UN Peacekeeping
Expected Council Action
In March, the Security Council will hold a high-level open debate on “Ensuring adaptability in UN Peace Operations—responding to realities”. Denmark’s Minister for Foreign Affairs, Lars Løkke Rasmussen, will chair the meeting, which is a signature event of Denmark’s Council presidency this month. The briefers may include Secretary-General António Guterres and a civil society representative.
Key Recent Developments
The future of UN peace operations has been a key topic of discussion in recent years, particularly with the drawdown and departure of several UN peacekeeping operations and special political missions. The abrupt departure of MINUSMA in 2023 sent shockwaves through the UN system, followed by the exit of the UN Integrated Transition Assistance Mission in Sudan (UNITAMS) in February 2024. The UN Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) is set to leave the country by the end of this year. Similarly, the UN Transitional Assistance Mission in Somalia (UNTMIS), which replaced the UN Assistance Mission in Somalia (UNSOM) in November 2024, is expected to transfer responsibilities to the UN country team by October 2026 and phase out. Additionally, the UN Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO), one of the remaining large UN multidimensional peacekeeping operations, is implementing a disengagement plan agreed upon with the Congolese government in November 2023.
In light of these developments, discussions surrounding the drawdown, reconfiguration, and termination of UN peace operations have taken on increased importance and urgency. The Secretary-General’s A New Agenda for Peace emphasised that “[e]xit strategies and transitions from peace operations need to be planned early and in an integrated and iterative manner to achieve successful mission drawdowns and ensure that gains are consolidated and the risk of relapse into conflict or escalation is minimized”. In this context, the UN Transitions Project, which was initiated in 2014 with the involvement of relevant UN departments and entities to provide coherent support for transition planning and management, is revising its existing guidance, policies, and mechanisms.
Beyond issues of drawdown, reconfiguration, and termination, the future of UN peace operations was also a key focus during the Summit of the Future in September 2024. In this regard, member states adopted the Pact for the Future, the outcome document of the summit, which, among other things, requested the Secretary-General to: “undertake a review of the future of all forms of United Nations peace operations, taking into account lessons learned from previous and ongoing reform processes, and provide strategic and action-oriented recommendations for the consideration of Member States on how the United Nations toolbox can be adapted to meet evolving needs, allowing for more agile, tailored responses to existing, emerging, and future challenges”.
In November 2024, the Department of Peace Operations (DPO) released an independent study that it commissioned, titled, Future of Peacekeeping, New Models, and Related Capabilities. The study was conducted by Wane; Paul D. Williams, Professor of International Affairs at the Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University; and Ai Kihara-Hunt, Professor at the Graduate Program on Human Security, the University of Tokyo. The study presents 30 different models for future peacekeeping, encompassing a wide range of traditional and new tasks. It is now expected to inform discussions at the next Peacekeeping Ministerial, which will be hosted by Germany in May.
These discussions about transitions and the future of UN peace operations are also closely tied to the peacebuilding and the sustaining peace agenda. The upcoming review of the UN peacebuilding architecture, set to take place this year, holds particular significance in this context. (For background, see the In Hindsight in our February Monthly Forecast.) Conducted every five years, the review aims to strengthen global peacebuilding efforts. The Pact for the Future, adopted by world leaders in September 2024 as the outcome of the Summit of the Future, reaffirms member states’ commitment to “strengthening the Peacebuilding Commission through the 2025 review of the peacebuilding architecture to bring a more strategic approach and greater coherence and impact to national and international peacebuilding and sustaining peace efforts.”
