full, equal, meaningful, and safe participation, the report offers the following recommendations.

For the Security Council and member states:

• Continue to build on progress on mainstreaming WPS in mission mandates;
• Prioritize the implementation of Resolution 2493’s provision on creating “enabling environments” for women’s participation; and
• Ensure gender advisers with context-specific expertise are mandated and properly resourced in all UN missions.

For UN missions, agencies, and partners:

• Conduct context-specific participation and protection analyses;
• Strengthen coordination between the UN missions, UN agencies, and other international organizations working on related issues to address the full range of protection-related barriers to women’s participation; and
• Ensure a gender-sensitive approach to the use of digital tools for participation to reflect the increased risks to women in online environments.

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-mcjpwc").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-mcjpwc").fadeIn(300);});});

During an event cohosted by IPI and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences on July 20th, panelists discussed the challenging global context for delivering humanitarian health responses, as well as specific issues such as the need to address gender-based violence in humanitarian health responses, the imperative to localize humanitarian action, and the opportunities and risks at the intersection of health, development, and peace.

The Secretary General’s New Agenda for Peace notes “conflict and disease can intersect in multiple ways and the risk posed are currently not addressed holistically and in a coordinated manner.” The discussion, which featured participants from a range of backgrounds, contributed to an enhanced systematic understanding of these constraints.

In May 2023, in partnership with MIT Press, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences released a special issue of the journal Daedalus, “Delivering Humanitarian Health Services in Violent Conflicts,” as part of the Academy’s project on Rethinking the Humanitarian Health Response to Violent Conflict. As the launch of this special issue, the policy forum brought together academics, scholars, policymakers, and practitioners to discuss the contemporary challenges and opportunities in humanitarian health delivery.

President of the International Rescue Committee, David Miliband set the scene by highlighting two major trends in global politics. The first trend is the “growing global risks in a hyper-connected world,” and secondly, political/geopolitical fragmentation, a trend which exacerbates those risks.

Addressing the health needs of people on the move requires rethinking the fluidity of health systems and the importance to expand the paradigm of the current health system and framework. Fouad Fouad, Associate Professor of Public Health Practice at the American University of Beirut suggested a potential “health system beyond borders,” which could foster a more integrated response. International health NGOs could be uniquely well positioned to operationalize commitments to localize humanitarian health delivery and better support actors in leadership roles, noted Jennifer Welsh, Canada 150 Research Chair in Global Governance and Security at McGill University. However, there is a lack of data to assess how localization could work in the humanitarian health sector and a need for more public opinion research on local populations. Welsh reminded participants that there are preexisting tools that could be enhanced.

IPI non-resident fellow Dirk Druet expressed that “given the realities of where health emergencies are likely to take place in the future, adopting emergency humanitarian responses to operating in conflict situations is absolutely critical to helping the most vulnerable.” In the realm of emergency health situations, the international community lacks clarity on the practical implications of adopting a conflict-informed approach.

Daedalus is the Academy’s open-access quarterly journal, featuring multidisciplinary, authoritative essays centered on a theme or subject and drawing on the intellectual capacity of Academy members and outside experts. Please visit here to see the May 2023 issue.

Welcoming/Opening Remarks:
Adam Lupel, Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, International Peace Institute
David Oxtoby, President, American Academy of Arts and Sciences

Panelists:
David Miliband, President, International Rescue Committee
Jennifer Welsh, Canada 150 Research Chair in Global Governance and Security, McGill University; Project Cochair, Rethinking the Humanitarian Health Response to Violent Conflict
Fouad Fouad, Associate Professor of Public Health Practice, American University of Beirut (virtual)
Dirk Druet, Affiliate Researcher, McGill University; Non-Resident Fellow, International Peace Institute (virtual)

Moderator:
Jenna Russo, Director of Research and Head of the Brian Urquhart Center for Peace Operations, International Peace Institute

Closing Remarks:
Paul Wise, Richard E. Behrman Professor of Child Health and Society, Stanford University; Project Cochair, Rethinking the Humanitarian Health Response to Violent Conflict

As part of MONUSCO’s mandate renewal in December 2022, the UN Security Council called for the secretary-general to outline pathways for the mission’s transition and withdrawal from the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), along with possible options for the future reconfiguration of the UN’s presence in the country, by July 2023. This past year, the rise of the M23 and other non-state armed groups in eastern DRC has led to the deployment of regional and bilateral forces, while rising anti-MONUSCO sentiment has further restricted the UN’s operating space. Following widespread and lethal civilian demonstrations against the mission’s perceived ineffectiveness throughout 2022, the government of the DRC notified the UN Security Council of its intention to reassess the agreed timetable for the mission’s departure, citing the deep displeasure of the Congolese people.

In this context, the International Peace Institute (IPI), Security Council Report, and the Stimson Center cohosted a roundtable on June 16, 2023, to discuss the UN’s presence in the DRC in the short and longer term. Convened under the Chatham House rule of non-attribution, this workshop brought together member states, UN officials, independent experts, and civil society stakeholders. The discussion sought to inform the UN Secretariat’s planning and discussions among UN member states on the prioritization and sequencing of MONUSCO’s transition and prompt creative thinking on the UN’s civilian, police, and military reconfiguration in the country, taking into account the deployment of regional and bilateral forces.

Participants raised several key considerations for MONUSCO’s transition and the UN’s reconfiguration:

• Prioritize a gradual, responsible, and conditions-based transition that addresses benchmarks 1–4 and 15 in the joint DRC-UN transition plan, emphasizing the protection of civilians as a priority task;
• Develop tailored transition strategies for each of the eastern provinces in collaboration with the UN country team (UNCT), the host government, and local civil society that reflect the unique conflict drivers and dynamics in each region;
• Call upon member states in the region to uphold their political commitment to the Luanda and Nairobi peace processes, ensuring the DRC’s and the region’s long-term stability;
• Urge member states to provide innovative, robust funding that enables the transfer of programmatic work from the mission to the UNCT, where appropriate;
• Continue to support the delivery of humanitarian aid and DDR processes where possible;
• Provide technical expertise in the lead-up to national elections slated for December 2023; and
• Adopt a “right fit,” tailored approach for the UN’s longer-term reconfiguration that embraces creative thinking, goes beyond a military approach, and addresses the drivers of conflict.

Download

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-pbekqa").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-pbekqa").fadeIn(300);});});

The historic decision on loss and damage (L&D) at the 2022 UN Climate Change Conference (COP27) calls for a new fund and funding arrangements focused on addressing L&D. It also tasks a Transitional Committee with preparing recommendations on the new fund and funding arrangements for adoption at the 2023 UN Climate Change Conference (COP28) in Dubai. IPI President Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein describes this decision made at COP27 in Sharm el-Sheikh as one of the most significant developments since the 2015 Paris Agreement.

IPI together with Oxford Climate Policy cohosted a policy forum on June 30th entitled “Innovative Finance for Loss and Damage: Capitalizing the New Fund.” During the event, participants discussed deficiencies and shortfalls in L&D funding and underscored innovative ways to capitalize on the new fund. Panelists also emphasized the need to take into account the global economic and political context, including the effects of COVID-19 and other crises.

With roughly six months left until COP28, the Transitional Committee will need to work efficiently to achieve its mandate, which includes determining the fund’s financial inputs or sources of capitalization. A new fund for addressing loss and damage will almost certainly require capitalization through a combination of old and new paths. Based on trends in official development assistance, contributions from developed country governments, though important, are unlikely to be sufficient to capitalize a new fund at the scale needed. Thus, it will likely be necessary to include new or “innovative” sources of finance. One idea is to combine conventional (public) contributions from donor countries and contributions from private donors using a specially designed tax, as countries have done with air travel to fund Unitaid. Such a tax could involve levies on air travel, bunker fuel, fossil-fuel extraction, greenhouse-gas emissions, or financial transactions. Another idea is to “frontload” contributions through the issuance of bonds, as the International Finance Facility for Immunisation (IFFIm) has done with its “vaccine bonds.”

Discussants asserted that multiple solutions are needed and presented several innovative options. IPI Research Fellow Michael Franczak noted the failure of developed countries to meet Official Development Assistance (ODA) commitments and introduced the option of a shipping levy. According to World Bank findings, putting a price on carbon could raise 40 to 60 billion dollars from the shipping industry between 2025 and 2050. While 22 countries have declared support for the principle of a levy on carbon emissions, many developing countries have been wary of tax burden transfers. Franczak noted the need for common but differentiated responsibility (CBDR) to effectively operationalize a carbon tax levy.