In recent years, there has been growing interest in the role of regional peace support operations in carrying out peace enforcement or counter-terrorism operations. The adoption of resolution 2719 on 21 December 2023, which addresses the financing of African Union (AU)-led peace support operations (AUPSOs), has provided renewed momentum to this emerging trend. The UN and the AU have been consulting on the implementation of this landmark resolution and developed a joint AU-UN roadmap to implement resolution 2719, which was adopted during the UN-AU annual high-level conference in Addis Ababa in October 2024. Discussions are also ongoing about potential cases to be considered by the Security Council under resolution 2719, with Somalia serving as the first test case. On 27 December 2024, the Security Council adopted resolution 2767, authorising the deployment of the AU Support and Stabilisation Mission in Somalia (AUSSOM), which replaces the AU Transition Mission in Somalia (ATMIS), whose mandate was terminated. The Security Council is expected to decide on the financing of AUSSOM later this year.
Key Issues and Options
How to adapt peace operations in a rapidly changing conflict landscape is a key issue for the Council; The March open debate offers member states an opportunity to engage on this vital and topical issue and should provide an overview of their perspectives in the lead-up to the Peacekeeping Ministerial in Berlin, the review of peace operations requested in the Pact for the Future, and the 2025 review of the UN peacebuilding architecture.
A related issue is how the Council can shape the future of UN peace operations. One option is for Council members to have a series of thematic debates this year aimed at developing their ideas around the future of peacekeeping. There also appears to be a lack of clarity regarding the Secretary-General’s approach to conducting the review, with relevant departments in the Secretariat holding differing views on the process. Similar to DPO, the Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs seems to be planning a separate study, specifically focusing on special political missions. Members could ask the Secretary-General to provide regular updates on the review during consultations or at their monthly lunches with him.
In discussing the future of peace operations, a key issue for Council members is how to better prepare to support peace operations across the full peace continuum while remaining agile and flexible in response to changing security situations. An option would be to request the Working Group on Peacekeeping to discuss what the Council can do to achieve this objective.
The Council could also adopt a presidential statement highlighting the pertinent action points raised during the debate that could be used as inputs to the peace operations review.
Council and Wider Dynamics
Peace operations remain a crucial tool for the Security Council in fulfilling its primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security. Shifting geopolitical dynamics and the evolving nature of conflict, however, have presented significant challenges to peacekeeping operations. Additionally, growing frustration among host countries and communities over the perceived ineffectiveness of UN peace operations has further complicated the operating environment.
Discussions about the peacekeeping budget are expected to become more complex with the return of the Trump administration. Based on past experience, this could lead to calls for a reduction and eventual exit of UN peacekeeping operations, pushing them to achieve more with fewer resources. In this context, the US may use the open debate to clarify its policy approach to peacekeeping operations.
The US may also clarify its position on the implementation of resolution 2719 and the upcoming discussions on the financing of AUSSOM. The US Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman, Senator James Risch, recently made it clear that resolution 2719 should not be used to fund AUSSOM, arguing that doing so “would lock the US into perpetual funding through its dues to the UN,” which he stated would be a disservice to the American taxpayer. In 2023, the three African members known as the A3 (then Gabon, Ghana, and Mozambique) played a pivotal role in spearheading the adoption of resolution 2719. However, it was difficult for the “A3 Plus” Grouping (then Algeria, Mozambique, Sierra Leone, and Guyana) to secure a clear commitment for the financing of AUSSOM under resolution 2719 during the negotiations in December 2024. This could potentially change with Somalia, the host country, being part of the “A3 Plus” grouping this year.
This year, three elected members—Denmark, Pakistan, and the Republic of Korea—seem eager to promote discussions on peacekeeping within the Council. Pakistan, as one of the top five troop-contributing countries to UN peacekeeping, has a strong interest in the matter. The Republic of Korea is also expected to continue chairing the Security Council Working Group on Peacekeeping Operations in 2025, pending the finalisation of the appointment of chairs for subsidiary bodies.
| Security Council Resolutions | |
| 21 December 2023S/RES/2719 | This was a resolution on the financing of African Union (AU)-led peace support operations (AUPSOs). |
| Security Council Meeting Records | |
| 9 September 2024S/PV.9719 | This was an open debate on UN peacekeeping operations. |
| General Assembly Documents | |
| 22 September 2024A/RES/79/1 | This was the Pact for the Future. |