“The adverse impacts that we are already experiencing are both attributed and associated with changes in global systems,” stated Koko Warner Director of the Global Data Institute, International Organization for Migration. In many cases these impacts are irreversible and deeply challenging for our financial systems, we need to think about flexibility in the real economy. Long recognized as an authority on loss and damage, Managing Director of Oxford Climate Policy and Director of the European Capacity Building Initiative Benito Müller discussed his proposal for international climate solidarity levies and levy on air travel to finance the Loss and Damage Fund. Chris Canavan put forward the idea of using bonds or frontloading to make the Loss and Damage Fund’s financing immediately available. Assistant Professor of Environmental Studies at Colby College Stacy-Ann Robinson affirmed that the conversation about innovative finance for loss and damage is about livelihood: “People matter and we need to center equity and justice.”

The panel contextualized for the New York audience current discussions on innovative finance for L&D, including within the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), in Paris at the Summit for a New Global Financial Pact, and at the International Maritime Organization, as well as best practices and examples from existing entities like Unitaid and IFFIm.

Opening Remarks:
Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, President and CEO, International Peace Institute

Speakers:
Michael Franczak, Research Fellow, International Peace Institute
Koko Warner, Director, Global Data Institute, International Organization for Migration
Benito Müller, Managing Director of Oxford Climate Policy and Director of the European Capacity Building Initiative
Chris Canavan, Senior Advisor, Cygnum Capital
Stacy-Ann Robinson, Assistant Professor of Environmental Studies, Colby College

Moderator:
Zeid Ra’ad Al-Hussein, President and Chief Executive Officer, International Peace Institute

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-yvuqer").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-yvuqer").fadeIn(300);});});

How have recent conflicts impacted global peace and what can the changing geopolitical landscape tell us about the likelihood of future conflict? On June 28th, IPI together with the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP) cohosted a policy forum entitled “A Measure of Peace: Key Findings from the 2023 Global Peace Index,” to address these questions and discuss how they could impact multilateral efforts and national priorities of member states in the future.

Produced by the IEP, the Global Peace Index (GPI) is the world’s leading measure of global peacefulness. It presents the most comprehensive data-driven analysis to date on trends in peace, the economic value of peace, and how to develop peaceful societies. The GPI covers 163 countries comprising 99.7 percent of the world’s population, using twenty-three qualitative and quantitative indicators from highly respected sources, and measures the state of peace across three domains: the level of societal safety and security; the extent of ongoing domestic and international conflict; and the degree of militarization.

Michael Collins, IEP Executive Director Americas provided an overview of key findings from the 17th edition of the GPI. Collins noted that peacefulness has continued to deteriorate this year and is the lowest it has been since the inception of the index. On a positive note, there have been improvements in peacefulness, which include a reduction in political terror, and surprisingly, in terms of military expenditure. While there has been an increase in military expenditure, in terms of GDP it has decreased on a global average. Unfortunately, the 2023 GPI found that “expenditure on peacebuilding and peacekeeping totaled $34.1 billion in 2022, which equals only 0.4 percent of military spending.”

Chief of Peacebuilding Strategy and Partnerships Roselyn Akombe stressed that because the economic impact of conflict is so vast, we need to rethink and focus on peace. Akombe also outlined four takeaways from the GPI, beginning by emphasizing that “numbers count” and economists provide valuable contributions by effectively quantifying peace and providing the data that situates where we are in terms of peace. Second, the GPI is making a business case for prevention. Measuring the cost of war and comparing returns of investment demonstrate the need to collectively work towards peacebuilding and sustaining peace. Third, through reading the 2023 GPI and looking at the key asks of the UN Secretary-General in the New Agenda for Peace, there exists confirmation that we are on the right path. Ending on a positive note, Akombe highlighted that when there are systematic responses towards building peace, it makes a difference. She cited the example of terrorism, which has decreased as a result of concerted efforts to prevent violent extremism and address its underlying causes.

In terms of the devastation that we are witnessing in the world, the trend of internationalized intra-state conflict is egregious. IPI Vice President Adam Lupel expressed gratitude for IPI’s partnership with IEP and appreciatively acknowledged IEP’s work on the positive findings of peacefulness. Lupel and Collings further discussed the positive peace angle, clarifying that while the 2023 GPI found 84 countries became more peaceful, 74 countries became less peaceful. It is much more difficult to build peace than it is to destroy it.

Welcome Remarks:
H.E. Mitchell Peter Fifield, Permanent Representative of Australia to the UN

Speaker:
Michael Collins, Executive Director Americas, Institute for Economics and Peace

Discussant:
Roselyn Akombe, Chief of Peacebuilding Strategy and Partnerships, UN Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs

Moderator:
Adam Lupel, Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, International Peace Institute

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-lejubp").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-lejubp").fadeIn(300);});});

Spring 2023 marked the fifth anniversary of the publication of the flagship UN-World Bank report “Pathways for Peace: Inclusive Approaches to Preventing Violent Conflict.” The report reviewed conflict trends, drew lessons from emerging research, including growing evidence on the importance of addressing patterns of exclusion and inequality, and building on 19 case studies, identified lessons of successful national prevention efforts. The report also made recommendations for ways to strengthen the international prevention architecture, including early warning and early response. Over the past five months, the UN and the World Bank have benefited from a series of reflections from Member States, think tanks, civil society, and multilateral and regional partners on the relevance of the findings of this report.

On June 26th, in partnership with PBSO and the World Bank, IPI cohosted a policy forum entitled “Inclusive Approaches to Preventing Violent Conflict: 5th Anniversary of Pathways for Peace Report,” to reflect and discuss its contemporary significance and ways forward for prevention and peacebuilding in rapidly evolving global and regional contexts. During opening remarks, Farhad Peiker, Acting Special Representative to the UN World Bank Group, highlighted several noteworthy advancements catalyzed by the report. These advancements include a notable shift in the perceptions of fragility, conflict, and violence within the World Bank, UN, and other institutions. Acknowledging that these issues pose critical developmental obstacles that threaten efforts to alleviate extreme poverty in both low- and middle-income countries. The influence of the Pathways for Peace initiative has prompted the World Bank to actively incorporate and prioritize the integration of the concept of a “livable planet” into its core mission and vision, while still prioritizing the eradication of extreme poverty.

The Pathways for Peace initiative has produced a series of papers as well as consultative workshops and digital exchanges hosted by the Cairo Center (CCCPA), the UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESWCA), the International Dialogue for Peacebuilding and Statebuilding (IDPS), the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI) and the Quaker UN Office. Kavita Desai, Quaker UN representative outlined some significant opportunities to strengthen the international architecture: First is the New Agenda for Peace which presents the opportunity to enhance peacebuilding and prevention, and incorporate innovation which can help put prevention back at the heart of the UN’s work; Second is the follow-up to last year’s resolution on financing for peacebuilding which creates space to achieve more prevention-focused financing strategies that also offer the flexibility to improve evidence bases and be informed by civil society; Third is strengthening existing data tools and coordination among them, including monthly regional reviews along with recovery peacebuilding assessments, early warning mechanisms and other analytical tools.

In the second session, participants focused on identifying and addressing the shortcomings of the Pathways for Peace report, particularly with regard to issues of exclusion and inequality. H.E. Arlene B. Tickner, Deputy Permanent Representative of Colombia to the UN, drew on her academic expertise to shed light on these gaps, highlighting the case of Colombia’s peacebuilding efforts as an illustrative example. Participants also engaged in a comprehensive discussion on various approaches to peace and the different methodologies to measure it. IPI Senior Adviser Youssef Mahmoud played a crucial role in facilitating the latter part of the discussion, stressing the importance of moving beyond the restoration of norms and instead emphasizing the need for their transformation.

Overall, the event distilled some of the lessons of these reflections, identified critical outcomes for prevention and peacebuilding, and provided a hybrid space to discuss future opportunities to reinforce shared prevention and peacebuilding lessons in rapidly evolving global and regional contexts.

Welcoming/Closing Remarks:
Adam Lupel, Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, International Peace Institute
Farhad Peikar, Acting Special Representative to the UN, World Bank Group
Elizabeth Spehar, UN Assistant Secretary-General for Peacebuilding Support
Asif Khan, Director of Policy and Mediation Division, UN Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs
Franck Bousquet, Deputy Director, Fragile and Conflict-affected States, International Monetary Fund

Speakers/Moderators:
Roselyn Akombe, Chief of Peacebuilding Strategy and Partnerships, UN Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs
Adam Day, Head of the Geneva Office, United Nations University Centre for Policy Research (virtual)
Richard Gowan, UN Director, International Crisis Group
H.E. Arlene B. Tickner, Deputy Permanent Representative of Colombia to the UN
Saji Prelis, Child and Youth Programmes, Search for Common Ground
Youssef Mahmoud, Senior Adviser, International Peace Institute

Discussants:
Representatives from the Cairo Center for Conflict Resolution, Peacekeeping and Peacebuilding (CCCPA), UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA), International Dialogue on Peacebuilding and Statebuilding (IDPS), Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI) and Quaker UN Office

IPI is very pleased to announce that Jean Todt was elected as Chair of IPI’s Board of Directors on June 21, 2023. Mr. Todt has served as IPI’s interim Chair since March 6, 2023. IPI is grateful for the contributions he has provided to the organization since first joining the Board in 2015 and is looking forward to his leadership as the organization expands the breadth of its work on pivotal issues of our time, including climate action.

Mr. Todt is a well-known and respected philanthropist who devotes his time to several charitable causes. He is one of the Founders and Vice-President of the Institut du Cerveau et de la Moelle Epinière (ICM), an institute focused on medical research for brain and spinal cord disorders.

He started his career in 1966 as a rally co-driver and participated in the World Rally Championship that he won with Talbot Lotus in 1981. Between 1981 and 1990, he was Director of Racing and Founder of Peugeot Talbot Sport and then Director of Sporting Activities of PSA Peugeot Citroën, between 1990 and 1993. Between 1993 and 2006, he was Team Principal of Formula 1, Ferrari. He then became Chief Executive Officer of Ferrari between 2006 and 2009.

He is the former President of the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA) and was first elected to this post in October 2009 and re-elected in 2013 and 2017 until 2021.

Mr. Todt was awarded the Humanitarian of the Year Award by the United Nations Association of New York in 2016 and the Lifetime Achievement for Contribution to Road Safety by the European Commission in 2022.

At present, Jean Todt holds the position of UN Secretary-General’s Special Envoy for Road Safety and is deeply committed to IPI’s mission. He succeeds the Honorable Kevin Rudd who served as Chair since June 1, 2018.

IPI President Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein strongly endorses this decision:

“Jean Todt is a visionary. His successful leadership in business, including his role as the leader of the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA)—a complex international organization—and his commitment to improving the lives of others, particularly through his philanthropy and work as the UN Secretary-General’s Special Envoy for Road Safety, have perfectly prepared him to lead IPI as Chair of the Board. We are honored to work together as we address the most pressing challenges facing our planet today.”

In 2016, the International Peace Institute (IPI), the Stimson Center, and Security Council Report established their now longstanding project “Prioritization and Sequencing of Security Council Mandates.” Since the project’s inception, more than thirty closed-door workshops have been convened with the aim of making UN peace operations more effective by helping member-state representatives, UN staff, and independent experts analyze how mandates can be adapted to reflect overarching political objectives and better respond to political processes and operational dynamics on the ground.

Given the interest in continuing this project, the project partners decided to convene a lessons-learned workshop to capture feedback and document suggestions for improving the project. This note summarizes observations raised during the first part of the workshop, focusing on current trends, practices, and dynamics related to the mandating process within the Security Council and its impact on UN peace operations. Overall, the discussion revolved around three main issues: the increasingly polarized Security Council and its mandating practices, the role of elected members (E10) and host states in the penholder system, and the effective prioritization and sequencing of mandates.

The following were key points from the discussion regarding future Security Council mandates:

• Participants emphasized that divides in the Security Council have hindered the ability of UN missions to effectively carry out their mandates. They therefore suggested that the Secretariat be more involved in conversations between member states and peacekeeping missions while cautioning against the potential divides this could create between missions and host states.
• Participants recommended an increase in communication between penholders and host states during the mandate negotiation process but warned against the possibility of host governments exerting undue pressure during negotiations.
• Participants agreed that streamlining mandate language has allowed missions to adapt to evolving situations on the ground but asserted that it is still too early to determine the full impact of cuts in language, particularly on priority activities like human rights, the protection of civilians, and women, peace, and security.

Download

The UN Security Council is expected to renew the mandate of the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (MINUSMA) in June 2023. Ten years after MINUSMA was established, the mission is at a critical juncture. As implementation of the 2015 Agreement on Peace and Reconciliation in Mali remains stalled, there is no longer “a peace to keep,” and mistrust is growing between Mali’s traditional partners and the country’s transitional authorities. These political challenges, alongside access restrictions, tensions over the mission’s human rights reporting, and the withdrawal or planned withdrawal of some countries’ peacekeeping contingents, have undermined the mission’s ability to implement its strategic priorities. The upcoming negotiations will also unfold in the context of broader geopolitical tensions in the Security Council.

In this context, the International Peace Institute (IPI), the Stimson Center, and Security Council Report co-hosted a roundtable discussion on May 18, 2023. This roundtable offered a platform for member states, UN officials, civil society stakeholders, and independent experts to share their assessments of the situation in Mali in a frank and collaborative manner. The discussion was intended to help the Security Council make more informed decisions on the prioritization and sequencing of MINUSMA’s mandate, as well as the mission’s strategic orientation and actions on the ground.

Participants largely agreed that MINUSMA’s mandated priorities are still relevant to the UN’s overall engagement in the country, even amid security concerns and difficult negotiations with the host state. They recommended that the Security Council focus on providing guidelines for the maintenance of the current number of uniformed personnel with a focus on strategic priorities and a consolidated footprint. In renewing MINUSMA’s mandate, the council will likely need to consider the following issues:

• Prioritizing the identification of new troop-contributing countries (TCCs) to ensure the mission is operating at full capacity, particularly countries with strong self-protection capabilities;
• Continuing to engage with the host state where possible, including in de-confliction of troop movements, training on human rights, election support, and support to the stabilization strategy for central Mali;
• Promoting host authorities’ compliance with the status of forces agreement (SOFA) and ending restrictions on flights and ground movements;
• Working to rebuild commitment to the 2015 Agreement for Peace and Reconciliation among the signatory parties and stepping up engagement on cease-fire monitoring mechanisms;
• Considering shifting toward a more mobile posture that could allow the mission to be more proactive in protecting civilians while reducing the resources devoted to self-protection;
• Remaining committed to the mission’s human rights mandate and adherence to the Human Rights Due Diligence Policy; and
• Investing further in strategic communications and community engagement initiatives to clarify the mission’s mandate and counter negative narratives about the mission, including in parts of the country where the mission is less active.

Download

In March 2023, the UN Security Council extended the mandate of the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) for a twelve-month period. In parallel, the council adopted Resolution 2679 (2023), which requested that the UN secretary-general provide the Security Council with an integrated, independent assessment of the international community’s approach to Afghanistan by November 17, 2023. Two years after the Taliban’s takeover of Kabul, the council identified the need for an independent assessment to make recommendations for the international community’s united reengagement with Afghanistan.

In this context, the International Peace Institute (IPI) hosted a roundtable on May 16, 2023, to discuss the independent assessment process and provide input from humanitarian experts during the preparatory phase of the assessment. This roundtable provided a platform for exchanges between humanitarian organizations, the UN Secretariat, member states, civil society groups, and independent experts, including those based in Geneva and Afghanistan. The discussion offered a chance to depoliticize discussions and unite behind a single strategy at a time when the Taliban are playing on divisions within the Security Council.

The participants’ recommendations for the independent assessment team included:

• Ensure the team includes humanitarian and gender experts;
• Facilitate an inclusive, meaningful, and safe process;
• Avoid duplicating other efforts and leverage existing platforms;
• Account for the diversity and complexity of the humanitarian sector;
• Consider the broader challenges facing the humanitarian sector;
• Make recommendations for a sustainable response that goes beyond humanitarian action; and
• Produce a strategic report rather than a detailed operational roadmap.

Download